Is it too much to ask? I have been a full-time working parent in all my life as a parent. I have always worked downtown. I have always struggled so hard to find quality, affordable childcare in a downtown location. Perhaps I can find a Kindercare or other corporate-run daycare, and the programs are typically priced for corporate workers. There is still a dearth of decent affordable childcare downtown.
There are many reasons why it makes sense for me to have my children at daycares in facilites close to the office. As a nursing mother, I could go nurse during breaks. I could also drop by during a break to just peak in, say "hi", give a kiss, or just catch a glimpse of the little folk as they nap. But, here in Portland, there is still a dearth of downtown childcare facilities.
We've previously mentioned that there are efforts underway to elevate issues that affect families in Central Portland and to make them visible to city officials. Some city folk have really been taken by this concept: is there really a lack of decent childcare for all the working parents in downtown Portland? Why? Are you a parent who works downtown? Where have you found suitable childcare -- is it downtown or perhaps closer to home?
I worked full time in downtown PDX until my son was over 4 years old. Having languished on waiting lists, I can attest to the fact that there is not enough childcare in downtown Portland.
FitPregnancy recently rated Portland as the #1 place in the US to have a baby. But they also said "There are just 3.7 licensed day care centers for every 1,000 children under 4 years. The average city in our survey has 5.9."
This impacts child safety, ability to nurse, quality of family life, length of commute, an employer's ability to retain working parents, just to name a few.
City leaders (and candidates), please provide incentives and subsidies to increase the number of childcare spaces available in the central city, and make it available to families within a wide range of incomes.
Posted by: nancy | February 21, 2008 at 10:41 PM
I have no resources, just righteous indignation. A day care provider friend just told me about having expectant mothers pay $600 in advaance to hold a spot in her family day care.
I just can't imagine it. It was so important for me to be able to nurse during the day when i went back to work. I ran those 7 blocks to the childcare rpovider house.
I wish I had a magic wand that would actually make Portland and by extension this country a family friendly place.
Posted by: ProtestMama | February 22, 2008 at 09:54 AM
Child care is the rule, not the exception for most Oregon families with young children, usually out of economic necessity. According to the National Association of Child Care Resource & Referral Agencies (NACCRA) 2007 report, “Parents and the High Price of Child Care”, Oregon is the least affordable state in the country for preschool-age care in a center. That means a greater percentage of our hard-earned dollars is going toward this expense. Furthermore, according to the report, the cost of child care is rising much faster than the rate of inflation.
I think elected officials - especially those in local government - should survey their districts/jurisdictions to assess the availability and cost of quality child care options for constituents. City, county, other local leaders and those seeking office should know finding affordable, quality care for our children is a critical issue in the core of our fair city - on both sides of the river.
Ideally, our elected officials will also take a look at their employees and know what is available to them in terms of child care options. Do our officials “walk the talk” by offering an on-site (or close by) facility that demonstrates child care best practices? Have electeds given any thought to the impact insufficient or unaffordable child care has in the short and long-term on our communities?
Posted by: MtM | February 22, 2008 at 08:44 PM
Another big reason to have your child close to your work rather than close to home is so you don't have to factor your commute time into time away from them. Granted time in the car isn't exactly quality time but it's better than nothing. We recently moved here from Los Angeles and while there were many many more daycares with openings in the Portland suburb where we live, I was shocked that we're paying close to double what we paid in LA. Home daycares were pretty much non existent.
Posted by: BeBo | February 23, 2008 at 09:02 AM
I have worked downtwon and had my kids in child care a few blocks away for almost 5 hyears -and love it that way. but we were lucky b/c the center is fed-subsidized and I work for the feds so got to hop the wait list. it was really important to me to be able to nurse my kids at lunch, and having them so close made that possible. it also was likely key to me being able to feed them only breastmilk. if you don't see your baby all day it can be hard to keep up the supply by pumping. also, it is convenient for driving/commuting, and a great peace of mind to know that a parent is within walking distance shoudl something happen. i wonder if there exists a map of where all the child care centers are in pdx? perhaps the resource and referral folks have one? or the state? i'll look around.
the city makes child care avail for its employees in the pdx bldg on 4th 9they get to hop the list), but i dont think there are snough slots for all city employees who want them, let alone non-city employees in that area. if the city is porviding this beneift for its own employees, might it be able to facilitate somethign similar for non-city employees? great topic, thx for bringing it up!
