HOLDEN – Members of the SAD 63 board of directors will consider a request for an alternative budget adoption process during their meeting at 7 p.m. Monday at the Holden School.

The alternative, requested by elected officials from two of the district’s three member towns, would involve a two-part budget approval process that would include a referendum. The plan could be put into place by a board vote or by residents themselves petitioning for a referendum.

So far, Clifton and Eddington selectmen have asked that the alternative process be implemented, Superintendent Ray Hart said Friday. Holden town councilors have requested additional information before taking a position on the matter.

Janice Tutt, Clifton’s administrative assistant, and Eddington Town Manager Pamela Violette both said Friday the referendum movement was driven by residents’ desire for property tax relief.

Hart said that another reason cited for the referendum request was that some residents felt “intimidated” while voting, usually done by a show of hands, because district budget meetings tended to draw mostly school personnel and parents and voting usually was conducted by a show of hands. Secret ballot votes, however, can be requested, he said.

As things stand, the local education budget is approved during the district business meeting, usually held in late May.

If the district were to adopt the budget validation referendum system, school officials would set a budget which would then be approved via referendum three days later, Hart said.

If member town voters approve the budget proposal, it would go into effect at the beginning of the next fiscal year.

However, if residents reject the budget, it would go back to school officials for adjustment. Another referendum then would be held, he said. The process could ping-pong several times before a budget proposal is adopted. If that does not occur by July 1, the school system would have to revert to the previous year’s budget.

Those are some reasons Hart said he will not recommend board members approve the request next week.

Hart said the property tax problem was not lost on school officials.

“We’re very well aware of the tax issue and how it is affecting people [in the district],” he said. “We’ve been trying to hold the line on the budget without losing the programs that have been getting increased student achievement.”

As Hart sees it, the double whammy of increasing valuation for SAD 63’s member towns and decreasing enrollment – primary factors in determining levels of state aid – are at the heart of the district’s budget problems.

In a scenario being played out throughout the state, decreased state funding must either be made up through increased property taxes or offset by budget cuts. With many educational costs either set by contract or outside of local control, staffing is one of the few areas in which schools have leeway. Hart said that in relatively small districts, like SAD 63, eliminating a position can mean wiping out an entire program.

He noted that the district’s enrollment dropped by 37 students between April 1 and Oct. 1 of this year.

At roughly $5,000 in state aid per student, Hart said, that eventually will translate to a loss of about $185,000 – funding that likely will have to be made up locally.

There also are costs associated with implementing the Maine Learning Results and the No Child Left Behind Act, the federal government’s major new education reform effort, Hart said.