Lubec voters defeated the proposed 2008B2009 MSAD 19 budget in voting on Tuesday, June 10, by eight votes, with 136 in favor and 144 opposing the budget. The $2,050,000 budget had been approved at a public meeting five days before but went down to defeat in the state-mandated second vote. The budget, though lower than last year's, would require a 12% increase in the local share, because of a severe cut in the state subsidy. "We had a higher than usual voter turnout," explained Town Clerk Betty Case. "We are lucky if we get 200 voters for this kind of election."

"I voted against the budget," said one resident, who asked not to be identified by name because she has a child in the Lubec Consolidated School. "We could save a lot of money if we tuitioned kids to WA [Washington Academy], and their test [scores] are so much better." Other opponents of the budget cited the increase in taxes and raises for the principal and others. At the June 5 public meeting, an amendment to reduce the administrative cost by $48,000 went down to defeat.

Under the new state consolidation law, the school board must propose another budget, which will then be presented in a town meeting, and finally be subjected to another referendum vote. The first meeting to discuss a new budget is scheduled for June 17, with the public vote and the referendum tentatively scheduled by the end of June.

At a public meeting on June 5, Lubec voters approved a school budget essentially as proposed by the MSAD Board of Directors. The board had reduced the total school cost by about 6% from last year but, because of a loss of state aid of almost $300,000, the local share raised from taxpayers would increase by 12%. Voters chose to add an additional $25,000, recommending that the board retain the full-time position of secretary to the superintendent with the additional funds. The 62 voters present approved, after some discussions, the remainder of the $2 million budget as proposed.

Cost center one, covering pre-kindergarten through high school instruction, was the largest of the cost centers at $1,161,000. This cost center covers the cost of teachers, educational technicians, guidance counselor and other personnel directly related to teaching, as well as books, audiovisual equipment and the like. The board's recommendation reduced these costs by approximately $160,000 from the 2007-2008 budget, and included the combining of the fifth and sixth grades, resulting in one less elementary teaching position, and a reduction of one full-time teacher from the high school. There was also a substantial reduction in the special education area, as well as cuts throughout this center. Superintendent Michael Buckley explained that 17 of the 18 schools in Washington County have at least one class with combined grades. Several parents questioned the wisdom of combining the grades, and asked whether there would be an ed tech full-time in the class, as had been promised at a previous public meeting. Buckley said, "There is no guarantee that there will be assistance all the time." A question from the voters about a comparison of the cost of closing the high school and tuitioning students versus the current budget was deemed not appropriate for the meeting, which "deals only with voting on the budget before you," ruled moderator Harold Bailey. The cost center was passed as proposed by a majority.

Cost center three, covering expenses for leadership, the superintendent, principal and board, was the only cost center not approved as proposed. The board had reduced the item by $37,000, mostly by eliminating the superintendent's secretary and combining her duties with those of the other secretaries. An amendment proposed to reduce the center by $48,000 and to return to a three-day-a-week superintendent and reduce the amount for the principal was defeated. Another amendment, to add $25,000 to the budget to retain the secretarial position, passed. Before the vote, moderator Bailey explained that the additional funds would be spent at the discretion of the board, and, though he felt the board would take due cognizance of the wishes of the voters, the funds could not be specifically earmarked.

The only cost center with a significant increase year on year was center six, operations. The board proposed increasing the appropriation for heating fuel by $70,000, doubling the previous year's budget. The board informed those at the meeting that about $125,000 had been spent in the current school year for fuel, and they had been unable to lock in prices for oil for the next year. Both bids received previously had been predicated on the cost at the time of delivery. Cost center six, covering the food service, was higher by $16,000, because of increasing costs of food and a one-time cost as a result of an employee's retirement at the end of the 2008-2009 school year. The two and a half hour meeting concluded with all articles passed and a budget of $2,050,000 placed before voters, as required by the state's new consolidation law, on June 10.