Ryan Manriquez opened the door of his second-floor apartment to a blaring fire alarm. It was September 2023, a few weeks into the school year at UC Berkeley, where he’s a graduate student studying public policy.

Residents descended the staircase, following lighted exit signs. The alarm was getting louder, urging Manriquez to leave. But he couldn’t. Sitting in his power wheelchair, he looked at the only way out of the building for him — an elevator down the hallway, its doors now shut and inoperable. There was no way out for him. 

“When I stepped into the hallway, I just broke down in tears because I knew finally that I wasn’t going to have a place to safely evacuate,” he said.

As a safety measure, elevators shut down to contain a potential fire. Even though the alarm turned out to be false, Manriquez waited four hours before the elevator worked again, causing him to miss his favorite class that afternoon — public policy. 

While California’s public university systems have robust emergency policies and procedures, not all students who are physically disabled have reliable access to equipment to help them evacuate in an emergency. 

Last summer, when Manriquez toured a unit of The Intersection, an off-campus apartment complex the university operates for graduate students, he noticed there were no disability evacuation chairs in the building.  

Evacuation chairs allow people who have a mobility disability to  in emergencies. Some chairs require assistance from two people and are typically folded and stored with other emergency supplies or mounted on the wall. Other evacuation chairs can be battery-powered, allowing physically disabled residents to independently transport themselves up or down stairs.

According to UC Berkeley’s housing policy, evacuation chairs must be  in all campus buildings. Before he moved in, Manriquez requested a chair from the Berkeley Housing office in July. The evacuation chair was not installed when the school year started the following month. And it still wasn’t installed when the fire alarm went off in September. 

The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 requires at least one  on every floor, whether it is achieved with an elevator, ramp or lift. The law doesn’t require buildings to have evacuation chairs in multi-storied buildings.  

People with disabilities are disproportionately impacted by disasters and emergencies. Data cited by the Partnership for Inclusive Disaster Strategies shows that disabled people are two to four times as likely  in emergencies compared to their non-disabled counterparts.

“It is hard to think that they just weren’t ready for someone like me to enter into one of the top graduate programs in the country,” Manriquez said. 

The ripple effect 

A few weeks after he was trapped in his apartment building, still without an evacuation chair on his floor, Manriquez shared his experience during public comment at the University of California Board of Regents meeting. After his speech, UC President Michael Drake offered a “personal apology.” Drake also asked campus chancellors to prepare an update on the status of emergency exit accessibility on their campuses at a future meeting.  

“The chancellors are here and I know by the time we come back to the November meeting all the chancellors will be able to ensure nothing like this can happen on any of the campuses in the future,” Drake said. 

Shortly after Manriquez spoke to the regents, in October 2023, two folding manual disability evacuation chairs were installed in his building, one of them on his floor. 

But some students have had to wait longer.

Some students still unequipped

Less than 24 hours after Manriquez’s experience, UC Berkeley student Trisha Nguyen couldn’t leave her second-floor, on-campus apartment during a fire drill.

Like Manriquez, Nguyen was met with shut elevator doors, blocking people from using it. After the drill was over, Nguyen’s apartment mates returned to open the elevator doors, so she could leave in her power wheelchair. 

“All undergraduate students and staff evacuated safely except for my personal care attendant (my mom) and me,” Nguyen wrote to CalMatters. 

Before the incident, Nguyen said UC Berkeley’s University Housing Department failed to give her an evacuation plan that would meet her needs. It wasn’t until after Manriquez shared his experience that the university housing department sent out information on , Nguyen said. 

“UC Berkeley does not do an excellent job of informing disabled students about emergency protocols for persons with disabilities,” Nguyen said. 

The UC Berkeley Office of Disability and Compliance sent out a self-identification questionnaire after her experience asking whether students with disabilities want a consultation to prepare for emergencies. The responses were then shared with building managers and first responders, said UC Berkeley Chief Accessibility Officer Eva Callow. 

Nguyen explained that with folding evacuation chairs, individuals with disabilities are “expected to simply wait” for first responders to assist, “hoping they arrive in time before the fire reaches us.” 

Nguyen wants to see the campus install electric evacuation chairs that allow disabled students like her to evacuate safely without relying on first responders or others. She added that as someone who doesn’t live on the first floor, she understands there might not be a safe route with an electric wheelchair. 

“The current protocol involves us relying on other people to get us out of the building safely,” Nguyen said. “But, I also want to have the resources necessary to take the initiative to evacuate myself.”

In March 2024, nearly six months after the September fire drill, Nguyen said university housing installed a manual evacuation chair on her floor.

Attempts to build accessible emergency plans

Across UC Berkeley’s campus, there are at least  to find an evacuation chair, according to the campus. As of publication, a webpage with in each building was still under construction.

The UC system does not record how many buildings have evacuation chairs across its 10 campuses, though developing system wide policies on disability accommodations such as emergency exits will be the responsibility of the UC’s new Office of Civil Rights.  

“My office is monitoring the progress of this work on our campuses and we’ll keep the board informed,” Drake said at the November UC Regents meeting. 

