Committee hears bill to provide free breakfast and lunch to all public school students

The Appropriations Committee held a public hearing on House Bill 1404, sponsored by Rep. April Berg and requested by Gov. Jay Inslee, which would require all public schools to offer breakfast and lunch at no charge to any requesting student beginning in the 2026–27 school year and require state reimbursement to cover meals not federally reimbursed at the USDA free rate.

The bill would expand existing requirements tied to the Community Eligibility Provision (CEP) and state law so that any public school that provides meals upon request must receive state reimbursements for meals that are not fully covered by federal free‑meal reimbursement. Committee staff estimated the annual cost to the state at roughly $146 million per year under current federal reimbursement assumptions and projected biennial and four‑year outlook costs in the tens or hundreds of millions.

Supporters said universal school meals reduce stigma and improve students’ ability to learn. “Food is a basic human need, and adequate nutrition is essential for students to learn,” Jenny Choi, K–12 policy adviser to the governor, told the committee during the hearing. Representative Berg said the bill is driven by direct experience working in school cafeterias and by a belief that “nobody should be means testing a 3rd grader over whether or not they should eat breakfast and lunch.”

Staff briefing and fiscal assumptions James Mackson of the committee staff summarized the federal and state programs that underlie the proposal, including the National School Lunch Program, the School Breakfast Program and the federal Community Eligibility Provision. Staff said schools with an identified student percentage (ISP) of 40% or greater must participate in CEP; other elementary schools with 30% or more FRPM must already provide meals at no charge under state law.

The staff briefing included a cost estimate prepared from OSPI assumptions: about $36.5 million per year to cover additional breakfasts in schools not already covered and about $109.6 million per year for lunches, plus roughly $6.5 million per year to pay an additional $0.05 per meal. Staff described the total annual estimate near $146 million, noting the amount would rise with federal reimbursement increases; staff projected about $153 million for the 2025–27 biennium and roughly $476 million over a four‑year outlook. Those estimates rest on staff assumptions recited in the hearing: roughly 370,000 students in schools not already covered, consumption rates drawn from OSPI (about 1.5 breakfasts per week per student and 2.75 lunches per week), and an assumption that a large share of the remaining students would be paid‑meal participants once meals were universally free.

Supporters at the hearing included school nutrition directors, teachers, students and advocacy groups. Symone Bowe of the Washington Education Association said the union supports universal meals but noted competing budget priorities in a tight year. School nutrition directors requested augmentations to cover sub and benefit costs for cafeteria staffing; Mitch Denning and Karen Brown testified that an additional per‑meal supplement between $0.05 and $0.25 would help district nutrition budgets and substitute coverage. Superintendents and district representatives detailed local operating pressures and urged the committee to consider the bill alongside other K–12 funding needs.

Public testimony and equity arguments Students and teachers described reductions in stigma where universal meals had been implemented and said participation and classroom engagement improved. Jake Garcia of the Latino Community Fund testified that “for many Latino families and immigrant families, school meals serve as a vital lifeline.” Several testifiers from rural and tribal areas described reliance on school meals and food banks.

Policy interactions and unknowns Witnesses and staff noted interactions with other funding programs that use FRPM data, including the Learning Assistance Program (LAP) and the National Board bonus for teachers in high‑poverty schools. Staff said those formula impacts are indeterminate in the current fiscal estimate; similar past policies had produced several million dollars per year of shift in those programs, which staff estimated could add roughly $10–20 million per year, but the committee briefing labeled those impacts as indeterminate.

Next steps The committee concluded the public hearing at the end of the testimony period. No committee action or vote on the bill was recorded in the hearing transcript; the bill will appear again as the Appropriations Committee proceeds with deliberations. The record includes detailed fiscal assumptions and public testimony that the committee can use in follow‑up sessions.