BILL ANALYSIS                                                                                                                                                                                                    



                                                                  SB 880
                                                                  Page  1

          Date of Hearing:  June 29, 2010

                           ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON JUDICIARY
                                  Mike Feuer, Chair
                      SB 880 (Yee) - As Amended:  June 15, 2010

                              As Proposed to Be Amended

           SENATE VOTE  :  21-13

           SUBJECT  :  PUBLIC SAFETY: SNOW SPORT HELMETS

           KEY ISSUES  : 

          1)SHOULD PERSONS UNDER 18 YEARS OF AGE PARTICIPATING IN DOWNHILL  
            SKIING OR SNOWBOARDING BE REQUIRED TO WEAR A PROPERLY FITTED  
            AND FASTENED SNOW SPORT HELMET, MEETING SPECIFIED STANDARDS,  
            OR FACE A $25 PENALTY FOR VIOLATION OF THIS REQUIREMENT?

          2)SHOULD THESE PROVISIONS BE ENACTED CONTINGENT UPON ENACTMENT  
            OF AB 1652, WHICH REQUIRES SKI RESORTS TO PREPARE AND MAKE  
            AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC AN ANNUAL SAFETY PLAN AND MONTHLY  
            REPORTS, AS SPECIFIED?

           FISCAL EFFECT  :  As currently in print this bill is keyed fiscal.  
           

                                      SYNOPSIS

          As proposed to be amended, this bill constitutes the most  
          significant step forward that the Legislature has taken in many  
          years to improve safety standards and practices at California's  
          ski resorts.  This bill, with its companion bill AB 1652,  
          represents the culmination of several years of effort by leaders  
          on this issue from both houses to improve safety at ski resorts  
          and protect young skiers and snowboarders from suffering severe  
          injuries that could be prevented by use of a sport helmet.  To  
          that end, this bill requires persons under 18 years of age  
          participating in downhill skiing or snowboarding to wear a  
          properly fitted and fastened snow sport helmet, meeting  
          specified standards, or face a $25 penalty for violation of this  
          requirement.  This bill also requires ski resorts to provide  
          notice of this helmet requirement by posting signs at the resort  
          as well as including notice on all trail maps and resort  
          Internet websites.  This bill does not increase or decrease any  








                                                                  SB 880
                                                                  Page  2

          duties imposed under existing tort law.  The California  
          Psychological Association, the sponsor of this bill, and other  
          supporters cite numerous research studies that they contend  
          demonstrate the protective effect that helmets have on reducing  
          the severity of injuries suffered by skiers and snowboarders. 

          As proposed to be amended, this bill includes contingent  
          enactment language stating that these provisions shall not  
          become operative unless AB 1652 (Jones) is also enacted into law  
          this session.  AB 1652 is in the process of being amended to  
          require ski resorts to prepare an annual safety plan and make a  
          specified report about any fatal accidents available to the  
          public each month.  It is the intent of both authors that the  
          two bills, SB 880 and AB 1652, represent a comprehensive,  
          jointly developed approach towards promoting ski safety in  
          California, and thus should be enacted together or neither  
          should be enacted.  This bill enjoys broad support from numerous  
          associations of psychologists and other health providers, as  
          well as ski safety advocates.  The position of the ski resort  
          industry is not known at this time, and there is no known  
          opposition to this bill.
          
           SUMMARY  :  Seeks to require persons under 18 years of age to wear  
          a snow sport helmet when participating in downhill skiing or  
          snowboarding, as specified.  Specifically,  this bill  :    

          1)Prohibits persons under 18 years of age from operating snow  
            skies or a snowboard, or from riding upon a seat or device  
            attached to snow skies or a snowboard, while participating in  
            downhill skiing or snowboarding, unless that person is wearing  
            a properly fitted and fastened snow sport helmet that meets  
            specified standards.

          2)Establishes a fine of $25 for any violation of this bill.   
            Dismisses charges against a person for violating this bill, if  
            the person alleges in court under oath that this is their  
            first charge, unless it is otherwise established in court that  
            it is not the first charged violation against the person. 

          3)Makes the parent or legal guardian of an unemancipated minor  
            jointly and severally liable with the minor for any fine  
            imposed under this act.

