Anti-Wilson Ads Quietly Scrapped : Politics: Lobbyists discard radio and newspaper campaign after governor settles teachers’ lawsuit and boosts funds for education.

It had all the makings of an all-out political war, one that would have been fought across California, and possibly into the early presidential campaign states of Iowa and New Hampshire.

The public schools lobby, among the most powerful state Capitol warriors, was prepared to lead an advertising attack aimed at Republican presidential candidate Gov. Pete Wilson.

But before any of it went public, Wilson, a fierce critic of teachers unions and the potent public school lobby, settled a long-running lawsuit by teachers against the state, and fashioned a compromise in the new state budget that will provide schools with an extra $1 billion when the school year begins next month.

When the deal was struck, the education coalition quietly dropped its plans for the anti-Wilson advertising blitz, leaving the completed radio scripts and newspaper ads for another day.

The planned ad campaign may not have been a factor in convincing the governor to settle the key $28-billion education component of the budget. But the prospect of such a campaign was one item on the negotiators’ table, as Wilson, his aides, legislative leaders and education lobbyists tried to end this summer’s budget deadlock.

At one of the first bargaining sessions to settle the education budget, an education coalition negotiator mused to Russ Gould, Wilson’s finance director, that they might soon buy billboard space. Another chimed in that the question was whether the billboards would be in this state or in Iowa City.

The reaction? “Smiles,” said Dennis Meyers, lobbyist for the Assn. of California School Administrators, who was at the meeting.

“We would have started with radio [in California] to let them know there was money,” another education lobbyist said. “But the billboards always loomed. They said ‘Iowa City,’ but they meant wherever he was running.”

“I can’t see being intimidated by that,” said Ken Khachigian, one of the governor’s top presidential campaign advisers. “My experience with Pete is you don’t get anywhere by threatening him.”

Knowing Wilson’s reputation as one who hunkers down for fights, some members of the education coalition opposed using out-of-state ads, but liked the idea of an in-state campaign if needed.

“My vote was to do the radio ads in Sacramento and ads in other parts of the state,” said Judith Michaels of the California Federation of Teachers. “He tends to be stubborn. I thought that type of [out-of-state] campaign would have backfired.”

As Wilson signed the budget-related education bill Thursday, the Republican governor was flanked by executives of several school lobbying groups, including some that were bitter Wilson rivals in years past.

The governor cited several policy reasons for increasing school spending and settling the lawsuit. He also said he was prepared to wait all summer for a state budget.

But with the budget now signed into law and public schools advocates happy, Wilson can head off on the campaign trail--as he will do today--as something of an education hero.

“The negotiations were done straight on the merits . . . with two yardsticks in mind--what was in best interest of schools and what was in the best financial interest of the state,” said H.D. Palmer, spokesman for Wilson’s Department of Finance.

Wilson’s decision on education funding was a turnaround. In the budget he proposed in January, and in more recent public statements, he had demanded that public schools repay $810 million of a $1.8-billion “loan” given to them as part of the 1992 budget deal.

But there were questions about the legality of the loan. Led by the California Teachers Assn., the education coalition insisted that it was never a party to the loan and sued three years ago, recently winning a court decision that the loan was illegal. That gave the governor a hard fiscal reason to settle the suit.

The state could have been liable for $3 billion, an amount that may have left California unable to meet its obligations.

In settling the suit and getting a budget agreement, Wilson is requiring only a $150-million partial repayment of the $1.8-billion loan this year, and promises to give education eight years to fully repay the loan.

The deal also means that the $28-billion public school system will get an extra $500 million for one-time projects, plus $500 million more for ongoing school operations, along with the first cost-of-living increase in five years.

The education settlement ensured Democratic support for the budget, given that teachers unions and other public school advocates are among their biggest supporters. Added funding for suburban schools also won Republican support in the Legislature.

The deal was beneficial to the California Teachers Assn. on several levels. Teachers emerged with a morale-boosting pot of cash for one-time projects, such as school paint jobs, computers and textbooks, plus an eight-year commitment that, unless there is an economic collapse, could put the schools billions of dollars ahead of where they are today.

Union officials believe that the money will help win back support for public education among parents. Another lean budget year for schools, they worried, might strengthen support for vouchers, which they believe would irreparably harm public education.

The public school lobby hopes, too, that the deal will help it change its image in Sacramento as an arm of the Democratic Party and only interested for teacher pay increases.

With Republicans holding a majority in the Assembly and Democrats holding a one-seat edge in the Senate, the California Teachers Assn. and others in the education coalition are trying to build bridges to GOP legislators, giving them more in campaign donations.

“This is an example of what can happen when we work together,” said Lois Tinson, who took over as CTA president in June. “There are areas where we disagree and ones where we agree, and we’re going to work on those where we agree.”

But if there had been no deal by, perhaps, mid-August, the proponents of the ad campaign might have prevailed.

The initial budget for the anti-Wilson advertising campaign was $100,000, with plans to go to $400,000 and beyond. The political consulting firm retained to wage the campaign was the same one that did the hard-hitting, $500,000 campaign aimed at Wilson during the 1992 budget debacle. That effort included television spots of kindergarten children being locked out of their classrooms.

In the campaign, the initial script for the radio ad featured two mothers lamenting the sorry state of public school funding in California.

“I say enough is enough,” one of the mothers said. “Our schools have already been cut to the bone. If the politicians keep ripping off our schools, our kids will never be able to compete for jobs or college.”

The full-page newspaper ad was to start in the Sacramento Bee.

“It was very clearly a pressure point,” said Assemblyman Richard Katz (D-Sylmar), who was among the Democrats who suggested the out-of-state campaign. “To have teachers in Iowa or New Hampshire following him around could have been potentially fatal to a campaign trying to get off the ground.”

Katz said that at one of the leadership meetings he attended with Wilson, Senate President Pro Tem Bill Lockyer (D-Hayward) noted that “the education coalition had not started its campaign.”

“It was done in a very clever manner,” Katz said, adding that it came as the leaders were relaxed and making small talk. “But the reminder was there that there was a huge downside in not settling the education piece.”