In 2006, 18-year-old Myles Bagley suffered serious injuries while snowboarding at Mt. Bachelor’s terrain park. He accused the resort of being negligent in its design and maintenance of the park. Prior to the injury, Bagley had signed a liability waiver — a contract that customers may sign when participating in recreational activities, which attempts to release an operator from legal responsibility for potential injuries incurred during an activity. In 2014, after years of legal proceedings, the Oregon Supreme Court decided that enforcement of the liability waiver Bagley signed was unethical — a decision that largely deemed waivers unenforceable in the state.
Since the ruling, several businesses in the recreation industry have called for liability reform, reporting increasing insurance premiums and, in turn, growing costs associated with activities.
A proposed bill in the Oregon Legislature, House Bill 3140, could reintroduce the ability for recreation businesses to require customers to sign a liability waiver, offering a layer of protection against being sued and, thus, lowering insurance rates. Opponents of the bill, however, see the move as unjust to individuals.
Protect Oregon Recreation (POR), a coalition of statewide recreation providers, brought the bill forward. According to Erik Kancler, a lobbyist with POR, many local recreation providers have lost insurance providers or experienced skyrocketing premiums due to a greater degree of perceived risk in the state.
“You have Oregon-based providers going out of business and providers from out of state who aren’t comfortable coming to Oregon,” Kancler told the Source Weekly.
The Oregon Bicycle Racing Association, based out of Bend, was dropped by its liability insurance carrier in 2021. While it was able to find a new insurer, its premiums rose significantly, according to its written testimony supporting HB 3140.
Vámonos Outside in Bend, an organization connecting the Latine/BIPOC community to the outdoors, noted in a written testimony that the high cost of insurance and potential fear of liability can be harmful to small organizations, making it difficult to sustain its programs.
The Bend Chamber of Commerce, which aims to help local businesses thrive, also supports the bill.
“If you look at the list of supporters, it’s largely small businesses that are in or adjacent to the recreation industry in Bend and Central Oregon,” said Sara Odendahl, director of government affairs at the Bend Chamber. “That is who we are as an economic engine in terms of the community… it’s really the heartbeat of our economy.”
The Bend Chamber has heard from varying businesses — including large entities such as Mt. Bachelor, one of the largest employers in the region, as well as solo entrepreneur fly fishing guides — that are supportive of this bill.
“HB3140 ensures that Oregonians continue enjoying safe, professionally managed outdoor environments, preserving the state’s recreation heritage,” said Mt. Bachelor General Manager John Merriman in an email to the Source Weekly. “Mt. Bachelor is supportive of the legislation, and we urge our representatives here in Bend, and across the state, to pass it into law.”
Other local entities in support of HB 3140 include Cog Wild Bicycle Tours, the outdoor gear consignment shop The Gear Fix and the City’s tourism promotion agency, Visit Bend, among others.
According to Odendahl, the recreation industry is a major driver of Bend’s economy. In 2023, recreators and visitors spent over $380 million in outdoor activities, supporting almost 3,500 jobs.
“We’re talking about this really large sector of our economy, which is really important, so that data really kind of underscores our support,” Odendahl told the Source Weekly.
The Chamber is also interested in helping Oregon become a more business-friendly state. According to Odendahl, Oregon ranks fairly low, nationally, when it comes to its tax climate and liability climate — things that businesses consider when looking to relocate, grow or start up in the state.
“This bill is just one example of a way that we can create a business-friendly, business-supportive state that’s going to help the entire state grow in terms of our economic output,” she said.
Kancler with POR explained that the current liability laws also affect the individuals utilizing the services.
“The user loses access, loses opportunity or pays more,” he said. “All of these activities are impacted. The impacts, like the proportional increases, are hardest felt by the smaller providers.”
Caleb Burns, co-owner of SWS Mountain Guides, out of Mt. Shasta, California, believes that the bill would enhance safety for individuals in the state.
Burns argues that it’s less safe for people to recreate in Oregon because there are fewer businesses willing to provide guided tours, experiences and safety lessons. He believes the bill would encourage more highly trained guides and outfitters to operate in Oregon.
“Insurance premiums go up significantly when you operate in Oregon,” Burns told the Source Weekly. “Outfitters and guides don’t make a ton of money already. And when you start to raise that insurance premium, we have two options: Either we raise our price, which is already expensive, or we just don’t do business there.”
Putting it on the People
Opponents feel the bill would be addressing increasing insurance premiums by placing the costs on the backs of those who are injured.
The Oregon Trial Lawyers Association, Oregon’s largest plaintiff firm which aims to protect access to justice, does not support the bill. The association sees the bill as unfair to individuals and believes it will limit people’s rights to go to a jury trial. “Businesses have an obligation to keep their customers safe. And when they don’t, it’s up to a jury to hear the facts of the case and decide, on a case-by-case basis, the outcome. This is our fundamental, constitutional right,” said Melissa Bobadilla, president of the Oregon Trial Lawyers Association.
At a Feb. 19 public hearing, supporters and those in opposition testified about the impacts of the bill. Bagley, the individual injured at Mt. Bachelor in 2006, submitted testimony stating his opposition.
“If this bill is allowed to move forward, there would be no recourse for a young man, just entering adulthood, who had his life utterly shattered (though fortunately not taken) by the poor design of a recreational feature at a ski resort,” Bagley wrote in his testimony.
Bend resident Allison Hickey, who was injured in June 2024 after a bull jumped the fence at the Sisters Rodeo, also submitted testimony in opposition, writing that the bill would take away the rights of Oregonians injured by an operator’s negligence.
David Rosen, a personal injury attorney who owns the Bend firm High Desert Law, sees the bill as an ineffective way to address the rising cost of premiums.
“I do this work because individual by individual, we get to help a person who’s been catastrophically injured and taken off their life’s path and work to get them back on their life’s path. And that’s the goal,” Rosen told the Source Weekly. “Part of that is holding a responsible party accountable. This bill would take that possibility off the table.”
Opponents also feel that bringing back liability waivers could cause businesses to be less careful.
“The best way to make sure companies do what they should do to protect Oregonians is the knowledge that they will be held responsible if they cause injury when they fail to act with the care that a reasonable person would exercise (negligence). And this bill takes that off the table, too,” said Rosen.
Instead of focusing on a bill, opponents believe the legislature should focus on insurance reform. With rising premiums in various industries, Rosen is not convinced this bill will change the way insurers work in Oregon.
“The general complaint from the recreation industry is the rising cost of insurance premiums. Even if the legislature were to pass this law, it’s naïve to believe the insurance companies are going to do the right thing — or anything different at all,” he said.
This article appears in The Source Weekly February 27, 2025.
MAKE LOCAL JOURNALISM HAPPEN
Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.
