FLOYD MODEL USE PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOR CHILD CARE

                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: SUNDAY, February 9, 1992                   TAG: 9202100195
SECTION: HORIZON                    PAGE: B2   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: 
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Medium
FLOYD MODEL USE PUBLIC SCHOOLS FOR CHILD CARE
MORE SCHOOL divisions, urban as well as rural, should follow Floyd County's example in allowing use of school buildings for before- and after-school day-care programs for youngsters.
As a story in this newspaper's New River Valley edition reported last week, Floyd's day-care program has been a hit with parents and children since it began operating in two of the county's elementary schools this past fall. A typical comment came from Diane Plaisted. This mother said her son, Ryan, has so much fun in the program that "he hates to leave." And "it works out good for me to have a place for him to go after school."
Floyd's program, called "The Adventure Club," is operated by a private firm, Child Care Consultant Services of Christiansburg. With space, utilities and access to playgrounds, libraries and equipment contributed by the schools, the cost to the parents is a modest $26 a week for one child, with discounts for more than one child from the same family.
Finding safe, affordable child care is not just a problem in rural counties, where wages tend to be low. It is one of the most pressing needs facing working parents everywhere. Yet, the overwhelming majority of the state's 133 school divisions still don't allow use of their buildings before and after school hours to help out working parents, and to help address the growing social problems of "latch-key" children.
This is not right. School buildings represent a major investment by taxpayers - many of whom are the very working parents who need child-care services to keep working and keep paying taxes.
When the buildings double as child-care centers, parents who need to get to work on time can be spared such knotty logistics as having to wake children before dawn and shuttle them to a neighbor's or relative's house to await the school bus - then arrange for more shuttling after school. This is hard on the kids as well as adults, and so unnecessary when school buildings can be used for before- and after-school child-care programs in which quality standards could be relatively easily monitored and assured.
In many localities, private providers of child care - fearing subsidized competition - have strongly opposed the use of schools. At the state level, private providers have successfully lobbied against legislation that would give blanket approval for school divisions to use schools for child-care programs. Thus, under Dillon Rule doctrine that limits local powers to those expressly granted by the state, school divisions have to jump through hoops if they want to accommodate parents and children in this manner.
This also is not right - not when hardly a city or county in Virginia has an adequate number of child-care providers. Some - including several jurisdictions in Southwest Virginia - have no licensed child-care centers at all.
It's not simply that maximum use of public buildings makes good public policy. More important are the children, and the need for proper child care. The legislature ought to encourage the use of schools for this purpose.

by Bhavesh Jinadra by CNB