Jill Schuups Bill 397

Home | Requirements that must be met | Parent Reviews | My Training/ Resume | My Philosophy | Activities/Programs | PICS | TEACHING TOOLS | Calendar Needs | My Daughter's Paper on Daycare Comparison's | ADHD BY JESS | as a mom.org | Community Links | CONTACT ME | Email Reminders

103508665_716106072547704_3950500391939913463_n.jpg

Under the guise of Simon's Law, Jill Schuup inserted "her will" over all those who wish to go into the Daycare Business.

Jill Schuups Bill 397 causes HUGE increases in Daycare Costs

State Legislation that Affects your Daycare Costs.

2021 HB 32 Witness Statement



Dear Honorable Representative Coleman,

 

            I sincerely appreciate you following up on an email personally.

Here are some of my thoughts on the Amendment Jill Schupp inserted into your bill. Mind you, your Sex Trafficking Bill as far as I can tell, was a good bill and well needed. Schupp has been trying to get her Bill on this passed for a decade, to no avail as it has many issues that effect Family and Taxes that go unresolved.

Please see the following ideas to work for the betterment of childcare.

 

Typically, Family Home Daycares sprout up for several reasons.

  • Parents fear the public daycares but cannot afford to stay at home with their kids, so they take on a few others for revenue to supplement the family budget. College loans are a huge issue for todays young adults.

  • There are health needs within the immediate family or elderly care is needed and they must stop working but need income.

  • Parents kids are being kicked out of public daycares, (this typically surrounds the hard to handle children). So, they start their own or seek home daycares.

  • Previous Teachers fed up with the system – decide to get out of teaching however income needs prevent them from going backwards in salary (public childcare employees are poorly paid) so they start their own daycare.

  • Some choose daycare as a career.

  • Consistency in care is important for children and public daycares do not offer One childcare individual for the term of their child’s infant to kindergarten needs.

  • Or they have more kids needing daycare than they can afford themselves.

     

    The Cons of Schupp’s Amendment:

     

  1. Punishes all Licensed included, for the failures of the few typically non-licensed.

  2. Has government interfering in the family unit.

  3. Forces grandparents to charge their children for daycare or lose income.

  4. Eliminates hard sought out, trusted daycare for families

  5. Eliminates revenue from daycare family budgets with only 3 weeks’ notice. Ex: I charge $120/week, with 21 weeks of lost revenue due to the loss of one already licensed spot, immediately my family loses $2520. That cannot be recouped but needed to pay bills. $6000.00 lost to the budget for a year, and this is only for One grandchild.

  6. Increases daycare costs to daycare customer families, giving them less money to spend on family needs, thus increases the cost to family budgets as well. Ex: If cost of daycare goes up $30 to recoup losses, then parents will lose an additional $1530.00 out of their yearly budgets. So much for tax reforms, huh?

  7. Does not consider affordability of daycare for parents in varying diverse regions. A Ladue daycare may charge $500/ week, St Charles daycare $250, a North City Daycare $50-$75 to avoid need for state subsidies.

  8. Thus, Forces Daycare costs and pricing to increase, to recoup future losses

  9. Ultimately costs ALL of the taxpayer’s additional money as State Subsidies are based on the average costs of daycare in the state.

  10. In cases of Non-Licensed Daycares, it limits the number of children families can give birth to, and care for as well as limits their grandparents from watching more than 6 of their grandkids. (you see if your neighbor calls you into the state for watching your grandkids…they will investigate and act accordingly) how embarrassing would that be?

  11. Gives Non-licensed daycares 2 additional children to care for, without licensing.

  12. Because this amendment was hidden into your sex trafficking bill, it was not on anyone’s radar to even have a chance to use our voices.

     

    Suggestions for amending the amendment:

     

  1. Licensed Daycare’s – put the language back in about related not counting in the numbers allowed, reducing it to children in the home (to include adopted/step) and whatever other words may be necessary to cover the parent’s children and grandparents. So, no 9th degree relationships just parents and grandparents. Evidenced through Birth Certificates/Adoption etc./gov paperwork to be accepted.

  2. Unlicensed Daycares- Limit set at their own kids/grandkids (same proof needed) plus SPACE LIMITATION. Ex: licensed gets one kid per 35sq ft inside and 75sq ft outside. So, if you had space for 10 and 8 of your own kids, they could watch 2. Or put a max of 4 nonfamily members that they could watch. Right now, they are rewarded with 2 extra kids. If the purpose is to discourage non-licensed, then it should be reduced to 2 nonfamily members.

