mark handler
SAWHORSE
Accessible Woodstock
Thursday, February 5, 2015
http://www.vnews.com/home/15522232-95/editorial-accessible-woodstock
Woodstock has long had many reasons to be proud of its historic, picturesque downtown. From the Federal-style red brick commercial district to the landmark Woodstock Inn to the gracious buildings that surround the Green, it is an iconic — perhaps the iconic — Vermont village. Now Woodstock has another claim to distinction: It has become a pioneer, although not necessarily a volunteer, in making its downtown accessible to people with disabilities.
As staff writer Matt Hongoltz-Hetling reported in the Jan. 25 Sunday Valley News, this transformation resulted from a series of 13 complaints filed with the Vermont Human Rights Commission by a person who visited downtown businesses in his wheelchair in 2012. The complaints alleged failure to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. After inspections of the buildings conducted jointly by the commission and the U.S. Department of Justice substantiated the complaints, eight businesses entered into agreements with the U.S. Attorney’s Office to remedy the violations. (The status of the other five is unknown.)
Why the complainant, whose identity is being withheld under state law, singled out Woodstock is unknown, although perhaps its prominence in Vermont’s tourist landscape had something to do with it. In any case, his action is believed to be the first time a single community has been cited for a large number of noncompliance issues at one time.
Woodstock was hardly unique in failing to comply with the ADA, though. “Every historic downtown in Vermont and in New Hampshire is subject to the same experience,” according to state Rep. Alison Clarkson, D-Woodstock, a long-time advocate of increased accessibility. That’s because New England downtowns tend to consist of old buildings that were constructed long before disability access became enshrined in law. Making them accessible is often a difficult and costly proposition.
How costly? In the case of Woodstock, the aggregate estimate is in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, and possibly in the millions. That’s a lot of money and perhaps explains in part why many businesses do not take the initiative to remedy access issues absent a complaint.
What was striking in Hongoltz-Hetling’s account was the degree to which the affected businesses have taken the long view. Despite the expense and some regulatory frustrations, most of those interviewed appeared to be happy to be able to better serve all their patrons. One was Paul Ramsey, director of operations at the Woodstock Inn and Resort, which will ultimately spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to come into full compliance by 2019. He said the inn wants to welcome disabled guests and recognizes that access is a fundamental right, he said.
Still, Ramsey sounded a little hurt that the complainant did not simply approach staff members at the inn if accessibility issues were a problem during his visit. We have some sympathy with that frustration. On the other hand, disabled people should not have to ask for help in accessing facilities; that is part of the independence that the ADA is intended to foster.
In any case, Woodstock’s commerce stands to prosper from the renovations and additions undertaken by its businesses. It is already a prime tourist destination whose appeal and reputation can only be enhanced by its ability to serve more fully and with increased dignity people with disabilities, whether they live nearby or travel from far away. Other Upper Valley communities can profit from reflecting on Woodstock’s experience and seeing how they can promote both civil rights and their shopping districts.
Thursday, February 5, 2015
http://www.vnews.com/home/15522232-95/editorial-accessible-woodstock
Woodstock has long had many reasons to be proud of its historic, picturesque downtown. From the Federal-style red brick commercial district to the landmark Woodstock Inn to the gracious buildings that surround the Green, it is an iconic — perhaps the iconic — Vermont village. Now Woodstock has another claim to distinction: It has become a pioneer, although not necessarily a volunteer, in making its downtown accessible to people with disabilities.
As staff writer Matt Hongoltz-Hetling reported in the Jan. 25 Sunday Valley News, this transformation resulted from a series of 13 complaints filed with the Vermont Human Rights Commission by a person who visited downtown businesses in his wheelchair in 2012. The complaints alleged failure to comply with the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. After inspections of the buildings conducted jointly by the commission and the U.S. Department of Justice substantiated the complaints, eight businesses entered into agreements with the U.S. Attorney’s Office to remedy the violations. (The status of the other five is unknown.)
Why the complainant, whose identity is being withheld under state law, singled out Woodstock is unknown, although perhaps its prominence in Vermont’s tourist landscape had something to do with it. In any case, his action is believed to be the first time a single community has been cited for a large number of noncompliance issues at one time.
Woodstock was hardly unique in failing to comply with the ADA, though. “Every historic downtown in Vermont and in New Hampshire is subject to the same experience,” according to state Rep. Alison Clarkson, D-Woodstock, a long-time advocate of increased accessibility. That’s because New England downtowns tend to consist of old buildings that were constructed long before disability access became enshrined in law. Making them accessible is often a difficult and costly proposition.
How costly? In the case of Woodstock, the aggregate estimate is in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, and possibly in the millions. That’s a lot of money and perhaps explains in part why many businesses do not take the initiative to remedy access issues absent a complaint.
What was striking in Hongoltz-Hetling’s account was the degree to which the affected businesses have taken the long view. Despite the expense and some regulatory frustrations, most of those interviewed appeared to be happy to be able to better serve all their patrons. One was Paul Ramsey, director of operations at the Woodstock Inn and Resort, which will ultimately spend hundreds of thousands of dollars to come into full compliance by 2019. He said the inn wants to welcome disabled guests and recognizes that access is a fundamental right, he said.
Still, Ramsey sounded a little hurt that the complainant did not simply approach staff members at the inn if accessibility issues were a problem during his visit. We have some sympathy with that frustration. On the other hand, disabled people should not have to ask for help in accessing facilities; that is part of the independence that the ADA is intended to foster.
In any case, Woodstock’s commerce stands to prosper from the renovations and additions undertaken by its businesses. It is already a prime tourist destination whose appeal and reputation can only be enhanced by its ability to serve more fully and with increased dignity people with disabilities, whether they live nearby or travel from far away. Other Upper Valley communities can profit from reflecting on Woodstock’s experience and seeing how they can promote both civil rights and their shopping districts.