Feature story: Burgers and brews among friends at the Dutch Goose

I'm very sad that this painful issue is being revived (and truly hope my comments, or parts of them, will not be erased).

--- I'm so glad that I am able to go to the Dutch Goose again, after quite unexpectedly becoming disabled 10 years ago. I'm even happier that our disabled Vets can now access the building and have fun at the Goose.

--- The Dutch Goose is not a victim here. They avoided compliance with the ADA requirements, which had been in place for over 20 years before the Goose finally was forced to comply.

Only part of the $2+ million remodeling covered the access issues....there was a total re-design of the restaurant (it needed it). Now the Dutch Goose is much more attractive, and much more functional for everyone (not just disabled folks). It also seems busier than ever.

Can we move on? It would be good for the entire community and good for the Goose.

Looking forward to visiting the new Goose for a round of their amazing deviled eggs, which I hope are still on the menu. And watching SC Trojans football.

Too bad Sr. Hernandez didn't realize he could park in the rear lot & use the ramp which was already in place from the sidewalk to the back door for access. I'm not very sympathetic to litigious folks who ignore the accommodations already in place. There are quite a few MP restaurants that aren't ADA compliant so I hope Sr. Hernandez didn't select only The Goose for his attentions.

Ms./Mr. Downtowner:
The parking spaces in the rear lot were standard parking spaces. Handicapped parking spaces include extra space for people to safely exit/enter their vehicles. This is essential for wheelchair users and cane users.

Disabled spaces must also be level to be safe, which the Goose's former disabled spots were definitely not. There were other code violations as well....e.g. the bathrooms, which are pretty important in a restaurant.

Speaking of restaurants with access issues -- I immediately think of a 1960s breakfast place on Santa Cruz, where the booths and aisles are far too narrow for access, and the only bathrooms are upstairs. Disabled people can't go to this restaurant.

So I agree with you that there are several other non-compliant restaurants Menlo Park that should make the access modifications which have been required by law for so long.

[Post removed. Please don't use Town Square to accuse people of criminal conduct. The litigant may have filed multiple suits, but unless he was convicted of extortion, don't make the accusations on Town Square.]

@Menlo Voter: Just hope that you never end up disabled. Trust me, you might not find the experience all that pleasurable...then again, you might find out why "disabled fan" feels the way he does about the remodel effort by Dutch Goose.

Mr. Hernandez had the guts to take on so many businesses to change things for the better, I love the new Goose! I used to go there many years ago when I was in high school, and had to stop due to a disability. If one has to use a wheelchair having an ADA bathroom is critical. So many people don't understand this, having not been in this situation. Think of all our vets who can now enjoy the facilities! I'd like to be able to go back to many more of the Menlo Park spots I love, which have yet to update their facilities.

If a restaurant is going to use the public commons (which, of course they do!) they should be accessible.

They've had dozens of years to figure a way to do it.

if they suddenly are surprised at the cost after 20 years of profitability, perhaps they should change their model.

Can't serve? Then deliver. Cater. Whatever.

20+ years? C'mon.

[Post removed. Please don't use Town Square to accuse people of criminal conduct. The litigant may have filed multiple suits, but unless he was convicted of extortion, don't make the accusations on Town Square.]

Menlo Voter -- "My problem is with people like Mr Hernandez who really aren't interested in accessibility. They're shake down artists. If they were truly interested in accessibility they wouldn't take "settlement" money to go away. They're extortionists and they've found a legal way to extort money from businesses."

So YOU say.

And we should take that opinion seriously because...?

stop:

do a little research. This guy is a well known ADA litigant. So's his attorney.

If businesses are failing in this area, it is not because of ADA. It is due to the real estate madness in the area. Prices and commercial rents are beyond irrational. No one puts a dime into their properties, merchants suffer from obscene rents. Yet non-compliant properties still exist and health and safety and zoning regulations still exist.

If not for Mr. Hernandez, the Dutch Goose would still be inaccessible today and would be even more than the 20+ years out of compliance it was when the suit began.

Mr. Hernandez' settlement was not outlandish -- I believe he was awarded about 15k. Regardless of the exact amount, if he had an attorney, the lawyer took 40% and both paid taxes on the settlement.

