TT trying to eliminate open lunch

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It is great for kids to be able to access teachers for meetings etc. And not eat lunch at 7:45 AM. And it does look like this unfortunately is happening. Vote is in a few weeks. Board members and TT is all on board unless I am missing something? With little time for comment.

The vote isn’t in a few weeks - it’s on May 21, a week from today! Why are they rushing this? Why the short comment period?

PLEASE READ THIS THREAD THOROUGHLY AND WATCH THE BOE's POLICY COMMITTEE MEETING.

Both of your questions are addressed in there.

You keep saying that, but I have read it and there’s really no good explanation. You screaming about it doesn’t change that.

Your answer indicates you did not read or watch the policy meeting, or that you lack comprehension skills.

1) In the policy meeting, Julie Yang explicitly asked why this policy was being brought to the policy committee, even though it was not previously on their work plan. MCPS Legal Counsel Robyn Seabrook responded that Dr. Taylor was considering changes with regard to open lunch policy that could impact the upcoming school year, and he did not want to get ahead of the board. So that's your answer to why're they're rushing this.

2) Re: Why the short comment period. Because Dr. Taylor wants to impact the upcoming school year, and he believes it's an urgent thing to address because of the inconsistency in implementation and the safety concerns.

Again, if you watched and read, you would know this. That you don't, means you didn't read or watch or that you lack comprehension skills.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:THERE NEEDS TO BE AN EXCEPTION FOR SCHOOLS THAT CANNOT ACCOMMODATE ALL THEIR STUDENTS DURING LUNCH, SUCH AS BCC.

BCC has always had open lunch, mostly because the cafeteria was not expanded during its multiple additions, and partly because since it's in downtown Bethesda, outside food options are safely and easily accessible.

It is not physically possibly for BCC students to all stay at school during lunch! The cafeteria cannot serve even a quarter of the kids! If most kids brings lunch from home and eat it at school, they will be forced to eat on the floor in the hallways. The outdoor court in the middle of the building is minuscule compared to the number of students and cannot accommodate even an eighth of the kids.

In short, there CANNOT be a blanket ban on open lunch. It takes very little effort to call up every high school and ask their Principals whether it would be a hardship, considering the size of the cafeteria, size of the building, and number of students, to cancel open lunch. WHY IS THE BOARD NOT DOING THIS?

The Board members need to resign if it knows so little about its schools that it leans towards a one-size-fits-all solution. SHAME ON THE BOARD AND THE SUPERINTENDENT.

You do realize that other MCPS high schools that have closed lunch policies do in fact have kids eating in classrooms and hallways, right?

So you're screaming and shouting that BCC would pretty much have to comply with a policy the rest of the HSes already comply with.

Smells like white privilege.

BCC isn’t the only school with open lunch btw.

A blanket ban on open lunch because “equity” doesn’t seem fair for the students and businesses that rely on them although it’s par for the course at MCPS to reduce opportunities, not expand them so this will probably end up happening.

Oh it’s happening. MCPS appeals to the lowest common denominators. Rather than provide opportunities for all, they handicap each school and student because like you mentioned, “equity”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:THERE NEEDS TO BE AN EXCEPTION FOR SCHOOLS THAT CANNOT ACCOMMODATE ALL THEIR STUDENTS DURING LUNCH, SUCH AS BCC.

BCC has always had open lunch, mostly because the cafeteria was not expanded during its multiple additions, and partly because since it's in downtown Bethesda, outside food options are safely and easily accessible.

It is not physically possibly for BCC students to all stay at school during lunch! The cafeteria cannot serve even a quarter of the kids! If most kids brings lunch from home and eat it at school, they will be forced to eat on the floor in the hallways. The outdoor court in the middle of the building is minuscule compared to the number of students and cannot accommodate even an eighth of the kids.

In short, there CANNOT be a blanket ban on open lunch. It takes very little effort to call up every high school and ask their Principals whether it would be a hardship, considering the size of the cafeteria, size of the building, and number of students, to cancel open lunch. WHY IS THE BOARD NOT DOING THIS?

The Board members need to resign if it knows so little about its schools that it leans towards a one-size-fits-all solution. SHAME ON THE BOARD AND THE SUPERINTENDENT.

