When Colorado voters approved “Healthy School Meals for All” two years ago, organizers behind the ballot initiative estimated the program would cost $115 million in its first year.
The actual costs significantly exceeded that — $166 million — leaving state lawmakers scrambling with the financial fallout.
“I don’t know why the costs have gotten so out of control,” said state Sen. Barbara Kirkmeyer, R-Brighton, who serves on both the legislature's appropriations and Joint Budget Committee. The latter drafts the state government's annual spending plan.
“They need to figure out how to get these costs in line with the funding,” the legislator said.
Given the actual cost of the program, supporters are seriously considering whether to put another ballot measure before voters to ask for more money.
Approved by 55% of voters in 2022, the program mandates — regardless of income — free breakfast and lunch for public school students beginning in the 2023-2024 school year.
Hunger Free Colorado, one of the organizations behind the voter-approved measure, had anticipated 60,000 schoolchildren would participate in the program.
More than that did.
Roughly 184,000 students ate a free breakfast and 435,000 students ate a free lunch across the state daily, said Brehan Riley, executive director of the School Nutrition Unit at Colorado Department of Education. Those numbers — Riley said — represent a 40% increase in participation in breakfast and a 34% in lunch.
Riley noted these participation numbers were “even higher than what was seen during the pandemic when meals were free for all.”
All 190 eligible school food authorities in Colorado opted into the program during the 2023-2024 school year, Riley said.
"Healthy School Meals for All" also envisioned upgrades to school kitchens, increased cafeteria staff wages and grants for schools to purchase local produce. To pay for the meals, the program increased taxes on households earning more than $300,000 in adjusted gross income per year.
The Joint Budget Committee agreed — temporarily — to bridge the funding gap through next school year.
“I’m willing to help them out because they messed this up this year,” Kirkmeyer said. “It’s not supposed to be funded with general funds.”
The budget committee decided to cover the $56 million shortfall for next school year with the state education fund, meaning they will take money away from public education.
The National School Lunch Program is a federal assistance meal program that accounts for roughly 40% of all school-age children in the U.S. and which was signed into law during the Truman administration.
In Colorado, roughly 41% of public-school students in 2019 were eligible for either free or reduced-priced school meals under the National School Lunch Program, according to the Colorado Department of Education.
Advocates often pointed to research suggesting that free school meals provides many benefits for school-age children, including improved attendance and concentration, as well as increased academic performance.
A 2021 report by the Brookings Institution, for example, found improved math performance, particularly among Hispanic students, as well as a reduction in suspensions among some students.
The goal is to ensure that children aren't hungry while trying to learn at school, advocates said.
Many also noted that the number of children experiencing poverty and hunger has been on the rise since the onset of the pandemic. The U.S. Census Bureau reports rates climbing from 5.2% in 2021 to 12.4% in 2022. Activists pointed to the expiration of enhanced funding for both child tax credit and the pandemic-era Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), colloquially knowns as “food stamps.”
Additionally, the federal government provided funding for free meals for all students during the COVID-19 pandemic. This, however, concluded with the end of the public health emergency last year.
Healthy School Meals for All was intended to fill in the gap, said Marc Jacobson, CEO of Hunger Free Colorado, one of the organizations behind the 2022 voter-approved initiative.
“It’s really been a godsend for a lot of parents around the state,” Jacobson said.
The way Jacobson sees it, the new program is a victim of its own success.
“It (participation) was significantly higher than we projected,” Jacobson said. “I doubt it’ll go down.”
He expects a continued gap between revenue and costs.
“It’s really a key component of the education system for our students,” Jacobson said.
Jacobson added: “We hope that we can sustain the revenue going forward to provide free school meals for all.”
What sets the program apart is that free meals are offered to all students, regardless of their income levels.
During the campaign in 2022, both sides of the debate used that point to argue their sides.
Opponents said the state should not pay to feed children who can afford to purchase a meal at school or bring food from home, and the program would mean permanently spending state resources for a program that not all students needs.
Supporters said the measure would remove a "source of shame and embarrassment for students who receive free meals" by making free food available to everybody.
Voters may yet see those arguments revived soon.
Hunger Free Colorado is weighing whether to put a second ballot measure before voters.
And there appears to be support for it.
Jacobson cited a Keating Research poll in February of 500 registered Colorado voters that found 62% of voters would support a second ballot measure to raise an additional $75 million to fully fund and expand the program.
Lawmakers have expressed both support for the will of voters — and frustration when they approve spending programs, despite caution by experts about their financial viability.
“This is another program that voters passed with an identified fund source that has also come up short,” state Rep. Shannon Bird, D-Westminster, chair of the Joint Budget Committee, said in March, when lawmakers were grappling with how to pay for the tens of millions of dollars in unanticipated expenses.
“There were tons and tons of analyses that were done that said this is not penciling out, the math doesn't work, and nobody listened,” state Sen. Rachel Zenzinger, D-Arvada, also said in March.
In an interview with The Denver Gazette, Kirkmeyer signaled that lawmakers' decision to cover the $56 million shortfall won't happen again.
“We’re not going to continue to put general funds into this,” Kirkmeyer said. “They need to stay within the amount they receive from the ballot measure.”
Most Popular
Comments / 0