Our Superintendent sent a district wide email to all parents a few days ago. It was to inform us of a change in student lunch accounts. Apparently some parents are not funding their children's accounts. We have a $62,000 deficit. Going forward, the school will not allow students to be over a $25 deficit and if the accounts are not cleared up Guidance Counselors will work with the family and if that doesn't fix it Dept Children Services will be called.
These neglected balances are not for those who qualify for free lunch due to low income. Sure there are people who don't qualify but are still struggling financially. And some parents are probably just taking advantage.
Apparently, the HS sells ice cream and other snacks and has no restrictions as to how much kids can buy on their lunch accounts. That is just wrong. Also I don't think the lunch accounts should be used to purchase that crap.
On the FB page for parents someone started a thread. Unbelievable the vile.
Thoughts?
__________________
Sometimes you're the windshield, and sometimes you're the bug.
Gosh, IKWTDS. Your school district is pretty lax. The kids can be $25 in the red?
Mine would get a note, or warning, as soon as their account went in the red. At that point, it was send in money, or you child would get "the lunch of shame". (A cheese sandwich and milk.)
Not that that ever happened to one of mine. But, I heard the stories.
In the lower grades, parents could control how much their child could spend on snacks and ice cream.
By the time they got to High School, Mrs. Obama had ruined school lunches. The kids were not getting enough to eat.
I packed lunches for my children, so they wouldn't starve.
Gosh, IKWTDS. Your school district is pretty lax. The kids can be $25 in the red?
Mine would get a note, or warning, as soon as their account went in the red. At that point, it was send in money, or you child would get "the lunch of shame". (A cheese sandwich and milk.)
Not that that ever happened to one of mine. But, I heard the stories.
In the lower grades, parents could control how much their child could spend on snacks and ice cream.
By the time they got to High School, Mrs. Obama had ruined school lunches. The kids were not getting enough to eat.
I packed lunches for my children, so they wouldn't starve.
I think only cash should be able to be used to purchase ice cream and such. And the lunch of shame? Why do kids, even parents, call it that? I am also told that most of those shaming lunches are thrown away.
__________________
Sometimes you're the windshield, and sometimes you're the bug.
Gosh, IKWTDS. Your school district is pretty lax. The kids can be $25 in the red?
Mine would get a note, or warning, as soon as their account went in the red. At that point, it was send in money, or you child would get "the lunch of shame". (A cheese sandwich and milk.)
Not that that ever happened to one of mine. But, I heard the stories.
In the lower grades, parents could control how much their child could spend on snacks and ice cream.
By the time they got to High School, Mrs. Obama had ruined school lunches. The kids were not getting enough to eat.
I packed lunches for my children, so they wouldn't starve.
I think only cash should be able to be used to purchase ice cream and such. And the lunch of shame? Why do kids, even parents, call it that? I am also told that most of those shaming lunches are thrown away.
Because when every other child is walking away with pizza, and apple, a cookie and milk...and one child walks away with a cheese sandwich and milk, the poor child feels shamed.
A hungry child will eat it. And their friends will share what they have with them.
Our school allows kids to get $5 in the hole before it switches over to a cheese or PBJ sandwich lunch. And the parents can set the account as to whether kids can buy extras and once the account is negative at all - no extras are allowed.
Schools need to be like colleges and hold report cards until accounts are paid.
-- Edited by Lawyerlady on Tuesday 19th of December 2017 10:30:37 AM
__________________
LawyerLady
I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.
Gosh, IKWTDS. Your school district is pretty lax. The kids can be $25 in the red?
Mine would get a note, or warning, as soon as their account went in the red. At that point, it was send in money, or you child would get "the lunch of shame". (A cheese sandwich and milk.)
Not that that ever happened to one of mine. But, I heard the stories.
In the lower grades, parents could control how much their child could spend on snacks and ice cream.
By the time they got to High School, Mrs. Obama had ruined school lunches. The kids were not getting enough to eat.
I packed lunches for my children, so they wouldn't starve.
I think only cash should be able to be used to purchase ice cream and such. And the lunch of shame? Why do kids, even parents, call it that? I am also told that most of those shaming lunches are thrown away.
Because when every other child is walking away with pizza, and apple, a cookie and milk...and one child walks away with a cheese sandwich and milk, the poor child feels shamed.
A hungry child will eat it. And their friends will share what they have with them.
Just my experience.
See, this is the sh*t that pisses me off to no end. They institute policies regarding dress codes to curtail bullying and then allow kids to feel the above with lunch and not having enough money in their account to purchase what the other kids are having.
-- Edited by Forever Sunshine on Tuesday 19th of December 2017 09:49:16 AM
I don’t think they should let them Get that much behind. But calling CPS? That seems extreme
They are worried the child is being neglected.
But these arent the kids that get free lunch right? Maybe a warning if the account gets more than $25 behind? A written warning that CPS will be called?
