For many in SF, it's "holiday party season". That's a nearly two-months period when able-bodied people juggle their schedules to keep lots of time open so as to be able to attend many and various parties. Except, it's not so jolly a season for many with disabilities. How often is it that a party is held at an office or house--or hilly neighborhood's "clubhouse"--that is inaccessible?

Somehow, though City law requires all meetings of public bodies to be in sites that are accessible, that inclusiveness escapes the consciousness of practically every group when it comes to planning holiday social events. If it's not required that a social gathering be held at a site that's accessible -- diversity and inclusiveness go out the window on where to have a party.

That architectural barriers in offices, homes, restaurants, and clubhouses exclude everyone from attending is just not part of the thinking of most public groups--whether it's a well-known partisan political club perennially touting its "progressive" credentials or the civil grand jury or city commissions or ???

This unthinking exclusion of people with disabilities goes beyond holiday parties, though.

Those who serve on city commissions and are regularly active in political advocacy follow this same obliviousness about accessibility when they hold campaign fundraisers. Some years after the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act supposedly an impact on America's consciousness, a major and viable candidate for _________ Attorney held a fund-raiser at a Port site that required people to climb up a flight of stairs to get to the reception room. I heard the same old, tired excuse of "since downstairs was accessible, I assumed upstairs was, too." It didn't seem incongruous for that attorney who wanted to represent the city to "assume" something not inquired about.

That carries over to all sorts of organized campaign fund-raisers--whether for a candidate or for a ballot measure.

Next time you readers go to any holiday function or hear of any organized campaign fundraiser (or hear of colleagues or friends who go), think of that FIRST step! That FIRST step ought to be the trigger to turn around and GO HOME.

Otherwise, attendees behavior says they'll meet in accessible sites because law forces them to, but they really don't want to socially associate with all who are disabled. They allow existing architectural barriers in their residences, offices, and neighborhood clubhouses to be the excuse for having a party/political fund-raiser not open to all.

Fair? Or subliminally indicative of an unwillingness to socially integrate?