I had a really good conversation with a head honcho at the local library about recently implemented policies that make it difficult for people who have a hard time getting to the library to get books (they decided that other people couldn't pick up someone's books for them, even if they had that person's card, for example. I explained that no policy should be at the expense of Disabled people, especially since the library's a public service, and it should be open to everyone. That doesn't mean that it would look the same for everyone. I also emphasized the fact that Disabled people have a long history (and current reality) of forced institutionalization, isolation, and other coercive measures that keep us shut in. Any policy decision that excludes us carries on that legacy.
Cumberland, as he pointed out, is also pointed out is full of older folk* who may not be able to get out. And for something to be truly accessible, it benefits everyone. Even though Disabled people are often hit hardest by inaccessibility, true accessibility benefits everyone: parents who can't get to the library because lack of childcare, etc. They had a sign above the mechanized door buttons that said that they were only to used by "handicapped people." But again, accessibility should be for everyone, including parents pushing strollers.
He was really receptive, and I'm working with him to develop more systemic policy changes that don't shut us out. I'm not giving out cookies here, but I'm always relieved when I'm not meant with backlash or defensive resistance.
*I always find it odd that people say "the disabled and elderly," as though a 68 year old who uses a wheelchair because of age-related arthritis, doesn't have the same or similar access concerns (or experiences ableism, even without recognizing it), than I do, just because I'm in my 20s, Is Disability such a terrifying thing that we're not even willing to comes to terms with the fact that everyone will become Disabled sooner or later, even through aging?