House committee reviews bill to create single sports calendar, lawmakers weigh enforcement and exemptions

The House of Representatives’ Commission on Recreation and Sport heard testimony on Proyecto de la Cámara 568 and Cámara Resolution 228 on the creation of a single, department‑managed sports calendar and additional regulation of sporting events in Puerto Rico that include minors.

Proponents say a unified calendar would help the Department of Recreation and Sports (DRD) better coordinate permits, reduce overlapping events that may overload youth athletes and strengthen enforcement of existing rules; opponents and some stakeholders warned the bill as drafted could create bureaucracy, hinder sponsorship and unintentionally restrict community fundraising and established university competitions.

Edwin Hernández, representing the DRD, told the commission the measure “permitirá al departamento de recreación y deportes coordinar, regular y fiscalizar de formas efectiva todos los eventos deportivos celebrados en Puerto Rico,” while also noting the department lacks resources for full enforcement under the current regulatory framework. Hernández and the DRD called for clearer definitions in the bill and for interagency mechanisms so other permit‑issuing bodies (for example, fire and municipal authorities) require DRD endorsement before issuing event permits.

Jorge Óscar Sosa Ramírez, commissioner of the Liga Atlética Interuniversitaria (LAI), described the LAI’s existing scheduling processes and cautioned that a single calendar could become “una actividad burocrática que nos detenga” for an organization that plans seasons and multi‑year festival dates in advance. Sosa said the LAI serves 17 universities with roughly 3,426 athletes and that university competition is largely organized around academic semesters; he asked that university sports be excluded or explicitly treated as an exemption in the bill.

Saraí Ruiz Maisonet, representing the Puerto Rico Department of Education, said the department views the bill as responding to “a una necesidad urgente y real de ordenar y regular la creciente celebración de eventos deportivos en Puerto Rico,” but deferred technical judgment to the DRD and expressed willingness to collaborate on implementation and dissemination of protections through school physical‑education curricula.

Witnesses raised several concrete concerns about the bill text as drafted: lack of precise definitions for terms such as “evento deportivo oficial” and “organizaciones deportivas”; unclear sequencing of required permits (for example, whether DRD authorization or fire‑department approval comes first); potential prepayment or up‑front cost burdens for small nonprofit leagues; and limits in the draft on fundraising events (the text discussed a maximum duration of three days, use of no more than two facilities and a cap on donations at three dollars per person per day).

DRD and education staff described ongoing safety initiatives the department is pursuing regardless of new legislation: a pilot concussion‑management protocol developed with the University of Puerto Rico‑Ponce and the medical school’s physical‑medicine department; collaborations with athletic trainers and a plan to require coach training modules; and efforts to publish event calendars, coach licensing lists and guidance for parents on the DRD website and social channels.

Testimony also referenced data and safety concerns used to justify regulation. A local epidemiological study cited at the hearing attributed youth sports injuries mainly to noncontact events (43 percent) and training sessions (51 percent), with reported injury distributions of about 35 percent ankle, 17 percent knee and 13.6 percent hand/finger injuries. DRD and education witnesses argued those findings support measures to limit excessive play and require documented training plans.

Several legislators and presenters emphasized enforcement capacity as the central issue: many of the protections and limits already exist in Regulation 91‑79 and Law 8 (the DRD’s organic law), they said, but inadequate budget and staffing have left those rules unevenly enforced. Edwin Hernández said the department has requested funding for regional interventors and will use training and redeployment of current staff if additional budgetary resources are not approved.

Members of the commission asked for clarifications and possible amendments to the proposal to protect community‑level fundraising and avoid unintentionally blocking small, informal events. A DRD lawyer acknowledged the concern and said the commission may consider carve‑outs or exceptions for one‑off community fundraisers while preserving stricter rules for recurring commercial promoters whose primary motive is profit.

No votes or final actions on Project 568 or Resolution 228 were recorded during the hearing; witnesses and lawmakers concluded with a list of technical changes and implementation questions for staff to address in future sessions.

Looking ahead, DRD officials said they will provide proposed definitions and recommended language changes to the committee, continue the concussion‑protocol pilot and expand coach‑training offerings, and that the commission will consider amendments to preserve university scheduling and to clarify whether and how small community fundraising events will be regulated.