PACIFIC-10 CONFERENCE
April 7-8, 2006

The meeting was called to order by Chris Dawson at 7:05 p.m. The chair, Anna Chappell, arrived at approximately 7:30 p.m. due to travel delays.

1. Approval of minutes of November 4-6, 2005, meeting

It was VOTED (15-0-0-5, USC M/W, ARIZ M/W, STAN M absent)

"to approve the minutes of the November 4-6, 2005, meeting."

2. Meeting Materials

Dawson reviewed the materials which provided background information for the Pac-10 SAAC participants. Particular note was made of the Pac-10 list serve. Each person who attended the Pac-10 SAAC meeting would be added to the list serve, and was responsible to monitor it. Any institutional SAAC member was free to subscribe to the Pac-10 list serve. Instructions on how to subscribe were included in the meeting materials.

Dawson stated that all Pac-10 Conference meetings use Robert's Rules to have orderly discussions during the meeting. The Rules were briefly reviewed. Dawson reviewed the members of the Pac-10 SAAC Advisory Committee, and the Pac-10 staff list, noting that these individuals were available to help any Pac-10 SAAC representative as requested. She also reviewed the list of Pac-10 Council members, and encouraged SAAC members to interact with and get to know the Council members at their institutions.

3. NCAA SAAC Report

Chappell,who had been elected vice-chair of the NCAA SAAC, reported on the NCAA SAAC activities. She sought input on the use of text messaging on cellular phones, and posed the question, should the NCAA regulate the number of texts sent to recruits?. Chappell reported that this was a very big recruiting issue. It was permissible under NCAA rules for coaches to send unlimited text messages to recruits. This may create an undue burden for coaches as well as recruits who felt pressured to constantly engage in this activity. It was stated that some recruits may feel uncomfortable receiving constant text messages from coaches, and that there was a cost involved in receiving messages. In addition, some coaches send a text message to recruits and have the recruit call them back, so it doesn't count as the permissible weekly phone call. The consensus of the group was that there as there was no limit on the permissible number of e-mails, there should not be a limit on text messages sent. In addition, it was suggested that it would be extremely difficult for compliance to track text messages, if some controls were instituted, since phone bills lack detail on the messages. One suggestion was made to propose legislation that says if a recruit does not return a coach's text message, the coach must cease messaging that recruit.

It was VOTED 13-3-3-1 (ASU W, USC W, ORE M opposed; ASU M, CAL W, WASH W abstain, STAN M absent)

"to recommend that there be a limit on the number of text messages and e-mails sent to recruits per month."

Chappell was to take that information back to the NCAA SAAC discussion.

Chappell described the NCAA SAAC newsletter. She planned to send a notice to the Pac-10 SAAC list serve as each issue was published, and encouraged SAAC members to distribute on campus when it was published. Any student-athlete who was interesting in providing an article for consideration to be published in the newsletter should contact her.

The November Pac-10 SAAC meeting was to include a review of NCAA legislative proposals. Because of the extremely large number of proposals, not all are discussed. The Conference office identifies the proposals that directly affect student-athletes. Chappell urged anyone who wished to discuss a particular proposal to advise the Conference office to make sure it was included on the list.

4. Pac-10 Sportsmanship Award

The SAAC reviewed the applications for the 2006 Pac-10 Sportsmanship Award, then voted and selected male and female winners. Eric Nygard, a track and field athlete from Washington State University, and Anna Key, a soccer player from the University of California, were selected. An award was to be presented to the institution on the student's behalf at the Pac-10 Summer Meetings. In addition, the applications were to be forwarded to the NCAA as the Pac-10's nominees for the NCAA Sportsmanship Award.

The other nominees were: Kate Benz (basketball; Washington State), Anna Chappell (basketball; Arizona); Lindsay Draper (swimming and diving; USC); Josie Hancock (gymnastics; Arizona State); Courtney Thompson (volleyball; Washington); Simon Burnett (swimming; Arizona); Matt Leinart (football; USC); James Lepp (golf; Washington); Scott Smith (football; California) and Cain Valasquez (wrestling; Arizona State). Each nominee was to receive a certificate.

The number of nominees was increased from the previous year, but ideally, every institution should nominate a male and a female for the award. The group was asked to strategize about how to obtain male and female nominees on each campus. The institutions which did submit nominations in 2005-06 discussed the process they used to select their nominees. One method which involved all teams was to have each team nominate one person for this award, and then have the campus SAAC would vote to select the institutional nominees.

The Conference staff was also asked to have the information about the Pac-10 Sportsmanship Award be relayed more thoroughly to people on campus in a timely way. Dawson stated the information was sent to the life skills coordinators as well as to the Council. SAAC members were also notified via the list serve of the nomination process and upcoming deadlines. The attendees at the November Pac-10 SAAC meeting also usually had this as an action item from their meeting.

5. Student-Athlete Code of Conduct

The group was was asked if their athletic department had a student-athlete code of conduct. Four schools reported that their athletic departments had a student-athlete code of conduct (WASH, ORE, ASU, OSU). The other six schools used the university's code of conduct. The schools that had a student-athlete code of conduct reported that this code was distributed in their student-athlete planners. Along with the student-athlete and university code of conducts, the group reported having sport specific team rules. Some coaches made student-athletes sign-off on the fact that they had read the rules and would abide by them.

It was VOTED 15-0-1-5 (ORE M abstain, USC M/W, ARIZ M/W/W absent)

"to recommend that each SAAC review its campus code of conduct, and discuss whether a student-athlete code of conduct is desirable, if one does not already exist. If a student-athlete code of conduct does exist, it should be reviewed with every student-athlete."

A discussion about the current events taking place at Duke, Colorado and Chico State arose. The question of whether student-athletes should be held to a higher standard was brought up. The group thought that since student-athletes are more recognizable and that they represent not only themselves, but their universities as well, they should be held to a higher standard. The group suggested that codes of conduct don't strongly influence behavior, but student-athletes need to be accountable to their teams, coaches and universities. The idea of using the SAAC to make the code of conduct more important to student-athletes was raised. The group acknowledged that peer-to-peer communication of the code of conduct and behavioral expectations would be more effective than just distributing written information or presentations by administrators. The group suggested after doing this, that the athletic administration enforce the code as well.

The group suggested having lectures touching on major issues relating to the code of conduct which include alcohol, sexual harassment, gambling, financial planning, etc. Another suggestion was to have a coach from each team discuss current events happening in athletics that could both positively and negatively affect a team.

There was no support for creating a Conference-wide student-athlete code of conduct.

6. Sportsmanship and Ethical Conduct Survey

The NCAA Sportsmanship and Ethical Conduct Committee conducted a survey which attempted to gauge the sportsmanship expectations of presidents, athletic directors, sports administrators, coaches, faculty athletics representatives and student-athlete advisory committees. The survey was to provide guidance and best practices at a Sportsmanship Summit scheduled for June 23, 2007, at the NACDA Convention. The SAAC was asked to complete, and have student-athletes at their institutions complete, the survey if they had not yet done so. It was suggested that SAAC members send the web address to every student-athlete at their respective institutions.

No institutions had a sportsmanship or ethical conduct policy of their own. It was suggested that the Pac-10 sportsmanship policy (CER 5-1 in the Pac-10 Handbook) be given greater visibility within the Conference.

7. Policies on Social Networking and Internet Sites

Websites such as Facebook.com and myspace.com have become quite popular with student-athletes. It was stressed to the SAAC that these websites are not private, and anyone with a .edu e-mail address can access facebook, including coaches and administrators, alumni, or future employers. Screens can also be captured and sent via-email to anyone.

Positive aspects of the sites included networking, finding old friends, communicating with teammates, and learning about students in study groups. The sites have also been used to research recruits, which some teams have found useful.

Negative aspects which were identified included having information or photos which reflected negatively on an individual or team, problems with stalkers, safety issues as a result of giving out too much personal information.

Although the SAAC did not favor banning the use of the sites, the importance of making good decisions about what was posted was stressed. For example, photos that show drinking or other illegal behavior may cause repercussions, ranging from team sanctions to diminished employment opportunities. Personal information may also be used to harass or stalk users.

SAAC members were to educate their constituents about these issues as an action item from the meeting.

8. Selection of Championship Memento

SAAC members were asked for assistance in selecting the memento which the Conference provided to members of teams which win Pac-10 championships. The budget for this item was $30. Previous items have included a pen, a clock, a picture frame, and a sterling silver key chain. Suggestions included a toiletry bag, towel, robe, wall clock, back pack, drinking glass set and a jump drive.

9. Selection of Participant Memento

In 2005-06, for the first time, all student-athletes who participated in Pac-10 championships (with the exception of the basketball tournaments) received the same participant memento, a messenger bag. The feedback about the bag from the group was that some of the teams liked the bag and others thought it was too big.

Recommendations for the 2006-07 participant memento included a towel, robe, engraved photo album, director's chair, stool, and portfolio. The budget for this item was $30.

10. Participation Numbers

Strange described the chart provided as a supplement in the meeting materials which showed the participation data for Pac-10 institutions. The data was drawn from the 2004-05 Equity in Athletics Disclosure Act report, a federally required annual report on institutional athletics programs. The chart broke down the percentage of male student-athletes, percentage of female student-athletes, and the total student body by gender, and compared them. The purpose of this chart was to identify which institutions in the Conference provided intercollegiate level of participation opportunities for male and female students in numbers substantially proportionate to their respective enrollments. Oregon State, Stanford, Washington and Washington State appeared to be the institutions which satisfied the proportionality prong of the test for participation opportunities as outlined in Title IX guidelines.

The difficulty of achieving proportionality when an institution sponsored football was noted. Some SAAC members advocated eliminating football from Title IX analysis., because there was no women's sport with equivalent participation numbers. Others believed football should be included because every student-athlete should be counted, regardless of which sport the person competed in. Dawson reviewed the Title IX regulations, which do not make an exception for football.

The Department of Education, the federal agency responsible for enforcing Title IX regulations,proposed permitting interest in participation to be measured by an e-mail survey. Non-response to the survey would be interpreted as a lack of interest. Rivera discussed the need for more research done to measure interest in participating in intercollegiate athletics on campus, especially for women. The SAAC did not believe such a survey would be an effective way of measuring interest.

11. Election of Officers

SAAC members who were interested in serving as an officer of the Pac-10 SAAC were asked to identify themselves at the meeting. Abby Windell of Oregon State was elected co-chair, and Whitney Myers of Arizona was elected co-vice chair . Their terms were to end in the spring of 2007.

12. Appointments to Subcommittees

SAAC members were asked to identify which subcommittees they wish to serve on by completing a preference form from the meeting. Appointments will be made by the Executive Committee.

13. Cooper Tire/Pac-10 Leadership Award

Smith gave an overview of the Cooper Tire/Leadership Award criteria. The application form for the 2005-06 Cooper Tire/Leadership Award was in the meeting materials. Attendees were reminded that submission of institutional nominees needed to be coordinated through the SAAC and the life skills advisor by the July 15 deadline.

14. Re-Use-a-Shoe Program

Jeffers described the Re-Use-a-Shoe Program his institution (Oregon State) implemented. Used tennis shoes are collected and then taken to a recycling center. Nike then recycles the shoes and builds play surfaces for hospitals, tracks, play parks, etc. Jeffers suggested having teams on every campus do this. Another suggestion that came out of this discussion was to send gently used tennis shoes to other countries. It was noted NCAA regulations relating to equipment needed to be followed in such programs.

15. Review of Action List from November, 2005, Meeting

Chappell reviewed the list of action items from the November 2005 meeting. The consensus was that SAAC representatives needed to do a better job of completing the action items to make their SAAC representation more effective. A suggestion was made to e-mail the action items list to the SAAC list serve. In addition, a message board on the Pac-10 website directly related to SAAC ideas and issues was suggested.

The meeting was adjourned at 9:52 a.m.

njs
4/20/06

Student-Athlete Advisory Committee

Action Item List from Meeting of April 7-8, 2006

1. Review institutional SAAC format listed in the April meeting materials and advise Nicole Strange of any changes necessary.

2. Review institutional code of conduct. If there is no separate student-athlete code of conduct, determine if one would be appropriate. If separate student-athlete code of conduct already exists, review it. In addition, find out how the student-athlete code of conduct was developed and what the avenues would be to suggest changes or additions.

3. Complete NCAA Sportsmanship survey on-line by April 28th. The URL is http://web1.ncaa.org/surveys/sportsmanship_survey.html.

4. Download and distribute NCAA SAAC newsletter when published..

5. Have administration give presentation on APR to SAAC if it was not done previously.

6. Talk about Sportsmanship Award and devise a plan to identify institutional nominees for 2006-07.

7. Bring student-athlete handbook to November meeting.

8. Have student-athletes (SAAC members or others) talk to teams about issues associated with Facebook.

---

 

Doubletree Hotel San Jose, CA

Those in attendance were:

Arizona Jake Arnold Anna Chappell Alicia Hollowell Arizona State Jackie Johnson Ryan McBride Jody Smith California Britani Pittullo Dan McDonnell UCLA Kate Richardson Jason Zinser Petrina Long Oregon Allison O'Brien Joey Lucas Oregon State Ta'Tyana McElroy Mitchell Gillis

USC Lindsay Oman Sebastian Salinas Christina Rivera Stanford Dylan Carney Alicia Soto Washington Brian Bauer Kelly McDonald Washington State Nicole Hatcher Pacific-10 Conference Christine A. Dawson Thomas C. Hansen Nicole J. Strange

PACIFIC-10 CONFERENCE
April 15-17, 2005

The meeting was called to order by co-vice chair Lauren Westendorf at 7:03 p.m.

1. Approval of minutes of November 5-7, 2005, meeting

It was VOTED (18-0-0-2, OSU M/W absent)

"to approve the minutes of the November 5-7, 2005 meeting."

2. Meeting Materials

Dawson reviewed the materials which provided background information for the Pac-10 SAAC participants. Particular note was made of the Pac-10 list serve. Student-athletes were encouraged to sign up for the Pac-10 list serve so the form of communication within the Conference would be easier. At least one member of each institutional SAAC should subscribe to the list serve and monitor it. Instructions on how to sign up were included in the meeting materials.

Dawson stated that all Pac-10 Conference meetings use Robert's Rules to have orderly discussions during the meeting. The Rules were briefly reviewed. She reviewed the members of the Pac-10 SAAC Advisory Committee, and the Pac-10 staff list, noting that these individuals were available to help any Pac-10 SAAC representative as requested. She also reviewed the list of Pac-10 Council members, and encouraged SAAC members to interact with Council members at their institutions.

3. Review of Action List from November, 2004, Meeting

Starting with the November, 2004, Pac-10 SAAC meeting, a list of action items for the attendees was developed. This was an effort to ensure that information provided at the meeting reached students back on campus. Westendorf reviewed the list of action items from the November 2004 meeting. There was a show of hands for each action item indicating which had been completed. The consensus was that SAAC reps needed to do a better job of completing the action items to make their SAAC representation more effective.

4. Pac-10 Sportsmanship Award

The SAAC reviewed the applications for the 2005 Pac-10 Sportsmanship Award, then voted and selected male and female winners. Cara Chlebicki, a water polo player from the University of California, and Channing Frye, a basketball player from the University of Arizona, were selected. An award was to be presented to the institution on the student's behalf at the Pac-10 Summer Meetings. In addition, the applications were to be forwarded to the NCAA as the Pac-10's nominees for the NCAA Sportsmanship Award.

The other nominees were: Betsy Boardman (basketball; Arizona State), Tamara Diles (track and field; Washington State); Bre Ladd (volleyball; Arizona); Lorenzo Alexander (football; California) and Mkristo Bruce (football; Washington State). Each nominee was to receive a certificate.

Ideally, every institution would nominate a male and a female for this award. Dawson asked the SAAC what could be done to increase the number of nominations. Since some of the SAAC members in attendance were unfamiliar with the award, Dawson reviewed the notification/application process.

The Conference office sent to the Life Skills Coordinator and Pac-10 Council members information about the award, a copy of the application, and pertinent procedures and deadlines. It was up to each institution to decide how its nominee would be selected.

Those institutions which did nominate individuals used different methods. In some instances, the nominee was selected by administrators without the input of the SAAC. One effective method, used at WSU, was to have each team nominate one person, and then the institutional SAAC selected the nominees. Another method was to have SAAC members nominate people, and then try to get the paperwork completed. For some institutions, the paperwork proved to be an obstacle.

It was suggested that this topic be on the coaches' meeting agenda at every institution to raise coaches' awareness and enlist their assistance in identifying candidates. Dawson agreed to use the list serve to provide information about nomination deadlines as well as access to the nomination forms themselves.

