Task Force Committee Meeting Transcription by tac49996


                                          Task Force Committee Meeting
                                                September 2, 2004
Task Forces Members: Nancy Becker (Oregon Dietetic Association), Chuck Bennett (COSA), Pat Burk (ODE), John
Chism (Oregon Health Services), Paul Cosgrove (Community Health Partnership), Noelle Dobson (Upstream Public
Health), Keri Dehen (Coca Cola Bottling of Oregon representing Bottling Association), Nina Fekaris (Oregon School
Nurses Assn), Judy Fry (American Diabetes Association-Volunteer), Ruby Haughton (CareOregon), Ron Hittner (Hittner &
Associates), Lou Leberati (Vend West Services representing Vending & Snacks Association), Beth Nead (PTA), Kristy
Obbink (Portland Public Schools), Joan Ottinger (NCO), Angie Peterman (OSBA), Robin Stromberg (OSFSA President),
Tom Welter (OSAA)
Task Force Members Absent: Tina Kotek (Children First of Oregon), Carolyn Smith-Evans (OEA), Cate Wilson (Oregon
Medical Association)
Gallery Attendees: Joyce Dougherty (ODE), Heidi Dupuis (ODE), Mary Lou Hennrich (Community Health Partnership),
Victoria Warren-Mears (OHSU), David Williams (OSBA); Jerry Jones (North Clackamas SD), Sally Hill (NW Automatic
Vending Association-NAVA), Jennifer Parenteau (ODE), Genevieve Remus (ODE), Joy Marshall (Stand for Children),
Reanne Betcher (ODE intern), Rich Femenela (NW Automatic Vending Assn), Joan Buck (Oregon Softdrink Assn), Patti
O’Sullivan (PPS)
Facilitator: Ron Hittner
Scribe: Dana Christensen (ODE)
Agenda Items:
 Meeting Kick-off and Agenda Overview
 Review and approval of minutes from August 11 meeting task force meeting
 Revisit ground rules
     Heidi Dupuis: The School Nutrition Environment Today – What’s Regulated And What’s Not
     David Williams: Work being done by OSBA; state and national guidelines
 Clarify/confirm objectives
 In / Out scope focus (follow up from last meeting’s discussion)
 Discuss future process
 Summarize day and confirm next meeting time and location
 Meeting conclusion

Meeting Kick-off and Agenda Overview
    • Recording meeting
Introductions to new attendees
Review and approval of minutes from August 11 meeting task force meeting
    • A recommendation was made that the meeting minutes be approved. It was seconded. The task force members
       unanimously approved the August 11 meeting minutes.
Revisit ground rules
    • Everyone is equal, and all thoughts and opinions count
    • Allow everyone to complete their thoughts
    • Participate in the discussion, practice active listening
    • Whenever possible avoid the use of jargon
    • Refrain from sidebar discussions
    • We are free to disagree about ideas, not people
    • Approach the discussion from the standpoint of our objectives
    • Respect people and the process
Presentation One:
    Heidi Dupuis (ODE) – The School Nutrition Environment Today – What’s Regulated And What’s Not
    Regulations Governing Food In Schools (handout)
    • National School Lunch Program (NSLP) has federally set regulations, but does not regulate all foods sold in
    • Five areas where food is available in school 1) school meals, 2) competitive foods, 3) foods of minimal nutritional
       value, 4) foods sold in schools, 5) food available in schools
       1. School meals are School Breakfast, National School lunch, Afterschool snack Programs. Federal regulations.
       2. Federal regulations definition for Competitive foods: Any foods sold in competition with the Program to children
           in food service areas during the lunch periods such as milk, juice, meal items sold individually, cookies, nuts,
           chips, bottled non-carbonated beverages. Federal and state regulations. (Sales Policy No Federal and state
           nutrition standard)
       3. Food of Minimal Nutritional Value (FMNV): subset of competitive foods such as carbonated beverages, popsicles,
           gum, life savers, cough drops, gummi bears, licorice, cotton candy, marshmallows, etc. Federal or state regulation.
       4. Same as those listed under competitive foods and foods of minimal nutritional value No federal or State regulation.
       5. Food available in schools such as classroom rewards and/or class parties. No federal or State regulation.

   Vending Machines in Schools (handout)
   State Competitive Foods Policies –updated by USDA September 2002 (handout)

Questions: Are competitive foods sold at cafeteria level?
Answer: Usually when you walk into the cafeteria there are two lines that are being operated by the school food
service: one is offering the unitized meals and the other is offering ala carte items.

Vending machines are not the only competitive foods. We are not talking about vending machines - they are a method
of service. We are talking about the choices that are in any place at any point in service whether it be an ala carte line,
or vending machine.

This is not about the vending industry. For example, vending machines, in many cases, have timers and local board
policy in the contract about what goes in the machines. In some ways, it is easier to regulate that choice then it is
what appears on an ala carte line, in the student store or other things like that. It is not about any one industry. It is
about the choices that are available to the students.

Some high schools have vending machines, but in the middle schools they have vending machines for drinks - but not
a lot of vending machines that offer candy, etc. Candy, cookies, etc. is sold by the cafeteria in the ala carte item line.

Most vending machines are close to gyms and give revenues to schools for the activities that are used in them.

Question: Money accrues to the school food service fund or the school or student organizations as defined by school
boards. Each of the 198 school districts decides what happens to the funds?
Answer: Yes. Ideally, that would be what would happen most often. I want to go back and do some history about
how we got to competitive foods. Competitive foods have been an issue in the National School Lunch Program since
its inception. If you go back and read the history, it is really interesting – all about competitive foods and what they
were offering back in 1940 for competitive foods. But in 1980, there was a drastic cut in funding for school nutrition
programs, and it was at that point in time where school food service divided from just serving the unitized meal to
having to look for other areas of revenue, because their Federal funding was undercut. There was then the
development of ala carte. Most school districts, for 20 years, have by default had ala carte lines and their funds are in
the purview of the school food service funds. For the other items that could be in the food services space would need
action to direct where those revenues are going.

