[{"_1":2,"_100":-5,"_101":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,76,88],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},"mediaId",6197570,"mediaKeyId","3850921-463662437e4bbd5d9bdeb4f0f1e0a3d5","parentId",3850921,"title","Oregon debate over waivers for recreational injuries pits insurers and ski industry against victims’ advocates","audioSeconds",4527,"startMs",721000,"endMs",5248000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3850921-463662437e4bbd5d9bdeb4f0f1e0a3d5&start=721&end=5248","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3850921-463662437e4bbd5d9bdeb4f0f1e0a3d5/thumbnail_721000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6197570/Oregon/Oregon-debate-over-waivers-for-recreational-injuries-pits-insurers-and-ski-industry-against-victims-advocates","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6197570-c5c5f7d94f17fd041633171497c11995/orig.mp4?Expires=1775278943&Signature=MZkj8kqFXMUX2WO6cYsBlBlJKOosQfR39nj0jA1qehDDV6xTR27sop-kTxueLkmL05TKW9XKFChjzksbzfWtSbks9rf43biSP9sgWZDjTsDXS0A2c1dkfRKFaJpvU8he~Y8nfwOVccJTIUyYYxTWz-bUV4~Hdre-OcR2-~lGmVbWlOS5fKA~ewXMib-Dcpf6SKHHAfIUwOkkyDPlpaw156ph6U7AWCNwMgSMQA2fzGrb3nEi6j4SaIw25e~~wmEsJSnyfmZLXPw075XIFlyv9uJ0tfJgxjXPiLtxoqGjhnKXL6dbVCsQXYJ3VS4cVyF8q09yIjJw64VNMBpG1tQmYA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","Oregon Legislature","date","2025-06-16T00:00:00Z","article","Senate Bill 1196 drew lengthy testimony and divided views on Monday as insurers, ski‑area operators, victims and legal advocates debated whether the state should allow waivers that bar ordinary‑negligence claims arising from participation in sports and recreational activities.

Senator Floyd Pruzanski, chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, testified in strong opposition and urged that the subject be handled in judiciary because the bill would “limit an individual seeking redress for injuries received due to simple ordinary negligence.” Pruzanski said the measure risks creating a “double standard” that would deny ordinary‑negligence claims in recreational settings while similar claims would remain available in places such as grocery stores.

Personal testimony highlighted stakes on both sides. Joel Shaikh, who told the committee he is now paraplegic after a 2020 ski crash that he blamed on unsafe conditions at Mount Hood Meadows, told senators: “This bill allows operators to walk away from their negligence in not keeping paying customers safe.” Amanda Halbert, who described a 2020 crash that killed her husband, said the run “was nothing short of a death trap” and urged senators to “vote no on limiting the rights of Oregonians.”

Industry and insurer witnesses said availability and affordability of liability insurance for outdoor recreation operators are at risk. Kimberly McGare, an attorney representing ski‑area interests, told the committee that insurers have been leaving Oregon’s market and that “as of May 30, we are down to one” carrier for ski areas. Tim Hendrickson, who manages the Mountain Guard Insurance Program, said underwriting specialty recreation is complex and that only a very small number of insurers write this business; he told the committee “it takes a significant amount of expertise to write in this industry.”

Proponents, including McGare and Jim Manley of the Pacific Legal Foundation, said the bill restores the pre‑2014 balance under which clear waivers were enforceable for ordinary negligence but did not apply to gross negligence, intentional misconduct or minors. They pointed to other Western states — and to the 2024 Colorado Supreme Court decision in Miller v. Crested Butte — as evidence that waiver enforcement can be limited to ordinary negligence and that statutory claims remain available.

Opponents warned that the bill’s breadth could bar many claims. Joe Pucci, an attorney for injured clients, said the bill’s language barring claims “arising out of or related to” a sport could sweep broadly and cited examples — drowning when lifeguards were absent, sexual abuse by a coach, or equipment hazards — that he said could be lost absent a full legislative solution. Senator Pruzanski and others suggested sending the measure to the Senate Judiciary Committee and to a cross‑stakeholder work group to explore alternatives, such as state‑backed insurance pools or other mechanisms to preserve operator insurance without extinguishing victims’ ordinary‑negligence claims.

