BILL ANALYSIS �
AJR 31
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AJR 31 (Skinner)
As Introduced August 26, 2013
Majority vote
EDUCATION 6-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Buchanan, Olsen, Ch�vez, | | |
| |Gonzalez, Nazarian, | | |
| |Williams | | |
|-----+--------------------------+-----+--------------------------|
| | | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY : Supports federal standards for healthy meals,
including those standards recently adopted pursuant to the
Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010; urges the President and
Congress to ensure that reimbursement rates are adequate to
fully fund the cost of producing a nutritious school meal
relative to the cost of living in the region; and, resolves that
the eligibility scale used to qualify families for free and
reduced-price meals be adjusted according to the
self-sufficiency index for the region served. Specifically,
this resolution :
1)Makes findings as to the:
a) Importance of all of California's more than 6 million
pupils to have access to high-quality, safe, nutritious
meals available in a school setting, recognizing the link
between adequate nourishment and educational performance.
b) Recent changes in federal menu planning regulations
resulting from the federal Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of
2010 that have increased costs so that they now exceed the
additional reimbursements provided for school meals.
c) Higher federal reimbursement rates for Alaska and Hawaii
approved by the United States Department of Agriculture in
recognition of the higher cost of living in those states.
d) Lack of an eligibility scale to qualify pupils for free
or reduced-price meals that takes into consideration
regions throughout the country with higher costs of living.
AJR 31
Page 2
2)Resolves that the Legislature supports federal standards for
healthy meals, including those standards recently adopted
pursuant to the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 and
urges the President and the Congress of the United States to
ensure that reimbursement rates are adequate to fully fund the
cost of producing a nutritious school meal relative to the
cost of living in the region served.
3)Resolves that the eligibility scale used to qualify families
for free and reduced-price meals be adjusted according to the
self-sufficiency index for the region served.
4)Resolves that the Chief Clerk of the Assembly transmit copies
of this resolution to the President and Vice President of the
United States, to the Speaker of the House of Representatives,
to the Majority Leader of the Senate, and to each Senator and
Representative from California in the Congress of the United
States.
FISCAL EFFECT : Unknown. This resolution is keyed non-fiscal by
the Legislative Counsel.
EXISTING FEDERAL LAW annually determines:
1)The Income Eligibility Guidelines for free and reduced price
meals, to account for changes in the Consumer Price Index.
2)The federal reimbursement rate for the National School Lunch
Program and the National School Breakfast Program to account
for changes in the Food Away From Home series of the Consumer
Price Index for All Urban Consumers.
COMMENTS : The National School Lunch Program is a federally
assisted meal program operating in over 100,000 public and
nonprofit private schools and residential child care
institutions. It provided nutritionally balanced, lowcost or
free lunches to more than 31 million children each school day in
2012. In 1998, Congress expanded the National School Lunch
Program to include reimbursement for snacks served to children
in afterschool educational and enrichment programs to include
children through 18 years of age. The Food and Nutrition
Service administers the program at the federal level. At the
state level, the National School Lunch Program is usually
AJR 31
Page 3
administered by state education agencies, which operate the
program through agreements with school food authorities.
According to the author, "AJR 31 recommends indexing school meal
eligibility and reimbursements to reflect costs. Federal child
nutrition programs provide a basic reimbursement for all meals
served -- an essential support for providers who sponsor the
programs. The law provides 'special assistance' for low income
households - those with income below 130% of the national
poverty line are eligible for free school meals, and households
between 130% and 185% receive school meals at a reduced price.
The problem is that the statute applies a single, national
standard for poverty; however, in some communities the cost of
living is substantially higher, resulting in families who are
living in poverty relative to their location but who find
themselves ineligible for the federal nutrition programs that
are intended to assist them. If we are to achieve President
Obama's goal of ending childhood hunger in America by 2015, we
must recognize that hunger and poverty are more prevalent in
communities with high costs of living, and the federal
government's solutions must reflect these disparities."
Further, the author argues, "The failure to recognize the local
costs of living is an issue of equity affecting California's
children, especially those in high cost regions like the Bay
Area. One size fits all does not protect the health and
well-being of California families that face severe economic
hardships as they try to put food on the table. Federal school
nutrition programs determine eligibility with a single
nationwide income level, which deny many families in high-cost
regions access to school meal programs that provide needed
breakfast, lunch and afterschool snacks. A family of four in
Oakland, California, needs $58,251 to be self-sufficient,
whereas, the national standard sets income for a family of four
at $42,643. If Congress recognizes that higher costs of living
have to be factored in determining poverty levels, we could
break the cycle of food insecurity, and put students on a path
of greater academic performance. California is home to four of
the top ten urban areas in the country with the highest cost of
living, according to the Council for Community and Economic
Research. Within California, San Francisco ranked as the most
expensive place to live followed by San Jose, Orange County and
Oakland, according to the index."
AJR 31
Page 4
The cost of living and the ability of a person to be
self-sufficient varies by region throughout the United States.
As stated in AJR 31, "a single-parent household with two
children in San Mateo County, California needs $56,280 to be
self-sufficient, while a similar family in Guernsey County,
Ohio, is self-sufficient with only $24,258." This example,
using the self-sufficiency index, clearly illustrates the
difference in cost of living from one area of the country to
another. Should these differences in cost of living be
considered when adjusting the federal government's income
eligibility scale for free and reduced priced lunches? Should
these differences in cost of living be considered when adjusting
the federal government's reimbursement rates to schools that
serve free and reduced price meals? The federal government
currently adjusts both the income eligibility scale and the
reimbursement rates for Alaska and Hawaii based on a higher cost
of living. In fact, the Federal Register states, "Due to a
higher cost of living, the average payments and maximum
reimbursements for Alaska and Hawaii are higher than those for
all other States." If the federal government takes into account
the higher cost of living in Alaska and Hawaii, shouldn't they
also recognize the differing costs of living by region across
the contiguous United States as well?
Prior Related Legislation : ACR 69 (Brownley), Chapter 151,
Statutes of 2008, supported the reauthorization of federal child
nutrition programs; urged the President and Congress to ensure
that reimbursement rates are adequate to fully fund the cost of
producing a nutritious school meal relative to the cost of
living in the region; and, resolved that the eligibility scale
used to qualify families for free and reduced-price meals be
adjusted according to the self-sufficiency index for the region
served.
Analysis Prepared by : Chelsea Kelley / ED. / (916) 319-2087
FN: 0003097