SEEKONK — Voters will get the chance Monday night to approve a controversial $15,000 proposal that calls for auditing three years of athletic program budgets.

But the proposal, drafted at the request of a resident who claims that improprieties worth far more than $15,000 have been going on the School Department for years, will not be getting a lot of support for town officials.

Two members of the Board of Selectmen, which put the item on the agenda of Monday night’s Town Meeting without investigating any of the allegations, now acknowledge that the board acted hastily.

Members backed off after School Committee Chairman Omer LeClerc told the board and the Finance Committee at a subsequent meeting that the issues raised by resident Gary Sagar have been addressed and, where necessary, corrected.

Sagar said yesterday that because some residents have urged him to find another way to get the answers without spending $15,000, he will announce Monday night that he would like to withdraw his proposal, at least for now.

But he said that he may resurrect his proposal in spring if he can’t get the information he wants in the coming months.

So for now, the item remains on the Town Meeting agenda, and voters could approve it, anyway.

Sagar has been on an exhaustive crusade to get details of the athletic program budget for more than two years.

In general, he has focused on what the town received — in terms of equipment and services — in exchange for letting coaches run private clinics in school facilities.

He has also sought a detailed accounting of all money raised from high school ticket sales, and whether that money actually went to the town instead of private programs

And he has questioned why a part-time coach who lives out of town was able to let his son attend Seekonk High School without paying tuition, a perk reserved for full-time teachers.

LeClerc said the School Committee has changed its policies to make sure that the tuition issue doesn’t surface again.

When it comes to using school facilities, a former superintendent approved the arrangements that have piqued Sagar’s interests, and nothing illegal was done, LeClerc said.

“My sense is, the superintendent did what he thought was good for the kids. No one was going to benefit except the kids, and Gary doesn’t want to let it go. He keeps digging. He keeps saying ‘I want more,’ but there is no more,” LeClerc said.

Consider, for example, Sagar’s March 15, 2005, request to the high school for accounting records.

His request ran for seven single-spaced pages.

In just a single paragraph regarding basketball camps, he asked for a complete list of all camp employees, consultants, subcontractors, coaches and the amount each earned, along with information about whether they were covered by workers compensation insurance, whether the School Department had a certificate of insurance, whether the employees had received background checks, whether they met Seekonk Board of Health regulations, details on how average costs per camper were calculated, whether different campers were charged different amounts, and how costs and incomes from the programs were calculated.

LeClerc said the requests have been overwhelming.

“He thinks there’s money to be recovered, but as far we know, there is no money to be recovered. And if there were, it would be little at best. Do you spend $15,000 to collect $200, especially when there’s no criminal activity?” the chairman said.

For example, in exchange for allowing a private basketball program to use school facilities without charge, the School Department received donated uniforms and equipment.

“Maybe they should have been made to pay,” LeClerc said. “If we thought for a minute that there would be something illegal, we would have taken care of this. We’ve done our research. There’s nothing done that’s illegal.”

Sagar said that part of his persistence come from the frustration of having to fight the School Department for information. And even when he’s gotten data, nobody can provide any documentation to show that the town got a fair deal.

“If it’s a wash, I have no issue with that whatsoever,” he said.

Selectman John Turner, who pushed to have the audit proposal placed on Monday night’s agenda, said he’s now satisfied, based on LeClerc’s explanations, that everything is OK.

He said he found out about the allegations only the day before the deadline for putting items on the Town Meeting warrant, and wanted to make sure it was considered.

As a private individual, Turner said, he will be voting against the audit. “I believe the School Committee has addressed the information.”

Selectman David F. Viera said the board decided to put the proposal before the voters because rejecting it might raise suspicions that the selectmen were trying to cover something up.

“That’s why I was trying to get some specifics from [Sagar],” Viera said. “I think [Town Administrator Paul Lemont] is correct. If there’s something illegal, why not go to the Attorney General?”

(In August, 2005, Sagar wrote to the state Ethics Commission asking for an investigation. The commission notified him in June that “this matter does not warrant further investigation or the imposition of formal sanctions at this time.”)

Turner said that if Sagar had been given a proper explanation by the School Committee, Sagar probably wouldn’t have pushed for a vote at Town Meeting.

LeClerc said the selectmen could have avoided all this by calling him and letting him know that Sagar’s proposal for an audit was going to be considered by the board.

Selectmen Robert L. Richardson, John Whelan and Chairman Michael H. Brady could not be reached for comment. Calls placed to them on Friday and yesterday were not returned.