Steps and Guidelines for Changing UCLA

Bylaws, Regulations, and Appendices

Prepared by

Committee on Rules and Jurisdiction, UCLA

May 26, 1999

OVERVIEW

Any agency of the Los Angeles Division of the Academic Senate (e.g., the Executive Board, a Senate standing or special committee, a College, a School, a Department or Faculty) can propose changes to Divisional legislation. In this guide, the unit that generates a legislative change proposal is referred to as the originating body. The originating body is responsible for taking proposals through each step of the change process, which is described in detail below.

Divisional legislation includes Bylaws and Regulations and related Appendices (see, e.g., Statewide Bylaw 5 and University Committee on Rules and Jurisdiction Legislative Ruling 12.93A). For example, Divisional Bylaws 160 through 184 and the corresponding sections of Appendix II govern the membership and operations of the Faculties of different Schools and Colleges. Similarly, Divisional Bylaw 65.1 and Appendix XIII together describe the responsibilities and procedures of the Undergraduate Council. Some Appendices pertain to a specific Senate body, such as the Council on Planning and Budget or the Graduate Council; others are broader in scope and govern more general Senate activities, such as academic program reviews (Appendix XVI) or faculty conduct (Appendix XII). Originating bodies should consider the effect of their proposals across all the relevant Bylaws, Regulations and Appendices.

Los Angeles Division Bylaw 100(B)(3) states that the Division’s Committee on Rules and Jurisdiction (CR&J) is responsible for reviewing proposed legislative changes for consonance and conformity with other Divisional and Statewide legislation. CR&J is also responsible for making non-substantive editorial and conforming changes in Divisional legislation on an as-needed basis.

CR&J has prepared the following step-by-step directions for preparing legislative change proposals and submitting them to the appropriate bodies for review, recommendations, revision, and approval. The steps to be taken depend on the type of legislation being proposed; all of the steps are summarized in a check list and flow chart at the end of this guide. The steps differ somewhat for Bylaw/Appendix vs. Regulation changes, but in general legislative changes must be reviewed by the Faculty affected and other appropriate Senate agencies prior to being brought before the Legislative Assembly (LGA) for final adoption.

For your information, we have provided references throughout the text to the relevant Divisional documents that govern these procedures. Please feel free to contact CR&J’s coordinator, Ms. Judy Nawa (nawa@senate.ucla.edu or phone 6-2469) if you have any questions or need guidance about any part of this process.

Step 1: Proposal Contents and Presentation

To speed the review and approval process, originating bodies should provide as much information about the proposed changes as possible. All legislative change proposals must contain:

a) The existing text of the legislation that will be repealed or modified (i.e., the currently effective legislation in the Division Academic Senate Manual, which is available in Departments, Schools, Colleges, from the Senate Office, or online at http://www.senate.ucla.edu);

b) A statement of the purpose and effect of the proposal, i.e., its rationale and justification;

c) The exact text of the new legislation to be adopted;

d) The results of the Faculty vote on the proposal, if appropriate; and

e) A timeline for implementing the change.

[see Los Angeles Division Bylaw 120(D)]

The text of the existing and proposed legislation must be presented with strike-throughs of the language to be replaced or deleted and shading of the new language in the proposed text, to make the changes easy to see.

Step 2: Preliminary CR&J Review (OPTIONAL)

In any legislative change process, but especially in cases where a proposed legislative change must be voted on by the affected faculty (such as curricular changes), the originating body may submit the draft proposal to CR&J before the faculty vote or other reviews to obtain preliminary advice about the proposal’s language and conformance with Divisional and Statewide legislation. This step is not a final ruling, nor can it substitute for CR&J's formal ruling on the proposal later in the process.

CR&J recommends this step so that potential problems can be identified and changes made to the proposal before the Faculty vote or other bodies review the proposal. After making its preliminary recommendations, CR&J returns the proposal to the originating body so that they can make the recommended changes before proceeding with subsequent steps.

The rest of the steps to be taken depend on whether the proposal applies to Regulations (curricular matters), or Bylaws and Appendices. Regulation changes are discussed first.