Question: Do school boards have as an agenda item in the school board meetings, where they say we have $5,000
or whatever the amount?
Answer: No. They would say we want to have vending machines for our Student Body Association in the food
service and have those revenues generated by those machines or the student store approved to the ASB funds.

Question: Do school boards say we need more money let’s get some competitive foods to raise more money? Is that
how it happens? How do competitive foods get in the school?
Answer: The vending machines in the Grants Pass School District evolved. It started in the football field concession
areas. The funds do not go to the food service department unless it is designated by the board to go to the student
organization. At high school level four organizations/student bodies receive funds from those designated machines. If
it is not designated to that student body group it will not go back to that food service organization. Our district
evaluates that every year and decides if this group can have it or if another group comes in. Funds are spread out
among those four groups.

Contracting is a local issue. What a local board negotiates with a company or how they do their own food service line
is a local issue. The ala carte operation is normally part of the district food service program whereas, other things like
a student store, or vending machine operations is usually something that either deals with student body activities or
goes into the school general fund. If there are student body funds, there are expectations that those funds are
managed in a responsible way, such as knowing where the money went, someone is accounting for the money and
knows how it is spent but that operation is basically a local operation. The state agency level does not get involved on
how the local districts develop contracts with vendors.

The ala carte line is a competitive market against the school program and must be a balance and not put high volume
sales in ala carte and lose out on the reimbursable side of the student meals. Ala carte sales look great but losing
more district wide by not running through the reimbursable side.

Question: Does the food service director, business manager or deputy clerk or the cook manager decide how much
and what to put in a la carte? What kinds of requirements are there around the training in nutrition for the food service
director, business manager or deputy clerk or the cook manager?
Answer: Yes, that is correct. There are no requirements for any of those positions as far as nutrition goes. Child
Nutrition Programs staff provides training and up until this reauthorization the training was optional. And, with the new
reauthorization bill, the National School Lunch Program will have mandatory trainings annually for the sponsors. But
we moved from optional trainings to mandatory trainings through Federal regulation. But there are no (as teachers)
certification requirements for any of those positions as far as school nutrition goes.

Question: I’m not sure if this is on the same topic because I am curious about competitive foods sort of generally.
We’ve been talking about ala carte and vending machines and other things in the food line, but what’s the competition
– I’m thinking of the broader term competitive – provided by food from home, bag lunches and off-campus purchases?
Do you have any feel for what those bag lunches look like in terms of nutritional value? Do you have any kind of rules
relative to food from home? Do you know anything from food from home? Do you know anything about the numbers?
And, I guess the other, is off-campus too. As competition, do you know anything about that?
Answer: Well, because all of those happen outside the school environment, we have no real say about how the
quality of foods that are offered off-campus or come from home. What I can tell you is that 45% of the students
enrolled in Oregon schools participate in the National School Lunch Program.

Question: 55% of the students do not participate in the National School Lunch Program?
Answer: 55% of the students are having food from other sources, it could be bag lunch, ala carte, vending machine,
or off-campus. If I look at the number of meals served over the last school year and compare it on a daily basis to the
number of children that are enrolled in Oregon schools, it’s around 45% that ate a meal during it.

Question: If a child eats lunch at school he could go through the school lunch line or he could have gone through the
ala carte line. How do you count that? The student eats a la carte is that student in the count of 45%?
Answer: The student eating ala carte is not counted. The number of kids eating at school or purchasing food from
school is greater than 45%. It is just 45% that eat the National School Lunch Program. The remaining 55% are having
food from other sources that isn’t being reimbursed by the Federal government.

Question: Is there is someplace/somebody that knows how that 55% falls apart?
Answer: Each individual school district should know that.

Question: As part of their policy decision, local school district would be dealing with that 55% and they would know
these numbers?
Answer: They would not know the number of people who would be eating food from home. They might know a little
bit more about the ala carte line.

Question: They know how much is sold?
Answer: They know how much is sold and the number of meals that are sold. The policy maker closest to the data is
the local school board.

The term competitive foods (in this case) have a very specific definition in Federal regulation. It talks about food sold
during school time at the same time that the School Lunch and School Breakfast and Afterschool Program are being
served. There is a specific Federal regulation.

Competitive foods definition: Single foods sold in competition to federal program meals in the food service area during
meal times. $ accrue to school food service fund or school or student organizations as defined by School Board.

There are a variety of sources that students can get food. We all have concerns about what kids eat. Do we try to
control what parents send to school with the kids? It is difficult to get kids to eat a balanced lunch that has been sent
from home, for example. We do not have regulations about that.

It would be totally impossible to regulate what comes from home. But I do want to point out something that came to
me last meeting when we were talking about the things that are sold off-campus, because it sounded to me that some
people have the idea that all kids can go off-campus. That is not always the case. Except for high schools, they’re not
allowed to go off-campus. And some high schools even have closed campuses but elementary students and middle
school students don’t go off-campus to buy things – it’s a closed campus. To go home for lunch, they have to get
special permission. They have to have something signed by their parent. Except for high schools, and that’s just that
percentage of kids, those kids are not going off-campus and buying things for lunch. What they’re buying for lunch,
they’re getting out of the cafeteria.

Depending on what is available in their school, it may not just be from the cafeteria, because they can’t leave school
campus. The nutrition programs in the schools are in competition with themselves. The needs are the kids are trying
to be met.

