Photobucket


La Vida Locavore
 Subscribe in a reader
Follow La Vida Locavore on Twitter - Read La Vida Locavore on Kindle

A Teacher Crusades for Better School Food and Gets Stomped

by: euclidarms

Tue Apr 06, 2010 at 02:41:35 AM PDT


Bookmark and Share
( - promoted by JayinPortland)

By Ed Bruske
aka The Slow Cook

Mendy Heaps, a stellar English teacher for years, had never given much thought to the food her seventh-graders were eating. Then her husband, after years of eating junk food, was diagnosed with cancer, diabetes and high blood pressure and suddenly the french fries, pizza and ice cream being served in the cafeteria at rural Elizabeth Middle School outside Denver, Col., took on a whole new meaning.

euclidarms :: A Teacher Crusades for Better School Food and Gets Stomped
Heaps was roused to action. She started teaching nutrition in her language arts classes. She bombarded colleagues, administrators and the local school board with e-mails and news clippings urging them to overhaul the school menu. She even took up selling fresh fruits and healthy snacks to the students on her own, wheeling alternative foods from classroom to classroom on a makeshift "fruit cart," doling out apples for a quarter.

Finally, the school's principal, Robert McMullen, could abide Heaps' food crusade no longer. Under threat of being fired, Heaps says she was forced to sign a personnel memorandum agreeing to cease and desist. She was ordered to undergo a kind of cafeteria re-education program, wherein she was told to meet with the school's food services director, spend part of each day on lunch duty recording what foods the students ate, and compile data showing the potential economic impact of removing from the menu the "grab and go" foods Heaps found so objectionable.

"It was humiliating to stand in the cafeteria in front of the kids and the other teachers every day 'collecting data,' " Heaps says. "I called it my penance."

Heaps' husband, Robert Heaps, a retired police officer, said his wife is paying the price for rocking the boat in a small town. "Unfortunately, she works in a sem-rural district in a tight-knit community where change isn't always at the top of the list of things to do," he said. "My only concern for Mendy is that it seems she is fighting a losing battle. I don't care to see rifts created between her and the school board or the administration over an issue as important as this. I suspect she could become a target and subjected to hostile work conditions. But she appears to be up against a brick wall."

McMullen did not respond to multiple requests for comment.

The case of Mendy Heaps is a stark reminder that at least one voice is largely missing from the debate over school food that's getting so much attention lately: the voice of teachers. Teachers see what kids eat every day. They have opinions about the the food and how it impacts children's health and school performance. Yet they are almost universally silent.

With one notable exception: An Illinois teacher recently created an internet sensation by blogging anonymously and publishing photos about her self-imposed diet of cafeteria food. Calling herself "Mrs. Q," she frequently writes about her fear that she could be fired for exposing what kids are eating every day at school.

As I was gathering information for this report, Heaps said her local teachers union urged her to stop talking to me. "The union rep in my building came to my classroom and 'begged' me to stop everything I was doing," Heaps wrote in an e-mail. "She insisted they will find a way to 'get rid of me' and there is nothing the union will do to help me. HOW'S THAT FOR SUPPORT!!!"

Heaps says it isn't so much the food served in the federally subsidized cafeteria line that concerns her most, although that's bad enough: "Mashed potatoes and corn are usually served more than anything else, along with breaded chicken nuggets, chicken patties, and chicken tenders," she said. "Hamburger patties are also served a lot--drenched in canned gravy with mashed potatoes sitting on top of a slice of bread or on a bun with a serving of corn or green beans."

Students who choose the subisidized meal are also entitled to a salad bar. But only a small percentage of students at the school qualify for free or reduced-price meals based on family income and apparently fewer still choose to pay for the federally supported food. According to Heaps, some say they are embarrassed to be seen in the subsidized food line.

No, what really makes her blood boil are the alternate foods sold in what the school calls the "deli" line or "grab and go":  Pizza, corn dogs, Subway sandwiches, Chick-fil-A, Cheetos, nachos, fruit rollups, ice cream sandwiches and especially the "healthy" fries. "They call them 'healthy' because they're baked!" Heaps says. According to numbers she compiled while assigned to the cafeteria, somewhat fewer than half  the 170 students in seventh grade bring lunch from home. Only a very small number--15 to 24--eat the reimbursible "hot lunch," she said. Between 25 and 30 do not eat, and the rest--58 to 78--purchase food at the "grab and go."

