Looking Back Lincoln: 50 years ago - WPUSD, state loan measures among 4 issues on ballot

50 years ago Population 3,179 (U.S. Census 1960 and 1970) Four issues affecting local voters are on the ballot for next Tuesday's general election. Polls in the Lincoln area will be open from 7 a.m. until 8 p.m. Topping the local issues are the Western Placer Unified School District bond measure and state loan measure to provide funds for construction of a new high school within the district. Also appearing on the ballot is the Placer County Agency Zone No. 1 loan contract measure which was defeated by the voters in the primary vote. Of the state races the Third District Assembly race, which pits veteran assemblyman Gene Chappie, Republican, against former Roseville Mayor Baron Reed, Democrat. The two are seeking election to the newly-created Third Assembly seat. Chappie has represented the old Sixth District for the past 10 years in the assembly. Other races on the ballot include the Houston I. Flournoy, GOP, Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Democrat, governors race. Also seeking the top state job are Edmon V. Kaiser, AIP, and Elizabeth Keathley, the Peace and Freedom party candidate. Polling places in the Lincoln area will be located at the Central Community Clubhouse, Gold Hill Grange Hall, Lincoln High School, Veterans Memorial Hall, Mt. Pleasant Hall, Sheridan School and Valley View School. 75 years asgo Population 2,410 (U.S. Census 1940-1950) Special Election A lot of pressure and publicity have been brought to bear on the McLain issue which is to be put up to the voters in the form of Proposition 2 next Tuesday in the Special Election. Business interests, farm groups and other civic organizations have gone all out to defeat what is apparently an attempt by George McLain to take over control of the State Department of Social Welfare. But all of this effort may go to waste if more people are not educated as to how to vote on the proposition. Many are just confused enough that they think a "no" vote is needed to defeat the McLain aggregation. You must vote "Yes" if you wish to kick McLain and his group out of control. The proposition also faces considerable danger from those who are receiving pensions for the aged and the blind. They perhaps believe that if the proposition goes through, they will be deprived of these pensions. Such is not the case. Regardless of whether the proposition is approved or defeated, they will get $75 for the aged and $85 for the blind. The proposition has one purpose in mind—that of stamping out now what promises to be a dictatorial political power. It is doubtful that McLain has the interest of the pensioners at heart. Once he gains what he seeks—unreserved political power—he is likely to forget those who put him there. One other point which the taxpayers must consider is that under Proposition 4, the cost of the pension set-up in California has increased 90 million dollars. Much of that is administrative and other costs. It's costing the taxpayers a lot of money just to see that checks are mailed out to pensioners under the McLain system. Proposition 12 Most Californians are mindful of the desperate need for new school construction provided for in Proposition 1, and most Californians are fully cognizant of the necessity for overturning the McLain pension machine by passage of Proposition 2. But there is another vitally important measure on the Nov. 8 ballot where the issue is not so clearly understood. In fact, proponents of Proposition 12, the so-called Daylight Saving measure, are carefully shielding the true danger of such a program from public scrutiny. Perhaps because the people of California have twice previously defeated daylight saving when submitted on the ballot—in 1930 and again in 1940—proponents of Proposition 12 are more than happy that due to its late inclusion on the ballot a full campaign cannot be organized against it. It is an old story, the farmer's aversion to Daylight Saving. But it is nevertheless true. The farmer must operate by sun time. Definite financial losses result from shifting the clock, both because of lost time of farm workers and because of injury to the quality of many crops when harvested too early. Dairymen suffer losses, too, in the reduction of butterfat produced. The farmer cannot begin harvesting many of his crops an hour earlier in the morning. He must wait until the sun dries the dew on his fields before he and his men can go to work. Daylight Saving would mean that the farmers would work an extra hour each evening, or, as is too often the case, the farm workers would start on sun time and quit on Daylight Saving Time, thus losing an hour of each day during the harvest season, the very time when he cannot be found in sufficient numbers to meet the needs of farmers. Daylight Saving is hard on children's health. They cannot sleep with the sun still up, yet they are awakened an hour earlier in the morning. Chief of Police Worton of Los Angles says there is no foundation for the statement that Daylight Saving prevents traffic accidents. Longer daylight after work just puts more cars on the road at dusk, with the resultant increase in accidents. Realignment of train, bus, airline and radio broadcast schedules twice a year will cause great inconvenience and expense to the companies involved as well as confusion to the public. The Interstate Commerce Commission has opposed Daylight Saving Time for years. Tampering with the clock is not the way to solve the problem. Proposition 12 is not in the interest of the State of California. Every Californian should remember his duty to vote at this important Nov. 8 Special Election. No matter what his inclination regarding the measures appearing on the ballot, every qualified voter should go to the polls. Voting It's an old theme with American newspapers--this business of attempting to cajole and entice citizens out on election day. He would almost think voting wasn't a privilege but rather a job which required effort, time and expense. Well, we don't have any ideas for creating new ways to get the voters out. All we can do is point out that the laws we have to live by depend on the voting public. We could also mention that there probably would not be any need for a vote on Proposition 2 on November 8 if the voters had made it a point to know what Proposition 4 was in the last election and vote accordingly. We can also point out a sterling example of what failure to vote can do for a national party in the complete defeat of the Republican party last fall. Judging by the number of persons who have failed to register this year, the November 8 election ballot is likely to be light. But just consider how much time the voter will save by not having to go to the polls once or twice a year—maybe even as much as two hours. 100 years ago Population 1,324 (U.S. Census 1900, 1910, 1920) Placer County Voting Precincts in 1924 are: Allens, Central, Dry Creek, Lincoln, Manzanita, Roseville, Sheridan, Gold Hill, Loomis, Mt. Pleasant, Mt. Vernon, Newcastle, Ophir, Penryn, Rocklin, Auburn, Clipper Gap, Junction, Lone Star, Long Valley, Rock Creek, Alta, Applegate, Blue Canyon, Cisco, Colfax, Drum, Dutch Flat, Emigrant Gap, Gold Run, Illinois Town, Summit, Weimar, Butcher Ranch, Forest Hill, Iowa Hill, Last Chance, Michigan Bluff, Tahoe, Todds Valley, Westville, and Yankee Jims. Vote A good many communities in California have financed and developed their own water supplies for domestic use and irrigation and their own local power projects. These communities have paid or are paying for such enterprises without any aid from the state. Under the proposed water and power act the credit of the entire state is pledged behind a $500 million bond issue, the proceeds of which will be expended by five politicians in yet unspecified water and power projects. That means that the people of districts which are now supplied with water or power, on their own credit, must sponsor bonds for the development of water and power projects in other localities. Aside from its inherent faults, the scheme is unfair to the districts which have financed their own projects. The measure was beaten in 1922 by a majority of 354,000. It should be defeated this year by a still larger majority as a rebuke to the restless agitators who refuse to accept the people's decision rendered two years ago.