The committee kept the public hearing open and carried the item forward to a future meeting; senators said a work group and additional committee sessions will continue the discussion. No committee vote on SB 1196 was taken on June 16.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","Senate Committee On Finance and Revenue 06/16/2025 1:00 PM","oneSentenceSummary","Senate Bill 1196 would allow operators to require waivers that bar ordinary‑negligence claims arising from participation in sports and recreation; proponents say it is needed to shore up insurance availability, opponents say it strips legal recourse and should go to the judiciary committee for fuller review.","taxTitle","Finance and Revenue, Senate, Committees, Legislative, Oregon","taxId",17809,"location","Oregon","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":77,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":78,"_41":79,"_43":80,"_45":81,"_47":82,"_49":83,"_51":84,"_53":85,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":86,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":87,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6197576,"Oregon bill would route foreclosure sale surpluses to Treasury, create statewide claims process",4054,194000,4248000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3850921-463662437e4bbd5d9bdeb4f0f1e0a3d5&start=194&end=4248","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3850921-463662437e4bbd5d9bdeb4f0f1e0a3d5/thumbnail_194000.jpg","/articles/6197576/Oregon/Oregon-bill-would-route-foreclosure-sale-surpluses-to-Treasury-create-statewide-claims-process","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6197576-6d54720a1508d315ee6aca7b53fd8f49/orig.mp4?Expires=1775278943&Signature=n16OKOoe69llzDtusQBg9vpXk6KPHgKm6mYEbank1EX1za87Tb1bkx4-pQXQ4lQS2ZO8uKbwPWxo6MIy1QN~K-ikupJ2CfJF9nL0q3m46H24jcCEP-jun76xCQxHflnJyhzxaSHSgOUlwm2um3EkmEdO74mKgf9SiQ4dBqEQ08NiOzvaZaZXgxArI-TQnwg1KKEmT5Ur08wj2kIyalqhPMK48ZBdXvpxlV3ckYU1MrFSN2xIUfOPQxLjxMZbEFZEuogAPSlOoSgXeV1ARNdwVVneVIfwRcnaH8CGeJH4ilTcYJIdWc2FLsQ7qQpPumurvXReESGXygq5x~74EFVKJw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Representative Emerson Levy told the Senate Committee on Finance and Revenue on Monday that House Bill 2089A establishes a statewide process for handling surplus proceeds from property tax foreclosure sales and directs those surpluses to the Oregon State Treasury’s unclaimed property program.

“House Bill 2089A relates to how the surplus proceeds of property tax foreclosure sales will be handled,” Representative Levy said, framing the measure as a follow-up to the U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 decision in Tyler v. Hennepin County and to prior state legislation (House Bill 4056, 2024).

The bill would require counties to transfer surplus proceeds to the State Treasury rather than retain them locally. Claudia Chobanu, trust property director for the Oregon State Treasury, told the committee the Treasury already operates an unclaimed property program and would list foreclosure surpluses on its website where owners can claim funds “for free 24 hours a day.” Chobanu added the bill would allow funds to be sent to Treasury “as soon as the surplus is realized rather than once a year” to speed access for homeowners and reduce county call volume.

Levy and supporters described two sale tracks in the bill: residential properties that are a current or former primary residence would permit counties to use a real estate agent (with an exemption to procurement rules for certain transactions) to maximize sale value; other properties would generally be sold via standard auction procedures with bid steps tied to market value. Levy said the Treasury’s existing unclaimed property infrastructure would be used to vet and pay legitimate claims and to guard against fraudulent claim-shopping that emerged after Tyler.

Consumer advocates and counties testified they reached a compromise on the measure. Andrea Meyer, director of government relations for AARP Oregon, said the bill includes mandatory brief notice language in five languages directing owners to the Treasury website and contains provisions intended to “maximize the value of the property, particularly residential properties.” Justin Lowe of the Association of Oregon Counties said counties had been concerned about administrative and financial burdens but worked with stakeholders to produce a version they could accept while remaining attentive to implementation costs.