Question: Are there any competitive foods that bring money back on Federal dollars? If they sell 20 Snicker bars or
20 cases does that daily requirement in that bar gain them any Federal monies?
Answer: No, in order to get a Federal reimbursable meal, they have to sell the meal as a unit, it has to meet the meal
pattern that’s been defined and those items do not fit the meal pattern.

Question: Has a school every received federal reimbursement for a non-reimbursable meal?
Answer: No. It has never happened. But, when you read articles, that would be the conclusion that you would come
to that a student can go to the cafeteria and get pop and a cookie and that the school’s going to get Federal
reimbursement for the pop and the cookie, and that is absolutely false!

The cafeteria has to serve what is called the “unit meal”, the unitized meal to get reimbursement. The school district
ends up suffering at times financially, if we don’t encourage kids to take that unitized meal. Because, what happens,
for example, is you get a far higher percentage of elementary level of kids participating than you do at the high school
level. And, so, the amount reimbursed to the district for food service gets lowered because of lower participation. So,
the only thing that counts, in terms of that Federal reimbursement is whether or not you sold that unitized meal.

Competitive foods is competing with the school meal, anything sold competes with that school meal. Nutrition services
compete with themselves. Is it a good thing? No. Would I rather serve just the school meal? Absolutely. Are there
kids who wouldn’t participate if it were only the meal? Yes. We try to meet the needs of all the kids. Portland has a
set of standards for the ala carte items in the cafeteria for middle schools, and has vending machines that dispense
some of those foods that we have defined as “okay.” Candy bars aren’t one of them. Pop isn’t either.

You have an environment in the middle schools, where we do sell ala carte items in the cafeteria, where the
reimbursable meal is being sold at the same time. We try to balance because we’re registered dietitians and we are
also business people. We are trying to balance the nutrition with the money, just like everybody is. But it’s very hard
when there is a teacher right outside the cafeteria trying to earn money for a special event selling Crispy Crème.
That’s the kind of thing we deal with in Portland that FEELS unfair and that there isn’t a level playing field. Now,
should that be controlled locally? Yes. Absolutely, it should be. And do we have policy around that? We do. And,
so, then, again, it comes back to how do you enforce those policies?

Question: Is ala carte always sold in the school line?
Answer: It can be in the school line. It could be a vending machine. Ala carte is a method of delivery, a delivery tool.

History of vending: approximately 1970 to 1978 Marshfield High School’s only delivery of food service was through a
vending machine – hot and cold vending machines. Cooks prepared food behind, stuffed them in, people came
through with their credit card, which wasn’t a credit card in those days, put their little ticket, opened the door and also
the people that didn’t quality for free lunch could put money into that vending machine. We did that at Ashland High
School and we did that at Marshfield High School for many years. And, then, all of a sudden, contract food came into
the picture – Marriotts and all the many numerous people who do food service in hospitals. That’s when we got out of
the food service business at a high school level, most of us vendors. And, then, most people asked us to partner with
them and dispense some of the cold food items and some of the refrigerated items. And, then, as we got moved out of
the cafeteria and they became more into their lines selling salad and ala carte lines and selling other stuff, we got
moved out to the hall, because the Principal wanted money. And, then, that’s when we started selling more other stuff.
And now we’re going back the other way as a portion of my vending machine has got more healthy stuff. I put
refrigerated milk machines.

A kid could walk through the line and there would be a set of apples or extra milk that they want to buy – that’s ala
carte. But they could just as easily buy that same apple or that same carton of milk out of a machine. It doesn’t matter
if it is vending or other. A vending machine is simply away of delivering a choice.

Question: Is it still, basically, three choices school food, ala carte and other?
Answer: Yes. This task force is trying to define the “other” foods.
Competitive food doesn’t really describe what the work we’re discussing, because it is greater than just what happens
during mealtime in the food service area, which is the very definition of competitive foods. We have a district, in the
state of Oregon, who is experimenting with vending machines for providing reimbursable meals. Those vending
machines are out away from the cafeteria where kids are but they don’t have to be staffed.

Look at it as two issues or two types. There’s the reimbursable USDA-approved meal served by food service
organizations in our schools throughout the state and then everything else that’s served basically falls into ala carte. It
may be served through a service point or line in the school cafeteria area. It might be served through vending
machines somewhere. It might be a separate fundraiser. It might be a student store across the campus. That’s just a
different method.

Question: Is somebody’s planning all the ala carte stuff?
Answer: Maybe or maybe not. The districts that have food service directors and people who are educated and kind of
understand the balance are trying to plan what is sold extra. Ala carte generally means that money goes back to the
nutrition services department. The vending machine in the hall, where those milk sales goes to the school, we
wouldn’t necessarily call that ala carte. Ala carte goes to the food services whereas the other the stuff goes to other

In terms of the work in this group, that split works. We have those that are regulated and then we have, for lack of a
better word, ala carte, which is everything else.

Question: How many food service directors are qualified Registered Dietitian? It is an important decision that they’re
making – the money versus nutrition.
Answer: There is not that many but it is growing. There are many kitchen managers or directors that started from
cook and moved their way up, it’s only been the last eight years that there have been vacancies and a lot of districts
increasing their requirements of that director over that department, requiring them to have an Registered Dietitian or
being certified.

Question: How much of that 45% of the food students eat in the school lunch program is regulated by USDA
regulations. In other words, there’s an assumed nutritional value to hot lunches in every part of the state, because it’s
under that guidance. Do I understand it right?
Answer: Yes. Right.

Question: That whole batch of food is under nutritional control from the Feds and we don’t know how the 55% breaks
out so we don’t know right now - and I still wonder why this hasn’t been examined – because it appears if there’s a
lack of nutritionists in the school district that would have been a role the department would have picked up in its
nutritional role, or kind of its advisory role, to assist them, not in the candy bar section, but in that kind of ala carte but
your pizza should be low fat kind of stuff. Is that covered, too?
Answer: Right, and it is. We do.

