Voters put Maine back to where it was six months ago on Question 1, the tax-relief measures. But with another session of the Legislature arriving before a second version of this vote appears at the polls, lawmakers should work with municipalities to devise a fairer school-funding plan for the state and add tax reform before yet another citizen’s initiative does it for them.

The approximate tallies for Question 1 put the 1A option, immediate property tax relief, ahead of 1B, phased-in relief, and 1C, neither of the above. Option A, however, did not receive a majority of the vote, so it will be placed on the ballot again, perhaps in June or next November. But Maine shouldn’t wait as long as another year before beginning on tax relief and reform.

Maine is where it began with this question because it now has the Maine Municipal Association’s tax-relief plan as the only likely proposal, a reluctant Legislature and an overwhelming sense in Maine that the state should act on this issue – more than 70 percent of voters supported relief of some kind. Now there is a chance for both state government and MMA to avoid the mistakes of last spring that kept them from coming to an agreement on a single proposal.

Both sides say they bargained in good faith then; both said they wanted to avoid a vote that would merely lead to another vote. One of the reasonable demands from MMA was that the governor commit more school-funding money in the early years of what was his five-year plan. He should agree to that now, building up the state share of General Purpose Aid to education this winter and offering general relief no matter which way the next vote goes.

After that, the state should emphasize targeting property-tax relief to middle- and low-income residents and examine its sales tax with an eye on shifting taxes toward leisure and the pursuits of tourists. Though such a change does nothing for tax stability, that issue can be addressed by lawmakers through reform of income taxes, which has rates that rise too steeply and which allows Maine, as it not long ago discovered, to rely too heavily on capital gains.

Despite the weight of the governor’s office, the Legislature and dozens of state organizations backing 1B, the MMA prevailed with 1A because it offered immediately what Maine citizens have already waited too long to receive: substantial property relief and the opportunity for tax reform. With that message in mind, both sides should get to work on an agreement that can be put into effect quickly.