A 4-year-old preschool in the works at the Bolinas-Stinson Union School District has parents and community members both thrilled with a free program and fearful for enrollment and education at the decades-old Bolinas Children’s Center.
Adding to the sense of instability is the fact that the only other local preschool, Stinson Beach Preschool, will close at the end of the school year, as the mobile facility on the Stinson campus must be removed in July per water district regulations.
The district’s board voted unanimously at a more than four-hour school board meeting on Tuesday to press forward with the pre-K program, creating a steering committee to advise on program specifics and deciding to recruit a teacher by March. But most trustees expressed deep reservations about the ripple effects of the free program, which is part of the district’s strategic plan. They crafted a list of roughly 10 questions for a board subcommittee and the superintendent, John Carroll, to investigate for the January meeting.
The 4-year-old program will be funded entirely by the district. So far roughly 15 children are pre-enrolled for next fall, though at least one did not realize the program would not operate in the summer, according to trustee Bob Demmerle.
One of the central fears discussed at the meeting revolved around the consequences for the Children’s Center. Director Laura DiStasi said the preschool may not survive if the district siphoned off 4-year-olds, which this year comprise about half of the school’s 21 children. “I can’t say for sure we could continue,” she said. Ms. DiStasi said the pool of local families was small and that scholarship funding from the state, a significant part of the budget, could be lost if they lose children.
As for Stinson Beach Preschool, a Montessori program, its days are numbered. After the school board ended a lease for its own facilities in 2012, the preschool has used a mobile classroom on district property. But the septic system is too close to the lagoon, and a water district waiver will not be renewed. “I will be offering zero classes because I don’t have a venue. So there you go,” said Susan Tacherra, who said the preschool was over 50 years old.
School board members debated how to consider impacts to a private entity, even one as beloved as the Children’s Center. If the free program led to that school’s demise, 2 and 3-year-olds would have no place to go in town.
“I’m not sure we’ve done enough research,” said trustee Steve Marcotte. “As a board member I’m not supposed to look at [impacts to] a private preschool. I’m doing this from the kids’ perspective,” he said. Trustee Georgia Woods echoed concerns about the impact.
But trustee Jennie Pfeiffer seemed less inclined to give significant weight to concerns. “I don’t think it’s up to the board to put the viability of a business ahead of what district families need,” she said. Ms. Pfeiffer expressed optimism that the community could devise creative solutions to help the preschool, and was skeptical that younger children would be left unserved. “Someone will step up for these children if there’s a need,” she said.
Though the most pointed concern was the Children’s Center’s potential demise, a myriad of other questions arose at the meeting. Some wondered how separating 4-year-olds from younger kids would affect their education, and the education of the toddlers. “It forces [the Children’s Center] to be a toddler program,” said Mr. Demmerle, who at the beginning of the meeting said he would support a one-year delay of the program.
Ms. DiStasi said having a range of ages was important at her school. “It would philosophically impact our program,” as kids look forward to moving up the ranks, she said. “That impact is severe and should not be overlooked.”
“What is it like for 4-year-olds to be by themselves?” a man said at one point.
“What is it like to be alone and not in school?” someone responded, a nod to families who don’t have enough money to enroll their kids.
Other questions include whether transportation will be provided, an issue that will be addressed next month, and what parents would when the district is not in session.
But supporters called on the board to continue with the 4-year-old program, including Ms. Tacherra. “I am so hoping you don’t back down on this,” she said.
That sentiment was echoed by Melinda Stone, a Bolinas resident with a child who will be eligible for the program. She would like to send her child to preschool five days a week even now, but it is difficult to afford. “And I’m a professor,” she said.
Attendees floated a number of ideas to help the Children’s Center stay afloat, but not all were feasible. For example, enrolling babies would require both a new license—for which the facility would probably not meet standards—and a smaller teacher to student ratio, which could be financially untenable.
The district’s strategic plan calls for a 4-year-old program rather than a universal preschool because the district figured the latter would indeed run the Children’s Center out of business, said Ms. Pfeiffer.
But some at Tuesday’s meeting wondered whether the program should be a starting point for an eventual universal program. Others wondered whether the district could instead fund the Children’s Center as a satellite campus—yet another question that will be discussed in January.
People also wondered what the impact would be to the Stinson campus if the preschool were located there, whether afterschool care will be offered, whether a paid summer program for 4-year-old is possible, and more. But trustee Nate Siedman noted that not every question would have a firm answer, a sentiment that Mr. Marcotte expressed too, with some frustration. “The ‘what ifs’ drive you crazy,” he said.