5. NCAA SAAC Report

Cassel informed the group that he will be leaving his NCAA SAAC term a year early due to job responsibilities. He outlined the selection process for the new member, noting that the term was two years and student-athletes could serve one year past the completion of their eligibility.

Cassel described the national SAAC duties and obligations. A benefit of the position was the ability to meet with the NCAA Management Council and the Board of Directors. SAAC members had to be up on the legislation and issues surrounding college athletics. He emphasized the importance of student-athletes communicating new ideas and opinions about legislation to the national SAAC representative from their conference to make them more aware of the views they have. Cassel asked the group to create awareness on campus about this open position to get a wide range of nominees for the position.

Cassel reviewed the topics from the January, 2005, NCAA SAAC meeting. Male practice players competing on female teams was a prominent topic of discussion. Pac-10 SAAC members who were opposed to this concept stated that male practice players take away opportunities for women to participate and develop their skills, as well as use institutional resources. Some believed, however, this was beneficial since male practice players provided the daily competition in practice to help make the women's teams better. One approach to this issue might be to limit the number of male practice players allowed per team. Legislation on this topic was expected for the 2005-06 cycle.

Cassel reviewed selected pieces of legislation that were discussed at the January, 2005 NCAA SAAC meeting.

PACIFIC-10 CONFERENCE
November 5-7, 2004

The meeting was called to order by co-vice chair Jake Arnold at 7:00 p.m.

1. Approval of minutes of April 9-10, 2004, meeting

It was VOTED (17-0-0-3, USC M, WSU M/W absent)

"to approve the minutes of the April 9-10, 2004 meeting."

2. Meeting Materials

Dawson reviewed materials which provided background information for the Pac-10 SAAC participants. Particular note was made of the Pac-10 SAAC outline, and the five Pac-10 subcommittees to which new members will be appointed by the new executive committee.

SAAC representatives were asked to make sure at least one person from each institution was signed up for the Pac-10 list serve, to make communication from the Pac-10 office and with other members of the Pac-10 SAAC quicker and easier. It was hoped that the Pac-10 SAAC list serve would become a more effective tool in the future.

Robert's Rules of Order were reviewed, with a reminder that those desiring to speak needed to be recognized by the chair before speaking. Strange reviewed various lists of Pac-10 and institutional personnel, all of whom would be available to help Pac-10 SAAC representatives if needed.

3. NCAA Legislation

Smith reviewed the NCAA legislative process and timeline, as well as the procedure for introducing legislation. Any proposals originated by the Pac-10 SAAC would be forwarded to the Pac-10 Council for a vote to determine if the Conference would sponsor the legislation. If sponsored by the Conference, the legislation would then enter into the regular NCAA process.

The SAAC discussed and took positions on several pieces of proposed legislation in the 2004-05 NCAA legislative cycle, as follows:

2003-23-A (would exempt need-based and academic aid from counting against team equivalency): Favored (13-3-3-1, UCLA M/W, WASH W opposed; WASH M, OSU M/W abstained; USC M absent). Generally, SAAC members believed that students should be able to retain aid from outside of the athletic department without affecting the team equivalency. Those opposed believed that some institutions may have greater amounts of aid to award, or may manipulate the awards, resulting in unfair competitive advantage.

2003-23-B (would exempt academic aid only from counting against team equivalency): Favored (13-6-0-1, ORE M, UCLA M/W, WASH M, CAL M/W opposed, USC M absent). Those in favor believed that students should be able to retain aid from outside of the athletic department without affecting the team equivalency. Those opposed believed that some institutions may be able to provide greater amounts of such aid, resulting in unfair competitive advantage.

2004-21 (would increase the maximum grant-in-aid limitations in selected women's sports): Favored (12-5-2-1, WSU M/W, OSU M, CAL M/W opposed, STAN M/W abstained, USC M absent). Those in favor believed this would increase the percentage of women's participation. Those opposed stated this might negatively affect men's sports if existing funding for men's teams was shifted to pay for these scholarships. It was stated that increasing the limits might help some institutions meet federal gender equity guidelines.

2004-98 (would permit an institution to pay for one parent or guardian to accompany a prospect during an official visit): Favored (15-4-0-1, WSU M/W, CAL M/W opposed, USC M absent). Those in favor stated that because guidance from parents is desirable when making major life decisions, a prospect should have the option of bringing a parent or guardian at the institution's expense. Those opposed were concerned about the costs, especially at institutions with existing budget problems. In addition, it was stated that because the parent would not be at the school with the student once enrolled, making the visit without a parent provided a more realistic view of campus life.

2004-99 (would reduce the number of expense paid official visits from five to four in football and basketball): Opposed (1-18-0-1, WSU W favored, USC M absent). Those opposed believed a fifth visit was needed in order to compare and contrast with the previous four schools.

If the legislation were passed, the SAAC favored (18-1-0-1, UCLA M opposed, USC M absent) applying the legislation to all sports.

2004-40 (would amend the maximum number of contests in certain sports): Opposed (1-16-2-1, WSU M favored, WSU W, OSU M abstained, USC M absent). SAAC members were concerned that these limitations would negatively affect skill development, as well as decrease motivation to train.

2004-44 (would permit an institution to reimburse student-athletes for travel related to practices at off-campus sites): Favored (18-0-1-1, WSU W abstained, USC M absent) Those in favor stated that reimbursement should be granted for travel if a student-athlete is required to be at a practice and has to use his or her own means of transportation.

2004-48 (to permit the use of the one-time transfer exception in all sports): Favored (12-4-3-1, UCLA M, WSU M/W, WASH M opposed, ARIZ W, STAN W, UCLA W abstained, USC M absent). Those in favor believed that all sports should be treated the same and this rule gives the student-athlete an option to leave a situation that does not fit him/her. Those opposed believed this could professionalize college sports and student-athletes would start acting like free agents.

2004-84 (permits an institution to provide one shirt bearing the institution's logo per academic year for team travel or other team events): Favored (17-0-2-1, ARIZ M, WASH M abstained, USC M absent ).

2004-111 (permits additional benefits in men's basketball): Opposed (2-17-0-1, ORE W, UCLA M favored, USC M absent) Those opposed believed that men's basketball players should be treated the same as other student-athletes. Those in favor stated that men's basketball players help bring in money and should be rewarded for it.

2004-73 (in Division I football, to permit a student-athlete to engage in five season of competition): Opposed (0-17-2-1, ORE W, OSU M abstain, USC M absent). Those opposed believed that this would limit the number of new potential football players to be signed, as well as expressing concerns about course selection during the fifth year, and premature return from injuries because the hardship year would be eliminated.

If the legislation were to be passed, the SAAC favored applying it to all sports (17-0-2-1, STAN M, CAL M abstain, USC M absent).

4. SAAC Information Sharing

Representatives shared information about their institutional SAAC's, including format, meeting schedule, and committee structure. A majority meet once every two weeks, for an hour to an hour-and-a-half. Some institutions have committees which meet separately from the normal SAAC meetings. Most SAAC groups try to have two representatives from each team at the meetings. Attendance by senior institutional administrators varies widely, but was seen as desirable.

Activities common to institutional SAAC's include identifying contests for each team which all other student-athletes try to attend, often publicized through t-shirts; and social events, such as barbecues, formals, banquets, or pizza parties. Examples of community service activities included student-athlete auctions to generate funds for a cause; elementary school reading programs; participation in the "Sparrow Clubs" program to help a sick child; humane societies, canned food drives; and health fairs.

Common problems faced by SAAC's included securing attendance and participation from all teams at the institution, and delegation/sharing of workload beyond the core of officers.

5. Pac-10 Cooper/Tires Leadership Award

The SAAC selected Jason Ranne of Arizona and Nikki Neuburger of Oregon State as the 2003-04 winners of the Cooper Tires/Pac-10 Leadership Award.

Noting that there were only three nominees for the award, SAAC members were asked to help publicize the award at their institutions, and encourage nominations and completion of the application materials. The group declined to alter the qualifications, which may have resulted in a larger pool of nominees.

6. Pac-10 Sportsmanship Award

Because the NCAA Sportsmanship Award criteria had changed so that only student-athletes were eligible, the SAAC voted (20-0) to change the Pac-10's criteria for its Sportsmanship Award to match the NCAA's criteria. As of 2004-05, there will be awards to one male and one female student-athlete from the Pac-10, whose name will then be forwarded to the NCAA. It was noted that the element of a "specific act of sportsmanship" had been eliminated.

Arnold stressed the need to publicize this award at institutional SAAC meetings and within the athletics department, so there is a sufficient pool of nominees.

The SAAC also voted (18-0-1-1, WSU M opposed, OSU W absent) to create a Pac-10 Sportsmanship Award for coaches or staff who exhibit exceptional sportsmanship. The Pac-10 staff was to develop suggested criteria for approval at the next Pac-10 SAAC meeting.

7. NCAA 20-Hour Rule

The SAAC was surveyed to see how many were familiar with educational information which the NCAA distributed in August of 2004 regarding the 20-hour rule. About half of the group reported having seen or reviewed it at their institution. Smith led a discussion about application of the rule, and avenues to explore if student-athletes believed the limits were not being adhered to.

Dawson asked the SAAC to be sure the materials are available at their institution. Putting the materials in the student-athlete handbook and discussing them at institutional SAAC meetings were identified as beneficial ways of sharing the information.

8. NCAA SAAC Report

Oman provided the NCAA SAAC report on behalf of Matt Cassel, who was unable to attend due to a competition. Significant issues discussed at the last NCAA SAAC meeting included:

Gambling. A recent NCAA study showed a high level of participation by student-athletes. Division II and III schools had significantly higher student-athlete statistics for gambling than Division I schools did, perhaps because educational efforts were much greater in Division I.

Sportsmanship. Institutions were trying to develop strategies to increase the practice of good sportsmanship and awareness of it at athletic events.

Travel policies. The use of 15-passenger vans was a major topic of discussion for the NCAA. They are prone to turnovers when fully loaded, which makes them very dangerous, particularly when driven by students.

Pregnancy. Automatic clock extensions for pregnant student-athletes compared with use of a redshirt year, and retention of financial aid were aspects of this issue being discussed.

Day off. The NCAA membership did not approve legislation which would have required the mandatory day off be other than the travel day. This continues to an issue for the NCAA SAAC.

Dawson noted that Cassel's term as the Pac-10's NCAA SAAC representative would end as of the July meeting, and a new person would be appointed. She referred the group to an outline of the selection procedure and asked them to have their institutional SAAC's become involved in identifying suitable candidates from their institution. It was noted that the NCAA SAAC rep had a two-year term, and the individual could serve a year after his/her eligibility was exhausted.

9. Student-Athlete Opportunity Fund

Long reviewed the summary of Pac-10 expenditures of the SAOF in 2003-04, the first year of the fund. While the majority of the funds expended were for general purpose use, Long highlighted the fact that expenditures for individual male and female student-athletes were approximately the same amount ($239). It was noted that Pac-10 institutions, in the aggregate, spent about 63% of the funds allocated, and Long encouraged SAAC members to work with their institutional administrators and suggest ways to spend the money.

SAAC members reported the planned 2004-05 uses at their institutions, which included computers, SAAC budget, various types of academic awards, school supplies, clothes, summer school fees, insurance premiums, dental work, graduate school exams, planners, computer software, medical emergencies, and banquets.

SAAC members reported varying levels of discussion with their administrators regarding the fund and its expenditures. For those who wished to have more input, it was suggested that the institutional SAAC draw up a list of proposed uses and then discuss that with institutional administrators. The consensus of the group was that all student-athletes (scholarship and non-scholarship, those without financial need as well as those with financial need) should benefit from the fund. Long pointed out that administrators may have a different perspective on what the institutional priorities were, but should still welcome a well thought out proposal from the SAAC.

10. Pac-10 Speaker's Bureau/Stay In Bounds

Arnold described the Stay In Bounds materials, and Seaman gave the history on why the Pac-10 SAAC had adopted Stay In Bounds as the Pac-10 Speaker's Bureau. Seaman noted that the Communications Subcommittee had identified training for student-athlete speakers as a Conference-wide need, and that the subcommittee also sought to deliver a consistent message. However, only about one third of the group had seen the materials before, and none reported using it in community service activities.

Representatives described the community service activities at the respective institutions, and a majority of Pac-10 institutions do outreach with elementary schools. The SAAC participants agreed the Stay in Bounds material would be a good tool for student-athletes. Dawson encouraged them to make others at their institutions aware of the web site and materials.

Washington and Oregon SAAC's had worked with the Sparrow Clubs to adopt a "sparrow" as a community service activity. This program provides funds for families with a child who has a life-threatening or seriously disabling illness, with a business sponsor providing the funds upon completion of 256 hours of community service. Other SAAC members expressed interest in starting this program. (Note: Information about the Sparrow Club can be found at www.sparrowclubs.org).

11. Election of Officers

Those interested in serving on the Executive Committee were identified from the subcommittee preference list. The SAAC elected Lindsay Oman of USC as co-chair of the SAAC and Anna Leksinska of Oregon as co-vice chair. The term will expire after the fall, 2005, Pac-10 SAAC meeting.

12. Appointments to Subcommittees

Because of the lack of consistent attendees at the Pac-10 SAAC meeting, doing committee work has been difficult. After discussion, the group agreed to keep the subcommittee structure intact, with the option to schedule subcommittee meetings during the Pac-10 SAAC meeting.

SAAC reps were asked to identify subcommittees on which they wished to serve, by completing a preference form. Appointments were to be made by the Executive Committee.

13. 2004-05 Student-Athlete Forum

Seaman and Leksinska, both of whom had attended the 2004 NCAA Leadership Conference, shared their experiences. Both found it a very worthwhile experience and encouraged SAAC members to apply. They suggested several icebreakers for the Pac-10 Student-Athlete Forum.

In order to assist with planning for the Pac-10 Student-Athlete Forum in April, 2005, the group was asked to identify topics of interest for student-athletes for the small group discussions. The top five topics from a list of about 20 suggested were:

- strategies for increasing SAAC participation and informing other student-athletes about SAAC;

- improving relationships on campus with other students and faculty;

- effective delegation for leaders and motivating others;

- qualities of a leader; and

- athletic and academic issues.

The SAAC provided suggestions for mementos for Forum participants. The top four items selected included a Nalgene water bottle, sweatpants or fleece pants, a backpack, or a long-sleeved shirt, preferably with logos of all Pac-10 institutions.

Suggestions were also made for the Saturday night social activity. These included bowling, Dave and Buster's, a professional sports contest, laser tag, Great America, miniature golf, or hiking.

The SAAC voted (19-1, OSU M opposed) to implement a t-shirt/hat exchange at the Forum in 2005.

14. Action List

At Long's urging, the SAAC agreed to develop an action item list during future Pac-10 SAAC meetings to take back to their respective institutions.

15. NCAA Surveys

Long described a survey which addressed substance use and sexual behavior that UCLA had been asked to administer to two specific teams. She asked the group what it believed the comfort level of student-athletes would be completing such a questionnaire. Dawson added the purpose of these surveys was to identify areas where education and life skills programs were needed by student-athletes, as was shown by a the NCAA gambling survey.

SAAC members were very concerned about privacy issues, as well as with the research methodology. Long expressed confidence in the legitimacy and confidentiality of NCAA research department, yet it was evident more information needed to be available about such surveys. The topic was to be placed on the agenda for the April SAAC meeting, with the staff preparing a report on the survey process and use.

16. Olympic and NGB Information

Dawson reviewed an information sheet of frequently asked questions for Olympic and National Governing Body Participation and Competition, which was to be a discussion topic for the NCAA SAAC at its November, 2004, meeting. Noting that there are many Pac-10 student-athletes for whom this information would be valuable, Dawson urged the group to review the information at institutional SAAC meetings.

17. NCAA Baseball Issues Committee

The NCAA Baseball Issues Committee report, which proposed establishing a start date of March 1 for college baseball and moving the College World Series back two weeks, was reviewed. This was an attempt to correct what some viewed as the competitive advantage gained by institutions in the sun belt states. Legislation to implement these changes would be in the 2005-06 NCAA legislative cycle. The main topics discussed in the report included: competitive equity, weather issues, summer school availability, the Cape Cod League, living arrangements, and the fact that the committee did also consider softball.

SAAC members seemed most concerned about the length of time student-athletes would be on campus after the end of the academic year, and the many different issues that would raise. It was also pointed out that such a change would be unlikely to affect recruiting, as student-athletes in outdoor sports would continue to select institutions in the south and west in order to have optimum year round practice opportunities. Thus, the desired competitive equity may not be achieved.