CHANGES TO DIVISIONAL REGULATIONS

(Curricular Matters)

Step 3: Faculty Vote

According to Divisional Bylaw 115(B), regulations govern the implementation of curriculum-related matters, such as admission and degree requirements and the authorization and supervision of courses and curricula. Divisional Bylaw 10(B) says that “No change in the curriculum of a college or school at Los Angeles may be made by the Legislative Assembly until the matter has been formally considered by the Faculty concerned.” Therefore, any legislative change proposal that deals with curriculum-related matters must include the exact wording of the existing and proposed regulation, formatted as in Step 1, and must be approved by the Faculty of the affected College, School or Department. A simple majority vote of the affected Faculty is needed to approve the proposal.

Step 4: Council Review

After the Faculty vote, the originating body must submit the proposal for review to the Undergraduate Council (UgC) if it involves undergraduate curriculum, or to the Graduate Council (GC) if it involves graduate curriculum. The Faculty vote should be reported to the respective Council along with the proposal.

Step 5: Formal CR&J Review

The respective Council receiving the proposal forwards it to CR&J for a formal review. CR&J recommends changes as necessary to correct problems with language or consonance with Divisional or Statewide code, and returns its recommendations to the respective Council with the proposal. The Council then returns the proposal to the originating body with CR&J’s recommendations for revision and the Council's comments and suggestions. Once the revisions are made, the originating body resubmits the revised proposal for another round of review through the respective Council and CR&J; the process is repeated until all outstanding issues have been properly addressed and CR&J rules that the proposal conforms with Divisional and Statewide legislation.

Once CR&J issues its ruling, the respective Council can consider and vote on its substantive merits.

Step 6: Senate Executive Board Review

After the proposal is considered and approved by a vote of either the UgC or GC, the respective Council forwards it to the Division Academic Senate Executive Board for its review and comment. The Executive Board may return comments or suggest changes in the proposal to the originating body and the respective Council before including the proposal in the Notice of Meeting (agenda) for consideration during a meeting of the Legislative Assembly.

If the measure is considered routine or unlikely to raise questions, the Executive Board may elect to place it on the agenda's Consent Calendar. Otherwise, the measure goes into the regular agenda, typically as New Business (see Step 7.).

Step 7: Legislative Assembly Vote

A representative of the originating body attends the LGA meeting to present a brief oral summary of the proposal and to answer any questions about the measure from LGA members if it is included in the regular agenda.

All items appearing on the Consent Calendar are ordinarily adopted with a single majority vote without discussion at the start of the meeting. However, any Senate member attending the meeting may request to have any item in the Consent Calendar moved to the regular agenda in order to discuss and vote on it separately. Therefore, even if a proposal appears on the Consent Calendar a representative of the originating body should attend the meeting to respond to questions in case members wish to consider the measure separately.

According to Divisional Bylaw 120(C), changes to Divisional Regulations require a simple majority of the voting members present at a meeting of the Legislative Assembly, or a simple majority of those voting if the measure is submitted to a mail ballot. The new legislation becomes effective 10 instructional days after it is reported in the Legislative Assembly minutes, or (when approved by a mail ballot) on a later date specified in the legislation [see Divisional Bylaw 120(E) and Divisional Bylaw 155].

CHANGES TO DIVISIONAL BYLAWS AND APPENDICES

Step 3: Single Unit (Faculty Vote) vs. Faculty-Wide Impact

According to Divisional Bylaw 115(A), bylaws “define the source of authority, membership, powers, duties, and organization of the Academic Senate, the Division and its various agencies.” Generally, Bylaws and Appendices govern the functions and activities of Senate agencies, except those related to curriculum. Changes to Bylaws and related Appendices that directly affect a particular College, School or Department must include the exact wording of the existing and proposed Bylaw and/or Appendix, formatted as in Step 1, and must be approved by the Faculty involved. A majority vote of the affected Faculty is needed to approve the proposal before the originating body can send it on to the Executive Board.

Bylaw changes that affect the Senate as a whole are submitted directly from the originating body to the Senate Executive Board for review.

Step 4: Senate Executive Board Review

The originating body must submit either type of proposal (whole-campus or single-unit) to the Executive Board for review. The result of the Faculty vote (for single-unit proposals) should be reported to the Executive Board along with the proposal.

