The following transcript was generated using automated transcription software for the accessibility and convenience of our audience. While we strive for accuracy, the automated process may introduce errors, omissions, or misinterpretations. This transcript is intended as a helpful companion to the original audio and should not be considered a verbatim record. For the most accurate representation, please refer to the audio recording.
Michael Dunne: They say that skiing is all about riding the edge, the edge of your skis and the edge of your abilities. But for ski resorts in Oregon, they've also been living on the edge with regard to legal liability for more than a decade. Oregon law has made it relatively easy for customers to sue entities like ski resorts and other recreational facilities for injuries, opening the door to catastrophic settlements. Today on the show, you'll hear from a reporter at The Oregonian about a major change to this law, which could drastically reduce the legal exposure of the state's outdoor recreation providers. Then, in the second part of the show, you'll hear from our own Brianna Bowman about an important program on the coast helping educate rural and indigenous students about STEM fields. Aimee Green, who is a reporter with The Oregonian, thanks so much for coming on and talking with us.
Aimee Green: Yeah, sure. Happy to be here.
Dunne: I want to talk about the story you've been covering. Your article that you wrote recently, "Oregon Is About to Make It Much Harder to Sue Your Gym and Ski Resort." Tell us about what this bill that passed is going to do for this important segment of our economy, the outdoor recreation and overall recreation industry here in Oregon.
Green: Well, it is going to make it a lot more difficult for lawsuits to succeed in Oregon courts. The idea was brought about because, about 12 years ago, in 2014, there was an injured snowboarder at Mount Bachelor, a teenager who became paralyzed from the waist down from a snow park crash. He sued Mount Bachelor, and the Supreme Court ruled that liability waivers, including the one his parents signed, are unconscionable, at least in this case, and what turned out to be many, many circumstances. Virtually all circumstances, the lawyers tell me. Whenever a skier, someone who climbs at a rock gym, hires a whitewater river rafting guide, or even participates in a parks and rec program like summer camp or tennis lessons, and they sign these liability waivers, those waivers are no longer valid. They don't hold up in court. So what this bill that passed the Legislature does is say that, actually, in many circumstances these liability waivers that participants sign will now hold water. For what I might describe as lower-level lawsuits, like lawsuits claiming ordinary negligence against a recreational provider, meaning: This ski resort, or this river guide, was careless or inattentive in some way that led to my injury. What this bill says is that if you have signed a liability waiver and you are claiming ordinary negligence, then you should not be able to sue.
Dunne: Let's just kind of game this out. If a ski resort has shoddy equipment on its ski lift that it doesn't maintain, and a tragic accident happens as a result, that would be a situation involving more than ordinary negligence. So, if you signed a waiver, but this kind of unusual negligence caused your injury, you could still sue?
Green: Yes, exactly. You bring up a great point. There are many carve-outs in this bill. Let's say a ski resort rented you a pair of skis that were improperly maintained. You're skiing down the slope, and your skis malfunction. You crash, your boot doesn't release properly, and you break your leg because of the carelessness of the ski resort in maintaining those skis. Under this bill, your liability waiver, even though you signed it, would probably be thrown out by a judge, and your lawsuit would proceed. So there are carve-outs for things like improperly maintained equipment. Another big one: There's a carve-out for situations where a vehicle hits you, such as a snowcat, a snowmobile, or a bus in the parking lot. There was a lot of debate in the Legislature about whether those lawsuits could still go forward, and this bill says yes.
Dunne: I see. I would imagine the industry is pretty happy about this. We've done stories about how liability insurance is getting incredibly expensive for ski resorts, to the point where some of them were worried it could be an existential crisis. I imagine they're quite pleased right now with this.
