There are fundamental and serious flaws with the tax cap legislation that goes to voters in November.

Supporters of the ballot initiative, who met with the Sun Journal editorial board Wednesday, recognize the problems and say they would support changes once the question has passed.

The most important part of the proposed law – the limit on the mill rate – is crucial for the state’s future, they say. And, they say, the problems can be solved, but a message must be sent to lawmakers in Augusta and town selectmen that spending as usual cannot continue.

But rewriting state tax laws with bad legislation doesn’t send a message demanding reform. It undermines the ability of towns and cities to provide the services that voters want and have voted to support.

Elements of the proposed law are likely unconstitutional. A four-member majority of the Supreme Judicial Court has said that the provision to roll assessments back to 1996-97 levels would violate the state’s Constitution by mandating that taxes not be assessed uniformly. Some people would face higher taxes just because they’re new to their neighborhood.

While the proposal would allow municipalities to adjust the mill rate above the 1 percent cap to pay for debt service, it’s not at all clear that applies to municipalities like Lewiston and Auburn, which have a town manager-city council type government. The cap legislation allows for increases only on debt approved by a two-thirds vote. Debt that was not approved directly by voters is not specifically addressed. That could create a real crunch for Maine’s cities.

The tax cap plan also attempts to storm the state’s tax code, and then pull up the ladder so other changes are more difficult to initiate. The tax cap would be able to pass in November with a simple majority. As written, however, once passed the law would require a two-thirds statewide vote for it to be changed by initiative. The text of the legislation relies on voters for ratification, but then doesn’t trust those same voters not to change their mind. That’s a serious affront to the initiative process.

Former state Sen. Phil Harriman and former Secretary of State Mark Gartley, two respected spokesmen for Tax Cap Yes!, agree the rollback won’t pass muster and has to be changed. They also recognize the other problems.

But they also maintain that something must be done about out-of-control government spending and that state lawmakers have not taken the demand for property tax relief seriously. They put forward a compelling argument about the need to restrain government spending.

But the tax cap would go beyond fiscal discipline; it would put the state in a financial chokehold. Proponents of the tax cap ask: Just look at the numbers. For this proposal, here’s the number that counts: 1 percent. In many cases, the tax cap would force cities and towns to cut their expenditures by more than 50 percent. That’s not trimming fat, that’s cutting government off at the waist.