A bill proposed at the St. Louis Board of Aldermen would ask voters to raise sales taxes to fund early childhood education programs. This bill has led to contentious debate and, yesterday, was unanimously opposed by the St. Louis Public Schools Board.
Board Bill 7, sponsored by Ward 10 Alderwoman Shameem Clark Hubbard, would add a question to the November 2024 ballot asking voters to approve a levy that would increase the city’s sales tax by 0.5 percent. The funding would be used to support early childhood education programs for children who are not yet in kindergarten.
If approved, the revenue generated from this tax would go into an “early childhood education fund,” to be administered by the City of St. Louis Mental Health Board of Trustees.
There was a public hearing for the bill before the Transportation and Commerce Committee on Monday. Public speakers were cut off after an hour during the hearing due to another aldermanic committee meeting beginning at 3 p.m. that could not be rescheduled due to STL TV’s ongoing budget problems.
Clark Hubbard said before the hearing that she wanted to answer the question of who could access the potential revenue from the bill.
“The funds may be used for early education and care for children ages 0 to 5 provided by public — as a proud SLPS parent I’m glad that’s first — public, private, not for profit, and for profit entities licensed, license exempt, or registered by the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education,” Clark Hubbard says.
She says she wanted to share that information with the media and those present from the public because a “different narrative” was shared online.
WEPOWER, a nonprofit organization, previously acknowledged to the RFT that in order for public programs to receive any funding, state law would have to change. A spokesperson for the organization said, “The way the Community Children’s Services Fund currently exists creates limitations. As a result, there are efforts underway to amend the structure of the Community Children’s Services Fund. At the state level, a bill was voted out of the Select Committee on Empowering Missouri Parents & Children that would allow funds to also become available to public schools. Additionally, the bill would allow Children’s Services Funds to administer dollars to improve the quality, affordability, and access to early childhood development programs. This could include but not be limited to increasing educator wages and benefits.”
WEPOWER has not yet responded to requests to provide more information about the state bill they’re referring to. We will update this story when we hear back.
SLPS’ board passed a resolution opposing the bill 7-0 in a special meeting Monday morning. The resolution says, among other criticisms of the bill: “Board Bill 7 directs taxpayer dollars to non-public entities with no oversight or accountability measures in place.”
Matt Davis, vice president of the school board, spoke at the hearing, citing the board’s similar opposition to Proposition R, a property tax increase that city voters approved in 2020. He said it also included funds for early childhood education that would be distributed by the Mental Health Board. None of the money from Prop R has gone directly into services or to increase capacity and wages for childcare centers and instead it has gone to nonprofits, he said.
“It’s really unclear where that money has gone and most importantly, whether that’s been effective,” Davis said. “To increase the money by tenfold at this point seems to be a little premature. In addition we also do oppose the addition of a regressive sales tax.”
This sentiment was echoed by community members speaking in opposition to the bill, who alleged that WEPOWER, the organization that helped draft the bill, may not have the intention of supporting public programs.
Gloria Nolan, a former WEPOWER employee and the campaign coordinator for Prop R, says the nonprofit has failed to deliver on any of its promises regarding early childhood education. Nolan has been public about how she believes WEPOWER is being used by proponents of charter schools like the Opportunity Trust.
“WEPOWER and their affiliates have been working hard at requesting funding from every stream available starting with their funder the Opportunity Trust, then moving on to proposition R, they’ve asked for ARPA funding, now they’re asking for this regressive sales tax, they’re asking for Rams settlement funds, and they’re even rolling baby strollers through the halls of Congress asking for more funding to undermine democratically run public education,” Nolan says. “Everything that has been said sounds lovely but nothing has been proven, nothing has been shown and we have to stop this now.”
As Nolan spoke, a row of supporters for the bill laughed, smiled, whispered and shook their heads at her comments. One of these supporters was WEPOWER’s Director of Early Childhood Power Building, Paula-Breonne Vickers, who spoke after Nolan.
“I was actually that parent that pushed my stroller through Congress because there is a crisis at all levels, local, state and federal, where funding that existed before is coming to an end and without stabilization at all levels, it will be a crisis that harms us all,” she says.
Vickers shared her experiences as a mother living in north city, saying that she was on a two-year waitlist for childcare as of 2020. She says she was encouraged to move out of the city to position her family near more resources.
She stresses that she believes in SLPS but says spaces in its early childhood programs are not readily available to parents. She argues that Board Bill 7 would be a progressive opportunity to set young children up for success.
“I ask you to move this Board Bill 7 forward so that voters can decide if this is something we want for St. Louis City,” Vickers says.
Local public school advocacy group Solidarity with SLPS started a letter-writing campaign against the bill.
“This bill is a naked attempt by known proponents of education privatization to trick the public into funding their and their friends’ consulting operations under the guise of childcare or early childhood education,” Ben Conover, an activist with the group, said at the hearing. “Let’s be clear, the funds for this bill cannot go towards increasing the affordability or the accessibility of early childhood education. None of the state statutes that pertain to this bill allow for the funds to be spent towards either purpose.”
There will be additional public hearings before the committee in the future. No vote was taken Monday.
Subscribe to Riverfront Times newsletters.
Follow us: Apple News | Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter | Or sign up for our RSS Feed
