September 13, 2008
Shaming Accomplished: Edmonds School District Backs Off

The Edmonds School District seems to have decided that physically removing hot lunch from the hands of kids and throwing it away might not make a lot of PR sense. They're not going to be doing that any more.

Now, they can go about correcting a couple issues that never should have reached this point.

Based on the public dialogue that followed the original news, including in this thread, a couple points should be made:

1) This was never an issue of giving hot lunches to kids whose parents weren't paying. The original Herald story discussed how other school districts in the area were figuring out if the child could pay at the start of the cafeteria line. Thus, if the child couldn't pay, they got the substitute/emergency cold lunch right away.

Hence, no taking trays of food out of the hands of kids at the end of the line and then having to toss the unpurchased food to boot. That was the real stupidity of it all.

Other school districts gave students a grace purchase of between two and five unpaid meals before the students received a cold replacement lunch of a cheese sandwich, fruit, and milk, rather than the "straight to a cheese sandwich and that's it," as the Edmonds School District pursued.

When it comes down to it, kids who are eligible for free-and-reduced price lunch should be signed up accordingly. Parents who are milking the system should be made to pay. And parents who were unaware of the unpaid bill, for whatever reason, should be duly and vigorously encouraged to correct the situation.

Which brings us to 2) the school district should have been more proactive about dealing with the issue. Over $200,000 in unpaid school meals from last year makes it clear the district itself wasn't pursing this matter with enough vigilance - especially to match the eventual steps they took to address the problem.

One idea that has been bandied about in the public discourse: withholding report cards from students with unpaid lunch bills sounds like a splendid option to get that large tab paid down.

That process should result in kids who are eligible for free-and-reduced price lunch getting signed up, parents who can pay doing so, and others who can't still be made aware of the problem so they can seek some sort of accommodation with the school district. This is not a small issue given the significant pockets of lower-income students that actually exist in many suburban school districts where stereotype presumes they don't live (Edmonds, Bellevue, etc.)

In the meantime, all it took was a little common sense to figure out there was a better way to handle unpaid hot lunches than taking the food literally out of the hands of kids and throwing it away. Too bad it took a public shaming for that common sense to kick in.

Posted by Eric Earling at September 13, 2008 08:48 PM | Email This
Comments
1. I think withholding report cards is even worse than taking a hot lunch off their tray. Taking the lunch is directly related to their failure to pay, though I agree with you that the school should find a less obnoxious approach. But report cards are part of the educational program, not the food concession, and the school has no more right to deny a report card to cafeteria debtors -- especially when it gave them food on credit in the first place -- than it has to suspend them from school. Furthermore, is that really the outcome you want: taking kids whose parents/guardians are too poor/disorganized/irresponsible to pay their lunch bills, and denying them information about how their kids are doing in school? I didn't think so.

Posted by: Bruce on September 13, 2008 11:26 PM
2. Quite frankly, with the amount of taxpayer money that schools recieve, EVERY SINGLE KID IN SCHOOL should be eligible to recieve free meals. Just fire a couple of worthless admins. You know, people with BS made up jobs with 6 figure salaries - Caprice Hollins ring a bell?

If you are going to crack down on parents for lunch money, maybe we can tie that in to the schools actually producing, you know, a worthwhile product. Such as a decent education free of liberal nanny-state nonsense.

Posted by: Aaron on September 14, 2008 05:26 AM
3. Well, I take a different view.

Step one, develop and implement a system that requires income verification. As of now, there is no income verification taking place any more than there is citizenship verification taking place when one registers to vote (Thanks, Sam Reed! Your efforts to keep up the illegal alien vote are noted!)

Second step, develop a plan to get out of the "free meal" business altogether.

Placing exactly zero responsibility on the parents of children to provide meals for their own kids does nothing to address the problem and given our abysmal educational outcomes, it does nothing to make our kids better students.

Less cigarette, beer, dope, etc... and voila! YOU pay for your kid's meals, instead of the taxpayers.

And, my PARTICULAR favorite: if you can't afford to give your kids a school lunch, then why the hell did you have them in the first place? Was it because you knew that others would be paying for them?

Posted by: hinton on September 14, 2008 11:36 AM
4. withholding report cards from students with unpaid lunch bills sounds like a splendid option to get that large tab paid down.

This presumes that the parents are interested in their child's education and are looking for report cards. If they're not bothering to see that their child's lunch is paid for, I doubt very much that they're waiting at the door on report card day.

Posted by: Ryan on September 14, 2008 11:42 AM
5. I grew up in a poor family. I do not remember our schools having a free lunch program. What I do know is from 3rd grade untill graduation from High school, I cleaned cafeteria tables, or washed dishes to earn my lunch! It was not free and I did not suffer from not having recess with my friends. Now I visit the schools that my children attend and I see school district employees performing the same tasks I did and they are earning a lot more than a free lunch. I learned more working for my meal than I would have if it was given to me for free. P.S. I attended school in Vancouver Washington/

Posted by: John Towers on September 14, 2008 03:11 PM
6. The cheese sandwich policy is just the tip of the iceberg. Take a few minutes and read some entries at www.esd15.org. Your head will be spinning in no time.

Mark

Posted by: Mark Zandberg on September 14, 2008 04:28 PM
7. I have a friend who's mother enrolled at Bellermine after he had problems as a sophomore at Lakes. When she refused to pay the tuition for him to continue there as a Junior and Senior he got a job and paid the tuition himself. I don't remember him expecting lunch as part if the bargain.

Posted by: JDH on September 14, 2008 04:43 PM
8. While I normally agree with you, Eric, I have to say I definitely DISAGREE with you on this topic. They were giving the kids cold sandwiches instead. So, the kids were still getting lunch! FOR FREE!!!!!!!!!

When my husband saw that on the news, he was thinking he wished they did that in the 1980s. He'd have just taken the cold cheese sandwich as usually the hot lunch is so gross anyway.

Are our kids seriously that weak these days? They can handle getting teased about their clothes but they can't handle brief embarrassment over getting the hot lunch replaced by the cold sandwich? GMAFB.

Posted by: ferrous on September 15, 2008 02:09 AM
9. "And parents who were unaware of the unpaid bill, for whatever reason, should be duly and vigorously encouraged to correct the situation."

Leaving our educational system employee's reduced to bill collector's wasting their valuable time phoning 3,000 deadbeats to settle their account.

The nannystater's win another round.

Posted by: Rick D. on September 15, 2008 05:44 AM
10. RE: HINTON

"Less cigarette, beer, dope, etc... and voila! YOU pay for your kid's meals, instead of the taxpayers.

And, my PARTICULAR favorite: if you can't afford to give your kids a school lunch, then why the hell did you have them in the first place? Was it because you knew that others would be paying for them? "


You have got to be kidding. Maybe think outside the box? Not everyone that has children should not have them. I am a single mother of 4, and can't afford the school lunches not because of my own lack of foresight or irresponsibility but I am a new widow. I work 50+ hours a week making decent pay, but when it comes to handing out 22.00 a day in school lunches/breakfasts I simply can't afford it. I am not one of the parents owing, and agree that the system should not be taken advantage of, but to take away the support for people who happen to be in similar situations is heartless.

And the issue with the children being embarrased had nothing to do with thier lunches simply being replaced with cold lunches. What they were actually doing is serving them hot lunches, taking the tray away, tossing the food in the trash THEN replacing with the cold food. Simply cruel in my eyes. These children should not have to pay for thier parents mistakes.

Posted by: Jamie on September 19, 2008 11:19 AM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?