It reminded Heaps too much of her husband's lousy diet. "When I met him about nine years ago, the only liquids that passed his lips were Pepsi and coffee and sometimes orange juice. He never ate fruit or vegetbles or dank water. The folks at McDonald's and Krispy Kreme knew him by his first name," Heaps said. "If he did cook for himself, it was processed food--pizza, pot pies, hot pockets, hot dogs, canned soups and chili, lots of chips and Hostess cupcakes...Bob had no knowledge of nutrition--tomato sauce and french fries were vegetables, Wonder bread was vitamin fortified, and apple pie was the same thing as eating an apple."

Robert Heaps was diagnosed with kidney stones and while he was being treated for that he was found to have bladder cancer. He underwent surgery three times to remove tumors, each time followed by weeks of chemo-therapy. Subsequently he was found to be suffering Type II diabetes and high blood pressure.

Mendy Heaps' concern about the food being served at school became urgent. "I started feeling guilty that I had never really done anything to change what was going on, even though I knew it was wrong."  Heaps said she could not understand why the school condoned students eating so much "junk" food. "Why do we serve or sell ANYTHING that isn't good for the kids?" she said. "I hate the food they serve, but I hate even worse that they sell so much JUNK along with the bad food they serve."

According to Heaps, food services director Susan Stevens and other school officials respond that students are entitled to "treats," and should be free to choose their own food. "They feel like my ideas are too radical and you should not 'restrict' kids," Heaps said.

Stevens did not respond to requests for comment. In an e-mail she sent to Heaps on April 28, 2009, she said, "My job is to provide each student with a healthy meal that adheres exactly to CDE [Colorado Department of Education] mandated nutrition guidelines. Our kitchens and staff are regularly audited to prove that we follow these guidelines and that we are all in compliance with state safety and health regulations."

Ron Patera, who oversees food services as the school system's finance director, said in a statement, "Ms. Heaps and I are both in support of providing nutritious and safe meals to Elizabeth's students so they have every opportunity to enhance their academic peformance. Elizabeth's schools meet and exceed the Federal and State laws governing the National School Lunch Program."

Federal nutrition guidelines currently do not cover foods sold outside the subsidized food line. Legislation making its way through the U.S. Senate would, for the first time, give the secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture authority to regulate all foods available in public schools. That measure reflects growing sentiment that schools need to address a nationwide epidemic of childhood obesity and stop selling nutritionally inferior food to students.

Heaps said one of her students was unable to use a standard-size desk in class because she was so heavy and had to be outfitted with a special table instead. That student habitually ate choco-tacos for lunch from the "grab and go"--two or three of them, according to Heaps--"and washed them down with a big Gatorade."

Klondike brand choco-taco is an ice cream dessert folded inside a cookie and dipped in chocolate. A single choco-taco contains 290 calories (40 calories more than a McDonald's cheesburger), 11 grams of saturated fat (four grams more than a BallPark beef hotdog) and 24 grams of sugar, (slightly less than a one-cup serving of Coca-Cola). "Of course the kids loved them and I'm sure the cafeteria made a boat load of money selling them," Heaps said. "They were meant for dessert, but what middle school kids do--when they have money and there is a 'concession stand' open at lunch--is they buy only 'dessert' and eat it for lunch. Duh--they're kids." Heaps said the school no longer offers choco-tacos.

Heaps said she was told that sales from foods such as nachos and ice cream were needed to support the lunch program. But student behavior after meals was so disruptive, classes following lunch were rotated so that no single teacher would be forced to bear the brunt of it every day. "They were hyper and crazy...and then they crashed," Heaps said.

At one point, Heaps began teaching nutrition with seventh-grade science teachers but found she could not reconcile what they were telling the children in class with what the children were being served in the cafeteria. In an e-mail she sent to the entire school staff, Heaps wrote: "When I started teaching nutrition a la language arts/science, I realized everything I was teaching did not go along with what is happening at our school when it comes to eating healthy. Do I simply tell the kids we need the money more than they need their future health? Or should I tell them that maybe only 'some' of them will get diabetes or cancer or have heart attacks--so go ahead and play the odds!"

