BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SB 278
Page 1
Date of Hearing: June 21, 2011
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
Mike Feuer, Chair
SB 278 (Gaines) - As Amended: April 25, 2011
PROPOSED CONSENT
SENATE VOTE : 38-0
SUBJECT : Public Safety: Ski Resorts
KEY ISSUES :
1)should ski resorts be required to prepare annual safety plans
and make them available upon REQUEST to the public?
2)should ski resorts be required to file a monthLY safety and
accident report to be available to the pubic upon request?
3)SHOULD SKI RESORTS BE REQUIRED TO ESTABLISH A UNIFORM signage
policy and trial marking policy?
FISCAL EFFECT : As currently in print the bill is keyed
non-fiscal.
SYNOPSIS
This non-controversial bill would require ski resorts to prepare
an annual safety plan and make the plan available for same day
viewing by the public upon request. Additionally, the bill
would require a ski resort to file a monthly safety report and
include information about all fatal incidents that occurred at
the resort within the past month resulting from a recreational
activity. The resort must make the monthly report available
within 30 days of receipt of a request to view the report by the
general public. Finally, the bill would require a ski resort to
establish its own safety signage policy to indicate open and
closed runs, difficulty of runs and the weather and snow
conditions on the slopes. Currently, California ski resorts
fall under the jurisdiction of several different federal and
state organizations and as a result safety rules and regulations
differ widely across the state. As the author notes, this bill
is necessary to standardize safety signage and reporting across
California's approximately two-dozen ski resorts to ensure that
all California skiers are protected by a set of standard safety
SB 278
Page 2
rules. This Committee considered and supported a similar bill,
AB 1652 (Jones, 2010) that was subsequently vetoed by
then-Governor Schwarzenegger who claimed the burden imposed by
the reporting and signage requirements placed on ski resorts was
unnecessary. The bill is supported by ski safety groups,
physicians groups, travel and tourism groups as well as the
local sheriffs and has no known opposition.
SUMMARY : Imposes new safety reporting and signage requirements
on ski resorts in California. Specifically, this bill :
1)Requires a ski resort to prepare an annual safety plan, and
upon request make the plan available to the public the same
day the request is received.
2)Requires a ski resort to prepare a monthly report detailing
any fatal incidents occurring at the resort that occurred
during recreational activity. This report must be made
available within 30 days of the receipt of a request from the
public.
3)Requires a ski resort to establish its own signage policy.
4)Requires a ski resort to establish its own safety padding
policy for the resort.
5)Specifies that none of the provisions shall be construed to
change the existing assumption of risk doctrine as it applies
to ski resorts.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Under federal law, provides that the Secretary of Agriculture
is authorized to issue permits for the use and occupancy of
lands within the National Forest System for nordic and alpine
skiing operations and purposes. (Pub. L. 104-333, div. I,
Title VII, Sec.701, 110 Stat. 4182; 16 U.S.C. 497c.)
2)Under federal law, requires the holder of a winter recreation
resort permit to prepare and annually revise an operating plan
that covers all operations authorized by the permit. (Pub. L.
104-333, div. I, Title VII, Sec.701, 110 Stat. 4182; 16 U.S.C.
497c, et seq.)
3)Requires the reporting of any fatality or injury of a patron
requiring more than standard first aid by an operator of
SB 278
Page 3
amusement rides to the Department of Occupational Health and
Safety. (Labor Code Sec. 7925.)
4)Provides that every person who, among other things, willfully
commits a trespass by knowingly skiing in an area, or on a ski
trail, which is closed to the public and has signs posted
indicating the closure, is guilty of a misdemeanor. (Penal
Code Sec. 602(r).)
COMMENTS : This bill will require ski resorts to establish and
maintain operational safety plans. The author notes:
California has 25 ski resorts, 19 of which are located on
public land and are regulated by the US Forest Service or
US Park Service. Each resort maintains an operating plan
that includes policies regarding: the posting of signs;
warnings related to ski slope conditions, boundaries and
known hazards; and the padding of towers and snowmaking
equipment. While each resort maintains a safety plan as a
part of its operating plan, there is currently no state law
requiring such a document.