Dawson posed the question of whether baseball should be treated differently from other outdoor sports. The consensus of the group was that for a majority of NCAA regulations, sports should be treated the same.

SAAC members were asked to discuss the report with baseball players at their institutions, and the topic would be on the agenda in April, 2005.

18. NCAA SAAC Travel Policy

The NCAA SAAC's draft travel policy generated a great deal of discussion about use of vans for team practice and travel. Many SAAC members stated that their institutions used 15-passenger vans, and a ban on such vehicles, or on the use of student-athletes as drivers, could create a significant hardship.

There were differences in the policies for licensing requirements and driver training across institutions. The use of 15-passenger vans has become a significant risk management issue nationally, and some institutions are banning their use.

In response to a question about enforcement of the policy, Dawson stated that it would offer recommended best practices, but was not contemplated as legislation at this time.

Note: The SAAC broke from its meeting on Saturday, November 6, from 9:00 am - 12 noon to perform a community service activity. The group assisted in refurbishing displays for Christmas In The Park, a community display in downtown San Jose which draws approximately 500,000 visitors.

The meeting was adjourned at 1:45 p.m.

njs

11/16/04

PACIFIC-10 CONFERENCE
Student-Athlete Advisory Committee Meeting
April 9-10, 2004

The meeting was called to order by co-chair Courtney Carter at 7 p.m.

1. Approval of minutes of November 1-2, 2003, meeting

It was VOTED 18-0-0-2 ( WSU M/W absent)

"to approve the minutes of the November 1-2, 2003 meeting."

2. Meeting Materials

Dawson reviewed the materials which provided background information for the Pac-10 SAAC participants. Particular note was made of the Pac-10 List Serve. SAAC representatives were asked to make sure at least one person on their campus signed up for the list serve so that their campus could be kept informed of information sent from the Pac-10 office.

3. California SB 193 Update

Bruce reviewed the chronology of California Senate Bill 193, and its current status. He and Oman described their visit to California legislators on the Higher Education Committee in January, 2003, saying they had been welcomed and received assurances from a number of Committee members that SB 193 would not be passed out of Committee. Bruce cited the importance of SAAC leadership on this topic, explaining the significance of the legislators hearing directly from students who were opposed to the bill.

4. Pac-10 Intra-conference Transfer Rule

Leland gave an overview of the existing Pac-10 intra-conference transfer rule, and noted the Conference was considering changing the rule. He outlined arguments for and against transfer restrictions.

Factors favoring restrictions included: The value of educational stability. Since studies show that 80% of all freshmen would say at least once during some point in their freshman year that they considered transferring, such restrictions help them to stay the course and not act impulsively and transfer. This is educationally beneficial. Institutional investments in student-athletes. Examples of these investments include time, money (financial aid and support services, time and money spent recruiting), admissions slots, and positions on teams. The quid pro quo for such investments is a way to insure the student continues at that institution. The role coaches play. If students were allowed to transfer freely when coaches leave, it would wreak havoc with the team, as well as contribute to an environment where coaches could make even more unreasonable demands (e.g., salaries) since the departure of a coach could mean the loss of many team members.

Factors favoring relaxing the transfer requirements include: Student rights. Student-athletes should have the right to transfer freely for any reason, whether it be economic, family-related, or sports-related. The NCAA one-time transfer exception works. The original concern that there would be significant recruiting of student-athletes already in college has not been found to be true. There would be greater clarity if the NCAA and Pac-10 transfer rules were the same.

SAAC members engaged in an extended discussion about what the appropriate Pac-10 intra-conference transfer regulations should be. Options considered included 1) adopting the current NCAA rule; 2) keeping the existing Pac-10 rule; 3) requiring a year of residence without the ability to receive athletically-related financial aid, the loss of a year of eligibility, and a waiver provision for any of the elements; and 4) requiring a year of residence with the ability to receive financial aid, the loss of a year of eligibility, and a waiver provision for any of the elements. Some viewed the two year residence requirement and loss of eligibility as overly burdensome, and believed one year of each was sufficient penalty. A desire to keep talented athletes in the Conference rather than have them compete against the Pac-10 was another factor influencing the discussion. In addition, some cited the ability of institutions to deny permission to contact or a release to transfer as sufficient safeguards for the institutions.

It was VOTED (18-0-0-2, WSU M/W absent):

"to recommend that the Pac-10 intra-conference transfer rule be revised to require one year of residence with the ability to receive financial aid, the loss of one season of eligibility, and a process by which any of the penalties could be waived to the NCAA rule."

By a slim margin (10-8), SAAC members favored continuing to exclude football, basketball, and ice hockey from the NCAA one-time transfer exception .

5. NCAA Legislation

Smith reviewed the NCAA legislative process and timeline. Dawson explained that any legislative proposals initiated by the Pac-10 SAAC would be forwarded to the Pac-10 Council, which is the entity that ultimately decides which proposals from Conference groups would be forwarded to the NCAA.

The SAAC discussed and took positions on several pieces of proposed legislation which were already in the NCAA cycle, as follows: 2003-74, mandatory day off/travel day: not favored, 9-9-0-2 (STAN M/W, ARIZ M/W, USC M/W, WASH M/W, ASU M favored, WSU M/W absent). Those in favor stated such a rule would reassert the importance of academics. Those opposed believed that practice time would become limited, or that difficult practices would be instituted on travel days. (Note: Subsequent to the SAAC meeting, this was defeated by the Management Council) 2003-88, elimination of printed media guides: No vote taken, but consensus was guides should be kept. While not a determining factor in recruiting, they were worthwhile to recruits as tangible evidence of commitment to sport. SAAC members felt media guides were more valuable to enrolled student-athletes as a memento of participation. Note: Subsequent to the SAAC meeting, this was referred to the AEC Cabinet by the Management Council). 2003-33, change in recruiting calendar to permit earlier contact: favored, 10-7-1-2 (ASU W, UCLA M/W, ORE M, OSU W, WASH M/W opposed, OSU M abstain, WSU M/W absent) (Note: Subsequent to the SAAC meeting, this was approved by the Management Council).

Smith reviewed the so-called "40-60-80" rule which requires completion of a fixed percentage of degree requirements based on year in school. SAAC members expressed concern about the lack of flexibility in the rule, believing it might have the effect of tracking student-athletes into certain majors whose requirements are more easily fulfilled. In addition, it would effectively prevent them from changing majors, as well as discourage them from exploring academic interests outside their selected majors. Smith noted that junior college transfers were the students who were most likely to have difficulty meeting the requirements of the rule.

SAAC members also gave input on potential NCAA legislation regarding number of competitions. There was general agreement that a fixed number of contests per sport, including non-traditional season contests, was appropriate. It was noted that non-traditional season contests were important for several reasons: breaking up the boredom of training; development of players; and training for the Olympics. SAAC members did not wish to see a reduction in the number of actual contests.

In addition, rather than folding all events into one number, it was suggested that there could be two numbers: one for intercollegiate contests, regardless of when and where they occur, and another for what was termed "auxiliary events," such as alumni games and fund raising activities.

There was little support for the concept of "exempt events" which were contests that counted in a team record. SAAC members believed every team should have the opportunity to play the same number of contests every year.

6. NCAA SAAC Report

No new NCAA SAAC information was presented. The next NCAA SAAC meeting was scheduled for the week after the Pac-10 SAAC meeting.

SAAC members reviewed the NCAA SAAC newsletters from the 2003-04 year. They were encouraged to make sure these received wide distribution on their respective campuses. It was suggested that each campus as well as the Conference office provide the link to the NCAA SAAC website where the newsletters could be viewed and downloaded.

7. Pac-10Sportsmanship Award

There were five nominees for the inaugural Pac-10 Sportsmanship Award: Pete Carroll, USC head football coach; Josh Childress, Stanford men's basketball player; Heidi Goehring, Oregon State gymnast; Grayling Love, ASU football player; and Dave Rubio, Arizona head women's volleyball coach. Because of the timing of submission of the applications, they were not prescreened by the subcommittee, and all five nominees were discussed.

After a series of votes, Grayling Love of ASU was selected as the Pac-10 Sportsmanship Award winner. ASU will be recognized at the Pac-10 Summer Meetings, where the award will be presented. All other nominees will receive a certificate.

SAAC members were asked to encourage their institutions to participate in the nominating process next year, as there are worthy nominees on each campus. It is hoped the establishment of the award will encourage acts of sportsmanship at member institutions.

8. Pac-10 Speakers' Bureau

Dawson presented information about the NCAA "Stay In Bounds" program, as a way to fulfill the fall, 2003, Pac-10 SAAC recommendation that the SAAC sponsor a speakers' bureau. This program provides materials which student-athletes can use to deliver positive messages and engage in activities to school groups of various ages. The Stay In Bounds program is based on the "RICHER" principles: respect, integrity, caring,harmony, excellence, and responsibility." It was pointed out that at least one of these principles could apply to any topic student-athletes might be requested to speak on.

Dawson explained that all the materials are expected to be available on the internet, so that schools would be able to access them for ease of distribution to student-athletes.

It was VOTED (20-0) "to adopt the NCAA Stay In Bounds program as the vehicle for the Pac-10 Speakers' Bureau."

Dawson said she would communicate this information to the institutional SAAC advisors to encourage its use. It was agreed that the program would be reviewed in the fall.

The name for the speakers' bureau was debated, and it ultimately decided that individual campuses should retain the flexibility to have their own name. However, the Conference SAAC desired to have its name attached as evidence of its activity.

It was VOTED (20-0) to have the nomenclature for institutional speakers' bureaus be "(Institution name) Speakers' Bureau, brought to you by the Pac-10 SAAC."

SAAC members shared information about how community service activities were organized on their respective campuses. It was agreed that having a staff member dedicated to coordinating the activities was the optimum system. The system at Arizona was cited as a program that works extremely well,with a staff member who performs outreach, communicates with the student-athletes, follows up with all concerned, and drives student-athletes to the site as needed.

9. Recruiting Practices

SAAC members discussed recruiting practices and the changes which were being contemplated as a result of highly publicized unethical and illegal behavior on recruiting trips.

The question was raised as to whether special host groups of non-athletes students were desirable. Many believed that hosting recruits should properly be the responsibility of team members, who would be the best judges of a prospect's fit with the institution. However, such hosting could be burdensome because of the time and energy required, particularly if there were also contests on that day. In some sports (e.g., football) the length of the game required that someone other than players be assigned to host prospects, especially when large numbers of recruits visited on the same weekend.

The SAAC took the following positions on various aspects of recruiting: favored allowing institutions to have host groups (17-0-2-1, WASH M, OSU M abstained, CAL M absent). opposed host groups of the opposite gender (1-16-2-1, ASU M favored, WASH M, ARIZ M abstained, CAL M absent) opposed requiring staff members as escorts for recruits at all times (0-18-1-1, OSU M abstain, CAL M absent) favored retaining current NCAA regulations on entertainment (19-0-0-1, CAL M absent) favored retaining current NCAA regulations on host funds, but requiring student-athletes to provide receipts and and explanation of what was done (19-0-0-1, CAL M absent) opposed establishing a curfew for recruits (2-17-0-01, OSU M/W favored, CAL M absent)

No support existed for reducing the number of paid visits, nor for having staff members accompany recruits at all times during a visit. The view that recruits "did not need a baby sitter" but rather the student-athlete host should be held accountable for the activities was expressed.

10. Pac-10/SEC SAAC Initiative

Partly as an outgrowth of discussions with legislators about California Senate Bill 193, Bruce noted the need for increased strength of institutional SAAC's. He noted that the NCAA and Conference SAAC's seemed to be up and running effectively, but the weak link seemed to be on campus. Discussions with Southeastern Conference SAAC representatives led to the development of an initiative to strengthen institutional SAAC's. The chief methods for doing this would be a DVD which would outline pertinent SAAC issues, as well as the establishment of an NCAA internship for a person who would travel around the country and assist institutions in developing credible SAAC's. In order for this to move forward on the NCAA SAAC level, the Pac-10 SAAC needed to endorse the idea.

It was VOTED (18-0-1-1, ASU M abstaining, CAL M absent) to approve this concept as a Pac-10 SAAC initiative."

An outline of the initiative is attach as Supplement A of the minutes. Note: Subsequent to the Pac-10 meeting, the NCAA SAAC adopted the initiative as a project.

11. SAAC Subcommittees

SAAC members were asked to submit a list of their subcommittee preferences. They were advised the newly-elected SAAC officers would make appointments to subcommittees.

12. Election of Officers

Those interested in serving on the Executive Committee were identified from the subcommittee preference list. The SAAC elected Lauren Westendorf of Oregon as a co-chair of the SAAC for 2004-05, and Jake Arnold of Arizona as a SAAC co-vice-chair.

The other Executive Committee members should have been elected at the fall, 2003, SAAC meeting. Since that had been overlooked, the election was to take place in Fall, 2004.

13. SAAC & Forum Meeting Dates and Format

The dates for future meetings were discussed. It was desired that future SAAC and Forum meetings not be held on Easter weekend.

Noting the SAAC vote to include a community service activity in the fall meeting, Dawson asked the group to consider reducing the number of students attending the Forum in order to pay for the additional fall expenses. It was also noted that finding five students per institution to attend the Forum in April was difficult, due to team schedules and other spring activities.

It was VOTED (17-0-2-1, WASH M, WSU W abstaining, CAL M absent) to recommend reducing the number of student-athletes who attend the Forum from five to four.

14. Championship Mementos

The sterling silver key ring and clock which were chosen as the memento for members of Pac-10 Championship teams at the suggestion of the SAAC were displayed. Suggestions for future mementos included: ring holder; blanket; paperweight; trophy; pen set; watch; bag; business card holder; license plate frame; and patch.

The meeting was adjourned at 11:50a.m.

cad

4/27/04

The meeting was called to order by chair Bruce at 1 p.m.

1. Approval of minutes of April 4-5, 2003, meeting

It was VOTED 19-0-0-1 ( UCLA M absent)

"To approve the minutes of the April 4-5, 2003 meeting."

2. Review of background materials

Bruce explained the meeting structure to the new SAAC members, noting that the meetings operate under Roberts Rules of Order. Dawson reviewed the meeting materials and noted that SAAC members can expect to receive the information about two weeks before each meeting. If possible, agenda items should be discussed at institutional SAAC meetings before the Pac-10 SAAC meets. Updated rosters and other pertinent materials were to be updated and included with the minutes sent out after the meeting.

Johnson explained the workings of the Pac-10 SAAC list serve, which provides a way to communicate with other SAAC members. It was anticipated that the list serve would become an important tool for communication for the SAAC, and SAAC members were urged to sign up. Every institution should have at least one SAAC representative who is signed up for the list serve and monitors it regularly.

3. Information Sharing

An opportunity for information sharing is on the agenda for each Pac-10 SAAC and Forum meeting, with institutional representatives outlining what their respective SAAC's are doing. Common activities include developing ways to support other student-athletes through attendance at athletic events, and various forms of community service. The highlights of the institutional reports follow.

Arizona has a well-established community service program which they continue to build on. They have started a "certificate of excellence" program for those who are active in community service, have an annual blood drive, and "adopt a family" during the holidays.

Arizona State implemented "Gold Games" to help promote attendance at athletic events. One event per sport per year is identified at the beginning of the year, and t-shirts are distributed with the dates of those contests printed on them. Teams were encouraged to attend wearing the t-shirt. In addition to increasing attendance, this has helped create solidarity among the student-athletes. Another project was "Feeling the Competitive Edge," a fund raising drive for the California fire disaster victims.

California's SAAC planned the student-athlete formal. A significant recent focus is trying to find ways to help improve recruiting, and increasing the visibility of the University to prospective student-athletes.

Oregon has focused on putting "civil" back into the Civil War game against Oregon State. The SAAC has also developed a partnership with a local organization which provides funds to specified nonprofit organizations for every hour of community service which student-athletes perform. Other programs include Duck Days, Quackin Action (all sports day for local youth), and the Smart Program which encourages children to read.

Oregon State has programs such as "The Other Side," which brings alumni and boosters back to campus to interact with the student-athletes. The SAAC also put on a student-athlete talent show which was extremely successful. Coaches, administrators and student-athlete performed community service as a group on Student-Athletes' Day. OSU also has an Athlete Auction (to raise money for community service), Canned Food Drive, and the Orange Games, which promotes student-athlete attendance at other teams' events.