Posted by: LTF | February 23, 2008 at 09:12 AM
i'm sorry i don't have any solutions to offer but just some supportive frustration and at times, well..i guess rage. i needed care on the east side and needed it quick due to the current care situation closing down. and i couldn't find it. maybe i didn't look in the right spot, but after being told "no vacancy!" about 9 times, my husband had to resign from his job to stay home. of course staying home and having one of us with her is great, but a job was given up and that is kind of drastic. worth it, but frustrating.
when my daughter was an infant, i was back to work when she was 5 months old. having her somewhere close to nurse and visit would have been dreamy. instead, i pumped in random spots and was repeatedly walked in on. and bebo made the point of having time together during the commute--even car time--is better than driving to get your child who you so desperately want to be with, but are sitting in parking lot traffic on 26 instead. i'm getting all riled up here...
i wish portland had more. i'll be looking again in the fall. am i looking in the wrong spots? am i missing it all?
Posted by: Suzanne | February 23, 2008 at 03:59 PM
When our wonderful daycare announced closing last summer, I looked and looked but found nothing within our budget because we need just two days and everyhere the charge for two days is the same as three (I was told that bank loans required this). In the end, my husband and I changed our work schedules and take the kids to grandma's house once a week.
I started looking again this month for next fall when the older goes to kindergarten but am finding the same. We looking into nanny-shares or may continue the long drive to grandmas. I am tired and frustrated by the lack of space and flexibility in daycare.
Posted by: AmyS | February 23, 2008 at 04:59 PM
I will need downtown daycare for an infant starting next winter. So far, the options close to work seem few and far between and the costs are high.
I am willing to pay more for the first year to be able to nurse at lunch time. I doubt that I am the only one.
It seems like there are a lot of buildings with empty space.
Posted by: mom2b | February 23, 2008 at 07:09 PM
I agree, this IS an important issue but I think it's important that people understand, when they say they want government to pick up the slack, subsidize or otherwise fund childcare, what that means (same with the arts and so many other things I see/hear people wanting subsidized).
I don't know what's going on in other areas of government but I do know that Multnomah County simply does not have the funds to do more. They don't have the funds to do what they already do.
Multnomah County has no taxing authority unlike many other jurisdictions.
MultCo gets its discretionary funds from Property Taxes. (there are pass through funds from the State & Fed govt but they aren't discretionary so there's no picking and choosing).
Property taxes also fund schools (an entity entirely separate from the County), programs like CHIF, parks and any other levy we choose to vote for, many things that have nothing to do with the County. What does this mean?
The more levies we pass, the fewer dollars that MultCo gets to fund mental health care, drug and alcohol treatment, minority programs, emergency services, aging & disability services, roads and bridges (like the infamous Sellwood), animal services, jails and MORE.
The things MultCo does are necessary; they aren't luxuries. Yet, they are being cut because the money simply isn't there and unlike the Federal gov't, MultCo can't create more money when it wants. They are looking at cutting approx $12+ million of services in the next budget in order to create a balanced budget (another thing the Fed. govt doesn't have to do). They cut a substantial amount last year.
PPS wants help, social service needs are growing, MultCo owns one of the most-crossed bridges in the state (that has a safety rating of 2 on a scale of 1-100) and we have a jail that has been empty for ~6 years because no one could figure out how to fund the opening.
The majority of the public seems to be against taxes or fees of any sort yet they want these services.
Ted is brilliant (yes, I know I'm biased). He has a degree in Economics from Stanford and an MBA from Columbia. He's no dummy when it comes to crunching numbers. But he can't create money where there is none, he can't raise taxes without authority and he can't fund new or old services without the funds.
I don't mean to hijack this thread to talk about MultCo but time and time again, I read or hear about how gov't needs to fund this, that and more (everyone has something they want gov't to fund). Government can't fund those things without $$; right now, the money isn't there. At least not in Multnomah County.
Posted by: Katrina Wheeler | February 24, 2008 at 12:23 PM
Katrina: A reality check is always a good thing, so thanks! The eternal issue of competing needs and too few resources. Those pesky trade-offs we learned about in grad school. I guess the real question is what is being done around child care planning in the county (by anyone, not just the county), and what would we do to advocate for more locations downtown (or elsewhere)? The county resource & referral agency seems the logical starting point: http://www.ccrr-mc.org/employment.html. Seems like some options are: finding resources (community developers? CDFIs?), PDC-style subsidies/incentives to locate, or encourage employers to orchestrate/provide space/subsidy as a benefit to employees.
I took a quick look at the state resource and referral agency web site and they have a staff person who does that. Yippee! http://www.oregonchildcare.org/ourstaff.htm Let's contact her. Sit down with the cty resource and referral folks (uh-oh, are they county funded? probably...)- learn what IS happening, what CAN/NOT happen, and where we can be most effective. Takers? I'll happily contact the CR&R folks. I love to complain as much as the next person, but if doesn't take us somwehre, what a waste!!
Wonder what the nursing advocates say about this since a number of us have noted the link between nearby childcare and nursing while working... I'll ask.
Posted by: LTF | February 24, 2008 at 02:28 PM
First of all, thanks for mentioning the child care referral agency, LTF. I think it is a great idea to explore the resources they offer. I look forward to reading what you find out.
