A Saint Paul November ballot measure is facing pushback from the city's mayor, Melvin Carter.

This Monday, Carter was critical of the city ballot question asking voters about increasing property taxes annually to fund child care subsidies.

City Council President Mitra Jalali is urging a no vote, while several members on the council are supporting a yes vote, they're pushing a yes vote.

Fred Melo of the Pioneer Press has been covering this story.

I'm trying to remember the last time a mayor came out so strongly against a ballot question like, I mean, people can agree that, you know, affordable childcare is important, but he's he's down on this one.

He he is supremely down on this one.

He asked a whole bunch of reporters to meet him on short notice on Monday for, for a kind of a heart to heart about all the different ways that this would just be unenforceable, he says, even if it passes we’re authorized to raise taxes for child care, that doesn't mean I'm going to do it.

it may not be a mandate so well that we'll probably land in lawyers depending upon how the vote goes.

But yes, he is against this.

The costs escalate.

It's kind of a traditional thing where you get a program going, spend a little bit of money, get a constituency and then let the let the costs increase and it's hard to get rid of it.

Isn't that kind of what the deal is?

It's locking in the city for ten years of property tax increases for 2 million the first year, 4 million the second.

So tops out at 20 million in year ten.

And it really takes about ten years to really get going.

So we're not going to see that many kids subsidized in the first couple years, really year four and five.

But supporters of it say the mayor is thinks the voters are stupid.

What's that all about?

Well, I mean, voters understand.

I think, you know, talking to a council member, Rebecca Noecker, who's done a lot of doorknocking in favor, she says, hey, the voters understand it takes a couple years to get rolling.

Child care is a big issue there.

You need subsidies.

You need something's got to give for very young kids.

For babies, 0 to 4 is what is what this program would cover.

And voters are patient.

They’ll wait for it to get to get rolling.

But ths a pretty big property tax increase.

And you're talking about what else in the city, paying off medical debts and maybe reparations.

I mean, there's a lot of money that we're talking about here.

And our tax base is kind of shaky.

The downtown buildings, some of them have lost value.

Some of them are going up for auction.

There's office buildings that are empty.

As downtown values go down, somebody has to absorb all of the property taxes that building would have paid, because we have to fill potholes and pay police and teachers and etc.

So that that's part of the mayor's worry, I think.

There's also a concern how many kids are really going to benefit from this.

We're hearing it could be 4000 to 7000 over the course of the entire program.

Divide by ten.

That might only be 400 a year.

In a city of 20,000 kids, the mayor says, hey, that's not good enough fund this some other way, find a different kind of level of government to institute this.

Advocates say how how many people would be eligible?

Is there an income limit or how would that work?

It’s 185% of the federal poverty level.

So you're looking at, you know, maybe a universe of ,000 kids within that area, other kids from families who make more than that might get, you know, sliding scale subsidies if all the money comes together.

And there's a lot of ifs there.

The mayor says this money won't last and won't even cover it.

You need child care workers and infrastructure and and that's a whole other issue.

The the child care industry has said we've had a lot of workers leave because $15 at Target versus holding a baby all day that's screaming, crying a lot more liability.

This doesn't really address the shortage of labor.

So that's kind of another debate whether this really gets at the underlying problem.

At the same time, subsidies that stabilize child care facility or create new at home daycares could open up some slots.

And that's what this is all about.

Interesting in terms of the politics of this, progressive progressives are being pitted against progressives.

What about that?

Yeah, I mean, it's tough there.

There's a group called Isaiah, which is like an interfaith social justice coalition.

And they really had an internal debate.

They have a whole child care wing within them.

And, they decided not to take a stand.

They were going to just sit this one out.

That it was just too divisive.

So yes, that was progressive versus progressive.

I don't think anyone's ever called Mayor Carter, who was the state kind of deputy czar of early learning, anything but, left of center.

And he's very much against this.

So let's say this passes.

What would happen next?

Yeah.

Well, this lives within the city.

So the city would have to probably through its Office of Financial Empowerment, create a whole new staffing infrastructure.

I think the plans call for 4 to 7 employees and the program manager and evaluator and then get rolling probably 135 infants in the first year.

But as you say, he could decide to not implement it.

Is that right?

That's that's what he's threatened.

Well, we'll we'll see what the lawyers say.

But I was goin say is that that can't be legal.

The devil is always in the details with the law.

The ballot question says this authorizes a property tax increase.

It doesn't say, Mayor Carter, you were mandated to do anything.

That's his interpretation.

I've talked to people who feel very strongly otherwise.

Never dull in the saintly city.

Never dull in the saintly city.

You got a great beat.

Thanks.

Thanks, Fred.

Thanks for having me.