The day after the storm

Today, squealing neighborhood children slide and screamed down our ice-crusted street, one of Portland’s steepest.

At the bottom of the glazed skid, vigilant parents stomped away the cold between careening downhill runs. Then, clusters of children spinning their way, they stood poised to hurl themselves between kids and cars, walls and the neighbor’s looming, foot-of-the-hill garage.

From my kitchen window, I briefly considered my liability, escape clauses in my insurance policy and vulnerability to litigation.

Winter exposure.

Among my neighbors are parent/attorneys.

Many parent/attorneys. Good neighbors. Nice people.

The laughter of their children — of all the children — brushed aside my worry.

Later, transporting mandarin rinds and banana peels to our compost bin, I discovered Sunday’s storm had spread a cloth over the patio table. Snow padded our mesh metal chairs with frosted white cushions.

A summer setting in December. A trick in time.

On the Trail of the Liability for Liability

Hillsdale readers will find Steve Duin's column in today's Oregonian intriguing. It's the same topic of liability for hiking accidents that I addressed here earlier this week.

Duin builds his story around SWTrails' founder, president and driving force, Don Baack, who is also the president of the Hillsdale Neighborhood Association.

Duin makes the whole right-of-way/liability issue seem like a walk in the woods. He puts it in the same category as Don's stepping up and having SWTrails build a pedestrian bridge built in Stephens Creek Park.

If only ...

Mayor-elect Sam Adams is quoted as saying that he has been "pushing the legal shop to come up with something that works in the real world."

He could be pushing a wet noodle.

Let's see what the City's legal minds come up with in time for our meeting with City officials on Dec. 2 about this issue.

In the meantime, Duin can expect to hear from many property owners who, even if they are eventually freed of liability, don't like hikers skirting their property lines. Absurd, I know, but it's a fact. When the Portland Tribune wrote about this issue months ago, things got nasty and personal very fast in the on-line comments section.

Then there's the little matter of whether the volunteers' trail improvements are up to code. "Red Tape" alert, but several of the property owners will tell you that volunteer-constructed steps are too steep, handrails should be required, and railroad ties are slick and dangerous in the rain. All of which is why they didn't want to be stuck with liability for an accident waiting, as they say, to happen.

So the bright red ribbon Duin ties around the trails package is misleading. I'm certain he will hear from all those folks he didn't talk to. (I checked his blog at noon and there were no comments. Folks may be responding to him directly at steveduin@news.oregonian.com)

I hope that everyone concerned is at the table when we meet with the officials. Duin might like to join us.

Meanwhile, Don told me this morning that the City has assumed liability on many trails already. It can do so in Hillsdale too on a case-by-cases basis, he says. So why doesn't it? Could it be because the liability problem provides cover for the property owners?

Stay tuned.

A Hiker's Liability

Over the past few months here in Hillsdale we’ve had a standoff between hikers and property owners living next to public right-of-ways that accommodate urban trails.

Seems that the City holds the property owners liable for any mishap the befalls a hiker on a trail running next to an owner’s property, even if the right-of-way is technically the City’s.

One property owner, claiming to be fearful of liability, has blocked off access to the right-of-way to hikers. He has also torn out steps that were installed to make passage easier. In their place, the owner has planted juniper bushes, making passage nearly impossible.

Now other property owners are raising similar concerns about liability associated with trails next to their properties.

On Dec. 2, the Pedestrian Office of the City’s transportation department is holding a meeting to address the issue.

So far it has been framed so that the liability gets batted back and forth between the property owners and the City.

How about this? The hikers assume the liability. They might carry an endorsement on their home owners insurance or even on their auto insurance. Or they might get insurance by joining a hiking club like The Mazamas or SWTrails. It shouldn’t cost more than a buck or two for an entire family. If a property owner stops them, they can simply pull out their insurance card and say, “Not to worry. I’m covered and so are you.”

I’m going to suggest the idea the meeting. I’ll let you know how it turns out. In the meantime, let me know if you see any problems with the proposal.