Within the office, which officially launched in February, there will be a disability rights office dedicated to improving accessibility at UC campuses. 

In January 2024 the UC’s Systemwide Advisory Workgroup on Students with Disabilities provided updated recommendations to better serve disabled students and staff. Developing a systemwide disability-inclusive emergency evacuation plan was the group’s main recommendation. 

“Students with disabilities experience an  for emergency evacuation — and often, downright danger,” the report read.

Currently, all campuses have emergency protocols for students with disabilities, some more extensive than others. While most campuses have evacuation chairs available, the onus falls on students to think proactively and request them, according to UC Communication Strategist Stett Holbrook. 

At UC Irvine, for example, students can use the  to request a customized evacuation plan by selecting “ADA” under the “Report” section. The university is updating its individualized emergency evacuation plan process, so this method will likely change soon, said ADA coordinator Andrew Berk.

“There are a lot of people with hidden disabilities who choose not to disclose,” he said. “We do not in any way want to put pressure on someone to disclose their disability.”

No student has requested an emergency evacuation plan this year, according to Berk. UC Irvine’s Emergency Management Director Randall Styner said his office is working to better communicate emergency evacuation options and resources available to students with campus posters and programming at orientation. 

Berk and Styner collaborate to create customized plans for students when requested. Both stressed the importance of including people with disabilities in the planning process. 

“You cannot have accessibility if you do not involve people with disabilities,” Berk said, adding he is as a person with a disability. 

UC Irvine has installed evacuation chairs in  according to a 2021-2022 emergency management report. Additionally, newer student housing offers two options: a button with two-way communication alerting first responders of the person’s location or a one-way system for guidance during emergencies. 

“This goes beyond people with disabilities because what we do for that population also helps people who are injured and people who might be a little older,” Berk said. 

At UC Davis, representatives from housing, emergency management and the campus fire department are currently revising some emergency protocols, according to UC Davis Crisis Communications Manager Bill Kisliuk.

“The draft calls for relevant campus units, for example, Student Housing and Dining Services, to train staff in identifying those in their communities who have access needs or functional needs and supporting them in an evacuation or other emergency,” Kisliuk wrote to CalMatters.  

Other higher education emergency plans

The 23-campus California State University system requires campuses to have emergency management programs, but not a protocol for accessibility. The Cal State Chancellor’s Office does not track which buildings at each campus have an evacuation chair. Each campus decides how to maintain evacuation chairs in the buildings, depending on how frequently the building is used or who is using the building, said Cal State spokesperson Amy Bentley-Smith.  

Like UC students, Cal State students with disabilities have had to navigate campuses not built for them. Cal Poly Humboldt alum Christine diBella  her campus and the CSU over a  in October 2021. Her complaint outlined a general lack of accessibility on campus, including the lack of an emergency evacuation plan. Despite living on the third floor of her dorm building at the time, like other disabled students she could not get out in her power wheelchair. The case was settled in October 2023.

The California Community Colleges Chancellor’s Office instructs campuses to follow the state-recommended , “emphasizing that districts comply” with the recommendations. Those include communicating plans on social media or having a local disaster registry — a list of individuals who might need additional support during emergencies, said system spokesperson Melissa Villarin.  

“We feel it’s important that college officials, who have deep and specific knowledge of their campuses, partner with local emergency response officials,” said Villarin, who explained each community college district has individualized emergency plans. “Their knowledge, combined, can be used to develop plans and policies that protect students, staff and the public.” If there is a need for further emergency training, campuses are directed to consult the California Office of Emergency Services.

What is happening now at UC?

The UC Office for Civil Rights  Feb. 20 and includes a Title IX office, an office for anti-discrimination and one for disability rights. Catherine Spear will start as  of the civil rights office on May 6, reporting directly to Drake. The office will streamline all discrimination and harassment allegations and aims to provide consistency in the reporting process, according to the office’s website.  

In an email sent March 19, Drake required each campus to designate a representative to update on campus evacuation plan changes and to complete a checklist by June 30. Campuses must designate a campus representative, develop individualized emergency evacuation plans and provide evacuation chairs.  

These new requirements are aimed at ensuring students don’t experience the anguish Manriquez felt in his hallway in September. He says he’s optimistic about the new protocols and office, something that may not have happened had the UC Regents not heard him from that meeting. 

“I think it is extremely important to have leaders among higher education that are representatives of the students they serve,” Manriquez said. “I rarely, if ever have, seen a physically disabled person in a position of university leadership at the highest level.” 

For the record: This story has been updated to clarify the process for students to request an individualized evacuation plan at UC Irvine.

This story was originally published on .

A bill proposed to help children with disabilities actually represents a “staggering” loss of funding to public schools in the form of a “blank check,” would be a hit to rural districts, and unconstitutionally routes state money to private institutions “at the discretion of private individuals,” according to a lawsuit filed Tuesday.

The voucher program in is also “antithetical to both quality and equality” in education, the plaintiffs said.

In the lawsuit, the Montana Quality Education Coalition, or MQEC, and Disability Rights Montana allege HB 393 is unconstitutional in four different ways, including by directing public money to “private actors” not under control of the state, and by directing cash payments to some students “to the direct disadvantage of others.”

