To strike or not is a fraught decision for child care providers
Pinwheels posted at Tree Top child care center in Ashland represent the families on the waiting list for the program. (Photo courtesy of Theresa Fredericks)
Theresa Fredericks grew up in the world of child care.
Her mother founded a child care center in Ashland 52 years ago, when Fredericks was just 5 months old. Fredericks started her career in early education as a teacher there, then took over management and ownership of the program, Tree Top Child Development Center and Preschool.
Fredericks has been proud of the center's reputation in the community. Tree Top currently is licensed for 33 children at a time. With schedules staggered for some children, there are a total of 39 currently enrolled.
The waiting list is nearly twice that size: 72 children. This week Fredericks put up one pinwheel for each waiting list occupant on the law in front of the center, along with some signs. 'Child care wanted,' one sign said. 'Quality child care should be a right' said another. 'Not a luxury,' said a third.
On Tuesday Fredericks was 300 miles away, at the state Capitol in Madison. Tree Top was closed, and Fredericks says it will be closed again on Wednesday and the rest of this week.
It was a tough decision, she said — but one she and her staff felt was necessary to make a point to Wisconsin lawmakers.
'Without state investment the parents can't afford to pay rising tuition and staff can't afford to stay at low wages,' Fredericks told the Wisconsin Examiner. 'With investment, we will see a rise in teachers going into the field, we will see an increase in available programs.'
That's why she and her staff decided to join the statewide strike called by child care providers.
The strike is a response to action May 8 by the Republican majority on the Legislature's Joint Finance Committee to strip $480 million from Tony Evers' proposed budget. The money would provide child care centers with an ongoing monthly stipend, continuing support first provided through federal COVID-19 pandemic relief funds.
Child care providers have credited the money for enabling them to increase the wages of child care teachers while avoiding increases in the fees that parents pay.
'I know that there are many people who think that because we care for very young children that we don't count as teachers,' said Tree Top teacher Betsy Westlund at a combination press conference and rally on the Capitol steps Tuesday. 'But the work we do is highly skilled and deeply critical to our society, the economy, and our communities.'
She described a common suggestion that child care providers hear when they talk about funding shortfalls: increase tuition and expand enrollment.
'Never mind the tuition is already so high that so few can afford it, and never mind how difficult it is to find teachers willing to work for low wages with no benefits,' Westlund said.
'No one considers supporting the quality of child care by supporting skilled teachers because they assume anyone will do,' she added. 'And that hurts. Man, does that hurt — because I know how much I have to put in to become educated in early childhood.'
Republicans favor expanding employer child care tax credit; providers skeptical
'We are not just babysitting — we are laying the foundation for lifelong learning,' said Amber Haas, a fellow Tree Top teacher.
The organizers of the strike are calling it 'State Without Child Care.' They're doing it 'so that our elected representatives, especially on the Joint Finance Committee, can actually have an idea of what is going to happen this summer,' said Corrine Hendrickson, co-founder of Wisconsin Early Childhood Action Needed (WECAN) and the operator of a family child care center in New Glarus.
At the Assembly's floor session Tuesday afternoon, child care providers sat in the overhead gallery. On the floor, Rep. Jodi Emerson (D-Eau Claire) introduced some by name, adding that they 'are here in the Capitol to advocate for $480 million in the budget for living wages for teachers in early childhood education.'
While some providers are going all in with the strike, many say they cannot — but they are equally concerned about the issue.
Angela Norvold has grown her child care program in Hudson from a family day care serving eight children to two centers, each licensed for 43 children. One is for younger kids and the other for older children, including 4-year-old kindergarten.
'We thought hard and as a team,' about closing for the strike, Norvold said in an interview. She and the center's administrators decided to send a letter to parents asking for their input. 'They agreed that we should stay open, and my fear was that if we closed we would lose those people for good,' she said.
There's a child care shortage in Hudson, Norvold said. At the same time, she added, there are several providers in the area to choose from, but many have rooms that aren't in use because they cannot find teachers.