We elect people to make choices for us, to be good stewards of our funds and to provide necessary services. Too often, it is my observation that politicians keep their pet programs alive and dangle things we’re emotional about, such as early education programming or library services, stating they will have to go unless we cough up more money. I would like to see our elected officials live within their means and only ask for more money when every last option has been exhausted. I would also like to see things like education get funded first, not last.
Katrina, since you mentioned your husband Ted Wheeler, who inherited the Wapato problem and many others, I took a look at his website and noticed under “issues and projects” a Vital Aging Taskforce charged with studying matters having to do with the aging population in our communities. Does Chair Wheeler have plans for a similar taskforce to look at issues that pertain to working parents and their children? Perhaps child care affordability/availability could be addressed there.
Posted by: MtM | February 24, 2008 at 08:10 PM
MtM - I wrote a very long response to you and somehow lost it. Probably for the best given my frustration.
I'll try to cut to the chase with a couple of points:
You state: "I would like to see our elected officials live within their means and only ask for more money when every last option has been exhausted. I would also like to see things like education get funded first, not last."
I can tell you the Ted "lives within his means". Unlike many / most public officials, Ted has a great understanding of finance. Not only does his education give him this understanding but his business experience does, as well. When we elect officials who have no private experience, we often end up with politicians who do not understand basic economics. I realize it's not politically expedient for me to say this but, as I have a degree in business and experience as a Financial Advisor, I can't tell you how many times I am struck by decisions that are made by some which have no financial basis whatsoever. My husband, has a great degree of understanding though, and I assure you, he is exhausting all possible avenues before asking for more.
We are in an economic downturn. Oregon's tax system is dependent upon economic success -- income taxes and a capped property tax mean fewer taxes when the need for social services are the highest (more unemployed = higher need but also lower revenue). In addition, we have a kicker. When the government has "excess" we return it to taxpayers, making it impossible to create a rainy day fund. You can only create savings when you have excess -- when we have excess, we have to give it back. For profit businesses aren't run like this because it doesn't make sense; there's a reason for that.
Point #2 in reference to your comment, the County is not responsible for funding education. I'm not saying it isn't important but facts are facts. I stated it above and I'll state it again: The County is responsible for funding services like those for the mentally ill, the aged (meaning those without $$ to take care of themselves), the addicted, the jailed and more.
While they fund the SUN Schools, it is NOT part of their mission. The SUN Schools were taken on during a flush economic period (while ignoring the deteriorating, 100 yr old Sellwood Bridge) as a bonus.
Does Ted support the SUN Schools? Absolutely. He chaired the committee to find a solution for funding for them (where were the other politicians?). Not only did he chair this committee but he did so after the election but BEFORE he took office -- meaning he could have been enjoying time off instead of working at a loss. The SUN Schools technically do not fall under the County's jurisdiction. And since the County does not have enough funds for what they are required to take care of, they can't really re-direct funds to take care of something that isn't in their mission statement.
I realize this is a bit dis-jointed. There's a lot more I'd like to say but I'm not sure that my opinion or thoughts matter to you.
I'll ask my husband what the County's plans are for childcare and working parents. But, remember, as you are asking about childcare, a zillion other people are asking / emailing him about mental health issues, aging & disability services, union issues, jails, addiction services, library issues (which, btw, are determined by voters, not politicians), and so, so, so, much more.
Posted by: Katrina Wheeler | February 24, 2008 at 11:50 PM
Katrina: I keep thinking, and this issue is no exception, that measure 5 and the kicker are what really need to be changed, for this and about 1,000 other reasons. it seems daunting, however, and not directly/clearly a "parent" issue, though it clearly is. Time permitting, I hope to do a revenue problem post on here that includes these 2 funding problems. We did discuss the kicker back in December, and mentioned the effort afoot to change it. That seems like a good place to direct efforts.
But I guess my question on the child care topic here is: if we're leaving the county out of this, where to direct our efforts? Not that you should have all the answers! But I thought it worht asking. Thanks for all of your very useful inout here, it is great to get a more 'inside' perspective.
Posted by: LTF | February 25, 2008 at 03:55 AM
I'd LOVE to see a funding post. Taxes aren't popular but they are necessary if we want government services and infrastructure. It would be great to see what kind of solutions this board can come up with. Since taxes aren't popular, many politicians don't want to tackle the issue. Ted's position has virtually no influence or power over our tax system so while he has opinions, he can't really do anything.
As far as where to direct efforts re: childcare, education and family issues. I'm not entirely sure but I'd start with state officials and the City. The City has excess right now (it won't forever so keep that in mind). I believe Randy Leonard was involved in a program involving doulas for low-income women (I could be wrong about the Commissioner -- just working from fuzzy memory) and of course, Dan Saltzman's CHIF program. So locally, I'd probably start there.
