Twenty years ago this June 6, California voters approved Proposition 13 and signaled revolutionary change in the state's tax structure. Love it or loath it, Proposition 13 has survived the test of time that has included assaults by opponents, initiative challenges, repeated efforts by the Legislature to change it, and a thorough judicial review.

Despite all the efforts of its critics, the initiative that cut property taxes more than half in 1978 remains in effect. It has been a catalyst for a host of fundamental reforms that have changed the way we look at and even define government in California.

Before passage of Proposition 13, taxpayers were faced with arbitrary assessments, scandalous assessor behavior and skyrocketing property taxes. California was in the running to be the nation's highest-tax state. Even after Proposition 13, California ranks among the leaders in per capita burden of state and local taxes and fees, and among the heaviest burdened in proportion to income when compared to other large states. Indeed, Californians pay more than $100 billion a year in total taxes, fees and assessments to finance state and local governments.

Proposition 13 has worked better than almost everyone predicted. It has provided stable, ongoing property tax relief, which is something no other proposal at the time would have achieved.

Opponents of Proposition 13 claimed that a $5 billion-a-year reduction in property tax revenue would devastate local governments and schools. They were wrong. Even within Proposition 13 limits, the property tax has proven to be a stable source of local government revenue. It grew nearly 10 percent per year between 1980 and 1992, when, even in recession, the growth exceeded 7 percent.

Because of Proposition 13, California's property taxes are far less volatile. Statistics drawn from State Board of Equalization reports show property tax revenue was nearly three times more volatile, or subject to annual fluctuation, under the old market-value system.

Even with falling real estate values since 1991, property tax growth has held up remarkably strong because Proposition 13 acts as a reservoir of property value for local government.

Cities, counties and special districts have backfilled some property tax revenue losses by raising fees and other taxes. Before the recent recession, state and local revenue had grown to exceed 16 percent of personal income - virtually the same level as 1977-78, prior to the passage of Proposition 13. In 1993-94, fees and assessments grew by almost $2 billion - faster than all California state and local taxes combined for that year.

One reason Proposition 13 has survived unscathed is the inherent unfairness of schemes that have been discussed or proposed to take its place. For example, 92 percent of elderly property owners would have to pay higher taxes under a suggested revenue-neutral change that would involve raising all assessments to true market value along with lowering the property tax rate to end up with the same amount of total revenue. This was found in a 1993 study by the California Policy Seminar of the University of California. Further, the study found that under the hypothetical revenue-neutral change in Los Angeles County, 43 percent of households with 1975 base years would find their property tax bills increasing by over 160 percent.

Prior to 1978, property owners had faced uncertainty at the hands of assessors using a market value approach that put objectivity at risk. Proposition 13's acquisition-based valuation is far more objective, and free of assessor manipulation that had reached scandalous proportions in the 1960s.

The lasting legacy for taxpayers is the protection against surprise increases in assessed valuation. Taxpayers know what to expect in property taxes when they buy property and what they will owe 10 years down the road.

Proposition 13 was a shot heard around the world 20 years ago. It is now a prominent and permanent part of California's culture.