Sidewalk safety issue affects business, residents, liability

Sidewalks have become a slippery subject for Springfield City Council.

City Council is attempting to put a 50-year-old ordinance back on the books after accidentally dropping it off about two years ago.

The proposed ordinance calls for property owners or those occupying the property to keep their sidewalks "clear and free of hazards so as not to endanger or inconvenience pedestrians using such sidewalks."

The ordinance is about being a good neighbor, City Manager Tom Finnie said.

"It hasn't anything to do with repair; just keeping stuff off sidewalks. Limbs and those types of things that people could take care of without any problem," Finnie said.

The vagueness of the ordinance, however, has the Greater Springfield Apartment and Housing Association concerned.

"As an association, I don't know that we totally understand the city's full intent. " said board member Brent Haselhorst. "It's as wide open as it can get. It says clear and free of hazards, and as far as I'm concerned, a hazard can be anything in the world that's out there.

"I don't think it's the intent of the ordinance to make us start repouring sidewalks to make them safe for the public, but I don't think it doesn't tell us not to do that either."

Haselhorst and three other members of the public spoke against the proposed ordinance at the Sept. 23 council meeting. City Council may vote on the bill at the Oct. 7 meeting.

Liability

The apartment and housing association also is concerned about the legal liability the bill would put on property owners.

Haselhorst, who owns rental property in Springfield, said he has been advised by an attorney not to clear sidewalks of snow and ice.

"I have been told by private attorneys before that if an attempt is made at clearing snow and ice and it is done poorly, and then somebody gets hurt, then you are exposed to more liability than if the original hazard was just in place," Haselhorst said of single-family rentals. "Walking across a snow-covered sidewalk, there is some personal responsibility that you realize there is a hazard that exists. If I make an attempt to clear it, there is a point you can assume that it is safe."

That increased liability for maintaining city property has the apartment and housing association scrutinizing the proposed ordinance.

"It's very much a concern of ours," Haselhorst said. " If I'm hiring someone to clear snow and ice from our apartments or commercial setting, those people are insured. If they're your own employees, they've got workman's comp, and then you've got your own business liability on top of that. If it's an outside company, they've got their liability insurance.

"Suddenly, now your taking a homeowner and telling them to clear city property. Have we become agents of the city at that point? Am I exposing the city to more liability or exposing myself to liability? I think that has lawsuit liability written all over it."

Finnie sees no connection between being a good neighbor by clearing a sidewalk and increased legal liability.

"It has been on the books as long as anybody can remember, and I don't know of anybody that's ever brought that issue up before," Finnie said. "I'm not an attorney, so lawyers would have to address that issue. But it's never been presented as a problem as long as the law was on the books."

Virginia Fry, managing partner with Blackwell Sanders Peper Martin, doesn't believe that the proposed ordinance would necessarily increase legal liability.

"As a practical matter if someone trips on a sidewalk, they sue everybody even remotely close to the sidewalk," Fry said. " What (the city is) trying to do is share the risk. I don't know that the practical effect of that would really be that significant, because in the commercial area, their insurance is written to cover the premises.

"If maintenance of a sidewalk is a governmental function, there would be an issue of whether or not that is something they could delegate."

Chuck Medley, insurance agent for State Farm Insurance, agreed that a property owner would likely be brought into a lawsuit, regardless of their legal responsibilities. "Somebody can sue you for anything, anytime, any place, anywhere, whether you're legally responsible or not."

He said if a property owner were to be sued for a sidewalk accident, an insurance company would defend the property owner against the claim.

Richard Ollis with Ollis & Company Insurance believes there is some increased legal liability.

"I do think that it is creating more liability for that business if they are going to be responsible for shoveling the walk. However, if (the public was) going to have to walk up that sidewalk anyway, (the business) could be construed as liable anyway," Ollis said.

Business focus

The purpose of the proposed ordinance is to help businesses avoid trouble with neighbors.

"All we're trying to do is make sure somebody can get to a business and not get blocked by poor business owners or out-of-town property owners who refuse to do anything," Finnie said. "That is the 100-percent reason for the law: So we can tell them (they) must clean it up so people can get to your business."

Haselhorst said the apartment and housing association has no problem with clean sidewalks, the association just wants a clearly written ordinance.

"If the intent is for business owners to keep their commercial property clear for a better society, then let's try to write an ordinance about that, and let's get business input on what's good and bad ideas on that. Let's not write one that's across the board."

Finnie said the ordinance is open-ended because of the difficulty and expense of writing a specific bill.

"It's pretty hard to differentiate between a business and residential sidewalk," Finnie said. "So, instead of spending enormous amount of taxpayer dollars trying to figure out how to write a law to cover every possibility, we (use) the same thing we have for 30 years."