I think people are applying their own school lunch experiences to all CA school lunches. There was a big push to make school food healthier and more kid friendly/likable years ago. I know not every district is the same, but my kids’ elementary school has a garden and they all have class time in the garden and an after school club that tends it (along with parent volunteers). They supplement the school lunches with the veggies they grow (the kids get so excited knowing they grew the food they’re eating), and they have a farmers market with the rest of the produce to help raise funds.

I just checked the menu for my daughter’s high school and today for breakfast they’re offering cereal (daily), breakfast sandwich, or pancakes. For lunch the choices are penne with turkey meat sauce, chicken and bacon salad, or red beans and rice. Other days they offer things like carnitas burritos, veggie burritos, minestrone, pizza, veggie pasta, veggie chow mein, chicken wraps. I’ve seen them, and they don’t look bad. It sort of reminds me of what you’d get at a museum cafe. It’s not particularly great or memorable, but there’s a variety and it’s decent. One thing I like is that when they list veggie/vegetarian options, they generally mean loaded with veggies rather than meat free. I checked the next district over and they seem similar. They have a daily option of yogurt with granola, chicken sandwich, Caesar salad with or without chicken, cheeseburger, and a rotating entree that includes things like chili, burritos, maple glazed chicken, chicken sliders.

When I was in school, we had things like pizza that was essentially cardboard with tomato sauce and cheese sprinkled on top, a salad made of lettuce and ranch dressing, and various other slop. My kids’ experience is quite different.

Anonymous wrote:

You forget that income limits require employees to verify data and burocracy
The cost to monitor, process and enforce a program will be much more than an extra bowl of chicken noodle soup

I am open to the idea that administrative costs may be more than the cost of providing free lunches to all students, but I would want to see the numbers that prove this. Do you have any data on administrative costs for school lunch programs? And are there any data on what percentage of school lunch food is actually eaten by students?

No I do not
But I have come across news articles in foreign media where it was stated that providing a universal benefit is cheaper due to eliminating administrative costs
Another example is the amount of money that was granted by EU to help with the migrant crisis of 2015 and how very little of that was for the migrants.
I can find more examples if you are interested, I would bet that US systems do run into similar issues. So it is universal

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it really free?

it's free to the kids, and to the families who don't make much since they don't pay much in taxes.

CA has a $97 billion surplus. It's nice that they are using it to feed kids. I grew up in CA and was lower income. I remember vividly being in 1st grade and being hungry and couldn't wait till snack time when they gave us a few crackers. This was before Prop 13 passed. Once that passed, the free snacks went out the window, along with a bunch of other services and programs.

A one time surplus or a surplus every year?

? can you tell me what state had a $97b billion surplus in one year, let alone multiple years?

One that's extremely bad at budgeting.

I bet any state would just love to be this bad at budgeting then. LOL

I'll ask again: can you tell me what state had a $97b billion surplus in one year, let alone multiple years

Sounds like California is overtaxing its residents. No wonder they're leaving.

Can't wait to see what happens when California is only populated by freeloading illegals and the rich in their castles.

there are a lot of rich Rs there, too. That's why all R POTUS hopefuls go to CA for fundraising. I used to live near two of those rich conservative enclaves.

Why do you suppose these rich conservatives continue to live in this overtaxing state? Why don't they leave?

Anonymous wrote:Yet people are dying to get into California's public universities!

It's interesting, isn't it.

I think what people don't understand about CA is that it's a huge state with a huge diverse population. Yes, there are a lot of lower income families. Why? CA is extremely expensive.

But, there are also a lot of well off families, hence the high housing costs.

Even with the overall state of the public schools in CA, there are a lot of smart kids there, and the vast majority apply to the great public universities in CA. That's why schools like UCLA, Cal consistently rank high nationally, if not internationally.

But, that's ok, I know there are a lot of jealous people on here.

A huge state like CA with its diverse population, huge wage gap, is bound to have a lot of issues. But, they have one of the strongest economies in the country, if not the world. Yet another thing for many conservatives to be jealous about.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is it really free?

it's free to the kids, and to the families who don't make much since they don't pay much in taxes.

CA has a $97 billion surplus. It's nice that they are using it to feed kids. I grew up in CA and was lower income. I remember vividly being in 1st grade and being hungry and couldn't wait till snack time when they gave us a few crackers. This was before Prop 13 passed. Once that passed, the free snacks went out the window, along with a bunch of other services and programs.

A one time surplus or a surplus every year?

? can you tell me what state had a $97b billion surplus in one year, let alone multiple years?

One that's extremely bad at budgeting.

