PORTLAND – With the statewide referendum vote less than a week away, Gov. John E. Baldacci intensified his campaign against the school funding question Wednesday in a series of public appearances and television ads.

Speaking to more than 500 members of the Portland Regional Chamber of Commerce, the governor said the initiative supported by the Maine Municipal Association and the Maine Education Association would have a chilling effect on state programs.

In order to find the estimated $250 million that would be needed immediately to raise the state’s share of local education costs from 43 percent to 55 percent, Baldacci said the Legislature could be forced to slash funding for public safety, child care and mental health.

“Question 1 is only half of the equation,” the governor said. “Where’s the $250 million going to come from?”

The only statewide issue on the June 8 ballot, the referendum is the same question that last November won more votes than a competing measure proposed by the governor and state lawmakers. Because Question 1A didn’t get more than 50 percent of the vote, however, it is back on the ballot by itself this June for a straight up or down vote.

The proposal is perceived by many school officials and municipal officers as the best hope for tax relief, since education costs are the primary drivers of tax increases in Maine cities and towns.

But in television ads that were airing with increasing frequency Wednesday, Baldacci insisted there were no guarantees that municipal governments would be required to direct the additional $250 million in revenue toward education costs and property tax relief.

“Tax reform isn’t about shifting taxes,” Baldacci said at the chamber’s Eggs and Issues Forum at the Holiday Inn By The Bay in Portland. “It’s about getting the spending policies changed so that you folks can have tax relief and so that Maine doesn’t have the highest tax burden in state and local taxes.”

An MMA spokesman countered, however, that the Legislature has had many opportunities to take on tax reform in the past and continuously failed to do so.

“The primary purpose of a citizens initiative is to send a message to the Legislature when the people feel the Legislature is not responding to their needs,” said Michael Starn of the MMA. “This responds very well to the Legislature’s inability to get a real handle on property tax relief and tax reform.”

But Baldacci said Wednesday that, while the competing measure had failed last November, he and members of the Legislature were able to resurrect many of its provisions and sign them into law this year as part of the state’s new Essential Programs and Services plan for education.

The law phases in additional school funding to reach the 55 percent target over a longer period of time than the Question 1 proposal, while requiring greater efficiencies and cost-savings by school districts.

The governor said proponents of Question 1 have attempted to imply that the Legislature had been ineffectual on tax reform and tax relief when the new EPS law was actually evidence to the contrary.

“Essential Programs and Services represents a true merger between [both of the November questions] since it means the January budget must include $70 million more for education in addition to the $725 million that goes out annually,” Baldacci said. “And by ramping down [expenses], we will be able to at least reduce the costs and spending practices so that people get some kind of relief through new controls that will be out in place.”

While the governor was wrapping up his Wednesday morning presentation in Portland, education leaders, school funding experts and policy-makers were preparing in Augusta for a State House press conference where they, too, railed against Question 1.

In a prepared statement, the opponents said the initiative would overburden taxpayers throughout the state and saddle Maine schools with bad education policies.

Peter Geiger, chairman of the Maine Coalition for Excellence in Education, said his organization had “long supported the Essential Programs and Services school funding model” that was embodied in LD 1924 passed earlier this year by the Legislature.

“LD 1924 is a more fiscally responsible way to increase the state’s share of education funding than the approach of Question 1,” Geiger said. “With the passage of LD 1924, the Legislature has committed to an approach without the drastic fiscal and special education implications of Question 1.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.