Agenda Item
16. 22-666 Report regarding receipt of an Impact Report on a Citizens Initiative Ordinance of an Annual Parcel Tax on Some Commercial Office Properties for Early Care and Education and Childcare and Development Programs and adoption of a Resolution Calling for the submission to South San Francisco voters of an Initiative Ordinance to Enact an Annual Parcel Tax on Some Commercial Office Properties for Early Care and Education and Childcare and Development Programs at the General Municipal Election of November 8, 2022, establishing the schedule for submission of Ballot Arguments, and Authorizing the County of San Mateo Elections Division to Conduct the election. (Mike Futrell, City Manager; Sharon Ranals, Assistant City Manager; Sky Woodruff, City Attorney)
Legislation Text 1 - SB 343 - 9212 Impact Report on the Proposed Early Learning and Care Parcel Tax Initiative 2 - Strategic Economics Presentation, South San Francisco Parcel Tax Analysis 3 - Brion Economics Presentation, Financial Analysis of the Proposed Early Learning and Care Parcel Tax Initiative2571 SSF Parcel Tax BEI Presentation - 8.5 1 - 9212 Impact Report on the Proposed Early Learning and Care Parcel Tax Initiative - 08 05 2022 version.pdf 3 Public Comments
•
Guest User at August 10, 2022 at 2:03pm PDT
Support
Hi,
I’m in support of putting this measure on the ballot for this upcoming election because ECE improves people’s lives. I’m fortunate enough to have grown up in South City, attending preschool, summer camp, and SSFUSD’s after school daycare (which have all had an impactful effect on my life). I met my childhood best friend, who I’m still friends with today, in a preschool in Westborough. ECE is not only to have someone watch the kids while their parents are working. Children are given the space to interact with other children in a structured educational way. Your most formative years are between 0-3 years old, interacting/learning from children your own age will set the foundation for your social and educational development in the future.
I can guarantee you I would’ve been worse off in K-12 school had I never attended preschool. Many working class families do not have access to ECE because it’s so dang unaffordable. And as you know, the subsidized preschool the city offers has a multiple year waiting list. This ballot measure does right in that it taxes biotech companies to make a childcare program that is free for all SSF residents while ALSO paying preschool workers a competitive living wage. When we say teachers need to get paid more, does that not extend to preschool teachers?
This ballot measure proposes a program which recognizes working class families’ right to have a fruitful upbringing for their children in South San Francisco. If there are any lingering logistical concerns the council possesses, I’m sure they can be resolved without voting not to send this initiative to County, especially since 6,000 SSF Voters have signed their support in doing so.
Sincerely,
Russell
•
Guest User at August 09, 2022 at 3:22pm PDT
Support
Dear Councilmembers:
I’m Chet Lexvold, one of many volunteers supporting the initiative to bring universal early care and education (ECE) to all working families in South San Francisco, and a living wage for ECE workers and educators. Unfortunately I’m traveling for work during the 8/10 Council meeting and likely can’t provide live comment.
The “Impact Report” confirms what we have said from the beginning: this measure provides SSF with the opportunity to add to its title as “Biotechnology Capital of the World” and become the Greatest City in the U.S. to Raise a Family, and Greatest City in the U.S. to Work. We can provide free preschool to all who live and work in SSF and pay ECE workers a living wage without raising taxes on the working class, and without major impact to development. This is an amazing opportunity to improve people’s lives.
While the Report largely confirms this measure will accomplish what it sets out to accomplish if passed, the Report has material errors. First, on pages 33-35 (Table S-1), the Report fails to incorporate existing ECE funding from City, County, State, & Federal sources into its projected funding for the program- it only incorporates revenue generated by the parcel tax.
