By sustaining the governor's veto, an overwhelming majority of the state House of Representatives wisely backed away Wednesday from legislation passed at the 11th hour last year that would have imposed a statewide, 20 percent real property reassessment cap. Now, unless Charleston County Council does something foolish, there's nothing to stop the S.C. Supreme Court from deciding once and for all whether such a cap is constitutional.

The governor cited the constitutional question as his primary reason for vetoing the legislation. His concern was well-placed. The city of North Charleston's challenge of a 15 percent, local option reassessment cap already is before the high court. Regardless of whether a cap is 15 or 20 percent, statewide or local option, the legal issue is the same. Can any cap on reassessment be imposed by mere legislation or does it require a constitutional amendment?

Circuit Judge Victor Rawl, appointed by the high court as a special referee in the North Charleston case, has, we believe, rightly concluded that the 15 percent cap fails to meet the constitution's test that property be assessed for tax purposes at fair market value. All that's left to be done before the Supreme Court reaches its decision are oral arguments before the justices by the county and the city.

One of the most disturbing aspects of the 20 percent statewide legislation was a provision that voided the 15 percent local option cap being challenged by North Charleston. That would have meant the North Charleston case, which has taken two years to reach the high court, would have been moot. Most assuredly a new suit would have been filed against the 20 percent cap. But what a waste of time and money that would have been.

The House's agreement with the governor to kill the 20 percent bill has ended that concern. But now there's an equally disturbing suggestion that County Council might be ready to try to end the North Charleston lawsuit.

Council's acting chairman Curtis Bostic was quoted in our Thursday report as saying he thinks there is sentiment on council to end the suit. "What I think we're hearing the court say is they're disfavoring the tax cap system. I don't want us to spend money needlessly battling for something that's not going to happen," he said.

To the contrary, if council tries to find a way out of the suit, years of legal effort and many thousands of taxpayer dollars will go down the drain. North Charleston attorney J. Brady Hair says there's little left for the lawyers to do. He could foresee only a day of preparation for the oral arguments and a day before the court. In view of the money that's been spent, it would be foolish, he said, to bail out now on a cost-saving argument.

And, as he insists, the constitutional issue is extremely important and isn't going away. "We are in a position now to get that answer to give guidance for the future."

County Council would be doing a major disservice to its own taxpayers and to the citizens of this state if it tries to stop this lawsuit so near the finish line.