One West Seattle classroom for 1st year of city preschool program

When the levy-funded Seattle Preschool Program launches this fall, one of its first 12 classrooms will be in West Seattle. That’s according to a city announcement sent to media outlets today, listing the locations at which the program will begin this September. The announcement says the Community Day School Association, including a location described as “Delridge,” will be among the first providers. For specifics, we followed up with Jason Kelly from Mayor Murray’s office, which sent the announcement; he says the CDSA site at Highland Park Elementary will have one classroom for the SPP. If you’re interested in applying for a spot in the program – which the city says will expand year by year, find the application here.

H.E.N.R.Y. July 6, 2015 (2:46 pm)

Why does the application ask about income? Does this mean that free preschool will only be available to those whose income is below a certain level? My wife and I pull in a high income, but after high taxes, high student loan repayments, high healthcare premiums, and high mortgage payments, preschool is not affordable for us. Are my tax dollars funding this program? If so, shouldn’t we enjoy the benefits as well?

WSB July 6, 2015 (2:53 pm)

Eligibility info’s on this page: http://www.seattle.gov/education/child-care-and-preschool/seattle-preschool-program/for-parents

BMC July 6, 2015 (3:08 pm)

Looks like income levels max out a 3 times the federal poverty level? I think that varies based on family size.

sam-c July 6, 2015 (3:09 pm)

just a general question from someone not very familiar with ….
the eligibility says:
“Are three years old on August 31st from families with incomes equal to 300% of Federal Poverty Level or below.”

when you look up Federal Poverty Level, are those numbers gross income or after taxes, etc?

http://www.medicaid.gov/medicaid-chip-program-information/by-topics/eligibility/downloads/2015-federal-poverty-level-charts.pdf

if you look at http://aspe.hhs.gov/ FAQ’s, the answer to that question is: “There is no simple answer to these questions.”
Well, at 300% of poverty level, we would be eligible, gross or net, at least based on last year’s taxes.

D.D.S. July 6, 2015 (3:39 pm)

H.E.N.R.Y.
Did You Forget You Are In Seattle.

dsa July 6, 2015 (5:39 pm)

From the ordinance 124509

3. Making participation in the program voluntary for providers and participants.
.
4. Achieving the ultimate goal of serving all eligible and interested 4-year-olds and all 3-year-olds from families making less than 300% of the federal poverty level in Seattle.
.
5. Providing free tuition for children from families earning at or below 300% of the federal poverty level.
.
6. Setting tuition on a sliding scale for families earning more than 300% of the federal poverty level with at least some level of subsidy for all families.

yo July 6, 2015 (6:14 pm)

Henry, your story is the same as millions of middle class families, too rich to qualify for subsidies but too poor to pay for things such as preschool, health insurance, etc. You are not the only one.

Mike July 6, 2015 (9:36 pm)

If it’s at or below 300% of federal poverty level, a family of 4 making at or below $71,550 qualifies. Sorry people making $72k, you’re out.
.
I won’t qualify, but I also fork out about $21k/yr a year for my kiddo to go to a fantastic Montessori school. I might not be rolling in the Benz or living the high life with more than a single bathroom, but I’m fortunate to have the 1st world problems I have.
.
I am sort of mixed on this news, but at the same time it’s much needed for many families that would never get a chance to have their kids attend and get rolling in early education. I am all for early education. As long as they do it right and give the kids quality education.

WS since '66 July 7, 2015 (7:02 am)

The only way out of poverty, besides winning the lotto, is education. Education costs money. Several posts are from people of means who are fortunate to had an education.

To break the poverty cycle let’s not deprive the opportunity of a child access to a proper education. I applaud the plan and hope to see it expanded.

Some will cite the cost but what is the cost of ignorance? Crime, police, the legal system, and prison cost more than this program. Which do you chose to have your money support?

“If you think education is expensive, try ignorance.” Derek Bok

C Miles July 7, 2015 (7:45 am)

I just wonder however, if the city could’ve implemented some sort of voucher or scholarship program to the many already established preschools in the area. Instead though, we have created another hierarchy of bureaucracy with property taxes to pay. And yes, I’m a democrat but we DO have a lot of extras to pay for and property values are rising – thus taxes too. Not everyone who owns a home is “privileged”.

H.E.N.R.Y. July 7, 2015 (10:03 am)

I am all for free education. In fact, there should be free public education for all children, starting at age 3, all the way through four years of college. But make it available to EVERYONE! I am tired of being classified as a rich person, when in fact I am just a couple missed paychecks away from not being able to pay my mortgage and sky-high taxes. Stop the regressive taxation, stop insisting that the middle class pick up the tax burden, and start taxing the ultrarich at the same level as the rest of us.

Kevin July 7, 2015 (11:30 am)

This is funded by a $58MM tax levy over four years to pilot the program for 200 students. That breaks down to $72,500 a year per student. Please tell me I’m missing something here because this does not make sense.

WSB July 7, 2015 (1:15 pm)

Kevin, the enrollment is supposed to grow to thousands, not hundreds, of students over the life of the levy. Haven’t crunched those numbers, but there is a TON of fine print in documents linked from the left sidebar of the program’s home page, to which we link above. – TR

KM July 7, 2015 (11:51 am)

Henry-
What you are referring as “free” education isn’t free. Someone has to pay for it, generally residents in the form of higher taxes. Regardless of the merit of the program, taxes are based loosely off of property value, in some cases income, but never what’s left after a person pays their bills and spends out.

NeoYogi July 7, 2015 (3:42 pm)

According to the ordinance info, it looks like there is a “sliding scale” cost for those over the maximum income level. Did you miss that? I don’t have children, own my home and am more than happy to have my tax dollars used for a program such as this. I just hope it’s managed well and that those who need the most help get it.

AJP July 7, 2015 (6:14 pm)

If I remember correctly, it’s starting small and growing bigger. I remember voting for it, and thinking “darn, my youngest kid will just be going into kindergarten when this is fully implemented.”

Sorry, comment time is over.