disability the process for buying a ticket and getting entrance in the clubhouse straightforward they buy their ticket they have directly and for persons like my client who are disabled they cannot do that there's only one accessible route of travel from the entrance to the clubhouse and it involves navigating a locked door that's kept locked during all business hours the process is that the person the disability checks in at the ticket booth they then contact the office of janitorial services  then arrange to send down an escort who will then meet the person of the disability at the entrance and escort them up to the locked door at that point they will either unlock the door or they'll send for security guard who has a key who unlock the door and allow them to gain entrance this violates the a p a in two respects first of all the general prohibitions i mean if it's an equalize face the treatment that they have in the act as they have and if you put this i like you to consider if you will this in a different discriminatory cont up the stairs and into the clubhouse you know right if there's different issues that are implicated in race than disability but the lane is your what's your action has mr lando ever encountered the locked door where the where there was no escort and therefore no one to arrange to open door for him i don't believe so i don't believe i saw it so there this is this alternative means of access has always worked for him yes i mean he will there's no question this case he can always ultimately gain access and he hasn't even alleged that there's a substantial delay or that he misses a race because he's waiting or anything like that has no no he hasn't there's a delay there's an argument about whether it's in order not obviously we argue there shouldn't be any delay he should have to be escorted are taken by the hand and taken up to the to the location but you don't dispute that the stairs can't be removed at this point right you're not you're not saying that the solution is that he should be able to have a ramp up the stairs no we don't believe it's readily achievable to provide a and so and the thing is interestingly enough the actual the specific probations or the eighty eight right that require physical access say only one route there only these the b one accessible route from the entrance to the clubhouse so although there is a primary entrance that has stairs technically it does say that they you know exist where i should be the one that is the one of the general population uses to the extent feasible but you're not contesting as not feasible right i mean  door ok so i guess i've since he hasn't encountered any delays he hasn't missed any races and it has always been there to help him through the locked door is it your position that the law law requires that the door unlocked at all times yes the department justice says just that both in its implementing regulations and in a technical sense this manual says your cases go that far i i thought that even the regulations acknowledge that there may be legitimate reasons such as security can't be a locked door and that's black and white right check with this man who says any let go no i don't think that's i guess what i'm having a difficult time i don't read the regulation that way i read the regulation as saying lock doors may be permissible under certain legitimate business purposes here i understand that purpose to me and because you have to pay extra in order to get into the clubhouse there has to be some means of preventing people who have not paid for access to the clubhouse who would otherwise simply walk through the unlocked door without paying it isn't that the racetracks justification for keeping the store on it is that is their justification that the regulations don't say that the regulations are and you've said in numerous places they say very clearly but why isn't that a security act i'll call it an exception which the regulations do acknowledge oh there is a security exception so the problem that we have so let's talk about what's at stake here is twenty dollars to get internet let's talk about the law let's try and figure out what the law requires that that's where i think right out of focus the argument that's one folks the argument so you say there's a security implication i'm saying i'm asking you i mean you seem to be taking the position that a person a locked door is per se a violation of the regulations and i don't read the regulations quite that stringently because they do admit of exception ok guess our position is i want think the law says the standard is you can't have locked doors there are exceptions to that you can raise explosion is an attendant there kept the door locked and he unlocked the door and time anybody showed up one in the club wou at a locked door but at that point you're not saying you can never have a locked door so i don't even really understand the difference between the attendant and the escort yet so here's what we're saying that door's locked if someone makes their way over there sorry they have to arrange for some of the coming on like a door from every door can be on one i mean there's no question about that just like every other barrier can be overcome in some manner what we're saying here is that my client should have to jump through the hoops of finding someone to unlock the door right because it's i mean that the language says that you have a problem i mean he gets there any i assume the person who sells on the ticket calls the person to escort him and you said there's never been a delay so i don't really understand why that's harder than asking the attendant at the door to open the door and if there was a delay i said there's there there is a delay it's automatic there's a lay someone else by the take and head straight in person who goes there mike mike you know if you can't get around the stairs so you're i mean the difference i think that you're arguing about is someone sitting by the door versus someone walking up and unlocking the door and i just i'm not quite sure especially if you have an alleged that it takes someone a very long time to get to the door that there's any difference between those too no the difference is this if they propose that we have if someone checks in their personal disability they're head and they're the person going through the example entrance and they unlock that door before the plane gets there and they never have to navigate or deal with a locked door no problem or if there's an attendant there for us or we know it's not alleging that he's ever been delayed for any appreciable amount of time because of the fact that an attendant is with him to get him through the door i just don't see where the violation is but your honor we're saying that there is a delay they have to we're saying i said earlier that he ultimately gets access and but this is not an issue that the district  focused on and it would be a tribal issue whether the delay is inordinate but he hasn't made