Finally, Heaps took matters into her own hands and started selling what she considered healthier foods from her "fruit cart."

"I used the cart that my overhead projector sat on," Heaps explained. "Once I started selling fruit in my classroom and the kids knew, they kept coming to my room to buy it...I decided to take the fruit to them. I got some kids to help. We piled the fruit on the cart (we also had cheese sticks, granola bars, peanuts) and the kids pushed it around from room to room."

Heaps said the parents of one of her students were local produce distributors and started delivering fresh fruit to her on Wednesdays. "My sister gave me a small refrigerator for my classroom so I could keep things cold. The fruit they delivered was awesome. They let me buy it at a discount so I was getting strawberries, blueberries, pears, all different kinds of apples. It was great."

But Heaps made a mistake one day, taking the cart into the cafeteria during lunch. Federal rules forbid competing food being sold alongside the subsidized meal. "I had taken the Fruit Cart in the cafeteria because the kids wanted to have some fruit for lunch and the cafeteria either wasn't selling any, or the fruit I had was so much better, the kids wanted it instead." Then she sent an e-mail to the school staff--except the principal and assistant principal--in which she referred to the kichen workers as "evil lunch ladies." Heaps said she meant it as a joke, but the gaffe was her undoing.

In a personnel memo dated May 1, 2009, principal Robert Mcmullen wrote, in part, "Your continued campaign has caused dusruption to the normal operatons of the district Food Serivce Director, district Finance Director, myself, your colleagues and the school...Therefore, I am issuing the following directive:

"You will support and treat all school and district personnel and departments with respect.

"You will include Mr. Westfall [assistant principal] and myself on all mass emails from or to school accounts.

"You will cease the fruit cart sales after the end of the school year.

"You will spend at least 15 minutes each day on lunch duty for the remainder of the 2009 school year. This will give you an opportunity to observe what our students are truly eating at lunch.

"You will bring me hard numbers regarding the percentages of EMS [Elizabeth Middle School] students who do eat hot lunches each day. These numbers will include both the full lunch as well as the pizza, Chick-Fil-A, Subway, etc. served in the hot line.

"You will meet with Susan Stevens, before the end of this school year, to better understand the realities of the economics of Elizabeth Food Services. Let me know when that meeting will take place and report to me your findings.

"You will bring to me the data showing the economic costs of eliminating the 'Grab and Go' line as you have proposed.

"You were hired to teach Language Arts. You will ensure that all your units, lessons and materials focus on the Language Arts standards and benchmarks."

Heaps says she no longer teaches nutrition in her classes. But she does talk to her students about her husband and "how much our life changed when he got sick."

"When I got the memo, everyone became afraid," said Heaps. "If I tried to talk about the memo, no one wanted to listen. I got a little support from a couple of teachers, but not very much. Everyone wanted to forget about it and they wanted me to forget about it too...The only thing I still do is write letters and try to get someone interested! I'm working on one for Michelle Obama right now."

Tags: , , , (All Tags)
Print Friendly View Send As Email

Well, how about that... (4.00 / 2)
According to Heaps, food services director Susan Stevens and other school officials respond that students are entitled to "treats," and should be free to choose their own food. "They feel like my ideas are too radical and you should not 'restrict' kids," Heaps said.

Teach to tests and build an entire generation of compliant American "consumers" who are largely discouraged from thinking for themselves?

Check.

Suggest that an 8-year old should eat real food?

Holy shit, call in The Ghost of Joe McCarthy, we've got Commies in our midst!!!


Penny wise and... (4.00 / 2)
"You will bring to me the data showing the economic costs of eliminating the 'Grab and Go' line as you have proposed.

So after forming lifetime habits in his institution and assuming parental-level nutritional authority for all children under his care 5 days a week during the school year, I presume Principal McMullen and Elizabeth Middle School will also be personally picking up "the economic costs" later down the line brought about by dietary diseases, & c?

