The issue of lunch debt and the school’s lunch program was a topic of discussion at the Rugby School Board’s regular meeting on Tuesday, Jan. 13.

Business manager Dawn Hauck commented on the issue of free lunch, which is set to be revisited by the North Dakota Legislature during its special session this month. Hauck said she had to transfer $18,000 to the hot lunch program in December and was likely going to have to again in January.

“What happens is, the federal government covers free and reduced meals to a point, regardless of what the state does. There’s always going to be free meals for those who apply and qualify. They’re all still going to get those free meals. The state has agreed to pick up the extra reduced meals, and the state picks up a little bit more than the federal government does,” Hauck said. “What that means, is that it would then pay for all those who don’t qualify for free and reduced meals. When people say, ‘Oh, you’re not going to provide meals to kids. That’s terrible. What if they can’t afford it?’ The federal government is always going to provide it.”

School Board President Dustin Hager asked if the district would have to continue supplementing the hot lunch program as it has been if the proposed free lunch legislation goes forward, and Superintendent Mike McNeff said it would increase the district’s reimbursement.

“We never turn away kids, even those who have a balance of $800. We don’t say anything to them. We’re not allowed to due to the anti-shaming bill that came through a few years ago. Like Dawn said, the idea that kids are going hungry in school, and it’s simply not the case. I’m not aware of any district that doesn’t give a kid the meal regardless,” McNeff said. “I think there’s broad support for the free lunch measure because it feels good and sounds good. The problem is, this is going to go through by a high margin. The funds will come from the bucket of money likely out of K12 education. The money has to come from somewhere. It may be money given to salaries, benefits or all of those things.”

McNeff said he would like the state to revisit reimbursement rates for schools like Rugby so they aren’t having to dip into their general funds when the price of groceries is rising. Hager responded saying his concern is the nature of the regulation that would accompany state funding of school lunches.

“Any time the state puts their hand into paying for something, they’re going to regulate how it’s paid for,” Hager said.

McNeff said there are a number of variables and consequences that could arise from the legislation. McNeff pointed to a decrease in applicants to the federal free and reduced lunch program during the COVID pandemic when the federal government was paying for all lunches. A decrease in applicants could affect how much federal support the state at large could receive.

“Everybody who applies and qualifies for free and reduced meals, that money comes from the federal government. If people stop filling out those applications, the state will have to pick up even more families,” Hauck said.