The New York City Advisory Commission on Property Tax Reform released its final report last week, just before the de Blasio administration headed out the door. While we’ve been critical of this process for the more than five years we’ve pushed reforms, we have to admit: We are impressed.

The panel, jointly created by the mayor and City Council, has proposed some smart, substantive measures to make the system more equitable and transparent, along with safeguards and financial relief to ensure the changes do not cause undue harm.

The hard part is over. Now comes the really hard part: making it happen.

We are ready to do what it takes. But almost all these crucial changes must be made by the governor and Legislature.

Gov. Hochul’s just-proposed $1 billion statewide property-tax rebate, mostly for low-income families and seniors, might be at least an implicit acknowledgment that the problem must be addressed. But those rebate checks won’t unravel the convoluted mess that is our property-tax system. Albany must make real reform a priority in 2022.

This is the fifth op-ed we’ve penned on this in three years, and the case for comprehensive reform has only gotten stronger. New York is reeling from a pandemic that’s wreaked havoc on our economy and our lives. Yet as most tax revenue dropped precipitously during the recent recession, property-tax bills continued to climb. In 2008, when income and property-transfer taxes hit a peak in Gotham, property taxes were 35 percent of city tax revenues. Now they account for close to half.

The problem is our city’s property-tax system is fundamentally unfair and purposefully opaque. To determine the levy, the Department of Finance calculates the market value of all city real estate, takes a fraction of that number to establish the assessed value, then multiplies that by an average tax rate. A state law capping the yearly increase at 2% does not apply to New York City, which is why, in part, our levy has increased about 75% in a decade — more than four times the rate of inflation.

Another law requires that levy be divided proportionally among the four property-tax classes, which are each assessed and taxed at different rates, with various exemptions. And the proportion — or “class share” — changes with each year’s budget, making next year’s taxes impossible to predict.

Common sense dictates that homes with the same market value in the same property class should have the same property-tax bill. That’s far from the case. One big reason is another state law capping the amount single property assessments can increase at 6% each year, or 20% over five years.

In theory, this should protect homeowners from rapidly rising taxes. In practice, it has artificially reduced the tax bills of high-priced homes in hot real estate markets, while the tax bills for moderately priced homes continue to increase steadily. That is why our ex-mayor pays about $4,000 in property taxes on his Park Slope home valued at close to $1.6 million while a home on Staten Island’s North Shore valued at $700,000 gets hit with $6,500 in property taxes.

Another cause of inequity is yet another state law requiring condos and co-ops to be assessed as income-producing properties, rather than based on comparable sales. This is particularly problematic in Manhattan, where the values of luxury condos are often determined by comps to rent-stabilized apartments nearby. This illogical methodology leads to many homes being extremely undervalued and explains why the median effective tax rate — taxes paid per $100 of market value — in Manhattan is only $0.45, less than half the ETR in Staten Island ($0.97) and The Bronx ($0.91).

And because the city levy is based on the total market value of real estate, homeowners in these working- and middle-class outer-borough neighborhoods are subsidizing the property taxes of wealthier ones.

Some of the commission’s recommendations could help. Eliminating the assessment cap would redistribute property-tax liability among the posh Upper West Side brownstones and modest homes in Tottenville and Bensonhurst. The commission also urges expanding Class 1 properties into a new “residential class” that would include one- to three-family homes, co-ops, condos and four- to 10-unit rental buildings and using a sales-based methodology — not rental income — to value them.

The commission also suggests ending “fractional assessments” and instead calculating property taxes by multiplying a new lower tax rate by full market value and fixing class shares rather than changing them every year. This would make tax bills easy to understand and more predictable.

And to help ease the transition, the commission proposes financial safeguards like five-year phase-in of market-value changes, a homestead exemption for owner-occupied homes and “circuit breakers” to help ease the burden of tax increases for lower-income families and seniors.

None of these solutions is perfect, but let’s not let the perfect be the enemy of the good.

The New York City Advisory Commission on Property Tax Reform has done its job. Now it’s time for the Legislature and governor to do theirs.

Joe Borelli is the minority leader of the New York City Council. Justin Brannan, a Democrat, represents Southern Brooklyn in the City Council.