HARRISBURG -- It was supposed to be easy.

State officials would receive revenue from a new source -- up to 61,000 legalized slot machines -- and give it to school districts so they could cut property taxes.

Slots players wouldn't have to leave the state to gamble. Gov. Ed Rendell would make good on his 2002 campaign promise to reduce property taxes. And homeowners would finally get a break on their school taxes.

But with a May 30 deadline looming for Pennsylvania school boards to say "yes" or "no" to the tax-cut plan, the once-promising idea is looking more and more like a train wreck.

As of Friday, only 40 of the state's 501 school districts had opted in to the tax-relief program, which is officially called Act 72 of 2004. That number is dwarfed by the 106 school districts that have said no thanks, and the more than 350 districts still on the fence.

"There is great consternation (by both Republicans and Democrats) regarding the slow pace by which districts are opting in to Act 72," Rendell said in a letter last week to the Pennsylvania School Boards Association.

The letter was co-signed by two other Democrats who are strong supporters of slot machines, Senate Democratic leader Robert Mellow of Scranton and House Democratic Whip Mike Veon of Beaver Falls.

There are only seven days left for the fence-sitting districts to make a choice. Any school district that doesn't vote affirmatively to join Act 72 would be automatically left out, which means their residents won't get property tax reduction once slots revenue starts flowing.

Rendell claims that up to $1 billion in new state revenue will be received once all 14 new casinos are fully up and running. He said property tax cuts will vary from about $100 a year to $800 a year, depending on the school district, but will average about $330 per year. He called that a significant reduction.

But even the districts that take part in Act 72 probably won't see any tax relief before 2007, because it will take a couple years to issue casino licenses, build the new gambling palaces and then have patrons arrive in significant numbers.

Many school officials around the state are doubtful about how much tax relief will actually be produced for homeowners. They wonder about the accuracy of Rendell's $1 billion projection for total state revenue.

The reaction of the Peters School Board seems typical of many skeptical boards. After eight months of debate and public meetings on the Act 72 issue, the board decided last week not to participate.

Board member James O'Kelly called the Act 72 tax-cut plan "ill-conceived," unclear and complicated: "We don't even know what we're approving."

In the Harrisburg area on Monday night, seven boards voted on the Act 72 issue -- and six of them said no thanks.

The Mt. Lebanon School Board is expected to vote down Act 72 tonight , saying it fears it could lead to a loss of local control over schools.

School boards have two main reasons for shunning Act 72. If they participate, they have to enact a new tax on their residents -- a 1/10th of 1 percent earned income tax. In more affluent districts, where a taxpayer might earn, say, $80,000 a year, that would mean an EIT of $80, which would partially offset whatever property tax cut they get.

But more repugnant to many districts is a something called a "back-end referendum." A school board that opts in has to submit future budgets to a public vote if they contain tax increases that exceed the annual rate of inflation.

Some boards fear that could mean a loss of their control over budgets. Rendell counters that many other states already offer local voters the right to vote on school tax increases.

Some districts in the socially and religiously conservative area of Central Pennsylvania don't like idea of using gambling money for schools.

"I don't think many people would have anticipated Act 72 getting into this situation, where it's run into lots of opposition at the local level," said Chris Borick, a political science professor and pollster from Muhlenberg College in Allentown.

"One of the things this issue tells us is that Gov. Rendell isn't the salesman he professes to be,'' said Josh Wilson, spokesman for the state Republican party.

A frustrated Rendell recently quipped that he never realized "how hard it would be to give away a billion dollars."

Some boards wanted the state to extend the May 30 deadline by as much as 12 months to give them more time to think. But pro-gambling legislators didn't like a delay because they're anxious to create the casinos and generate revenue for property tax cuts. Commonwealth Court and the state Supreme Court have denied requests for delays in the May 30 deadline.

Rendell has said districts around the state have had since July, when he signed Act 72 into law, to find out about it.

General Assembly Republicans generally like the idea of reducing property taxes, but some are cooling to Act 72 for political reasons, as it appears it could prove to be a major political embarrassment for Rendell when he seeks re-election in 2006.

Rendell has the most to lose politically if school boards keep turning up their noses at Act 72. He's made it his personal crusade.

"The fate of his re-election could well hinge on his failure to deliver substantive property tax relief," said the GOP's Wilson.

Rendell and his cabinet members -- with the noticeable exception of Education Secretary Francis Barnes -- have criss-crossed the state in recent weeks urging boards to opt into Act 72. Barnes, a former Bucks County school superintendent, hasn't explained his lack of enthusiasm for Act 72, but his absence on the hustings seems to indicate a coolness to the program.

"Is Act 72 an issue that could derail Rendell's re-election? I won't go that far,'' said Borick, who had done polls on the issue. "But it clearly has to be a concern for him if a large segment of the state doesn't join it.''

So what happens next?

When state legislators return to Harrisburg June 6, action is expected on at least one of several bills that would, in effect, overrule the school boards that don't want to take part in Act 72.

Rep. Veon has a bill that would simply mandate that all districts participate in the tax-relief program. A similar bill has been offered by Rep. Robert Godshall, R-Montgomery.

Rep. Curt Schroder, R-Chester County, and Sen. Lisa Boscola, D-Northampton, have bills with a slightly different approach. As opposed to a flat-out mandate, they would let homeowners in any school district that has opted out of Act 72 vote in a November referendum on whether to overrule their school board.

In his letter to the PSBA, Rendell said that school boards should be aware "of the dramatic impact these legislative initiatives will have on school districts.''

Veon said the Legislature's main reason for expanding gambling through slot machines was to give homeowners across the state long-awaited property tax relief. He didn't think school boards should stand in the way of that relief. Act 72 "was never intended to be about school boards.''

Some legislators said the back-end referendum provision was necessary to keep school boards from simply raising school taxes in, say, 2008, and thus canceling out the property tax cuts that slots revenue will provide in 2007.

Rep. Douglas Reichley, D-Berks, has introduced a bill that would force all school districts -- whether they opt into Act 72 or not -- to have a back-end referendum on tax increases above the rate of inflation.

Republicans and Democrats claim the other side is trying to play politics with Act 72. Reichley said Rendell appears to be trying to scare the school districts into participating.

"The governor is trying to play the good guy, saying 'If you don't opt in, the Republican-controlled Legislature will force you to,'" Reichley said. "He's trying to deflect attention from his own actions."

Democrats counter that Republicans have called for property tax reductions for years, but now that slot machines are going to bring that about, they don't want to give Rendell and the Democrats any credit.

Republicans, who control the Legislature, are divided on whether they should force school boards to take part in Act 72.

Some GOP leaders say the Legislature shouldn't mandate Act 72 for unwilling districts. Many Republican legislators come from conservative areas of the state, where gambling is seen as a vice and state interference in local educational matters is viewed as bad.

On the other hand, Republicans would like to see their constituents get reductions in their property taxes, and so might be willing to require school districts to participate in Act 72.

One aspect of the situation is certain: The first round ends May 30.