I bet any state would just love to be this bad at budgeting then. LOL

I'll ask again: can you tell me what state had a $97b billion surplus in one year, let alone multiple years

Sounds like California is overtaxing its residents. No wonder they're leaving.

Can't wait to see what happens when California is only populated by freeloading illegals and the rich in their castles.

I have a feeling you will be dead by then.


"They" are mostly middle class people leaving CA who are being priced out. You understand the concept of supply and demand, right?

I guess a ton of rich people would rather live in CA and be taxed then live in low tax red states.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course middle class and above kids will turn their noses up at school food because they have food at home. Truly poor kids aren't turning down edible food.

Good for California kids!

Said the person who has obviously never worked in a school. All the kids grab the free, crappy lunch. Most of it winds up in the trash because it's disgusting. So by your logic, the "poor" kids are forced to eat truly horrendous food? Btw, kids are kids. The kids that truly need subsidized lunches are throwing away the crap food because A) they would rather starve than eat it, and/or B) they don't want to be the person seen eating the crap food.

I don't know about CA school food, but in my DC's MCPS HS, they were offering free lunch this past year, and DC and friends ate some of the free school lunch, after they ate their home brought lunch. Teens eat a lot. DC said some of it was not bad.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Of course middle class and above kids will turn their noses up at school food because they have food at home. Truly poor kids aren't turning down edible food.

Good for California kids!

Said the person who has obviously never worked in a school. All the kids grab the free, crappy lunch. Most of it winds up in the trash because it's disgusting. So by your logic, the "poor" kids are forced to eat truly horrendous food? Btw, kids are kids. The kids that truly need subsidized lunches are throwing away the crap food because A) they would rather starve than eat it, and/or B) they don't want to be the person seen eating the crap food.

+1

Anonymous wrote:Of course middle class and above kids will turn their noses up at school food because they have food at home. Truly poor kids aren't turning down edible food.

Good for California kids!

Said the person who has obviously never worked in a school. All the kids grab the free, crappy lunch. Most of it winds up in the trash because it's disgusting. So by your logic, the "poor" kids are forced to eat truly horrendous food? Btw, kids are kids. The kids that truly need subsidized lunches are throwing away the crap food because A) they would rather starve than eat it, and/or B) they don't want to be the person seen eating the crap food.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a bad idea. The food last year was way worse because it did not actually cover costs in the same way the prior split with paying kids did.

This will result in worse food for the kids that need it

If all children get free lunch then the children of poor families are not embarrassed.

Omg. Educated yourself, please. No one knows who gets the free lunches. It's all automated. The lunch lady working the computer might know, but that's it. And believe me, if you saw the quality of the "free" lunches, anyone would agree it's not worth it.

Anonymous wrote:This is a bad idea. The food last year was way worse because it did not actually cover costs in the same way the prior split with paying kids did.

This will result in worse food for the kids that need it

+1000

The food is inedible about doing this in VA the past couple years. I can't imagine the waste.

Texas, Florida and California along with Las Vegas, Arizona, and New Mexico all have horrible school systems. Now what do they have in common?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But the quality of their education is low!

California schools are basically daycare centers.

“Decades of underinvestment in schools, culture battles over bilingual education, and stark income inequality have made California the least literate state in the nation, as Capitol Weekly reported.

Nearly 1 in 4 people over the age of 15 lack the skills to decipher the words in this sentence. Only 77% of adults are considered mid- to highly literate, according to the nonpartisan data crunchers at World Population Review.“

https://edsource.org/updates/california-has-the-lowest-literacy-rate-of-any-state-data-suggests

Education and literacy rates in Republican-run areas like Greg Abbott's Texas and DeSantis's Florida are every bit as bad.

Then I guess as long as they get a free meal, everything is fine.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:But the quality of their education is low!

California schools are basically daycare centers.

“Decades of underinvestment in schools, culture battles over bilingual education, and stark income inequality have made California the least literate state in the nation, as Capitol Weekly reported.

Nearly 1 in 4 people over the age of 15 lack the skills to decipher the words in this sentence. Only 77% of adults are considered mid- to highly literate, according to the nonpartisan data crunchers at World Population Review.“

https://edsource.org/updates/california-has-the-lowest-literacy-rate-of-any-state-data-suggests

Education and literacy rates in Republican-run areas like Greg Abbott's Texas and DeSantis's Florida are every bit as bad.

The ROI on free school meals is hard to argue with.

You forget that income limits require employees to verify data and burocracy
The cost to monitor, process and enforce a program will be much more than an extra bowl of chicken noodle soup

I am open to the idea that administrative costs may be more than the cost of providing free lunches to all students, but I would want to see the numbers that prove this. Do you have any data on administrative costs for school lunch programs? And are there any data on what percentage of school lunch food is actually eaten by students?