Per my conversation with David Fleishman at the 4Cs, that’s a substantial omission of approximately $10 million (see SSF Childcare Master Plan pgs 50-51: reported $13.3M of funding, subtract $2.4M for school-age programs and $1M for COVID-related funding). Thus, the Report’s projected revenue shortfall of $10.7M in Year 1 is wrong, and the Report’s projected surplus of $341k after planned development is completed should be increased by $10M. Adding existing ECE funding sources to the revenue generated by the parcel tax means there WILL be funding for ECE infrastructure to expand existing capacity to meet demand and potentially expand into care for children under 2.5 years. Finally, the Report incorrectly implies there must be surplus before revenue can be spent on ECE infrastructure.
Under the measure, the City/Administering Body must fund Parks & Rec preschool seats to maintain or increase Parks & Rec seats compared to the prior year; however, that spending is capped at 50% of annual tax revenue, and the City would then have discretion to spend on infrastructure. This was intentionally drafted to provide flexibility to invest in ECE infrastructure.
Regarding the Portland measure, the Report mischaracterizes that program. We consulted extensively with the people behind that measure while drafting this one, and again consulted them after reading this Report. While the task force mentioned in the Report did start exploring political intervention in ECE in 2012, they hadn't determined the scope until 2019 when they issued a report calling for a means-tested program that had no funding mechanism. A separate group- the "UPNOW!" (Universal Preschool Now) coalition- started in 2018 and proposed a universal program with no means testing funded through progressive taxation. The Portland program is universal and funded through progressive taxation because the UPNOW coalition qualified for the ballot independently of the other measure, and the other measure chose not to run against UPNOW and merged into the UPNOW measure 3 months before the election.
Other omissions in the Report are the questions that are never asked or answered. Are there benefits to the local economy? Yes! Research by Nobel Prize-winning economist James Heckman shows that every $1 invested in quality early childhood programs yields returns between $4 and $16 to the community. Local businesses benefit as more parents join the workforce and both parents and ECE workers will have more disposable income to spend in the local economy. Children themselves benefit greatly from high-quality ECE: higher graduation rates, college matriculation rates, and incomes, plus lower incarceration rates, teen pregnancy rates, and need for social welfare. Does paying ECE workers a living wage advance gender and racial equity? Yes! In the SF Bay Area, 99% of the ECE workforce is made up of women, and 75% are women of color.
All these benefits are why this measure is backed by a wide range of parents, teachers, ECE experts, and community members, including but not limited to: AFSCME Local 829, representing public preschool teachers and staff; UDW/CCPU, representing private childcare providers and teachers; Margaret Brodkin, who the campaign consulted with from the beginning and who literally wrote the book on funding ECE in California; both SSFUSD School Board President and Vice-President John Baker and Mina Richardson; SSF Mothers’ Club President Nadia Bick; a majority of Trustees on the San Mateo County Board of Education, including Hector Camacho (representing the area that covers SSF); and many more. Please follow the will of the people of SSF and place this measure on the Nov. 2022 ballot, and I respectfully ask for your endorsement of the measure. •
Guest User at August 08, 2022 at 4:58pm PDT
Support
United Way Bay Area is an anti-poverty nonprofit that serves SSF and the Bay Area. Our organization supports access to safety net services, including early childhood education and childcare for working and low-income communities, and supports policies that provide livable wages and economic stability for all Bay Area residents. In SSF, ECE workers are not making livable wages, while the cost of living in San Mateo County requires at least 50k annually for a single adult to meet basic needs. We support increasing ECE workers’ wages to 230% of minimum wage to ensure a livable wage and keep these workers in the city.
According to the Real Cost Measure for San Mateo County, a family comprised of two adults, 1 preschooler, and one school-aged child would need to budget over 20k per year in childcare alone. Currently half of all South City kids aged 2.5-5 have no access to affordable preschool and the waitlist for the affordable preschool program is 4 years long with over 700 families waiting for a spot. This measure will provide universal access to quality care for this community’s preschool-aged children, raise teacher wages to a living wage, and lead the way for the rest of San Mateo County. For these reasons, UWBA endorses this measure and urges the city council to support the measure. Thank you.
TaShon Thomas,
United Way Bay Area
Public Policy Director