The California Constitution generally limits ad valorem taxes on real property to 1% of the full cash value, as defined, of that property, and provides that the full cash value base may be adjusted each year by an inflationary rate not to exceed 2% for any given year. Existing property tax law implementing this constitutional authority provides that the taxable value of real property is the lesser of its base year value compounded annually by the inflation factor not to exceed 2%, as provided, or its full cash value. Existing property tax law also provides that the taxable value of a manufactured home is the lesser of its base year value compounded annually by an inflation factor not to exceed 2% or its full cash value.

This bill would provide that the inflation factor shall not apply to the principal place of residence residence, as specified, of a qualified taxpayer, defined by the bill to mean a person who owns a dwelling as his or her principal place of residence, or a person who owns a manufactured home as his or her principal place of residence, who is 65 years of age or older on the lien date who meets specified requirements.

By changing the manner in which local tax officials calculate the taxable value of real property owned by senior citizens, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

Section 2229 of the Revenue and Taxation Code requires the Legislature to reimburse local agencies annually for certain property tax revenues lost as a result of any exemption or classification of property for purposes of ad valorem property taxation.

This bill would provide that, notwithstanding Section 2229 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, no appropriation is made and the state shall not reimburse local agencies for property tax revenues lost by them pursuant to the bill.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to these statutory provisions.

This bill would take effect immediately as a tax levy.

Existing law, the Pharmacy Law, provides for the licensure and regulation of pharmacists and pharmacy corporations in this state by the California State Board of Pharmacy. The law prohibits a pharmacy from compounding sterile drug products unless the pharmacy has obtained a sterile compounding pharmacy license from the board, and prohibits the board from issuing or renewing that license until the board has, among other things, reviewed a current copy of the pharmacys procedures and policies for sterile compounding. That law authorizes a pharmacist to perform listed procedures or functions as part of the care provided by specified health care entities, including initiating or adjusting the drug regimen of a patient pursuant to a specific written order or authorization made by the individual patients treating prescriber, and in accordance with the policies, procedures, or protocols of the health care entity.

Existing law, the Pharmacy Law, provides for the licensure and regulation of pharmacists and pharmacy corporations in this state by the California State Board of Pharmacy. The law prohibits a pharmacy from compounding sterile drug products unless the pharmacy has obtained a sterile compounding pharmacy license from the board, and prohibits the board from issuing or renewing that license until the board has, among other things, reviewed a current copy of the pharmacys procedures and policies for sterile compounding.

This bill would make a nonsubstantive change to that licensing provision.

Date of Hearing: August 10, 2016

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS

Lorena Gonzalez, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 587

Author:(Stone) – As Amended Ver:August 4, 2016

Urgency: No State Mandated Local Program: Yes Reimbursable: Yes

SUMMARY:

This bill eliminates the inflation adjustment of the assessed value of a low-income senior’s primary home. Specifically, this bill, beginning on January 1, 2017, eliminates future inflation factor increases for qualified homeowners 65 years or older who have an annual income of $25,000 or less, if single, or $50,000 or less, if married.

FISCAL EFFECT:

1. Annual property tax loss of approximately $27 million, resulting in GF costs of approximately $13.5 million as a result of the Proposition 98 guarantee.
2. Minor and absorbable costs to the Board of Equalization (BOE) to modify forms, publications, and website materials.
3. Unknown and possibly reimbursable costs for local assessors to verify the income of qualified seniors.

COMMENTS:

1. Background. When a home is purchased, its assessed value is the purchase price, or “acquisition value.” Each year thereafter, the property’s assessed value increases by 2% or the rate of inflation, whichever is lower. This process continues until the property is sold, at which point the county assessor again assigns it an assessed value equal to its most recent purchase price.
2. How would SB 587 work? The elimination of the inflation-adjustment for seniors means that the property tax amount owed by a qualified senior is frozen until that senior moves or no longer meets the income requirements.

For example, a home purchased in 2017 for $300,000 would see its assessed value increase to no more than $306,000 the following year. The resulting property tax amount owed would increase from $3,000 in 2017 to $3,060 in 2018. However, under SB 587, a qualified senior would still pay tax on an assessed value of $300,000, resulting in a $60 tax reduction relative to what they would otherwise have to pay.

