Non-profit sues Ohio on behalf of Cedar Fair and Kalahari to reopen

Posted Friday, June 5, 2020 10:26 AM | Contributed by Jeff

Lawsuits filed on behalf of Cedar Point, Kings Island, and Kalahari Resorts demand theme parks be allowed to reopen immediately. The lawsuits were filed by the 1851 Center for Constitutional Law against Ohio Department of Health Director Dr. Amy Acton in Warren County and Erie County Common Pleas Courts on Thursday.

Read more from WBNS/Columbus.

Read the statement from 1851 Center For Constitutional Law.

Related parks

Friday, June 5, 2020 10:30 AM
Jeff's avatar

This should be interesting to watch. I'm not sure the non-profit really has standing, but suggesting that the action isn't constitutional is pretty flimsy. The courts have a long history of ruling in favor of government shutting down business for public health reasons. I mean, they do it all the time when restaurants are dirty.


Jeff - Editor - CoasterBuzz.com - My Blog - Music: The Modern Gen-X - Video

+0
Friday, June 5, 2020 12:23 PM
Tommytheduck's avatar

Yeah, the Constitution seems to be the go-to rallying cry for the selfish, stubborn "Idonwanna" crowd.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm going to go look up what the Bible says about Iphones.

+0
Friday, June 5, 2020 12:58 PM

I will say I am a bit surprised, given that the zoos and a lot of other entertainment locations are able to open. I have not been able to find out yet, but are the zoos able to open their "amusement" rides, such as the trains and carousels?

+1Loading
Friday, June 5, 2020 12:58 PM

^^ I think this should help...

---

Zechariah 2:8

For thus said Siri, after his glory sent me to the nations who plundered you, for he who touches you touches the Apple.

---

Last edited by PDXPointer, Friday, June 5, 2020 12:58 PM
+2Loading
Friday, June 5, 2020 2:07 PM
Jeff's avatar

My suspicion, why parks are not in the same bucket as zoos or even movie theaters, is that the two big parks draw people from many states away, and in greater numbers. It's not unreasonable to assume that not having research on the risk is a driving factor in the decision. I'm not saying it's right or wrong, just that we don't know. It is definitely very much a gut-based decision. That's not great, but I don't agree with the legislative response, which isn't even gut-based, it's just political.


Jeff - Editor - CoasterBuzz.com - My Blog - Music: The Modern Gen-X - Video

+1Loading
Friday, June 5, 2020 2:53 PM

Amusement parks, waterparks and casino's will be allowed to open on June 19th.

I'm not surprised that the lawsuits put some pressure on them after the list that was released on Thursday. Are you going to clean a game between each user at an FEC?


June 11th, 2001 - Gemini 100
VertiGo Rides - 82

+1Loading
Friday, June 5, 2020 6:31 PM

That indoor FECs and trampoline parks were on yesterday's list and amusement parks and water parks were not was a real head scratcher. I mean, in my personal risk assessment, indoor FECs are on my "Eh, not just yet" list...and I ate in a restaurant last night. Meanwhile I'd be fine at an outdoor amusement park or water park operating with very minimal changes from 'normal'.

I have to think the lawsuits certainly didn't hurt. 1851 has brought several suits against the State regarding the coronavirus restrictions and has actually had a pretty good record in court. They've been demonstrating that in spite of the supposed constitutionality of the government actions, the way those actions have been taken in Ohio has been illegal. This is the same organization that filed the suit that allowed the gyms to open three days early. Given the lack of clear reasoning in yesterday's order, I suspect the amusement park suit would have had a good chance of prevailing.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.


    /X\        _      *** Respect rides. They do not respect you. ***
/XXX\ /X\ /X\_ _ /X\__ _ _ _____
/XXXXX\ /XXX\ /XXXX\_ /X\ /XXXXX\ /X\ /X\ /XXXXX
_/XXXXXXX\__/XXXXX\/XXXXXXXX\_/XXX\_/XXXXXXX\__/XXX\_/XXX\_/\_/XXXXXX

+1Loading
Friday, June 5, 2020 7:39 PM
Jeff's avatar

Are you going to pass tens of thousand of people in a visit to an FEC?

