NATIONAL HARBOR, Maryland – The Division II Management Council noted at its Wednesday meeting that applications are being solicited for the annual $250,000 membership fund designed to retain current schools and attract new members to the division.

The application process must be completed by April 10 for institutions to be eligible for awards allocated in September. A second application period (deadline of September 16) will be activated this spring for awards allocated in January 2010.

The membership fund is an outcome of the 2007 Presidents and Chancellors Summit, during which presidents determined the need for resources to retain current active institutions and help attract new schools or conferences to the division. The fund was approved by the Division II Planning and Finance Committee (which oversees the fund) this past spring as a part of the biannual budget process.

A Membership Fund Selection Committee, chaired by Charles Dunn, president emeritus at Henderson State, has been established to review applications. Other members are Mary Athletics Director Roger Thomas, Shippensburg Athletics Director Roberta Page, Virginia State President Eddie Moore, Mount Olive Athletics Director Jeff Eisen, New Haven Athletics Director Debbie Chin and Southwest Minnesota State President David Danahar.

Requests for funds must:

•         Identify and encourage new Division II members or create opportunities for successful Division II active membership.

•         Fund initiatives that stabilize current Division II membership (such as projects to enhance or develop additional Division II, non-championship postseason opportunities; projects to promote continued membership opportunities for independents or assistance with conference membership; or efforts to increase the visibility of Division II).

•         Fund initiatives that guard against membership attrition, such as educational sessions to counsel presidents, chancellors and governing boards on the benefits of Division II membership.

Examples of requests that would be considered are available on the application site.

Legislative actions

The Division II Management Council also prepared for Saturday’s business session at its Wednesday meeting, approving an amendment to Proposal 2009-7 (transcript submission) that does not require prospects who have been certified by the Eligibility Center to present schools with current high school transcripts before signing a National Letter of Intent or a written offer of aid.

The Council also approved a directive related to Proposal 2009-8 (percentage calculations for hardship waivers) specifying that the proposal, if approved, would regulate cases that occur on or after August 1, 2009. Cases occurring between August 1, 2007, and July 31, 2009, would be handled through either the current rule or the rule set forth in the proposed legislation, whichever most benefits the student-athlete.

In other legislative actions, Council members approved noncontroversial legislation to allow schools to hire a band (for example, marching band or pep band) composed of prospect-age individuals to perform at athletics contests.

They also acted on a couple of membership-related matters, including a change in terminology in the membership process that introduces a “candidacy” period (formerly “exploratory”) for the first two years. The Council and the Membership Committee, which proposed the change, believe “candidacy” more accurately reflects the process (whereas “exploring” gives the impression that schools don’t need to be as far along in activating the Division II strategic-positioning platform as the Membership Committee would prefer).

The Council also approved an increased fee structure for schools applying for active Division II status ($2,000 for each year of the minimum three-year period). Thus, an institution entering into the process must provide $28,000 upon application for the first two years of the candidacy period and an additional $14,000 each year thereafter.

In other action, Council members referred a concept to the Division II Championships Committee that would add various sports other than basketball to the exception currently in place that prohibits an institution’s coach from being involved as a participant or in instructional or coaching activities in the same sport for a local sports club or organization. The prohibition is rooted in competitive equity, but some Council members are concerned that the restrictions may harm sports that are under-developed in certain regions.

They also advanced a proposal to the 2010 Convention in Atlanta that would allow institutions to pay fees associated with the use of institutional practice and competition facilities by a prospective student-athlete who is engaged in voluntary athletically related activities in his or her sport during the summer before initial collegiate enrollment, provided the prospect has signed a National Letter of Intent or a written offer of admission or financial aid. Existing legislation allows institutions currently to pay such fees for currently enrolled student-athletes. The proposal would align the allowance for prospects as well.

Championship travel policies

The Council also continued its discussion on bracketing principles and policies to add efficiencies to championships administration. The Division II Championships Committee at its February 2-4 meeting will review data from the Division II fall-sports championships in 2008 that were administered under policy changes that included reimbursement of a maximum of two bags per traveler, and having sport committees use special bracketing software to help reduce the number of preliminary-round flights where appropriate.

Those changes, implemented in all three divisions, resulted in 19 fewer flights and significant savings in charter and baggage costs. The changes did not compromise timeliness in team/individual arrival to the championship site, either – despite the reduced flight capacity in the airline industry.

The Division II Championships Committee will review any additional policy changes carefully, such as the possibility of more geographically neutral sites or even predetermined sites (rather than having the top seeds host). Several Management Council members are concerned about any movement away from allowing top seeds the right to host – a right they believe is pivotal in the championships philosophy. They also like the effect on attendance the top-seeds-as-hosts principle usually provides.

Others, though, believe attendance wouldn’t suffer in a more centrally located, neutral, in-region site, since fans from several teams might be closer to that site than the site of the top seed, particularly if the latter is in a remote location.

Still, most Council members agreed that protecting the primacy of the top seeds was paramount, and they were assured that whatever options were advocated in the near future would not exclude teams in remote locations from hosting championships competition.

Management Council Vice Chair Dave Riggins, who also chairs the Championships Committee, said the travel-policy talks about rising fuel costs and reduced flight availability actually dovetail with Division II’s ongoing comprehensive review of championships administration.

“The economic situation merely jump-started discussions that have been occurring anyway,” he said. “The economy is not driving the current discussion – it’s a factor, certainly, but not the reason for the deliberations.”