travel issue but he hasn't established a fact of delay in any of the papers that i've heard yeah so so h trial on a factual dispute where you haven't made a prime official allegation that there is a fact right our presentation allegation is this earlier said you read the regulations are saying that there can be exceptions to this locked door because the department justice does say that there can't be locked doors that lock doors are not my view for a with the tracks business reason for keeping the door locked because it is an area that requires the payment of an additional fee to get into it yet in this case we quarrel with their argument that it has to remain that they that the mechanism that they have is the only mechanism they can pursue to insure controlled access because what i see the problem is like what's your alternative what are you saying is more feasible that that there should be an employee stationed at that door during all hours that the clubhouse is an operation you know don't get lee opened the door for someone who wants to come through it is that know there's a number of solutions judge carter an oral argument says he has i came up with a solution why don't you do this i mean even he thought through the problem there's something different than having to wait for someone to come down an escort to collect you then to bring you up there to open the door there's something different that can be done for example when someone doesn't the law permit for example in a disabled access to a building does don't the regulations provide for a buzzer or bell that the person can activate in order to alert folks inside the building that the door needs to be open and doesn't that contemplate some period of minimal delay while somebody responds to the bell there is no regulation whatsoever under the n you can't fix the stair case so we're in a situation where you've acknowledged where we need another workaround because we can't get around the staircase so this is their workaround isn't it no it's not why not because the code only requires one excess will have to tr this is the accessible path to travel this isn't just a work around the main staircase this is the only required access will have trouble they have to have they don't have to have all of them only one but if they can't then you've got to work around why isn't the staircase the route that now can't be fixed and so they have a workaround if the staircase were the only accessible only route and they could not fix it and they had to have come up with a workaround for instance taking someone through an employee area or through a kitchen area or something like that that would be one setting that's not what we have i not because this is a route that they have designed and is available to people with disabilities and others who need to use the elevators this is one of their routes into the facility and therefore has to be accessible they only have to have one accessible route i guess here's the disconnect you're saying here's the staircase one isn't this an alternative to that and we're saying why do we leave it alternative there are only required have one sensible route they could have five going into the great club sort out but i mean everyone who goes that way has a locked door right it's not like the disabled person in the wheelchair is the only one who has the lock to read if they're going that way so everyone has the locked door and i think that makes it not an accessible route right it's not a public route anyone can just walk through right and that's the distinction is that people who are not disabled have a route they can take that does not require light and would knowledge that that route that most people take can't be fixed so now aren't we in the workaround alternative but it's not a workaround because they have multiple entrances to this place one of them is a staircase right that's not control people can go in and there's no locked door this one which is the excessive overhead involves an elevator a lift someone sitting near it to open it if it was unlocked whenever my client that there would be a locked door to him is council i'd like to direct your attention to department of justice or rights division publication under the americans with disabilities act guide for small business and it six that document the department writes if the alternative accessible entrance is not left unlocked due to security concerns you must provide an accessible way for notifying staff to open the door such as a buzzer or bell right that kind of flavor that there has to there might be a short delay while staff responds to the buzzer or the bell in order to unlock the door whenever it's not readily to will to provide co compliant x what you've agreed that it wasn't feasible to put a ramp up next to the stairs you've conceded that an alternative route may be provided here and i don't understand inter alternatives wright says that's the way the code is written we're saying they can provide code compliant access by do leaving that door unlocked having another mechanism for dealing with it was never locked to a person the disability that would be co security concern that the business has articulated right in so for either the regulations as interpreted by the department of justice the fact that there might be some small delay in responding and unlocking the door does not make the business in violation of the do you want to leave some time for rebuttal you're down to about thirty two seconds i don't think i'll have time to think if guns are say what i think respond with respect to the security thing that is typically a tribal issue whether security input is security issues in case something allow you to what you should to be tried we're back to the problem we talked about before judge you have an alleged that i had to wait an hour for somebody to unlock the door there's no evidence in the record so as the course position that if you that day you don't have to provide as long as there's just some modest income being innocent is that you have to come to us with evidence to support a violation of the act and i don't see it here based on the alternative method that the racetrack has employed if it is a problem you want to get to thirty seconds just to say  thing without our position is simple you have to provide code compliant access if you if you can do it here they can do it yes there might be security issues but that does not require keeping it locked keeping forcing someone to go and contacts someone to be escorted there are other ways they do it that don't require that type of treatment and we've talked about some of those and the judge didn't find otherwise there's no been no finding that they couldn't do a different route in fact the judge in oral argument says i can come up with ideas that would result both of your issues are only point is this if they're going to say they cannot leave that door unlocked because of security issues they need to prove that this was a summary