Stanford's main focus this academic year was getting incoming freshmen involved with other sports on campus, as well as with the SAAC. Activities similar to the "Gold Games" to promote dorm activities and support for other sports' big games were also being carried out. The "Champions Cup" is a dinner which helps connect current athletes with alumni. The SAAC is taking steps against California legislation SB 193 by brainstorming ways to help defeat the bill.

UCLA has several different committees within the SAAC which each have their own event. Examples include distributing food at homeless shelters, assisting with the campus-wide "I'm Going To College" day for area youth, and organizing a student-athlete function for the end of the school year. The spirit committee is responsible for organizing the big games important to each team, the student-athlete formal, and professor day, which encourages professors to come to games and events to get to know student-athletes better.

USC has a new life skills advisor and their SAAC is being reorganized. The USC reps hoped to use the meeting as a platform to get information and ideas for their campus SAAC.

Washington reorganized its SAAC and elected officials to be more productive. They have had a clothing drive and an athlete formal. They have been involved in discussions about relocation of training table due to on-campus construction. "Dinner with the Dawg," which helps links student-athletes with professionals in the area, is another ongoing program.

Washington State SAAC recently had a talent show as part of the freshman class transition exercises, a teen care reading buddy program, and Varsity Ball, the student-athlete social. They also have several programs to promote attendance at each others' events, including Crimson Game Day, tracking attendance at games other than football and basketball, and providing supplies to make signs and posters for games.

4. Pac-10 SAAC Mission Statement

Bruce noted that the current SAAC statement is a list of goals rather than a more succinct mission statement. The group requested that it be reworked.

It was VOTED (19-0-0-1 UCLA M absent)

" To adopt the following as the Pac-10 SAAC mission statement:

The mission of the Pacific-10 Conference Student-Athlete Advisory Committee (SAAC) is the enhance the total student-athlete experience.

It was VOTED (19-0-0-1 UCLA M absent)

"To adopt the following as the goals of the Pac-10 SAAC:

1. Fostering Conference unity and pride;
2. Facilitating communication between the Student-Athlete Advisory Committees of each institution and that of the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA);
3. Establishing and maintaining conference-wide community outreach programs;
4. Actively contributing in the development and understanding of NCAA and Conference-specific legislation;
5. Further improving the image of the Pacific-10 Conference and that of its member institutions;
6. Applying leadership skills developed at the Pac-10 Forum and NCAA Leadership Conference;
7. Developing a system of networking, sharing and learning among institutions;
8. Demonstrating to prospective student-athletes that their thoughts and concerns are being heard by their conference; and Increasing the role and participation of student-athletes in their college experience."

5. NCAA Legislative Issues

Dawson described the NCAA legislative process and the new single cycle that has started this academic year. Richardson then reviewed selected NCAA legislative proposals, and explained to the group that they would discuss each one, then vote to establish a Pac-10 SAAC position. The Pac-10 SAAC position was to be noted on the information provided to Pac-10 Council members.

The NCAA legislative positions established by the Pac-10 SAAC were as follows:

2003-74 Playing and Practice Seasons - Required Day Off - Travel Day - To mandate that a travel day may not be considered the mandatory day off.

SAAC Position: Favored 18-0-1-1 (UCLA M absent, OSU W abstaining) .

2003-17 - Playing and Practice Seasons - Time Limits for Athletically Related Activities - Outside the Playing Season - Require two days off outside the playing season.

SAAC Position: Favored 9-5-5-1 (ARIZ W, CAL M, CAL W , UCLA W, WASH M opposed, ASU M, ARIZ M, OSU M, STAN M, WASH W abstaining, UCLA M absent)

Those opposed were concerned about how this might affect certain sports and the ongoing skill work necessary to be competitive. There was also some sentiment that while two days off might be desirable, because of the training cycle it might not always be advisable. It would depend on the time of the year.

2003-33 - Recruiting - Contacts and Evaluations - For all sports, permits on April contact in the junior year on prospective student-athletes high school campus, and one call in March of PSA's junior year of high school. Eliminates restrictions telephone call to football PSA's.

SAAC Position: Favored 18-0-1-1 (ORE M abstaining, UCLA M absent)

The group felt this was a good way to limit phone calls so that prospective student-athletes wouldn't be inundated when the recruiting period starts.

2003-90A - Recruited Student-Athlete: Changes the definition of a "recruited student-athlete" to eliminate unintended financial aid consequences.

SAAC Position: Favored 19-0-0-1 (UCLA M absent)

2003-3 - Eligibility : Permits hardship waiver even if the injury occurs in the second half of the season.

SAAC Position: Opposed 4-9-6-1 (CAL M, ORE M,WASH, UCLA W favored; ASU W, CAL W,OSU W, WSU W, USC M, USC W abstained; UCLA M absent)

While SAAC members agreed with the general intent of the rule, there was concern about the potential for abuse. They wanted a clearer definition of season-ending injury, believing that ambiguity might provide a loophole for coaches to redshirt student-athletes who were not performing at the desired level. The participation limit was also questioned,with several members preferring a percentage of total time available rather than number of games, to provide for students who played only a minute or two in a game which put them over the 20% limit.

2003-49 - Permissible benefits- Medical Expenses: To permit an institution to pay for a student-athlete's medical expenses resulting from an injury or illness, provided such expenses are necessary for the student-athlete to return to competition.

SAAC Position: Favored 12-1-6-1 (WASH W opposed, ARIZ W, ASU M, ASU W, OSU M, OSU W, WASH M abstained, UCLA M absent)

While the belief that all athletic injuries should be covered regardless of when they occurred was widely held, some believed that the broad scope of the legislation might provide a recruiting advantage because schools which are struggling financially may not be able to provide these expenses. Vydra opined that as an administrator this would allow her to view these issues on a case by case basis and make an informed decision.

2002-83-A - Financial Aid - Maximum Limit on Financial Aid - Individual Limit - Sets individual financial aid limit at the coat of attendance. A student-athlete may receive athletics aid at the current grant formula, as well as outside aid up to the value of a full grant-in-aid.

SAAC Position: Favored 11-2-6-1 (OSU M, OSU W opposed, ARIZ M,ASU M, ASU W, STAN W, USC M, USC W abstained, UCLA M absent)

2002-83-B - Financial Aid - Sets individual financial aid limit at the cost of attendance.

SAAC Position: Opposed 3-16-0-1 (ARIZ M, ASU M STAN M favored, UCLA M absent) Vydra explained that while 2002-83 A would not have budget implications for individual institutions, 2002-93-B would have significant financial implications to institutional budgets. Proposal 2002-83-B would result in an additional $2500-$4000 (depending on the institution) being added to the amount of a full athletic scholarship.

SAAC members questioned the effect proposal 2002-83-A, if passed, would have on equivalency sports. There was concern that equivalency sport athletes would still not be able to accept outside aid in the amount of the difference between the athletic grant in aid and cost of attendance since it would still count against team limits, which would remain unchanged. It seemed unfair that only full ride or head count athletes would benefit under this legislation. Richardson noted that there was another proposal, which had been tabled, which would exempt almost all financial aid which was not based on athletic ability from counting against team limits.

(Note: Subsequent to the meeting, the staff received clarification that 2003-83-A would benefit only student-athletes who were receiving a full grant-in-aid. Any aid received after a full grant had been reached, up to the cost of attendance, would be considered "incidental" and would not be figured into the individual or team limits). However, aid which a student-athlete on a partial scholarship received would continue to count against the team limit, until he/she reached the full grant amount).

Academic Incentives and Disincentives

Because of the lack of specificity in the current proposals, the SAAC discussed only the general concept of having athletic or financial incentives and disincentives for academic performance. The loss of opportunity to compete in the post-season was used to illustrate the type of penalties which might be applied.

Richardson noted that, as was currently envisioned, teams would only be penalized with a loss of post-season eligibility if they failed to meet these qualifications on three levels. SAAC members expressed concerns about the timing of potential penalties, as well as the prospect of a team being penalized for the performance of one or two individuals. However, they acknowledged that such penalties might be effective in changing the behavior of coaches so more emphasis would be placed on academics.

It was VOTED 13-4-2-1 (ASU W, CAL M, CAL W, USC M opposed, ARIZ M, WSU M abstained, UCLA M absent)

"To support the concept of team penalties for poor academic performance, pending the clarification of certain standards."

6. Spring Student-Athlete Forum Planning

Mike Robbins, who was to give the presentation at the 2004 Pac-10 Student-Athlete Forum, came to the meeting to solicit ideas for presentation topics. The following were suggested: improving communication skills; promoting unity between student-athletes and the student body; keeping athletics in perspective; developing as a complete person; effective ways to deal with difficult people; how to market skills learned as a student-athlete in the professional world; time management; and understanding cultural differences among teammates.

Dawson asked for suggestions about the small group discussions, and whether a format change was desirable. The group discussed the possibility of having a three- tiered discussion, with two small groups (of five) discussing a given topic, then moving to a group of 10 to review before reconvening to give reports to the complete group. Dawson noted that the staff would explore this possibility and discuss it with the Executive Committee.

Suggested small group discussion topics for the April, 2004, Forum were: student-athlete communication; scheduling; creative uses of the Student-Athlete Opportunity Fund; community involvement; racial divisions on teams; divisions on teams between scholarship and non-scholarship athletes; NCAA legislation; SAAC recruitment; the gap between student-athletes and regular students; coach interaction with the SAAC; educating student-athletes on use of the SAAC; and relationships with faculty.

Suggestions for the spring memento were backpacks, slippers, fleece blanket, fleece jacket, and a messenger bag. Some suggestions for the social activity were a sporting event, bowling, improv groups at a theater, comedy club in the city, dinner cruise, and a bonfire.

7. Pac-10/Cooper Tire Leadership Award

Johnson reviewed the Pac-10/Cooper Tire Leadership Award and the voting process to decide on a male and female winner. She noted that the normal process was to have the Cooper Tire subcommittee of the SAAC screen the nominees, and present three of each gender to the SAAC for final selection. As the subcommittee did not complete that duty, all nominees (three men and four women) were discussed before the vote was taken.

Janell Bergstrom of Oregon and Adam Chavira of Arizona State were selected by the SAAC as the 2002-03 Pac-10/Cooper Tire Leadership Award winners.

The group then engaged in a discussion of the various requirements for the award.

Ghatan opined that he would like to change the voting procedure from a secret written ballot to an open vote by show of hands. He felt public voting would be a better way to choose a winner and would encourage discussion.

It was VOTED 14-0-6 (ARIZ M, ARIZ W, ASU M, OSU M, STAN W, WASH M abstaining)

"To amend the voting procedure to an open vote by show of hands instead of a secret written ballot."

Opalka recommended that the selection criteria be changed to allow other campus leadership activities as an alternative to the SAAC service requirement. His view was that the award was meant to reward leadership and it could be demonstrated in more ways than through SAAC. Others believed that the award was meant to encourage SAAC participation and leadership in SAAC activities as well as reward it. A proposal to eliminate the language that a nominee must have had two years of service on the institutional SAAC FAILED 3-16-1 (ARIZ M, ARIZ W, OSU M favored, UCLA M abstained)

Dawson noted the difficulty of actually getting a letter of recommendation written by institutional SAAC members, and asked if the group thought it appropriate to have the SAAC advisor write this letter. It was thought that the institutional SAAC representative at the meeting where voting took place could speak effectively on behalf of the applicant .

It was VOTED 18-0-2 (ARIZ W, WSU W abstained)

"To eliminate the requirement that the institutional SAAC provide a letter of recommendation for the Pac-10/Cooper Tire Leadership Award."

With the requirement of a SAAC recommendation letter eliminated, there was discussion about the appropriate source of the remaining letter of recommendation.

It was VOTED 19-0-1 (OSU M abstained)

"To amend the qualification criteria to specify that the required letter of recommendation must come from a member of the athletic department."

8. NCAA/Conference Sportsmanship Award

Dawson advised the SAAC that the issue of sportsmanship continues to be a point of emphasis for institutional presidents and chancellors and reminded them that at the April 2003 meeting, the SAAC approved implementation of the Pac-10 Sportsmanship Award. She referred the group to the proposed procedures in the meeting materials as the method for determining the Pac-10 Sportsmanship winner. Some modifications to the timeline were suggested. It was also suggested that a physical award be given to the winner. Dawson was to take that request to the Pac-10 Budget Committee. An appropriate time and location for the presenting the award would be determined by the Conference office.

It was VOTED 20-0-0 "To approve the procedures as amended for the Pac-10 Sportsmanship Award." (The amended procedures are attached to the minutes as Supplement A)."

9. California Senate Bill 193

Hansen described SB 193, which had been introduced by Senator Kevin Murray at the request of the Collegiate Athletes Coalition. The bill was being considered by the California State Assembly after having passed out of the State Senate. He reported that passage of the bill would result in exclusion of California schools from the NCAA. Pac-10 SAAC co-chair Bruce participated in lobbying efforts against the bill in the summer of 2003, as well as representing the Pac-10 SAAC at the Summit Meeting held in October, 2003.

Since more student opinions were desired on the legislation, Hansen suggested that the SAAC submit a statement voicing their position on the bill.

It was VOTED 20-0-0

"That the Pac-10 SAAC formally oppose the tenets of SB 193 and submit a formal resolution to that effect."

The resolution was later drafted by Bruce, and it was VOTED 14-0-0-6 (CAL M, CAL W, STAN W, ORE M, ORE W, WSU W absent)

"To approve the following Pac-10 SAAC resolution:

WHEREAS, we applaud the attention of the State of California Legislature to student-athlete welfare and agree with some of the benefits gained through SB 193, but strongly disagree with the means to accomplish this marginally beneficial end; and

WHEREAS, the NCAA is not perfect and reform is necessary, but using the California student-athletes as a bargaining chip undermines the fundamental premise of a bill of rights; and

WHEREAS, we believe it is possible for the student-athlete voice to be heard in the current NCAA structure through the established Student-Athlete Advisory Committee hierarchy; and

WHEREAS, we oppose any legislation threatening the composition of our Conference and our membership in the NCAA;

LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT, we, the student-athletes of the Pacific-10 Conference institutions, stand opposed to SB 193."

SAAC members desired to take the resolution back to their respective campuses and gather signatures on a petition to present to California legislators, to demonstrate the scale of student opposition to the bill. The Conference office was to provide copies of the resolution and a sample petition. Representatives of the Pac-10's California institutions were to plan a meeting with legislators in January, 2004.

10. Student-Athlete Opportunity Fund

SAAC members reaffirmed their interest in ongoing monitoring of the SAOF. They reviewed a chart showing the allocations to each institution, as well as the NCAA guidelines for uses of the fund. Vydra reported the intentions of administrators in the Conference to come up with creative ways to spend the SAOF money, so that it goes directly to the student-athletes. Since there are few restrictions, she wanted to know how other campuses are using their funds and if student-athletes had input in the decision-making. Institutions reported as follows:

Arizona administrators chose to distribute $150 to each student-athlete upon completion of an application. Student-athletes were advised on the limitations on the types of allowable spending, and were required to provide receipts for their purchases. This direct student-athlete spending would account for about half of Arizona's allocation. The other half was to be held for use for student-athlete emergencies.

Arizona State administrators chose to use the money for student-athlete flights home, childcare, and possibly grocery store vouchers.

California administrators solicited the SAAC for ideas. A decision was made to purchase athletic department vans for use by a number of the teams. Other uses are being considered.

Oregon administrators purchased planners for all student-athletes. The SAAC suggested purchasing laptops for use by student-athletes while traveling.

Oregon State administrators, working with the SAAC, decided to reimburse student-athletes for the cost of parking permits on campus, which was a new charge. Other uses are being considered.

Stanford had not yet determined uses of the fund. The SAAC and administrators planned to meet to generate ideas.

Washington administrators decided to recognize academic achievement by awarding 10 student-athletes per quarter $250 gift certificates. The winners were to be determined by the Academic Advising Center based on established academic categories. Washington also purchased new computers for the athletic study center, gave the SAAC $10,000 for its budget, and planned to covering foreign student-athletes' health insurance costs.

UCLA, USC and WSU SAAC representatives did not know their institutional plans for spending the SAOF money.

Vydra encouraged the group to keep talking on the their respective campuses about uses of the fund. The SAOF money will grow each year, so it is important to continue to share ideas. It is likely that more guidelines will be established after a review of the spending the first year or two.

11. Kid's College

Dawson discussed this web-based educational program that the Pac-10 has sponsored this year for elementary schools in the Pac-10's four states. This is a free program which increases educational knowledge by using computer games and collegiate sports themes. The program correlates with each state's educational standards. Dawson believed that this could be a good SAAC community service project, with student-athletes actually playing the games with the students while visiting local schools. It is a good way to promote the Pac-10 message about the importance of education. She suggested working with campus marketing department about possible ways to provide prizes (such as admission to athletic contests, t-shirts, etc) to students who achieve the various levels of the program. Institutional life skills administrators would be able to demonstrate the program to SAAC members.

