Our picks of the governor's propositions Our picks of the governor's propositions (October 28, 2005)

It's no great exaggeration to say that Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger faces the toughest political fight of his brief governorship as he campaigns for voter approval Nov. 8 of the propositions he has endorsed. Of the eight propositions on the ballot, we are taking a position on Props. 74, 75, 76 and 77. We are taking no position on the others. We supported the election of Schwarzenegger in the Recall Election because of his promise to reduce the state deficit, seek a balanced budget, curb runaway spending and wrest control of the state government from special interest groups. We believe he has moved quite successfully on those issues and that he deserves high marks in his continuing efforts against much opposition from special interest groups to further rein in state spending.

Yes on Proposition 74. Public School Teachers. Waiting Period for Permanent Status.

It is our understanding that school districts have no difficulty removing temporary or probationary employees for any reason. For tenured employees, the situation is different. Although they can be removed for illegal or immoral activities simply removing for unsatisfactory performance such as not being a very good teacher is more problematic. Because this proposition helps solve that problem we support it. We understand that some believe an unintended consequence of this proposition may make it more difficult for school districts to dismiss temporary or probationary employees. We hope this it not the case. Often opposition finds problems and issues with change that turn out to be manageable or are not real. We think the benefits outweigh this potential detriment.

Yes on Proposition 75. Public Employee Union Dues. Restrictions on Political Contributions. Employee Consent Requirement.

We believe this issue is simple. If you want to take money from an employee you should be required to ask for their consent.

Yes on Proposition 76. State Spending and School Funding Limits.

We like the intent of this measure to subject state expenditures to a spending limit. Our elected representatives have not had the political will to reign in spending as they should on our behalf. The special interest groups are just too powerful. While this measure is very complex and may cause difficulties, we don't believe that the legislature and the governor have the strength of will in the face of continual re-election to spend within the state's means. Therefore, the people must take control of this problem. Real change takes leadership and it sometimes takes a single voice. In this case, it is the Governor's unilateral voice. Telling the politicians to spend within their means is a powerful message.

Yes on Proposition 77 Redistricting.

Pleasanton has three gerrymandered State Assembly, State Senate and Congressional districts. This measure, which we support, would mean that boundaries for political districts like ours would be drawn by retired judges and approved by voters at statewide elections. A redistricting plan would be developed for use following the measure's approval and then following each future federal census.

If this measure is not approved, boundaries will continue to be drawn by the Legislature and approved by the Governor, a political process that works best at keeping incumbents in office.

While you may not like or support the Governor, he has moved quickly to address the issues of importance to the fiscal health and economy of our state. Change is always difficult, but we currently have someone in office who is beholden to no one and willing to make drastic changes. Because our state is in such need of overall fiscal and political reform, it is in this spirit that we support these measures.

E-mail a friend a link to this story.