1. Other property tax benefits for seniors. Existing state law provides additional benefits to certain qualified senior households. Those benefits include:
2. Base year value transfer. Persons over the age of 55 may “transfer” their base year value from one home to another that is of equal or lesser value, allowing these homeowners to avoid reassessment of the newly purchased home to its fair value. This is a once-in-a-lifetime benefit that tallows seniors to pay the same level of taxes if they move. B
3. Property Tax Postponement Program. This State Controller-administered program, which is set to restart in October 2015, allows income-eligible persons 62 and older to postpone property tax payments on their principal residence. To participate, the program requires total household income of $35,500 or less and 40% home equity. The interest rate is 7%.

Analysis Prepared by: Luke Reidenbach / APPR. / (916) 319-2081

Date of Hearing: August 1, 2016

ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON REVENUE AND TAXATION

Sebastian Ridley-Thomas, Chair

SBPCA Bill Id:SB 587

Author:(Stone) – As Amended Ver:June 22, 2016

Majority vote. Tax levy. Fiscal committee.

SENATE VOTE: Not relevant

SUBJECT: Property taxation: inflation factor: senior citizens

SUMMARY: Eliminates the annual inflation adjustment used to determine the property tax base for the principal place of residence of an income-eligible taxpayer 65 years of age or older. Specifically, this bill:

1. Provides that, for any assessment year beginning on or after January 1, 2017, the inflation factor used to calculate the tax base of real property shall not apply to the principal place of residence of a "qualified taxpayer".
2. Defines a "qualified taxpayer" as a person who owns a dwelling as his or her principal place of residence who is 65 years of age or older on the lien date and satisfies either of the following:
   1. If single, his or her annual household income, as defined in Revenue and Taxation Code (R&TC) Section 20504, is $25,000 or less; or,
   2. If married, his or her combined annual household income is $50,000 or less.
3. Specifies that a qualified taxpayer who is 65 years of age or older includes a married couple, one member of which is 65 years of age or older on the lien date.
4. Provides that when claiming this benefit, the claimant shall provide all information required by, and answer all questions contained in, an affidavit furnished by the county assessor to determine the claimant's eligibility. The assessor may require additional proof of the information or answers provided in the affidavit before allowing the benefit.
5. Extends this bill's benefits to a qualified taxpayer who owns a manufactured home.
6. Provides that, notwithstanding existing law, the state shall not reimburse local agencies for property tax revenues lost by them under this bill.
7. Provides that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that this bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made, as specified.
8. Takes immediate effect as a tax levy.

EXISTING LAW:

1. Specifies that all property is taxable unless otherwise provided by the California Constitution or federal law. (California Constitution Article XIII, Section 1.)
2. Limits, as a general rule, the maximum amount of any ad valorem tax on real property to 1% of the property's "full cash value". (California Constitution Article XIII A, Section 1(a).)
3. Defines the term "full cash value" as the county assessor's valuation of real property as shown on the 1975-76 tax bill or, thereafter, the appraised value of real property when purchased or newly constructed, or when a change in ownership occurs. (California Constitution Article XIII A, Section 2(a).) In addition, the full cash value base may reflect from year to year an inflationary rate not to exceed 2% for any given year. (California Constitution Article XIII A, Section 2(b).)
4. Provides that, for any assessment year beginning on or after January 1, 1998, the inflation factor shall be the percentage change, rounded to the nearest one-thousandth of 1%, from October of the prior fiscal year to October of the current fiscal year in the California Consumer Price Index for all items, as determined by the California Department of Industrial Relations. (R&TC Section 51(a)(1)(C).)
5. Provides that the taxable value of real property is the lesser of its base year value compounded annually by the inflation factor not to exceed 2%, as provided, or its full cash value. (R&TC Section 51(a).)
6. Requires the Legislature to reimburse local agencies annually for certain property tax revenues lost as a result of any exemption or classification of property for purpuses of ad valorem property taxation. (R&TC Section 2229)

FISCAL EFFECT: The State Board of Equalization (BOE) estimates annual revenue losses of $27 million.

COMMENTS:

1. The author has provided the following statement in support of this bill:

Many senior citizens are on a very fixed income, with most of that coming from Social Security and pensions. With the rising costs of health care and prescription drugs, and the economic uncertainty taking place across the country, California's senior citizens find themselves in a very challenging time. There is nothing more important than the pride and freedom that comes with home ownership. For seniors at the lower end of the income spectrum, the ability to stay in their own home is becoming harder and harder, unless California finds ways to make holding on to the American Dream more affordable. SB 587 is a small attempt to bring financial relief to senior citizens, who want to stay in their own home, by capping the property tax assessment for all senior citizens (age 65 or older) who meet the income requirements. By making property taxes affordable for more senior citizens on a fixed income, we can empower the most vulnerable in our society.