The program is free for the first 10 levels as a result of the Pac-10 sponsorship. Elementary schools or classes have the option to purchase additional levels for their students. A concern was raised about the perception of using the Pac-10 name and Pac-10 student-athletes to sell a commercial product.

The Arizona SAAC has used Kids College to leverage television coverage about their student-athletes' community service. It has been a positive way to promote Arizona's student-athlete image involving education.

12. NCAA SAAC Report

Matt Cassel is the new Pac-10 NCAA SAAC representative, starting his term at the January, 2004, meeting. He has not yet attended a meeting but asked for topics that the group wished for him to bring up. The group asked that he discuss current legislative proposals pertinent to them, the satisfactory progress rule, six credit rule and the possible elimination of foreign tours.

Cassel asked the group about the one-time transfer exception, and the possibility of extending the rule to all sports. He voiced the opinion that with coaching changes happening so often, student-athletes need the opportunity to transfer. The group felt that although this might create some difficulties in recruiting and competitive equity, the positive implications outweigh the negative ones. The majority of the institutional SAAC's which had discussed it felt that every student-athlete should have one opportunity to transfer, especially with the revolving door of coaches.

It was VOTED 16-0-4 (CAL M, CAL W, OSU W,USC M abstained)

"To support application of the one-time transfer rule to apply to all sports."

13. Developing Conference Pride

One of the Pac-10 SWAC objectives for 2003-04 was how to develop greater Conference pride among student-athletes. The group suggested increasing the number of Conference championships to increase parity among student-athletes, playing down traditional rivalries, more visible Pac-10 logos on uniforms and athletic venues, better commercials, greater availability of Pac-10-logoed merchandise in campus stores and at events; and organization of a Conference-wide community service project.

14. Subcommittee Reports

The Community Service subcommittee reported on ways to improve implementation of community service activities on campus. Opalka gave suggestions as follows:

1) make sure to get the information to those who were interested ;

2) provide student-athletes with an application form with contact information;

3) set up a list serve of upcoming events with monthly or weekly notices so that student-athletes can plan ahead;

4) provide transportation to and from the events (very important);

5) having a variety of types, days, length, and location of events; and

6) place a link on the intercollegiate athletics home page with a listing of past and current events and photos.

Opalka noted that at Arizona, there was a staff member who worked directly with students on community service projects, which helped improve the response rate. Other institutions without that level of staffing would need to identify individuals to carry out the suggestions.

Dawson noted that many other conference SAAC's performed a community service activity at their meetings. She asked the group if they wished to consider doing such an activity.

It was VOTED 17-0-0-3 (CAL M, CAL W, STAN W absent)

"To recommended that the Pac-10 SAAC perform a community service project at its November meeting."

In order to have sufficient time for SAAC business as well as the community service project, the group suggested starting the fall SAAC meeting on Friday night, rather than Saturday afternoon. Depending on what it was, the community service could be either Friday night or Saturday morning. Dawson explained that the current budget would not cover expenses for an additional day. However, an increase would be requested from the Pac-10 Budget Committee in the spring of 2004.

Suggested projects included visits with elementary schools or boys' and girls' clubs, park clean ups, serving meals at shelters, and working at food banks. The Conference staff was to research possible venues and discuss it with the subcommittee before the next meeting.

Bruce and Seaman suggested the Pac-10 SAAC sponsor a Speakers Bureau, which would provide student-athletes with training for public speaking engagements. It was envisioned as a packaged program which each institution could provide for its student-athletes, possibly by having a weekend seminar on each campus, or integrating it into existing life skills classes on campus.

It was VOTED 16-0-1-3 (ASU W abstained, CAL M, CAL W, STAN W absent)

"To recommend that the Pac-10 SAAC adopt a "Speakers' Bureau" community service project."

Other Pac-10 SAAC subcommittees had not met, and thus had no reports.

15. Future Meetings

The spring SAAC meeting was scheduled for April 9-10, 2004. The Student-Athlete Forum was scheduled for April 10-11, 2004. Both were to be at the SFO Westin.

16. Administrative Fellowship Position

Johnson advised that the Administrative Fellowship will be available in the spring of 2004, for a term which began in August, 2004. The Fellowship is a stepping stone for someone who wishes to gain experience in athletic administration. Applications were to be sent to institutional administrators and would be due in April. Anyone who was interested was to contact Johnson directly with more questions.

Johnson displayed the sterling silver key chain which was to be given to members of 2003-04 Pac-10 champion teams, noting that the staff had acted on the SAAC suggestion from the previous year. Suggestions for subsequent Pac-10 champion mementos included desk clocks, pen sets and necklaces with a Pac-10 medallion.

17. Commissioner's Remarks

Hansen thanked the student-athletes for attending the Pac-10 SAAC meeting. He envisioned that the SAAC would be the voice of the student athletes to the Conference and campus administrators. He reminded the student-athletes that they were part of an elite conference, and urged them to take pride in this. 18. Selection of NCAA Student-Athlete Representative

Dawson explained the process for Pac-10 nominations and appointments to NCAA committees, including the NCAA SAAC. The Pac-10 always has a representative on the NCAA SAAC, who serves a term of two years. The Conference is required to nominate three individuals to the NCAA, and the the NCAA selects from among those three, balancing ethnic and sport diversity in the final group.

Now that the Pac-10 SAAC has been established, it seemed appropriate that it have input into the selection of the NCAA representative. It was thought that nominees who had service on the institutional and/or Pac-10 SAAC's would be better able to represent the Conference Pac-10 SAAC representatives did not favor making individual recommendations to the Pac-10 Selection Committee, but wished to have information about vacancies on a timely basis so that they could help identify the best possible candidates on their respective campuses.

The Conference office agreed to notify Pac-10 SAAC members and institutional SAAC advisors when nominations for the NCAA SAAC were being solicited, so that institutional SAAC's could provide input to their Council members who made nominations.

It was VOTED 15-0-5 (CAL M, CAL W, ORE M, ORE W STAN W absent)

"To recommend to the Pac-10 Selection Committee that participation on the Pac-10 and/or institutional SAAC's be a strong criterion when making recommendations for NCAA SAAC appointments."

19. Intra-Conference Transfer Rule

In light of the SB 193 discussion about application of the one-time transfer exception to all sports, the SAAC desired to examine the Pac-10 intra-conference transfer rule, which was more stringent than the NCAA rules. After a brief discussion of the current rule and the existing waivers, the group asked to table the discussion until the April agenda.

The meeting was adjourned at 2:20 p.m.

caj/cd

11/21/03

---

PACIFIC-10 CONFERENCE
April 15-17, 2005

The meeting was called to order by co-vice chair Lauren Westendorf at 7:03 p.m.

1. Approval of minutes of November 5-7, 2005, meeting

It was VOTED (18-0-0-2, OSU M/W absent)

"to approve the minutes of the November 5-7, 2005 meeting."

2. Meeting Materials

Dawson reviewed the materials which provided background information for the Pac-10 SAAC participants. Particular note was made of the Pac-10 list serve. Student-athletes were encouraged to sign up for the Pac-10 list serve so the form of communication within the Conference would be easier. At least one member of each institutional SAAC should subscribe to the list serve and monitor it. Instructions on how to sign up were included in the meeting materials.

Dawson stated that all Pac-10 Conference meetings use Robert's Rules to have orderly discussions during the meeting. The Rules were briefly reviewed. She reviewed the members of the Pac-10 SAAC Advisory Committee, and the Pac-10 staff list, noting that these individuals were available to help any Pac-10 SAAC representative as requested. She also reviewed the list of Pac-10 Council members, and encouraged SAAC members to interact with Council members at their institutions.

3. Review of Action List from November, 2004, Meeting

Starting with the November, 2004, Pac-10 SAAC meeting, a list of action items for the attendees was developed. This was an effort to ensure that information provided at the meeting reached students back on campus. Westendorf reviewed the list of action items from the November 2004 meeting. There was a show of hands for each action item indicating which had been completed. The consensus was that SAAC reps needed to do a better job of completing the action items to make their SAAC representation more effective.

4. Pac-10 Sportsmanship Award

The SAAC reviewed the applications for the 2005 Pac-10 Sportsmanship Award, then voted and selected male and female winners. Cara Chlebicki, a water polo player from the University of California, and Channing Frye, a basketball player from the University of Arizona, were selected. An award was to be presented to the institution on the student's behalf at the Pac-10 Summer Meetings. In addition, the applications were to be forwarded to the NCAA as the Pac-10's nominees for the NCAA Sportsmanship Award.

The other nominees were: Betsy Boardman (basketball; Arizona State), Tamara Diles (track and field; Washington State); Bre Ladd (volleyball; Arizona); Lorenzo Alexander (football; California) and Mkristo Bruce (football; Washington State). Each nominee was to receive a certificate.

Ideally, every institution would nominate a male and a female for this award. Dawson asked the SAAC what could be done to increase the number of nominations. Since some of the SAAC members in attendance were unfamiliar with the award, Dawson reviewed the notification/application process.

The Conference office sent to the Life Skills Coordinator and Pac-10 Council members information about the award, a copy of the application, and pertinent procedures and deadlines. It was up to each institution to decide how its nominee would be selected.

Those institutions which did nominate individuals used different methods. In some instances, the nominee was selected by administrators without the input of the SAAC. One effective method, used at WSU, was to have each team nominate one person, and then the institutional SAAC selected the nominees. Another method was to have SAAC members nominate people, and then try to get the paperwork completed. For some institutions, the paperwork proved to be an obstacle.

It was suggested that this topic be on the coaches' meeting agenda at every institution to raise coaches' awareness and enlist their assistance in identifying candidates. Dawson agreed to use the list serve to provide information about nomination deadlines as well as access to the nomination forms themselves.

5. NCAA SAAC Report

Cassel informed the group that he will be leaving his NCAA SAAC term a year early due to job responsibilities. He outlined the selection process for the new member, noting that the term was two years and student-athletes could serve one year past the completion of their eligibility.

Cassel described the national SAAC duties and obligations. A benefit of the position was the ability to meet with the NCAA Management Council and the Board of Directors. SAAC members had to be up on the legislation and issues surrounding college athletics. He emphasized the importance of student-athletes communicating new ideas and opinions about legislation to the national SAAC representative from their conference to make them more aware of the views they have. Cassel asked the group to create awareness on campus about this open position to get a wide range of nominees for the position.

Cassel reviewed the topics from the January, 2005, NCAA SAAC meeting. Male practice players competing on female teams was a prominent topic of discussion. Pac-10 SAAC members who were opposed to this concept stated that male practice players take away opportunities for women to participate and develop their skills, as well as use institutional resources. Some believed, however, this was beneficial since male practice players provided the daily competition in practice to help make the women's teams better. One approach to this issue might be to limit the number of male practice players allowed per team. Legislation on this topic was expected for the 2005-06 cycle.

Cassel reviewed selected pieces of legislation that were discussed at the January, 2005 NCAA SAAC meeting.

PACIFIC-10 CONFERENCE
November 5-7, 2004

The meeting was called to order by co-vice chair Jake Arnold at 7:00 p.m.

1. Approval of minutes of April 9-10, 2004, meeting

It was VOTED (17-0-0-3, USC M, WSU M/W absent)

"to approve the minutes of the April 9-10, 2004 meeting."

2. Meeting Materials

Dawson reviewed materials which provided background information for the Pac-10 SAAC participants. Particular note was made of the Pac-10 SAAC outline, and the five Pac-10 subcommittees to which new members will be appointed by the new executive committee.

SAAC representatives were asked to make sure at least one person from each institution was signed up for the Pac-10 list serve, to make communication from the Pac-10 office and with other members of the Pac-10 SAAC quicker and easier. It was hoped that the Pac-10 SAAC list serve would become a more effective tool in the future.

Robert's Rules of Order were reviewed, with a reminder that those desiring to speak needed to be recognized by the chair before speaking. Strange reviewed various lists of Pac-10 and institutional personnel, all of whom would be available to help Pac-10 SAAC representatives if needed.

3. NCAA Legislation

Smith reviewed the NCAA legislative process and timeline, as well as the procedure for introducing legislation. Any proposals originated by the Pac-10 SAAC would be forwarded to the Pac-10 Council for a vote to determine if the Conference would sponsor the legislation. If sponsored by the Conference, the legislation would then enter into the regular NCAA process.

The SAAC discussed and took positions on several pieces of proposed legislation in the 2004-05 NCAA legislative cycle, as follows:

2003-23-A (would exempt need-based and academic aid from counting against team equivalency): Favored (13-3-3-1, UCLA M/W, WASH W opposed; WASH M, OSU M/W abstained; USC M absent). Generally, SAAC members believed that students should be able to retain aid from outside of the athletic department without affecting the team equivalency. Those opposed believed that some institutions may have greater amounts of aid to award, or may manipulate the awards, resulting in unfair competitive advantage.

2003-23-B (would exempt academic aid only from counting against team equivalency): Favored (13-6-0-1, ORE M, UCLA M/W, WASH M, CAL M/W opposed, USC M absent). Those in favor believed that students should be able to retain aid from outside of the athletic department without affecting the team equivalency. Those opposed believed that some institutions may be able to provide greater amounts of such aid, resulting in unfair competitive advantage.

2004-21 (would increase the maximum grant-in-aid limitations in selected women's sports): Favored (12-5-2-1, WSU M/W, OSU M, CAL M/W opposed, STAN M/W abstained, USC M absent). Those in favor believed this would increase the percentage of women's participation. Those opposed stated this might negatively affect men's sports if existing funding for men's teams was shifted to pay for these scholarships. It was stated that increasing the limits might help some institutions meet federal gender equity guidelines.

2004-98 (would permit an institution to pay for one parent or guardian to accompany a prospect during an official visit): Favored (15-4-0-1, WSU M/W, CAL M/W opposed, USC M absent). Those in favor stated that because guidance from parents is desirable when making major life decisions, a prospect should have the option of bringing a parent or guardian at the institution's expense. Those opposed were concerned about the costs, especially at institutions with existing budget problems. In addition, it was stated that because the parent would not be at the school with the student once enrolled, making the visit without a parent provided a more realistic view of campus life.

2004-99 (would reduce the number of expense paid official visits from five to four in football and basketball): Opposed (1-18-0-1, WSU W favored, USC M absent). Those opposed believed a fifth visit was needed in order to compare and contrast with the previous four schools.

If the legislation were passed, the SAAC favored (18-1-0-1, UCLA M opposed, USC M absent) applying the legislation to all sports.

2004-40 (would amend the maximum number of contests in certain sports): Opposed (1-16-2-1, WSU M favored, WSU W, OSU M abstained, USC M absent). SAAC members were concerned that these limitations would negatively affect skill development, as well as decrease motivation to train.

2004-44 (would permit an institution to reimburse student-athletes for travel related to practices at off-campus sites): Favored (18-0-1-1, WSU W abstained, USC M absent) Those in favor stated that reimbursement should be granted for travel if a student-athlete is required to be at a practice and has to use his or her own means of transportation.

2004-48 (to permit the use of the one-time transfer exception in all sports): Favored (12-4-3-1, UCLA M, WSU M/W, WASH M opposed, ARIZ W, STAN W, UCLA W abstained, USC M absent). Those in favor believed that all sports should be treated the same and this rule gives the student-athlete an option to leave a situation that does not fit him/her. Those opposed believed this could professionalize college sports and student-athletes would start acting like free agents.

2004-84 (permits an institution to provide one shirt bearing the institution's logo per academic year for team travel or other team events): Favored (17-0-2-1, ARIZ M, WASH M abstained, USC M absent ).

2004-111 (permits additional benefits in men's basketball): Opposed (2-17-0-1, ORE W, UCLA M favored, USC M absent) Those opposed believed that men's basketball players should be treated the same as other student-athletes. Those in favor stated that men's basketball players help bring in money and should be rewarded for it.

2004-73 (in Division I football, to permit a student-athlete to engage in five season of competition): Opposed (0-17-2-1, ORE W, OSU M abstain, USC M absent). Those opposed believed that this would limit the number of new potential football players to be signed, as well as expressing concerns about course selection during the fifth year, and premature return from injuries because the hardship year would be eliminated.

If the legislation were to be passed, the SAAC favored applying it to all sports (17-0-2-1, STAN M, CAL M abstain, USC M absent).

