Capitol issues: Lunch funding, low-income relief
By Mike Mitchelson

MNSA members met last month to discuss strategy for lobbying efforts at the state capitol.

With the legislative session ramping up and both political parties looking to creatively squeeze the state’s budget to accommodate a several billion-dollar deficit, the Minnesota School Nutrition Association sought to protect school lunch funding.

About 75 members met at the state capitol campus to review the association’s 2009 legislative issue paper with lobbyist Elaine Keefe of Capitol Hill Associates Inc. The group discussed those issues and strategy when speaking with legislators. This included a “lobbying tips” paper for attendees (listing suggestions such as maintaining a non-partisan and non-argumentative tone, keeping the conversation on track and weaving in a story on how the issues impact respective districts).

The items included:

• School lunch aid: The MNSA supports a 3 cent increase in school lunch aid, from 12 cents per lunch to 15. The reason is that state funding has not kept pace with increased food costs, and school districts have not been able to cover costs with the traditional combination of student payments and funding from the state and Federal governments. The gap between those revenues and the cost of producing a lunch stands at 37 cents. Increased state funding would help close the gap slightly.

Schools attempt to make up the 37 cent difference with a la carte sales, Keefe said. Increasing the price of a lunch isn’t a good option, she added, since many students’ families are enduring financial hardship. “It’s been two years since the last (state funding) increase.”

One counter proposal from legislators was to redirect funding from paid lunches to the free-lunch program. “Nobody was in favor of this,” Keefe said, adding that it would have meant dropping from 12 cents of state reimbursement to 6 cents.

• Eliminate reduce-price lunch: The proposal is to qualify students whose families have income between 130 percent and 185 percent of poverty (for the period of July 1, 2007, through June 30, 2008, 130 percent of the poverty level is about $27,000 for a family of four; 185 percent is about $38,000) for free lunch. The reform would align free school lunch eligibility with WIC (Women, Infants & Children) eligibility and the state’s school breakfast program.

Low-income families have difficulty paying the 40 cents per day for the reduced-price lunch, often charging a lunch or skipping it altogether. These students are also less likely to have their nutritional needs met at home.

• Nutritional integrity: Reforming federal nutrition standards as proposed by the School Nutrition Association (for more information on those standards, visit www.schoolnutrition.org). Updating standards in accordance with current scientific research will maintain school meals’ nutritional integrity.

• Farm to School: The MNSA supports measures to encourage schools to purchase locally-grown agriculture products. “Thirty states have passed something to do with Farm to School programs,” Keefe said. “Were it not for the (state) budget situation, we would probably be asking for a grant (to help implement the program).”

• Shared services: The association encourages all school districts to participate in cooperative food purchasing groups to take advantage of economies of scale. Keefe noted that the Minnesota School Food Buying Group is one such group. At the moment, documentation for schools to prove they purchased goods more cheaply than state contracts is oppressive, Keefe said.

“This year (we are) very much in a defensive posture because of the state budget issue,” Keefe said. But she reminded attendees before they went out to visit legislators, “You are the experts, and they want to hear from you.”