I see the settlement as an appropriate fee for Hernandez' willingness to see this through, and believe it is a fair award for the horrible attacks he endured along the way. I am disabled, but don't think I could have endured the hate. Hernandez' lawsuit helped many many people gain access... and it should put other local scofflaws on notice.

But not having to sue in the first place would have been the best option. Everyone involved would have saved a lot of money and a lot of emotion.

My last post on this topic will begin with the point of the first post:
The Goose is so much more attractive and functional for everyone with this remodel and it seems busier than ever. It's a Win-Win that could have been a lot simpler and cheaper if the property owners had con it without the drama.

disabled fan:

the point is that many establishments simply can't afford to bring buildings built LONG before the ADA and people like Hernandez are out there suing them knowing full well they can't afford the money to bring their establishment up to ADA requirements. Yet, Hernandez and his attorney will SETTLE FOR A MONETARY FEE THAT DOES NOT REQUIRE THE ESTABLISHMENT TO BRING ITS BUILDING UP TO ADA CODE. Is it clear now that they are not really interested in getting buildings up to code? If they were they wouldn't settle in the cases where buildings weren't going to brought up to code. As I said, legal extortion. The Dutch Goose situation may be different, but it is an exception.

shouldn't some of the blame be on the landlord ? Why is it the Goose id getting most of the blame ? The DG is paying rent, hoping whomever owns the building will bring it up to code.

Like any regulation, the ADA has been subject to abuse. There are people who simply troll restaurants - often by google earth maps - and threaten the owners with lawsuits if they don't send them money. It's a mafia-style shakedown, pure and simple.

There are individuals (usually lawyers) who threaten hundreds of small businesses every year. As Menlo Voter said, they have NO interest in correcting the problem. If the business owner sends them money, usually $5,000 or so, they will drop the threat. Tony Soprano would be proud.

A well intentioned law has become a joke and simply a new litigation ploy for attorneys.

Pogo & Menlo Voter & Dutch Goose landlord -- I had to respond, even though I wanted out of this acrimonious topic.

--- If a lawsuit had been filed by a disabled Veteran, you would have said that the Dutch Goose should stop avoiding the disability law and become accessible right away? Would a vet be entitled to the settlement, or would you also attack this person? I'm wondering what the Vet I saw yesterday with 2 artificial legs would say.

--- The excuses against the DG's refusal to follow the law were and are ridiculous. And the excuses are especially ugly in one of the wealthiest communities in the U.S.

Anyone can become disabled at any time -- even you or someone in your family -- and disabled people are entitled to have access to restaurants and bars, theaters, stadiums, schools, transportation, etc. without having to sue.

We don't exclude or shut away disabled people in this country. America is better than that.

[Post removed. Please don't use Town Square to accuse people of criminal conduct. The litigant may have filed multiple suits, but unless he was convicted of extortion, don't make the accusations on Town Square.]

I do understand. And I understand your motivations as well.

Hernandez is disabled, as am I. We both "ACTUALLY CARE" about access.

I'm glad he's taking on the scofflaws who have been avoiding the law for decades. And I think he's entitled to some compensation for both his expenses for suing the lawbreakers and for the hateful attacks that he endures.

disabled fan:

if he truly "cared" why would he take compensation from business owners in lieu of ACTUALLY fixing the access issue. Sorry, this guy is an extortionist nothing more. His disabled status doesn't change that.

Unfortunately, in our system it costs money to get enforceable legal redress when property owners stubbornly refuse to follow both Federal law and the local building & safety code. Not doing so for 20 years is pretty egregious.

I have no problem that a well-known litigant sued a well-known scofflaw.

Personally, I hope Hernandez or someone else has the guts to take on other inaccessible properties in Menlo Park. For now, I won't patronize them and neither will my friends/family. BUT I WILL PATRONIZE THE GOOSE now that it's remodeled.

disabled fan:

clearly you don't get it. Hernandez isn't doing this to make businesses correct their ADA noncompliance. This is his income. [part removed.] You obviously don't care as long as he's doing what you think is great. If he was "goring your ox" I'd doubt you'd feel the same way.

Enjoy the Dutch Goose.