'I don't know that [closing] would be making a statement where we are,' Norvold said. At the same time, though, 'we did have some parents volunteer to keep their children home so that we could come [to Madison] today and tomorrow.'
Norvold said that her centers were once more affordable than those in Minnesota, drawing families who moved across the border to make their home.
'They didn't just come for lower prices, they came for quality care, educated staff that wanted to stay, and a community that values raising children well,' she said in a brief speech at the rally.
The funding providers received during the pandemic 'didn't just help families, it helped providers,' Norvold said. 'It helped us retain and educate staff, it helped us keep costs down without sacrificing quality. It helped us build futures.'
If the support doesn't continue, 'we're looking at yet another tuition increase — at least $30 per child per week,' Norvold said. 'That will push our infant care to a level that is not sustainable for most working families. It is not sustainable for us either.'
Families of children enrolled at Tree Top in Ashland have gotten behind the center's decision to join the child care strike .
'Our families support us,' Fredericks said. 'They know that we have done everything. We're contacting our legislators, they're contacting our legislators —over and over again, telling them how important it is.'
Tony Singler is the father of three children who have gone through Tree Top's program, from the age of 3 months though 4-year-old kindergarten. His youngest child is now nearing graduation from the 4-K program.
'Everything that Theresa does there is just more in-depth and more one-on-one,' Singler said in a telephone interview Tuesday. For his kids, he said, the center has been an ideal place to help their children through their first years.
'There's a lot of research and support that the early years are very important to the children,' Singler said. 'Our pediatrician supports that, and it's a choice we make to give our children the best chance they have.'
Singler is a certified public accountant; his wife is a nurse. 'We're not teachers,' he said. 'We don't know how to teach kids at that young age.'
Now they are juggling schedules and turning to friends for help while hoping their child can return to Tree Top soon.
'It's tough,' said Singler, but he says he understands the position that Fredericks and the center's employees are in.
'It's been a very good center,' he said. 'And if they don't have the funding, and they lose the teachers because the teachers have to go somewhere else, and they have to cut the enrollment and people get cut — then you don't have the opportunity to put your child into the center like that, give them the best chance forward in their early development.'
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Hill
17 minutes ago
- The Hill
Trump EPA moves to repeal climate rules that limit greenhouse gas emissions from US power plants
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Environmental Protection Agency on Wednesday proposed repealing rules that limit planet-warming greenhouse gas emissions from power plants fueled by coal and natural gas, an action that Administrator Lee Zeldin said would remove billions of dollars in costs for industry and help 'unleash' American energy. The EPA also proposed weakening a regulation that requires power plants to reduce emissions of mercury and other toxic pollutants that can harm brain development of young children and contribute to heart attacks and other health problems in adults. The rollbacks are meant to fulfill Republican President Donald Trump's repeated pledge to 'unleash American energy' and make it more affordable for Americans to power their homes and operate businesses. If approved and made final, the plans would reverse efforts by Democratic President Joe Biden's administration to address climate change and improve conditions in areas heavily burdened by industrial pollution, mostly in low-income and majority Black or Hispanic communities. The power plant rules are among about 30 environmental regulations that Zeldin targeted in March when he announced what he called the 'most consequential day of deregulation in American history.' Zeldin said Wednesday the new rules would help end what he called the Biden and Obama administration's 'war on so much of our U.S. domestic energy supply.' 'The American public spoke loudly and clearly last November,' he added in a speech at EPA headquarters. 'They wanted to make sure that … no matter what agency anybody might be confirmed to lead, we are finding opportunities to pursue common-sense, pragmatic solutions that will help reduce the cost of living … create jobs and usher in a golden era of American prosperity.' Environmental and public health groups called the rollbacks dangerous and vowed to challenge the rules in court. Dr. Lisa Patel, a pediatrician and executive director of the Medical Society Consortium on Climate & Health, called the proposals 'yet another in a series of attacks' by the Trump administration on the nation's 'health, our children, our climate and the basic idea of clean air and water.' She called it 'unconscionable to think that our country would move backwards on something as common sense as protecting children from mercury and our planet from worsening hurricanes, wildfires, floods and poor air quality driven by climate change.' 