The day after Mother/s Day seems an appropriate time to discuss the mother of all proposition face-offs on the June 3 statewide ballot.

We bring this up so early in the process because mail-in ballots are already in the hands of thousands of county voters. And these competing initiatives provide a classic demonstration of what/s right and what/s wrong with the initiative process.

We/ll hit the bottom line first. We believe you should solidly support Proposition 99, but soundly defeat Proposition 98. It/s confusing, but we/ll do our best to explain why we make these recommendations.

Part of the confusion has to do with the fact that California has a rich history of ballot initiatives, so rich, in fact, that it is forced to recycle some of the proposition numbers. Prop. 98, for example, in a past incarnation was all about school funding.

The one you/ll see on the June 3 ballot purports to be about eminent domain 7 but really is about giving mobile-home-park owners the power to rid themselves of rent controls.

The eminent-domain aspect of Prop. 98 seems to make sense 7 greatly limiting the power of local government to seize private property 7 but the tradeoff of stripping away rent controls has the potential to do irreparable harm to the state and its middle- and low-income residents.

So, if you don/t closely inspect Prop. 98/s fine print, you might vote in favor of limiting government/s power to take property, but at the same time essentially kick tens of thousands of Californians out of their homes.

If Prop. 98 should win voter approval, any rent-control laws enacted after Jan. 1 of last year would be wiped out. The older rent-control rules would be phased out gradually, but the overall result would be just as painful.

And before marking your ballot, it would be wise to consider the major source of funding behind Prop. 98 7 mobile-home-park owners. Proponents of 98 have raised about ,4.5 million for their campaign, and nearly 75 percent of that money came from mobile-home-park owners.

Mobile homes may not be the prettiest houses on the block, but they provide a crucial segment of affordable housing throughout the Central Coast, especially for seniors. Many park residents benefit from rent control, and have for years. The impacts of this law on these folks 7 and probably on the local economy as well 7 likely would be devastating.

Prop. 99 was created as the anti-Prop. 98 measure, and is supported by both government and private-property-rights activists. It would limit the power of governments to seize property through eminent domain, in a common-sense way, but is not nearly as Draconian as Prop. 98 7 and, it doesn/t mess with the mobile-home rent controls.

There is no hidden agenda in 99, as there is in 98.

The differences between the propositions could not be more well-defined, but that doesn/t automatically doom the lesser of the two proposals. These are the only statewide initiatives on this ballot, and this is the second of three statewide elections this year.

When ballots are this bare, and part of a string of elections, voters tend to stay away in droves. A small turnout puts more emphasis on the campaign with the deepest pockets. Polls show voters don/t like Prop. 98, and do favor Prop. 99. But you don/t want to leave this to chance.

Our best advice is to not be fooled by Prop. 98/s claim to reign in greedy government, because that comes at the expense of a significant number of middle- and low-income Californians.

We recommend a BnoC vote on Proposition 98, and a ByesC vote on Proposition 99.

May 12, 2008