Opinion ID: 4644043
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Little Links’s Allegations

Text: Little Links’s declaratory and injunctive action stems from the June 15, 2020 Healthy at Work: Requirements for Childcare.49 Center-based childcare programs, like Little Links, were closed on March 20, 2020. To fill the childcare void for health care workers and first responders LDCs were permitted to open. When center-based childcare programs were permitted to reopen on June 15, 2020, some regulations differed from the LDCs which were continuing to operate but were scheduled to be phased out by the end of August. Thus, the center-based childcare programs and the LDCs’ remaining operation period overlapped for about two and one-half months. Little Links alleges three particular rules arbitrarily impose demands that are detrimental to survival of its business. Little Links complains that in contrast to LDCs, all other childcare programs must utilize a maximum group size of ten children per group, a significant limitation on the business’s ability to be profitable. Rather than being limited to a specific maximum group size, the LDCs have capacity limitation of one child per thirty square feet.50 Second, 49 The Governor’s June 15, 2020 order incorporated the Healthy at Work requirements. The Healthy at Work: Requirements for Childcare Programs addressed the requirements for in-home childcare programs, which opened June 8, and centerbased childcare programs, which opened June 15. 50 Pursuant to 922 KAR 2:120, for Kentucky childcare center premises typically, “[e]xclusive of the kitchen, bathroom, hallway, and storage area, there shall be a minimum of thirty-five (35) square feet of space per child.” When emphasizing the difference in the capacity limits for LDCs vis-a-vis regular childcare programs, the Attorney General misapplies the building restriction, noting one witness had a 43,500 70 LDCs do not have the restriction that children must remain in the same group of ten children all day without being combined with another classroom. Little Links views this rule as arbitrary, interpreting it to not allow children of the same household to be grouped in the evening despite the children leaving the center in the same vehicle. Lastly, because programs may not provide access to visitors after hours Little Links cannot conduct tours for prospective clients. Plaintiffs’ witnesses testified about these disparities and the negative impact on a childcare facility’s business viability. Dr. Sarah Vanover, Director of Kentucky’s Division of Childcare, testified about the rule creation for the LDCs and the June 15 reopening of the centerbased childcare programs. As to the LDCs, when it became obvious that childcare centers were going to be closed, her office began the background research to put emergency licensure in place, contacting several coastal “hurricane” states to obtain copies of their emergency licenses and applications. At that time, many hospitals were looking at creating pop-up centers on site to make sure their employees had the childcare coverage that they needed, given many childcare options were no longer available. LDCs were created specifically to serve the needs of hospital staff and first responders. Given the understanding of the pandemic at the time childcare facilities closed, and the critical need to keep childcare available to essential square foot playground, allowing 4,000 square feet per child “a limit untethered to science or reality” and hypothesizing that if it were an LDC it could serve well over 1,000 children. The childcare square footage limitation applies to buildings, not playgrounds. 71 employees, the LDCs were implemented using other states’ emergency regulations as a guide. All centers which became LDCs were already a licensed type 1 center or certified program, meaning they already knew how childcare in Kentucky worked. LDCs had fewer restrictions in order to open. Unlike the typical childcare regulations,51 but like other states’ emergency regulations, a specific maximum group size was not listed.52 LDCs were required to have two adults present in each classroom and to divide children by age groups. Dr. Vanover testified that the many business closures at the time played a role in the adult to child ratio limitation. At the point LDCs opened, most businesses in the community were not open. Families using LDCs were leaving home, dropping a child off at childcare, going to work (as health care workers or first responders), and after work, picking up the child and going home. Consequently, the opportunity to contract the virus in different locations was very limited. Plus, many hospitals added their own restrictions, such as having their staff change out of their scrubs and into different clothes before picking their child up and entering the LDC to make sure that they were not spreading germs from the high-risk environment that they had been in. Dr. Vanover testified many LDCs 51 Dr. Vanover explained ordinarily the maximum group size for preschool children is 28, with an adult to child ratio of 1 to 14. 52 A memorandum from the Cabinet, Office of Inspector General, entered into evidence during Christine Fairfield’s July 16, 2020 testimony stated that each LDC location should have 30 square feet per child. 