'Ignoring the immense harm to public health from power plant pollution is a clear violation of the law,' added Manish Bapna, president and CEO of the Natural Resources Defense Council. 'If EPA finalizes a slapdash effort to repeal those rules, we'll see them in court.' The EPA-targeted rules could prevent an estimated 30,000 deaths and save $275 billion each year they are in effect, according to an Associated Press examination that included the agency's own prior assessments and a wide range of other research. It's by no means guaranteed that the rules will be entirely eliminated — they can't be changed without going through a federal rulemaking process that can take years and requires public comment and scientific justification. Even a partial dismantling of the rules would mean more pollutants such as smog, mercury and lead — and especially more tiny airborne particles that can lodge in lungs and cause health problems, the AP analysis found. It would also mean higher emissions of the greenhouse gases driving Earth's warming to deadlier levels. Biden, a Democrat, had made fighting climate change a hallmark of his presidency. Coal-fired power plants would be forced to capture smokestack emissions or shut down under a strict EPA rule issued last year. Then-EPA head Michael Regan said the power plant rules would reduce pollution and improve public health while supporting a reliable, long-term supply of electricity. The power sector is the nation's second-largest contributor to climate change, after transportation. In its proposed regulation, the Trump EPA argues that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases from fossil fuel-fired power plants 'do not contribute significantly to dangerous pollution' or climate change and therefore do not meet a threshold under the Clean Air Act for regulatory action. Greenhouse gas emissions from coal and gas-fired plants 'are a small and decreasing part of global emissions,' the EPA said, adding: 'this Administration's priority is to promote the public health or welfare through energy dominance and independence secured by using fossil fuels to generate power.' The Clean Air Act allows the EPA to limit emissions from power plants and other industrial sources if those emissions significantly contribute to air pollution that endangers public health. If fossil fuel plants no longer meet the EPA's threshold, the Trump administration may later argue that other pollutants from other industrial sectors don't either and therefore shouldn't be regulated, said Meghan Greenfield, a former EPA and Justice Department lawyer now in private practice. The EPA proposal 'has the potential to have much, much broader implications,' she said. Zeldin, a former New York congressman, said the Biden-era rules were designed to 'suffocate our economy in order to protect the environment,' with the intent to regulate the coal industry 'out of existence' and make it 'disappear.' National Mining Association president and CEO Rich Nolan applauded the new rules, saying they remove 'deliberately unattainable standards' for clean air while 'leveling the playing field for reliable power sources, instead of stacking the deck against them.' But Dr. Howard Frumkin, a former director of the National Center for Environmental Health and professor emeritus at the University of Washington School of Public Health, said Zeldin and Trump were trying to deny reality. 'The world is round, the sun rises in the east, coal-and gas-fired power plants contribute significantly to climate change, and climate change increases the risk of heat waves, catastrophic storms and many other health threats,' Frumkin said. 'These are indisputable facts. If you torpedo regulations on power plant greenhouse gas emissions, you torpedo the health and well-being of the American public and contribute to leaving a world of risk and suffering to our children and grandchildren.' A paper published earlier this year in the journal Science found the Biden-era rules could reduce U.S. power sector carbon emissions by 73% to 86% below 2005 levels by 2040, compared with a reduction of 60% to 83% without the rules. 'Carbon emissions in the power sector drop at a faster rate with the (Biden-era) rules in place than without them,' said Aaron Bergman, a fellow at Resources for the Future, a nonprofit research institution and a co-author of the Science paper. The Biden rule also would result in 'significant reductions in sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides, pollutants that harm human health,' he said.
