Rush to implement U-Pre-K in Rutland is a disservice totaxpayers, childcare providers, and children
Rutland — Rutland City Schools are suddenly moving on a fast track to create a universal public preschool program, despite widespread opposition to such programs by taxpayers and private childcare providers and a growing body of evidence demonstrating the ineffectiveness of such programs.
The Rutland City School Board will present this concept to the public on Tuesday, August 22, 7:00 pm, at the Longfellow School Building, 6 Church Street in Rutland. Private childcare providers have been told they will not be allowed to speak. The Board plans to take a final vote on September 5th.
The only reason the Rutland City Schools could have for a putting such a program on a fast-track and at this time – before the legislature is finished conducting a cost/benefit analysis of U-Pre-K in Vermont — is to avoid public debate while making taxpayer funded U-Pre-K so pervasive in VT that the legislature will have not choice but to fund it—regardless of what studies, costs and evidence suggests. (Which is why this story should be of great concern to ALL Vermonters, not just Rutland residents.)
Clearly, this cynical attempt to move bad and unpopular policy does not have the best interests of children or taxpayers at heart.
Background
Right now, a Legislative Summer Study Committee (S.314) is convening to determine if universal preschool for all 3 & 4 year olds, regardless of special or financial need, is either affordable for taxpayers or beneficial to children. Their report is due January 7, 2007.
This study follows a similar one completed by a sub-committee of Vermont State Board of Education on Feb 22, 2006, which concluded that Vermont should NOT pursue U-Pre-K as a policy (citing high costs, lack of benefit)….
….And follows the failure of S.132, the Early Education bill, to even get out of the Senate Education Committee in either the 2006 or 2005 legislative sessions due to fierce opposition by taxpayers and private childcare businesses. A similar bill S.166 failed to pass the House in 2004.
Rep. Caroline Branagan (R-Georgia) offered a common sense moratorium amendment to S.314 (The Bill authorizing the Early Ed Summer Study Committee) that would have prohibited the kind of maneuver now being pulled in Rutland, but a majority (78-49) of House members voted “no.” See who they are here: http://www.freedomworks.org/informed/issues_template.php?issue_id=2604.
Governor Douglas did not sign S.314, allowing the study to become law without his signature, explaining his objections (Official Statement Regarding H. 880, An Act Relating to Education Finance Simplification and S. 314, An Act Relating to Early Childhood Education, Thursday, May 25, 2006). “At a time when property taxes and the cost of education are increasing at unsustainable rates, but school enrolment is declining, Vermont should not be adding grades to the public school system.”
Other issues/contexts/resources to consider in regard to this story: