State’s Voters Face Longest List of Issues in 66 Years : Nov. 8 Ballot to Carry Maze of 29 Propositions

California voters on Nov. 8 will be confronted by the longest list of ballot propositions in 66 years--a complex maze of at least 29 measures, Secretary of State March Fong Eu announced on Wednesday.

The ballot measures will include five initiatives that backers say would reduce escalating automobile insurance rates, $3.3 billion in bonds for various capital outlay projects and a 25-cent-per-pack cigarette tax increase. The money would be used for a variety of purposes including health education and health care.

Also on the statewide ballot will be a measure to restore state funds for a worker-safety inspection program, two AIDS-related propositions and a proposal to give the governor authority to revoke the parole of convicted murderers.

Among the 29 propositions to be decided in the November general election are 12 initiatives, which are placed on the ballot after supporters submit petitions bearing the required number of signatures of registered voters.

As the ballot stands now, it will be the third longest in state history and the biggest since 1922, when there were 30 propositions, including 11 initiatives. The longest ballot in state history was in 1914, when voters were asked to act on 48 propositions, including 17 initiatives.

The initiative process was set in motion by voters in 1911 under reform-minded Gov. Hiram Johnson.

Two Others Possible

Still floating around the Legislature with a chance to make the November ballot after the lawmakers’ July recess are a proposed $100-million toxic clean-up bond issue and two measures aimed at boosting the state gasoline tax to help pay for highway improvements and maintenance.

The huge number and diversity of ballot measures reflect, in large part, the Legislature’s seeming paralysis in dealing with complex issues that affect not only many millions of people but powerful special-interest groups. These interest groups, in effect, have battled each other to a stalemate in the Legislature.

That is particularly true this year in the case of the five insurance initiatives. Although each is billed as an answer to the problem of obtaining fairly priced coverage, their sponsors also see the measures as ways of bludgeoning their political enemies.

The insurance industry, for example, is backing two measures that would establish a no-fault system and reduce attorney contingency fees. Meanwhile, groups allied more closely to trial lawyers are sponsoring initiatives to lower insurance rates and step up regulation of the insurance industry.

All of these measures have been before the Legislature in one form or another but died because of strong opposition by these same rival interests.

Often Powerless

Legislative leaders have acknowledged in recent years that they are often powerless to reach a consensus in the absence of agreement by these industry groups.

A rare exception to the stalemate occurred last year when the trial lawyers, insurers and physician representatives agreed in a private meeting to revamp the state’s complex civil liability system. Although similar legislative efforts had died year after year, lawmakers on the last night of the legislative session approved the private agreement without making any changes.

More often, however, these special-interest groups are unable to reach a consensus and see the initiative process as a means of bypassing the Legislature.

Assembly Speaker Willie Brown (D-San Francisco), frustrated with the turn of events, is actively seeking modifications of the initiative process, including banning paid signature gatherers, and requiring additional signatures to qualify measures and higher percentages of votes to pass them.

The initiative process has become “an opportunity for special-interest groups to manipulate public opinion,” Brown said.

‘We’re All Frustrated’

Other lawmakers said the growth in the number of initiatives shows that the public lacks faith in its elected leaders.

“We’re all frustrated because we think the legislative process has stagnated,” Assemblyman Rusty Areias (D-Los Banos), one of five Assembly Democrats who have been challenging Brown’s leadership, said recently. “We don’t think it’s responding to critical areas like affordable insurance, access to health care and many others. That’s why there are so many initiatives on the ballot.”

The five automobile insurance measures will be:

- Proposition 100 to require a 20% minimum reduction in good-driver rates unless companies can prove that they are financially unable to provide the reductions. The measure is sponsored by the California Trial Lawyers Assn. and state Atty. Gen. John K. Van de Kamp.

- Proposition 101 to reduce auto insurance premiums for bodily injury liability coverage and impose other rate-cutting practices. Assemblyman Richard Polanco (D-Los Angeles) and Harry Miller, chief of Coastal Insurance Co., are the chief proponents.

- Proposition 103 to mandate 20% rate rollbacks, and require that the state insurance commissioner be elected instead of appointed by the governor. It is backed by a consumer group called Access to Justice and has been endorsed by consumer activist Ralph Nader.

- Proposition 104 to set up a no-fault automobile insurance system, reduce rates by an average of 7% to 17% for two years, limit damage awards against insurers and curb future rate-regulation legislation. It is sponsored by the automobile insurance industry.

- Proposition 106 to impose strict limits on attorney contingency fees. Fees would be limited to 25% of the first $50,000 recovered, 15% of the next $50,000 and 10% of any amount in excess of $100,000. It also is backed by the insurance industry.

