St. Paul Mayor Carter vetoes tax-raising early childhood education ballot measure

Mayor Vetoes Resolution for Early Childhood Care and Learning in St. Paul

Mayor Melvin Carter has vetoed a resolution that would have asked voters in St. Paul’s 2024 election whether to raise the property tax levy to fund early childhood care and learning for low-income families in the city.

The resolution, which was originally passed by the City Council in a 5-2 vote, could still be overridden if no council member changes their vote.

Proposed Measure for Funding Early Childhood Education

The current measure orders a special election to authorize the city to incrementally raise the property tax levy each year for 10 years. It is estimated that a total of $20 million will be raised by the end of the decade, with an average annual cost of $16 to the average household.

However, Mayor Carter believes that while the proposal has good intentions, it is not practical or actionable. He argues that the proposed tax rate would only cover half of the funding needed to fully support early care and learning for children in low-income households.

Concerns and Criticisms

• Critics argue that there are still many details that need to be addressed, such as certifying families’ income levels and establishing criteria for evaluating providers.
• Mayor Carter believes that institutions like the county and the school district are better equipped to handle these tasks, and that implementing the proposal would require significant financial resources to build the necessary infrastructure.

Importance of Early Childhood Education

The current proposal aims to fund early childhood education for low-income families, partially subsidize families with slightly higher incomes, and support childcare providers. Supporters argue that while there are existing programs for struggling families, there is a lack of early intervention.

They emphasize the importance of investing in children’s early years, as this is when their brains are rapidly developing and they acquire critical language and problem-solving abilities. They believe that this investment is crucial and cannot wait.

Disappointment and Advocacy

• Community advocates for early education express disappointment in Mayor Carter’s veto.
• The resolution to increase the property tax levy for early care and learning was proposed by the Early Learning Legislative Advisory Committee, which consists of council members, residents, and organizations.
• Committee co-chair Quentin Ocama argues that voters should have the final say on the issue, not the mayor.

Public school board member Halla Henderson acknowledges the valid questions raised by the mayor about how the program will work, but believes that this should be an ongoing conversation. She emphasizes that this resolution is just the first step towards reaching every family and person in St. Paul.

Henderson believes that investing in early care and learning will demonstrate the city’s commitment to families and children from marginalized communities.

Next Steps

The City Council has 30 days to revote and potentially override the mayor’s veto. If the veto is not overridden, council members have until August 2024 to approve a new proposal to be placed on the ballot.

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 1: No Poverty
• SDG 4: Quality Education
• SDG 5: Gender Equality
• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

• SDG 1.3: Implement nationally appropriate social protection systems and measures for all, including floors, and by 2030 achieve substantial coverage of the poor and the vulnerable.
• SDG 4.2: By 2030, ensure that all girls and boys have access to quality early childhood development, care, and pre-primary education so that they are ready for primary education.
• SDG 5.4: Recognize and value unpaid care and domestic work through the provision of public services, infrastructure, and social protection policies and the promotion of shared responsibility within the household and the family as nationally appropriate.
• SDG 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic, and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• Indicator for SDG 1.3: Proportion of population covered by social protection floors/systems.
• Indicator for SDG 4.2: Percentage of children under 5 years of age who are developmentally on track in health, learning, and psychosocial well-being.
• Indicator for SDG 5.4: Time spent on unpaid domestic and care work, by sex, age, and location.
• Indicator for SDG 10.2: Proportion of people living below 50 percent of median income, by age, sex, and disability.

4. Table: SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Behold! This splendid article springs forth from the wellspring of knowledge, shaped by a wondrous proprietary AI technology that delved into a vast ocean of data, illuminating the path towards the Sustainable Development Goals. Remember that all rights are reserved by SDG Investors LLC, empowering us to champion progress together.

Source: mprnews.org

Join us, as fellow seekers of change, on a transformative journey at https://sdgtalks.ai/welcome, where you can become a member and actively contribute to shaping a brighter future.