1 JANET RENO Attorney General 2 DEVAL L. PATRICK 3 Assistant Attorney General Civil Rights Division 4 JOHN L.

WODATCH, Chief 5 Disability Rights Section Civil Rights Division 6 ALYSE S. BASS 7 THOMAS M. CONTOIS Attorneys 8 Disability Rights Section Civil Rights Division 9 U.S. Department of Justice Post Office Box 66738 10 Washington, D.C. 20035-6738 (202) 616-9511 11 For the United States 12 LAWRENCE H. KAY 13 Attorney for R.E. Huffman Corporation Stanton, Kay & Watson 14 7801 Folsom Boulevard, Suite 350 Sacramento, California 95826 15 (916) 381-7880 16 For R.E. Huffman Corporation 17 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 18 19 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) 20 Plaintiff, ) ) 21 ) No.: CIV-S-96 260 WBS GGH v. ) 22 ) ) CONSENT ORDER AND FINAL 23 DAYS INNS OF AMERICA, INC, ) JUDGMENT DISMISSING HOSPITALITY FRANCHISE ) CLAIMS OF THE UNITED 24 SYSTEMS, INC., ) STATES AGAINST DEFENDANT DILIP PATEL, ) R.E. HUFFMAN, INC.

25 IYER & ASSOCIATES, and R.E. HUFFMAN, INC., 26 ) Defendants. ) 27 ) 28 -101-01146

) )

1 2 INC. 3 4 1. On February 8, 1996, the United States filed an action 5 to enforce title III of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 6 1990 (the "ADA"), 42 U.S.C. S S 12181 through 12189, against, among 7 others, R.E. Huffman Inc., ("R.E. Huffman"), general contractor 8 for the Days Inn hotel at 475 North Humboldt, Willows, 9 California, ("the hotel" or the "Willows Days Inn"). 10 2. On or about October 31, 1994, representatives of the 11 United States Department of Justice, Civil Rights Division, 12 ("Department"), visited and inspected the Willows Days Inn, as 13 part of an investigation of the hotel conducted pursuant to the 14 Department of Justice's authority to review the compliance of 15 entities covered by title III of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. 16 S 12188(b)(1)(A)(i). 17 3. As a result of its investigation, including its 18 CONSENT ORDER AND FINAL JUDGMENT DISMISSING CLAIMS OF THE UNITED STATES AGAINST DEFENDANT R.E. HUFFMAN, A. Background

inspection of the hotel, the Department identified several 19 features, elements, and spaces of the Willows Days Inn which 20 failed to comply with the ADA's Standards for Accessible Design, 21 28 C.F.R. Part 36, Appendix A ("the Standards"). A list of the 22 features, elements, and spaces of the hotel which did not comply 23 with the Standards is attached hereto as Exhibit 1. 24 4. In an effort to resolve their differences 25 expeditiously, plaintiff United States and defendant R.E. Huffman 26 have engaged in good faith negotiations. As a result of those 27 28 -201-01147 1 negotiations, those parties have agreed to enter into this 2 jointly proposed Consent Order and Final Judgment Dismissing 3 Claims of the United States against Defendant R.E. Huffman Inc. 4 B. Agreement of the Parties 5 Accordingly, by consent of plaintiff United States and 6 defendant R.E. Huffman, it is hereby ORDERED and DECREED that: 7 1. This Court has jurisdiction of this action under 8 42 U.S.C. S 12188(b)(1)(B) and 28 U.S.C. S S 1331 and 1345. 9 The Court may grant declaratory and other relief pursuant to 28 10 U.S.C. S S 2201 and 2202. 11 2. Venue is proper in this district. 12 3. The Willows Days Inn is a non-residential facility 13 whose operations affect commerce. As such, it is a commercial 14 facility within the meaning of section 303(a) of the ADA. 42 15 U.S.C. S 12183(a). In addition, because the Willows Days Inn is 16 a place of lodging, it is also a public accommodation within the 17 meaning of section 303(a) of the ADA. Id. 18 4. The last building permit for the Willows Days Inn was 19 applied for on or about March 2, 1993. 20 5. The first certificate of occupancy for the Willows Days 21 Inn was issued on or about September 30, 1993. 22 6. Defendant R.E. Huffman is a private entity engaged in 23 the business of providing general contracting and construction 24 services. Defendant R.E. Huffman participated in the design and 25 construction of the Willows Days Inn by constructing the hotel.

