Controversy has sprung up among Californian university administrators and student athletes over a bill proposed in the state Legislature to improve conditions for collegiate competitors.

Although not slated for a final vote until January, the California state senate approved the bill, dubbed the Student Athletes’ Bill of Rights, in May.

The bill was co-sponsored by Sen. Kevin Murray, D-Culver City, and Sen. John Burton, D-San Francisco. It would alter the current NCAA regulations, which college athletes must abide by to maintain playing eligibility.

According to Michael Mistretta, legislative aid for Burton, the initiative will aim to improve some of these policies, such as voluntary-involuntary practice sessions, health insurance benefits, guaranteed four-year scholarships and marketing opportunities, among others.

“The end-all, be-all is ‘let’s improve conditions for these athletes.’ Any other student at any time could talk to a representative [from a professional organization], accept offers and leave school,” Mistretta said, using musicians and computer specialists as examples. “These are the conditions we want met.”

Mistretta said Burton decided to push for this bill when two former University of California-Los Angeles football players, Ramogi Huma and Ryan Roques, approached him and discussed how slow the NCAA was to consider their requests on the matter. Both former football players formed the Collegiate Athletes Coalition more than two years ago, which works to boost standards for student athletes.

If the bill were to pass, California universities would be rendered ineligible by the NCAA, a notion that has outraged the NCAA and many universities and could also possibly cost the university system about $40 million. Mistretta, however, assures that “we’re not trying to make these kids get paid,” adding that the bill’s goal is not to force schools out of the NCAA.

Although Stanford University, which would fall under the bill’s influence, has an efficient checks and balances system for its athletes, the president of the Associated Students of Stanford University, Madiya Figueroa, feels that the proposal is a positive step forward for the college athletic world.

But Stanford senior Sam Fuld, who plays on the baseball team, is skeptical of the bill’s far-reaching goals. While he does recognize that some NCAA policies may need adjusting, he thinks Burton’s ideas could potentially be harmful.

In an area where the standard of living is quite high, Burton pointed to the restriction on receiving outside donations or gifts, an NCAA regulation, as an example of the fixed rules he and his peers must abide by.

“Depending on your background, it can be a challenge to get by. The intentions are in the right place, ” he said, “But I’m definitely against it as a whole.”

Although Fuld does not think the bill will pass, he said that there could be negative ripple effects if, by some chance, it did. If this happened, Fuld said he was not sure what would happen to the California college athletic world, saying that all universities within the state would possibly have to compete solely against each other.

“It’d be pretty bad. There’s only so many schools in California,” he said. “It’d be a big mess.”

Fuld and other campus community members are taking active measures to ensure that the situation does not get that far. He and fellow members of the Cardinal Council are working to get petitions against the bill from varsity athletes, a move he believes will open up Burton’s eyes.

“As a community, we’re all against it,” he said, adding that he feels privileged to be a college athlete. “I don’t feel like I’m being exploited, personally.”

Although the bill will not fall under review until January, Mistretta said others have started to step forward with similar initiatives, such as University of Colorado football player Jeremy Bloom and the states of Iowa and Nebraska.

“It might actually start a trend. It would be a tough situation for us but could be beneficial in the long run,” Fuld said, saying that California would serve as the “guinea pig” for the changes in such circumstances.