Question: Where do we need these - you’re describing sort of 114 missing nutritionists. Do we need them out there
in these small districts or do you guys help them?
Answer: School Nutrition Programs has a staff of five. We do offer nutrition training for site staff and school district
staff in a variety of venues throughout the school year. The hindrance that we have had in the past is that the trainings
have been voluntary. There was no state requirement, no Federal requirement to make people come. Now, with the
reauthorization starting July 2005, our trainings will to be mandatory.

Question: You said the trainings are going to be mandatory? Who is the training for?
Answer: The trainings will be for whoever is guiding the food service program.

You have a food service program and the food served is guided by Department of Agriculture regulations so we have
an obligation to make sure that the people that are managing that part of the program are informed of their responsibly
under the Federal regulations. That’s the mandatory part of the training that they receive.

Question: The other question is on that the remaining 55% the department offers a lot of guidance in whatever small
percentage remains as the ala carte portion. Is staff available to the business manager or whoever calls? Do we need
to go to the legislature for 114 additional food service managers in school districts? Is that really what you would be
Answer: Child Nutrition Programs provides guidance. Following up guidance requires implementation at the school
district level. We do not see implementation at the school district level, regardless of how reasonable, how
manageable our recommendations. Our program has not only nutritional implications for the students but also has
fiscal implications for the school district. We’re not only working on the financial piece, it’s a balancing act between the
nutrition and the financial piece. For the smaller school districts, we’re working with them on both sides of the
question. My opinion is that the work of this wide broad based group will have more weight than a single individual
from the Department of Education giving their recommendations. We can have training but what gets people excited
is when they have a person who’s done it and shares their experience in doing it. That is what gets people to move.

There are three important issues:
1. Is regulation the answer? The answer is probably not. We have quite a bit of regulation that is already in place that
   is not fully monitored or implemented. Do you necessarily get that just by regulation? The answer is “no”.
2. There is need for more research, and that research is a resource-intensive activity. Who does the research and
   who pays for it? What can we do as a community to further research in this area to answer some of these
   questions? There are some areas that we need more work, that have been the work of the Health Kids Learn
   Better Network, which most of you are a part of.
3. What is the degree of professional development and training that is available? There are a number of ways to think
   about that. The Oregon School Food Service Association (OSFSA) is a statewide organization. How do we work
   with OSFSA concerning various delivery models? ODE has a television studio that links to every Education
   Service District in the state. There is a way for us to participate in a more coordinated way in delivering basic
   information to people. This conversation is not necessarily about regulation; it is about trying to find ways to move
   forward in a variety of areas that we can work with together.
Requiring a degree of professionalism in our nutrition services people is going to be difficult. Large districts have the
money to hire people of high caliber to run the program. But a small school district that has a couple hundred kids, if
you require them to hire a registered dietitian that would kill them! They’d have to fire a couple teachers to run that
food service program. That would be just a terrible requirement.
We need better data, looking at how we prepare existing people and recognizing how this plays out in the local school
district – there’s a lot of improvement that can be made without going to increasing regulation.
I’d like to encourage us to turn to the discussion from the standpoint of our objectives. I don’t think that professional
development for our staff is not the reason why we’re here. So, I’d just like us to refocus on our objectives. And,
regarding, comments about that 55% of students and how much of that is bought from a vending machine or brought
from home, from my standpoint, even if it’s 5% of that 55% is getting their food from an ala carte or a vending
machine, the point is that it’s unregulated and it doesn’t have standards around it and we’re serving it to our students
during a school day. I think that’s what we’re here to discuss.
I worked with the Head Start Program in Lane County and I was the health services coordinator and I had a dozen
cooks working under me at different sites. None of them were Registered Dietitians and they all had whatever minimal
training we could provide. But what they did have was clear regulations about what the food had to be that they
served. And I understand that there’s a money issue here, and I think that having clear regulations and guidelines
allows people to provide healthy food and make healthy choices for ala carte foods, because they have those
regulations and guidelines. And when they don’t, then you probably need someone who has good training and
credentials to make those choices.
The erroneous assumption is that there are no regulations. Districts all over this state have board policies, which are
their regulations and rules that guide decisions that are being made about foods that are being served, not just foods
that qualify under USDA for reimbursable meals, but also those foods that will be allowed to be sold, whether it’s
through ala carte sales in a cafeteria or a vending machine or anything else. And so I think it’s inappropriate to make
the assumption that we don’t have any rules.

Question: Can we get access to those board policies?
Answer: That is part of what David Williams (OSBA) will discuss in his presentation.

A Principal at a school has created a small new area to serve food where we had vending last year and left them on all
the time. They asked us to time out the machines during the times when students will be sitting and eating – to time
those vending machines out during that lunch period. They regulate themselves a lot more than we think.

This type of discussion is exactly the kind of thing we need to have at a local level. How do we do that? How do we
get all the players to sit down and have these chats? We’re talking Principals and volunteer parents who sell food and
a representative from the Teacher’s Association. How do we get those people around this table so we can have these
conversations to best fit each individual school district? Food service programs can’t do it alone. Although they are
following USDA guidelines and trying to do the best they can with ala carte foods and trying to see that the Principal is
following the regulations on competitive foods, it’s not going to work unless there is buy-in at the local level.

There are a number of things that could come out of a group like that – that could come out of a group like this – a
recommendation to have a conversation at the local district level about these issues and how that might take place.
That’s a very good idea – excellent idea.