26 7. The Willows Days Inn is not readily accessible to or 27 usable by individuals with disabilities, as required by section 28 -301-01148

1 303(a)(1) of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. S 12183(a)(1). The hotel fails 2 in numerous respects to comply with the Department's regulation 3 implementing title III of the ADA, 28 C.F.R. Part 36, including 4 the Standards for Accessible Design. See 28 C.F.R. S S 36.401, 5 36.406. 6 8. The failure of the Willows Days Inn to be readily 7 accessible to and usable by individuals with disabilities 8 constitutes unlawful discrimination that raises an issue of 9 general public importance within the meaning of 42 U.S.C. 10 S 12188(b)(1)(B)(ii) and 28 C.F.R. S 36.503(b). 11 9. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. S 12188(b)(2) and to vindicate 12 the public interest, R.E. Huffman will pay to the Department of 13 Justice a civil penalty of $7,000 by no later than June 8, 1996. 14 10. Defendant R.E. Huffman shall comply with the ADA 15 Standards in any future involvement in the design and 16 construction of a public accommodation or commercial facility.

17 11. The parties shall negotiate in good faith to resolve 18 any dispute relating to the interpretation or implementation of 19 this order before bringing the matter to the Court's attention. 20 12. The Court shall retain jurisdiction of this action to 21 enforce the provisions of this order through December 31, 1997, 22 after which time all of its provisions shall be terminated, 23 unless the Court determines that it is necessary to extend any of 24 its requirements, in which case those requirements shall be 25 extended. 26 13. This agreement is only between the Department of 27 Justice and R.E. Huffman and does not address, and shall not be 28 -401-01149

1 construed to address, any other issues of ADA compliance at the 2 Willows Days Inn, or at any other commercial facility or place of 3 public accommodation constructed by defendant R.E. Huffman or any 4 other violations of federal law. 5 6 7

8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 01-01150

-5-

14. This instrument reflects the entire agreement between the parties. SO ORDERED this 15th day of May, 1996. United States District Judge AGREED AND CONSENTED TO: For Plaintiff United States of America: ALYSE S. BASS TOM CONTOIS Attorneys Disability Rights Section Civil Rights Division U.S. Department of Justice Post Office Box 66738 Washington, D.C. 20035-6738 (202) 616-9511 For Defendant R.E. Huffman Corporation Mr. LAWRENCE H. KAY Attorney for R.E. Huffman Corporation Stanton, Kay & Watson 7801 Folsom Boulevard, Suite 350 Sacramento, California 95826 (916) 381-7880 -5-(A) 01-01151

1 2 3 4 5

EXHIBIT 1 Failures of the Willows Days Inn to comply with the ADA's Standards for Accessible Design as identified by the U.S. Department of Justice 1. Parking and passenger loading zone violations

There are no accessible parking spaces. There are 56 6 spaces in the lot; the Standards require three accessible spaces, including at least one van accessible space. 7 Standards S 4.1.2(5). While two spaces are designated accessible, neither complies with the requirements of the 8 Standards, as specified in items 1.b. and c., below. 9 b. Neither of the spaces designated accessible is on the shortest accessible route to the guest rooms designated 10 accessible. Standards S 4.6.2. 11 c. One of the spaces designated accessible is not flat and level. Standards S 4.6.3. 12 d. There is no van accessible parking space. Neither of the 13 spaces designated accessible has an access aisle 96" wide, and neither has a sign designating it as "van 14 accessible." Standards SS 4.1.2(5), 4.6.4(a). 15 e. The passenger loading zone at the front entrance to the hotel lobby does not have a demarcated access aisle. 16 Standards S 4.6.6. 17 2. Exterior route violations 18 a. There is no accessible route connecting the swimming pool to the rooms designated accessible. Standards 19 SS 4.1.2(2), 4.3. 20 3. Violations at exterior and interior stairs and areas of rescue assistance 21

a.

a. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28

Nosings on all the exterior stairs project beyond the maximum permitted by Standards. Standards S 4.9.3. b. The design of the stairways at the rear of the hotel reduces vertical clearance adjacent to an accessible route to less than 80", but no barrier to warn blind or visually-impaired persons is provided. Standards S 4.4.2.