I don’t think they should let them Get that much behind. But calling CPS? That seems extreme
They are worried the child is being neglected.
But these arent the kids that get free lunch right? Maybe a warning if the account gets more than $25 behind? A written warning that CPS will be called?
but yeah it sucks. Really it’s the schools
fault for allowing the arears
Correct, free lunch receivers aren't part of this issue. The policy has been sent and so all parents who care to know the policy can read it. They already send a warning when balance falls below $10, the $25 threshold is when the school is taking action to force the parent to be involved. I think that is a good thing.
And what is the school supposed to do? They don't want the kids to go hungry. But then the cost falls on the taxpayer.
__________________
Sometimes you're the windshield, and sometimes you're the bug.
Hell, I receive a notice of the boys' funds dip below $25.00, warning me to replenish before it runs out. Maybe I have it set up that way, I don't know. But I have it on auto deposit so the bank is automatically charged so I don't have to worry about it. I don't know what would happen if the funds were not available and I hope I never find out.
#2 prefers to bring his lunch, but he will buy milk and a pretzel or popcorn or cookie (once a week) to supplement what I provide. #1 will buy but most often he goes to the salad bar because he loves veggies. He's also a lot thinner than #2, to the point where I serve him whole milk to keep him from getting too thin.
The lunches served are a bit meager, IMO. I don't think they serve enough to feed a mouse. The cashier monitors what the children are buying, too, and make sure they are getting a balanced diet.
One thing I didn't understand about MO and her lunch fiasco, if she wanted to improve school lunches, you'd think the first step would making sure each kid got a good meal. Regardless of ability to pay.
I'd rather tax dollars go toward providing lunch in schools instead of providing tv, cable, or libraries for criminals.
Mom worked in the cafeteria when I was in elementary school and again when my kids were in elementary school. The principal, at the last school she worked, would stand by the cashier. If the account came up in the red, the principal would take the tray of food from the student, throw it away, and give the child a brown bag lunch. It had a cheese sandwich a fruit, and they got a milk.
When I found out about that, it pissed me right off. The food was thrown away. How wasteful and petty is that?
As to the OP and getting CPS involved, that's just ridiculous.
__________________
A flock of flirting flamingos is pure, passionate, pink pandemonium-a frenetic flamingle-mangle-a discordant discotheque of delirious dancing, flamboyant feathers, and flamingo lingo.
One thing I didn't understand about MO and her lunch fiasco, if she wanted to improve school lunches, you'd think the first step would making sure each kid got a good meal. Regardless of ability to pay.
I'd rather tax dollars go toward providing lunch in schools instead of providing tv, cable, or libraries for criminals.
Mom worked in the cafeteria when I was in elementary school and again when my kids were in elementary school. The principal, at the last school she worked, would stand by the cashier. If the account came up in the red, the principal would take the tray of food from the student, throw it away, and give the child a brown bag lunch. It had a cheese sandwich a fruit, and they got a milk.
When I found out about that, it pissed me right off. The food was thrown away. How wasteful and petty is that?
As to the OP and getting CPS involved, that's just ridiculous.
How? If a kid is not being taken care of and being neglected the school is the first line to be able to help. They won't be bringing DCS until they have interacted with the parent. Why should taxpayers foot the bill? We already do so for EBT/food stamps and reduced priced lunch in schools. this crap has to not be part of our school budgets.
__________________
Sometimes you're the windshield, and sometimes you're the bug.
I'd like to see a breakdown of the cafeteria budget. How many are free/reduced, how many are behind, how much comes from taxes, costs per child.
The more students that receive free/reduced meals, the more federal funding the school gets. I'd like to see how much it breaks down to per meal.
Like I said, I'd rather tax money go to school lunches than a prison program.
__________________
A flock of flirting flamingos is pure, passionate, pink pandemonium-a frenetic flamingle-mangle-a discordant discotheque of delirious dancing, flamboyant feathers, and flamingo lingo.
Personally, I think it is wrong for a kid to be able to buy crap with their lunch ticket. Their lunch ticket should be for.........lunch. A hot lunch and not all the extra crap they sell. I had a problem with kids buying breakfast, snacks, etc and they were blowing thru a crap ton of money. I was met with a big shrug from the Food Director. Yes, i should control my kids. But the school is also supposed to act as "in loco parentis" as well. Even a 100 years ago when i was a kid, we were allowed to buy ice cream on onF Fridays and that had to be cash. So, the school could easily remedy this but they choose not too.
One thing I didn't understand about MO and her lunch fiasco, if she wanted to improve school lunches, you'd think the first step would making sure each kid got a good meal. Regardless of ability to pay.
I'd rather tax dollars go toward providing lunch in schools instead of providing tv, cable, or libraries for criminals.
Mom worked in the cafeteria when I was in elementary school and again when my kids were in elementary school. The principal, at the last school she worked, would stand by the cashier. If the account came up in the red, the principal would take the tray of food from the student, throw it away, and give the child a brown bag lunch. It had a cheese sandwich a fruit, and they got a milk.