I'll volunteer right now to gather those statistics and deliver them to him myself.


Jay makes some good points (4.00 / 2)
some of which I agree with and some I don't, sort of.

While I understand where Mendy's coming from, and she's right on so many points, even people with good intentions can go too far, which she apparently did.

I wonder, did any parents complain about what she was doing? Given that at least some parents supported her efforts as detailed in Ed's article, that those parents could lend her some support in the form of letters written to the principal and administrative staff of the school as well as, perhaps, letters written to the school district.

I assume that the principal and other staff knew about the food cart. Did she get permission to run a food cart in the school, etc.? I don't know what the food regs are in Colorado, but here in Oregon, it's illegal under state laws, to sell any foods that a person purchases, without a food retailer's license. If you're going to store the food, it has to be done in an inspected device (refrigerator, cooler or other storage area). In Oregon, the only exemption is if you're growing, foraging and/or harvesting the stuff yourself, then no licenses or inspeciton are required (with certain conditions). If Colorado has similar laws, and she didn't have these licenses and/or inspections, she was operating an illegal business on school grounds, with the school's (prinicpal's) knowleage, during business hours, which could have left the school/school district open to any number of liability and or disciplinary actions on the part of the state/county/city food safety agency and/or state department of agriculture. In certain circumstances it's not even legal to give stuff away, which I think is completely assinine, but that's the way the rules are written sometimes.

I would think that, instead of the discplinary measures the principal imposed, a better course of action would have been to restrict Mendy's selling the fruit to only students that were either in her class(es) or students who came to her class room to purchase the fruits she was offering between classes, at lunch time, or before or after school hours. It would also have to have include that she obtain any licenses, etc. that were required to do what she wanted to do, and for her to indemnify the school district for any liability associated with the produce she was selling.

Normal people scare me.... But not as much as I scare them.


Actually, looking closer at the link (4.00 / 1)
I see that Lunchables have been around only since 1988, so two corrections.

First, I would have been in my early 20s when I first tried them and was probably eating them at a job site while I was working as a tile/stone apprentice.

Second, now I feel old because I was thinking of myself as an early 20 something as a 'kid'. Yikes!

Normal people scare me.... But not as much as I scare them.


[ Parent ]
Wow, confusion (4.00 / 2)
That lunchables comment should have gone in the comment thread for Jill's Girlscout badge diary. I must have hit a wrong key on the 'puter....

Normal people scare me.... But not as much as I scare them.

[ Parent ]
selling in schools (4.00 / 2)
Most schools have some sort of store where they sell all sorts of items, edible and otherwise, and very often run by students. I don't think they require special licenses. In fact, there was just a report about a school store in Los Angeles that is experiencing a sharp decline in sales since the state banned junk food in schools.

Ed Bruske aka The Slow Cook

[ Parent ]
Those stores may be run by the students (4.00 / 2)
but I'll bet they're licensed by the school, or covered by some other license required of school in order for it to sell/prepare/store the food.

I'll still bet that, for a teacher or other contractor to sell in the school, there would have to be some sort of licensing. If the teacher was selling in the school independantly, as Mendy is for the fruit, that he/she would have to be licensed as a food retailer or some such just like any other vendor.

The regulations covering food sellers, especially those selling stuff they don't grow themselves, can be byzantine at best. Even for things that one grows themselves the regs can be byzantine. For instance, if I grow salad greens, I can pick them and wash them and sell them without inspection. However, if I chop them and bag them as mixed greens I have to have inspection.

Joel Salatin's book Everything I Want To Do Is Illegal is a great window on such regulations and licenseing requirements. Even though that book covers primarily livestock production, a lot of what he talks about also applies in similar ways to produce too.

Normal people scare me.... But not as much as I scare them.


[ Parent ]
The point I was trying to make is that (4.00 / 2)
by running the fruit cart, the teacher essentially made herself into an independant food contractor.

Normal people scare me.... But not as much as I scare them.

[ Parent ]
Meny Heaps replies (4.00 / 2)
I asked Mendy to respond to the comments here, this is the reply she sent me last night:

"I hate to look like an idiot, but is there a way to reply to the comments on this blog?  I don't have time tonight to figure it out.  Too many papers to grade tonight...