judgment motion that wasn't a basis for the court's ruling there's no evidence of that there's plenty of other ways they can do it so that persons with disabilities don't have to deal the court my name is chris was a risky i represent in this case the loss on wheels racing association you hit the nail on the head there is no showing that there was an undue amount of time spent by mr orlando in trying to get into the track and he just  today and i think it's in the briefs that he was never denied access at any time and in fact their expert mr bishop at excerpts eleven through thirty egg knowledge is that this alternative method that we provided their expert mr orlando's expert acknowledges that that alternative was fine and it meets eighty eight compliance so their own expert admits that they have no showing of any undue time what's the difference between this case in the there is no showing that there's any block to the to the handicapped individual it is soon as he calls he's admitted immediately there's no showing that it takes longer to do that than than the main entrance which which would be i think a different situation the re admitted immediately through the door soon as somebody comes down through the janitor service and no showing that it takes any longer than one or two minutes if you just a question of time how long he asked wait ike if you have to wait at all i mean if he called ahead i suppose he wouldn't have to wait at all but yes it's just a question of time in addition to that the reason we have the walk to work is you hit on it just tell me that the the door is locked so that people who don't pay the extra fee are not admitted to this private area otherwise there's no just and that's no different for somebody who's handicapped or someone who's not handicapped you have to pay to get into this private area we have a declaration from an individual who shows that it would be about one hundred forty thousand to man that door at all times and that's because the racetrack is open three hundred sixty three days a year and also open at night so total you'd need three different staff wanted one of the day one of the night and one for relief which he totals up our controller at about one hundred forty three thousand five hundred seventy four dollars and fifty five cents so that cost is not reasonable councils admitted and given away that the ramp should replace the stairs that's just not doable it's not reasonable we judge the cost of i mean you say it's not reasonable to spend that much to have someone there how did you put on evidence of the total earnings of the tracker i mean how do we compare that cost to something else to figure out whether it's reasonable is there an absolute number for what's reasonable i don't think we put on earnings of the total earnings of the track but we did put on that the cost of doing that in the time just made it unreasonable and they conceded that at the time in the lower court so i  don't even think that became an issue for them after that if you know what he's talking about when he says there are other alternatives that were discussed i thought that was the one so if you're saying they can see that one wasn't available then i guess i'm not sure what other alternatives were discussed in the trial i think in the lower court the court mentioned that he could think of alternatives and he hoped that we could work something out but the alternative i think was fine especially once we saw that their expert conceded that that alternative in his mind met a d m requirements we felt that we had done all we could at the station somebody there at all times is not feasible it's too costly to leave it unlocked is not feasible because and that allows entrance for everybody without having to pay the fee so in our minds we did what we could by reasonably accommodating and there was no showing that he had the weight or that he was never it never gained access what was the evidence to show that it was not feasible to have it and there because i think we had michael manji who testified that they had done that before and there wasn't very many people that you know were asking  for entrance into that private area number one and number two the cost which was from the controller who was mr snyder that the controller indicated cost about one hundred forty three thousand to station somebody there for those rare  admissions and they say we're not raising financial wherewithal at all as a defense and so just to become relevant that wasn't a defense but that the problem when they argued that it was a hundred forty thousand dollars or whatever they just said that was discussed in the trial court wasn't it  was but it was you mean by they didn't raise that as a defense we did request for admissions it's in the us with a record we said are you going to raise for your financial wherewithal as a defense they said no and so we didn't demand those financial documents that they had just honored forty thousand dollar number whatever it was exactly did you move to compel their total profits you know it's meaningless it's meaningless because it's not compared against financial wherewithal to saying something cost x if you can't compare to y which is financial wherewithal you can't put forward in the form of defense or broadly achievable so when they talk about it they're just talking about the general nature of the feasibility so it's an argument it doesn't how much but our point was there was other things we don't need someone to be there all the time there's some what are you saying should happen what we think happens when someone checks in and they know they have to use excess will route the elevator that they shouldn't have to wait for an an elevator but i don't know how you get to the elevator yet it's well signed and if it's not there quiet you say it's feasible to have a directional path they can just call ahead and say someone's coming up with a disability wheelchair user some of the walker like my client please make sure that doors unlocked when they get there i mean if there's someone that sneaks in somehow and doesn't pay the two dollars which is the fee to get into the clubhouse i don't think that should trump the rights of persons with disabilities to be able to pretty much have ready access which is what the law requires is why the d o j said there can't be unlocked doors they have to maintain things in a winner that's accessible though if that were the case then they wouldn't say anything about buzzers and bell you want i can read it you did their dirty you don't have to re i can read it for myself and you and i are reading it differently the tentacles this is manual says doris must remain unlocked during all business hours unless there is a legitimate security reason in which case then you provide things like methods of alerting staff inside to unlock the door but who says that there's a legitimate security we're just going around and this is your trouble this your time is up thank you very much the