The latest news on property tax reform out of the state Senate Thursday says at least two constitutional amendments will be in the package debated by that body. That's the most potentially far-reaching aspect of what will be the most important and challenging legislative session in decades. Integral to the debate is a recent report prepared for the non-profit Palmetto Institute that provides an in-depth evaluation of the state's existing revenue system. Equally important is the need for lawmakers to heed the Institute's warning before tampering.

Financier Darla Moore, the Palmetto Institute chairman, cautioned in a statement that any tax change should consider the effect it would have on the entire system and not just as an isolated tax. While the study, headed by a Clemson economist, made no recommendation on specific tax changes, the Palmetto Institute urged the Legislature to immediately establish an independent, statewide tax study commission. The commission would review and evaluate legislative tax proposals.

Political reality says, however, that the property tax reform clamor is too loud to delay debate, particularly in an election year. Committee proposals to be introduced early in the session range from a House push to totally eliminate the property tax on owner-occupied homes to partial elimination in the Senate. One of the most discussed new sources of revenue for supplanting that tax is a two cent on the dollar increase in the state sales tax. A Senate committee's proposed constitutional changes involve the way property is assessed for tax purposes. Our report said the changes would scuttle the periodic fair market value system for a 'point of sale approach' that would stipulate property only would be reappraised when it is sold or substantially altered, along with some local option provisions. A second amendment would involve limits on the size of local tax increases.

Anything less than a statewide method of property assessment should be a matter of great concern. Berkeley County Supervisor Jim Rozier described the 'point of sale' concept as 'an awful idea.'

'Our children and grandchildren would never be able to buy a house,' he said. 'They would be paying all the taxes.' Mr. Rozier added that if legislators want to do something 'they should take education off the local tax bill.' The property tax, he noted, was designed for such services as police, fire protection and libraries. 'It wasn't meant for education. That's a state responsibility.'

Regardless of whether the Legislature formally creates a tax study commission, there must be a way to get an independent, outside review of the impact of the legislative proposals, particularly the constitutional amendments. Certainly the Palmetto Institute could take the lead.

There is nothing more basic, more complicated, more controversial or more subject to political demagoguery than the property tax issue. What's needed is less heat and more light.