As a mother of two, I know how essential early childcare is—and also how much money it costs. When we offer our residents affordable childcare, we make it possible for more people to work and contribute to a better society for all of us. We also invest in our future by investing in our children—and giving all of them a caring environment for learning and growing. This bill is a major step in the right direction, and I urge you to support it!

I am definitely against this bill which aims to create a statewide, unified, universally accessible, public-private system for early childhood care and education. Financial Burden: Implementing a universally accessible system where every three or four-year-old has a guaranteed slot, especially with provisions for free or reduced-cost services, would place an enormous financial strain on the state, potentially diverting funds from other critical educational or public services. Quality Concerns: Mandating universal access might lead to a dilution of quality in early childhood education programs as the demand could outstrip the supply of high-quality providers, leading to rushed expansion or lowering of standards to meet the requirement. Administrative Overload: The Department of Education would face significant challenges in establishing and maintaining a comprehensive online program, including the development of content, ensuring technological accessibility, and managing a hybrid learning model. This could overwhelm current administrative capabilities. Inequity in Implementation: The sliding scale for determining cost based on family means could be complex to implement fairly across the Commonwealth, potentially leading to disparities in how families are assessed and supported, creating new forms of inequity. Logistical Challenges: Ensuring each family has access to a slot involves logistical nightmares, including transportation, staffing, and facility availability, particularly in rural or underserved areas where infrastructure might not support such a mandate. Digital Divide: While the online program aims to be universally accessible, it overlooks the digital divide where not all families have reliable internet or the necessary technology, potentially excluding those who could benefit most from early education. Community Center Utilization: Using community centers or libraries as learning hubs for hybrid learning might strain these facilities, which are often underfunded and might not have the capacity or resources to support educational activities effectively. Parental Choice: This bill could limit parental choice by imposing a system where families might be assigned to slots that do not align with their preferences for educational philosophy, location, or type of care, reducing the personalization of early childhood education. Delayed Effective Date: The delay until July 1, 2026, might seem like a planning buffer, but it also postpones addressing current needs, potentially leaving children without adequate early education support in the interim. Public-Private Partnership Concerns: The integration of public and private sectors in such a system could lead to conflicts of interest, where profit motives might overshadow educational quality, or where public funds subsidize private enterprises without clear accountability. I strongly oppose this legislation due to the financial implications, potential quality degradation, administrative burden, implementation inequities, logistical challenges, the digital divide issue, strain on community facilities, reduction in parental choice, the delay in addressing current needs, and concerns over public-private partnerships. A more targeted, flexible, and resource-conscious approach to early childhood education would better serve Virginia's families without the risks this bill presents.

Comments Document

The attached comments express a particular concern about the overall agenda that HB 1972 advances.