Green: Yeah, they are. If you had asked them a week or two ago how they were feeling, they would have said they were very worried about Oregon recreation, whether they would have to raise prices on the people who patronize their resorts, or climbing gyms, or even general gyms. They were worried more insurance companies would pull out of Oregon and that they would not be able to afford insurance from the ones that remained. The recreational providers were very worried and upset. But last-minute amendments to the bill that did ultimately pass have made them very happy. It doesn't give them everything they wanted, but I think everyone will have to see how it goes. All the recreational providers I've heard from say this is going to make things better and they are relieved, but they really have to see how it plays out. We don't know for sure, case by case in court, which lawsuits will succeed and which will get thrown out.
Dunne: This seemed to pass overwhelmingly, but there was some opposition. I think state Rep. Nathan Sosa, a Democrat from Hillsboro, voted against it. Can you tell us what the opposition said?
Green: Yeah, I'm glad you brought that up. What Rep. Sosa from Hillsboro said was really interesting to me. He was one of only two legislators out of 86 who voted no, and he is a plaintiff's lawyer who represents injured people. He said: This bill says it's OK for Oregonians to sign away their constitutional right to sue. Everybody should be able to seek redress for wrongs they've suffered in court. And if we're allowing people to sign away the right to sue in certain circumstances, is it OK to say that if you go whitewater rafting, you can sign away your freedom of religion? Or if you want to work out at your neighborhood gym, you can sign away your right to vote? He gave what I thought was a powerful speech on the House floor. He said that years from now, there will be Oregonians who are injured, who are paralyzed, who lose limbs, who suffer brain damage, and when they go to file a lawsuit against the recreational provider they had hired or paid money to, they're going to find out they can't sue because of something in the small print that they didn't fully read or understand. And they're going to ask: How is this even possible? And the answer will be that back in 2026, legislators said it was OK. I'll also mention the response from state Rep. Kim Wall, a Republican from Medford. She said that we can sign away certain constitutional rights if we understand what we're doing. She used the example of police showing up at your front door and asking if they can take a look around without a warrant. You have a constitutional right requiring them to get a warrant first, but you are free to say, "Come on in." She said it's the same thing with signing away your right to sue for ordinary negligence. Her quote: "If you want to strap two skinny fiberglass skis to your feet and hurtle yourself down a mountain," that is your choice. No one is making you do it. And if you want to sign a liability waiver so you can go skiing, and you understand what you're doing, Oregon should allow it.
Dunne: We're all very used to waiver-type documents. We're almost inundated with them, whether it's getting a new smartphone or agreeing to a software update. The documents are incredibly lengthy, and the vast majority of us probably don't read them thoroughly. Does this bill help or hinder the public's understanding of what they might be liable for, and what a ski resort, for example, might be liable for?
Green: I can only speak from personal experience and the experience of people around me. I think what you're alluding to is that there are many waivers, fine-print agreements, and contracts that we're all asked to sign as we go about our everyday lives, and who really reads all that fine print and actually understands it? I've spent a lot of time reading this bill, looking at liability waivers, and trying to understand what certain clauses or phrases mean. It's very difficult. I've even had to ask some of the bill's drafters what certain language means, and sometimes it's difficult even for them to explain. I think in the end, the feeling is: This is what we believe it means, and we'll have to see how it plays out in court. And the Legislature may come back and make tweaks if they find that there are horrible injustices, like people being unable to seek compensation in truly egregious cases of carelessness or recklessness on the part of recreational providers. Or maybe the concern turns out to be that people simply didn't understand what they were signing away.
Dunne: When you were doing research for this article, did supporters of the legislation point to any specific cases where someone was able to sue, because of the Supreme Court ruling, in a way that really financially hurt a ski resort or other organization? A case that, under this new legislation, might have turned out differently?
Green: It is really interesting to look at the cases that would have gone through under the old rules and compare them to what might happen under this bill. The one that comes up most often, other than the Mount Bachelor case involving the teenager who became paralyzed, was a case a few years later at Ski Bowl. A 30-something-year-old mountain biker, an expert rider, was using the lift to go up in the summertime and then riding down a trail. There was a signpost in what he described as the main part of the trail. He hit it and ended up paralyzed from the waist down. He had signed a liability waiver, but a judge threw it out before trial, allowing his lawsuit to proceed. He went to a jury and won just over $11 million. It later settled for about $10.5 million, which often happens when parties negotiate after a verdict. A lot of people say he was able to get that $10.5 million because he sued for ordinary negligence. Under this bill going forward, he might not be able to bring that same claim. He would have to prove a higher level of negligence, known as gross negligence, in order to win.
