S.B. 295: COMMITTEE SUMMARY LICENSURE: BOXING JUDGES
Senate Bill 295
Sponsor: Senator Joel D. Gougeon
Committee: Economic Development, International Trade and Regulatory Affairs Date Completed: 9-27-95
The bill would amend Article 8 of the Occupational Code, which regulates boxing, sparring, and wrestling, to delete wrestling and sparring from the article’s provisions; delete the November 1, 1995, sunset on the exemption of certain boxing elimination contests from the article’s regulations; specify that “boxing club” would mean an organization affiliated with USA Boxing, rather than the Amateur Athletic Union of the United States; and specify criteria for licensure as a boxer or as a judge or referee of boxing matches.
Specifically, the bill would require an applicant for licensure as a judge, referee, or boxer to pass a physical examination as established by rules of the Athletic Board of Control, and present evidence of passage to the Board. Further, an applicant for licensure as a judge or referee could be required to pass satisfactorily an examination given by the Board that tested the person’s knowledge and skill, as determined appropriate by the Board. The Board would be required to develop or adopt examinations and promulgate rules as required by these provisions.
The bill also specifies that in addition to the article’s current licensure requirements and the bill’s examination requirements, an applicant for license as a professional referee would have to referee unofficially a minimum of 300 rounds of amateur competitive or noncompetitive boxing in a facility that conducted an active boxing program. (Currently, the article requires an applicant for licensure as a promoter, referee, or judge to be of good moral character. License applications have to be in writing and verified by the applicant and have to state the facts requested by the Department of Commerce.) After a person had successfully completed the examination and refereeing requirements of the bill, the Board could issue the applicant a limited license as a referee. Before the person could be issued a full license as a referee, however, he or she would have to officiate at least 12 4-round preliminary contests, at least six 6-round preliminary contests, and at least four 8-round preliminary contests. After the applicant completed officiating the mandatory number of rounds, the Board would have to review and evaluate the applicant’s work.
In addition to the article’s current licensure requirements and the bill’s examination requirements, an applicant for license as a professional judge would have to score, unofficially, at least 200 rounds of professional boxing. To fulfill this requirement, the applicant could only unofficially judge contests that were approved by the Board for that purpose. An applicant could not receive compensation for judging these contests. Scorecards would have to be transmitted to the board for review and evaluation. The Board would have to complete a standardized evaluation sheet for each contest judged by a licensee. The evaluation sheets periodically would have to be reviewed and evaluated by the Board.
The Board, through the promulgation of a rule, would have to develop or adopt continuing education programs for persons licensed under Article 8.
The Department of Commerce would have to issue a license without an examination to a person who was licensed under the article on the effective date of the bill, upon application on a form provided by the Board and payment of the appropriate fee.
MCL 339.806 et al. Legislative Analyst: L. Burghardt
The provisions in the bill for prelicensure examinations would cost the Department of Commerce between $50,000 and $75,000 to administer. The Department would be required to review and approve continuing education programs. The cost of this review cannot be determined at this time since the number, scope, and detail of these programs are not defined.
Fiscal Analyst: K. Lindquist
S9596\S295SA
This analysis was prepared by nonpartisan Senate staff for use by the Senate in its deliberations and does not constitute an official statement of legislative intent.