  3. Add a hefty fine for failure to license, if found above these numbers to deter. But unless you find a way to ensure every person is informed, I suggest a warning fine 1st, then a heftier one.

  4. You could set this as a state standard that all smaller governments within, must follow and update their codes to. This would put more eyes on the solution. Currently only the understaffed State workers have eyes on. Smaller governments are the eyes of the state for law enforcement.

     

    Again,

    Thank you for your personal follow-up,

     

                      Amy Poelker                        Paid for by Citizens for Amy Poelker, Rebecca (Becky) Buwalda Treasurer.

This Bill 397 states Daycares must count their own children and Grandchildren in their allowed numbers.

 

Thus if allowed 10 and have 1 relative age 5 and under, then our numbers are reduced by 1 to 9 allowed. But what happens when more grandchildren or children for those younger daycare owners… 10 to 8, 10 to 7, 10 to 6 etc.

 

Prices are typically based on Budget needs thus,

when you calculate out the current price in my daycare $120/week minus the 1 spot not allowed anymore...

It eliminates in this case $6,240.00 per spot, per year out of a budget.

 

CAN ANY OF YOU AFFORD TO CUT $6,240.00 OUT OF YOUR HOUSEHOLD BUDGET???

 

OF COURSE NOT, RIGHT?

 

THUS, THIS BILL WILL CAUSE INCREASES IN THE COST OF DAYCARE.

THIS BILL WILL CAUSE INCREASES IN DAYCARE SUBSIDIES GIVEN TO THOSE WHO CANNOT ALREADY AFFORD DAYCARE ALREADY, BY THE STATE OF MISSOURI. Just to make the same rate of income and be able to meet their household bills.

 

In my case $120 becomes $150 with one spot loss, $120 becomes $160 for a 2 spot loss, $120 becomes $175 for a 3 spot loss, $120 becomes $200 for a 4 spot loss… etc. and my rates have always been low purposefully to help those in my community afford daycare in a society where the norm home price is $160/week and the big daycares charge $280/week.

 

THUS, THIS BILL WILL CAUSE MORE OF YOUR TAX DOLLARS TO BE SPENT by our State Government!!!

This Bill 397 places a hardship on Daycare Owners and the Parents they serve.

 

A $20. increase/week to Parents equals $1,040.00 less to spend per year on their bills as well.

 

This Bill 397 will cause Parents who have already found legal daycare, to lose that daycare immediately upon Aug 30, 2019. No Notice given.

Causing Parents undue stress as well, due to Daycare Shortages.

In my case it will cause an immediate loss of $2,280.00 our of my 2019 Budget.

 

Remember this is affecting all daycares,

so, it will not be just a few parents that lose their services,

 it will be multiplied by all the daycares out there. ?????????????????

 

This will cause Daycare Shortages as well.

Jill has been trying to get this bill passed for years, now she stuck it within Simon's Law!

 

Because our legislature has NO Forethought....they passed this bill. So did the Govenor.

Did he read it???

 

Did the legislature read it?

Who knows....

 

We know that the County Council didn't read their bills we know, that  in 2016 for sure, they did not read the contract for the Election Board moving to the Crossings,

as the contract was not written till 9 days after they passed the Ordinance #26460

which can be see on You Tube on 7/12/16.


 https://youtu.be/BGv5ZYFdGw4

Vote by Council on Crossings/Election Board issue. Conversation occurs at 17:30 explaining the process, vote later in video at 43:51 apparently Dooley began the process. The vote was 5 yes 1 no with 1 absent. Each Councilman gave their opinion on this project, so listen to their words. Now in 2018 they hold hearing on this project and tell the media they were duped.

Government is not protecting our tax dollars!

Government is not protecting our tax dollars!
garryearls.jpg






The fight continues to stop onerous legislation that raises Childcare Prices.


Line 65 4. Children who are related within the third degree of consanguinity or affinity to, 66 adopted by, or under court appointed guardianship or legal custody of a child care 67 provider who is responsible for the daily operation of an in-home or group-home licensed 68 child care facility that is organized as a corporation, association, firm, partnership, limited 69 liability company, sole proprietorship, or any other type of business entity in this state shall 70 not be included in the number of children counted toward the maximum number of 71 children for which the facility is licensed under section 210.221. If more than one member 72 of the corporation, association, firm, partnership, limited liability company, or other 73 business entity is responsible for the daily operation of the facility, the related children of 74 only one such member shall be excluded. Nothing in this section shall prevent a qualified 75 licensee who is not organized as a corporation, association, firm, partnership, limited 76 liability company, sole proprietorship, or any other type of business entity from claiming 77 this exemption. 78 5. Notwithstanding any other provision of law to the contrary, any licensed child 79 care facility receiving funding for a child in the facility's care under the Child Care and 80 Development Block Grant Act of 2014, as amended, shall abide by the licensure provisions 81 required under this chapter to receive such funding.

