HOUSE BILL REPORT

SHB 1601

BYHouse Committee on Appropriations (originally sponsored by Representatives Peery, Schoon, K. Wilson, Cole, Valle, Jones, G. Fisher, P. King, Pruitt, Kremen, Winsley, Wang, Holland, Wineberry, Cooper, Jacobsen, H. Myers, Dorn, Basich and Phillips)

Establishing a school breakfast program.

House Committe on Education

Majority Report:  Do pass with amendments.  (13)

      Signed by Representatives Peery, Chair; G. Fisher, Vice Chair; Brumsickle, Cole, Dorn, Fuhrman, Jones, P. King, Phillips, Pruitt, Rasmussen, Valle and K. Wilson.

Minority Report:  Do not pass.  (3)

      Signed by Representatives Betrozoff, Ranking Republican Member; Horn and Walker.

House Staff:Susan Patrick (786-7111)

Rereferred House Committee on Appropriations

Majority Report:  The substitute bill be substituted therefor and the substitute bill do pass.  (21)

      Signed by Representatives Locke, Chair; Grant, Vice Chair; H. Sommers, Vice Chair; Appelwick, Belcher, Bowman, Braddock, Brekke, Dorn, Ebersole, Hine, Holland, McLean, Peery, Rust, Sayan, Spanel, Sprenkle, Valle, Wang and Wineberry.

Minority Report:  Do not pass.  (5)

      Signed by Silver, Ranking Republican Member; Youngsman, Assistant Ranking Republican Member; Ferguson, Nealey and Padden.

House Staff:      Janet Peterson (786-7136)

AS PASSED HOUSE MARCH 14, 1989

BACKGROUND:

In October 1988 the Governor's Task Force on Hunger called for the increased utilization of the National School Lunch and Breakfast Program.  The Task Force recommended that the serving of breakfast be mandated in all schools where more than 25 percent of the students are eligible for free or reduced price school meals.  Currently schools where 40 percent or more of the children participating in the school lunch program qualify for a free and reduced priced lunch, schools receive $.95 for each free breakfast served.  In the 1989-90 school year that will increase to $.98 per breakfast served.  These schools are identified as severe need schools.  If the school is not identified as a severe need school, the reimbursement for each free breakfast served is $.79 and will increase to $.82 in the 1989-90 school year.

SUMMARY:

A school breakfast program shall be implemented in severe need schools over a three year time schedule.  A severe need school is a school building where 40 percent or more of the students participating in the National School Lunch Program are receiving free or reduced price lunches.  School districts with 40 percent or more of their students receiving free or reduced price lunches shall implement a breakfast program in their severe need schools in the 1990-91 school year.  School districts with 25 to less than 40 percent of their students receiving free or reduced price lunches shall implement a breakfast program in the 1991-92 school year.  All other school districts shall implement a breakfast program in severe need schools in the 1992-93 school year.  The breakfast program requirement shall lapse if the federal reimbursement is reduced or eliminated.  The program is to be supported entirely by federal grants, commodities and charges to students.  No state funding or basic education obligation is implied.

Fiscal Note:      Available.

House Committee ‑ Testified For:    (Education)  Marie Korsmo, Principal, Franklin Pierce School District; Lisa Chatterton, Food Service Supervisor, Franklin Pierce School District; Kathleen Clark, Washington State Food and Nutrition Council and Washington State Dietetic Association; and Linda Stone, Governor's Task Force on Hunger.

(Appropriations)  Tony Lee, Washington Association of Churches.

House Committee - Testified Against:      (Education)  Kris Van Gorkom, Washington Association of School Administrators; and Dwayne Slate Washington State School Director's Association.

(Appropriations)  None Presented.

House Committee - Testimony For:    (Education)  In the Franklin Pierce School District there are five high schools and one elementary school which provide a breakfast program.  These programs in schools which have more than forty percent of the participants receiving free and reduced lunches have been able to break even on the federal subsidy of ninety-four cents per breakfast served.  Prior to starting the breakfast program six years ago in the elementary building, students by mid morning paid little attention, were listless, easily upset and morning recess was the source of endless fights.  We finally concluded that many of our children were hungry and began the breakfast program.  There is a marked difference.  You cannot teach a child who is hungry.  Our experience has shown that we have made more efficient use of our staff and better utilization of food since we began the breakfast program.  There are two other elementary buildings in which we should provide the breakfast program.  The primary obstacle is the willingness of the principal.  The purpose of this bill is to target the schools within a district with the children of greatest need.  In talking with districts that have provided breakfast programs, they have been very flexible in how the food is serve to avoid additional costs for supervision and transportation.

(Appropriations)  This direction was recommended by the Governor's Task Force on Hunger.  Federal funding is available.  There will be no state cost.

House Committee - Testimony Against:      (Education)  We are concerned that there will be added costs for districts in the form of additional costs for supervision of students and transportation.  If we are to do this program, money must be provided to cover our costs.  Also we do not like to see mandates.  The breakfast program should be a local option.

(Appropriations)  None Presented.