SACRAMENTO - In the waning days of the 2005 legislative session, a landmark solar energy measure has become snagged by last-minute revisions pushed by interests that don't want Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to score political points before the upcoming special election.

The battle over solar energy is an example of how the legislative agenda is shaped behind the scenes by economic interests who are sometimes heavy campaign donors. It also shows how the November special election may influence the outcome of legislation.

With lawmakers scheduled to end their session Friday, many other bills are being quickly stitched together that various special interests are hoping to influence. Examples include: a potential $100 million-a-year tax break for Hollywood studios, backed by labor, and a seemingly arcane feud over whether raisins should be included in the governor's $18 million program to provide fresh fruits to school kids.

Governor's `feel good' bill

The solar bill was supposed to be the ``feel good'' bill of the year. Backed by Schwarzenegger, it is intended to put solar panels on 1 million roofs and cut the need for new power plants. But all that changed last month when, at the behest of the electrical workers union, Democrats added a provision that requires solar work be done at prevailing union wages. The move had Schwarzenegger aides threatening the governor might veto the proposal.

Organized labor wins either way. If the bill becomes law, installers are paid prevailing wages. But if the wage requirement kills the bill, then labor has effectively denied the governor a political victory on the eve of the special election.

Backers of the measure, SB 1, by Sen. Kevin Murray, D-Culver City, are especially miffed that an Assembly committee inserted amendments without debate.

``I think it's a breakdown and a sign of deterioration in the way the Legislature operates,'' said John White, a lobbyist for environmentalists and the solar industry. ``It's probably the biggest environmental and energy bill, and it looks like it got caught in the crossfire between the politicians and the special interests.''

Scott Wetch, lobbyist for the electrical workers union, said labor is being unfairly scapegoated. He scoffed at the notion that election-year politics are at play. Wetch says he has nothing to be ashamed about because the measure, in effect, provides a tax break to builders who install the solar equipment.

Other unions irked

While the electricians now support the bill, other unions are irked because of how the bill spells out who can install solar panels. They say the wage provision will prompt a veto. Sen. John Campbell, R-Costa Mesa, who had worked with Murray, now opposes the bill, contending it would boost the cost of solar panels. He calls the amendments examples of union ``greed and corruption.''

The governor, too, ``remains unable to support the bill in its current form,'' press secretary Margita Thompson wrote in an e-mail, ``but hopes that legislators will remove the onerous amendments.''

If not, the solar bill could be the best example of how the special election is ensuring that less of consequence will be enacted this week.

``There's nothing happening,'' said Sen. Debra Bowen, D-Redondo Beach, ``because when both sides go outside the building they are gearing up for war.''

Still, amid the crush of the roughly 400 remaining bills, a smattering are drawing particular attention.

One, being pushed by the bi-partisan duo of Schwarzenegger and Assembly Speaker Fabian Nu�ez, is designed to give the movie and TV commercial industry as much as $1 billion in tax credits over the next decade as a sweetener to keep productions from leaving the state. It is backed by unions as well as Hollywood studios.

In an analysis, Senate Republicans contend the bill -- AB 777 -- is ``the equivalent of a direct payment from the state treasury to one of the wealthiest industries in California.''

The legislation could provide $100 million annually to cover a 12 percent tax break for film productions; some TV commercial productions could qualify for as much as a 15 percent credit.

Nu�ez, a Los Angeles Democrat, said the tax credits are necessary to prevent increasing ``runaway'' production of films and commercials to places like Canada or Louisiana, which has an aggressive tax credit program.

But unless Schwarzenegger finds a way to build some Republican support, the bill may never make it out of committee.

Other measures include:

• SB 426, by Joe Simitian, D-Palo Alto, that would rank coastal locations for building a facility to receive liquefied natural gas shipments. The bill would require the governor to veto any project not ranked at the top of the list.

• SB 281, by Sen. Abel Maldonado, R-San Luis Obispo, would implement a Schwarzenegger pilot plan to allow schools to provide students with free fresh fruits and vegetables.

But some lawmakers -- including one who represents much of raisin-rich Fresno County -- are troubled that raisins, nuts and other items would be excluded. ``I think raisins are as healthy as any other fresh fruit,'' said Sen. Dean Florez, D-Bakersfield, in an e-mail. ``And I think it is shortsighted not to include then as a healthy alternative.''

• AB 1041, by Assemblyman Tom Umberg, D-Anaheim, would force the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim to switch the baseball team's name back to the Anaheim Angels. Arte Moreno, owner of the Angels and an opponent of the bill, co-hosted a baseball game fundraiser last week for Schwarzenegger.

Asked if he was concerned it might appear that there's an attempt to influence him, Schwarzenegger said: ``I made it very clear during the time I ran for governor that this man cannot be bought. I'm wealthy enough independently no one can buy me. I was elected to become governor in order to represent the people of California -- not the special interests.''