Concerning the 55% - at the elementary level every student is going to have a meal, whether it’s from the food service
or from home. If one site is doing 60% or 70%, the balance is bringing it in from home. With the secondary level,
there are ala carte sales. I know about how many students are participating in there and add that to my reimbursable
side, and I can tell how many are not eating, whether they’re going outside to play or bringing something from home.
The ala carte area for our secondary level, if a parent puts money into a student account, that parent has to authorize
those funds be used into the ala carte area. It’s a system we have that takes a lot of pressure off me. If a student
goes home and says he had this snack and juice and he’s still hungry, we pull it up and we find out the student went
through the ala carte side and the parent has already granted permission. Those funds going into that student account
is regulated.

Question: What is the average proportion of kids who are either doing your subsidized – your Federal program - or
ala carte versus home?
Answer: The figures can vary by district because the percent of low-income families. High school’s have lower
participation because of open campus.

Gallery comments:

Question: With meals sold as a unit, most of all the elementary schools at Bend now have a salad bar, so that the hot
portion comes on the tray and the other portion comes from the salad bar. Is that considered a reimbursable meal?
Answer: Yes.

Question: Even if the kid gets just ranch dressing or something from the salad bar part, it is still considered the offer of
the vegetables and fruit and stuff?
Answer: No. In Oregon, most of our schools have variety menus, so there are multiple entrees and there are multiple
fruits and vegetables available. And to best facilitate them serving and being able to select themselves, they have a
single point of service and they collect their items to meet the Federal guidelines and that whole unit has a meal price:
elementary $1.50 if you’re a paid student, $0.40 if you’re reduced price student. I can go down the line and get my
entree and my fruit and vegetable servings and my milk and show up at the point of service and I’m counted at that
point for my meal components. We also have “offer versus serve”, which requires that the program plan a complete
meal and is instituted as an effort to reduce waste. The child can decline two of those five menu items and still have a
reimbursable meal.

Question: If a student paid for their meal and then went through the line, then at the end of the line there’s not a
reimbursable meal would that school or that district be in out of compliance?
Answer: There has to be a reimbursable meal to get reimbursed. The meal cannot be claimed for reimbursement.

For clarification on the decision-making – how it’s done at the local level. School district boards of elected officials
govern what happens in a school district, including facilities, curriculum, the employees and every other thing; accept
what State and Federal government regulations. Their decision-making in each school district has all kinds of levels.
Some is very casual because it is a small district and everyone knows what’s going on. For some of the larger
districts, staff does a lot of the prep work and recommendations are made on certain things. The board adopts the
overall policy and then they expect staff to carry out policy but would trust staff to make decisions within that policy.


Presentation Two:
   David Williams (Oregon School Boards Association)
   Food Choices in Schools Task Force, ODE, Memorandum (handout)

   Locally elected school boards regulate Education Service Districts and Community Colleges not the department or the
   US department. All of these school boards are elected locally and responsive to their communities and the wills of their
   communities. And every one of those 198 school districts has different needs and different requirements placed on
   them by the communities and some of those are highlighted in some of this work that we’ve pulled together.

   We found that nearly all of the districts in the state have no vending machines in elementary schools. 81% no vending
   machines, 14% had vending machines but, of those 14%, the vending machines were made up of milk or juice or
   water – period! There were 5% that had vending machines but these go to the 198 districts. Those 5% were K-12
   buildings. They were combined buildings.

   All of the districts surveyed had some form of policy, varying from USDA guidelines for their food service going on up
   and beyond those. I’ve attached to this document a memo to me from Angie Peterman, who actually conducted this
   work, and I want to thank Angie and the network of school business officials around the state who are very responsive
   to our questions, when we ask them. And behind them are minutes from a Eugene school board meeting. Someone
   asked the questions if we can get hold of policies. Of course, all of the districts in the state are public bodies and all of
   the policies they implement are public documents and are available to anyone who asks.

   The minutes I’ve attached are just a way to highlight the discussions that happen. Frankly, it was a learning
   experience for me that there might be a belief system or assumption that districts around the state are ignoring the
   problem. That’s simply is not the case. The truth is that there are there just 198 solutions to the problem. This is not
   a top down approach. Schools are run by local communities. That’s the way we’ve run schools for over two centuries
   now and we have found that to be a very successful way to run our schools, because our communities have needs.
   The needs of Philomath, for how they want to educate their children, are different than the needs of Beaverton and
   Hillsboro. The discussion in Eugene just highlights what boards face and how they approach these problems. They
   actually had a response to a community group that presented them with the results of the American Pediatric
   Association. And they detailed how they were approaching food service in their district and how they were responding
   to the needs of their community.

Attached are sample policies that OSBA developed in 2002. This is on our website. But we do have a policy
department that develops policy for districts and they subscribe to our services and we have policies on everything.
The first page of this nutrition program - and just a little code thing will help differentiate – at the top is says code EFA.
This is a sample of what a district and what we encourage school boards to adopt as their policy. We work to provide,
not only the board with a policy, but also staff with implementation tools they can use. They don’t have, necessarily,
somebody who can develop that kind of policy. This is being provided as a service.

This second document is not necessarily something a board would adopt but is a method a district would use to
implement that board policy. Its very good policy where we provide districts with options on how they want to regulate
their food service programs in their district. And, again, it goes to serve the fact that a school board governs what
happens in their buildings, and they are in charge of what happens locally. We encourage advocates in local
communities to get involved. You know, all to often, school boards only hear from people when they’re upset. They
don’t hear from people when they want to come before the board to develop something constructive.