Dear Honorable Representatives,

 

Let me explain why I support the adjustment in HB 32 shown above for childcare.


Jill Schuup’s Nathans Law when inserted into Bill 397 in 2019 caused many changes that wreaked havoc in the childcare industry.

In the future I would like to see Committee's put together to come up with solutions in daycare that exist of REAL Daycare Operators throughout the State of Missouri, as we have the best understanding of the needs and how to police our own profession. Schupp had been trying to get her Bill on Nathans Law passed for a decade, to no avail as it has many issues that affect Family and Taxes that go unresolved.

Please see the following ideas to work for the betterment of childcare.

 

Typically, Family Home Daycares sprout up for several reasons.

 

• Parents fear the public daycares but cannot afford to stay at home with their kids, so they take on a few others for revenue to supplement the family budget. College loans are a huge issue for today’s young adults requiring two incomes to support a family and have a home.

• There are health needs within the immediate family or elderly care is needed and they must stop working but need income.

• Their kids are being kicked out of public daycares, (this typically surrounds the hard to handle children). So, they start their own or seek home daycares.

• Previous Teachers fed up with the education system – decide to get out of teaching however income needs prevent them from going backwards in salary (public childcare employees are poorly paid) so they start their own daycare.

• Some choose daycare as a career.

Consistency in care is important for children and public daycares do not offer One childcare individual for the term of their child’s infant to kindergarten needs. Parents like to know who is watching their child, no substitutes, so they seek out home childcare.

• Or they have more kids needing daycare than they can afford themselves, so they start their own childcare to supplement their income.


The Cons of Schupp’s Amendment Change, which caused the above amendment need:

 

1. Punishes all Licensed Childcare facilities, for the failures of the few which are typically non-licensed, non-trained individuals.

2. It causes the government to interfere in the family unit.

3. Forces grandparents with childcares to charge their children for daycare or lose income due to the loss of 1+ spots.

4. Eliminates hard sought out, trusted daycare for families, and strains the infant sitters even further as a result.

5. Eliminated revenue from daycare family budgets with only 3 weeks’ notice. Ex: I charged $120/week, with 21 weeks of lost revenue in 2019 due to the loss of one already licensed spot, immediately my family lost $2520 out of the 2019 budget because it was an emergency clause, that could not be recouped but was needed to pay bills. It was a $6000.00 loss to the budget for the next year 2020, and this was only for One grandchild. Grandma is not charging their kids for childcare. Where was this $6000 going to be replaced to pay bills with? Then $12,000 as the 2nd one comes, etc.

6. Thus it increased daycare costs to daycare customer families, giving them less money to spend on family needs as well, and increased the cost to their family budgets as well. Ex: If cost of daycare goes up $30 to recoup losses, then parents will lose an additional $1530.00 out of their yearly budgets. So much for tax reforms, huh?

7. Does not consider affordability of daycare for parents in varying diverse regions. A Ladue daycare may charge $500/ week, St Charles daycare $250, a North City Daycare $50-$75 to avoid need for state subsidies.

8. Thus it forced Daycare costs and pricing to increase, to recoup current and future losses. Of course, then Covid-19 hit and doubled down on the losses.

9. Ultimately this will cost ALL the taxpayer’s additional money as State Subsidies are based on the average costs of daycare in the state. With prices going up, so will subsidy costs.

10. In cases of Non-Licensed Daycares, it limits the number of children families can give birth to, and care for as well as limits their grandparents from watching more than 6 of their grandkids. Sure, it did not say that but - (you see if your neighbor calls you into the state for watching too many kids…they will have to investigate and act accordingly) how embarrassing that can be.

11. Gives Non-licensed daycares 2 additional children to care for, without licensing/training. Does this make sense to you?

12. Because this amendment was hidden into a sex trafficking bill, it was not on anyone’s radar to even have a chance to use our voices.

