South Portland High School’s athletic complex. Contributed photo/South Portland School Department

The South Portland school board settled on a multiple-choice format Monday night for how it will ask voters about an athletic complex bond.

After a $12.3 million bond to revamp the high school’s aging athletic facilties failed in November 2024, the board finally decided on a multiquestion referendum with much less expensive bond proposals.

But as the city faces a $5 million budget gap and sent layoff notices to more than 20 employees this month, some called on the board to reconsider moving forward on the athletic referendum at all.

Central to the athletic complex question is whether the project should include any synthetic turf.

The natural grass versus artificial turf debate has played out over several workshops this winter. Supporters of a synthetic turf field, like the South Portland athletic director, say it will allow for more playing time and expanded opportunities for various athletic teams and extracurriculars like the marching band. Opponents are concerned about the environmental impacts of a synthetic field, the health effects of toxic chemicals and the higher cost.

In late February, the board was poised to vote on a $8.25 million bond proposed by the superintendent, which included two artificial turf fields, when board member Rosemarie DeAngelis proposed a substitute motion that would strip the bond down to what she described as the most critical elements: the field, the track, bathrooms and lighting. She pitched a multiple-choice question, which would allow voters to pick a $4.3 million natural grass option, a $5.1 million artificial grass version, or neither.

Superintendent Timothy Matheney said he would have to consult with the city’s attorneys about the viability of the proposed ballot question, and Monday night the board reviewed a new format for the question. The revised version of the referendum splits the issue into two separate questions: one will ask for approval of a $4.7 million bond with a natural grass field, new track, lighting and permanent bathrooms. The other asks for approval of a $5.5 million bond with an artificial turf field, and the rest of the same improvements.

South Portland School Board member Rosemarie DeAngelis holds a basket so an audience member can randomly select the order of items about an athletic complex bond on the November ballot. Riley Board/Press Herald Staff Writer

But what happens if both measures pass? The board settled on having “conflicting questions,” wherein the one that gets the most yes votes prevails.

In order to not suggest support for one proposal over the other, the board decided to settle the order of the questions by drawing either “grass” or “turf” out of a basket randomly. An audience member drew the word “grass” meaning that question will be listed first.

The board voted to move forward with the revised questions, with the natural grass question listed first. It will appear on the ballot for city voters in November.

Public commenters, like Beth Meyers, thanked the board for working toward a more fair ballot question.

“The people of South Portland voted against the first referendum, and as a board, you realized that you cannot assume that you know why. There are multiple reasons it did not pass,” she said. “In a democracy, it’s not up to a select few — despite their expertise, their knowledge or their professional opinion — to decide independently what is the best choice.”

Other comments expressed concern about how the new ballot plan might be confusing and unclear to voters.

BUDGET TIMING

Amid the referendum workshops, the district announced that in order to balance its budget, it would be eliminating more than 20 staff positions, and sent layoff notices to employees in early March. Teachers, ed techs and the teachers union have turned out at recent meetings in strong opposition to those cuts and the way they were announced.

Some public commenters Monday night expressed concern about the district’s priorities and the decision to move forward with the athletic complex project during a time it is cutting positions. Among them was student representative Eliot Wertheimer, who said he was unaware of the severity of the district’s budget issues when the board voted on the athletic complex motion on Feb. 24. He said approving an athletics bond while cutting positions in music indicated an unfair prioritization from the district.

“It’s a shame that we’re here without being astoundingly clear on the budget situation we were in before we made a decision,” he testified.

Nicholas Boggs, an ed tech in the district and parent of a middle school student, said amid those budget cuts, it felt like the wrong time to move forward on the referendum.

“This is not the time to be asking the citizens for money,” he said.

South Portland High School student Howard Saffer-Meng also expressed concern about the referendum, and said that money would be better spent on educating multilingual students or music programs.

“It seems very obviously clear to me that if we really are millions of dollars short of paying our teachers, our ed techs, making sure our classrooms are staffed and the kids are getting the support they need, we should not be spending $5 million on an athletic complex that we need, apparently, because our fields aren’t nice enough, or our tracks aren’t as amazing as they could be,” he said. “To me, these issues seem to pale in comparison to the much larger ones that afflict the hundreds of teachers and students in our district.”

Note: This story was updated at 11:30 a.m. to correct the spelling of a student representative’s name.