The Solution to Framingham’s Childcare Problem is in Plain View

Much attention has been paid recently to the critical shortage of childcare capacity for 3- and 4-year-old children in Framingham. Last month, our own Representative Katherine Clark, the second-ranking Democrat in the U.S. House, emphasized the need for investment in childcare facilities and the early education work force.

At a March forum on economic development, our Mayor, Charlie Sisitsky, said: “Every place you go in the Framingham area, there are waiting lists for childcare — it’s terrible”.

Framingham Councilor John Stefanini added that only 38% of Framingham’s roughly 1,600 children who are 3 and 4 years old are in full-day pre-school. Stefanini further noted that even when some private childcare facilities have spare capacity, they cannot hire and retain staff. If you check out the staff pay rate in those facilities, you will find it is around $20/hour, much less than even classroom aides in Framingham Public Schools (FPS). So pay is also a problem.

To underline the overwhelming support for solutions among our elected officials, witness the key leadership role, Karen Spilka, our state senator, and Senate President, played in the passage last July, of S.2973 ‘An Act to expand access to high-quality, affordable early education and care’.

With everyone so completely on the same page, and agreement that we need an expansion of pre-K space, a boost in pre-K educator pay, and a reduction of financial barriers which block parents from placing their children in pre-K programs, it is remarkable that Framingham is also uniquely positioned with the experience and expertise, the school facilities, and the finances to rapidly deploy a solution to most of these challenges.

First, FPS has its BLOCKS pre-K program, which costs parents $7,000/year per fulltime student, but currently serves 300 students very effectively, so there is the experience and expertise. Second, Farley School is being vacated by Mass Bay Community College at the end of the year, freeing up most of the space in that facility to return to its mission of educating our younger students. So, there is the space to expand our pre-K capacity to serve all 4-year-olds in the city. Third, the city has $10 million/year in reserve education funding which can be deployed to support this pre-K expansion, preparing Farley for its new educational task, hiring the necessary staff, and eliminating all fees.

This $10 million/year piece bears explanation.

In the current fiscal year, FY23, the Mayor has been using $5 million/year in city money originally dedicated to funding the school district, to pay for water & sewer maintenance and school roof replacements. That diversion of education money is planned to increase to $10 million/year in the next fiscal year, FY24. The city used to fund the FPS budget at the level of $89.8 million (FY22), but dropped that to $85 in FY23, and plans go to $80 million in FY24.

So, $10 million/year which used to go to the school district budget has now been earmarked for infrastructure investment.

Isn’t it time to recognize that the number one priority in the city is educating our youngest children, and freeing their parents to return to the work force? Isn’t it time to return that education money to the schools and encourage the Mayor to use the other powerful financial tools he has at his disposal to address city infrastructure problems?

That money -and it may not take the entire $10 million/year -would guarantee that full-time pre-K for all 4-year-olds would be free. Finally, we would have free, universal pre-K for Framingham kids!

And rest easy. We will not be leaving the Mayor between a rock and a hard place if that money goes back to the schools. He has three other major sources of finance for his infrastructure projects.

The first is the Stabilization Fund, our rainy-day fund, which remained untapped during the pandemic, and has $16 million available. The second is $10 million/year which would come available if the pension fund liability paydown date was shifted from 2030 to 2040, like Brookline did in recent times to finance an expansion to its high school to accommodate an unexpected increase in student population. The final source is the property tax levy. In this current year, an additional $3 million/year was cut from city revenue by again taxing under the levy limit. The city cannot keep on giving away tax breaks when city infrastructure urgently needs investment! So, the city must stop taxing below the levy limit, so it can fund infrastructure, and enable a comprehensive solution to the childcare problem for our kids and their families.

There it is. Short and sweet. All it takes is commitment to education in Framingham and to providing much needed support for parents as they try to get back to work after dealing with the pandemic.

We could win the trifecta. All our youngest kids could be given the best, free educational support when it matters most. Farley could come back online as a school for our youngest kids. All pre-K teachers and staff could be supported with decent pay, backed by FPS.

Oh, and one more plus. With all 4-year-olds handled by FPS pre-K, the capacity problem in pre-K for 3-year-olds would be largely solved, as all the 4-year-olds currently in childcare outside the FPS BLOCKS program, would move into the expanded BLOCKS program, freeing up many slots for 3-year-olds in those non-FPS facilities.