Bill would reintroduce income eligibility for school lunches; lawmakers debate trade-offs between meal access and classroom funding

Representative [Myers] presented House File 2201 before the Education Finance Committee on April 1, proposing to keep free universal breakfast for all students while restoring income eligibility for free school lunch above a proposed threshold (example used in the hearing: $150,000 for a family of four). The bill would redirect projected state savings into a new local optional revenue (LOR) tier intended to support classroom positions and reduce layoffs.

Author and intent: "What the bill does is it maintains free breakfasts for everybody... it requires anybody over $150,000 income, they've gotta provide those lunches," Representative Myers said in his opening. He and supporting witnesses described the measure as a pragmatic compromise to preserve educator jobs and classroom programs amid projected budget shortfalls. (Representative Myers, author)

Fiscal and program details: The bill’s supporters cited a nonpartisan estimate that the proposal would save roughly $85 million per year (about $170 million over the biennium) and redirect those savings to classrooms; proponents said that would fund teacher retention and a new LOR tier. Minnetonka school treasurer Dan Olsen described the mechanics: "This lives up to the spirit of ... free school meals for kids while also freeing up state resources to benefit those same kids in the classroom." (Dan Olsen, Minnetonka school treasurer)

Opposition and student-impact concerns: Advocates, school nutrition workers and educators strongly opposed reintroducing means-testing. Matt Shaver of Allies argued the state has a statutory obligation to feed children who are required by law to be in school and called the universal meals policy an important standard. "House File 2,201 proposes to repeal universal meals and re-establish a lunchroom of haves and have nots by setting an arbitrary financial line," Shaver said. (Matt Shaver, Allies)

Several speakers emphasized stigma associated with means-testing and the administrative burdens of re‑introducing eligibility screening. Leah Gardner of the Hunger Free Schools Coalition (and a school board treasurer) told the committee that returning to income limits would bring back lunch shaming and increase paperwork, while school food workers described watching children avoid the line before universal meals. "Before Universal Meals... kids were being sent to the principal's office with a cheese sandwich," said Laurie Smith, a cook and SEIU trustee. (Leah Gardner; Laurie Smith)

MDE and implementation concerns: Minnesota Department of Education staff stated the agency had strong concerns about moving away from universal meals. MDE reported a large increase in participation since universal meals were adopted in 2023 and warned that reinstating means testing would impose administrative costs, vendor changes and could remove up to roughly 130,000 students from universal lunch access under the proposed threshold. (Ado Shuni, MDE)

Amendments and committee action: The chair offered and then withdrew a proposed A1 amendment that would have applied potential savings to teacher pensions (a proposal discussed in the hearing and estimated to cost roughly $75 million). The committee also discussed an A2 amendment that would shift a small per‑meal supplement (12.5¢) from the nutrition fund to the general fund and create a voluntary mechanism for districts to convert meal‑fund payments into general fund dollars; that amendment was offered for discussion but was withdrawn during the hearing. Representative Myers said he would continue to pursue options to unlock nutrition account surpluses and provide local flexibility.

Disposition: After extensive testimony on both sides, House File 2201 was laid over for possible inclusion in an omnibus bill or further consideration. No final vote was taken.