The Paradise Valley Unified School District Governing Board on Jan. 12 deferred a proposal to raise Community Education fees, voting 3–2 to postpone the measure until the end of the year and refer it to a study session. Board members who supported deferral said they had received materials only the night before and that the proposal still left important questions unanswered about equity and program design.

District staff presented the plan as necessary to sustain the district’s community education offerings beginning July 2026. Presenters said Community Ed contributes about $470,000 to prekindergarten and other early childhood programming and that the proposal includes a $260-per-month low-cost community preschool option, an income‑eligible scholarship program for Title I families, a $10 nonrefundable registration fee for enrichment programs, and annual adjustments tied to district costs. Staff also reported that 1,596 surveys were sent to families and 98 responses were returned.

"Given that the material was not provided with sufficient time, it was provided at 5 p.m. last night," Dr. Amanda Lim said when moving to defer the vote, arguing board members needed more time to review the data and for the district to develop a fuller strategic plan for early childhood programs. Mrs. Christiansen seconded the motion. Supporters of the deferral emphasized potential harm to families and staff if changes were rushed; opponents warned that postponing increases would require use of carryforward funds and might shift costs into the district’s maintenance-and-operations budget.

District staff cautioned that Community Ed had used roughly $800,000 of an approximately $1.4 million carryforward this year and that without increased revenue the M&O budget could face an estimated additional cost in the low six figures. Presenters also reiterated plans to pursue partnerships (including Head Start and Southwest Human Development), develop scholarship processes aligned with federal poverty guidelines, and explore program design options such as sliding scales, sibling discounts and premium-hour pricing.

Board members exchanged detailed concerns about timing, program-by-program fee discrepancies (for example, between Montessori and other preschool options), survey response rates, communication to families and effects on Title I schools and staff. After debate, the motion to defer carried 3–2.

The board directed that the topic be placed on a study-session agenda; a final vote was deferred to the end of the year. The district said it will continue refining the proposal, working with federal partners on scholarship administration, and communicating with families about enrollment and program options.