This month, the state approved SAD 61 to follow an independent path without consolidating with other school districts.

By Feb. 1, the district must show the state the chosen trail has no thorns that adversely affect education in the district.

That mixed message is what SAD 61 officials and school board members confront while preparing to reconcile $2.5 million in Essential Programs and Services subsidy reductions and additional spending reductions mandated by the Reorganization Law in the 2008/09 district budget.

The vexing question in SAD 61 is just what proposed cuts could be viewed by the state as creating an adverse impact.

“Does after-school busing or an increase of students in a classroom cause an adverse impact?” SAD 61 Superintendent Frank Gorham asked last week.

Gorham knows the Dec. 14 response from Department of Education Commissioner Susan Gendron is clearly based on the law passed by the Legislature in June. However, clarity is lost when specifics are considered, and the state’s response calls on the district to justify whatever might be cut from administration, special education, transportation, facilities and maintenance.

David Connerty-Marin, a spokesman for the department of education, said the onus is on SAD 61 to show proposed cuts would not be detrimental. “They have to make the case to us,” he said, although the proposed cuts could be discussed at meetings before the details are filed.

The Department of Education is emphasizing the need to maintain quality education to all districts in response to consolidation or alternative plans filed, Connerty-Marin said. Because SAD 61 is uncommon in that its alternative plan was accepted after being rejected in September, following the full letter and intent of the law are especially underscored.

The loss of state subsidies and required 50 percent reduction in district administration spending and additional 5 percent cuts in special education, transportation, and facilities and management have the district considering the elimination of four positions in administration and closing as many as four facilities by 2010.

Already outlined in the plan is the elimination of four administration positions to reduce more than $158,000. Other proposed cuts bring the total to more than $185,000 with a target figure of more than $280,000 in reductions.

The transportation budget needs to be pared by almost $200,000, with the elimination of a Naples bus route as the largest portion of $27,000 already identified in savings. At this point, Gorham is uncertain if ending the route or eliminating bus service used by students in extra-curricular activities would be deemed an adverse effect by the department.

Reductions in facilities and maintenance spending must total more than $1 million, with $44,500 identified as definite cuts in the alternative plan filed Dec. 1. Other cuts that would be considered include reducing the amount set aside for district capital improvements by more than $500,000.

Concerned that cuts to the special education budget would violate state and federal laws, the alternative plan calls for savings to come from closing district facilities, including Casco Memorial School, where special education programs are conducted.

Voters in Casco would have to approve closing the school by a majority vote after two-thirds of the SAD 61 School Board also approved the plan. Bridgton Memorial School, home of district adult education services, could also be closed, with special and adult education and the SAD 61 administrative offices moving to Lake Region Middle School.

As the SAD 61 school board and administration look for ways to obey the law and deal with the subsidy losses, Connerty-Marin said the situation could have been more drastic, because though a $36 million state spending reduction is at the center of the reorganization law, it was taken from an overall increase in state education spending that still amounts to $43 million.