Then, there's PPS. The official education entity. They are strapped for cash but perhaps more volunteers and more people speaking out, could help direct funds where you want them to go.
Legislators are another one. And the Governor. They determine where the State's cash goes (whether it's PPS, human services, bridges, jails, etc). And let's be real -- the squeaky wheel gets the grease.
I don't know enough about how any of the 3 work to give you more information than that. It would be great if the County had the funding to take care of this issue. In a lot of ways, it would make sense. But when the money isn't there and they are cutting programs they have to fund, it's just not possible.
Posted by: Katrina Wheeler | February 25, 2008 at 07:16 AM
Great resource from the Mult Cty direcotr of the the CCR&R: City of Seattle - way back when - used development incentives to require child care centers in office buildings. Duh! How. many. things. does. Portland. enourage??!! green roofs, art, you name it. Brilliant! Why not child care? Anyoen familiar with the planning rules in Portland? Work for the Planning Bureau? If so, help! Is this feasible, what happened in Seattle? Here's a NYT artice on it from - yeah - 1990: http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0CE0DA1E31F937A25753C1A966958260&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all
Beauty is, of course, no public funds required. Downside is, of course, developers may not care for it. Any developers out there? Thoughts? This is a compelling quality of life issue.
Posted by: LTF | February 26, 2008 at 04:21 PM
I read the NYT articel a wee bit more thoroughly and it notes Portland as one of several other US cities that DO include a density bonus for childcare... so, how successsful has it been? Is anyone at the city in the know about its success? current status?
Posted by: LTF | February 26, 2008 at 04:25 PM
You might see if Nick Fish would be available to answer any of these questions. He's not on the City Council but he is a candidate and is quite familiar with a number of the City's issues & policies. In addition, he and his (working) wife, have young children so I'm guessing this is something they come face to face with on a daily basis.
Posted by: Katrina Wheeler | February 26, 2008 at 09:32 PM
Good idea. We are meeting with some candidates to talk about the mamagenda, including Nick, and to be sure this'll be on it!
Posted by: LTF | February 26, 2008 at 11:18 PM
One way for Portland to support childcare is to provide city land for the space. The city already does property transfers like this for programs and services that it believes are important. Affordable housing comes to mind.
There are city-owned sites in my downtown neighborhood that could be great for childcare, if the city would require it as part of the deal when they transfer ownership to a developer. And of course require that it be accessible to a wide range of incomes.
When a facility doesn't have a lease to pay each month, they can more easily focus on income accessibility. Peninsula Childcare Center is a good example of this.
Posted by: nancy | February 26, 2008 at 11:57 PM
Joyful Noise CDCs get subsidy, more from feds than the city or metro, both of whom shoudl be doing more for their employees, who pay more than the parents at the fed centers - all b/c of the subsidy difference. nancy I agree that including this piece in the city's dev planning, requirements, deals, etc.. is an excellent avenue - and apparently was the case at one time. Hope??
Posted by: LTF | February 27, 2008 at 01:44 AM
Here's a link to Seattle's still existing commercial bonus program: http://www.seattle.gov/housing/incentives/Commercial_bonus.htm
Posted by: LTF | February 27, 2008 at 10:29 AM
I believe I have what you are looking for.
My name is Bonni Petillo and I have been operating a pre-preschool in my NE Portland home for twenty-two years. This year I graduate three of my students and because one of my parents had a change of jobs, an immediate opening for a 2- 5year old. While I am not right downtown Katrina, I am close enough to you that you can work assured that your child is close by, well-cared for and with an energetic peer group.
Although I must warn you that I do operate in a school-like setting, which is not only training for the child but the parent as well. While dropping in does you a great deal of good, it does little to reinforce how school will be.
You can find much of the information you might need here: http://funtasticdaycare.com/
Best,
Bonnni Petillo
Posted by: Funtastic Daycare | May 19, 2009 at 05:07 AM
CULTURAL CARE AU PAIR
Finding quality, affordable childcare is one of the biggest challenges facing busy, working parents. For many families, the au pair program is the perfect choice because it achieves a fine balance between quality care at an affordable price. It also provides a cultural enrichment for the whole family.
Cultural Care Au Pair is one of the most affordable childcare options available. Regardless of the number of children in your family, the average weekly cost is just $345, which includes the application fee, selection fee, program fee and your au pair’s weekly stipend. That’s just $7.70 per hour for 45 hours of childcare coverage!
I am a local childcare co-ordinator and based in Portland. We have a wonderful group of host families and au pairs from all over the world and enjoy working closely with a potential host families in finding the best possible au pair.
For more information, please contact Yvonne Evans on (971)-533-4907 or yvonne.evans@lcc.culturalcare.com and visit my website http://yevans.aupairnews.com/
Posted by: Yvonne Evans | January 29, 2011 at 05:39 PM