Arizona universities are a step away from taking a huge leap into the future of collegiate athletics: Paying student athletes in hopes of attracting better prospects. Legislation awaiting a final House vote would expand upon an existing 2021 law which allowed student athletes to earn money from the use of their names, images and likenesses in commercials and other promotions. If approved, Senate Bill 1516 would expand that law to allow universities to provide cash distributions to athletes to promote the schools. If passed, however, those students wouldn’t be considered employees. SB1516 was prompted by an anticipated ruling by a federal judge in California to settle litigation filed against the NCAA which had for years blocked any compensation for student athletes. The door opened a bit when the agency that regulates intercollegiate athletics first allowed students to negotiate deals with businesses, such as promoting a car dealership or appearing in a video game. SB1516 is designed to let the University of Arizona, Arizona State University, Northern Arizona University and the privately owned nonprofit Grand Canyon University to take advantage of the terms. And we're not talking nickels and dimes here: The NCAA settlement would let each school spend up to $20.5 million in what essentially would be salaries for student athletes. Of note, though, is that the number is fixed for each university, regardless of its size or the number of academic programs. So the U of A, for example, with a full spectrum of sports — including intercollegiate football — would get to spend no more on all student athletes for use of their name, image and likeness than GCU, which doesn't have a football team, and may emphasize payments to its basketball players. The legislation, sponsored by Sen. T.J. Shope, R- Coolidge, is designed to limit where the schools can get that cash. Shope included a specific provision barring the use of student fees to pay for such distributions. But Shope did agree to give the universities a new way to find the money: Raffles. Mike Haener, a lobbyist for Arizona State University, told lawmakers that could work through a 50-50 raffle, selling chances to those going to games, with participants hoping to win. That could raise some serious bucks. For example, if 10,000 people at a football game each bought $10 worth of tickets, that's $100,000. Then whoever has the winning number that game walks away with $50,000, with the balance going to the university to pay the athletes. Still, that's a hard way of getting to $20.5 million. The legislation, however, does not limit this to 50-50 raffles. Schools could raffle off something more valuable — perhaps a car — with each ticket costing much more and the potential for a larger net haul for the university. At least part of the motivation for the legislation is the fear that other schools in other states are already preparing to use similar legislation to pay their student athletes once the NCAA deal is approved. Judge Claudia Wilken said she has asked for some final tweaks, but final approval could come within weeks. Without legislation here, Jason Corriher, a spokesman for University of Arizona athletics, said that Arizona schools could be at a disadvantage. "Currently, Arizona is behind the ball compared to other states with competitive athletic programs,'' he said. "This bill will create the necessary structures to ensure that our universities are able to compete nationally when recruiting students to come to Arizona.'' That's also the assessment of Rep. Matt Gress, R-Phoenix, who agreed that the original NIL law needs to be updated. "We have exceptional college athletic programs in Arizona,'' Gress said. "We need to ensure that they can recruit the very best athletes and win.'' The legislation is probably not necessary to allow universities here to start paying students directly. Once the federal judge approves the settlement with the NCAA, that should occur automatically. But Jamie Boggs, vice president of athletics at Grand Canyon University, said it's important to have all this already on the books in Arizona once the judge issues her final ruling. And that comes back to ensuring that universities here aren't left behind competitors for students elsewhere. "If there were going to be states that were already going to put these proposals into place, we definitely didn't want to be at a disadvantage,'' she said. Boggs, anticipating final approval of the deal, said the legislation was crafted so it would take effect immediately on the signature of Gov. Katie Hobbs, putting Arizona "in a good spot.'' It starts with specifically incorporating the direct payment language into state statutes so there's no question that anything anyone does here in line with the NCAA settlement will run afoul of Arizona law. But there are provisions in SB1615 that go beyond that agreement. Most notably, the permission for the universities that want to conduct raffles to help pay those student athletes. Under the current criminal code, certain nonprofit organizations can operate raffles. However, this is legal only if the proceeds — beyond what is paid out to winners — go to a nonprofit organization like the ASU Foundation, which raises money for various university-related causes. SB1615 strips that away specifically for raffles run for the purpose of compensating student athletes who allow a university to use their name, image or likeness to promote the school or its programs. Unlike existing laws governing raffles, there would be no cap of $10,000 a year in this legislation. Not all lawmakers are enthusiastic about putting even more money into the system. "It's supposed to be an amateur sport,'' complained Rep. Lisa Fink, R-Glendale. She voted against the plan when it came before the House Education Committee last month. Rep. James Taylor, R-Litchfield Park, acknowledged what Fink was saying. "I also miss the days when amateur sports were amateur,'' Taylor said. "But those days are gone,'' he said while voting for the bill when it was approved by the committee. "The bus has left the bus barn.'' Others in support of the measure had their own take on the legislation. "Opportunities like these with NIL really allows students to be able to compete and go to places where they're able to make a living, quite frankly, and support their fellow players and the sport overall,'' said Rep. Brian Garcia, D-Tempe. "A lot of these players take it very seriously,'' he said while praising "the professionalism that goes into various aspects of whichever collegiate sport that they go into.'' But there's more to the legislation than clearing the way for Arizona universities to raise money and start directly paying student athletes. One spells out that athletes who get money directly from a university are not considered employees. Boggs said such a status would complicate relationships between the schools and their students. And then there are some new regulations that govern not just the direct payments to student athletes but also the deals that they can make with outside interests. "It puts in place some prohibitions about what kinds of contracts a student athlete cannot go into, making sure they do not go into a contract with a marijuana dispensary or alcohol company,'' said Sabrina Vazquez who lobbies for the U of A. There also are protections against the NCAA from preventing a student athlete from fully participating in an intercollegiate program because that person is earning money for the use of name, image or likeness. And there's verbiage barring NCAA from preventing universities from providing compensation. What is not in the legislation is the $20.5 million cap. That's in the settlement which SB1615 is designed to effectuate. Of note, there's even a provision to police that cap, with a note that every deal worth $600 or more would have to be approved by a clearinghouse, a move designed to ensure an NIL arrangement is not being used to exceed the cap. All of this comes back to the fact that each university gets the same cap on direct payments, regardless of size. Still, nothing in the NCAA deal limits the amount an individual student athlete can make with direct deals. More importantly, it allows schools to help. "The bill allows the university to partner with a third-party entity that is dedicated to secure deals beyond the university's brand, creating more NIL opportunities for students,'' said the U of A's Corriher, something he said is also part of the NCAA deal.