A hot topic on “The Front Porch” is the tax-cap referendum proposal (the Palesky proposal) that would limit property taxes to 10 mills based on 1996-97 valuations.

It is intended to be a dramatic approach to tax reform. It has an in-your-face quality about it. While all of us would like to see a reduction in property taxes (and we should have one), this is too drastic and fundamentally at odds with the Maine way of doing things.

In the interest of full disclosure, let me state at the outset that I am chair of the Maine State Board of Education, but in this piece I speak only for myself, albeit the majority of my colleagues on the board agree with my conclusions.

Long before I joined the state board, I believed that Maine should continue to increase its efforts to provide the very best education we can afford to deliver in order to equip our kids to live productive lives in the information/knowledge century.

The data is very clear that failure to do this consigns our young people to lives on the margins in all respects.

Take a look at Ireland. They were at the bottom of the heap among western european nations. Now they are at the pinnacle. A cornerstone of their strategy was to invest in the educational infrastructure to benefit their kids. Teaching became a prestigious profession, highly paid and competitively sought after by their best undergraduates – and their kids futures have shot through the roof!

In the Maine way, we have been making incremental and important progress for our kids. The Maine Learning Results (high standards) and the Essential Programs and Services initiative that promises adequate funding for all Maine kids to meet those high standards are two examples.

Palesky will eviscerate those efforts.

If we exclude the unconstitutional parts of Palesky (imagine passing a law which we know from the Supreme Court is unconstitutional in certain respects) and apply the Palesky formula to the 2003-04 year for which we have final numbers, Portland would lose 49.8 percent of its educational funding, Auburn would lose 58.5 percent, Lewiston would lose 56.2 percent and Rumford would suffer a loss in the mid-30 percent range. That scenario would be repeated in the vast majority of Maine’s school districts.

What will it mean? You can be sure it will mean larger classes, fewer courses, no A.P. courses and a radical reduction in extracurricular activities. Do we really want to do that to Maine kids – our kids?

The Palesky proposal is copied after Proposition 13 in California. Consider this: In terms of student performance, California had arguably the best school system in the country. Post Prop. 13, California is near the bottom in the nation. That is fact, not just scary rhetoric. Do we want to join California in a race to the bottom in terms of preparing our students for the 21st century.

Look beyond education. Think of our municipal services. They will suffer comparable, if not worse reductions. Using 2003-04 numbers again and applying the Palesky formula, Portland would see a loss of 51.6 percent, Auburn 47.5 percent and Lewiston 43.8 percent. The impact on basic services as we know them in police, fire and sanitation, will be shattering.

Which public safety calls will we not respond to? How much do we charge for trash collection? Which roads do we not repair?

Palesky will unleash internecine warfare between education and municipal services as well as among municipal agencies that will make Auburn’s budget battles of this past year appear like child’s play.

There is another important part of “the Maine way” in play here. We pride ourselves on the balance that exists between what is decided in Augusta and what remains a local matter. For better or worse, local control is a strong component of our political culture.

Make no mistake about it, Palesky puts that delicate balance in jeopardy. New taxes and fees will be necessary at the state level. That is not a threat or mere Chicken-Little rhetoric. This sky will really fall!

As we rely increasingly on state revenue for education and other municipal services, greater authority over local matters will be exercised in Augusta. Does Maine want to change its “way” in such a profound manner?

There is much anger around the state on this issue. People are understandably upset that our political leaders in recent administrations and Legislatures have failed to bring about fundamental tax reform providing reasonable property tax relief. I have heard people say, “I don’t think Palesky is the way to go, but I am going to vote for it just to show those folks in Augusta the consequences of their inaction.”

While I can understand that sentiment, I sincerely ask them to reconsider. Revenge is not a good basis for writing tax law.

There is another way. Put candidates on the spot on the tax issue in the elections this fall. Send a Legislature to Augusta that gets it on tax reform, and hold their feet to the fire. And don’t forget that we put into law this past June a requirement (not an intention) that the state fund 55 percent of local education cost under the ESP formula. In that same law, we limited local funds for education to less that 10 mills. That will bring property relief if municipal leaders use discipline in their budget building

It is also important that the Legislature deliver on the 55 percent within two or three years at the most. This is a much more rational approach to tax reform and property tax relief.

The Palesky initiative is a colossal mistake. It short changes our kids in a way that places their futures at a comparative disadvantage globally. It reduces the capacity of local government, potentially putting citizens at risk and centralizing more power in Augusta.

We can do tax reform, stand by our kids and increase efficiencies at the municipal level through regional arrangements. That is “the Maine way.”

Palesky is not in the Maine tradition. I am betting that Maine common sense will triumph once again and soundly defeat the tax-cap referendum. Our kids and grandkids deserve nothing less of us!

Jim Carignan is a retired educator who lives in Harpswell. His e-mail address is [email protected].