1. The BOE notes the following in its staff analysis of this bill:
   1. Freezes assessed values for low-income seniors 65+: "In practical application, this bill freezes the assessed value of any income-qualified person 65 years of age or older at the home's factored base year value for the 2016-17 fiscal year, which is the factored base year value for the January 1, 2016 lien date. In addition, as other homeowners reach the age of 65, their homes' assessed values also will be frozen."
   2. Qualifying homeowners will need to take action: "Assessors do not have homeowners' age information. The bill specifies a basic requirement that a claim must be filed to request this tax benefit."
   3. Annual income verification process: "To implement this bill, assessors will need to establish a procedure to verify continued income eligibility. The bill requires that [homeowners] provide proof of income to continue to receive the benefit."
   4. The bill would apply to low income 65+ floating home owners: "The law provides that [R&TC] Section 110.1 applies to a floating home and it is to be treated the same as real property for property tax assessment purposes. Therefore, age and income qualified floating homeowners would benefit from the bill."
   5. The bill does not address whether the inflation factor should be eliminated for land in excess of what is reasonably necessary for use of the property as a home: "For example, in other areas of law, 'residential dwelling' means a dwelling occupied by the claimant as the principal place of residence, and so much of the land surrounding it as is reasonably necessary for use of the dwelling as a home."
2. Committee staff comments:
   1. California's property tax system: Proposition 13 (1978) replaced California's market value-based system of property taxation with an acquisition value-based system. This change was designed to provide property owners with greater predictability regarding future property taxes. Specifically, Proposition 13 rolled back the assessed values of real property to 1975 market value levels and limited future assessed value increases to the inflation rate, not to exceed 2%, for as long as a property's ownership remains unchanged and the property is not substantially improved (i.e., through new construction). Thus, even if a property appreciates considerably in value over time, the 2% maximum inflation adjustment ensures only limited increases in the property's assessed value. In this manner, Proposition 13 can result in substantial property tax savings for long-term property owners.
   2. Base year values: A property's "base year value" refers to the real property's protected value under Proposition 13. Specifically, existing law requires county assessors to establish a "base year value" for real property at its 1975 market value, and thereafter reset the value to the current market value every time the property changes ownership. This base year value must be compounded annually by an inflation factor not to exceed 2%. The property's inflation-adjusted value, in turn, is called the "factored base year value." Generally, the law requires a property's assessed value to be based on its factored base year value or its current market value, whichever is lower.

Reassessment limits and caps on inflation ensure a predictable, slowly increasing tax obligation for the taxpayer, as well as predictable revenues for local agencies. At the same time, however, these provisions may also result in a taxable base year value for a property well below the property's actual market value. Critics, in turn, contend that this system shifts the cost of public services from longstanding property owners to those who have only recently purchased property.

• 1. What would this bill do? This bill is designed to provide property tax relief to low-income homeowners by freezing assessed values once the owner turns 65. Specifically, this bill provides that, for any assessment year beginning on or after January 1, 2017, the percentage increase for an assessment year shall not apply to the principal place of residence of a "qualified taxpayer". A "qualified taxpayer", in turn, is defined as a person who is 65 years of age or older on the lien date and who satisfies certain income conditions. Specifically, if the qualified taxpayer is single, his or her annual household income, as defined in R&TC Section 20504, is limited to $25,000. If the qualified taxpayer is married, his or her combined annual household income would be limited to $50,000. This bill provides that a qualified taxpayer who is 65 years of age or older includes a married couple, one member of which is 65 years of age or older on the lien date. This bill also specifies that, when claiming this benefit, the taxpayer shall provide all information required by an affidavit furnished by the county assessor to determine that the claimant is a qualified taxpayer. In addition, the assessor is authorized to require additional proof before allowing the benefit this bill provides. Finally, this bill provides similar relief to owners of manufactured homes.
  2. Existing property tax relief provisions for California seniors: Beyond the protections afforded by Proposition 13, California seniors also benefit from additional property tax relief measures. For example, individuals over the age of 55 may "transfer" their Proposition 13 base year value from one home to another that is of equal or lesser value and located within the same county or in one of 11 counties that accept transfers from non-county residents. In this manner, that individual is able to avoid a reassessment of the newly purchased home to its current market value. This once-in-a-lifetime benefit allows seniors to pay the same level of taxes if they move by avoiding Proposition 13's reassessment provisions when purchasing a qualifying new home.

