AUBURN - The tenor of Tuesday night's Auburn Enlarged City School District Board of Education meeting made it difficult to say which stirred more passion: the Maroons' state football championship or what the fields they played on were made of.

Even before members began considering the merits of putting a proposal for synthetic turf at Holland Stadium out to a public vote, five school district residents took to the podium set up in the high school library, and urged the board to keep the topic of turf in play.

“Maybe the timing's off,” said district resident Dennis Sedor, referring to the city council's adoption last week of the 2007 county tax rate, which will see Auburn's tax levy increase 7.4 percent.

Still, Sedor said Holland Stadium showed “great potential,” and cited possibilities for generating revenue from a turf carpet at the field located behind East Middle School.

The community's palpable support for the football team as it won each game that ultimately brought it to the Carrier Dome in November, he said, was a significant change from the negative drift of local conversation about turf when the district initially proposed installing a synthetic surface on the high school practice field.

“If you couldn't feel the electricity in the air ... it was wonderful,” he said. “Auburn will support its football team and its community.”

Taxpayers voted overwhelmingly against a similar proposal in October. That plan, which the school district hyped aggressively over the summer months and through to the referendum, would have put a synthetic carpet on the high school practice field, with state aid covering 85 percent. Voters rejected the proposition, 2,428 to 1,390.

Acknowledging that the summer perhaps precluded input from and access to information for vacationing residents, schools superintendent John Plume asked the board to begin a public conversation about putting up another proposition.

He asked members to consider what kind of input they'd need to move forward with another referendum, timelines for the process and whether each member would willingly commit to active support of such a proposal.

“What's your pleasure, in terms of directing yourselves as a board?” he said.

Member Frederick Cornelius solidly dissented. Citing the district's public information sessions and other exhaustive attempts only a few months ago to inform and address taxpayers' concerns, he said, “What's changed since the last discussion? Nothing, I respect the community voted it down. We discussed all these things, and the community didn't agree. That's part of the process.”

Reminding the board he'd emphasized turf on a varsity field from the beginning, William Andre said he wanted to spend as little time as possible on the matter. The district faces more pressing issues, he remarked, than athletic fields.

“The community wants to see us talking about those issues, not field turf,” he said.

Yet the possibilities for creating revenue (by hosting sectionals or leasing out the field), helping Auburn's economy, ultimately became the dominant theme.

“We need to develop revenue sources for the overall community,” said David Lansford. “It's not just a school thing. This can create revenue for the city that can benefit many.”

Members asked Plume to return with more information: principally how much revenue comparative schools with turf fields have seen, opportunities for corporate sponsorship and possibilities for leasing out Holland Stadium to other groups for events.

Staff writer Olivia Goldberg can be reached at 253-5311, ext. 235 or at olivia.goldberg@lee.net