School Lunch?

I was reading this opinion on the NYTimes. To summarize briefly, a California woman (who lives near Berkley) wants public schools to go "local" and support farmer's markets and provide "better" food for children in public schools at only slightly more cost. I can go for some of her suggestions: having real cooks instead of pre-packaged and hyper-processed food that you pop in the microwave before slapping on Styrofoam trays to pass out to students. But, when she started saying that we should support local farmers by having them provide the food? I started laughing.

I look out my window and see 2 feet of snow on the ground in the end of February. We've had snow and freezing temperatures for 5 of the 7 months Zoë's been in school. Yes, you can "harvest" and "preserve" some of those bounteous crops for the winter, but providing thousands of school children with healthy produce? Yeah, this lady didn't exactly live in the midwest. I seriously have wondered where the "local" farmers' market gets some of their produce. I know Indiana grows corn, Michigan has great blueberries and apples, but bananas? tangelos? grapes? I don't think they grow so well here.

I think school lunch can be better- maybe even much better. I know our school tries (the menu sounds pretty good, and Zoë even told me she picked salad over what the "main" dish was that day). But, it isn't my homemade whole-wheat bread and an apple I just cut open that morning. I serve applesauce without any additional sugar or high fructose corn syrup (which I actually prefer to the hyper-sweetened stuff). I try to include something from each of the 4 food groups (veggies are hard for me, so I'm welcome to suggestions other than carrot or celery sticks- they are not eaten by my eldest). I also know what she doesn't eat because she brings home her left-overs. I can tell if she's had a balanced lunch or not. School lunch programs just don't do that. Who knows what the kid ends up eating. Many of them have gone to all processed foods that cater to kids tastes (pizza, chicken tenders, hot dogs). They say they have a balanced offering, but who wants to eat "strawberry glace" (which Zoë said was mushy strawberries in some shiny syrup, and she did NOT eat that).

I have some friends who qualify for the free lunch program. I am glad that they have this option to feed their children, and know that they are getting a decent lunch. I think (at least in our school district) that the lunches are ok. But, I wouldn't mind them being better. And, hey, it'd be a great way to stimulate the economy, right? More government subsidized spending on healthy food for kids. And, they should just make breakfast mandatory at school, since that's suppose to help kids do better at school. Oh, wait, but for my daughter that would be lunch since she eats "lunch" at 9"45 in the morning. Yeah, it's really more like an early breakfast. And, yes, she is ravenous when she gets home, despite the "snack" they have in the afternoon (an obligatory carbohydrate like sugared cereal, pretzles, raisins).

I'm all for supporting local, so far as it's feasible. Maybe we could then ease up on some of the subsidies. I'm all for improving school lunch to take out the processed meat. I'm all for having real cooks in a real kitchen at schools again (hey, more jobs, right? construction workers to build the kitchens, people to staff it, etc.) But, I think this lady's idea of going local is really only a possibility in Berkley, California. Or maybe Porterville. :)

BTW, do any of you have ideas for inexpensive snacks to provide for 24 kids? I've done the goldfish/pretzle/raisin route. I've even taken in string cheese (which for me was my favorite, but probably most expensive snack). It's sad they don't let people bring homemade items any more. No more cupcakes or handmade and kid decorated sugar cookies any more. How sad!