Gov. Uses Muscle on Ballot Measures

Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, concerned about a November ballot filled with initiatives that could undermine his agenda, is seeking to use his political muscle to scare off some of the measures.

After successfully appealing to the California Teachers Assn. to drop their proposed property tax increase, the administration is working to torpedo a measure advocated by city and county officials.

“If there is bad policy that we would oppose and ... we are able to discourage an initiative from ever going to the ballot, that is something we will do,” said Schwarzenegger spokesman Rob Stutzman.

Schwarzenegger, whose negotiating style often includes threats to go to the ballot himself, is finding other groups using the same tactic. Some of them hope he will make deals to keep them off the ballot.

Even before the governor takes a position on some measures, his top political advisors are out working to pull apart the coalitions that support them. Their goal is to keep the governor from getting dragged into a lengthy campaign, as well as to clear the ballot of clutter that might distract voters’ attention from measures that Schwarzenegger may want to put there.

“Gov. Schwarzenegger has figured out that even his bully pulpit is only big enough for one thing at a time,” said Republican political consultant Dan Schnur.

And at the moment, local government representatives are doing everything they can to take advantage of the governor’s desire to keep things off the ballot.

Their initiative would prohibit the state from making any further cuts to cities and counties. It is being circulated in response to the governor’s plan to reduce their funding by $1.3 billion as California faces a projected $14-billion budget gap.

The governor has yet to take an official position on the initiative, but if it passes, Sacramento would have to give back any money it takes from cities and counties in the coming budget year. Organizers must submit signatures by Friday for it to qualify for the November ballot.

Kathy Fairbanks, spokeswoman for a coalition of local government leaders, says her group is “moving full steam ahead with our measure.”

But other local government representatives close to the talks and legislative officials say privately that cities and counties are hoping to strike an alternative deal with the governor to avoid a costly and combative campaign.

Schwarzenegger spokesman Stutzman would not discuss details, but confirmed that talks are driven by Friday’s deadline. “The fact we’re at the deadline for signatures for ballot measures is creating the incentive for discussions,” he said. “Local government is included in that.”

The negotiations, according to those involved, are centered on an administration proposal that would still cut $1.3 billion from cities and counties -- but not permanently. The cut would gradually be restored over several years.

And it would come with an assurance that such a cut would never be made again. The tax system would be changed to back up that pledge. The change would involve cities and counties swapping payments from the state’s general fund -- payments the Legislature can cut at any time -- with a larger share of property tax protected by a constitutional amendment.

The process of nudging groups off the ballot is not always so amicable.

Sometimes it takes what activists consider a much heavier hand. That’s what one of the governor’s top political advisors, Jeff Randle, used in his campaign to kill the California Teachers Assn.’s $6-billion property tax increase initiative.

Randle and his team began building a broad coalition against the measure in February. In addition to the traditional GOP allies, such as business and anti-tax groups, they reached out to minority groups, public safety organizations and even some of the state’s major education groups.

Randle said the governor was passionate in his opposition to a property tax increase. “From Day 1, he was opposed to this thing, and he was opposed vociferously.”

Randle said that was made clear soon after the campaign began: “We weren’t even through the March ballot yet. But we wanted to let them know we were going to come at them on all fronts.”

As they built the coalition, the governor came out strongly against the proposal in public and privately applied pressure on organizers, according to supporters of the measure. While teachers union officials say they pulled the proposal because the ballot was becoming too cluttered with other initiatives that would distract voters, other education officials say the governor clearly played a role.

“The minute Jeff Randle became engaged in the opposition campaign, it sent an obvious signal that the governor wasn’t going to take this sitting down, and it did have an impact on their ultimate decision,” said Kevin Gordon, executive director of the California Assn. of School Business Officials.

Gale Kaufman, a political consultant whose firm was running the teachers’ campaign, suggests the governor is working under a double standard.

“At the same time he is saying out loud, ‘I don’t like what you’re doing, I’m going to the ballot,’ ” Kaufman said, referring to Schwarzenegger’s threats to lawmakers over a state spending cap and workers’ compensation reform, “he is saying privately, can you take that off the ballot?”

“If the voters are behind him, then why wouldn’t he want them to decide any number of issues, including the ones where millions of signatures are collected? Because he didn’t collect them? There is no question there is at least a slight contradiction between what he is doing publicly and what he is saying privately.”

Stutzman says the governor weighing in is appropriate in an open democracy. “Gale and her client still could have gone to the ballot,” he said. “They were just being advised of what they were in for. That sounds democratic to me.”

“The governor is all for the initiative process. That doesn’t mean they are all good ideas. He will speak out against the ones that are a bad idea and tell groups before they submit signatures. And if they choose not to go forward, it will save them a lot of money,” Stutzman said.

Sometimes, however, the governor doesn’t even have to say anything privately -- or publicly.