Dunne: Aimee, always appreciate having you on. Aimee Green, reporter with The Oregonian. Thanks so much for coming on and talking to our audience.
Green: Yeah, thanks, Michael.
Dunne: Now our reporter fills us in on a rural education program on the coast. Brianna Bowman, our weekend edition host. Brianna, thanks so much for coming on and talking with us.
Brianna Bowman: Yeah, happy to be here.
Dunne: You also do stories from time to time for us, and I was really intrigued by the story you put together about students at the Siletz Valley School District. Talk about this story, this really unique program.
Bowman: Yeah, so I was first invited to come check out a family math and science event at Siletz Valley School, which is the only school in Siletz. I knew this was part of a program that Oregon State University runs: a pre-college program called SMILE, which stands for Science and Math Investigative Learning Experiences. Schools in rural areas of Oregon participate in these SMILE clubs, and the students at this school, primarily from the fourth and fifth grade classes, were showcasing what they had learned that year. There was a lot of material about whales, and some students had investigated ocean mysteries. They kind of explored whatever piqued their interest. Also showcased at the event was another program supported by OSU called Explore and More. That program is unique to Siletz Valley School and Chemawa Indian School. It guides high school students through STEM experiences and research topics, while also blending and enriching those experiences with indigenous arts and culture. The students at the event were showcasing projects they had worked on throughout the year. It was really interesting, and the students were so passionate about it. I had so much fun talking to them about their projects.
Dunne: What I found fascinating, too, is that, with budgets the way they are and our education system facing a lot of challenges, it was really neat that a very rural school district, with fewer than 300 kids in the entire district, was getting this kind of attention and these kinds of resources from OSU.
Bowman: Yes, and OSU is really more of a logistical partner in this effort. The Explore and More program is primarily organized and run by three women: Korey Cimock, AJ Mallozzi and Teresa. They are incredibly passionate about this program. They are the ones working directly with the students, though the students also have OSU mentors, students at OSU who serve as mentors for the high schoolers at Siletz and Chemawa. So it's a very collaborative program. I'll also note that Korey and Teresa both work at Siletz Valley School, and AJ is a Ph.D. student at OSU. This program is actually her dissertation. She's studying the impacts of providing a program like this for students.
Dunne: As I understand it, there might be some uncertainty about the programming continuing, because they still need financial support, correct?
Bowman: Yes. They had a federal grant, and I believe they have funding through the end of the fiscal year, through June. But this particular grant has been discontinued, so they are uncertain about the future of the program. I just spoke with AJ, and she made a point that, of course, not having funding is a challenge and concerning in itself. But some of these students have experienced inconsistency as a constant factor in their lives, and having a program and resources that remain consistent to them is incredibly important. So the looming funding gap has a lot of different layers in terms of the impact it could have on students, because this program has had such a positive impact on them. They've seen a measurable increase in graduating seniors going on to college as a result of participating in this program. These students get exposed to professionals in a wide variety of fields, not just classic STEM research, but they also visit chefs in Portland. One of the students I mentioned in the article learned how to make cologne and perfume. They get exposed to so many different paths they could continue on in their lives.
Dunne: Brianna Bowman, who did this story. Brianna, thanks so much for coming on and talking about this.
Bowman: Yeah, thank you, Michael.
Dunne: That's the show for today. All episodes of Oregon on the Record are available as a podcast at KLCC.org. Tomorrow on the show, we'll bring you both sides of a debate on how to best manage Oregon forests, a debate being severely tested by the federal government. I'm Michael Dunne, host of Oregon on the Record. Thanks for listening.
