CALIFORNIA ELECTIONS / BALLOT MEASURES : Prop. 116 Ad Riles Backers of State’s Transit Proposal

A new radio spot that advertises Proposition 116 as a measure that would authorize transportation bonds without raising taxes is causing a strain in what until now have been cordial relations with the sponsors of Proposition 108, another proposal authorizing bonds for transportation.

What angers some of the backers of Proposition 108 are references in the 60-second Proposition 116 spot that they believe clearly impugn their proposal.

The ad, featuring a brief conversation between a man and woman, has the man asking: “116? What’s that?” and the woman replying, “The passenger rail initiative put on the ballot by the people, not the politicians. It increases mass transit and rail service without increasing taxes.”

Proposition 116, sponsored by the nonprofit Planning and Conservation League, would authorize $2 billion in general obligation bonds to finance a series of specific rail transportation projects.

Proposition 108, placed on the ballot by Gov. George Deukmejian and the Legislature, authorizes another $1 billion in bonds for rail transportation. The measure could not go into effect, however, without passage of Proposition 111--which modifies the state spending limit and doubles the gasoline tax.

While the official campaign organization for Proposition 108 is keeping quiet on the issue, some backers of the measure complain that the new radio advertisements by the sponsors of Proposition 116 violate an unwritten agreement between the two camps not to criticize each other.

“I told them (the Proposition 116 campaign) that it surprised me that they were trying to pass 116 at the expense of 108 and 111. I thought we were trying to get all three measures passed,” said Assemblyman Richard Katz (D-Sylmar), an author of the gas tax proposal.

But Gerald Meral--executive director of the Planning and Conservation League, which formally endorsed Propositions 108 and 111 on Wednesday--said the advertisements were meant not to criticize but to distinguish between the two proposals.

“Our concern is about taxes,” he said. “Right now state finances are a little precarious and we don’t want people to think voting for us would trigger a tax increase.”

He said he doubted that the radio spot, which will be aired throughout the state until Election Day, would “hurt in the slightest” either Proposition 108 or 111. Although the ad will be aired in each area of the state, he said the campaign organization had only enough money to make limited buys with a few stations.

“I think they’re a little sensitive myself,” Meral said. “They’re a little nervous. They have the same polling we have and it shows it (voter opinion on Propositions 111 and 108) very close.”

Katz, however, noted that only a month ago supporters of the gas tax increase changed a radio advertisement when the Proposition 116 camp complained about a segment that urged voters to approve “two important transportation measures--108 and 111.” He said the campaign for 116 was concerned that the ad was implying that Proposition 116 was not important.

Katz also took issue with the contention that Proposition 116 would not raise taxes. While it would not immediately raise taxes, he said bond issues contribute to deficits that ultimately may lead to tax increases because general fund revenues are used to pay the interest on them.