In addition, the state's property tax postponement program is scheduled to resume later this year. This program, administered by the State Controller, will allow income eligible individuals at least 62 years of age to postpone property tax payments on their principal residence. Finally, the BOE notes that prior California law provided a rebate to income qualified homeowners for property taxes paid up to the first $34,000 of assessed value. Under this Franchise Tax Board-administered program, the amount rebated was determined according to a sliding income scale. In addition, household income limits were adjusted for inflation.

This Committee may wish to consider whether this bill's proposed benefits are merited given those already afforded under current law. Alternatively, this Committee may wish to consider whether it would be preferable to augment the existing property tax postponement program or re-establish a rebate program to assist qualified homeowners.

• 1. Income-testing: The benefits of this bill would apply to individuals aged 65 and older with less than a specified amount of annual income. For example, if the qualified taxpayer is single, his or her annual household income, as defined in R&TC Section 20504, would be limited to $25,000. Because county assessors do not possess income information for property owners, this bill would also require the taxpayer to provide the assessor with an affidavit attesting to his or her eligibility. It is not clear, however, whether these affidavits would have to be submitted annually given that a taxpayer's income may fluctuate over time. This Committee may wish to consider whether this bill's expansion of property tax benefits should depend on a taxpayer's income and whether such a limitation is warranted given the potential administrative costs involved with implementation.
  2. Questions of constitutional authority and interpretation: Article XIII A Section 2(b) of the California Constitution appears to grant the Legislature discretion on the question of whether or not to adjust the base year value of real property for inflation. Specifically, Section 2(b) provides:

The full cash value base may reflect from year to year the inflationary rate not to exceed 2 percent for any given year or reduction as shown in the consumer price index or comparable data for the area under taxing jurisdiction, or may be reduced to reflect substantial damage, destruction, or other factors causing a decline in value. (Emphasis added.)

Thus, while Article XIII A does not appear to prohibit the Legislature from enacting a law making the inflation factor optional, the California Constitution is silent on the question of whether the inflation factor can be applied in a differential manner to discrete classes of taxpayers (e.g., those over a certain age). Moreover, the BOE staff analysis notes that this bill's provisions could potentially be in conflict with Article XIII, Section 1(a), which provides that "[a]ll property is taxable and shall be assessed at the same percentage of fair market value."

• 1. Related legislation: This bill is substantially identical to SB 1126 (Stone), which was held on the Senate Appropriations Committee's Suspense File. For additional discussion of this bill's provisions, please refer to the Senate analysis prepared for SB 1126.

REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:

Support

None on file

Opposition

None on file

Analysis Prepared by: M. David Ruff / REV. & TAX. / (916) 319-2098

 CONSENT  

Bill No: SB 587

Author:

:

Vote:

SENATE BUS, PROF. & ECON. DEV. COMMITTEE: 8-0, 1/11/16

AYES: Hill, Bates, Berryhill, Block, Galgiani, Hernandez, Jackson, Wieckowski

NO VOTE RECORDED: Mendoza

SENATE APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE: Senate Rule 28.8

SUBJECT:

SOURCE: Author

DIGEST: This bill requires the California State Athletic Commission to establish a task force to evaluate the impacts of weight cutting, dehydration and rapid rehydration.

ANALYSIS:

Existing law:

1. Provides, under the Boxing Act, or State Athletic Commission Act (State Act), for the licensing and regulation of boxers, kickboxers, martial arts athletes and events held in California by the California State Athletic Commission (Commission) within the Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA) and makes the Commission inoperative and repealed on January 1, 2020. (Business and Professions Code (BPC) § 18600 et seq.)
2. Establishes an Advisory Committee on Medical and Safety Standards (MAC) consisting of six licensed physicians appointed by the Commission which meets for the purpose of studying and recommending medical and safety standards for the conduct of boxing, wrestling and martial arts contests.
   (BPC § 18645)
3. Requires a licensed physician approved by the Commission with at least three years of experience in the practice of medicine to be present at all Commission regulated events. Requires the physician present at an event to perform the physical examination of the contestants and observe the physical condition of the contestants during the event. (BPC § 18705)
4. Requires the physician above to conduct a physical examination, not later than at the time of weigh-in, of the contestant and certify in writing as to the contestant’s physical condition to engage in the contest or match. Specifies that the weigh-in time shall not be more than 30 hours prior to the beginning of the first event. (BPC § 18706)
5. Requires a contestant to complete a questionnaire developed by the Commission on which he or she is asked to disclose any conditions, including, but not limited to significant weight gain or loss and any change in weight in the seven days prior to the contest. (Id.)
6. Requires the Commission to establish by rule the weight spreads and classes of contestants. (BPC § 18728)
7. Requires the Commission, by rule and regulation, to prescribe the length and duration of professional and amateur kickboxing and martial arts contests, the weight classifications, the manner in which the contestants engage in such contests and such further safeguards and conditions as shall insure fair, sportsmanlike, and scientific contests. (BPC § 18765)
8. Establishes nine weights and classes, including the range of pounds in each class and specifies that no contest shall be scheduled and no contestant engage in a contest where the weight difference exceeds the allowance outlined in regulation. (4 CCR §298)