I guess only the cafeteria can sell food...no one can "compete" with the cafeteria.  

The fruit cart...I guess I just started taking the fruit from room to room and no one said anything, so I just kept doing it.  Everyone knew I was doing it, but no one ever told me to stop or even monitored what I was doing...until the memo. Sometimes I worried about the kids not washing the fruit and getting sick.  Thank goodness that never happened!  I also made sure I never made any money.  Sometimes I lost money, but I figured that was better than making any.   I kept hoping someone would notice how successful it was - so I started pointing out to McMullen how it could be made into something profitable for Student Council or a club, but he never paid any attention to how successful it was.  And when he did "order" me to stop, he made sure I finished out the year with the cart so no one would miss it or complain when it didn't come around any more.

I got very little support from parents...but there was some.  One parent, however, complained (letters to school board and superintendent) that I was scaring the kids and making the girls anorexic. She also said I wasn't teaching language arts, but never came to look at my lesson plans.  No one ever came to look at my lesson plans when I taught nutrition - I ALWAYS covered state standards.
I maybe heard from 5 - 6 parents who were very happy, but there might have been more.  Unfortunately, most middle school parents just don't keep in touch unless you piss them off :)  At one time I had two moms who were really interested in helping me, but after the memo they disappeared - I've never heard from them again."

Ed Bruske aka The Slow Cook


[ Parent ]
Thanks Mendy for the reply and extra info (4.00 / 2)
and thank you too, Ed, for asking her and posting it here.

I wonder if a possible approach for next year would be to do something like getting the student council involved as you tried to do this year. Perhaps if enough students were interested in selling the fruit that the school would be more interested in letting them.

As far as the parents who were interested in helping, perhaps after the memo they felt that either this was something that was unacceptable to the school, or maybe they didn't want to get you into more trouble than the memo indicated you were already in?

I commend you for what you're doing, and I understand full well the situation with getting parents involved in school matters. I know that it can be difficult enough to get parents to come to parent/teacher conferences, etc., much less involved in school food issues. I think a lot of people are of the mind that we hire people for this and therefore we don't have to become directly involved in school issues ourselves.

And then too, a lot of people assume, that because food is over seen by the state and federal governments as well as the school districts, and it's approved for human consumption, and the subsidized food meets all the federal and state requirements, that it's also healthy food. Maybe they don't or didn't realize exactly what the kids are being fed or allowed to buy in the school cafeteria. Then, too, if the same type of food that's being served in the cafeteria is being served at home, the parents would think that the school food is fine to eat anyway.

Normal people scare me.... But not as much as I scare them.


[ Parent ]
I don't understand. (4.00 / 1)
Federal rules forbid competing food being sold alongside the subsidized meal.

If that's true, how do we get the following?

...pizza, Chick-Fil-A, Subway, etc. served in the hot line.

And, if the pizzas and Subways are being sold in some other building or some other room, couldn't Heaps have sold fruit there?


I'll bet that the fast food vendors are contractors (4.00 / 2)
to the school's lunch program. The teacher wasn't.

Normal people scare me.... But not as much as I scare them.

[ Parent ]
According to Ed (4.00 / 1)
the fast food is "alternate food," explicitly not part of the reimbursible meal program. My thinking is, a teacher should be able to sign a deal with the school and sell fruit where the fast people sell their food.

As I said, I'm not sure I understand.


[ Parent ]
Contracting with the school/school district (4.00 / 2)
is different than someone just going in and doing things on their own. That's the key difference.

The fast food may be 'alternate food' but the providers I'm sure are contracting with the school district, meaning that the school district is getting a percentage of the sales, or a fixed rate fee for the space. That's why it's different.

I think that if the teacher set herself up as a contractor with the school, they she'd probably be fine.

Of course that sets up lots of arguments about conflict of interest, insider access to venues for sales that outside vendors don't have (unfair competition), and she'd probably have to pay so much out in licensing, fees, liability insurance, bonds, etc. that it'd be way cheaper for her just to bring a big lunch back of fruit and share it with the class for free.

