EDITORIAL\Watch your wallet\College trustees call an end run around Prop. 13 to raise taxes.

IT'S no secret that a lot of people view government with distrust. So what does the Los Angeles Community College District do about it? It confirms their worst suspicions by coming up with a plan to ambush the taxpayers.

For months now, a majority of the college district's board members have been trying to impose a sneaky, unjustifiable new tax on property owners.

Of course, they don't dare to call it a tax. They say it's an assessment, which is a technical name for this type of cash grab.

But it's a form of taxation, all the same. To prove it, the government seizes the property of landowners who refuse to pay assessments.

Last year, members of the college district board proposed the assessment plan, and immediately drew fire from taxpayer groups, the public and even a few board members who strenuously opposed it.

Since then, the board hired a pollster to survey 1,000 voters to gauge the feelings of the electorate. Here's what the survey found: Popular support for the assessment is less than the two-thirds voter approval required to pass a tax increase in an election.

So, did the board nix the idea? Think again. These elected officials are going ahead with it, because they see a loophole large enough to drive this tax truck through.

By loosely interpreting an obscure state law, the board - acting alone - can impose the new charge without a vote of the people, as long as the board describes the tax as a "benefit assessment."

However, the board first will be required to hold two public hearings (they're tentatively set in April, with notices to be mailed to owners of the 1.1 million parcels that would be billed for the new assessment).

Regardless of the turnout at the hearings, the only sure way of blocking the scheme is for protests to be submitted in writing by more than 50 percent of the owners of all 1.1 million parcels - which is unlikely.

Besides objecting to the sneaky way the board intends to fleece taxpayers, we also oppose the flimsy rationale for the new charge. It's an abuse of the system of benefit-assessment districts, which the law permits landowners to impose upon themselves.

In this instance, the college district offers the improbable argument that landscaping, lighting and other facilities on the district's campuses provide benefits to all property owners, so the others ought to pay up. (It makes about as much sense as painting your house and sending the bill to your neighbor, on the theory that he should pay because his house now is in a nicer neighborhood.)

In spite of the board's shenanigans, the district really does deserve more money from state higher-education funds, because community colleges are a terrific value for taxpayers and students alike.

But, this scheme is the wrong way to raise revenues, conflicting with the spirit - if not the letter - of Proposition 13, which limited tax increases.

We hope the board will come to its senses and put an end to this folly. They should quit acting as if they were elected by voters to pick their pockets.