4. SAAC Information Sharing

Representatives shared information about their institutional SAAC's, including format, meeting schedule, and committee structure. A majority meet once every two weeks, for an hour to an hour-and-a-half. Some institutions have committees which meet separately from the normal SAAC meetings. Most SAAC groups try to have two representatives from each team at the meetings. Attendance by senior institutional administrators varies widely, but was seen as desirable.

Activities common to institutional SAAC's include identifying contests for each team which all other student-athletes try to attend, often publicized through t-shirts; and social events, such as barbecues, formals, banquets, or pizza parties. Examples of community service activities included student-athlete auctions to generate funds for a cause; elementary school reading programs; participation in the "Sparrow Clubs" program to help a sick child; humane societies, canned food drives; and health fairs.

Common problems faced by SAAC's included securing attendance and participation from all teams at the institution, and delegation/sharing of workload beyond the core of officers.

5. Pac-10 Cooper/Tires Leadership Award

The SAAC selected Jason Ranne of Arizona and Nikki Neuburger of Oregon State as the 2003-04 winners of the Cooper Tires/Pac-10 Leadership Award.

Noting that there were only three nominees for the award, SAAC members were asked to help publicize the award at their institutions, and encourage nominations and completion of the application materials. The group declined to alter the qualifications, which may have resulted in a larger pool of nominees.

6. Pac-10 Sportsmanship Award

Because the NCAA Sportsmanship Award criteria had changed so that only student-athletes were eligible, the SAAC voted (20-0) to change the Pac-10's criteria for its Sportsmanship Award to match the NCAA's criteria. As of 2004-05, there will be awards to one male and one female student-athlete from the Pac-10, whose name will then be forwarded to the NCAA. It was noted that the element of a "specific act of sportsmanship" had been eliminated.

Arnold stressed the need to publicize this award at institutional SAAC meetings and within the athletics department, so there is a sufficient pool of nominees.

The SAAC also voted (18-0-1-1, WSU M opposed, OSU W absent) to create a Pac-10 Sportsmanship Award for coaches or staff who exhibit exceptional sportsmanship. The Pac-10 staff was to develop suggested criteria for approval at the next Pac-10 SAAC meeting.

7. NCAA 20-Hour Rule

The SAAC was surveyed to see how many were familiar with educational information which the NCAA distributed in August of 2004 regarding the 20-hour rule. About half of the group reported having seen or reviewed it at their institution. Smith led a discussion about application of the rule, and avenues to explore if student-athletes believed the limits were not being adhered to.

Dawson asked the SAAC to be sure the materials are available at their institution. Putting the materials in the student-athlete handbook and discussing them at institutional SAAC meetings were identified as beneficial ways of sharing the information.

8. NCAA SAAC Report

Oman provided the NCAA SAAC report on behalf of Matt Cassel, who was unable to attend due to a competition. Significant issues discussed at the last NCAA SAAC meeting included:

Gambling. A recent NCAA study showed a high level of participation by student-athletes. Division II and III schools had significantly higher student-athlete statistics for gambling than Division I schools did, perhaps because educational efforts were much greater in Division I.

Sportsmanship. Institutions were trying to develop strategies to increase the practice of good sportsmanship and awareness of it at athletic events.

Travel policies. The use of 15-passenger vans was a major topic of discussion for the NCAA. They are prone to turnovers when fully loaded, which makes them very dangerous, particularly when driven by students.

Pregnancy. Automatic clock extensions for pregnant student-athletes compared with use of a redshirt year, and retention of financial aid were aspects of this issue being discussed.

Day off. The NCAA membership did not approve legislation which would have required the mandatory day off be other than the travel day. This continues to an issue for the NCAA SAAC.

Dawson noted that Cassel's term as the Pac-10's NCAA SAAC representative would end as of the July meeting, and a new person would be appointed. She referred the group to an outline of the selection procedure and asked them to have their institutional SAAC's become involved in identifying suitable candidates from their institution. It was noted that the NCAA SAAC rep had a two-year term, and the individual could serve a year after his/her eligibility was exhausted.

9. Student-Athlete Opportunity Fund

Long reviewed the summary of Pac-10 expenditures of the SAOF in 2003-04, the first year of the fund. While the majority of the funds expended were for general purpose use, Long highlighted the fact that expenditures for individual male and female student-athletes were approximately the same amount ($239). It was noted that Pac-10 institutions, in the aggregate, spent about 63% of the funds allocated, and Long encouraged SAAC members to work with their institutional administrators and suggest ways to spend the money.

SAAC members reported the planned 2004-05 uses at their institutions, which included computers, SAAC budget, various types of academic awards, school supplies, clothes, summer school fees, insurance premiums, dental work, graduate school exams, planners, computer software, medical emergencies, and banquets.

SAAC members reported varying levels of discussion with their administrators regarding the fund and its expenditures. For those who wished to have more input, it was suggested that the institutional SAAC draw up a list of proposed uses and then discuss that with institutional administrators. The consensus of the group was that all student-athletes (scholarship and non-scholarship, those without financial need as well as those with financial need) should benefit from the fund. Long pointed out that administrators may have a different perspective on what the institutional priorities were, but should still welcome a well thought out proposal from the SAAC.

10. Pac-10 Speaker's Bureau/Stay In Bounds

Arnold described the Stay In Bounds materials, and Seaman gave the history on why the Pac-10 SAAC had adopted Stay In Bounds as the Pac-10 Speaker's Bureau. Seaman noted that the Communications Subcommittee had identified training for student-athlete speakers as a Conference-wide need, and that the subcommittee also sought to deliver a consistent message. However, only about one third of the group had seen the materials before, and none reported using it in community service activities.

Representatives described the community service activities at the respective institutions, and a majority of Pac-10 institutions do outreach with elementary schools. The SAAC participants agreed the Stay in Bounds material would be a good tool for student-athletes. Dawson encouraged them to make others at their institutions aware of the web site and materials.

Washington and Oregon SAAC's had worked with the Sparrow Clubs to adopt a "sparrow" as a community service activity. This program provides funds for families with a child who has a life-threatening or seriously disabling illness, with a business sponsor providing the funds upon completion of 256 hours of community service. Other SAAC members expressed interest in starting this program. (Note: Information about the Sparrow Club can be found at www.sparrowclubs.org).

11. Election of Officers

Those interested in serving on the Executive Committee were identified from the subcommittee preference list. The SAAC elected Lindsay Oman of USC as co-chair of the SAAC and Anna Leksinska of Oregon as co-vice chair. The term will expire after the fall, 2005, Pac-10 SAAC meeting.

12. Appointments to Subcommittees

Because of the lack of consistent attendees at the Pac-10 SAAC meeting, doing committee work has been difficult. After discussion, the group agreed to keep the subcommittee structure intact, with the option to schedule subcommittee meetings during the Pac-10 SAAC meeting.

SAAC reps were asked to identify subcommittees on which they wished to serve, by completing a preference form. Appointments were to be made by the Executive Committee.

13. 2004-05 Student-Athlete Forum

Seaman and Leksinska, both of whom had attended the 2004 NCAA Leadership Conference, shared their experiences. Both found it a very worthwhile experience and encouraged SAAC members to apply. They suggested several icebreakers for the Pac-10 Student-Athlete Forum.

In order to assist with planning for the Pac-10 Student-Athlete Forum in April, 2005, the group was asked to identify topics of interest for student-athletes for the small group discussions. The top five topics from a list of about 20 suggested were:

- strategies for increasing SAAC participation and informing other student-athletes about SAAC;

- improving relationships on campus with other students and faculty;

- effective delegation for leaders and motivating others;

- qualities of a leader; and

- athletic and academic issues.

The SAAC provided suggestions for mementos for Forum participants. The top four items selected included a Nalgene water bottle, sweatpants or fleece pants, a backpack, or a long-sleeved shirt, preferably with logos of all Pac-10 institutions.

Suggestions were also made for the Saturday night social activity. These included bowling, Dave and Buster's, a professional sports contest, laser tag, Great America, miniature golf, or hiking.

The SAAC voted (19-1, OSU M opposed) to implement a t-shirt/hat exchange at the Forum in 2005.

14. Action List

At Long's urging, the SAAC agreed to develop an action item list during future Pac-10 SAAC meetings to take back to their respective institutions.

15. NCAA Surveys

Long described a survey which addressed substance use and sexual behavior that UCLA had been asked to administer to two specific teams. She asked the group what it believed the comfort level of student-athletes would be completing such a questionnaire. Dawson added the purpose of these surveys was to identify areas where education and life skills programs were needed by student-athletes, as was shown by a the NCAA gambling survey.

SAAC members were very concerned about privacy issues, as well as with the research methodology. Long expressed confidence in the legitimacy and confidentiality of NCAA research department, yet it was evident more information needed to be available about such surveys. The topic was to be placed on the agenda for the April SAAC meeting, with the staff preparing a report on the survey process and use.

16. Olympic and NGB Information

Dawson reviewed an information sheet of frequently asked questions for Olympic and National Governing Body Participation and Competition, which was to be a discussion topic for the NCAA SAAC at its November, 2004, meeting. Noting that there are many Pac-10 student-athletes for whom this information would be valuable, Dawson urged the group to review the information at institutional SAAC meetings.

17. NCAA Baseball Issues Committee

The NCAA Baseball Issues Committee report, which proposed establishing a start date of March 1 for college baseball and moving the College World Series back two weeks, was reviewed. This was an attempt to correct what some viewed as the competitive advantage gained by institutions in the sun belt states. Legislation to implement these changes would be in the 2005-06 NCAA legislative cycle. The main topics discussed in the report included: competitive equity, weather issues, summer school availability, the Cape Cod League, living arrangements, and the fact that the committee did also consider softball.

SAAC members seemed most concerned about the length of time student-athletes would be on campus after the end of the academic year, and the many different issues that would raise. It was also pointed out that such a change would be unlikely to affect recruiting, as student-athletes in outdoor sports would continue to select institutions in the south and west in order to have optimum year round practice opportunities. Thus, the desired competitive equity may not be achieved.

Dawson posed the question of whether baseball should be treated differently from other outdoor sports. The consensus of the group was that for a majority of NCAA regulations, sports should be treated the same.

SAAC members were asked to discuss the report with baseball players at their institutions, and the topic would be on the agenda in April, 2005.

18. NCAA SAAC Travel Policy

The NCAA SAAC's draft travel policy generated a great deal of discussion about use of vans for team practice and travel. Many SAAC members stated that their institutions used 15-passenger vans, and a ban on such vehicles, or on the use of student-athletes as drivers, could create a significant hardship.

There were differences in the policies for licensing requirements and driver training across institutions. The use of 15-passenger vans has become a significant risk management issue nationally, and some institutions are banning their use.

In response to a question about enforcement of the policy, Dawson stated that it would offer recommended best practices, but was not contemplated as legislation at this time.

Note: The SAAC broke from its meeting on Saturday, November 6, from 9:00 am - 12 noon to perform a community service activity. The group assisted in refurbishing displays for Christmas In The Park, a community display in downtown San Jose which draws approximately 500,000 visitors.

The meeting was adjourned at 1:45 p.m.

njs

11/16/04

PACIFIC-10 CONFERENCE
Student-Athlete Advisory Committee Meeting
April 9-10, 2004

The meeting was called to order by co-chair Courtney Carter at 7 p.m.

1. Approval of minutes of November 1-2, 2003, meeting

It was VOTED 18-0-0-2 ( WSU M/W absent)

"to approve the minutes of the November 1-2, 2003 meeting."

2. Meeting Materials

Dawson reviewed the materials which provided background information for the Pac-10 SAAC participants. Particular note was made of the Pac-10 List Serve. SAAC representatives were asked to make sure at least one person on their campus signed up for the list serve so that their campus could be kept informed of information sent from the Pac-10 office.

3. California SB 193 Update

Bruce reviewed the chronology of California Senate Bill 193, and its current status. He and Oman described their visit to California legislators on the Higher Education Committee in January, 2003, saying they had been welcomed and received assurances from a number of Committee members that SB 193 would not be passed out of Committee. Bruce cited the importance of SAAC leadership on this topic, explaining the significance of the legislators hearing directly from students who were opposed to the bill.

4. Pac-10 Intra-conference Transfer Rule

Leland gave an overview of the existing Pac-10 intra-conference transfer rule, and noted the Conference was considering changing the rule. He outlined arguments for and against transfer restrictions.

Factors favoring restrictions included: The value of educational stability. Since studies show that 80% of all freshmen would say at least once during some point in their freshman year that they considered transferring, such restrictions help them to stay the course and not act impulsively and transfer. This is educationally beneficial. Institutional investments in student-athletes. Examples of these investments include time, money (financial aid and support services, time and money spent recruiting), admissions slots, and positions on teams. The quid pro quo for such investments is a way to insure the student continues at that institution. The role coaches play. If students were allowed to transfer freely when coaches leave, it would wreak havoc with the team, as well as contribute to an environment where coaches could make even more unreasonable demands (e.g., salaries) since the departure of a coach could mean the loss of many team members.

Factors favoring relaxing the transfer requirements include: Student rights. Student-athletes should have the right to transfer freely for any reason, whether it be economic, family-related, or sports-related. The NCAA one-time transfer exception works. The original concern that there would be significant recruiting of student-athletes already in college has not been found to be true. There would be greater clarity if the NCAA and Pac-10 transfer rules were the same.

SAAC members engaged in an extended discussion about what the appropriate Pac-10 intra-conference transfer regulations should be. Options considered included 1) adopting the current NCAA rule; 2) keeping the existing Pac-10 rule; 3) requiring a year of residence without the ability to receive athletically-related financial aid, the loss of a year of eligibility, and a waiver provision for any of the elements; and 4) requiring a year of residence with the ability to receive financial aid, the loss of a year of eligibility, and a waiver provision for any of the elements. Some viewed the two year residence requirement and loss of eligibility as overly burdensome, and believed one year of each was sufficient penalty. A desire to keep talented athletes in the Conference rather than have them compete against the Pac-10 was another factor influencing the discussion. In addition, some cited the ability of institutions to deny permission to contact or a release to transfer as sufficient safeguards for the institutions.

It was VOTED (18-0-0-2, WSU M/W absent):

"to recommend that the Pac-10 intra-conference transfer rule be revised to require one year of residence with the ability to receive financial aid, the loss of one season of eligibility, and a process by which any of the penalties could be waived to the NCAA rule."

By a slim margin (10-8), SAAC members favored continuing to exclude football, basketball, and ice hockey from the NCAA one-time transfer exception .

5. NCAA Legislation

Smith reviewed the NCAA legislative process and timeline. Dawson explained that any legislative proposals initiated by the Pac-10 SAAC would be forwarded to the Pac-10 Council, which is the entity that ultimately decides which proposals from Conference groups would be forwarded to the NCAA.

The SAAC discussed and took positions on several pieces of proposed legislation which were already in the NCAA cycle, as follows: 2003-74, mandatory day off/travel day: not favored, 9-9-0-2 (STAN M/W, ARIZ M/W, USC M/W, WASH M/W, ASU M favored, WSU M/W absent). Those in favor stated such a rule would reassert the importance of academics. Those opposed believed that practice time would become limited, or that difficult practices would be instituted on travel days. (Note: Subsequent to the SAAC meeting, this was defeated by the Management Council) 2003-88, elimination of printed media guides: No vote taken, but consensus was guides should be kept. While not a determining factor in recruiting, they were worthwhile to recruits as tangible evidence of commitment to sport. SAAC members felt media guides were more valuable to enrolled student-athletes as a memento of participation. Note: Subsequent to the SAAC meeting, this was referred to the AEC Cabinet by the Management Council). 2003-33, change in recruiting calendar to permit earlier contact: favored, 10-7-1-2 (ASU W, UCLA M/W, ORE M, OSU W, WASH M/W opposed, OSU M abstain, WSU M/W absent) (Note: Subsequent to the SAAC meeting, this was approved by the Management Council).

Smith reviewed the so-called "40-60-80" rule which requires completion of a fixed percentage of degree requirements based on year in school. SAAC members expressed concern about the lack of flexibility in the rule, believing it might have the effect of tracking student-athletes into certain majors whose requirements are more easily fulfilled. In addition, it would effectively prevent them from changing majors, as well as discourage them from exploring academic interests outside their selected majors. Smith noted that junior college transfers were the students who were most likely to have difficulty meeting the requirements of the rule.

SAAC members also gave input on potential NCAA legislation regarding number of competitions. There was general agreement that a fixed number of contests per sport, including non-traditional season contests, was appropriate. It was noted that non-traditional season contests were important for several reasons: breaking up the boredom of training; development of players; and training for the Olympics. SAAC members did not wish to see a reduction in the number of actual contests.