When I found out about that, it pissed me right off. The food was thrown away. How wasteful and petty is that?
As to the OP and getting CPS involved, that's just ridiculous.
How? If a kid is not being taken care of and being neglected the school is the first line to be able to help. They won't be bringing DCS until they have interacted with the parent. Why should taxpayers foot the bill? We already do so for EBT/food stamps and reduced priced lunch in schools. this crap has to not be part of our school budgets.
I'd rather see food stamps reduced and the schools provide breakfast and lunch.
__________________
LawyerLady
I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.
I'd like to see a breakdown of the cafeteria budget. How many are free/reduced, how many are behind, how much comes from taxes, costs per child.
The more students that receive free/reduced meals, the more federal funding the school gets. I'd like to see how much it breaks down to per meal.
Like I said, I'd rather tax money go to school lunches than a prison program.
Wouldn't we all. Not possible to cut prison budgets with the almighty ACLU. Limited tax dollar resources. Would rather hold parents accountable than increase my property taxes. Oh and at the same time help kids being neglected. Don't you want neglected kids taken care of?
__________________
Sometimes you're the windshield, and sometimes you're the bug.
One thing I didn't understand about MO and her lunch fiasco, if she wanted to improve school lunches, you'd think the first step would making sure each kid got a good meal. Regardless of ability to pay.
I'd rather tax dollars go toward providing lunch in schools instead of providing tv, cable, or libraries for criminals.
Mom worked in the cafeteria when I was in elementary school and again when my kids were in elementary school. The principal, at the last school she worked, would stand by the cashier. If the account came up in the red, the principal would take the tray of food from the student, throw it away, and give the child a brown bag lunch. It had a cheese sandwich a fruit, and they got a milk.
When I found out about that, it pissed me right off. The food was thrown away. How wasteful and petty is that?
As to the OP and getting CPS involved, that's just ridiculous.
How? If a kid is not being taken care of and being neglected the school is the first line to be able to help. They won't be bringing DCS until they have interacted with the parent. Why should taxpayers foot the bill? We already do so for EBT/food stamps and reduced priced lunch in schools. this crap has to not be part of our school budgets.
I'd rather see food stamps reduced and the schools provide breakfast and lunch.
Yeah so would I. Boston schools actually open in the summer sometimes to feed kids; kids whose parent(s) receive food stamps. Ridiculous.
__________________
Sometimes you're the windshield, and sometimes you're the bug.
The thing is that I don't want kids going hungry and it's not their fault that their parents are tw@twaffles. If we are going to spend money on food - I'd rather the kids get it directly. And I'm not against lunch becoming part of the school budget for ALL kids. Then I wouldn't have to listen to people bitch that their kid has to pay for food when others don't.
__________________
LawyerLady
I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.
Well, our Board considered opening up for the summer. But, who is going to transport the kids to school to eat these meals? It isn't like every kid could just walk in for meals. The costs for that would go on and on. How about we start holding SUCKY parents responsible for being sucky parents? If your kid isn't getting enough to eat, then why aren't we taking away the kids? I bet they would somehow have enough money for food and less money for Grand Theft Auto if that would happen.
Well, our Board considered opening up for the summer. But, who is going to transport the kids to school to eat these meals? It isn't like every kid could just walk in for meals. The costs for that would go on and on. How about we start holding SUCKY parents responsible for being sucky parents? If your kid isn't getting enough to eat, then why aren't we taking away the kids? I bet they would somehow have enough money for food and less money for Grand Theft Auto if that would happen.
I agree. If parents can't care for their kids, they don't get to keep them. Basic necessities like food, clothes and shelter are a parent's responsibility.
__________________
LawyerLady
I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.
The thing is that I don't want kids going hungry and it's not their fault that their parents are tw@twaffles. If we are going to spend money on food - I'd rather the kids get it directly. And I'm not against lunch becoming part of the school budget for ALL kids. Then I wouldn't have to listen to people bitch that their kid has to pay for food when others don't.
I see what you did there.
__________________
Sometimes you're the windshield, and sometimes you're the bug.
Well, our Board considered opening up for the summer. But, who is going to transport the kids to school to eat these meals? It isn't like every kid could just walk in for meals. The costs for that would go on and on. How about we start holding SUCKY parents responsible for being sucky parents? If your kid isn't getting enough to eat, then why aren't we taking away the kids? I bet they would somehow have enough money for food and less money for Grand Theft Auto if that would happen.
I agree. If parents can't care for their kids, they don't get to keep them. Basic necessities like food, clothes and shelter are a parent's responsibility.
CPS would be called because not feeding your child is neglect. If you qualify for free lunches, get on it, if you don't, then you need to make room in your budget to feed your kids.
I never understand that the outrage for not providing lunch goes towards the school and not the parents.
-- Edited by NAOW on Thursday 21st of December 2017 10:12:55 AM
But, I heard the stories.