          4)Exempts Nordic skiing (i.e. cross-country) from these  
            provisions. 








                                                                  SB 880
                                                                  Page  3


          5)Provides that this bill does not increase or decrease duties  
            imposed under existing law. 

          6)Requires a ski resort to post signs at the resort giving  
            reasonable notice of the helmet requirement and the potential  
            fine for violations, and further requires the ski resort to  
            provide prominent written notice of the helmet requirement on  
            all trail maps and resort Internet Web sites.

          7)Provides for contingent enactment with AB 1652 (Jones), with  
            the intent that these provisions shall not become operative  
            unless AB 1652 (Jones) is also signed into law in the 2009-10  
            session.

           EXISTING LAW  :  

          1)Prohibits a person under 18 years of age from operating a  
            bicycle, a nonmotorized scooter, in-line or roller skates, or  
            a skateboard, nor riding upon a bicycle, a nonmotorized  
            scooter, or a skateboard as a passenger, upon a street,  
            bikeway, or any other public bicycle path or trail unless that  
            person is wearing a properly fitted and fastened bicycle  
            helmet that meets ASTM International, the Consumer Product  
            Safety Commission (CPSC) standards, or standard subsequently  
            established by those entities.  This requirement also applies  
            to a person who rides upon a bicycle while in a restraining  
            seat that is attached to the bicycle or in a trailer towed by  
            the bicycle.  Violations are punishable by a fine of not more  
            than $25.  (Vehicle Code Section 21212 (a).)

          2)Prohibits operators of skateboard parks from permitting any  
            person to ride a skateboard therein, unless the person is  
            wearing specified protective equipment, including a helmet.  
            Establishes that any recreational skateboard facility owned or  
            operated by a local public agency, that is not supervised on a  
            regular basis, can be deemed in compliance with the protective  
            equipment requirement by: 1) adoption of a local ordinance  
            requiring any person riding a skateboard at the facility to  
            wear protective equipment; and, 2) posting signs at the  
            facility alerting riders of the requirement to wear protective  
            equipment, and stating that any person failing to do so will  
            be subject to citation.  (Health and Safety Code Section  
            115800.)









                                                                  SB 880
                                                                  Page  4

          3)Provides that every person who, among other things, willfully  
            commits a trespass by knowingly skiing in an area or on a ski  
            trail which is closed to the public and has signs posted  
            indicating the closure is guilty of a misdemeanor.  (Penal  
            Code Section 602.8 (r).)

           COMMENTS :  As proposed to be amended, this bill constitutes the  
          most significant step forward that the Legislature has taken in  
          many years to improve safety standards and practices at  
          California's ski resorts.  This bill, with its companion bill AB  
          1652, represents the culmination of several years of effort by  
          Senator Yee and Assemblymember Jones to improve safety at ski  
          resorts and protect skiers and snowboarders from suffering  
          severe injuries that may very well be preventable.

          To that end, this bill requires persons under 18 years of age  
          participating in downhill skiing or snowboarding to wear a  
          properly fitted and fastened snow sport helmet, meeting  
          specified standards, or face a $25 penalty for violation of this  
          requirement.  This bill also requires ski resorts to provide  
          notice of this helmet requirement by posting signs at the resort  
          as well as including notice on all trail maps and resort  
          Internet websites.  As proposed to be amended, this bill  
          includes contingent enactment language stating that these  
          provisions shall not become operative unless AB 1652 (Jones) is  
          also enacted into law this session.  AB 1652, as briefly  
          described below, would require ski resorts to prepare an annual  
          safety plan, as specified, and make available to the public each  
          month a report describing any fatal accidents that may have  
          occurred at the ski resort.

           Author's Statement of Purpose.   According to the author, this  
          bill is intended to decrease the number of serious injuries  
          resulting from skiing or snowboarding by requiring, for the  
          first time in California, that young participants of these  
          winter sports wear a helmet.  The author states:

               California's ski slopes are perhaps the last area of  
               recreation that lacks basic safety standards in place  
               for children. Despite repeated warnings from public  
               health experts, professional athletes, and ski  
               resorts, each winter brings news of hundreds of  
               unnecessary tragedies for the failure to wear a  
               helmet.  SB 880 can significantly reduce instances of  
               traumatic brain injury or death for such a vulnerable  








                                                                  SB 880
                                                                  Page  5

               population.