In addition, rather than folding all events into one number, it was suggested that there could be two numbers: one for intercollegiate contests, regardless of when and where they occur, and another for what was termed "auxiliary events," such as alumni games and fund raising activities.

There was little support for the concept of "exempt events" which were contests that counted in a team record. SAAC members believed every team should have the opportunity to play the same number of contests every year.

6. NCAA SAAC Report

No new NCAA SAAC information was presented. The next NCAA SAAC meeting was scheduled for the week after the Pac-10 SAAC meeting.

SAAC members reviewed the NCAA SAAC newsletters from the 2003-04 year. They were encouraged to make sure these received wide distribution on their respective campuses. It was suggested that each campus as well as the Conference office provide the link to the NCAA SAAC website where the newsletters could be viewed and downloaded.

7. Pac-10Sportsmanship Award

There were five nominees for the inaugural Pac-10 Sportsmanship Award: Pete Carroll, USC head football coach; Josh Childress, Stanford men's basketball player; Heidi Goehring, Oregon State gymnast; Grayling Love, ASU football player; and Dave Rubio, Arizona head women's volleyball coach. Because of the timing of submission of the applications, they were not prescreened by the subcommittee, and all five nominees were discussed.

After a series of votes, Grayling Love of ASU was selected as the Pac-10 Sportsmanship Award winner. ASU will be recognized at the Pac-10 Summer Meetings, where the award will be presented. All other nominees will receive a certificate.

SAAC members were asked to encourage their institutions to participate in the nominating process next year, as there are worthy nominees on each campus. It is hoped the establishment of the award will encourage acts of sportsmanship at member institutions.

8. Pac-10 Speakers' Bureau

Dawson presented information about the NCAA "Stay In Bounds" program, as a way to fulfill the fall, 2003, Pac-10 SAAC recommendation that the SAAC sponsor a speakers' bureau. This program provides materials which student-athletes can use to deliver positive messages and engage in activities to school groups of various ages. The Stay In Bounds program is based on the "RICHER" principles: respect, integrity, caring,harmony, excellence, and responsibility." It was pointed out that at least one of these principles could apply to any topic student-athletes might be requested to speak on.

Dawson explained that all the materials are expected to be available on the internet, so that schools would be able to access them for ease of distribution to student-athletes.

It was VOTED (20-0) "to adopt the NCAA Stay In Bounds program as the vehicle for the Pac-10 Speakers' Bureau."

Dawson said she would communicate this information to the institutional SAAC advisors to encourage its use. It was agreed that the program would be reviewed in the fall.

The name for the speakers' bureau was debated, and it ultimately decided that individual campuses should retain the flexibility to have their own name. However, the Conference SAAC desired to have its name attached as evidence of its activity.

It was VOTED (20-0) to have the nomenclature for institutional speakers' bureaus be "(Institution name) Speakers' Bureau, brought to you by the Pac-10 SAAC."

SAAC members shared information about how community service activities were organized on their respective campuses. It was agreed that having a staff member dedicated to coordinating the activities was the optimum system. The system at Arizona was cited as a program that works extremely well,with a staff member who performs outreach, communicates with the student-athletes, follows up with all concerned, and drives student-athletes to the site as needed.

9. Recruiting Practices

SAAC members discussed recruiting practices and the changes which were being contemplated as a result of highly publicized unethical and illegal behavior on recruiting trips.

The question was raised as to whether special host groups of non-athletes students were desirable. Many believed that hosting recruits should properly be the responsibility of team members, who would be the best judges of a prospect's fit with the institution. However, such hosting could be burdensome because of the time and energy required, particularly if there were also contests on that day. In some sports (e.g., football) the length of the game required that someone other than players be assigned to host prospects, especially when large numbers of recruits visited on the same weekend.

The SAAC took the following positions on various aspects of recruiting: favored allowing institutions to have host groups (17-0-2-1, WASH M, OSU M abstained, CAL M absent). opposed host groups of the opposite gender (1-16-2-1, ASU M favored, WASH M, ARIZ M abstained, CAL M absent) opposed requiring staff members as escorts for recruits at all times (0-18-1-1, OSU M abstain, CAL M absent) favored retaining current NCAA regulations on entertainment (19-0-0-1, CAL M absent) favored retaining current NCAA regulations on host funds, but requiring student-athletes to provide receipts and and explanation of what was done (19-0-0-1, CAL M absent) opposed establishing a curfew for recruits (2-17-0-01, OSU M/W favored, CAL M absent)

No support existed for reducing the number of paid visits, nor for having staff members accompany recruits at all times during a visit. The view that recruits "did not need a baby sitter" but rather the student-athlete host should be held accountable for the activities was expressed.

10. Pac-10/SEC SAAC Initiative

Partly as an outgrowth of discussions with legislators about California Senate Bill 193, Bruce noted the need for increased strength of institutional SAAC's. He noted that the NCAA and Conference SAAC's seemed to be up and running effectively, but the weak link seemed to be on campus. Discussions with Southeastern Conference SAAC representatives led to the development of an initiative to strengthen institutional SAAC's. The chief methods for doing this would be a DVD which would outline pertinent SAAC issues, as well as the establishment of an NCAA internship for a person who would travel around the country and assist institutions in developing credible SAAC's. In order for this to move forward on the NCAA SAAC level, the Pac-10 SAAC needed to endorse the idea.

It was VOTED (18-0-1-1, ASU M abstaining, CAL M absent) to approve this concept as a Pac-10 SAAC initiative."

An outline of the initiative is attach as Supplement A of the minutes. Note: Subsequent to the Pac-10 meeting, the NCAA SAAC adopted the initiative as a project.

11. SAAC Subcommittees

SAAC members were asked to submit a list of their subcommittee preferences. They were advised the newly-elected SAAC officers would make appointments to subcommittees.

12. Election of Officers

Those interested in serving on the Executive Committee were identified from the subcommittee preference list. The SAAC elected Lauren Westendorf of Oregon as a co-chair of the SAAC for 2004-05, and Jake Arnold of Arizona as a SAAC co-vice-chair.

The other Executive Committee members should have been elected at the fall, 2003, SAAC meeting. Since that had been overlooked, the election was to take place in Fall, 2004.

13. SAAC & Forum Meeting Dates and Format

The dates for future meetings were discussed. It was desired that future SAAC and Forum meetings not be held on Easter weekend.

Noting the SAAC vote to include a community service activity in the fall meeting, Dawson asked the group to consider reducing the number of students attending the Forum in order to pay for the additional fall expenses. It was also noted that finding five students per institution to attend the Forum in April was difficult, due to team schedules and other spring activities.

It was VOTED (17-0-2-1, WASH M, WSU W abstaining, CAL M absent) to recommend reducing the number of student-athletes who attend the Forum from five to four.

14. Championship Mementos

The sterling silver key ring and clock which were chosen as the memento for members of Pac-10 Championship teams at the suggestion of the SAAC were displayed. Suggestions for future mementos included: ring holder; blanket; paperweight; trophy; pen set; watch; bag; business card holder; license plate frame; and patch.

The meeting was adjourned at 11:50a.m.

cad

4/27/04

The meeting was called to order by chair Bruce at 1 p.m.

1. Approval of minutes of April 4-5, 2003, meeting

It was VOTED 19-0-0-1 ( UCLA M absent)

"To approve the minutes of the April 4-5, 2003 meeting."

2. Review of background materials

Bruce explained the meeting structure to the new SAAC members, noting that the meetings operate under Roberts Rules of Order. Dawson reviewed the meeting materials and noted that SAAC members can expect to receive the information about two weeks before each meeting. If possible, agenda items should be discussed at institutional SAAC meetings before the Pac-10 SAAC meets. Updated rosters and other pertinent materials were to be updated and included with the minutes sent out after the meeting.

Johnson explained the workings of the Pac-10 SAAC list serve, which provides a way to communicate with other SAAC members. It was anticipated that the list serve would become an important tool for communication for the SAAC, and SAAC members were urged to sign up. Every institution should have at least one SAAC representative who is signed up for the list serve and monitors it regularly.

3. Information Sharing

An opportunity for information sharing is on the agenda for each Pac-10 SAAC and Forum meeting, with institutional representatives outlining what their respective SAAC's are doing. Common activities include developing ways to support other student-athletes through attendance at athletic events, and various forms of community service. The highlights of the institutional reports follow.

Arizona has a well-established community service program which they continue to build on. They have started a "certificate of excellence" program for those who are active in community service, have an annual blood drive, and "adopt a family" during the holidays.

Arizona State implemented "Gold Games" to help promote attendance at athletic events. One event per sport per year is identified at the beginning of the year, and t-shirts are distributed with the dates of those contests printed on them. Teams were encouraged to attend wearing the t-shirt. In addition to increasing attendance, this has helped create solidarity among the student-athletes. Another project was "Feeling the Competitive Edge," a fund raising drive for the California fire disaster victims.

California's SAAC planned the student-athlete formal. A significant recent focus is trying to find ways to help improve recruiting, and increasing the visibility of the University to prospective student-athletes.

Oregon has focused on putting "civil" back into the Civil War game against Oregon State. The SAAC has also developed a partnership with a local organization which provides funds to specified nonprofit organizations for every hour of community service which student-athletes perform. Other programs include Duck Days, Quackin Action (all sports day for local youth), and the Smart Program which encourages children to read.

Oregon State has programs such as "The Other Side," which brings alumni and boosters back to campus to interact with the student-athletes. The SAAC also put on a student-athlete talent show which was extremely successful. Coaches, administrators and student-athlete performed community service as a group on Student-Athletes' Day. OSU also has an Athlete Auction (to raise money for community service), Canned Food Drive, and the Orange Games, which promotes student-athlete attendance at other teams' events.

Stanford's main focus this academic year was getting incoming freshmen involved with other sports on campus, as well as with the SAAC. Activities similar to the "Gold Games" to promote dorm activities and support for other sports' big games were also being carried out. The "Champions Cup" is a dinner which helps connect current athletes with alumni. The SAAC is taking steps against California legislation SB 193 by brainstorming ways to help defeat the bill.

UCLA has several different committees within the SAAC which each have their own event. Examples include distributing food at homeless shelters, assisting with the campus-wide "I'm Going To College" day for area youth, and organizing a student-athlete function for the end of the school year. The spirit committee is responsible for organizing the big games important to each team, the student-athlete formal, and professor day, which encourages professors to come to games and events to get to know student-athletes better.

USC has a new life skills advisor and their SAAC is being reorganized. The USC reps hoped to use the meeting as a platform to get information and ideas for their campus SAAC.

Washington reorganized its SAAC and elected officials to be more productive. They have had a clothing drive and an athlete formal. They have been involved in discussions about relocation of training table due to on-campus construction. "Dinner with the Dawg," which helps links student-athletes with professionals in the area, is another ongoing program.

Washington State SAAC recently had a talent show as part of the freshman class transition exercises, a teen care reading buddy program, and Varsity Ball, the student-athlete social. They also have several programs to promote attendance at each others' events, including Crimson Game Day, tracking attendance at games other than football and basketball, and providing supplies to make signs and posters for games.

4. Pac-10 SAAC Mission Statement

Bruce noted that the current SAAC statement is a list of goals rather than a more succinct mission statement. The group requested that it be reworked.

It was VOTED (19-0-0-1 UCLA M absent)

" To adopt the following as the Pac-10 SAAC mission statement:

The mission of the Pacific-10 Conference Student-Athlete Advisory Committee (SAAC) is the enhance the total student-athlete experience.

It was VOTED (19-0-0-1 UCLA M absent)

"To adopt the following as the goals of the Pac-10 SAAC:

1. Fostering Conference unity and pride;
2. Facilitating communication between the Student-Athlete Advisory Committees of each institution and that of the National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA);
3. Establishing and maintaining conference-wide community outreach programs;
4. Actively contributing in the development and understanding of NCAA and Conference-specific legislation;
5. Further improving the image of the Pacific-10 Conference and that of its member institutions;
6. Applying leadership skills developed at the Pac-10 Forum and NCAA Leadership Conference;
7. Developing a system of networking, sharing and learning among institutions;
8. Demonstrating to prospective student-athletes that their thoughts and concerns are being heard by their conference; and Increasing the role and participation of student-athletes in their college experience."

5. NCAA Legislative Issues

Dawson described the NCAA legislative process and the new single cycle that has started this academic year. Richardson then reviewed selected NCAA legislative proposals, and explained to the group that they would discuss each one, then vote to establish a Pac-10 SAAC position. The Pac-10 SAAC position was to be noted on the information provided to Pac-10 Council members.

The NCAA legislative positions established by the Pac-10 SAAC were as follows:

2003-74 Playing and Practice Seasons - Required Day Off - Travel Day - To mandate that a travel day may not be considered the mandatory day off.

SAAC Position: Favored 18-0-1-1 (UCLA M absent, OSU W abstaining) .

2003-17 - Playing and Practice Seasons - Time Limits for Athletically Related Activities - Outside the Playing Season - Require two days off outside the playing season.

SAAC Position: Favored 9-5-5-1 (ARIZ W, CAL M, CAL W , UCLA W, WASH M opposed, ASU M, ARIZ M, OSU M, STAN M, WASH W abstaining, UCLA M absent)

Those opposed were concerned about how this might affect certain sports and the ongoing skill work necessary to be competitive. There was also some sentiment that while two days off might be desirable, because of the training cycle it might not always be advisable. It would depend on the time of the year.

2003-33 - Recruiting - Contacts and Evaluations - For all sports, permits on April contact in the junior year on prospective student-athletes high school campus, and one call in March of PSA's junior year of high school. Eliminates restrictions telephone call to football PSA's.

SAAC Position: Favored 18-0-1-1 (ORE M abstaining, UCLA M absent)

The group felt this was a good way to limit phone calls so that prospective student-athletes wouldn't be inundated when the recruiting period starts.

2003-90A - Recruited Student-Athlete: Changes the definition of a "recruited student-athlete" to eliminate unintended financial aid consequences.

SAAC Position: Favored 19-0-0-1 (UCLA M absent)

2003-3 - Eligibility : Permits hardship waiver even if the injury occurs in the second half of the season.

SAAC Position: Opposed 4-9-6-1 (CAL M, ORE M,WASH, UCLA W favored; ASU W, CAL W,OSU W, WSU W, USC M, USC W abstained; UCLA M absent)

While SAAC members agreed with the general intent of the rule, there was concern about the potential for abuse. They wanted a clearer definition of season-ending injury, believing that ambiguity might provide a loophole for coaches to redshirt student-athletes who were not performing at the desired level. The participation limit was also questioned,with several members preferring a percentage of total time available rather than number of games, to provide for students who played only a minute or two in a game which put them over the 20% limit.

2003-49 - Permissible benefits- Medical Expenses: To permit an institution to pay for a student-athlete's medical expenses resulting from an injury or illness, provided such expenses are necessary for the student-athlete to return to competition.

SAAC Position: Favored 12-1-6-1 (WASH W opposed, ARIZ W, ASU M, ASU W, OSU M, OSU W, WASH M abstained, UCLA M absent)

While the belief that all athletic injuries should be covered regardless of when they occurred was widely held, some believed that the broad scope of the legislation might provide a recruiting advantage because schools which are struggling financially may not be able to provide these expenses. Vydra opined that as an administrator this would allow her to view these issues on a case by case basis and make an informed decision.

2002-83-A - Financial Aid - Maximum Limit on Financial Aid - Individual Limit - Sets individual financial aid limit at the coat of attendance. A student-athlete may receive athletics aid at the current grant formula, as well as outside aid up to the value of a full grant-in-aid.

SAAC Position: Favored 11-2-6-1 (OSU M, OSU W opposed, ARIZ M,ASU M, ASU W, STAN W, USC M, USC W abstained, UCLA M absent)

2002-83-B - Financial Aid - Sets individual financial aid limit at the cost of attendance.

SAAC Position: Opposed 3-16-0-1 (ARIZ M, ASU M STAN M favored, UCLA M absent) Vydra explained that while 2002-83 A would not have budget implications for individual institutions, 2002-93-B would have significant financial implications to institutional budgets. Proposal 2002-83-B would result in an additional $2500-$4000 (depending on the institution) being added to the amount of a full athletic scholarship.

SAAC members questioned the effect proposal 2002-83-A, if passed, would have on equivalency sports. There was concern that equivalency sport athletes would still not be able to accept outside aid in the amount of the difference between the athletic grant in aid and cost of attendance since it would still count against team limits, which would remain unchanged. It seemed unfair that only full ride or head count athletes would benefit under this legislation. Richardson noted that there was another proposal, which had been tabled, which would exempt almost all financial aid which was not based on athletic ability from counting against team limits.