All the schools have small cafeteria's and yet the kids manage just fine. They eat in classrooms, halls, etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My concern is the Board discussion to mandate multiple period closed lunches. My kid is at Blair and enjoys the hour long lunch period - everyone has the same lunch period. They run clubs during lunch, students meet with teachers for academic support, watch movies in the theatre, play sports in the gyms, go the weight room, etc., and if not in a club or meeting with a teacher, the kids get to chill with friends for an hour. Since everyone has the same lunch period - they get to see all their friends. The students eat in the cafeteria, outside, in teacher's classrooms, and in the hallway table areas. If a multi-period lunch gets mandated, gone are the lunch clubs, the kids won't be able to hang in teacher's classrooms or eat in multiple places, and academic support will be more limited. Hopefully that was just a passing thought and not something that will actually be implemented.

Several of the high-profile, gun-related safety incidents (such as the recent ones at Blake and Walter Johnson) have had open lunch as common denominator.

What you are describing, kids being able to eat in classrooms and have clubs meet during lunch, is not an Open Lunch policy. Many schools that have closed lunches allow for that.

The sticking point and why this topic is coming up now is on Open Lunch policies that allow kids to leave campus during lunch. The issues involved include:

- Complaints from local businesses about kids overwhelming those restaurants and businesses from a volume perspective
- Theft, violence and general disruption of those establishments
- Absenteeism, since many kids who leave for open lunch don't come back to school or don't come back to school on time
- Overall school safety since kids can bring things, like dangerous weapons, from outside the school into the school building when they come back

If you watch the BOE policy meeting and saw the vote and the tone of the discussion, you should know that this was not just a passing thought. Taylor is going to claw back open lunch from these schools.

The question is how will it be done?

1. The Board has the option of setting a clear and updated policy restricting the parameters under which open lunch is defined and allowed
2. Banning it completely (as PG County has done)
3. Rescinding the open lunch policy and leaving this area completely up to the Superintendent (in which case he will most certainly ban it)

For those who are passionate about preserving whatever positive aspects of Open Lunch you like, I'd encourage you to focus your time and energy on advocating for pathway 1, as that leaves the most opportunity for community engagement and involvement. The other two pathways are dead ends in that regard.

You mistakenly reference the Blake incident as being related to open lunch. Blake High School has and always has had a closed lunch policy. Kids leave the building whether or not lunch is technically open or closed.

[Anonymous]

I went to school in the 90s here in MoCo. We did not have open lunch. I also never once in my four years of Hs eat lunch in the cafeteria. It was always outside on school grounds, in a classroom or a hallway. The only time I ate lunch in a cafeteria was ES and MS. Like why the F is everyone freaking out over this? Kids were never allowed to leave school grounds when I was in HS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My concern is the Board discussion to mandate multiple period closed lunches. My kid is at Blair and enjoys the hour long lunch period - everyone has the same lunch period. They run clubs during lunch, students meet with teachers for academic support, watch movies in the theatre, play sports in the gyms, go the weight room, etc., and if not in a club or meeting with a teacher, the kids get to chill with friends for an hour. Since everyone has the same lunch period - they get to see all their friends. The students eat in the cafeteria, outside, in teacher's classrooms, and in the hallway table areas. If a multi-period lunch gets mandated, gone are the lunch clubs, the kids won't be able to hang in teacher's classrooms or eat in multiple places, and academic support will be more limited. Hopefully that was just a passing thought and not something that will actually be implemented.

Several of the high-profile, gun-related safety incidents (such as the recent ones at Blake and Walter Johnson) have had open lunch as common denominator.

What you are describing, kids being able to eat in classrooms and have clubs meet during lunch, is not an Open Lunch policy. Many schools that have closed lunches allow for that.

The sticking point and why this topic is coming up now is on Open Lunch policies that allow kids to leave campus during lunch. The issues involved include:

- Complaints from local businesses about kids overwhelming those restaurants and businesses from a volume perspective
- Theft, violence and general disruption of those establishments
- Absenteeism, since many kids who leave for open lunch don't come back to school or don't come back to school on time
- Overall school safety since kids can bring things, like dangerous weapons, from outside the school into the school building when they come back

If you watch the BOE policy meeting and saw the vote and the tone of the discussion, you should know that this was not just a passing thought. Taylor is going to claw back open lunch from these schools.

