A few sidenotes of interest from last night’s televised forum in Walnut Creek– one that, as we reported this morning on The California Report, didn’t seem to break much new ground, either in subject matter or rhetoric.

* PROP 76 MISSTATEMENTS: Both sides made statements about the budget initiative, Proposition 76, that don’t quite add up with how the initiative works. First up: Senate President Pro Tem Don Perata, who at one point said, “the problem with [Prop] 76 is, it just across the board requires cuts in schools, in in-home support services… it makes those cuts without retaining any respect to the reality, at all.”

But that’s not quite right. While Prop 76 would give the governor the power to make cuts after a budget deficit impasse, it doesn’t specify where those cuts would come from. In fact, given its vagueness, some budget analysts say it may not force a governor to make any cuts. The scenario laid out by Perata sounds like ACA 4X, Schwarzenegger’s budget proposal in the Legislature– similar to, but not an exact copy, of Prop 76. Perata may have reason to believe the governor would make those kinds of cuts, but the initiative doesn’t mandate them.

Later, Governor Schwarzenegger seemed to mischaracterize how Prop 76 works if a budget deficit occurs. “The legislators may decide that they want to do, if there’s $3 billion dollars that we’re out of sync, that $1.5 billion is an increase in taxes and $1.5 billion is in cuts.” Trouble is, that solution’s largely unworkable if state spending is already at the max allowed under 76’s spending cap formula. The Legislative Analyst’s Office says that in that case, new revenues from any tax increase must be put into the reserves… where they could only be used once there was room under the spending cap to spend them. In other words, a state government that is already spending the maximum allowed would have to cut by $3 billion.

WHY CAN’T WE BE FRIENDS?: The noisy crowd outside the forum last night was pretty predictable, with union members on one side (chanting things like “he’s our governor, not our king”) and a smaller, but passionate, group of Arnold supporters on the other side. But just before the event began, something unexpected happened. The two sides began singing patriotic songs together, including God Bless America. A few minutes later, though, it was back to the name calling.

ABORTION, CHEAPER DRUGS, ENERGY: These topics never made it to the televised “Special Election Showdown”… which bypassed any discussion of Propositions 73, 78, 79, and 80.

MICHAEL IS A CAPRICORN AND LIKES LONG WALKS ON THE BEACH: The format included two journalists who introduced the voters asking questions. But at some point, the intros started sounding like a matchmaker service. The first one seemed to be when Walnut Creek resident Michael Wilson’s intro included the fact that he is single. He laughed, and then asked his question about Prop 75. Every so often afterwards, the journalists would offer similar nuggets about other questioners, single or married. After the intro of Menlo Park resident Christie Heaton, Governor Schwarzenegger finally joked, “this sounds a little bit like a dating service here.”

AIM HIGH… ER, LOW: Governor Schwarzenegger is well-known for his seemingly eternal optimism, and always says he intends to win with all of his ballot initiatives. But after the event, top Schwarzenegger consultant Mike Murphy seemed to hint at what the “spin” might be for a much less rosy election outcome.

I asked him what would constitute a victory on November 8th. “I think if we win anything, it’s a victory,” Murphy said. He then added, “we’ve had more obituaries than Count Dracula.”