Aside from the production capacity which I don't have (but that I could aquire), it's all the damn hoops you have to jump through and the insurance, bonds, etc., that keeps me from even considering selling to schools or any other commercial buyer.

For instance, if I wanted to sell eggs to a restaurant, here's what I'd have to do - Build a food production building (for which I'd have to have plans engineered, and submitted to the food safety agency with the state), obtain a food retailers license, submit to inspections, get an egg handler's license (so I could grade and candle eggs). All of this would cost me several thousand dollars, and that's only because I know an engineer who could draw up plans for me for cheap, and because I can do all the building, plumbing and electrical myself (it still has to be permited and inspected, but because I'm a licensed contractor in Oregon and on my own property, or at least soon to be my own property, I can do that). And that's only if someone doesn't contest the permit for a home based non conforming business/building, which I would have the ever lasting pleasure of renewing ever year or 2 for food manufacturing in a RR5 (rural residential 5 acre zoning) plot of land.

Thank you but no, I'll just go ahead and keep selling eggs direct to home consumers, which require no permit, no license, no inspection, no fees, yadda yadda yadda....

Normal people scare me.... But not as much as I scare them.


[ Parent ]
competing foods (4.00 / 2)
Also called "a la carte" foods, they have to be sold separately under federal rules--often it's in a different room so as not to compete with the subsidized meals. But federal law also prohibits kids who are eating free or reduced-price meals (meaning subsidized) from being "overtly identified." Many kids who are otherwise entitled refuse to stand in the subsidized meal line because of the stigma that is often attached. Since they can't afford the a la carte food, they often don't eat at all.

Ed Bruske aka The Slow Cook

[ Parent ]
So, according to what you just said (4.00 / 2)
Mendy could have sold the fruit without competing with the subsidized meals, as long as she didn't sell in the actual cafeteria.

Where she crossed the line in that respect was when she started selling in the cafeteria itself?

Normal people scare me.... But not as much as I scare them.


[ Parent ]
byzantine indeed. nt (4.00 / 1)


[ Parent ]
Oy! (4.00 / 2)
you should try to look through the hoops I'm lookin' through! This is why people like me start getting a bit skittish when we see yet more food safety legislation coming down the pike.

Normal people scare me.... But not as much as I scare them.

[ Parent ]
How many schools... (4.00 / 1)
...still have subsidized lunch lines?

I spent all but one of my school years in urban public school districts in Northern New Jersey where the vast majority of students qualified for free lunches, from 1984 to 1997 K - 12.

We never had separate lines, but students with free or reduced-price lunches used tokens so it was easy to know "who was who".  Again, even though the vast majority of us qualified for free lunch, there was still a shame / pride thing going on there for some reason that I do remember.  But the schools to their credit tried as best they could to minimize "exposure".

As for me, even though I'm pretty absolutely sure we qualified at one time or another, my mother never applied for me or my sisters, and surely considered herself "too proud" to have her children on free lunch.  A psychological thing no doubt, since she and her 7 siblings grew up literally less-than-dirt-poor on welfare and housing assistance while bouncing around between Passaic and The Bronx, occasionally having to flee from an abusive alcoholic father with WWII-related PTSD...

But back to the point -

Many kids who are otherwise entitled refuse to stand in the subsidized meal line because of the stigma that is often attached. Since they can't afford the a la carte food, they often don't eat at all.

If there are any schools that still do have segregated lunch lines, well...

No excuse for that.  What's their problem?  Do they make those kids sit at the back of the cafeteria, too?

Any numbers on this out there?  It's not that hard to introduce a reasonable degree of discretion here.  Again, my schools were doing it 20-plus years ago.


[ Parent ]
possible clarification (4.00 / 1)
I think that if a student eats program food, there are not separate lines for students who pay "full" price and students who get free or reduced price lunches. The separate lines would be for students who eat from the reimbursible food line vs. eating "alternate food."

I don't know if my answer is correct, but do I at least understand your question correctly?


[ Parent ]
What caught my eye... (0.00 / 0)
Ed wrote above -

Many kids who are otherwise entitled refuse to stand in the subsidized meal line because of the stigma that is often attached.

