## Facts

- A city operated the Dreher Park Center and offered specialized recreational and social programs for individuals with disabilities.
- After a 1986 needs assessment, the city created and maintained multiple disability-focused programs, including camps, clubs, instruction, sports, and supervised activities.
- Roughly 300 individuals with disabilities participated in these programs during fiscal year 1992–1993.
- For fiscal year 1992–1993, the city’s leisure services budget included a “Special Populations” allocation, with a portion supporting Dreher Park Center programming.
- For fiscal year 1993–1994, citing budget constraints, the city substantially reduced the “Special Populations” budget; remaining funds were allocated to a supervisor’s compensation and non-program costs (e.g., utilities, maintenance, insurance) tied to a different facility.
- The budget changes eliminated or effectively shut down Dreher Park Center’s disability-focused recreation programs without providing comparable alternatives.
- Parents, volunteers, and program participants (or their guardians) formed an association and, along with individual plaintiffs, sought to prevent the termination of these programs.
- Plaintiffs alleged the loss of specialized, accessible programming would eliminate meaningful recreational opportunities not otherwise available in the community.

## Issues

1. Whether the city’s elimination or drastic reduction of disability-focused recreational programs likely violated Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act and § 504 of the Rehabilitation Act.
2. Whether plaintiffs met the requirements for preliminary injunctive relief, including likelihood of success, irreparable harm, balance of harms, and public interest.

## Decision

- The court granted a preliminary injunction requiring the city to continue (and refrain from terminating) the disability recreation programs at Dreher Park Center during the litigation.
- The court found plaintiffs showed a substantial likelihood of success on their ADA Title II and Rehabilitation Act § 504 claims.
- The court found irreparable harm because termination of disability-specific recreational and social services would cause immediate, non-compensable injury.
- The court found the balance of hardships favored plaintiffs over the city’s asserted fiscal and administrative interests pending final adjudication.
- The court found the injunction aligned with the public interest in enforcing federal disability nondiscrimination laws.

## Legal Principles

- Municipal recreational services can constitute “services, programs, or activities” covered by ADA Title II, and “program[s] or activit[ies]” covered by § 504 when federal financial assistance is involved.
- Disability discrimination may be shown by denial of meaningful access, including the elimination of programs that uniquely serve individuals with disabilities when comparable access is not provided.
- For a preliminary injunction, a plaintiff must show likelihood of success on the merits, irreparable harm absent relief, that equities favor relief, and that relief serves the public interest.
- Denial of statutory civil rights, particularly where harms are not readily compensable by money damages, can support a finding of irreparable harm.

## Conclusion

The court ordered interim continuation of the city’s disability-focused recreation programs because plaintiffs demonstrated a strong likelihood that targeted budget reductions unlawfully denied meaningful access under ADA Title II and § 504, and because the loss of specialized services would cause irreparable harm outweighing the city’s claimed fiscal burdens.


Concerned Parents to Save Dreher Park Center v. City of W. Palm Beach, 846 F. Supp. 986 (S.D. Fla. 1994)