           Research Data Supporting the Need for Helmet Protection Among  
          Skiers and Snowboarders.   The topic of head injury associated  
          with skiing and snowboarding has been the subject of several  
          epidemiological and neuropsychological studies in recent years. 

          In January 1999, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission  
          (CPSC) released a report on an investigational study of skiing-  
          and snowboarding-related head and neck injuries, in an attempt  
          to determine whether helmets would have prevented or reduced the  
          severity of injuries.  They note that head injuries account for  
          14 percent of skiing and snowboarding accidents, as well as 56  
          percent of related deaths.  Falls were the leading cause of head  
          and neck injuries, when individuals either hit a surface (48  
          percent) or hit their ski equipment (21 percent).  About  
          two-thirds of the falls to a surface resulted in injuries to  
          parts of the head which were identified as addressable by use of  
          a helmet.  Overall, the study indicated that 44 percent of head  
          injuries, an estimated 7,700 injuries annually, could be  
          addressed by helmet use.  The study also showed that for  
          children under 15 years of age, 53 percent of head injuries  
          (approximately 2,600 of the 4,950 head injuries annually) are  
          addressable by use of a helmet.

          One recent study cited by the author found that helmets may  
          reduce the risk of head injuries in skiers and snowboarders by  
          29% to 56%.  ("Effectiveness of Helmets in Skiers and  
          Snowboarders: Case-Control and Case Crossover Study," Hagel,  
          Pless, et al., 2005.)  The author also points to research  
          showing that helmet use for skiers and snowboarders under the  
          age of 13 reduces the incidence of head injury requiring  
          investigation and/or treatment.  ("Effect of Helmet Wear on the  
          Incidence of Head/face and Cervical Spine Injuries in Young  
          Skiers and Snowboarders," Macnab, Smith, et al.)

          The author also asserts that head injuries sustained without a  
          helmet are not only dangerous, but pose significant financial  
          hardship.  According to the American Medical Association,  
          first-year acute care costs for all skiers under age 17 who  
          sustain a head injury range from $1.5 million for patients with  
          mild traumatic brain injury to $82 million for those with severe  
          traumatic brain injury (TBI).  Annual lifetime care costs per  
          individual, excluding first year costs, range from $329,000 for  
          mild TBI to $8.96 million for severe TBI.  








                                                                  SB 880
                                                                  Page  6


           Previous Informational Hearing by this Committee.   In November  
          2008, the Assembly Judiciary Committee held an informational  
          hearing on "Ski and Snowboard Health, Safety and Liability  
          Standards."  At that hearing, the Committee reviewed testimony  
          that, unlike most states with major ski resorts, the ski  
          industry in California reportedly lacks uniform safety policies,  
          procedures and signage requirements.  The Committee also heard  
          testimony that California would benefit from enactment of its  
          first ski safety statute, especially one that established ski  
          and snowboard safety standards and provided for increased  
          oversight and certain information to be made available to the  
          public.

           As proposed to be amended, enactment of this bill is contingent  
          upon enactment of AB 1652 (Jones).   As proposed to be amended,  
          the bill states that its provisions shall not become operative  
          unless AB 1652 (Jones) is also signed into law in the 2009-10  
          session.  AB 1652 is currently set to be heard by the Senate  
          Health Committee on June 30, 2010, but, according to its author,  
          will be amended before that date to require California ski  
          resorts to: (1) prepare an annual safety plan that conforms with  
          the requirements of federal regulations applicable to ski  
          resorts operating on federal property, and make the safety plan  
          available to the public upon request; (2) make available to the  
          public a monthly report containing specified information about  
          fatal accidents occurring on ski resort property; (3) establish  
          a standardized signage policy used to indicate a ski area  
          boundary, hazard, or other safety information; and (4) establish  
          a policy for standardized safety padding or other barriers for  
          all lift towers and fixed snowmaking equipment located on or  
          near groomed ski runs.

          It is the intent of both authors that the two bills, SB 880 and  
          AB 1652, represent a comprehensive, jointly developed approach  
          towards promoting ski safety in California, and thus should be  
          enacted together or neither should be enacted.