Honestly, I never knew there was such a thing but I wouldn't be surprised if there was.  And of course, I only went to school in maybe 0.0000002% of America's public school districts.  So I wouldn't be surprised if there were such things.  But I sure hope there aren't, of course...


[ Parent ]
Oh, okay... (4.00 / 1)
I see what you mean here.  Sorry, I misinterpreted a "full vs. free" thing.  That was never mentioned...

But is there any other reason why there'd be a stigma in buying say an "ABC City Public Schools" hamburger, vs. buying Chick-Fil-A?


[ Parent ]
Further thoughts... (4.00 / 1)
I think, as I've said before, that New Jersey was always somewhat better than most states when it came to school lunches - soda was never allowed in vending machines, and we never had branded fast food in the cafeteria - but, of course we had chips and Oreos and crap for sale in the cafeteria, sadly.  

But there was always only one line, whether a student was buying school cafeteria lasagna or Wise potato chips.


[ Parent ]
My kids graduated from (4.00 / 1)
high school in the late '80s and early '90s. Their Baltimore high school had separate lines.

[ Parent ]
Fascinating... (0.00 / 0)
This is fascinating to me, and makes me wonder why New Jersey apparently has done so much right when other states have done so much wrong?  And do they still?  I wish I could get into Oregon schools, see what's going on here?

Were the two lines in Baltimore one for, say, cafeteria fried chicken and the other for like chips and cookies?  Did Baltimore Public Schools sell soda and branded fast food?

The one exception to my apparent blissful and sheltered New Jersey school food experience was the (freshman high school) year I spent in Arizona (in Maricopa County, in a small town just outside of Phoenix), where I absolutely remember separate lines... 3 of them, if I recall correctly.

In that school we had a "generic cafeteria line", which I'm almost certain probably sold Carl's Jr. or In-N-Out burgers and fries only without the corporate branding; and then there were two other lines, one of which was a chicken chain and the other of which was I'm almost positive Taco John's, the midwestern-and-southwest low-rent version of Taco Bell.  The latter two sold food with corporate packaging, logos and all.  Fast food restaurants in our high school, literally.

And on top of that, we had a soda fountain right in the cafeteria with branded Coca Cola cups of 3 sizes, which said sizes ranged from "much larger than a 14-year old should be drinking" to "absolutely ridiculous".

I loved it at the time, but I definitely noticed the difference from NJ to Arizona.


[ Parent ]
lines (4.00 / 1)
One line would have included whatever was on the reimbursible menu that day, inclucing fries and cookies. The other line was corporate fast food.

I don't know about sodas, but those years were before there was great concern, so sodas might have been there.


[ Parent ]
Corporate fast food... (4.00 / 1)
Wow, so just a few miles south of us*, Maryland was selling corporate fast food, while New Jersey didn't?

What made for the difference?  Why didn't New Jersey go in for that, while our neighbors did?

Did Pennsylvania?  Delaware?  New York?  Hmmm, in the latter case I can ask a crapload of childhood friends from Queens and Nassau in Long Island (not sure why I haven't before)...

Lee!  And RossL!

Did / do Pennsylvania schools sell fast food and soda?

*Well, I was way up north personally, but NJ as a state itself, in its southernmost form, reaches down to roughly the same latitude as DelMarVa


[ Parent ]
history (4.00 / 1)
I'd read a good history of U.S. school food since the 1940s, or even earlier, showing variations both in time and place.

[ Parent ]
Same here... (0.00 / 0)
Jill, you wanna write it?

If not, well maybe I can jump on it!  Jill unquestionably gets the "neutral" thing more than I do, though...


[ Parent ]
Rephrase... (0.00 / 0)
I "get" the neutral thing myself, I just don't see any need for it...

I like calling bullshit, and sparking fires whenever I can.

Again, that's why I'm not a spokesperson for our movement.

;-P


[ Parent ]
Yer a scrappy feller Jay! nt (4.00 / 1)


Normal people scare me.... But not as much as I scare them.

[ Parent ]
Food from home (4.00 / 1)
I wonder if the kids bringing food from home get food that is better or worse than the food available at school.

