A consultant who has worked on Arizona school funding campaigns urged Prescott Unified School District trustees on Dec. 2 to do early polling, build a representative advisory committee and prepare a public-facing needs assessment before deciding on specific bond or override figures.

Paul Uland, introduced himself to the board and described campaign steps he said are now common across the state: “You put together some type of needs assessment or blue-ribbon committee… walk through that process so that they’re the ones to come to you to make that recommendation,” he said. Uland emphasized voter-file research, demographic testing and continuing community outreach after a measure is called.

Uland told trustees that consultants and local PACs typically play separate roles: the district can provide factual information but may not legally advocate for the ballot measure, while a PAC can raise money and run advocacy. He recommended polling and message testing to determine what a community will accept and offered a ballpark for polling costs in the low five-figure range.

Board members pressed staff and the consultant about procurement and timing. Administrators explained that if the district hires a paid consultant (services over the district’s small-purchase threshold) it must use either an existing state contract or solicit at least three competitive quotes. The board was told the county must be notified in early May if the district intends to call an election; final ballot language follows in June under county rules.

Trustees also discussed community takeaways from a recent advisory session that included 22 respondents. That small advisory sample favored a mix of staff raises plus targeted class-size relief; many participants said a 5–10% override would be most politically viable in local polling, though some table discussions urged asking for a larger, more transformational package.

After discussion the board directed the superintendent and business office to solicit proposals and pricing from consultants (with preference for vendors on state contract, or three competitive quotes if not) and to return with cost estimates and draft scopes for the board’s January meeting. Administrators said polling options could be treated as an add-on in consultant proposals so the board could decide how much to pay for community testing.

The board did not place any measure on the ballot at Tuesday’s meeting. Administrators reiterated legal limits on district advocacy once a measure is formally adopted and counseled that individual board members may legally advocate privately but must avoid using district resources.

Next steps: staff will seek consultant proposals and sample fee schedules for the board to review in January; if the board later chooses to proceed, the district will coordinate county notification in the window described by staff.