The question is how will it be done?

1. The Board has the option of setting a clear and updated policy restricting the parameters under which open lunch is defined and allowed
2. Banning it completely (as PG County has done)
3. Rescinding the open lunch policy and leaving this area completely up to the Superintendent (in which case he will most certainly ban it)

For those who are passionate about preserving whatever positive aspects of Open Lunch you like, I'd encourage you to focus your time and energy on advocating for pathway 1, as that leaves the most opportunity for community engagement and involvement. The other two pathways are dead ends in that regard.

You mistakenly reference the Blake incident as being related to open lunch. Blake High School has and always has had a closed lunch policy. Kids leave the building whether or not lunch is technically open or closed.

You're right. Which is another issue raised at the BOE Policy committee: There's no documented definition of what Open Lunch means in MCPS.

Allowing students to eat lunch in the parking lot violates the spirit of a Closed Lunch policy, but because there's no definition, principals can flex and bend the policies however they feel like it.

[Anonymous]

I haven’t read the whole thread, but what schools have open lunch or senior only or de facto open lunch?

Open lunch:

WJ, RM, and B-CC

Seniors only:

WC, WW?

De facto open lunch:

Blair

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:THERE NEEDS TO BE AN EXCEPTION FOR SCHOOLS THAT CANNOT ACCOMMODATE ALL THEIR STUDENTS DURING LUNCH, SUCH AS BCC.

BCC has always had open lunch, mostly because the cafeteria was not expanded during its multiple additions, and partly because since it's in downtown Bethesda, outside food options are safely and easily accessible.

It is not physically possibly for BCC students to all stay at school during lunch! The cafeteria cannot serve even a quarter of the kids! If most kids brings lunch from home and eat it at school, they will be forced to eat on the floor in the hallways. The outdoor court in the middle of the building is minuscule compared to the number of students and cannot accommodate even an eighth of the kids.

In short, there CANNOT be a blanket ban on open lunch. It takes very little effort to call up every high school and ask their Principals whether it would be a hardship, considering the size of the cafeteria, size of the building, and number of students, to cancel open lunch. WHY IS THE BOARD NOT DOING THIS?

The Board members need to resign if it knows so little about its schools that it leans towards a one-size-fits-all solution. SHAME ON THE BOARD AND THE SUPERINTENDENT.

You do realize that other MCPS high schools that have closed lunch policies do in fact have kids eating in classrooms and hallways, right?

So you're screaming and shouting that BCC would pretty much have to comply with a policy the rest of the HSes already comply with.

Smells like white privilege.

Give me a break. White privilege is real, but this isn’t it. BCC students already eat in classrooms and hallways. Not everyone goes out for lunch and most who don’t aren’t eating in the tiny (relative to size of student body) cafeteria. The problem would be if all 2500 students had to stay in because almost all would be eating in the hallways and for no good reason. Open lunch works well at BCC. The current policy is to leave it up to each principal to decide. Why is that a problem? Every school is different. If my kids went to a school that wasn’t in a walkable location, I might not want the to have open lunch. But they can get a slice of pizza and Chipotle within a 5-min walk, which they do about once or twice a week and eat in the hallways the other days. Why should it matter to parents at other schools if kids at other schools in more urban settings have open lunch?!

Actually, open lunch at B-CC sort of supports TT’s logic. Kids are late to class due to the very short lunch period. -just over 40 minutes. The really only close food place is Andy’s.

[Anonymous]

Schools with open lunch (seven are just for juniors or seniors): BCC
Einstein
Walter Johnson
Damascus
Paint Branch
Poolesville
Quince Orchard
Richard Montgomery
Watkins Mill
Whitman
Churchill

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:THERE NEEDS TO BE AN EXCEPTION FOR SCHOOLS THAT CANNOT ACCOMMODATE ALL THEIR STUDENTS DURING LUNCH, SUCH AS BCC.

BCC has always had open lunch, mostly because the cafeteria was not expanded during its multiple additions, and partly because since it's in downtown Bethesda, outside food options are safely and easily accessible.

