DALLAS — The Division III Management Council is supporting proposed legislation for the 2007 Convention to manage the division’s growth by ensuring new members are fully prepared to join the division while holding current members accountable for demonstrating their commitment to membership.

The proposals — which among other actions would limit the number of institutions that annually would be granted provisional or reclassifying membership and would require full compliance with all of the division’s regulations during the first year of provisional or reclassifying status — were recommended by the Division III Membership Committee (see the July 17 issue of The NCAA News).

The proposals also include new measures for active members, ranging from annual reviews of compliance with sports-sponsorship requirements to requiring annual attendance by institutional personnel at the Convention and periodic attendance at regional rules seminars.

The Division III Presidents Council will be asked during its August 3 meeting in Indianapolis to sponsor the proposals at the Convention.

Division III currently accepts as many as six new provisional members annually and places no limit on the number of institutions that may seek reclassification from Divisions I and II. If adopted by the membership, the proposal supported by the Management Council would limit the annual total of new provisional and reclassifying members to four.

A waiver opportunity would be available in special situations — for example, if multiple institutions from one conference apply simultaneously for membership — but Council members suggested that such exceptions would be offset in other years by accepting fewer new members.

The proposal also poses new hurdles for new members by requiring that provisional and reclassifying institutions comply at the time of application with sports-sponsorship requirements and that they comply fully during the first year of membership with other Division III regulations.

Currently, provisional members are not required to fully comply with all regulations until the third year of the four-year provisional-membership period.

Council members debated whether to limit the annual class of provisional and reclassifying members to less than four, but ultimately agreed that the heightened admission requirements could effectively limit the number of new members in a particular year to one or two institutions.

Members also believe the proposals, along with an accompanying plan to extend a current moratorium on accepting new members through the 2008 Convention, are a preferable alternative to a hard cap on the size of Division III that is being sought by the North Coast Athletic Conference.

The Council also received a report on the work of an NCAA Executive Committee working group that includes representatives from all three divisions, which recently pledged to explore ways of addressing membership growth and migration from one division to another (see the July 3 issue of The NCAA News).

Convention proposals

The membership proposals are among nine new proposals the Presidents Council will be asked to sponsor at the 2007 Convention. The presidents agreed earlier this year to sponsor three proposals at the Convention, meaning that Division III members may be asked to vote in January on as many as 12 proposals originating from the governance structure.

Other proposals endorsed by the Management Council in Dallas and forwarded to the presidents:

The SAAC also recommended a proposal to permit student-athletes to practice during the nontraditional season without losing a season of participation, regardless of whether the nontraditional season is in the fall or the spring, provided that the student-athlete does not participate in competition during that period. The Council learned that a similar proposal has been submitted for the 2007 Convention by the Wisconsin Intercollegiate Athletic Conference and cosponsored by the Great Northeast Conference and Northwest Conference, and noted that if the Presidents Council approves the SAAC recommendation, the governance structure ultimately could join as an additional co-sponsor of the proposal.