OSBA and the school boards have to balance the needs not only of the communities but they’re also in charge of
running the business of the district, and there is a financial reality of districts. Oregon has this great 21st Century
schools or format where we have this fabulous goal of all students reaching 91% of standards. Now, we’re talking
reading, writing and arithmetic – the “Three Rs”, which aren’t really Rs – science and some other programs. And we
have this model that models how much it actually costs to fund that. And I’ll bring this up just to serve the highlight that
this model - in order to fund schools, we need $2 Billion more than what we currently fund schools at statewide. We
provide the state - last session provided $4.9 Billion for schools. We need $2 Billion more than that to fully implement.
You know, this is 25% of the budget we are under funding these districts. So, when we talk about 114 school districts
don’t have food service directors, it’s not because they don’t want to have them. It’s because they simply can’t afford
them. And you’ve got a Governor who campaigns on the fact that administrators make too much money and that we
have too many of them, which is also simply not true. But there is sort of that reality to this discussion, which, I know,
in a perfect world we’d like to ignore, but we simply cannot. We don’t have the luxury of ignoring it.

16% of high schools in the state have closed campuses. A lot of kids who have the ability to go off campus. We had
the discussion earlier about the ala carte meals. Results show that districts - elementary schools - provide the Federal
meal and that’s pretty much it. They’re not providing brownies and cookies and ala carte meals. Elementary school
kids don’t have access to that. And our results are showing they don’t have access to pop and candy bars and
vending machines either.

When we narrow down what is really is going on in schools, we’re talking about 14 to 18-year-old kids who we are
trying to help them make choices. And children – kids in high school deserve choices and we give them choices and
we do everything to help offer healthy choices.
When we are talking about these meals, think about the cost that we’re talking about. School districts do everything
they can to offer the healthy choice at an economic rate. An elementary school meal, a hot lunch meal cost $1.50.
The cost for a high school reimbursable meal is $2.10. To go through the ala carte line to get a slice of pizza is $2.00.
We are already sort of encouraging kids the best way we can to make these healthy choices.
The quality of food serve is different now than it was in the past. The slice of pizza is made with turkey pepperoni with
whole milk mozzarella. The corndog is a turkey dog that’s baked with healthy batter on the outside.
OSBA has worked on these issues in the past and continues to and the National School Board Association (NSBA),
has been out in front to encourage districts to do all they can to confront issues of nutrition in schools. The January
issue of the American School Board Journal had several articles in it on best practices and how communities have
been involved locally to help change the needs of districts. A district in Santa Monica was highlighted that actually
went over to all organic products in their vending machines. I’m guessing all organic vending machines may not go
over so well in some districts, but again, that’s goes to the needs of a local community.
The OSBA communications department is in the process of preparing for a fall week. We do critical issues magazines
on issues facing schools. They’re doing one on obesity, childhood obesity and nutrition issues related to that and how
schools are dealing with that, not only around the country, but also in the state of Oregon, and how schools are
confronting those issues. But the main thing I want to stress is that districts are not necessarily ignoring the problem of
childhood obesity and they’re not ignoring the changing world of nutrition in schools. And they are continually
confronting this issue and local school boards are continually reassessing their policies and their practices in their
districts and changing to meet the needs of their local community.
Questions: Are school boards opening school gyms later, planning activities after school for kids? The other side of
the spectrum is obviously Physical Education (PE). Is PE offered four years or one year?
Answer: A lot of the vending contracts in the districts subsidize a lot of after school programs in districts and athletic
programs. They’re subsidizing all the programs that are not covered in “No Child Left Behind”. In the tight budget
constraints we live in, some districts just raised their “play-to-pay” fees. We’re not making this easy for kids but the
root of this is not necessarily that we’re not trying. The root of this is there is a financial reality that we’re facing. We
don’t allow districts to raise money enough locally, if they wanted to provide free athletic programs to all students.
There are nutrition programs available for after school program. There are feeding programs that the Federal
government has funds for that you can get and would serve nutritious food to the kids after school.

There is one year of required physical education in our high schools. Many schools do not have any type of intramural
programs. The funding for activity programs has been cut to the core. It’s usually less than 1 or 2% of a total school
district’s total budget and yet it’s been cut. Districts are trying to be creative in finding ways to fund activities so that
the limited numbers of kids that are participating still have that opportunity.

Ashland SD established a new parks and recreation district that funds the high school athletic program. They are not
funded through the district, because they simply could not afford to fund it.

Education isn’t the only component, but I think it is a critical one. Marketing has lead to unhealthy choices. We have
to educate kids from day one. We need to have kids active in physical education from day one in our schools, in order
to tackle this problem. The amount of competitive foods is part of the problem but I’m not sure it’s the paramount part
of the problem. Teacher would not have to sell Crispy Crèmes outside the classroom, if we had enough money to pay
for a class to take that field trip.

Question: When OSBA conducted the survey did you ask the districts if anyone had adopted those policies?
Answer: No. I just asked if they had adopted policies and to send those policies to us.

Question: Would it be possible to find out the 40 school districts that replied or is that confidential information?
Answer: Yes. Another thing that OSBA is developing is an electronic database of all the policies, not just food
service, but of all policies of all the districts in the state, to be able to review those policies and see what is happening
on the ground – that’s not in implementation, yet. But, that’s one of the things our policy department is working on.

Question: Districts that responded to survey question #2 states all districts have adopted USDA guidelines for
nutrition programs in their schools at a minimum. Some districts have gone beyond that to incorporate additional
policies and standards for other competitive foods. My understanding is that they can’t participate in the School Lunch
Program unless they have. When it says some of them have gone beyond, is it 50% have gone beyond or 20%?
Answer: About 54% of the responses received had additional policy beyond the simple USDA requirements. Such as
policies relating to vending machines and competitive foods that are not USDA regulated.

In addition to the sample policy that OSBA has on its website, there might be some sample district policies that appear
to be good or could be somehow made available. Instead let districts know that there’s a no need to start from scratch.
There are sample policies, suggested policies and actual policies that can be used as guidance.

