PORTSMOUTH — The two sides warring over the school budget last night managed to fight over the one thing everyone had agreed upon – ordering a program audit to determine how efficiently the schools spend taxpayers’ money.

In the end, the School Committee voted 4 to 2 to authorize Schools Supt. Susan F. Lusi to seek proposals for the audit – and to set aside $125,000 in the budget for that purpose.

It was the latter move that drew fire, with some spectators accusing the committee’s outgoing vice president, David Croston, of attempting to increase the size of the school deficit.

Croston said the “paper” allocation was merely a bureaucratic step enabling Lusi to set in motion the process of selecting an auditor.

There were so many questions about who would pay for the program audit, first recommended by the Town Council about two weeks ago, that they gave rise to numerous calls for the School Committee to delay taking any action.

But Sylvia Wedge, the committee president, said the committee felt a necessity to move forward, because it is operating “illegally” with a deficit budget.

Outside consultants recently told the School Committee and the Town Council that the schools will fall about $770,000 short of meeting their legal and contractual obligations by the end of the current fiscal year as a result of a budget cut made by voters at a special Financial Town Meeting.

The committee is considering a lawsuit asking the Superior Court to order the town to increase revenue for the schools, but the vote on that action was postponed until Nov. 27, when two new members of the School Committee will be sworn in.

Last night’s debate, which went around in circles, left Lusi, the superintendent, quivering with apparent rage.

“The council wanted a program audit, and now the School Committee wants to be on record approving it, too,” Lusi said, but “we spent more than an hour of time getting nowhere.”

Lusi said she put the item on the School Committee agenda because “everyone wants to be on record supporting accountability.”

She said she had “no problem” tabling consideration of the program audit until the confusion gets sorted out, but “I can’t emphasize enough that this needs to get resolved,” she said.

The School Department is nearly halfway through the fiscal year, she said, and in the next couple of weeks, she will be deciding on a proposal for the next budget period while the current one is in limbo.

She said she either will have to ask people to “please ignore the $770,000 hole” in the current spending plan or else make cuts that will leave the schools with an “illegal” system that does not fulfill its labor contracts or state educational mandates.

“No matter which side you’re on, this really stinks,” Lusi said.

On Oct. 30, the Town Council approved a motion made by Councilman Dennis M. Canario to encourage the School Committee to seek a program audit. Canario was the top vote getter in the Nov. 7 election.

Since that meeting, Lusi said, Driscoll and Town Solicitor Kevin Gavin have told her that the School Committee must pay for a program audit under provisions of the Caruolo Act, which governs any lawsuit the committee might file to gain additional funds.

But Larry Fitzmorris, president of Portsmouth Concerned Citizens, said the Caruolo Act refers to a program audit that is conducted only after a lawsuit is filed.

He said he believed the council “is talking about a program audit separate from the Caruolo Act.”

Canario, the councilman who originally moved for the program audit, said he was “somewhat confused” and asked the committee to postpone the motion for the program audit.

He indicated that the council would be willing to appropriate additional funds for the review, but Croston reminded him that the council said it could not appropriate more money than authorized by the Financial Town Meeting.

“The council would need some court action,” Croston said. “There are no alternatives for the school district.”