Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Meals topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill to eliminate reduced‑price school meal copays draws broad support; committee questions cost and scope
Summary
Representative Melissa Romano’s HB551 would eliminate the 30¢–40¢ reduced‑price copays for school breakfast and lunch and fund reimbursements with $600,000 annually from the general fund. Testimony emphasized reduced stigma and administrative burdens; members asked staff to verify counts and whether the appropriation covers expected demand.
The House Education Committee heard House Bill 551, sponsored by Representative Melissa Romano, which would eliminate reduced‑price co‑payments for school meals and create a state reimbursement program funded at $600,000 annually.
"This is a bill about feeding kids," Romano said, noting that an estimated 1 in 6 Montana children live in food‑insecure households. Romano described HB551 as a state‑funded reimbursement program that would ensure students who qualify for reduced‑price meals receive them at no cost and said she had discussed the proposal with budget staff to include an appropriation in House Bill 2.
Proponents from education and nutrition organizations described the problem in practical terms. Kim Popham (MFPE) recounted classroom experiences with students arriving hungry and said the reduced‑price copays (30¢ breakfast, 40¢ lunch) still pose barriers. Isabella Bucciarelli of the Montana Food Bank Network said eliminating the copay reduces stigma and meal debt and that in 2024 roughly 43% of students were eligible for free or reduced meals. Tribal, school board, and nonprofit witnesses added anecdotes of deferred maintenance and student need.
Committee members sought detail on program costs and mechanics. Witnesses and the sponsor cited draft estimates: a handout identified roughly 21,000 students in the reduced‑price category and earlier estimates for the biennium ran near $930,000; Romano said she chose $600,000 to be conservative and anticipated unused funds would revert to the general fund. Committee staff and school nutritionists were asked to provide precise counts and per‑meal cost data after the hearing.
Members also pressed on district impacts. Administrators described monthly billing practices for unpaid accounts, occasional referrals to collections, and the staff time spent tracking small copays. Proponents said the proposal would reduce administrative burdens and improve nutrition access.
Representative Romano closed with a classroom anecdote about a student whose meal debt created stigma and said the proposal was both fiscally modest and impactful for affected children. The committee did not vote on the bill in the hearing record and requested follow‑up information from OPI and nutrition staff.