The intent of the bill is to require Ski resorts to prepare
a safety plan and provide public access to information
regarding ski and snowboard fatalities. It is being
introduced because there was a need to have a uniform
safety plan among ski resorts that the public could be
familiar with, and also a streamlined process for them to
be able to access reports of fatalities at these resorts
due to snow activities.
Lacking Oversight, Safety and Reporting Standards Are Not
Uniform Between California Ski Resorts: California can proudly
claim some of America's best downhill skiing resorts.
California's 25 resort facilities make up the backbone of the
state's ski tourism industry. However, as a 2008 Assembly
Judiciary Committee Hearing on "Ski and Snowboard Health, Safety
and Liability Standards" found, California's resorts are not
governed by a uniform law. This bill would standardize the
reporting of safety incidents at resorts, and ensure that
resorts publish safety plans for the public to view.
Most of California's ski resorts are located on federal land,
subjecting them to the jurisdiction of the U.S. Forest Service.
Although the U.S. Forest Service requires resorts to file an
annual operating and safety plan and possess the authority to
SB 278
Page 4
enforce safety improvements at resorts, the Service takes a
"hands off" approach to safety regulation and rarely mandates
rules or requires improvements be made. Additionally, all ski
resorts in California enjoy liability protection under
California's "primary assumption of risk" doctrine which shifts
liability from the resort to the skier for any injury suffered
as a result of normal athletic activity. Furthermore,
contractual waivers associated with lift ticket purchases gives
resorts added liability protection. By requiring a resort to
create a formal signage and padding policy this bill seeks to
lessen the frequency and severity of injuries at ski resorts but
in no way alters the liability protections ski resorts currently
enjoy.
Good Signage Makes For Safer Skiers: Regardless of a skier's
skill level, the National Ski Areas Association notes proper
signage and clearly published safety rules ensure that resort
patrons know the boundaries of ski runs, the weather conditions
on the mountain and the proper etiquette to be used on the
slopes. Properly informed skiers are better able to assess the
risks and hazards posed by skiing and anticipate the dangers on
the slopes. By requiring the resorts to publish accident
reports and statistics, skiers can further add to their base of
information. By standardizing the form of publically released
information across the state, skiers will be able to better read
and understand the warnings regardless of what resort they
patronize. Additionally, standardized notification on the
presence of padding allows skiers to pick the safest runs.
While resorts must provide a safe and well maintained facility
for patrons, the ultimate responsibility for a safe ski
experience rests with the individual skier. This information
will help to ensure that skiers truly better understand the risk
that they are assuming when skiing, better enable skiers to make
informed choices about safety on the ski slopes and better
protect the ski resorts from liability associated with accidents
occurring in the normal course of the sport.
Other Related Bills: SB 105 (Yee) would require all downhill
skiers and snowboarders under the age of 18 to wear safety
helmets. That bill would establish a $25 fine on all persons
found to violate the helmet requirement. That bill is scheduled
to be heard by this Committee as well as the Assembly Health
Committee.
Prior Legislation : AB 1652 (Jones, 2010) was similar to this
bill, and would have required ski resorts to prepare an annual
SB 278
Page 5
safety plan, make the safety plan available to the public, and
make available to the public a monthly report with specified
details about any fatal incidents at the resort which resulted
from a recreational activity. The bill would have required a
ski resort to establish its own signage policy and its own
safety padding policy for the resort. AB 1652 was vetoed by
then-Governor Schwarzenegger who claimed it was an unnecessary
burden on resorts.
SB 880 (Yee) (Ch. 278, Stats. 2010) was nearly identical to SB
105 (Yee) which requires minors to wear proper safety helmets
while skiing. SB 880 included a provision making the bill
contingent on the enactment of AB 1652 (Jones). AB 1652 was
vetoed by the governor, which subsequently voided SB 880's
chaptered status. SB 105 is not contingent on the passage of
this bill.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
California Chapter of American College of Emergency Physicians
California Chiropractic Association
California Emergency Nurses Association
California Ski and Snowboard Safety Organization
California Ski Industry Association
California State Sheriff's Association
California Travel Association
Opposition
None on file
Analysis Prepared by : Drew Liebert and Nicholas Liedtke / JUD.
/ (916) 319-2334