Skip to content

Letter: Outright ban not the answer for sliding hills

In light of recent news stories about the city banning all sliding on city property, I wonder when common sense will prevail? I understand the city cannot afford to pay out every person who gets hurt while sliding.
In light of recent news stories about the city banning all sliding on city property, I wonder when common sense will prevail? I understand the city cannot afford to pay out every person who gets hurt while sliding.

But isn’t there a better way than an outright ban? I mean if this goes through, what is next? Might as well close the outdoor rinks. I mean lots of people don’t wear helmets, could fall, suffer brain injuries, and sue.

What about the Ramsey Skating Path, or cross-country skiing through Anderson Farm? Where will the banning of free physical activity end?

During the summer, my family and I spend days at Centennial Beach, an unsupervised city-owned beach. What if someone drowned there? Would we ban swimming?

There is a large sign stating how the beach is to be used at a person’s own risk along with safety tips. Could large signs to the same manner not be used on hills?

If we ban these hills that have been used for decades, people will find even more unsafe conditions. Then what do we have?

My children will not sit in front of the TV all winter and play video games. They will get outside in the fresh air and play in the snow. They will skate, they will slide, and they will be kids.

I will skate, I will slide and I will feel like a kid again too. I don’t think one person’s action or lawsuit should dictate the rest of a community.

We need to find a better solution than banning sliding all together. “Use at your own risk” signs work for beaches, cement skate parks and other areas in the city. Why not for sliding hills?

Shantel Howard-Smith
Lively