Deukmejian’s Good Year Won’t Likely Be Repeated : Governor: He hasn’t usually been one to confront California’s problems boldly, and as a lame duck his opportunities will diminish.

George Deukmejian had his best year as governor in 1989. He’ll find the going much tougher in 1990, his last year in office. Ironically, much of last year’s success and the difficulties he faces this year stem from the same source--his status as a lame duck.

A year ago this month, the governor disclosed that he would not seek a third term in 1990. Partly, he made this unusually early announcement to help his fellow Republicans unite quickly behind a strong candidate in an especially important gubernatorial election. If the Republicans can retain the governor’s office next November, they’ll be in a position in 1991 to block a Democratic-controlled Legislature from once again gerrymandering legislative and congressional election districts to the disadvantage of the GOP.

But Deukmejian also had another and less partisan motive for disclosing his retirement plans so early. He correctly reasoned that he would be able to work better with Democratic lawmakers in 1989 if they knew that they would not have to turn around and oppose his reelection the following year. They had nothing to lose by helping him build a better record of accomplishment last year.

As a result, more was achieved in the legislative session than in any of the others in the previous six years of the Deukmejian Administration. The lawmakers and the governor agreed on a compromise to relax the straitjacket imposed on state and local government by the Gann spending limit enacted by an initiative a decade earlier. That compromise still must be approved by voters in June. They also produced a plan to finance long-overdue improvements in California’s transportation system. The state workers compensation program was reformed. And an important solid-waste disposal program was established. The Legislature also passed and Deukmejian signed into law a ban on semiautomatic assault weapons despite the strong opposition of the gun lobby.

None of those successes was achieved easily. Making those gains would have been much more difficult if the governor had been regarded as a candidate for reelection. The programs were, by and large, hammered out in the Legislature, not in the governor’s office. Ultimately, though, Deukmejian went along with important advances; he was able to claim credit simply by getting out of the way.

But what worked for him in 1989 now works against him. That’s not to say that he doesn’t figure in the political equation anymore. He will still sign those bills he likes and veto those he opposes. He can hope for some limited success in pushing pet proposals.

The most important contribution he is likely to make during his final year in office, though, will be simply to help nail down last year’s achievements.

He and the Legislature must prevent the compromise on the Gann spending limit and the transportation plan from falling apart in the face of shortsighted and selfish lobbying forces in the state Capitol. After that, Deukmejian will have to campaign hard to persuade voters to go along with the increase in the gasoline tax that is part of the plan.

But political considerations make it much more difficult to win enactment of further landmark legislation during an election year. Whatever Deukmejian has to say in his State of the State address Tuesday inevitably will loom less important in the minds of lawmakers, Republicans as well as Democrats, than what a Gov. Pete Wilson, a Gov. John Van de Kamp or a Gov. Dianne Feinstein is likely to be proposing in subsequent years. As a lame-duck governor during his final year in office, Deukmejian will find himself less important a player as each day goes by.

There’s an important lesson in this for the next governor. California is in need of a more activist chief executive, one who is ready at the very outset of the next administration to move boldly in confronting California’s problems.

An overly cautious man by nature, Deukmejian never was cut out for the role. He was confirmed in his passive ways by the way he resolved a major budget problem when he first took office. Through a combination of innate stubbornness, fiscal legerdemain (mostly in carrying a deficit over two years rather than paying it off immediately), and pure luck (in the form of an expanding economy), Deukmejian met the crisis without raising general taxes.

But the short-term achievement was produced at too high a long-term cost. Deukmejian won his way on the budget crisis by just saying no, and he thought it was enough to keep saying no when presented with other problems. He did so for far too long.

All the while, California’s population growth continued at a rapid pace; social problems festered and needs went unmet as governmental programs were starved for funds; the state’s environment became increasingly polluted, and its infrastructure decayed to the point where its present inadequacies pose an economic threat. California, once known as the promised land, has become noted for its growing problems and deteriorating quality of life.

Californians should be grateful that Deukmejian made some changes in his governing style last year. But it’s too late in the game to expect many significant achievements again in 1990. Too many years have been wasted, too many opportunities lost. The next governor must act more boldly and be willing to risk political popularity from the very start of his or her time in office.