           Liability standards remain unchanged by this bill.   The  
          California ski industry enjoys legal liability protection  
          through a common law doctrine of "assumption of risk" as well as  
          contractual negligence waivers included on ski pass purchase  
          agreements.  As a result of these protections, ski resorts have  
          limited exposure to legal liability.  This bill expressly  
          provides that none of its provisions shall be construed to  








                                                                  SB 880
                                                                  Page  7

          increase or decrease duties imposed under existing law,  
          including the duty of care that applies to ski resorts under  
          tort law.

           ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT  :  The bill is supported by numerous  
          associations of psychologists, nurses, and chiropractors who in  
          their respective practices report seeing patients who have  
          suffered serious injuries while snowboarding or skiing without  
          using a helmet.  The psychological associations report  
          neuropsychological research findings (cited above) that indicate  
          helmets protect against more severe injuries and are associated  
          with a quicker return to pre-accident functioning among injured  
          patients.  These medical professionals support this bill  
          because, generally speaking, they believe it has the potential  
          to prevent some of the traumatic head and muscular injuries that  
          these professionals treat each winter during peak skiing and  
          snowboarding seasons.

           PREVIOUS LEGISLATION  :  AB 990 (Jones) of 2009 would have  
          required ski resorts to prepare and file an annual safety report  
          with the Division of Occupational Safety and Health (DOSH) and  
          to report to DOSH on a quarterly basis any serious injuries or  
          fatalities involving patrons at the ski resort.  AB 990 was held  
          on suspense in the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

          SB 284 (Cox) of 2009 would have required DOSH to utilize the  
          most current safety standards when inspecting aerial passenger  
          tramways operated at ski resorts.  SB 284 would have also  
          required ski resorts to file an annual safety plan with DOSH,  
          make the safety plan available on demand, report to DOSH, within  
          24 hours, any fatalities involving patrons at the resort, and  
          standardize safety signage and equipment padding in use at the  
          resort.  SB 284 died in the Senate Labor and Industrial  
          Relations Committee.

          AB 2218 (Keeley) of 2002 would have created the California Ski  
          Safety Commission (Commission) in order to adopt uniform signs  
          and provide a copy of its standards and recommendations to all  
          ski areas doing business in California.  AB 2218 would have also  
          required ski areas that post signs to use the signs adopted by  
          the Commission.  AB 2218 failed passage in the Senate  
          Appropriations Committee.

           REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION  :









                                                                  SB 880
                                                                  Page  8

           Support 
           
          California Psychological Association (sponsor)
          Alameda County Psychological Association
          American Academy of Pediatrics 
          American Board of Trial Advocates
          American College of Emergency Physicians
          American Psychological Association - Division One "Clinical and  
          Professional Practice" 
          Association of California Insurance Companies
          California Brain Injury Association
          California Children's Hospital Association
          California Chiropractic Association 
          California Emergency Nurses Association
          California Hospital Association
          California Medical Association
          California Nurses Association
          California School Nurses Organization
          California Ski and Snowboard Safety Organization
          California Society of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation
          California Psychiatric Association
          California Travel Industry Association
          Central Coast Center for Independent Living
          Children's Advocacy Institute
          Children's Hospital and Research Center Oakland
          Children's Specialty Care Coalition
          Contra Costa Psychological Association
          Los Angeles County psychological Association
          Marin County Psychological Association
          Monterey Bay Psychological Association
          National Academy of Neuropsychology
          National Ski Areas Association
          Occupational Therapy Association of California
          Orange County Psychological Association
          Pacific Cascade Psychological Association
          Redwood Psychological Association
          Richmond Area Multi-Services, Inc.
          Sacramento Valley Psychological Association
          San Gabriel Valley Psychological Association
          Santa Clara County Psychological Association
          San Diego Psychological Association
          San Joaquin Psychological Association
          San Francisco Psychological Association 
          EDITORIAL: Santa Rosa Press Democrat
           








                                                                 SB 880
                                                                  Page  9

            Opposition 
           
          None on file


           Analysis Prepared by  :    Anthony Lew / JUD. / (916) 319-2334