The lawsuit means exactly dick. The third-party that filed it I'm skeptical could have even proved standing, let alone the case. Like I said, there is very little case law that has found in favor of the businesses with regard to public health risk. I think this is DeWine getting the assurance of Cedar Fair that they've got it covered. If that weren't the case, the governor would have been happy to let the courts take it on. There's no risk for the governor beyond being "wrong." The risk is on Cedar Fair, not the state. As soon as infected people start saying, "I was at Cedar Point/Kings Island," and I'm certain that will happen, the conversation will get really interesting. You won't need health official ordered closures for people to stop going.


Jeff - Editor - CoasterBuzz.com - My Blog - Music: The Modern Gen-X - Video

+1Loading
Friday, June 5, 2020 9:48 PM

Jeff said:

Are you going to pass tens of thousand of people in a visit to an FEC?

No. But I'll drive past Cedar Point to get to Six Flags Worlds of Adventure.

+5Loading
Saturday, June 6, 2020 9:44 AM
HeyIsntThatRob?'s avatar

Red Garter Rob said:

Are you going to clean a game between each user at an FEC?

Can you please make sure you clean the relay switch contacts on each ride after they touch one surface to another?

Can't be too safe!

+4Loading
Saturday, June 6, 2020 10:08 AM
Fun's avatar

You can start by cleaning the most pressed button in the park ... "Arms Down!"

+4Loading
Saturday, June 6, 2020 12:47 PM

HeyIsntThatRob? said:

Red Garter Rob said:

Are you going to clean a game between each user at an FEC?

Can you please make sure you clean the relay switch contacts on each ride after they touch one surface to another?

Can't be too safe!

Actually, a lot of the switches used these days are solid-state non-contact switches, so they kind of have that covered already. Except on Gemini, someone has to go out and clean all those cat's whisker switches...

Back when all this was starting, I paid a visit to my friends over at the University, and they had signs hanging in the IT department indicating that they were changing application protocols from TCP to UDP to avoid handshakes.

(That's a UDP joke which means I don't care if you get it.)

On a more serious note, in responding to me, Jeff asked...

Are you going to pass tens of thousand of people in a visit to an FEC?

No. But at an indoor FEC I am going to spend a lot more time in much closer proximity to any one of them than I do with any one of the 10,000's of people I may encounter in an outdoor amusement park, and without the benefits of sunlight and open-air movement to mitigate any potential viral load.

We don't have current data on active COVID-19 cases. But I did see (usual caveats) that as a general rule, COVID-19 patients stop shedding virus after 11 days. We can probably deduct another couple of days because of testing delays, but yesterday in Ohio we had 35,096 confirmed cases; 12 days prior we had 29,777 confirmed cases. That suggests an active case load of 5,319 cases. Putting aside for the moment that all 5,319 of those people are probably either hospitalized or staying at home sick, we know that we are undercounting cases possibly by as much as 70% (Doubtful it is that high given that the negative test rate is >98%, but let's run with it). So there might be 17,730 active cases out there. Again, let's quarantine the ones we know to be sick, that leaves us with (rounding up a lot) 13,000 active cases in a state of 11,000,000 (rounding down a bit) people. If they are evenly distributed across the state (and if I did my math right), your odds of meeting someone who has the virus could be as high as 1:850. In reality it is a bit lower than that because of my deliberately pessimistic rounding, plus the behavior of people who know they have something and are staying home, and other factors. Add in the conditions needed to receive an infectious viral load from that 850th person, and the odds begin to look pretty good even if that person happens to be sitting right in front of you screaming his head off on a roller coaster. All the same, I'd rather not have dinner or watch a movie with that person, as the risk increases with time.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.