It is not physically possibly for BCC students to all stay at school during lunch! The cafeteria cannot serve even a quarter of the kids! If most kids brings lunch from home and eat it at school, they will be forced to eat on the floor in the hallways. The outdoor court in the middle of the building is minuscule compared to the number of students and cannot accommodate even an eighth of the kids.

In short, there CANNOT be a blanket ban on open lunch. It takes very little effort to call up every high school and ask their Principals whether it would be a hardship, considering the size of the cafeteria, size of the building, and number of students, to cancel open lunch. WHY IS THE BOARD NOT DOING THIS?

The Board members need to resign if it knows so little about its schools that it leans towards a one-size-fits-all solution. SHAME ON THE BOARD AND THE SUPERINTENDENT.

You do realize that other MCPS high schools that have closed lunch policies do in fact have kids eating in classrooms and hallways, right?

So you're screaming and shouting that BCC would pretty much have to comply with a policy the rest of the HSes already comply with.

Smells like white privilege.

Give me a break. White privilege is real, but this isn’t it. BCC students already eat in classrooms and hallways. Not everyone goes out for lunch and most who don’t aren’t eating in the tiny (relative to size of student body) cafeteria. The problem would be if all 2500 students had to stay in because almost all would be eating in the hallways and for no good reason. Open lunch works well at BCC. The current policy is to leave it up to each principal to decide. Why is that a problem? Every school is different. If my kids went to a school that wasn’t in a walkable location, I might not want the to have open lunch. But they can get a slice of pizza and Chipotle within a 5-min walk, which they do about once or twice a week and eat in the hallways the other days. Why should it matter to parents at other schools if kids at other schools in more urban settings have open lunch?!

Actually, open lunch at B-CC sort of supports TT’s logic. Kids are late to class due to the very short lunch period. -just over 40 minutes. The really only close food place is Andy’s.

If kids are late because of open lunch, that is their specific fault and the rest of the students shouldn’t be punished because of them. TT logic is to restrict every student from anything above what they are individually capable of (higher level classes, open lunch, etc.) in order to make problem kids feel included.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:THERE NEEDS TO BE AN EXCEPTION FOR SCHOOLS THAT CANNOT ACCOMMODATE ALL THEIR STUDENTS DURING LUNCH, SUCH AS BCC.

BCC has always had open lunch, mostly because the cafeteria was not expanded during its multiple additions, and partly because since it's in downtown Bethesda, outside food options are safely and easily accessible.

It is not physically possibly for BCC students to all stay at school during lunch! The cafeteria cannot serve even a quarter of the kids! If most kids brings lunch from home and eat it at school, they will be forced to eat on the floor in the hallways. The outdoor court in the middle of the building is minuscule compared to the number of students and cannot accommodate even an eighth of the kids.

In short, there CANNOT be a blanket ban on open lunch. It takes very little effort to call up every high school and ask their Principals whether it would be a hardship, considering the size of the cafeteria, size of the building, and number of students, to cancel open lunch. WHY IS THE BOARD NOT DOING THIS?

The Board members need to resign if it knows so little about its schools that it leans towards a one-size-fits-all solution. SHAME ON THE BOARD AND THE SUPERINTENDENT.

All the schools have small cafeteria's and yet the kids manage just fine. They eat in classrooms, halls, etc.

It's so weird to me that you seem to think this is ok.

Let the kids move. Let them get some fresh air. Let them develop responsibility and good behavior in public. These kids have a more stressful high school experience than any of us "grown-ups" could have ever imagined. Give them some space and time to reset without shoving them into classrooms or making them sit on the floor in hallways. Good grief.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My concern is the Board discussion to mandate multiple period closed lunches. My kid is at Blair and enjoys the hour long lunch period - everyone has the same lunch period. They run clubs during lunch, students meet with teachers for academic support, watch movies in the theatre, play sports in the gyms, go the weight room, etc., and if not in a club or meeting with a teacher, the kids get to chill with friends for an hour. Since everyone has the same lunch period - they get to see all their friends. The students eat in the cafeteria, outside, in teacher's classrooms, and in the hallway table areas. If a multi-period lunch gets mandated, gone are the lunch clubs, the kids won't be able to hang in teacher's classrooms or eat in multiple places, and academic support will be more limited. Hopefully that was just a passing thought and not something that will actually be implemented.

