VT House Passes Universal Meals Bill

By Jim Sabataso
THE RUTLAND HERALD
Vermont’s K-12 schools are one step closer to providing free meals to all students — at least for another year.

This week, the Vermont House of Representatives passed S.100, a bill that would supply breakfast and lunch to all students for the 2022-23 school year.

With pandemic-era provisions guaranteeing free meals for K-12 students set to expire June 30, anti-hunger advocates have been pressuring lawmakers to take action to keep kids fed for free.

For the past two years, a federal waiver has provided free breakfast and lunch to all K-12 students nationwide, but come June most Vermont school districts will once again require families to pay for their meals.

Last spring, the Vermont Senate passed S.100 — which would provide free breakfast for all public school students, as well as create a task force to advise lawmakers by 2026 about how to also provide free lunch — sending it to the House for further consideration.

The House Education Committee took up the bill this session, making some key amendments that included providing funding for both breakfast and lunch, as well as allowing Vermont independent schools to receive support for students who tuition in from their local public school districts.

The bill also sets a goal of identifying a funding source to make the program permanent, calling for the Joint Fiscal Office to deliver a report by February 2023 “examining possible revenue sources including expansion of the sales tax base, enactment of an excise tax on sugar-sweetened beverages, and other sources of revenue not ordinarily used for General Fund purposes.”

S.100 pegged the cost of providing universal meals for the next school year at $29 million, which will be paid for out of the nearly $100 million surplus in the state Education Fund. The House Ways and Means Committee recently allocated $36 million — based on an initial JFO estimate — to support the program as part of H.737, the so-called “yield bill” that sets the state education property tax yield and non-homestead property tax rate.

The amended universal meals bill will now return to the Senate, where it will be taken up by the Finance Committee.

Anore Horton, executive director of Hunger Free Vermont, celebrated the bill’s passage.

“We can really say that what the House Education Committee did is they really created a bill, in S.100, that fulfills our vision of every student getting access to every school meal in every school in Vermont,” she said.

Horton acknowledged the bill only provides one year of funding but noted lawmakers have indicated they are committed to finding a long-term solution.

She added that with other pandemic-era supports like enhanced unemployment benefits and rental and mortgage assistance ending, keeping universal meals in place provided at least some relief to families who are still struggling financially.

She said the situation has led to a “severe spike” in food insecurity in Vermont in recent weeks.

Horton said the Vermont Foodbank has seen record numbers of families making use of its food distribution services, like Veggie Van Go, surpassing what was recorded even at the height of the pandemic.

“Hunger is one of the first signs of economic distress for families and for households, and it’s also one of the very last to dissipate,” she said, noting it took food insecurity numbers more than a decade to decline after the Great Recession of 2008.

Horton said she’s worried with federal child nutrition waivers for summer meals programs ending in June, many Vermont youth may be heading into a “very hungry and very, very food insecure summer.”

“We must get S.100 over the finish line, because we must at least provide some certainty, some reassurance to our kids, our families, our schools that they’re going to be able to take care of their students and make sure that they are not going hungry in school next school year,” she said.

But while advocates like Horton are optimistic about the bill’s passage, some lawmakers have raised concerns about the price tag of universal meals.

Rep. Larry Cupoli, R-Rutland, is vice chair of the House Education Committee and one of two members on the 11-person committee to vote against the bill. The other “no” vote was Rep. Sarita Austin, D-Colchester.

“I don’t think that we had the time or took the time to really explore what the real costs of this would be,” he said.

He added he didn’t feel he had enough data on student enrollment in school meal programs to make an informed decision.

“There’s really a lack of true information on this bill, and I can’t vote on something that we’re guessing at,” he said.

Cupoli said he also objected to the creation of a new tax to permanently fund the program — especially a tax on sugary beverages, which he said was “hurting the same people we’re trying to help.”

“Middle-class people just can’t absorb anymore,” he said.

Cupoli noted the federal government already provided free and reduced meals to eligible students, as well as universal meals for all students in eligible school districts, like Rutland City Public Schools.

“It is concerning that some kids do go to school hungry, and I know it affects their ability to learn, but they also have … the opportunity to use free and reduced lunch. Nobody’s preventing them from eating other than, perhaps, the parent who feels that they don’t want to fill out the forms that are needed,” he said.

More than 60 Vermont school districts had universal meals programs in place prior to the pandemic. That translates to about 18% of Vermont students, according to the Joint Fiscal Office data. But even in those districts, meals are not provided at all grade levels. For example, Rutland City Public Schools provides universal meals to students in grades K-8 but not in grades 9-12, which do not meet eligibility requirements.

Cupoli contended the stigma often cited as a deterrent for students participating in the free and reduced lunch program could be eliminated by streamlining the way food is purchased in school cafeterias, noting the state has the technological capability to do so.

Ultimately, Cupoli said he was unsure the bill would make it out of the Senate Finance Committee, noting other lawmakers shared his concerns — particularly, about tapping the Education Fund surplus, which he argued there were better uses for, such as addressing polychlorinated biphenyls, or PCBs, in school buildings and bolstering career technical education programs across the state.

“There’s a lot of things going around this building for uses of money that we could do much more good with, I think, and engage more children,” he said.