69����

Balanced choices are available. A recent example from our own district shows that students had the option of either macaroni and cheese or popcorn chicken, both of which meet rigorous nutritional standards. The macaroni and cheese is made with whole-grain pasta and reduced-fat, low-sodium cheese, while the popcorn chicken features whole-grain breading. Additionally, students had access to canned mandarin oranges and four other fresh fruit options, ensuring they could make well-rounded choices.

Meeting nutrition standards while keeping food appealing. School nutrition departments must strike a balance: meals need to be both nutritious and appealing, or they end up in the trash. The notion that schools are simply “shoving processed garbage” at students overlooks the careful planning that goes into creating meals that meet USDA guidelines while still being foods that students will eat.

Funding is limited but well-managed. In Janesville, the highest reimbursement received for a school lunch is just $4.54, which must cover not only food costs but also labor, equipment, utility costs, and maintenance. For breakfast, the reimbursement is even lower, and for students who don’t qualify for free or reduced meals, the district receives only $0.39 per meal. Despite these constraints, the district has managed to provide universal free breakfast while remaining fiscally responsible. The argument against additional funding ignores the reality that increased support could allow for even healthier meal options.

School nutrition is improving, and more support will help. The USDA has already set new guidelines requiring schools to limit added sugars to no more than 10% of weekly calories by the 2027-2028 school year. While this is a positive step, it comes with challenges, as healthier ingredient options often come at a higher cost. Without adequate funding, schools may struggle to provide the best possible meals while keeping them affordable.

Rejecting additional support is counterproductive. The claim that more funding will simply result in “more processed food” is misleading. Instead of dismissing investment in school meals, we should focus on how to use those funds to enhance meal quality, improve ingredient sourcing, and support nutrition staff in providing the best possible meals for students. If we care about the health and success of our future leaders, we should advocate for better funding and smarter meal planning — not less support.

Ultimately, school meals are a critical part of ensuring all students have access to nutritious food. It is very difficult for students to focus on learning when they are hungry. Rather than rejecting investment in school nutrition, we should support efforts that increase access and improve meal quality while maintaining financial responsibility.

We invite Mr. Knox to join us for lunch at one of our schools—our treat! We’d love the opportunity to showcase the great work our team does in providing quality, nutritious meals to students and staff while highlighting the many benefits of our school meal programs.