-1-

1 4. Front lobby violations 2 a. The registration desk is too high. Standards S 7.2. 3 b. There is no visual alarm in the lobby. Standards S 4.28.1. 4 5. Public and common use toilet room violations 5 a. The toilet in the lobby restroom is too far from the side 6 wall. Standards S 4.16.2 7 b. The grab bar on the side of the toilet in the lobby restroom does not extend far enough from the rear wall. 8 Standards S 4.16.4. 9 c. The lavatory in the lobby restroom does not provide adequate knee clearance. Standards S 4.19.2. 10 d. The hot water and drain pipes under the lavatory are not 11 insulated or otherwise configured to protect against contact. Standards S 4.19.4. 12 6. Violations with respect to guest rooms generally 13 a. The signs for the guest rooms are not mounted on the wall

14 15 16 17

b.

adjacent to the doors. Standards S 4.30.6. The guest rooms designated accessible are not dispersed among the various classes of sleeping accommodations available to patrons of the hotel, as specified below. Standards S 9.1.4. i) Both of the guest rooms designated accessible have one king-sized bed. The hotel has other guest rooms with one queen-sized bed, or two queen-sized beds, or two full-sized beds, but none of these rooms is accessible. ii) At least one guest room has a whirlpool tub. This room is not accessible.

18 19 20 21 22 c. 23 24 25 26 27 28

There are no rooms with notification devices. Standards SS 9.1.2, 9.1.3, 9.3. d. The bathroom doors in the rooms not designated accessible are too narrow. Standards SS 4.13.5, 9.4.

-201-01153

1 7. Violations with respect to guest rooms designated accessible -- Rooms 109 and 111 2 a. The threshold at the doorways of guest rooms 109 and 111 3 are too high. Standards S 4.13.8. 4 b. The operating controls for the drapes and for the wallmounted hair dryers at the vanity in guest rooms 109 and 5 111 are too high. Standards S 4.27.3. 6 c. The operating controls for the bedside lamps and heating and cooling units in guest rooms 109 and 111 require 7 tight grasping, pinching or twisting of the wrist. Standards S 4.27.4.

d. 9 10 11 f. 12 13 g. 14 15 16 i. 17 18 19 20 21 22

The clothes racks and shelves in guest rooms 109 and 111 are too high. Standards S 4.25.3. e. The towel racks the lavatories in guest rooms 109 and 111 are too high. Standards S 4.25.3. The bathroom doors in guest rooms 109 and 111 swing into the clear floor space required at the lavatories. Standards S 4.23.2. There is no unobstructed turning space in the bathrooms in guest rooms 109 and 111. Standards S 4.23.3. h. The toilets in the bathrooms in guest rooms 109 and 111 are too close to the side wall. Standards S 4.16.2. There is inadequate clear floor space at the toilets in guest rooms 109 and 111. Standards S 4.16.2. j. The bathtubs in guest rooms 109 and 111 have no tub seats. Standards S 4.20.3. k. The controls for the bathtubs in guest rooms 113 and 115 are improperly located. Standards S 4.20.5. l. There is inadequate knee clearance at the lavatories in guest rooms 109 and 111. Standards S 4.19.2. There is inadequate maneuvering space on one side of the bed in guest room 111. Standards S 9.2.2(1). n. There is no accessible route to, and inadequate clear floor space at the operating mechanism for the heating and cooling unit in guest room 111. Standards SS 9.2.2 (2), 9.2.2 (5).

m. 23 24 25 26 27 28

-301-01154