Opinion ID: 1224371
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: The ADA's Legislative History

Text: The legislative history of the 1994 amendments to K.S.A. 58-1304 reveals that no major change was intended by the legislature. The principal aim of the 1994 amendments was to harmonize state law with federal law and, in so doing, make ADA compliance easier for the private sector. The 1994 legislative committee minutes specifically address the question of whether the enforcement role of government entities would change after the amendments. No enforcement roles were to change. In 1994, House Bill 3028 was drafted as a joint effort (H.B. 3028 became L. 1994, ch. 195, amending K.S.A. 58-1304). The agencies involved included the Kansas Attorney General, Department of Administration, Division of Architectural Services, Kansas Commission on Human Rights, the Independent Living Centers, and the state ADA coordinator. Mary Jane Stattelman, an Assistant Attorney General, testified in committee that the changes were necessary to simplify the law. She said that in 1992, the legislature amended K.S.A. 58-1301 et seq. to assist disabled individuals in obtaining access to public accommodations in Kansas. However, the discrepancies between the 1992 version of K.S.A. 58-1301 et seq. and the federal ADA caused confusion for business owners. Ms. Stattelman cited the following example: For instance, the federal act exempts churches and private clubs yet the current state law covers these entities; federal law makes a distinction between a public accommodation (i.e. restaurant or grocery store) and a commercial facility (i.e. a warehouse); however, the current state law does not make this distinction. Testimony on Behalf of Attorney General Robert T. Stephan, House Committee on Public Health and Welfare (Feb. 22, 1994). Ms. Stattelman also observed, as summarized in the committee minutes: Changes proposed do not change the enforcement role of any governmental entity and should simplify the building code officials' role.... [T]here will be no fiscal impact, and [the changes] actually may decrease costs of complying with the Americans [with] Disabilities Act. (Emphasis added.) Minutes of the House Committee on Public Health and Welfare (Feb. 22, 1994). Further testimony was offered by the Kansas Commission on Disability Concerns and the state ADA coordinator. This bill would change the current language regarding the specifications for making buildings accessible to people with disabilities to more closely parallel the Americans with Disabilities Act Accessibility Guidelines. Testimony on H.B. 3028 by Martha Gabehart, Kansas Commission on Disability Concerns, House Committee on Public Health and Welfare (Feb. 22, 1994). House Bill 3028 parallels the Americans with Disabilities Act. There is no fiscal note involved in this bill nor is there any hardship to consider. Testimony of Jane Knight, state ADA Coordinator, House Committee on Public Health and Welfare (Feb. 22, 1994). Testimony addressing H.B. 3028 consistently stated that the amendments were designed to bring state and federal law together. There are no specific references in the legislative history to a new K.S.A. 58-1304(a)(3) enforcement requirement by municipalities. Link argues that if the City does not have the duty to enforce the ADA as to existing Title III facilities, no Kansas entity does. Thus, Link concludes, the mandate of K.S.A. 58-1301 that all existing facilities comply with the ADA is meaningless. The City counters that the ADA is geared to the future, its goal being that over time, access will be the rule rather than the exception, citing U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission & U.S. Department of Justice, ADA Handbook (1992). The positions advanced by the parties frame a major policy question for the State, a question best answered by the legislature. Reversed. The writ of mandamus is vacated.