The survey tells us how things are sold and the financial situation but there’s not much about the policies as they’re
being implemented. If the discussion is saying that schools regulate these foods then we need information saying they
are following the OSBA recommendations. Just saying going beyond that can mean a lot of different things. It would
be for future research, saying whether they have the vending machine or the ala carte. What food is being sold in
those vending machines? You can have a vending machine. It is not an evil thing, because it can contain milk and
healthy food choices. What’s being sold in the machine is really what we’re talking about. It is important to have
research to make these decisions and we need more specifics.

Question: How does OSBA work with individual school boards and school districts in terms of encouraging school
boards to adopt different policies? For example, all the policies that you have around nutrition – how do you go about
encouraging school boards to adopt those things? How do you actually work with school boards?

Answer: OSBA encourages school boards through a variety of means. Our policy department puts together annually
- and continuous refinement of – a sort of a sample policy handbook that districts can subscribe to. OSBA works to
identify those policies that are more important and we want to encourage districts on a broader perspective to adopt.
This nutrition policy is made available to districts, free of charge that we want them to adopt.

There is a full thick packet of food service policies and operating procedures. Generally, the policy department
develops a board policy, and then leaves it at that. They develop certain operating guidelines for policies where there
are Federal requirements so that a district is required to have operating guidelines or where there is a need among
districts. Districts have been asking us for these policies and, therefore, our policy department develops that sort of
operating procedures. A bi-weekly newsletter is sent to school districts, called Outlook and Review, and often times
we highlight a policy objective, something we’re trying to encourage districts to do.

Comment: The questions being asked of the districts has an assumption that there is some sort of statewide goal
beyond the USDA regulations and that districts have gone further indicates that there has been a local discussion that
took them beyond USDA regulations. The problem advocates in this area have is that there is not a groundswell
regarding this at the local level. You find yourselves in a situation where you’re trying to go top down and that
sometimes this is fundamental to the disagreement around these issues. I don’t understand is why this discussion is
going on here at all and isn’t going on at school districts where there is an identified problem, where parents have
contacted the PTA or some sort of nutrition council or a dietitian. They’re trying to make a one size fits all when we’re
looking at statistics. When looking at these statistics you got to be a person who deals with large numbers of people
and large amounts of money you got to come away from it saying, what problem – what problem - what problem are
you trying to fix here in the public schools, particularly when education is clearly not a researched way out of this thing.
If you could ask enough questions to find the answers that people who believe in a top down, single Superintendent, at
the state level kind of system is the way to go in this state and get rid of the local school boards.
Response: I don’t know that you can get there. The conversations are happening locally. This conversation may not
be, but communities are having this conversation about nutrition services locally and their districts are responding and
responding to needs of their local community and that is the thrust of this.

Oregon is not a data-rich state. When you ask the question, “do we have data on obesity in children” we’re a little bit
behind the curve in Oregon. We are beginning to see greater health risks, greater health problems amongst children
in our state. The national data on this issue says, “Yes. We do need to address it.” I am asking those questions of
my local school and it does need to be addressed. When we lack the data that we need, we don’t address problems
because we believe the information is anecdotal. Often times in Oregon we’ve become a secondary market on the
national scale, because we don’t collect this kind of data, we don’t focus on it, we believe that there’s not a problem.
There is a problem. It is a national problem. It is going to cost us a lot of money in the future. It is starting to cost us
money now with health risks and the issues inherent in obesity. It is worth looking into, not just at the groundswell
level but also at every level from the top down. We have to be leaders in our state, whether it’s at our district or if it’s
at the state level. And it’s important to have these discussions and to begin the dialogue and the change that’s
necessary. On a national level, this issue is coming about. It is going to be addressed and we would be well served to
begin to address it in Oregon ourselves, since that is the Oregon way.

The whole issue of local versus statewide is a really a big issue. Surely we can agree that some things are statewide
and not just local. We don’t let each school district do whatever they want. Some things are governed both by Federal
and State regulations. Great social change has occurred in our whole society because we have not allowed local
schools to keep carrying on practices that we thought were harmful or bad for our kids, because either the State
government or Federal government has said, “You can’t keep doing that.” Our whole country has a history of
intervening when local school districts aren’t doing their jobs or when there’s a problem. Specifically segregation. For
years, local school districts could do what they wanted and the Civil Rights movement happened and, all of a sudden,
you can’t just do what you want, you have guidelines. So, there’s a model. Each school district does not exist by itself.
It does exist to get state money so it’s answerable to the state government and answerable ultimately to all the people
of Oregon and ultimately to the people of the United States. It will stop us dead in our tracks to say, “Well, it’s local
control, and there’s nothing we can do about it.” We can think larger than that, because local control is not an end. It’s
one of the ways that our schools are governed. It’s not the only way that our schools are governed.

Just a reminder that we don’t get too hung up on the end result - what – how - whatever the end result that we come
up with - how it’s implemented, whether it’s a standard, or just a minimal set of guidelines; legislative mandate,
whatever; it could run the whole gamut. So, I want to make sure early in our discussions here we don’t get too hung
up on the tool or method of presenting what we come up with and, rather, focus on what we want to present, whether
is ends up being just a minimal set of guidelines/suggestions for the districts or its a set of standards or its an
administrative rule. I want to be careful we don’t get too hung up on that discussion and really focus on what are the
parameters that we want to come up with and focus on the discussion there.

OSBA doesn’t think there isn’t a problem with childhood obesity in Oregon. OSBA believes there is a serious problem
with childhood obesity and OSBA believes there is things schools can do about it/schools are doing about it. There is
also an issue persistence of obesity and kids who are obese before the age six, before they come to the public K-12
system; problem of kids before they reach age 12, before there are access to foods of minimal nutritional value in
schools. OSBA feels a bit frustrated that there may be a solution in search of a problem or in search of a problem that
doesn’t exist in that schools are fattening up kids. OSBA believes is not the case. OSBA believes that districts locally
are doing a lot, maybe not always everything possible, but they are continually working on this issue in response to,
not just their local community, but epidemics facing the nation.

