Denial of Transit Service Due to Rider Conduct : Civil Rights Considerations CalACT Spring Conference Yosemite, CA April 2015 Dawn Sweet Program Manager, Complaints & Communications Office of Civil Rights

Topics Covered General requirements for service denialsFTA’s oversight experienceRecommended local practices 2

Civil Rights Connection Consider the possible civil rights connection when denying service Access to transit is a civil right – Title VI and ADA ADA implications most common – Some disabilities affect behavior – ADA regulations specifically cover service denial thresholds 3

Why Is this Issue So Challenging ? Behavior issues can be subjective Difficult to capture every possible scenario in a written policy – Due process may vary depending on severity of offense Difficult to assess the behavior – Disability related? – Threatening? ADA regulations are not prescriptive 4

4 Service Denial Thresholds Agencies may refuse service to people with disabilities who: – Are violent – Are seriously disruptive – Engage in illegal conduct and/or – Pose a “direct threat” to the health or safety of others* *Direct threat” added to sec. 37.5(h) with reasonable modification rulemaking; was in sec only Overlap common – consider as a unit See 49 CFR 37.5(h), 37.3, Appendix D 5

Thresholds Defined High bars “Seriously disruptive”: Behavior needs to be more than offensive “Direct threat”: A significant risk to health or safety of others – Not based on speculation – Individualized assessment needed See 49 CFR 37.5(h), 37.3, Appendix D 6

FTA Complaints What we’re seeing Indefinite suspensions – Rider thinks the suspension is permanent; doesn’t know how to resume service No complaint or appeal process for the rider Permanent bans No warning / ad hoc suspensions for minor issues – Agency lacks policies / process 7

3 Actions FTA Wants Locally Document the incident(s) in writing – For internal purposes and to inform the rider of expectations – Give warnings to rider when possible Link clearly to ADA thresholds – Seriously disruptive (e.g., taking vehicle out of service) – Illegal (e.g., police involvement, restraining order) – Direct threat (e.g., CDC / medical support) Provide due process – Ensure riders understand terms of suspension and know what to do to subsequently present information to have service reinstated Reasonable timeframe for “appeal” opportunity No permanent suspensions but assumes the person can demonstrate the issue has been resolved or can present options to mitigate any problems 8

Parting Thoughts Think about potential civil rights connection Create a paper trail Provide rider due process Consider adopting written policy – Sets rider expectations – Avoids ad hoc denials 9

Federal Transit Administration Contact Us Tool on FTA Website (202)