13. Here is the REAL kicker – When the State Subsidies go up and the available monies for this program do not – the levels of income to qualify will be raised so that less parents will qualify and needy parents will be kicked off the program… not because they did anything wrong or different, but because a Bill 397 passed with an amendment that was not thought out thoroughly.

14. If one of the greater causes of accidental death is due to unlicensed, under trained daycare workers do you really give them 2 extra kids to care for? And again, the understaffed caseworker issue is still not addressed, need more eyes on this.

15. This I was just made aware of, as I do not employ people: Staff is being terminated to make up for the revenue losses as well. What else will be sacrificed by daycare centers to make up the revenue losses?...........................................

 


These were my previous suggestions for amending the amendment, though they are no longer needed with the above language, I wanted to show you where I stood on this topic in 2019 when I sent a similar letter to the representatives on 10/9/19.:

1. Licensed Daycare’s – put the language back in about related not counting in the numbers allowed, reducing it to children in the home (to include adopted/step) and whatever other words may be necessary to cover the parent’s children and grandparents. So, no 9th degree relationships just parents and grandparents. Evidenced through Birth Certificates/Adoption etc./gov paperwork to be accepted.

2. Unlicensed Daycares- Limit set at their own kids/grandkids (same proof needed) plus SPACE LIMITATION. Ex: licensed gets one kid per 35sq ft inside and 75sq ft outside. So, if you had space for 10 and 8 are your own kids, they could watch 2. Or put a max of 4 nonfamily members that they could watch. Right now, they are rewarded with 2 extra kids. If the purpose is to discourage non-licensed, then it should be reduced to 2 nonfamily members.

3. Add a hefty fine for failure to license, if found above these numbers to deter. But unless you find a way to ensure every person is informed, I suggest a warning fine 1st, then a heftier one.

4. You could set this as a state standard that all smaller governments within, must follow and update their codes to. This would put more eyes on the solution to the original problem of unlicensed daycares through code enforcement of muni’s and counties, etc. as well as give law enforcement a law to enforce that is not currently on their radar as a responsibility. Currently only the understaffed State workers have eyes on this issue and there are not enough of them to make a difference. The smaller governments of our state - are the eyes of the state for law enforcement and should be utilized as such.

The ratio on Daycare Inspectors to Providers is NOT enough.

 

It is disturbing to our those in our field to have been told now in 2020, that Childcare workers are an Essential part of the Mo, workforce and our Emergency Numbers were now allowed, to get through this Covid Emergency. For home childcare that would be plus 3.

So, we are competent enough to perform our duties in a 10 month Emergency but not competent enough on a daily basis to do so, this is basically what we took from that.

Even though we are trained, yearly…  Yet unlicensed receive 2 extra bodies with NO TRAINING!

 

 

In summary, I just want to add that I am not speaking just for myself but for all childcare operators. I am one of the lucky ones, my husband’s job was essential, and his overtime kept us afloat when my numbers were down huge for three months. But many of the others were not as lucky and with the increased costs for sanitation and lost income - closed.

We are trained very well. The health dept rips our facilities apart when they come. The Fire Marshall does the same. Your overworked State Inspectors do a very thorough job when they come as well.

            To be able to attract more childcare operators to the industry and not lose more of the ones we have left… Please consider forwarding this addendum and give us a little faith. And consider my “suggestion” #4 above as that is where the problem lies, in catching those who are not licensed, thus not trained.

 

Thank you,

Sincerely,

Amy Poelker

002104985

3459 Mary Ann Ct.

Saint Ann, MO 63074

314-517-2378

casjpoelker@msn.com

1/26/2021

 

 

Childcare is $160.00 Transaction Fees are added into price at $165.00. This is not a link see me.

FOR PARENT REMINDERS PLEASE SUBSCRIBE TO MY NEW EMAIL LIST

State Legislation that Affects your Daycare Costs.

NOAA WEATHER RADIO-GET YOUR WEATHER ALERTS HERE

63074, 63114, 63043, 63146, 63121,63132 AIRPORT AREA
T. C. B.
2032

TLC DAYCARE IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR THE CONTENT OF WEB PAGES LINKED FROM OUR SITE, OR THE CARE OF OTHER BUSINESSES SEEN ON THIS SITE.

Should the State of Mo decide that facemasks are mandatory. (To date these are not required in the Family Home Daycares.) You will have to purchase and maintain those. As a business owner, I will not be responsible for the purchase nor maintenance of facemasks. This is too huge of a liability risk. This daycare business follows the Rules and Regulations set forth by the Department of Health and Senior Services of the State of Missouri.