(Note: Subsequent to the meeting, the staff received clarification that 2003-83-A would benefit only student-athletes who were receiving a full grant-in-aid. Any aid received after a full grant had been reached, up to the cost of attendance, would be considered "incidental" and would not be figured into the individual or team limits). However, aid which a student-athlete on a partial scholarship received would continue to count against the team limit, until he/she reached the full grant amount).

Academic Incentives and Disincentives

Because of the lack of specificity in the current proposals, the SAAC discussed only the general concept of having athletic or financial incentives and disincentives for academic performance. The loss of opportunity to compete in the post-season was used to illustrate the type of penalties which might be applied.

Richardson noted that, as was currently envisioned, teams would only be penalized with a loss of post-season eligibility if they failed to meet these qualifications on three levels. SAAC members expressed concerns about the timing of potential penalties, as well as the prospect of a team being penalized for the performance of one or two individuals. However, they acknowledged that such penalties might be effective in changing the behavior of coaches so more emphasis would be placed on academics.

It was VOTED 13-4-2-1 (ASU W, CAL M, CAL W, USC M opposed, ARIZ M, WSU M abstained, UCLA M absent)

"To support the concept of team penalties for poor academic performance, pending the clarification of certain standards."

6. Spring Student-Athlete Forum Planning

Mike Robbins, who was to give the presentation at the 2004 Pac-10 Student-Athlete Forum, came to the meeting to solicit ideas for presentation topics. The following were suggested: improving communication skills; promoting unity between student-athletes and the student body; keeping athletics in perspective; developing as a complete person; effective ways to deal with difficult people; how to market skills learned as a student-athlete in the professional world; time management; and understanding cultural differences among teammates.

Dawson asked for suggestions about the small group discussions, and whether a format change was desirable. The group discussed the possibility of having a three- tiered discussion, with two small groups (of five) discussing a given topic, then moving to a group of 10 to review before reconvening to give reports to the complete group. Dawson noted that the staff would explore this possibility and discuss it with the Executive Committee.

Suggested small group discussion topics for the April, 2004, Forum were: student-athlete communication; scheduling; creative uses of the Student-Athlete Opportunity Fund; community involvement; racial divisions on teams; divisions on teams between scholarship and non-scholarship athletes; NCAA legislation; SAAC recruitment; the gap between student-athletes and regular students; coach interaction with the SAAC; educating student-athletes on use of the SAAC; and relationships with faculty.

Suggestions for the spring memento were backpacks, slippers, fleece blanket, fleece jacket, and a messenger bag. Some suggestions for the social activity were a sporting event, bowling, improv groups at a theater, comedy club in the city, dinner cruise, and a bonfire.

7. Pac-10/Cooper Tire Leadership Award

Johnson reviewed the Pac-10/Cooper Tire Leadership Award and the voting process to decide on a male and female winner. She noted that the normal process was to have the Cooper Tire subcommittee of the SAAC screen the nominees, and present three of each gender to the SAAC for final selection. As the subcommittee did not complete that duty, all nominees (three men and four women) were discussed before the vote was taken.

Janell Bergstrom of Oregon and Adam Chavira of Arizona State were selected by the SAAC as the 2002-03 Pac-10/Cooper Tire Leadership Award winners.

The group then engaged in a discussion of the various requirements for the award.

Ghatan opined that he would like to change the voting procedure from a secret written ballot to an open vote by show of hands. He felt public voting would be a better way to choose a winner and would encourage discussion.

It was VOTED 14-0-6 (ARIZ M, ARIZ W, ASU M, OSU M, STAN W, WASH M abstaining)

"To amend the voting procedure to an open vote by show of hands instead of a secret written ballot."

Opalka recommended that the selection criteria be changed to allow other campus leadership activities as an alternative to the SAAC service requirement. His view was that the award was meant to reward leadership and it could be demonstrated in more ways than through SAAC. Others believed that the award was meant to encourage SAAC participation and leadership in SAAC activities as well as reward it. A proposal to eliminate the language that a nominee must have had two years of service on the institutional SAAC FAILED 3-16-1 (ARIZ M, ARIZ W, OSU M favored, UCLA M abstained)

Dawson noted the difficulty of actually getting a letter of recommendation written by institutional SAAC members, and asked if the group thought it appropriate to have the SAAC advisor write this letter. It was thought that the institutional SAAC representative at the meeting where voting took place could speak effectively on behalf of the applicant .

It was VOTED 18-0-2 (ARIZ W, WSU W abstained)

"To eliminate the requirement that the institutional SAAC provide a letter of recommendation for the Pac-10/Cooper Tire Leadership Award."

With the requirement of a SAAC recommendation letter eliminated, there was discussion about the appropriate source of the remaining letter of recommendation.

It was VOTED 19-0-1 (OSU M abstained)

"To amend the qualification criteria to specify that the required letter of recommendation must come from a member of the athletic department."

8. NCAA/Conference Sportsmanship Award

Dawson advised the SAAC that the issue of sportsmanship continues to be a point of emphasis for institutional presidents and chancellors and reminded them that at the April 2003 meeting, the SAAC approved implementation of the Pac-10 Sportsmanship Award. She referred the group to the proposed procedures in the meeting materials as the method for determining the Pac-10 Sportsmanship winner. Some modifications to the timeline were suggested. It was also suggested that a physical award be given to the winner. Dawson was to take that request to the Pac-10 Budget Committee. An appropriate time and location for the presenting the award would be determined by the Conference office.

It was VOTED 20-0-0 "To approve the procedures as amended for the Pac-10 Sportsmanship Award." (The amended procedures are attached to the minutes as Supplement A)."

9. California Senate Bill 193

Hansen described SB 193, which had been introduced by Senator Kevin Murray at the request of the Collegiate Athletes Coalition. The bill was being considered by the California State Assembly after having passed out of the State Senate. He reported that passage of the bill would result in exclusion of California schools from the NCAA. Pac-10 SAAC co-chair Bruce participated in lobbying efforts against the bill in the summer of 2003, as well as representing the Pac-10 SAAC at the Summit Meeting held in October, 2003.

Since more student opinions were desired on the legislation, Hansen suggested that the SAAC submit a statement voicing their position on the bill.

It was VOTED 20-0-0

"That the Pac-10 SAAC formally oppose the tenets of SB 193 and submit a formal resolution to that effect."

The resolution was later drafted by Bruce, and it was VOTED 14-0-0-6 (CAL M, CAL W, STAN W, ORE M, ORE W, WSU W absent)

"To approve the following Pac-10 SAAC resolution:

WHEREAS, we applaud the attention of the State of California Legislature to student-athlete welfare and agree with some of the benefits gained through SB 193, but strongly disagree with the means to accomplish this marginally beneficial end; and

WHEREAS, the NCAA is not perfect and reform is necessary, but using the California student-athletes as a bargaining chip undermines the fundamental premise of a bill of rights; and

WHEREAS, we believe it is possible for the student-athlete voice to be heard in the current NCAA structure through the established Student-Athlete Advisory Committee hierarchy; and

WHEREAS, we oppose any legislation threatening the composition of our Conference and our membership in the NCAA;

LET IT BE RESOLVED THAT, we, the student-athletes of the Pacific-10 Conference institutions, stand opposed to SB 193."

SAAC members desired to take the resolution back to their respective campuses and gather signatures on a petition to present to California legislators, to demonstrate the scale of student opposition to the bill. The Conference office was to provide copies of the resolution and a sample petition. Representatives of the Pac-10's California institutions were to plan a meeting with legislators in January, 2004.

10. Student-Athlete Opportunity Fund

SAAC members reaffirmed their interest in ongoing monitoring of the SAOF. They reviewed a chart showing the allocations to each institution, as well as the NCAA guidelines for uses of the fund. Vydra reported the intentions of administrators in the Conference to come up with creative ways to spend the SAOF money, so that it goes directly to the student-athletes. Since there are few restrictions, she wanted to know how other campuses are using their funds and if student-athletes had input in the decision-making. Institutions reported as follows:

Arizona administrators chose to distribute $150 to each student-athlete upon completion of an application. Student-athletes were advised on the limitations on the types of allowable spending, and were required to provide receipts for their purchases. This direct student-athlete spending would account for about half of Arizona's allocation. The other half was to be held for use for student-athlete emergencies.

Arizona State administrators chose to use the money for student-athlete flights home, childcare, and possibly grocery store vouchers.

California administrators solicited the SAAC for ideas. A decision was made to purchase athletic department vans for use by a number of the teams. Other uses are being considered.

Oregon administrators purchased planners for all student-athletes. The SAAC suggested purchasing laptops for use by student-athletes while traveling.

Oregon State administrators, working with the SAAC, decided to reimburse student-athletes for the cost of parking permits on campus, which was a new charge. Other uses are being considered.

Stanford had not yet determined uses of the fund. The SAAC and administrators planned to meet to generate ideas.

Washington administrators decided to recognize academic achievement by awarding 10 student-athletes per quarter $250 gift certificates. The winners were to be determined by the Academic Advising Center based on established academic categories. Washington also purchased new computers for the athletic study center, gave the SAAC $10,000 for its budget, and planned to covering foreign student-athletes' health insurance costs.

UCLA, USC and WSU SAAC representatives did not know their institutional plans for spending the SAOF money.

Vydra encouraged the group to keep talking on the their respective campuses about uses of the fund. The SAOF money will grow each year, so it is important to continue to share ideas. It is likely that more guidelines will be established after a review of the spending the first year or two.

11. Kid's College

Dawson discussed this web-based educational program that the Pac-10 has sponsored this year for elementary schools in the Pac-10's four states. This is a free program which increases educational knowledge by using computer games and collegiate sports themes. The program correlates with each state's educational standards. Dawson believed that this could be a good SAAC community service project, with student-athletes actually playing the games with the students while visiting local schools. It is a good way to promote the Pac-10 message about the importance of education. She suggested working with campus marketing department about possible ways to provide prizes (such as admission to athletic contests, t-shirts, etc) to students who achieve the various levels of the program. Institutional life skills administrators would be able to demonstrate the program to SAAC members.

The program is free for the first 10 levels as a result of the Pac-10 sponsorship. Elementary schools or classes have the option to purchase additional levels for their students. A concern was raised about the perception of using the Pac-10 name and Pac-10 student-athletes to sell a commercial product.

The Arizona SAAC has used Kids College to leverage television coverage about their student-athletes' community service. It has been a positive way to promote Arizona's student-athlete image involving education.

12. NCAA SAAC Report

Matt Cassel is the new Pac-10 NCAA SAAC representative, starting his term at the January, 2004, meeting. He has not yet attended a meeting but asked for topics that the group wished for him to bring up. The group asked that he discuss current legislative proposals pertinent to them, the satisfactory progress rule, six credit rule and the possible elimination of foreign tours.

Cassel asked the group about the one-time transfer exception, and the possibility of extending the rule to all sports. He voiced the opinion that with coaching changes happening so often, student-athletes need the opportunity to transfer. The group felt that although this might create some difficulties in recruiting and competitive equity, the positive implications outweigh the negative ones. The majority of the institutional SAAC's which had discussed it felt that every student-athlete should have one opportunity to transfer, especially with the revolving door of coaches.

It was VOTED 16-0-4 (CAL M, CAL W, OSU W,USC M abstained)

"To support application of the one-time transfer rule to apply to all sports."

13. Developing Conference Pride

One of the Pac-10 SWAC objectives for 2003-04 was how to develop greater Conference pride among student-athletes. The group suggested increasing the number of Conference championships to increase parity among student-athletes, playing down traditional rivalries, more visible Pac-10 logos on uniforms and athletic venues, better commercials, greater availability of Pac-10-logoed merchandise in campus stores and at events; and organization of a Conference-wide community service project.

14. Subcommittee Reports

The Community Service subcommittee reported on ways to improve implementation of community service activities on campus. Opalka gave suggestions as follows:

1) make sure to get the information to those who were interested ;

2) provide student-athletes with an application form with contact information;

3) set up a list serve of upcoming events with monthly or weekly notices so that student-athletes can plan ahead;

4) provide transportation to and from the events (very important);

5) having a variety of types, days, length, and location of events; and

6) place a link on the intercollegiate athletics home page with a listing of past and current events and photos.

Opalka noted that at Arizona, there was a staff member who worked directly with students on community service projects, which helped improve the response rate. Other institutions without that level of staffing would need to identify individuals to carry out the suggestions.

Dawson noted that many other conference SAAC's performed a community service activity at their meetings. She asked the group if they wished to consider doing such an activity.

It was VOTED 17-0-0-3 (CAL M, CAL W, STAN W absent)

"To recommended that the Pac-10 SAAC perform a community service project at its November meeting."

In order to have sufficient time for SAAC business as well as the community service project, the group suggested starting the fall SAAC meeting on Friday night, rather than Saturday afternoon. Depending on what it was, the community service could be either Friday night or Saturday morning. Dawson explained that the current budget would not cover expenses for an additional day. However, an increase would be requested from the Pac-10 Budget Committee in the spring of 2004.

Suggested projects included visits with elementary schools or boys' and girls' clubs, park clean ups, serving meals at shelters, and working at food banks. The Conference staff was to research possible venues and discuss it with the subcommittee before the next meeting.

Bruce and Seaman suggested the Pac-10 SAAC sponsor a Speakers Bureau, which would provide student-athletes with training for public speaking engagements. It was envisioned as a packaged program which each institution could provide for its student-athletes, possibly by having a weekend seminar on each campus, or integrating it into existing life skills classes on campus.

It was VOTED 16-0-1-3 (ASU W abstained, CAL M, CAL W, STAN W absent)

"To recommend that the Pac-10 SAAC adopt a "Speakers' Bureau" community service project."

Other Pac-10 SAAC subcommittees had not met, and thus had no reports.

15. Future Meetings

The spring SAAC meeting was scheduled for April 9-10, 2004. The Student-Athlete Forum was scheduled for April 10-11, 2004. Both were to be at the SFO Westin.

16. Administrative Fellowship Position

Johnson advised that the Administrative Fellowship will be available in the spring of 2004, for a term which began in August, 2004. The Fellowship is a stepping stone for someone who wishes to gain experience in athletic administration. Applications were to be sent to institutional administrators and would be due in April. Anyone who was interested was to contact Johnson directly with more questions.

Johnson displayed the sterling silver key chain which was to be given to members of 2003-04 Pac-10 champion teams, noting that the staff had acted on the SAAC suggestion from the previous year. Suggestions for subsequent Pac-10 champion mementos included desk clocks, pen sets and necklaces with a Pac-10 medallion.

17. Commissioner's Remarks

Hansen thanked the student-athletes for attending the Pac-10 SAAC meeting. He envisioned that the SAAC would be the voice of the student athletes to the Conference and campus administrators. He reminded the student-athletes that they were part of an elite conference, and urged them to take pride in this. 18. Selection of NCAA Student-Athlete Representative

Dawson explained the process for Pac-10 nominations and appointments to NCAA committees, including the NCAA SAAC. The Pac-10 always has a representative on the NCAA SAAC, who serves a term of two years. The Conference is required to nominate three individuals to the NCAA, and the the NCAA selects from among those three, balancing ethnic and sport diversity in the final group.

Now that the Pac-10 SAAC has been established, it seemed appropriate that it have input into the selection of the NCAA representative. It was thought that nominees who had service on the institutional and/or Pac-10 SAAC's would be better able to represent the Conference Pac-10 SAAC representatives did not favor making individual recommendations to the Pac-10 Selection Committee, but wished to have information about vacancies on a timely basis so that they could help identify the best possible candidates on their respective campuses.

The Conference office agreed to notify Pac-10 SAAC members and institutional SAAC advisors when nominations for the NCAA SAAC were being solicited, so that institutional SAAC's could provide input to their Council members who made nominations.

It was VOTED 15-0-5 (CAL M, CAL W, ORE M, ORE W STAN W absent)

"To recommend to the Pac-10 Selection Committee that participation on the Pac-10 and/or institutional SAAC's be a strong criterion when making recommendations for NCAA SAAC appointments."

19. Intra-Conference Transfer Rule

In light of the SB 193 discussion about application of the one-time transfer exception to all sports, the SAAC desired to examine the Pac-10 intra-conference transfer rule, which was more stringent than the NCAA rules. After a brief discussion of the current rule and the existing waivers, the group asked to table the discussion until the April agenda.

The meeting was adjourned at 2:20 p.m.

caj/cd

11/21/03

---