72 added other restrictions to make sure that the children were staying healthy and safe. Dr. Vanover explained that some LDCs were allowed to stay open past June 15 because the state was having difficulty making sure there would be enough care for all of the hospital staff’s children when childcare centers reopened. No effort was made to revise the LDC requirements as the economy began to reopen because LDCs were phasing out at that point, with a planned expiration at the end of August. Dr. Vanover testified that she helped to create the childcare reopening plan, performing background work in April and May. She and other state personnel participated in the Childcare Council of Kentucky’s virtual meetings for childcare providers and advocates and heard questions and concerns of childcare center directors throughout the state; she visited LDCs to see procedures employed beyond those prescribed by the state; she contacted other states that had already opened or that never closed childcare, collecting information on what group sizes they used, what things had and had not been successful, and the relative spread of illness; and the Division of Childcare extensively reviewed CDC guidelines for childcare centers open during the pandemic to make sure that Kentucky followed the best health practices. Dr. Vanover agreed that a CDC online document providing guidance for childcare programs that remain open did not expressly state that children 73 should be in small groups.53 She explained, however, that in multiple CDC phone calls for state administrators the CDC emphasized that having a smaller group size as well as having the children stay in those small groups was beneficial to the children. Many states chose a group size of ten to see if it would be a small enough number to stop the virus spread, with the intent later to enlarge the number. Kentucky followed that example in its reopening plan, and in an emergency regulation effective September 1, 2020 increased the child care group size to fifteen. 922 KAR 2:405E. As to the requirement that children in different groups should not be combined, Dr. Vanover stated she knows of no public health reason that siblings should not be combined within the center at the end of the day.54 Dr. Stack testified similarly. Dr. Vanover noted that the regulation applies to combining groups, it does not specifically address siblings. Thus, this issue appears to be a misunderstanding of the regulation because it does not prohibit grouping siblings at the end of the day.55 53 The CDC guidance was entered as an exhibit during the July 16, 2020 evidentiary hearing. According to the supplemental guidance, it was updated April 21, 2020. 54 Under normal regulations, age group combinations are restricted in that children under the age of two and above the age of two may be combined for a maximum of one hour per day, which is typically the first half hour of the day and the last half hour of the day based on the number of children left in the building. 55 Witness Jennifer Washburn also described as problematic not being able to combine at the end of the day siblings who are in separate classes. Neither Fairfield nor Washburn testified that a state official advised them they could not combine siblings at the end of the day. Witness Bradley Stevenson testified that the primary concerns in the childcare industry at that point were the group size restriction of ten and being able to combine children before and after school. 74 Dr. Vanover also explained that in regard to the restriction on tours, with contact tracing in mind, the general idea was to restrict visitors to make sure that children and staff in the center had the minimal exposure possible to others who may have been exposed to the virus. Access was restricted to staff; children currently enrolled; those who would need legal access to the building, such as first responders; those needed for necessary repairs in the building; and therapeutic professionals. The plan was always to adjust going forward based upon the containment or spread of the virus. We note that effective September 1, 2020 childcare facilities were allowed to resume tours for prospective clients. 922 KAR 2:405E. Dr. Stack also testified that because children are not always compliant, other interventions are necessary which reduce density, increase hygiene, and if disease were to spread, enable other methodologies to contain it quickly, such as cohorting and keeping smaller groups. Consequently, if one cohort of a group of ten has a problem, that does not necessitate shutting down the whole facility. As to not allowing siblings to be grouped at the beginning and end of the day, Dr. Stack stated that separating a family from itself is not one of the vehicles the state is using to reduce virus risk. He acknowledged that the LDC and childcare reopening group size rules were different because knowledge about COVID-19 evolved and the state environment was a different place in March when most people had to stay healthy at home as compared to June as the broader community reopened. 75 Plaintiffs point to the differences between LDCs and the reopened childcare program requirements, both of which are meant to keep children and staff safe, and argue that if the lesser requirements serve that function, more stringent requirements are arbitrary. However, the record reflects the two programs were developed under different circumstances with different foundations of evolving knowledge. The LDCs were literally emergency childcare for healthcare workers and first responders in the very early days of the pandemic with regulations based on successful emergency childcare centers in other states. LDCs were limited to children of essential workers at a time when society was generally closed down, continued providing care when it was unclear that sufficient childcare would be available without them and now have evolved to provide temporary emergency childcare for nontraditional instuction during traditional school hours. When regular Kentucky childcare facilities generally reopened in June 2020, the group sizes and the tour restrictions for these centers were based on articulated public health reasons, i.e., efforts to limit the spread of disease as society in general was reopening. These facilities reopened serving the general population at a time when the potential for disease spread had increased. Thus, Plaintiffs failed to meet their burden of establishing that either of these challenged childcare restrictions lack a reasonable basis, standing alone or in comparison with LDC regulations. On the contrary, the record amply reflects a rational basis for both of them. As for the grouping of siblings, as noted above, the regulation does not prevent siblings being grouped together at the end of the day. 76