Schwarzenegger has yet to take a position or get involved with a proposal to add a surcharge of up to 3% on residential phone bills to pay for emergency room services. But one major backer has already bolted.

C. Duane Donner, president of the California Healthcare Assn., said Schwarzenegger’s opposition to new taxes, even ones that would pay for a specific program, has lessened the appetite for them among the public.

“The post-recall era has clearly changed the overall climate throughout California,” he said.

So far, Schwarzenegger has not gotten involved directly in what could be the most costly initiative fight on the November ballot: a proposition that could end Indian tribes’ monopoly on slot machines by opening the way for card rooms and racetracks to get 30,000 of the devices.

With good reason. He may be able to use that measure himself as leverage to persuade the tribes to contribute at least $500 million of their gaming money to the state. The threat of the popular governor campaigning for the proposal may be enough to keep tribes at the table.

“Our initiative helps him negotiate his deal,” said George Gorton, a consultant for the racetracks and card rooms financing the measure who also is among Schwarzenegger’s political consultants.

The governor has announced his opposition to a competing initiative proposed by the Agua Caliente Band of Cahuilla Indians. The Agua Caliente measure seeks to allow unlimited expansion of gambling on Indian reservations. In exchange, tribes would pay 8.84% of their net profits to the state.

And soon the governor will make it clear where he stands on a proposal to tax millionaires to expand mental health services, which recently qualified for the ballot. Assemblyman Darrell Steinberg (D-Sacramento), a lead sponsor of the measure, is eagerly awaiting his next meeting with Schwarzenegger.

“He said he wants to get together to talk about it,” Steinberg said.

Times staff writers Joe Mathews and Dan Morain contributed to this report.

*

(BEGIN TEXT OF INFOBOX)

The road to getting on the ballot

Here are some proposed measures for the Nov. 2 general election ballot. They can be put on the ballot by the Legislature or by initiative. To qualify for the ballot, an initiative proposing a constitutional amendment requires valid signatures of 598,105 voters; an initiative proposing a new law needs 373,816. The deadline for submitting voters’ petitions to the secretary of state is Friday to give county elections officials adequate time to verify signatures. At least 70 initiatives have been submitted to the attorney general for a title and summary, the first step in the process of getting the plan before the voters. So far, 19 have failed to get enough signatures or have been withdrawn voluntarily. Approximately 40 remain in circulation.

Approved for the ballot:

Railroad -- A $9.95-billion bond issue to start construction of a bullet train line between Southern and Northern California. (Put on the ballot by the Legislature)

Health -- A referendum to overturn a law requiring employers to provide healthcare insurance for uninsured workers.

Access -- A proposed constitutional amendment to guarantee the right of access to state and local government information. (Put on the ballot by the Legislature.)

Signatures being verified:

Hospitals -- Proposes a $750-million bond issue for construction, expansion and equipping of children’s hospitals.

Mental health -- Levies a 1% tax on the income of millionaires to finance expanded mental health services.

Vote -- Establishes an open primary system for elections.

Signatures submitted for verification:

Emergency -- Adds a 3% surcharge on telephone use to provide additional money for hospital emergency services and training.

Crime -- Amends the state’s “three strikes” law to require that a crime be a violent or serious felony in order to qualify as a strike and imposes more severe penalties for sexual crimes against children.

Business -- Limits a citizen’s right to sue under unfair business competition laws to situations in which the individual has suffered an actual injury or suffered a financial loss due to an unfair practice.

Failed to qualify or withdrawn:

Education -- Would have increased property taxes on commercial property to finance teacher salaries, reduced class sizes and established a voluntary universal preschool program.

Automobiles -- Would have given automobile buyers expanded ability to cancel their purchases and required fuller financing disclosures by dealers.

Partners -- Would have prohibited implementation of state’s domestic partners laws.

Vote -- Would have imposed fines for failing to register to vote.

Still in circulation as potential candidates for Nov. 2 or the 2006 ballot:

Research -- Establishes a constitutional right to perform stem-cell research and authorizes a bond issue of up to $3 billion to finance research activities.

Revenue -- Prohibits governors and Legislatures from making further budget cuts to local government.

DNA -- Requires all felons to provide a sample of their DNA for storage in a law enforcement database and authorizes local authorities to take such specimens from individuals arrested for rape or murder.

Workers -- Supported by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, it overhauls the costly workers’ compensation insurance system.

Gambling -- Requires Indian tribes that own casinos to contribute 25% of their slot machine revenue to state and local governments. If they refuse, 11 card rooms and five horse racetracks would gain the right to 30,000 slots, and would pay 33% or roughly $1 billion a year primarily to local government.

Gambling II -- Pushed by a Palm Springs Indian tribe, it allows tribes to have unlimited casino expansion rights on their land. In return, tribes would pay the state 8.84% of their net profits.

Source: California secretary of state

Los Angeles Times