Pacific Legal Foundation, which represented the Tyler plaintiff in the U.S. Supreme Court, supported the bill as the “best sort of compromise” post‑Tyler, said Jim Manley, the group’s state policy chief. County assessors and tax collectors indicated support for the negotiated approach while noting implementation will be administratively substantial, Eric Chancellor said.

No amendments or votes on the bill’s merits were recorded at the June 16 meeting; the committee proceeded to a work session vote on a different item before closing the hearing. Supporters said the bill aims to ensure that surplus foreclosure proceeds reach homeowners and heirs in a consistent statewide process rather than remaining in county coffers or being subject to fragmented local procedures.

The committee moved House Bill 2089A to the Senate floor with a “do pass” recommendation later in the session; the committee’s roll call recorded the motion’s passage.","House Bill 2089A would send surplus proceeds from property tax foreclosure sales to the Oregon State Treasury’s unclaimed property program and set procedures for sale and notice, a compromise developed after the U.S. Supreme Court’s Tyler v. Hennepin decision.",{"_33":89,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":90,"_41":91,"_43":92,"_45":93,"_47":94,"_49":95,"_51":96,"_53":97,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":98,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":99,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":72,"_73":74,"_75":74},6197581,"Senate Finance Committee moves Senate Bill 106 to Joint Committee on Tax Expenditures",145,43000,188000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3850921-463662437e4bbd5d9bdeb4f0f1e0a3d5&start=43&end=188","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3850921-463662437e4bbd5d9bdeb4f0f1e0a3d5/thumbnail_43000.jpg","/articles/6197581/Oregon/Senate-Finance-Committee-moves-Senate-Bill-106-to-Joint-Committee-on-Tax-Expenditures","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6197581-7a91aebd6df6080dc448e066f62ec38b/orig.mp4?Expires=1775278943&Signature=SX5bMN9aiEvNAsS7Tgn6XkmJUd9qh~UVIZBbp-dBc7z48Fu~fWjumXOD3EbhjkktlWD-dEYdoLLAw5f-zuXQQ2EzOUA3j6PbeFFZdYEa0dVKqK2Yi3sQQlOqjQLBpjiKdBFpADxOinTfSW7jIXKk6jhk1IuAhzFY2xR7ncAuamV8s6Pf6RNLUjNZFX5vGXrTG4pSbEefvo7iuC95uXQSbciZFwBBC4tBgEEsC3eWUpV8yTRAg600bn63ejl7DbvWU13yIEdBFCkscD57xWDGSIkdsCOND6pcKzm1uz7Eka7~TbLhSdXaciaG9XcTvBdesoTlGcbzzzPLAV7cWITP-A__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","The Senate Committee on Finance and Revenue voted Monday to move Senate Bill 106 to the Joint Committee on Tax Expenditures without recommendation.

Chair Cher Meek opened a work session on Senate Bill 106 “for the purpose of moving it to the Joint Committee on Tax Expenditures,” then Vice Chair McLean moved the bill “to the floor without recommendation as to passage and add a subsequent referral to the Joint Committee on Tax Expenditures,” the committee record shows.

The committee’s roll call recorded five ayes: Senator Patterson, Senator Starr, Senator Taylor, Vice Chair McLean and Chair Meek. Chair Meek said the bill’s fiscal and revenue impacts were minimal and called the motion passed.

Because the committee’s action was a referral without recommendation, the vote does not adopt policy on the merits; the bill will now be considered by the Joint Committee on Tax Expenditures. No further debate or amendments were recorded during the work session.

The committee then closed the work session on Senate Bill 106 and proceeded to other agenda items.","The Senate Committee on Finance and Revenue voted to send Senate Bill 106 to the Joint Committee on Tax Expenditures without recommendation after a brief work session.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Oregon debate over waivers for recreational injuries pits insurers and ski industry against victims’ advocates

Oregon bill would route foreclosure sale surpluses to Treasury, create statewide claims process

Senate Finance Committee moves Senate Bill 106 to Joint Committee on Tax Expenditures