The 25-cents-per-pack increase in the cigarette tax for treatment, research and education on tobacco-related diseases would be imposed under terms of Proposition 99, an initiative sponsored by a coalition of health groups, including the American Lung Assn. and the American Cancer Society.

$3.3 Billion in Bonds

All of the $3.3 billion in bond issue measures were placed on the ballot by the Legislature. These include $600 million for higher education facilities, $800 million for elementary and high school facilities, $817 million for prisons, $300 million for housing for the homeless and $75 million for domestic water systems.

Proposition 97, another initiative, calls for the restoration of state financing for the state’s occupational safety and health agency, known as Cal/OSHA. Sponsored by the California Labor Federation, it was prompted by Gov. George Deukmejian’s veto of Cal/OSHA funding. The program was turned over to the federal government.

One AIDS-related initiative, Proposition 96, sponsored by Los Angeles County Sheriff Sherman Block, would require persons charged with certain sex offenses or assaults on peace officers, firefighters or emergency personnel to provide blood specimens for testing for AIDS.

The second AIDS initiative, Proposition 102, would require doctors, blood banks and others to report to local health officers the names of any patients or blood donors who they believe have been exposed to AIDS or who have tested positive for the disease. The measure is sponsored by Rep. William E. Dannemeyer (R-Fullerton).

Proposition 89 would permit the governor to block the parole of convicted murderers. It was placed on the ballot by the Legislature following a five-year fight that started with a public outcry over the parole of convicted murderer-rapist Archie Fain of Oakdale in 1983.

THE BULGING BALLOT

This is the list of 29 state propositions that will appear on the Nov. 8 general election ballot:

Proposition 78--A $600-million bond issue for construction at the University of California, the state universities and community colleges.

Proposition 79--An $800-million bond issue for acquisition and construction of elementary and high school facilities.

Proposition 80--An $817-million bond issue for acquisition, construction and renovation of state adult and youth corrections facilities.

Proposition 81--A $75-million bond issue for construction, improvement or rehabilitation of domestic water systems.

Proposition 82--A $60-million bond issue for local water projects, water conservation programs and ground-water recharge facilities.

Proposition 83--A $65-million bond issue for water pollution control and water reclamation programs.

Proposition 84--A $300-million bond issue to finance housing for the homeless.

Proposition 85--A $75-million bond issue for improved public library facilities.

Proposition 86--A $500-million bond issue for construction of county jails and juvenile detention facilities.

Proposition 87--Would close a constitutional loophole that allows redevelopment agencies to receive a portion of property taxes levied by other local agencies to pay off bonds.

Proposition 88--Would authorize deposit of public monies in any federally insured industrial loan company in California.

Proposition 89--Would give the governor the power to block the parole of convicted murderers.

Proposition 90--Would allow people over 55 years of age to transfer their low Proposition 13 property assessment to a new home in another county if that county agrees.

Proposition 91--Would require that Justice Court nominees be members of the California State Bar or judges of a lower trial court for five years.

Proposition 92--Would stagger the terms of members of the Commission on Judicial Performance.

Proposition 93--Would eliminate the state residency requirement for veterans to receive the $1,000 property tax exemption.

Proposition 94--Would authorize judges to accept a part-time teaching position outside normal hours, but would prohibit their earning retirement service benefits from that position.

Proposition 95--Would create a public corporation to disburse funds to counties, other local jurisdictions and nonprofit organizations to provide emergency services for the hungry and homeless and to provide low-income housing.

Proposition 96--Would require people charged with certain sex offenses or assaults on peace officers, firemen or emergency personnel to provide blood specimens for AIDS testing.

Proposition 97--Would restore vetoed state funds for the state’s worker safety inspection program.

Proposition 98--Would establish a minimum level of state funding for school districts.

Proposition 99--Would increase the state tax on tobacco products to fund educational and medical research programs and to assist with medical expenses of people suffering from tobacco-related diseases.

Proposition 100--Would require a 20% reduction in good-driver automobile insurance rates from rates in effect last Jan. 1 unless companies could prove they can’t afford them.

Proposition 101--Would reduce auto insurance premiums for bodily injury liability coverage and impose other rate-cutting practices.

Proposition 102--Would require doctors and blood banks to report to local health officials the names of patients who they believe have been exposed to AIDS or who have tested positive for it.

Proposition 103--Would mandate 20% auto insurance rate rollbacks and provide for an elected instead of an appointed state insurance commissioner.

Proposition 104--Would set up a no-fault auto insurance system, reduce rates and curb future rate regulation legislation.

Proposition 105--Would, among other things, require advertisers’ warnings regarding the proper use and disposal of toxic household products.

Proposition 106--Would impose strict limits on attorney contingency fees in court cases.