Even if it weren't a blatant piece of single-interest ballot box budgeting, the proposed education initiative now being circulated is so riddled with problems that it deserves the ripping it's likely to get if it makes it to the November ballot.

Because there are likely to be two other tax increase measures on the ballot - one has already made it - none has a great chance of passing. But the self-styled Improving Classroom Education Act being run by the California Teachers Association (the state's biggest teachers union) and actor-director Rob "Meathead" Reiner is in a class by itself.

The measure seeks to raise $6 billion for preschools and for class size reduction, teacher salaries and materials in K-12 schools. The money would come from a split roll in which commercial property is taxed at a higher rate than residential property.

If that were done well, it wouldn't be a bad way to rectify some serious inequities in the state's tax structure.

At the same time it would generate more revenues from businesses that have borne a shrinking share of the state's property tax burden and that have enjoyed a hefty series of other tax breaks, state and federal.

But it isn't done well.

In 1980, according to the California Budget Project, homeowners paid less than 32 percent of the total property tax. Last year, that had risen to more than 38 percent, effectively an increase of over 20 percent of the burden. That's because, officially, commercial property changes hands - and thus is reassessed - less frequently than residential property.

The word "officially" is shorthand for the fact that while majority control of the stock of most corporations - i.e. real ownership - turns over roughly every three to five years, that change is not reflected in reassessments. Nor is the fact that a lot of commercial property is leased and thus turns over even more slowly.

But the Reiner/CTA proposal doesn't address that problem. Instead, in their pursuit of a fat windfall, the sponsors want to increase the rate on all commercial property by 55 percent. That's an anti-competitive step that hits new businesses - most of them small businesses - particularly hard and gives established operations, which are assessed at far below market value, an even larger advantage than they have now.

Had the measure required the annual assessment of all commercial property at real market value, it would have eliminated a major distortion in the market and created incentives for property to be used more efficiently. An exemption could have been created to protect mom-and-pop enterprises.

But that's only one of its problems. Since the initiative requires no accountability for how the K-12 windfall is spent - it leaves that to local districts - there's no assurance that they won't spend it as they have in the past: throw most of it on the bargaining table for the sponsor-union, which will gobble it up for salary and benefits hikes for teachers who are already the highest paid in the country.

The kids, the parents and the community get little in return. There are no incentives to reward successful teachers, much less draw them into the classrooms - mainly those serving poor and minority kids - that most need them.

The sponsors argue that because local school boards will control the money, it will be spent responsibly. But the record indicates that the lion's share of every boost in unrestricted funds to local districts usually goes to salary and benefit hikes that, in too many cases, the districts couldn't afford and later drove them to the verge of insolvency. That's hardly surprising since a lot of those districts are dominated by their own unions.

In a state with a high cost of living, a great many teachers aren't paid nearly enough. But some are paid far too much, and little in the system - certainly little sponsored by the CTA - has encouraged differential pay to create incentives for quality.

But the worst thing about this grab for money is that it's all earmarked for one purpose. The split roll has long been regarded as a possible way to raise general revenues while at the same time making the property tax system more economically efficient. The Reiner/CTA proposal - win or lose - kills that possibility for many years to come.

Of course the schools need more money. Contrary to the proponents' handouts, we're not 45th in the country in our per-pupil spending. But we are 30th or maybe 33rd, below the national average and far below what a state like this should spend.

And of course, the public's general distrust of the Legislature makes it nearly impossible to raise revenues not earmarked for some objective the voters support. But each such measure compounds the problem, making it harder for government to respond to new situations - the current deficit not least among them.

Last week there were rumors that the Reiner/CTA drive would be suspended in favor of yet another CTA deal with Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. Gale Kaufman, who's running the campaign, emphatically denied them.