FREEPORT – Unhappy with a consultant’s updated analysis of what a stand-alone Freeport school district would cost, Moving Freeport Forward, a group of residents advocating for the withdrawal of the town from Regional School Unit 5, will ask the Town Council for a citizen-driven data review.

“We need a bottom-up analysis,” said Charly Haversat, a spokeswoman for the group. “The update was a step in the right direction, but not as thorough as we need.”

On Oct. 17, the group presented Freeport Town Clerk Tracey Stevens with a petition signed by 500 Freeport residents, representing 10 percent of the number of voters from the last gubernatorial election, that, once verified, will trigger a special election to authorize the formation of a committee to explore withdrawal. If approved, the council must then appoint a withdrawal committee to create a draft plan for the creation of a stand-alone school district.

That plan must eventually be submitted to the Maine Department of Education for its input before any local referendum can be held on leaving the RSU.

The signatures must be verified before an Oct. 29 Freeport Town Council meeting, said Stevens, when councilors are expected to set a date for the special election.

The updated analysis by educational consultants Charles Lawton and Jack Turcotte was in response to sharp criticism from the Freeport Town Council about what was seen as their incomplete data on a potential stand-alone Freeport school district. Their second analysis reveals the town would be responsible for an additional $1.6 million in tax commitment for a Freeport-only scenario, not $4 million as the pair previously reported.

The study was commissioned by the Town Council in July at the urging of residents who were unhappy with the defeat of a June 11 referendum that called for a $16.9 million bond to renovate Freeport High School. According to the council in July, the study was meant to look at potential costs to taxpayers and the impact a withdrawal would have on the curriculum. The consultants were also asked to work with town staff on a speculative, Freeport-only school budget.

The initial results of the study were released on Sept. 27.

During its Oct. 1 regular meeting, the council blasted Turcotte and Lawson, of Planning Decisions, for not providing specific data for a stand-alone Freeport school district.

“What we asked for is a likely figure of what it would cost us, but what we’ve got is the worst-case scenario that doesn’t account for any possible savings that we might get from not educating students from Pownal and Durham,” said District 2 Councilor Sarah Tracy during the Oct. 1 meeting.

Lawton and Turcotte agreed to provide further analysis and sent their findings to Freeport Town Manager Peter Joseph on Oct. 17.

“Freeport’s actual operational expenditures in fiscal year 2009 were slightly more than $15.8 million,” wrote Lawton. “Based on discussions with the Finance Director for RSU 5, increases in spending directly attributable to Freeport schools amounted to approximately $700,000 for direct instruction and related support and just over $200,000 for additional contributions for teacher retirement. Assuming inflation-related cost increases of 3 percent over the entire five-year period adds just over $475,000, bringing the ‘built forward’ Freeport-only budget to just over $17.2 million,” wrote Lawton. “In short, the ‘deconstructing down’ from the actual RSU 5 budget for FY 2014 estimate and the ‘building forward’ from the Freeport budget of FY 2009 arrive at very similar estimates of the cost of providing the actual education received by Freeport students in FY 2014 – something between $17 million and $17.2 million.”

The scenario “effectively replaces the $4 million estimated cost that was previously presented,” wrote Joseph in a town manager’s report to the Freeport Town Council.

Haversat’s group is seeking more data.

“There are significant details to look at that will give us a clear, fact-driven analysis of what a stand-alone Freeport district will look like,” said Haversat. “It’s not so much about splitting hairs as it is going further with the data.”