Get stories like this delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for Âé¶čŸ«Æ· Newsletter

“HB 393 is part and parcel of a recent national effort to privatize education with public funds that cannot be squared with the spirit and letter of the Montana Constitution,” said the lawsuit, filed by the Upper Seven Law firm.

“Indeed, the Montana legislature is obligated to ‘provide a basic system of free quality public elementary and secondary schools’ and to ‘fund and distribute in an equitable manner to the school districts the state’s share of the cost’ of those schools.”

The nonprofit MQEC is one of the largest education advocacy organizations in the state, representing more than 100 school districts, six educational organizations, and educators in urban and rural areas.

Disability Rights Montana is the federally mandated advocate protecting and advocating for the civil, legal, and human rights of people with disabilities across Montana.

The lawsuit said the bill will harm Disability Rights Montana by hurting the students it needs to protect: “Not only does it make serving students with disabilities who remain enrolled in public school more difficult, HB 393 does not ensure that students with disabilities who opt for an ESA (education savings account) and leave the public school system will receive a free and appropriate public education.”

House Bill 393 was controversial in the most recent legislative session.

Passed by a two-vote margin in 2023, the law allows parents with students who have special needs the ability to be reimbursed with taxpayer money for their child’s education in homeschool or private school or an online nonpublic school.

In a reimbursement program slated to open next school year, school districts take money from their general funds, largely property taxes, and put it into an education savings account with the Office of Public Instruction.

Parents can be reimbursed from the fund for expenses for their child, such as tutoring or test preparation — or they can let the money accumulate until it hits a maximum $125,888, adjusted for inflation, when the child hits 19, the lawsuit said, although families have access to the fund until the student is 24.

“Masquerading as aid to students with disabilities, HB 393 takes public money out of local school district accounts and hands it directly to private individuals with little to no oversight,” said Upper Seven

In the 2023 legislative session, opponents supporting the public education system if the bill was signed into law. One opponent, Tal Goldin, described HB393’s “education savings accounts” as a way of laundering public money.

“This bill does not help Montanans with disabilities,” said Goldin, director of Advocacy at and attorney for Disability Rights Montana, in a statement about the lawsuit. “Instead, it reduces public school resources while offering no assurance that students with disabilities who leave the public schools will receive appropriate educational services that meet their needs. It’s a lose-lose situation.”

The lawsuit, filed against the State of Montana and Republicans Gov. Greg Gianforte and Superintendent of Public Instruction Elsie Arntzen, notes the bill authorizes “any other educational expense approved by the superintendent,” or “standardless spending.”

It also represents as much as $140 million a year redirected from school districts to private individuals if all students who are eligible participate, the lawsuit said, pointing to the cost estimate filed with the bill.

“While HB 393 provides no assurance that students with disabilities will receive the services and education they need, it assuredly provides that public schools will have fewer resources to serve their students, with and without disabilities,” the lawsuit said.

That’s because the cost of public education remains the same — the power bill for a classroom wouldn’t change, for instance — so school districts have to make up the difference, the lawsuit said. In other words, the payouts “compromise the economies of scale” that allow schools to provide a quality education, the firm said.

“MQEC cares about quality public education — full stop,” said Doug Reisig, Montana Quality Education Coalition’s executive director, in a news release from Upper Seven. “Strong public schools foster strong communities. HB 393 is the Montana Legislature’s attempt to shirk its obligation to provide free quality public education to every child in Montana.”

In an email from her office, defendant Arntzen said she is a daughter of a special education teacher and has always supported children of all abilities.

“Local accountability starts with the family. Montana parents know the educational needs of their students better than the government,” said Arntzen, who termed out of the superintendent job but running for the Republican nomination for U.S. House in Montana’s eastern district.

The Governor’s Office said it also doesn’t generally comment on litigation but stressed Gianforte’s . Gianforte is making a bid this year for a second term.

“The governor believes each child is unique and deserves access to the best education possible to meet his or her individual needs, especially for the more than 18,000 students in Montana who require specialized education services,” a spokesperson said.

HB 393 is one of several that was controversial during the most recent legislative session. Another bill, HB 562, is under a temporary injunction after a separate lawsuit alleged it would unconstitutionally outsource public education and divert public school tax dollars to private schools.

Upper Seven is representing plaintiffs in that lawsuit as well. Tuesday, the firm’s executive director said HB 393 also runs contrary to Montana’s promises for students.

“Like our public lands, public schools are one of Montana’s most precious resources,” said Rylee Sommers-Flanagan, Upper Seven Law’s executive director and attorney for the plaintiffs. “The Montana Constitution guarantees a quality education for all students, regardless of background or circumstance. HB 393 hollows out this promise. The law cannot stand.”

is part of States Newsroom, a network of news bureaus supported by grants and a coalition of donors as a 501c(3) public charity. Daily Montanan maintains editorial independence. Contact Editor Darrell Ehrlick for questions: info@dailymontanan.com. Follow Daily Montanan on and .