This bill:

1. Requires the Commission to establish a task force to evaluate the impacts of weight cutting, dehydration, and rapid rehydration. Authorizes the task force to be comprised of physicians and surgeons with expertise in dehydration and rapid rehydration and boxing and mixed martial arts stakeholders, including licensees.
2. Requires the task force, in evaluating impacts of weight cutting, dehydration and rapid rehydration to consider the dangers of certain practices athletes undergo prior to weighing in before an event. Authorizes the task force to provide recommendations to the Commission that include, but are not limited to, proper techniques to detect dehydration, outreach the Commission can undertake to educate licensees about dehydration and rapid rehydration and the appropriateness of Commission weight classifications.

Background

Significant and dangerous weight loss efforts leading up to a fighter's weigh-in before an event can result in dehydration and other negative health impacts like decreased kidney function and increased risk of brain injury, and can also hinder a fighter's performance in the event. The practice of losing a large amount of weight in a short period of time prior to a weigh-in, then gaining weight back in the 24 hours leading up to a fight, can also affect the outcome of a fight.

Despite the requirement under current law for contestants to disclose “significant weight gain or loss and any change in weight in the seven days prior to the contest”, this information is rarely if ever provided to the Commission. Extreme weight cutting by combat sport athletes is a problem that the Commission has sought to curb, as reported to the Senate Business, Professions and Economic Committee through the Sunset Review oversight process. The Commission conducted a study on over 500 licensees and determined that weight cutting was prevalent amongst these athletes. As a means of preventing extreme weight-cutting for combat sports athletes, the Commission has taken steps to deter this dangerous practice. The Commission is working on altering its weigh-in procedures and requirements as well as implementing a progressive disciplinary system that applies to all licensees, including, but not limited to, promoters and trainers. The Commission also recently issued a memorandum created in partnership with the Association of Ringside Physicians outlining the dangers of extreme weight-cutting, citing a 2013 study published in the Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research that found that 39 percent of mixed martial arts fighters were dehydrated at the time of their events. The Commission memorandum advised fighters that, among other dangers of cutting their weight and dehydrating themselves, there are at increased risks of brain bleeds and concussion. The memorandum also encouraged athletes not to use extreme methods for making weight such as excessive heat methods (rubberized suits, steam rooms, saunas), excessive intense bouts of exercise, vomiting, laxatives and diuretics as well as not using dehydration as a mainstay of making weight due to other risks associated with improper rehydration techniques.

FISCAL EFFECT: Appropriation: Fiscal Com.: Local:

SUPPORT: (Verified 1/19/16)

None received

OPPOSITION: (Verified 1/19/16)

None received

Prepared by: 4104

1/20/16 15:40:02

**** END ****

SENATE COMMITTEE ON

BUSINESS, PROFESSIONS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT

Senator Jerry Hill, Chair

2015 - 2016 Regular

Bill No: Hearing Date: January 11, 2016

Subject:

SUMMARY:

Requires the California State Athletic Commission to establish a task force to evaluate the impacts of weight cutting, dehydration and rapid rehydration.

Existing law:

