July 15 is the deadline for NCAA institutions and conferences to submit legislative proposals. The July 15 deadline includes Division I members for the first time since restructuring was implemented in 1997.

Based on the new 12-month legislative cycle approved by the Division I Management Council and Board of Directors in April, Division I conferences must submit legislative proposals to the national office by 5 p.m. Central time July 15. The same deadline applies for Divisions II and III membership-sponsored proposals for consideration at the Association's 2004 Convention.

In Division I, pursuant to the new legislative calendar, Division I conferences are permitted to formally submit legislative proposals that will be considered by the governance structure. Legislative proposals developed and sponsored by the Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet or the Championships/Competition Cabinet must also be submitted by the July 15 deadline.

In Division II, a minimum of 15 active member institutions is required to sponsor an amendment not sponsored by the Division II Presidents Council. The minimum number of active members required in Division III is eight.

A Division II proposal must be signed by the chief executive officer of a sponsoring institution or by the CEO's designee. In the alternative, at least two chief elected or executive officers of a voting member conference (such as a conference commissioner) can submit legislation on behalf of the 15 or more active conference members, as long as those sponsoring institutions are listed and the proposal is signed by the chair of the conference's official presidential administrative group (or by at least two CEOs of conference schools if no such group exists).

In Division III, legislation also may be submitted by a chief conference officer on behalf of the eight or more active conference members. CEO signatures are required in the same manner as in Division II.

Other procedures for submitting proposals were detailed in a May 15 memorandum to Division I conference commissioners and Divisions II and III CEOs. Copies of the official amendment-submission forms for institutions and conferences accompanied the memorandum.

Among the procedures:

Each proposal must be accompanied by a rationale statement of fewer than 200 words. Division I rationale statements must note any fiscal impact to the Association or institutions or both and, additionally, whether the proposal impacts student-athlete time demands. The rationale statement also should indicate whether the proposal is consistent with the deregulation efforts taking place in Division I.

In accordance with the new 12-month legislative cycle in Division I, proposals will be posted online as part of a Web-based "Initial Publication of Proposed Legislation" by August 15. Also by then, the Management Council's administrative committee will refer the proposals either to the Academics/Eligibility/Compliance Cabinet or the Championships/Competition Cabinet for review during their September meetings.

The first of two amendment periods will last from August 15 to the end of the Management Council's October meeting (typically held during the third week in October). During this time, the cabinets or any conference (whether it sponsored the proposal or not) may amend a proposal.

At its October meeting, the Management Council will review proposals that have been amended but not agreed to by the original sponsor. In those cases, the Council may choose to support the original proposal or the amendment(s), or develop its own proposal.

A printed "Official Notice" will be distributed by November 15 and will list all pending legislative proposals sponsored by conferences, cabinets or the Council.

At the NCAA Convention, Division I members will have the opportunity to engage in educational/discussion sessions about the more significant proposals and conduct conference meetings in order to develop voting lines on pending legislation. Then the Management Council will meet to initially consider the legislative proposals.

A 60-day membership comment period will ensue for proposals initially approved by the Council. Conferences or cabinets may amend any proposal during the 60-day comment period, provided any amendment does not increase the modification specified in the original proposal. In March, a Management Council legislative review subcommittee will develop a consent package for the Council to consider in April.

Legislation approved a second time at the Council's April meeting will be forwarded to the Board later that month for adoption. After Board approval, a 60-day override period will be in place until mid-June.

In Divisions II and III, all membership-sponsored proposals will be evaluated by an appropriate Association-wide or Division II or III committee before they are included on the agenda for the 2004 Convention. The divisions' respective Presidents Councils will designate the reviewing committee.

The designated committee will report to sponsors the results of its review of a proposal by October 7. Committees will attempt to complete the review process in time for sponsors to make any alterations to proposals before the September 15 deadline for modifications by sponsors.

A committee may indicate support for or opposition to a proposal or suggest an alternative proposal as a result of its review. A committee position will not prevent a vote by the membership on a proposal, as long as submission requirements and deadlines are met.

Properly submitted proposals, after appropriate editing by the Legislative Review Subcommittee of the Division II Legislation Committee, the Division III Interpretations and Legislation Committee and the membership services staff, will appear in the Initial Publication of Proposed Legislation, which will be provided online in PDF format not later than August 15.

The Second Publication of Proposed Legislation (which includes amendments submitted by the Presidents Councils and those properly modified by sponsors) will be provided online not later than September 23, and the Official Notice will be provided not later than November 15.

Future deadlines for preparation of legislation for the 2004 Convention are:

Division I's single cycle aims to defuse 'disenfranchisement' among members

BY GARY T. BROWN
THE NCAA NEWS

July 15 once again is an important date for Division I. The day that Division I members used to have circled on their calendars as the deadline for submitting legislative proposals has returned to highlighter status after a six-year hiatus.

That's because the Division I Management Council during its last two meetings agreed to implement a single annual legislative cycle that uses July 15 as a trigger date for conferences to submit proposals, and the April Council and Board of Directors meetings as the finish line for approval. In between, proponents hope, are fewer headaches for administrators tracking legislative proposals, a more manageable comment period and perhaps even a revitalized NCAA Convention.

"The membership wanted an annual system of legislative enactment that is easy to track," said Metro Atlantic Athletic Conference Commissioner Rich Ensor, who chairs the Management Council's governance subcommittee. "This single cycle will reduce confusion as to where proposals are in the system."

Ensor, whose governance subcommittee was the point group for developing the single cycle after a survey of the membership indicated a strong desire for change, noted that Division I operated on quarterly cycles when restructuring was implemented in 1997. It didn't take long for the membership to find four cycles too cumbersome, though, so the current six-month cycles were adopted shortly afterward. A majority of the membership, however -- particularly those members not directly involved in governance committees -- thought even the two-cycle system was too confusing, since each six-month cycle incorporated two different comment periods.

Now there will be one annual comment period after the Management Council's initial consideration of legislation in January. And though that will be the only "official" comment period, the new system strategically incorporates another discussion window before the NCAA Convention. The "Official Notice," which includes all pending legislative proposals from members, cabinets and the Council, will be published in November to allow institutions to convene their personnel for discussion and review. That should prime the membership for an issues forum at the NCAA Convention that precedes the Management Council meeting. Thus, the Management Council's initial review ideally will be guided by membership "comment."

The primary benefits to the new system appear to be simplicity and increased membership involvement. The caveats may be a slower pace and still no voting Convention. While the new cycle is similar to the pre-federated model used before 1997 in some ways, the final decision-making authority rests with the Board of Directors and not one school-one vote.

Ensor said the governance subcommittee considered structures that allowed members some form of a vote, including a system where members could cast "directed" votes that might guide the Management Council's deliberations. But Ensor said though the Board has not issued an official position on the matter, Board members who attended a Council/Board luncheon in January indicated they were not interested in membership voting.

It remains to be seen then whether the sense of disenfranchisement many Division I members felt with the current structure is from not being able to track legislation or not being able to vote on it. But Ensor said if a voting Convention is something the membership feels is necessary, it may have to come from the membership rather than through the committee structure.

"The complicated legislative process and the inability to vote are two elements that contribute to that sense of disenfranchisement," Ensor said. "We've addressed the one. The voting issue though is something that the membership would have to deal with through the legislative process."