The DOJ Warned Monroe County About This in 2005
RPD Interpreter Access Review Series – PSS Case 2024-0084
In 2024, a Rochester Police officer violated federal disability law and the department's own policy during a traffic stop with a Deaf motorist. When the incident was reviewed, RPD's Professional Standards Section found no policy violation—despite having the violated policy in their own files. This wasn't just a failure of individual judgment. It was a systemic failure nearly two decades in the making.
In 2005, the U.S. Department of Justice entered into a settlement agreement with the Monroe County Sheriff's Office (MCSO) after finding that the agency had failed to provide effective communication to Deaf individuals, as required under Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
That agreement required MCSO to:
Train officers on interacting with Deaf and hard of hearing individuals
Ensure rapid access to qualified interpreters
Equip facilities with auxiliary aids (e.g., TTY devices)
While the agreement did not legally bind the Rochester Police Department (RPD), it was a public, local, and federal enforcement action—a clear signal of what the law required and what best practices looked like in Monroe County.
Yet nearly two decades later, in 2024, an RPD officer failed to secure a qualified interpreter for a Deaf motorist during a traffic stop. Instead, the officer relied on the woman's daughter to relay communication—an approach explicitly discouraged by both federal ADA guidance and RPD's own written policy (General Order 517).
The case was reviewed by RPD's internal Professional Standards Section and higher-level command staff, who found no policy violation, classifying the matter as an "Incident Review." Notably, RPD's internal records included a copy of General Order 517 — the ADA compliance policy that explicitly discourages use of family members as interpreters. Yet despite possessing and presumably reviewing the policy, the investigation made no reference to it when determining that "no wrongdoing" occurred.
If a department that serves the heart of one of the largest Deaf communities in the country can ignore its own policies—and lessons from a nearby federal settlement—it raises serious concerns about whether disability rights in policing are being taken seriously. Rochester is home to the National Technical Institute for the Deaf at RIT, making it a hub for Deaf culture and community in the Northeast. The city's substantial Deaf population makes RPD's ADA compliance not just a legal requirement, but a fundamental aspect of serving its community effectively. When a department in this context can't—or won't—follow its own accessibility policies, it signals a troubling disconnect between stated values and actual practice.
This isn't about a single officer's decision. It's about a longstanding failure to internalize the legal and ethical requirements to ensure Deaf individuals have full and equal access to police services.
The 2005 DOJ settlement should have been a wake-up call for all Monroe County law enforcement. Instead, RPD's failure to hold itself accountable for violating its own ADA policies shows the same warning signs are being ignored nearly 20 years later. The question isn't whether RPD knows what the law requires—it's whether the department has the will to enforce its own standards when disability rights are at stake.
📄 Read the DOJ-Monroe County Settlement: https://www.ada.gov/monroenyatti.htm
Prepared by Transparent Law Enforcement – July 2025
Contact: admin@transparentlawenforcement.com