Step 5: Formal CR&J Review

The Executive Board forwards the proposal to CR&J for a formal review. CR&J recommends changes as necessary to correct problems with language or consonance with Divisional or Statewide code, and returns the proposal with its recommendations to the Executive Board. The Board then returns the proposal to the originating body with CR&J’s recommendations for revision and the Executive Board's comments and suggestions. Once the revisions are made, the originating body resubmits the revised proposal for another round of review through the Executive Board and CR&J; the process is repeated until all outstanding issues have been properly addressed and CR&J rules that the proposal conforms with Divisional and Statewide legislation.

Once CR&J issues its ruling, the Executive Board considers the substance and potential consequences of the proposal and may return comments to or request changes by the originating body before including the proposal in the Notice of Meeting (agenda) for consideration during a meeting of the Legislative Assembly.

If the measure is considered routine or unlikely to raise questions, the Executive Board may elect to place it on the agenda's Consent Calendar. Otherwise, the measure goes into the regular agenda, typically as New Business (see Step 6.).

Step 6: Legislative Assembly Vote

A representative of the originating body attends the Legislative Assembly meeting to present a brief oral summary of the proposal and to answer any questions about the measure from LGA members if it is included in the regular agenda.

All items appearing on the Consent Calendar are ordinarily adopted with a single majority vote without discussion at the start of the meeting. However, any Senate member attending the meeting may request to have any item in the Consent Calendar moved to the regular agenda in order to discuss and vote on it separately. Therefore, even if a proposal appears on the Consent Calendar a representative of the originating body should attend the meeting to respond to questions in case members wish to consider the measure separately.

Changes to Divisional Bylaws and related Appendices require a two-thirds affirmative vote of the voting members present at a meeting of the Legislative Assembly, or two-thirds of those voting if the measure is submitted to a mail ballot [Divisional Bylaw 120(C)]. The new legislation becomes effective 10 instructional days after it is reported in the LGA minutes, or (when approved by a mail ballot) on a later date specified in the legislation [see Divisional Bylaw 120(E) and Divisional Bylaw 155].

CONCLUSION

We hope these guidelines are helpful. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact CR&J by calling Ms. Judy Nawa or the Senate Office. We are available to help all the steps in proposing and revising legislation go as smoothly as possible.

COMMITTEE ON RULES AND JURISDICTION, 1998-1999

Prof. Leah A. Lievrouw, Chair

Prof. Alfreda Iglehart

Prof. Kathryn Morgan

Checklist for Changing

UCLA Bylaws, Regulations and Appendices

STEP 1.

Originating body prepares the legislative change proposal

STEP 2. (OPTIONAL)

Originating body submits proposal to Committee on Rules and Jurisdiction for a preliminary review

For Bylaws/Appendices:

STEP 3. Single-Unit vs. Faculty-Wide Effect

• Changes affecting single units must be approved by simple majority vote of affected faculty before going to the Executive Board

• Change proposals affecting the entire Senate go directly to Executive Board

STEP 4. Executive Board Review

• Originating body submits proposal (with the result of the vote if required) to Executive Board

STEP 5. Formal CR&J Review

• Executive Board forwards proposal to CR&J

• CR&J suggests changes as needed or rules on conformance

• CR&J returns recommendations and/or ruling to the Executive Board

• Executive Board considers substance and consequences of proposal; returns its recommendations, with CR&J recommendations and/or ruling, to originating body

• Executive Board places proposal on the Legislative Assembly agenda (Consent Calendar or regular agenda)

STEP 6. LGA Vote

• Representative of originating body is available to present the proposal and take questions

• Measure requires 2/3 majority vote for adoption

For Regulations (Curricular Matters):

STEP 3. Faculty Vote on Proposal

• Simple majority vote of affected faculty required to approve

STEP 4. Council Review

• Originating body submits proposal and result of vote to UgC or GC as appropriate

STEP 5. Formal CR&J Review

• Council forwards proposal to CR&J

• CR&J recommends changes as needed or rules on conformance

• CR&J returns recommendations and/or ruling to Council

STEP 6. Executive Board Review

• Council forwards its recommendations, with CR&J recommendations and/or ruling, to the Executive Board with the proposal

• Executive Board considers substance and consequences of proposal, may make suggestions to respective Council or originating body

• Executive Board places proposal on Legislative Assembly agenda (Consent Calendar or regular agenda)

STEP 7. LGA Vote

• Representative of originating body is available to present the proposal and take questions

• Measure requires simple majority vote for adoption