Our View: We recommend

Proposition 91: Transportation funds. The passage of Prop. 1A in November 2006 makes this initiative unnecessary. Vote No.

Proposition 92: Community colleges funding. This initiative sets up mandatory funding levels for community colleges, akin to Prop. 98. These rigid formulas limit the state's flexibility. If every interest group locks up a permanent, untouchable revenue stream, legislators will have few choices in balancing the state budget, which is $14.5 billion in the red. Vote No.

Proposition 93: Term limits. Under the guise of shortening legislative terms, the initiative's immediate effect would be to lengthen the terms of 42 current incumbents. There may be good reasons to modify the 1990 term-limit law, but this self-serving initiative should be defeated. Vote No.

Propositions 94-97: Indian gaming. The measures would allow four Southern California Indian tribes to add more slot machines at their casinos and provide more revenue for the state. It amounts to a high-stakes battle among private gambling interests, so there's nothing to support or oppose as a matter of public policy. The feds who already approved the tribal compacts could well have the final say. No position.

Measure N (Yuba County): Yuba Highlands. Despite the short-term housing downturn, Yuba County's long-term future depends on orderly growth that includes master-planned communities such as Yuba Highlands. Measure N would uphold the project's approval by county supervisors, but now the developer is urging a "no" vote. That will allow the project to be downsized and address concerns raised by critics who forced the issue to a vote. We hope next time the developer's private property rights won't be assaulted by lawsuits and a senseless referendum. Vote No.