Safety First at Theme Parks

With Disneyland and its planned expansion, and Knott’s Berry Farm, Orange County is a land of theme parks. Since the fatal 1998 Christmas Eve accident at the sailing ship Columbia at Disneyland, substantial legislative progress has been made to improve the safety of park rides in California. But there is still much unresolved. Exactly what kinds of accidents to report, and how inspections will be done, both have been contested during the pending implementation phase of the reform legislation.

The Columbia accident provided needed impetus for a movement that had been resisted by the effective lobbying interests for the theme park industry for years. But since AB 850 was signed into law last fall, implementation has faltered, largely because regulations have been lobbied over in the post-legislative stage. This is a politically difficult and sensitive time where a higher standard of safety still must be secured. Legislators already have passed a law, and therefore can say they have done their part. Now it is up to the bureaucracy, with suggestions from the industry and consumer advocates, to make it work.

The California Department of Industrial Relations’ Division of Occupational Safety and Health got off to a good start in bringing together representatives this year from both sides during the implementation phase. But the negotiations over the details of the reporting and inspections questions faltered this spring.

In the meantime, the industry, as always, is well-organized and able to be heard. It has been seeking a definition of serious injuries that could raise the bar for reporting injuries higher than was suggested by the legislation, or by a draft version of the department’s regulations. The law says that amusement parks have to report any injuries from rides that require anything more than first-aid treatment. This seems straightforward and sensible. The Division of Occupational Safety and Health has followed this standard logically by saying anything that requires a doctor’s attention off-site would have to be reported.

But in this critical phase, the industry has attempted to define for reporting purposes what categories of injuries would need to occur beyond ordinary first aid, such as loss of consciousness or other specified results of injury. The law is clear enough when stated broadly, so why split hairs? The law’s standard should be upheld in regulations: If it’s something the first-aid station can’t handle, it should be reported.

The new law requires state inspections of rides, but what this means is also subject to interpretation. An industry proposal floated last spring suggests examining a theme park’s paperwork and observing two full cycles of a ride. Surely this is not too much different from the self-reporting that the industry long has favored. A more extensive independent inspection would offer more protection for the public.

The public has an interest in knowing as much as it can about even relatively minor accidents, and in inspections that are independent and comprehensive.

In April, a Lake Forest teenager was taken to Western Medical Center-Anaheim, and treated and released after getting her leg stuck beneath a Disneyland ride. She had climbed out of her seat when the ride was moving to fetch a fallen stuffed toy. The incident ended well for the young lady, described by hospital officials and paramedics as a “lucky little girl.” But this and the accident recently at Disneyland’s Space Mountain roller coaster that caused minor injuries to nine people, suggest that levels of injury and safety of rides are a continuing issue requiring the best possible level of safety protection for the public.

There is always the potential for hair-splitting over injuries, and there is a need to tighten procedures and make good on the promise of better theme park safety for Orange County parks and for others throughout the state.