With the stroke of a pen Friday, Gov. Mark Sanford killed the bill that would have saddled the owners of modest homes, manufacturers, commercial-property owners and utilities with a backdoor tax increase. The veto ensures that real estate tax values continue to track with market values.

Sanford's action will disappoint folks who own fast-appreciating homes on or near the beach and in other desirable areas.

During the 2003 and 2004 sessions of the General Assembly, Rep. Vida Miller, D-Pawleys Island, and other sympathetic legislators worked hard for the bill's passage.

The final product would have limited tax-valuation increases at 20 percent over the five-year tax-reappraisal cycle. Had Sanford signed it, these good folks would have been spared the eye-popping tax increases that their galloping property values have inflicted upon them.

But part of the tax burden they now are paying would have shifted onto the shoulders of every other class of taxpayers - including lower-income residents who live in slower-appreciating homes.

This would have been an egregious violation of the S.C. constitutional principle that taxation be uniform and equal. The only way to accomplish this with the property tax is to tie tax values to market values, as current law does.

But even though this bill deserved to die, it's easy to sympathize with property owners hit hard by monster valuation increases. They pay a disproportionate share of the cost of schools and local government and get tabbed for even more when higher valuations drive up their taxes.

But tax relief for them alone is not the answer.

As Sanford noted in his veto message, the answer is reforming the state-local tax system to make it fairer while also making government more efficient. Sanford sees state income tax relief as the best way to accomplish this. He may be right, though the proposal he presented to the 2004 General Assembly also would hit lower-income folks disproportionately hard.

Perhaps the death of the 20 percent tax-valuation cap will motivate legislators to take comprehensive tax reform seriously.

The aggrieved folks who'd been hoping Sanford would sign the tax-cap bill can supply the motivation.