Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Accessibility Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate approves state ADA alternative dispute process after floor negotiation
Summary
Lawmakers passed House Bill 366 to create a state-based alternative dispute resolution process for ADA complaints, adding notice-and‑cure steps before federal litigation; the measure was circled for sponsor follow-up after concerns from disability advocates and later passed under suspension of rules.
The Utah Senate passed House Bill 366, which establishes a voluntary, state‑based alternative dispute resolution (ADR) process for Americans with Disabilities Act complaints and provides a four‑stage pathway — informal resolution, written notice, final notice, and then civil action — intended to give businesses a chance to correct accessibility problems before federal lawsuits proceed.
Sponsor Senator Weiler told colleagues the bill targets what he and supporters described as opportunistic lawsuits that seek monetary settlements rather than accessibility remedies, and framed the ADR as a faster, less costly option for resolving technical violations. On the floor some disability advocacy groups expressed concerns: the Disability Law Center told the chamber it did not support the bill because it lacks funding for training and enforcement, while Roads to Independence and other groups indicated support.
Senators paused floor action and circled the bill to allow the sponsor to consult stakeholders. Following that discussion sponsors reported targeted outreach and clarified that participation in the ADR process is optional and does not affect the federal rights available under the ADA. The Senate then passed HB 366 under suspension of rules; the roll-call recorded 28 yeas, 1 nay, 0 absent.
The bill’s supporters said the ADR mechanism aims to reduce litigation costs for small businesses while providing notice and an opportunity to remediate access barriers. Opponents warned that without training or enforcement funds the process could delay remedies for people with disabilities; sponsors said they would continue stakeholder engagement during implementation.
