CALIFORNIA ELECTIONS: THE AD CAMPAIGN

The race: Governor. Whose ads: Republican Pete Wilson. Cost: The campaign declines to disclose. Producers: Don Sipple and Larry McCarthy.

Republican Sen. Pete Wilson began airing two new 30-second television commercials Wednesday, one of them promoting his promises for action if elected governor and the other attacking Democrat Dianne Feinstein’s fiscal record as mayor of San Francisco. The pro-Wilson ad is similar to one aired earlier, but is more specific on his proposals, including the creation of a new state Environmental Protection Agency. Apparently it is designed to counter inroads Feinstein has made with voters who consider the environment a critical issue.

Elements of the ad with analysis by Times political writer Bill Stall:

Ad: As shots show Wilson talking to crowds, in a classroom, talking to a farmer and a woman, in a helicopter with a long shot of the coastline, and then walking on the beach, an announcer says: “The Pete Wilson agenda for California: Pass criminal laws with teeth and appoint judges with the guts to make the laws stick. Merit pay for teachers and bring innovation back into the classroom. Limit terms of state officials so they work with the people instead of themselves. And create a new Environmental Protection Agency to protect our land, air, water and health.”

Analysis: Wilson has talked about all those things in his campaign and endorsed Proposition 140, the term-limits initiative. Both candidates have promised to get tougher sentencing laws and to appoint tough judges. Incumbent GOP Gov. George Deukmejian has prided himself on appointing tough judges. Feinstein also has proposed creation of a state EPA. But, with the support of the California Teachers Assn., she has opposed merit pay.

Ad: With photos of Feinstein and newspaper headlines on a San Francisco budget deficit, the ad quotes Feinstein as saying, “I did not leave the city with a deficit. What there was was a shortfall in revenues.” The announcer says, “Makes you wonder,” and asks, “What was up with Dianne Feinstein’s financial management of San Francisco? Well, taxes went up. Spending went up. The number of city employees was up. After unprecedented spending and raising taxes to record levels, Feinstein still left behind a $172-million deficit.” And the ad repeats the footage of Feinstein saying, “What there was was a shortfall in revenue.”

Analysis: Taxes, spending and the number of employees went up in virtually every California city during the period Feinstein was mayor, 1978-89. Feinstein has boasted of increasing San Francisco’s police strength. Most governments have “unprecedented spending” every year because of inflation and natural growth of some programs. San Francisco was hit with some unique expenses, such as fighting the AIDS epidemic and widespread homelessness. Any tax increase usually raises taxes to “record levels.” She supported some increases and opposed others. Feinstein notes that San Francisco is both a city and county, the only such entity in the state, and that therefore there is no fair fiscal comparison with other municipalities. Much of the spending that counties do is forced on them by the state Legislature, something Wilson has decried as illegal and unfair and vowed to end. Feinstein’s last year in office ended with a budget surplus, but a $172-million deficit occurred in the first year of Mayor Art Agnos, her successor, who blamed it on Feinstein. The deficit was a result of both a decline in expected tax revenues and increases in city costs.