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Missouri approves stadium aid for Kansas City Chiefs and Royals and disaster relief for St. Louis
JEFFERSON CITY, Mo. (AP) — Missouri lawmakers on Wednesday approved hundreds of millions of dollars of financial aid to try to persuade the Kansas City Chiefs and Royals to remain in the state and help the St. Louis area recover from a devastating tornado. House passage sends the legislative package to Republican Gov. Mike Kehoe, who called lawmakers into special session with a plea for urgent action. Kehoe is expected to sign the measures into law. Missouri's session paired two otherwise unrelated national trends — a movement for new taxpayer-funded sports stadiums and a reevaluation of states' roles in natural disasters as President Donald Trump's administration reassess federal aid programs. The stadium subsidies already were a top concern in Missouri when a deadly tornado struck St. Louis on May 16, causing an estimated $1.6 billion of damage a day after lawmakers had wrapped up work in their annual regular session. The disaster relief had widespread support. Lawmakers listened attentively on Wednesday as Democratic state Rep. Kimberly-Ann Collins described with a cracking voice how she witnessed the tornado rip the roof off her house and damage her St. Louis neighborhood. Collins said she has no home insurance, slept in her car for days and has accepted food from others. 'Homes are crumbled and leveled,' said Collins, adding: 'It hurts me to my core to see the families that have worked so hard, the businesses that have worked so hard, to see them ripped apart.' Lawmakers approved $100 million of open-ended aid for St. Louis and $25 million for emergency housing assistance in any areas covered under requests for presidential disaster declarations. They also authorized a $5,000 income tax credit to offset insurance policy deductibles for homeowners and renters hit by this year's storms — a provision that state budget director Dan Haug said could eventually cost up to $600 million. The Chiefs and Royals currently play football and baseball in side-by-side stadiums in Jackson County, Missouri, under leases that expire in January 2031. Jackson County voters last year defeated a sales tax extension that would have helped finance an $800 million renovation of the Chiefs' Arrowhead Stadium and a $2 billion ballpark district for the Royals in downtown Kansas City. That prompted lawmakers in neighboring Kansas last year to authorize bonds for up to 70% of the cost of new stadiums in Kansas to lure the teams to their state. The Royals have bought a mortgage for property in Kansas, though the team also has continued to pursue other possible sites in Missouri. The Kansas offer is scheduled to expire June 30, creating urgency for Missouri to approve a counteroffer. Missouri's legislation authorizes bonds covering up to 50% of the cost of new or renovated stadiums, plus up to $50 million of tax credits for each stadium and unspecified aid from local governments. If they choose to stay in Missouri, the Chiefs plan a $1.15 billion renovation of Arrowhead Stadium. The Chiefs, in a statement to The Associated Press, described the legislative vote as a 'significant step forward' that enables the team to continue exploring options to remain in Missouri. The Royals described the legislation as 'a very important piece of our decision-making process" but made no site-specific commitment. 'Our focus remains the same: to prioritize the best interests of our team, fans, partners and regional community as we pursue the next generational home for the Kansas City Royals,' the team said in a statement to the AP. Though they have no specific plans in the works, the St. Louis Cardinals also would be eligible for stadium aid if they undertake a project of at least $500 million. Many economists contend public funding for stadiums isn't worth it, because sports tend to divert discretionary spending away from other forms of entertainment rather than generate new income. But supporters said Missouri stands to lose millions of dollars of tax revenue if Kansas City's most prominent professional sports teams move to Kansas. They said Missouri's reputation also would take a hit, particularly if it loses the Chiefs, which have won three of the past six Super Bowls. 'We have the chance to maybe save what is the symbol of this state,' Rep. Jim Murphy, a Republican from St. Louis County, said while illustrating cross-state support for the measure. The legislation faced some bipartisan pushback from those who described it as a subsidy for wealthy sports team owners. Others raised concerns that a property tax break for homeowners, which was added in the Senate to gain votes, violates the state constitution by providing different levels of tax relief in various counties while excluding others entirely. 'This bill is unconstitutional, it's fiscally reckless, it's morally wrong," said Republican state Rep. Bryant Wolfin. ___ Associated Press writer Dave Skretta contributed from Kansas City, Missouri.
