For several years there has been a growing sentiment in Maine that our tax structure needs to change.

The system taxes some people or businesses disproportionately while others receive undeserved tax breaks. At the same time, citizens cannot rely on their government to provide the services they want and need if revenue fluctuates based on the economy. When the economy chugs along, state government takes in revenues from retail sales, lodging, meals and income taxes to fund state programs, road repairs and schools, but when the economy sags, revenues plummet.

The pitfalls in our tax system are complex and no quick-fix scheme is going to solve it. Yet, unfortunately, Question 1A on the ballot has offered a quick-fix solution that will not do what Mainers are looking for.

The Maine Municipal Association’s proposal would instantly boost state spending on education by at least $240 million, without ever saying where that money will come from. Even the most conservative members of the Legislature have predicted that the proposal would require an increase in state taxes and drastic cuts in vital state programs such as nursing home care for the elderly, public safety and mental health services for children. This on the heels of drastic cuts made earlier this year to balance the state budget because of a $1.2 billion shortfall.

Where will the money come from? Their answer is it will come from the state, and that the Legislature will have to figure it out. But we all are the state. An extra $240 million in state taxes will be paid for by all of us, and that is not tax relief.

Gov. Baldacci and the Legislature have come up with an alternative plan, which will appear on the ballot as Question 1B. This “competing measure” will provide real property tax relief:

. Like the MMA proposal, Question 1B will fund local education at the 55 percent level. But it does so incrementally over a period of five years, allowing the state to absorb the additional cost without decimating critical programs and without increasing taxes.

. 1B does not write a blank check to school districts and municipalities to spend as much as they want, however they want. While Question 1A suggests it will provide tax relief, there is nothing to require municipalities to lower local property taxes because of increased state contributions to education funding.

. 1B uses what is called the Essential Programs and Services formula to ensure that every K-12 student is educated on a level playing field. Resources in one school district should not be taken up by state subsidies to nonessential programs in another district. The formula calculates the true cost of providing a core education, one that will achieve the Maine Learning Results for all Mainers. The formula also accounts for regional and other costs that may differ from one district to another.

. 1B provides real tax relief. The competing measure includes two elements that will go directly to the real issue at hand – local property tax relief. The measure would double the amount the state spends on the circuit-breaker program, which benefits homeowners and renters. The maximum refund would rise from $1,000 to $2,000, and families earning up to $75,000 would be eligible. The competing measure also reinstates the full $7,000 Homestead exemption, which provides tax rebates to every homeowner in Maine. Together, these two programs will provide an additional $76 million over a three-year period in property tax relief to nearly 400,000 Maine households.

What does it all mean? It means that for the first time in decades the Maine Legislature and the governor have worked together to provide meaningful tax relief for property taxpayers, to increase funding for local education to alleviate the burden on property owners, and to encourage local municipalities – which spend more than 40 percent of all state and local tax revenues combined – to explore the financial efficiencies of regional cooperation and consolidation.

Maine’s tax system is still based on an outdated system that assumes valuable property is an indicator of high income. It is a tax system based on goods and not services. It still relies far too much on local taxes and local spending. The Legislature’s proposal, if approved by the voters, will be a significant first step in the process of tax relief, but it will not be the last.

The alternative, however, is a dangerous road map to tax increases and shortchanging vital programs for our citizens and our children. 1A is not tax reform or spending reform; it is an attempt to get more money for local schools, without any pledge of putting that money into tax relief for citizens.

We can increase support for our schools to provide the best education possible for our students, and provide meaningful tax relief to our residents. 1B is better state fiscal policy, it is better educational policy, and it is guaranteed property tax relief, not hoped-for tax relief.

John Richardson is a Democrat representing District 49, part of Brunswick, and is the House Majority Leader.