Several of the high-profile, gun-related safety incidents (such as the recent ones at Blake and Walter Johnson) have had open lunch as common denominator.

What you are describing, kids being able to eat in classrooms and have clubs meet during lunch, is not an Open Lunch policy. Many schools that have closed lunches allow for that.

The sticking point and why this topic is coming up now is on Open Lunch policies that allow kids to leave campus during lunch. The issues involved include:

- Complaints from local businesses about kids overwhelming those restaurants and businesses from a volume perspective
- Theft, violence and general disruption of those establishments
- Absenteeism, since many kids who leave for open lunch don't come back to school or don't come back to school on time
- Overall school safety since kids can bring things, like dangerous weapons, from outside the school into the school building when they come back

If you watch the BOE policy meeting and saw the vote and the tone of the discussion, you should know that this was not just a passing thought. Taylor is going to claw back open lunch from these schools.

The question is how will it be done?

1. The Board has the option of setting a clear and updated policy restricting the parameters under which open lunch is defined and allowed
2. Banning it completely (as PG County has done)
3. Rescinding the open lunch policy and leaving this area completely up to the Superintendent (in which case he will most certainly ban it)

For those who are passionate about preserving whatever positive aspects of Open Lunch you like, I'd encourage you to focus your time and energy on advocating for pathway 1, as that leaves the most opportunity for community engagement and involvement. The other two pathways are dead ends in that regard.

Ok several things.
1) the common denominator with the gun incidents isn’t open lunch. Blake doesn’t have open lunch and the other individual wasn’t a student. In the case of the Whitman one this week, that kid probably had the gun in his bag IN THE SCHOOL all morning prior to lunch. The common denominators include guns, teens, boys, history of disciplinary issues, often bad parents, etc.

2) how do you know if there are complaints from local businesses? Maybe local businesses like the revenue. Maybe they don’t. No one has asked them and you are just making assumptions.

3) absenteeism is relevant but again, it would be helpful to compare ACTUAL stats between schools with open lunch vs closed lunch. You are making a huge assumption with no data because no one has actually run the numbers and shared them.

4) overall school safety because kids can bring in weapons and things after lunch? Are you actually serious? You think they can’t bring things in and out during other times of the day? You think this applies to lots of students? The vast majority of students would never in a million years bring a weapon to school and getting rid of open lunch isn’t going to be the magic solution for the small subset of kids who don’t know better.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My concern is the Board discussion to mandate multiple period closed lunches. My kid is at Blair and enjoys the hour long lunch period - everyone has the same lunch period. They run clubs during lunch, students meet with teachers for academic support, watch movies in the theatre, play sports in the gyms, go the weight room, etc., and if not in a club or meeting with a teacher, the kids get to chill with friends for an hour. Since everyone has the same lunch period - they get to see all their friends. The students eat in the cafeteria, outside, in teacher's classrooms, and in the hallway table areas. If a multi-period lunch gets mandated, gone are the lunch clubs, the kids won't be able to hang in teacher's classrooms or eat in multiple places, and academic support will be more limited. Hopefully that was just a passing thought and not something that will actually be implemented.

Several of the high-profile, gun-related safety incidents (such as the recent ones at Blake and Walter Johnson) have had open lunch as common denominator.

What you are describing, kids being able to eat in classrooms and have clubs meet during lunch, is not an Open Lunch policy. Many schools that have closed lunches allow for that.

The sticking point and why this topic is coming up now is on Open Lunch policies that allow kids to leave campus during lunch. The issues involved include:

- Complaints from local businesses about kids overwhelming those restaurants and businesses from a volume perspective
- Theft, violence and general disruption of those establishments
- Absenteeism, since many kids who leave for open lunch don't come back to school or don't come back to school on time
- Overall school safety since kids can bring things, like dangerous weapons, from outside the school into the school building when they come back

If you watch the BOE policy meeting and saw the vote and the tone of the discussion, you should know that this was not just a passing thought. Taylor is going to claw back open lunch from these schools.

The question is how will it be done?

