BRATTLEBORO-Gov. Phil Scott has proposed eliminating Vermont's successful universal school meals program.
As a parent and paraeducator working in the Windham Southeast School District, I see firsthand the importance of offering children meals during the school day. I think it is common sense to most folks that kids need to be properly fed to be able to learn, which is what they are in school to do.
It makes very little sense to put obstacles in the way of the growth and development of children, but that is what ending universal school meals would do.
Ending the program would mean returning to a two-tiered system where some students pay for lunch and others do not. This has been proven to cause some low-income kids and families to choose not to accept free food because of the stigma associated with it.
Studies have shown that schools that have universal school meals see a reduction in suspensions and other behavioral issues, improved test scores, and better health in general for students. Additionally, with the rising cost of groceries, plenty of Vermont families would not meet the income requirements but would benefit from the relief. They, too, would be left behind by Gov. Scott's proposal.
Our farmers also benefit from universal school meals. The Farm to School program, which connects our family farms to local schools with a goal for 50% of all school food to be locally sourced, has already generated $1.4 million for Vermont's economy, with $374,000 of that going directly to farmers and food processors. Imagine how much money our farmers could earn if the program's goal were met!
Supporting local farmers not only strengthens our local economy, it reduces our reliance on larger supply chains. I think we all understand why this is an important direction to move in, after seeing the instability that depending on outside products, especially food, can lead to.
Farmers benefit from knowing the market for their product so they can plan and prepare for the growing season. Schools can provide an incredibly stable market for farmers, with universal school meals creating an efficient system that makes it easy for schools to provide farmers with the information they need. A two-tiered system would make it harder and financially riskier for farmers to connect with schools.
It is unclear to me why Gov. Scott, who has enjoyed the benefits of bipartisan support, would choose to knowingly disadvantage our children, their education, family farmers and, by extension, our local economy.
Perhaps he intends to retire elsewhere, but I personally (and perhaps you as well) would prefer to live and age in a well-educated state that supports its citizens and will continue to do so.
If you feel the same, I strongly urge you to contact Gov. Scott and share your viewpoint with him.
Ellen Graham
Brattleboro
This letter to the editor was submitted to The Commons.
This piece, published in print in the Voices section or as a column in the news sections, represents the opinion of the writer. In the newspaper and on this website, we strive to ensure that opinions are based on fair expression of established fact. In the spirit of transparency and accountability, The Commons is reviewing and developing more precise policies about editing of opinions and our role and our responsibility and standards in fact-checking our own work and the contributions to the newspaper. In the meantime, we heartily encourage civil and productive responses at [email protected].