You know, your question is relevant to a Jamie Oliver (4.00 / 2)
interview I watched yesterday. They asked him about food brought from home and he said a lot of it was as bad as what was served in the schools.

I remember when I brought lunch from home - a sandwich, a bag of chips, cheetos, etc. (a very samll bag to be sure but chips, etc. just the same). I think that's about all I ever brought. The sandwich would be tuna, lunch meat (salami, pastrami, bologna, etc.). I would also have something like soup or spaghetti for breakfast (which would have been left over from dinner the day before).

Usually I didn't take fruit. We had apple, peach, prune, and fig trees, and the grape vines, but of course those fruits weren't ripe during school season.

Now, my next question - would the lunches I took to school have been as bad as the school lunches that are being served today? Kind of the same foods, but way smaller portions. The chips my mom sent with us were about half the size bag as you'd find in the convenience store today.  

Normal people scare me.... But not as much as I scare them.


[ Parent ]
food brought from home (4.00 / 2)
There has been some research to show that food brought from home is worse than what's served in school.

Ed Bruske aka The Slow Cook

[ Parent ]
Political Activism Blogs - BlogCatalog Blog Directory
Menu

Make a New Account

Username:

Password:



Forget your username or password?


Notable Diaries
- The 2007 Ag Census
- Cuba Diaries
- Mexico Diaries
- Bolivia Diaries
- Philippines Diaries
- My Visit to Growing Power
- My Trip to a Hog Confinement
- Why We Grow So Much Corn and Soy
- How the Chicken Gets to Your Plate

Search




Advanced Search


Blog Roll
Blogs
- Beginning Farmers
- Chews Wise
- City Farmer News
- Civil Eats
- Cooking Up a Story
- Cook For Good
- DailyKos
- Eating Liberally
- Epicurean Ideal
- The Ethicurean
- F is For French Fry
- Farm Aid Blog
- Food Politics
- Food Sleuth Blog
- Foodgirl.ca
- Foodperson.com
- Ghost Town Farm
- Goods from the Woods
- The Green Fork
- Gristmill
- GroundTruth
- Irresistable Fleet of Bicycles
- John Bunting's Dairy Journal
- Liberal Oasis
- Livable Future Blog
- Marler Blog
- My Left Wing
- Not In My Food
- Obama Foodorama
- Organic on the Green
- Rural Enterprise Center
- Take a Bite Out of Climate Change
- Treehugger
- U.S. Food Policy
- Yale Sustainable Food Project

Reference
- Recipe For America
- Eat Well Guide
- Local Harvest
- Sustainable Table
- Farm Bill Primer
- California School Garden Network

Organizations
- The Center for Food Safety
- Center for Science in the Public Interest
- Community Food Security Coalition
- The Cornucopia Institute
- Farm Aid
- Farm and Ranch Freedom Alliance
- Food and Water Watch
-
National Family Farm Coalition
- Organic Consumers Association
- Rodale Institute
- Slow Food USA
- Sustainable Agriculture Coalition
- Union of Concerned Scientists

Magazines
- Acres USA
- Edible Communities
- Farmers' Markets Today
- Mother Earth News
- Organic Gardening

Book Recommendations
- Animal, Vegetable, Miracle
- Appetite for Profit
- Closing the Food Gap
- Diet for a Dead Planet
- Diet for a Small Planet
- Food Politics
- Grub
- Holistic Management
- Hope's Edge
- In Defense of Food
- Mad Cow USA
- Mad Sheep
- The Omnivore's Dilemma
- Organic, Inc.
- Recipe for America
- Safe Food
- Seeds of Deception
- Teaming With Microbes
- What To Eat

User Blogs
- Beyond Green
- Bifurcated Carrot
- Born-A-Green
- Cats and Cows
- The Food Groove
- H2Ome: Smart Water Savings
- The Locavore
- Loving Spoonful
- Nourish the Spirit
- Open Air Market Network
- Orange County Progressive
- Peak Soil
- Pink Slip Nation
- Progressive Electorate
- Trees and Flowers and Birds
- Urbana's Market at the Square


Active Users
Currently 0 user(s) logged on.

Powered by: SoapBlox