    /X\        _      *** Respect rides. They do not respect you. ***
/XXX\ /X\ /X\_ _ /X\__ _ _ _____
/XXXXX\ /XXX\ /XXXX\_ /X\ /XXXXX\ /X\ /X\ /XXXXX
_/XXXXXXX\__/XXXXX\/XXXXXXXX\_/XXX\_/XXXXXXX\__/XXX\_/XXX\_/\_/XXXXXX

+4Loading
Saturday, June 6, 2020 12:49 PM

Don't worry Dave. Even with that math they'll still be sure to send coaster trains out 3/4 empty after taking 7-10 minutes to clean between dispatches. #safetyfirst

+1Loading
Saturday, June 6, 2020 2:50 PM
ApolloAndy's avatar

Of all of the precautions with all of the varying costs, spacing out roller coaster trains seems like the worst trade off. The risk is fairly minimal, given that the time you're in the train and not moving is fairly low. If the station/brake run is indoors, then you're probably going to have other problems from staff and queue more so than from a train full of people waiting there. You also have the potential side effect that lower capacity means more people standing in line which is probably way worse.


Hobbes: "What's the point of attaching a number to everything you do?"
Calvin: "If your numbers go up, it means you're having more fun."

+3Loading
Saturday, June 6, 2020 3:58 PM

I still don't think that is going to stop all of the park operators from doing it, simply because of the illusion of safety it gives. Which is honestly why we're spending time and resources on a lot of these theatric precautions.

+1Loading
Saturday, June 6, 2020 6:01 PM

ApolloAndy, I think you are absolutely correct on all counts. Ladies and Gentlemen, this is what risk management looks like.

BrettV, this is a fundamental problem: most people suck at risk assessment and would gladly take on a greater risk to avoid a smaller one.

--Dave Althoff, Jr.


    /X\        _      *** Respect rides. They do not respect you. ***
/XXX\ /X\ /X\_ _ /X\__ _ _ _____
/XXXXX\ /XXX\ /XXXX\_ /X\ /XXXXX\ /X\ /X\ /XXXXX
_/XXXXXXX\__/XXXXX\/XXXXXXXX\_/XXX\_/XXXXXXX\__/XXX\_/XXX\_/\_/XXXXXX

+2Loading
Sunday, June 7, 2020 5:45 PM

Using RideMan's estimate of someone at Cedar Point being infected of 1/850, and a very small attendance cap of 5,000 people, there is a 99.7% chance that someone in the park will be infected. [1-(849/850)^5,000 = 0.997]

If we reduce the odds that someone is infected to 1 in 2000, and increase the number of people in the park to 10,000, which is my guess where they will cap the attendance, there is a 99.3% chance that at least one person in the park is infected [1-(1,999/2,000)^10,000].

So if you go to Cedar Point, the odds that someone in the park will be infected is almost guaranteed. The odds that the infected will be sitting in front of you on Millennium Force is very low, given that there are only 36 people on the train. But what about standing in line or walking through the park? That risk is certainly higher. At this point, I don't think I'm ready to accept that much risk. I certainly hope Cedar Point can convince me that it is safe to visit, but I certainly won't be one of the first to visit.

+1Loading
Sunday, June 7, 2020 7:41 PM
Lowkae's avatar

If we assume it's 1/850 infected and an attendance cap of 10,000, it means roughly 12 infected people are in the park on a given day. Let's say they get past temperature checks at the entrance.

What does it take to infect someone? It's hard to say. Let's say it's having them cough, sneeze, or talk for 5+ minutes without a mask onto you. Or if they cough into their hand and then touch a railing or restraint that you touch in the next 30(?) minutes before touching your own mouth/nose, thus inoculating yourself.

Assuming the parks require masks, people socially distance properly, and high-contact surfaces are regularly sanitized or otherwise avoided, I'd say it's very unlikely you get infected from someone there. This doesn't include infected employees, which is another matter.

Last edited by Lowkae, Sunday, June 7, 2020 7:42 PM
+2Loading
Sunday, June 7, 2020 8:45 PM

I agree. The on site housing is going to be a far bigger issue than brief, relatively contactless interactions between staff and guests and guests with each other during park operations.

+2Loading

You must be logged in to post

POP Forums - ©2020, POP World Media, LLC
Loading...