1. The Boxing Act, or State Athletic Commission Act (State Act), provides for the licensing and regulation of boxers, kickboxers, martial arts athletes and events held in California by the California State Athletic Commission (Commission) within the Department of Consumer Affairs (DCA) and makes the Commission inoperative and repealed on January 1, 2020. (Business and Professions Code (BPC) § 18600 et seq.)
2. Establishes an Advisory Committee on Medical and Safety Standards (MAC) consisting of six licensed physicians appointed by the Commission which meets for the purpose of studying and recommending medical and safety standards for the conduct of boxing, wrestling and martial arts contests. (BPC § 18645)
3. Requires a licensed physician approved by the commission with at least three years of experience in the practice of medicine to be present at all Commission regulated events. Requires the physician present at an event to perform the physical examination of the contestants and observe the physical condition of the contestants during the event. (BPC § 18705)
4. Requires the physician above to conduct a physical examination, not later than at the time of weigh-in, of the contestant and certify in writing as to the contestant’s physical condition to engage in the contest or match. Specifies that the weigh-in time shall not be more than 30 hours prior to the beginning of the first event.
   (BPC § 18706)
5. Requires a contestant to complete a questionnaire developed by the Commission on which he or she is asked to disclose any conditions, including, but not limited to significant weight gain or loss and any change in weight in the seven days prior to the contest. (Id.)
6. Requires the Commission to establish by rule the weight spreads and classes of contestants. (BPC § 18728)
7. Requires the Commission, by rule and regulation, to prescribe the length and duration of professional and amateur kickboxing and martial arts contests, the weight classifications, the manner in which the contestants engage in such contests and such further safeguards and conditions as shall insure fair, sportsmanlike, and scientific contests. (BPC § 18765)
8. Establishes nine weights and classes, including the range of pounds in each class and specifies that no contest shall be scheduled and no contestant engage in a contest where the weight difference exceeds the allowance outlined in regulation. (4 CCR §298)

This bill:

1. Requires the Commission to establish a task force to evaluate the impacts of weight cutting, dehydration, and rapid rehydration. Authorizes the task force to be comprised of physicians and surgeons with expertise in dehydration and rapid rehydration and boxing and mixed martial arts stakeholders, including licensees.
2. Requires the task force, in evaluating impacts of weight cutting, dehydration and rapid rehydration to consider the dangers of certain practices athletes undergo prior to weighing in before an event. Authorizes the task force to provide recommendations to the Commission that include, but are not limited to, proper techniques to detect dehydration, outreach the Commission can undertake to educate licensees about dehydration and rapid rehydration and the appropriateness of Commission weight classifications.

FISCAL EFFECT:

Unknown. This bill is keyed fiscal by Legislative Counsel.

COMMENTS:

1. Purpose. The Author is the Sponsor of this measure. According to the Author, while the Athletic Commission has taken important first steps to deter dangerous practices that can impact fighter well-being by issuing safety notices and convening stakeholder meetings, extreme weight cutting measures are still being undertaken on a regular basis. A dedicated focus on this specific issue, through the work of a task force, can be a very helpful tool in the protection and promotion of athletes’ health and safety. The Author is concerned about multiple reports of combat sport athlete injuries, health problems and even deaths related to dangerous steps they take to lose a large amount of weight leading up to a mandatory weigh-in, which often includes heat and sweating efforts to quickly lose weight, and the subsequent rapid rehydration and weight gain activities they then undergo leading up to the actual event.
2. Background. Significant and dangerous weight loss efforts leading up to a fighter's weigh-in before an event can result in dehydration and other negative health impacts like decreased kidney function and increased risk of brain injury, and can also hinder a fighter's performance in the event. The practice of losing a large amount of weight in a short period of time prior to a weigh-in, then gaining weight back in the 24 hours leading up to a fight, can also affect the outcome of a fight.

Despite the requirement under current law for contestants to disclose “significant weight gain or loss and any change in weight in the seven days prior to the contest”, this information is rarely if ever provided to the Commission. Extreme weight cutting by combat sport athletes is a problem that the Commission has sought to curb, as reported to this Committee through the Sunset Review oversight process. The Commission conducted a study on over 500 licensees and determined that weight cutting was prevalent amongst these athletes. As a means of preventing extreme weight-cutting for combat sports athletes, the Commission has taken steps to deter this dangerous practice. The Commission is working on altering its weigh-in procedures and requirements as well as implementing a progressive disciplinary system that applies to all licensees, including, but not limited to, promoters and trainers. The Commission also recently issued a memorandum created in partnership with the Association of Ringside Physicians outlining the dangers of extreme weight-cutting, citing a 2013 study published in the Journal of Strength & Conditioning Research that found that 39 percent of mixed martial arts fighters were dehydrated at the time of their events. The Commission memorandum advised fighters that, among other dangers of cutting their weight and dehydrating themselves, there are at increased risks of brain bleeds and concussion. The memorandum also encouraged athletes not to use extreme methods for making weight such as excessive heat methods (rubberized suits, steam rooms, saunas), excessive intense bouts of exercise, vomiting, laxatives and diuretics as well as not using dehydration as a mainstay of making weight due to other risks associated with improper rehydration techniques.

SUPPORT AND OPPOSITION:

Support: None on file as of January 6, 2016.

Opposition: None on file as of January 6, 2016.

-- END --