Yahoo
17 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Louisville did not delay police reform order, say mayor, chief in response to criticism
Louisville Mayor Craig Greenberg talks with attendees of The Louisville Forum at Vincenzo's in downtown Louisville. June 11, 2025. (Kentucky Lantern photo by Sarah Ladd) LOUISVILLE — Louisville Mayor Craig Greenberg and Louisville Police Chief Paul Humphrey said the city should not be blamed for delaying a court order to correct civil rights abuses by Louisville police and to reform the department. During the monthly meeting of The Louisville Forum Wednesday, Humphrey pointed to federal 'bureaucracy' while Greenberg acknowledged that 'a lot of people … think that our administration and the LMPD was the reason' a consent decree mandating police reforms was not signed before the Republican Trump administration killed the agreement as expected. The mayor insisted that is not the case. Responding to an audience question, Greenberg told the gathering that it took more than 11 months for the Justice Department under Democratic President Joe Biden to get the city a draft agreement after then-Attorney General Merrick Garland came to Kentucky in 2023 to discuss the police department's civil rights violations. Greenberg said the city at that time offered to provide an initial draft of a consent decree. 'They insisted that they would provide us with the first draft. Notwithstanding our weekly requests (of) when that draft was coming, we got the first draft of the consent decree 11 and a half months later,' Greenberg said. 'So we waited basically a year to see a first draft of the consent decree after Attorney General Garland came to our city.' Trump Justice Department moves to end consent decree aimed at reforming policing in Louisville The agreement was announced in December 2024, the month before President Donald Trump was inaugurated for his second term. In May, the Trump administration's U.S. Department of Justice pulled back from the consent decree, saying such actions are 'handcuffing local leaders.' The consent decree came in response to the 2020 police killing of Breonna Taylor, an unarmed Black woman, and a subsequent federal investigation that exposed a pattern of constitutional violations by Louisville police. Taylor's mother criticized the mayor, Louisville Public Media reported in May, accusing him of 'dragging his feet' on the issue. Louisville Metro Council member J.P. Lyninger, a Democrat, also has voiced disappointment with Democrat Greenberg's administration. 'The findings were announced two years ago,' he told Louisville Public Media last month. 'If we had more speedily entered into agreement with the Department of Justice, this would already be on the books and we wouldn't be talking about this today.' A consent decree is a negotiated agreement that avoids a trial by spelling out requirements that a federal judge signs and enforces. On Wednesday, Greenberg said, 'Louisville Metro government was not the reason why this took time.' Instead, he said, the police department and city had 'worked day and night with getting this done as their primary focus.' Humphrey agreed, saying there are 'a lot of things that could be improved about that process' at the federal level to expedite the consent decree process. The federal government, Humphrey said, was 'more concerned with protecting the case than they were with improving the police department.' On the same day the Trump administration moved to let LMPD off the hook for reform, Greenberg and Humphrey announced the city would move forward with its own Community Commitment, a 214-page handbook with goals similar to those outlined in the proposed consent decree. 'If we were using delay as a negotiating tactic, we would not have voluntarily signed the community commitment within hours of the Department of Justice announcing they were dropping the case,' Greenberg said at the Louisville Forum. 'It would have been a very different response.' Under the Community Commitment, the city will issue a request for proposals (RFP) seeking candidates to fill the role of an independent monitor. The public will be able to weigh in on monitor candidates via an online survey and at community listening sessions. The independent monitor will cost Louisville around $750,000, Greenberg said, and will have a five-year contract. 'We have our community commitment that we're moving forward with, and so … looking back at what the federal government did or didn't do is a waste of time, in all honesty,' Humphrey said. 'Let's move forward and … make this community better.' The city has several listening sessions already scheduled where the public can weigh in on reforms. 'I encourage you to be a part of the solution,' Greenberg said. 'It's very easy to criticize, it's very easy to observe and talk to friends. We want (people) across the community to be a part of the solution.' SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX