ATLANTA − The Division I Legislative Council approved one part of a plan aimed at cleaning up the recruiting environment in men’s basketball and will seek feedback from the membership on several companion proposals.

The Council approved 2009-99, which would prohibit institutions from hiring people associated with prospects for noncoaching positions during a period two years before and two years after the prospect’s enrollment at an institution. It will be considered adopted at the conclusion of the Board meeting Saturday.

In essence, the proposal allows coaches either to recruit the prospective student-athlete or recruit the coach, but not both.

The measure was part of a package of proposals sponsored by the Board of Directors and supported by the Basketball Focus Group, the Conference Commissioners’ Association, the National Association of Basketball Coaches and the NCAA enforcement staff. The package is intended to address escalating instances of money being funneled to people associated with prospective student-athletes and is the result of a year-long study of the recruiting environment by the Basketball Focus Group.

The Council will seek feedback on other portions of the package, including:

• Proposal No. 2009-100, prohibiting an institution from holding nonscholastic basketball events on campus or in regularly used facilities.
• Proposal No. 2009-101, allowing men’s basketball coaches to recruit during an institution’s camp or  clinic
• Proposal No. 2009-102, prohibiting institutions from hiring anyone other than enrolled students or institutional staff members for camps and clinics

The Council also approved one proposal that originated from the Basketball Academic Enhancement Group: Proposal No. 2009-96, which limits the number of physical education credits that junior college transfer students in the sport will count for eligibility purposes. The Council members believed that the proposal would better prepare two-year college transfer students for academic success at four-year institutions. Other portions of that package were also sent for comment.

The Council separated 2009-98 into four portions for voting purposes, and each part was sent out for comment.

The four parts would:

• Require an institution’s faculty athletics representative to review and approve the men’s basketball athletics participation schedule, with an eye toward academic implications for student-athletes in the sport. While many institutions have similar requirements already, some members expressed concern about legal implications and timing issues.
• Require teams to return to campus within 24 hours of the conclusion of a contest (current rules allow teams to stay away for 48 hours).
• Create a staggered-start practice schedule aimed at easing men’s basketball student-athletes into full athletics participation. The proposal would allow minimal practice two weeks earlier than current rules, ramping up to the current rules by October 15.
• Eliminate a contest. A companion proposal in women’s basketball (2009-78) was also sent out for comment.