1. The Board has the option of setting a clear and updated policy restricting the parameters under which open lunch is defined and allowed
2. Banning it completely (as PG County has done)
3. Rescinding the open lunch policy and leaving this area completely up to the Superintendent (in which case he will most certainly ban it)

For those who are passionate about preserving whatever positive aspects of Open Lunch you like, I'd encourage you to focus your time and energy on advocating for pathway 1, as that leaves the most opportunity for community engagement and involvement. The other two pathways are dead ends in that regard.

Ok several things.
1) the common denominator with the gun incidents isn’t open lunch. Blake doesn’t have open lunch and the other individual wasn’t a student. In the case of the Whitman one this week, that kid probably had the gun in his bag IN THE SCHOOL all morning prior to lunch. The common denominators include guns, teens, boys, history of disciplinary issues, often bad parents, etc.

2) how do you know if there are complaints from local businesses? Maybe local businesses like the revenue. Maybe they don’t. No one has asked them and you are just making assumptions.

3) absenteeism is relevant but again, it would be helpful to compare ACTUAL stats between schools with open lunch vs closed lunch. You are making a huge assumption with no data because no one has actually run the numbers and shared them.

4) overall school safety because kids can bring in weapons and things after lunch? Are you actually serious? You think they can’t bring things in and out during other times of the day? You think this applies to lots of students? The vast majority of students would never in a million years bring a weapon to school and getting rid of open lunch isn’t going to be the magic solution for the small subset of kids who don’t know better.

Great points but MCPS will hide behind their decision citing safety and call it a day. 11/26 schools offer open lunch - they’re now getting punished for some reason for something that’s been around for 50+ years at this point.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Schools with open lunch (seven are just for juniors or seniors): BCC
Einstein
Walter Johnson
Damascus
Paint Branch
Poolesville
Quince Orchard
Richard Montgomery
Watkins Mill
Whitman
Churchill

I just saw on instagram another kiddo at Wootton was attacked and seriously injured today. I’m extremely upset and don’t know details. But Wootton doesn’t have open lunch. It’s not the open lunch that is the problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:My concern is the Board discussion to mandate multiple period closed lunches. My kid is at Blair and enjoys the hour long lunch period - everyone has the same lunch period. They run clubs during lunch, students meet with teachers for academic support, watch movies in the theatre, play sports in the gyms, go the weight room, etc., and if not in a club or meeting with a teacher, the kids get to chill with friends for an hour. Since everyone has the same lunch period - they get to see all their friends. The students eat in the cafeteria, outside, in teacher's classrooms, and in the hallway table areas. If a multi-period lunch gets mandated, gone are the lunch clubs, the kids won't be able to hang in teacher's classrooms or eat in multiple places, and academic support will be more limited. Hopefully that was just a passing thought and not something that will actually be implemented.

Several of the high-profile, gun-related safety incidents (such as the recent ones at Blake and Walter Johnson) have had open lunch as common denominator.

What you are describing, kids being able to eat in classrooms and have clubs meet during lunch, is not an Open Lunch policy. Many schools that have closed lunches allow for that.

The sticking point and why this topic is coming up now is on Open Lunch policies that allow kids to leave campus during lunch. The issues involved include:

- Complaints from local businesses about kids overwhelming those restaurants and businesses from a volume perspective
- Theft, violence and general disruption of those establishments
- Absenteeism, since many kids who leave for open lunch don't come back to school or don't come back to school on time
- Overall school safety since kids can bring things, like dangerous weapons, from outside the school into the school building when they come back

If you watch the BOE policy meeting and saw the vote and the tone of the discussion, you should know that this was not just a passing thought. Taylor is going to claw back open lunch from these schools.

The question is how will it be done?

1. The Board has the option of setting a clear and updated policy restricting the parameters under which open lunch is defined and allowed
2. Banning it completely (as PG County has done)
3. Rescinding the open lunch policy and leaving this area completely up to the Superintendent (in which case he will most certainly ban it)

For those who are passionate about preserving whatever positive aspects of Open Lunch you like, I'd encourage you to focus your time and energy on advocating for pathway 1, as that leaves the most opportunity for community engagement and involvement. The other two pathways are dead ends in that regard.

You mistakenly reference the Blake incident as being related to open lunch. Blake High School has and always has had a closed lunch policy. Kids leave the building whether or not lunch is technically open or closed.

Wasn't the Blake incident in the school's parking lot? If so, still on school property.