The State and Federal government regulate districts, but those regulations are generally in response to policy
statements passed by the US Congress or the Oregon State Legislature.

There are local conversations going on. There is a groundswell of local conversations, but it comes to the nutrition
services department. And, even if it goes to the chairperson on the board, she emails and says, “What are you doing
about it?” The food service receives an email, “What are you doing about this childhood obesity issue?” We come up
with a four-page document about healthy school environment and what we’re doing and what we’ve done in the past
with district partners and what policies are in place. We’ve got this whole thing to reeducate our board. This is what
we are doing and here’s some things we should be doing. And what about PE? Did you send this email off to the
athletic director? Did you send this off to the principals with vending machines? No. They send it to us. Believe me,
there’s a groundswell. Most of us in nutrition services try to insulate the board from all of this because, we want to be
good kids and take care of things. We can’t do it alone! Although we have all this, I have to disagree with you, about
the recommendation that we make, because I think that’s where we need to go. Because, even if you’ve got
standards, which we have, a five-page document about creating a healthy school environment, it stands at the local
level to get it done. If, in fact, this group could just legislate or recommend or mandate – get together folks – let’s talk
about it – cause it’s out there – it’s a problem – there is childhood obesity in Oregon. That’s what we need to do for our
kids. It is a problem. So, I guess I have to disagree with let’s not talk about what we come up with.

No, my point was we need to talk about - our focus should be on what we come up with, not the tool for implementing
it. That is an important second conversation. What we need to come up with is what our focus should be. And, then
how you implement that is the second conversation of whether it’s a recommendation, it’s a guidelines, it’s a set of
administrative rule, but that’s a second conversation and we’re going to keep muddling up the waters, if we don’t focus
on what our recommendations are and focus on that conversation.

I want to go on record to say it should be at the local level and it should be mandatory and if we’re going to do this,
then let’s do it.

One of the handouts today is a letter from Bend-LaPine School District about what that district is doing in a proactive
manner to address these issues, and it’s from a district level, not simply something that has been forced onto the
nutrition folks individually. The nutrition department can’t fix it by themselves. But North Clackamas responded to our
request for information on this survey and, one of the things they pointed out, is that their board directed them to
organize and form their own task force around this issue of community members, board members, the nutrition folks,
their business folks. There are a lot of districts doing a variety of things. We can learn from the things that are
happening and what they’re doing and, hopefully, convey that message to our local boards, of the importance of them,
as well as the folks in the trenches and the parents getting involved. I don’t think it takes legislation to do that.

How can we mandate that community groups come together locally to do things? The people around this table
represent people all over the state. Something this group can do is to develop a system where all your groups can
come together in these districts, where you see that there’s a problem. Not every district has a problem. Find districts
where there are problems and connect parents and constituents and kids and teachers in those local communities and
find out where those holes exist.

Eating is a learned behavior. We can make all the rules and regulations we want but, if we don’t do it in the family
setting, we’re not going to change the behavior of the child. If you have an obese kid that’s five or six years old, that’s
a learned behavior. When they get in schools, we can assist, if there is education being taught on how to eat correctly.
Where do you put that? It’s not in the lunch line. They’re not going to learn by walking through and seeing healthy
food. It starts in the home, and this isn’t the place to address what happens in a home. We can make all the
regulations we want, but it’s a learned behavior and it starts early. There are 22 fast food chains down Lancaster here
in Salem, in a two and a half mile range. What is a kid learning?

An email was sent to Oregon Dietetic Association (ODA) members about what’s going on with this task force. There
are people from all over the state who say, “Wow! I’ve been working on this and I’m so glad that somebody’s doing
something on a larger level to give us some guidelines and push us ahead. We feel like we’re the only people in the
world who are working with our school systems.” There is a groundswell out there and maybe our role is to encourage
that groundswell and support that groundswell and provide guidelines that they can follow.

There are a lot of issues that go into if there is a healthy school nutrition environment that is coming from home or at
school. That activity should come from a local level. There are examples where there is an opportunity to set a
framework, ground level, let’s all start here. There is so much more that can be done about nutrition at the school
level. It would be a service to all the state and all the students in schools. Help them get started. We will inspire
people to continue on that local level to make improvements.

Our children spend a significant amount of time in our schools under our care. We have a great power of influence
over what those kids are experiencing during the time they are in our care in our schools. Whether it is what we are
teaching them in the classroom, how we make them move during their school day, what food choices they have. We
have to balance that with the financial and fiscal responsibilities of running an appropriate school. I am hoping that the
fiscal responsibility in the short term do not out weight the long term health effects of what we are feeding, teaching,
and having our children move/do in our schools. This task force on a state level has power at the local level.

Clarification: Are we recommending a minimum standard that all schools in Oregon would meet? If they wanted to
go further, we would encourage it, but there be a minimum standard so all students at least have the basics.
Answer: Both, set the minimum and local issues.

Question: Is the USDA standard inadequate? If you read the USDA standards and looked at how it was being
applied it is not an insubstantial standard. The idea of being coercive from the state level is where you tend to part
company where you try to be coercive in situation of assuming that teaching nutrition results in better eating behavior.
There is no research that shows that. There is a need for the research but it is not there. There is no question that
more athletic time is a great idea but where do you find the money? I would like to hear what the problem at the
USDA. What is wrong with the minimum standard?
Answer: This conversation needs to be put on hold it is not on topic of OSBA. It is an important question, but is part
of a conversation that we are going to have in the future.

Gallery comments:
The Oregon Department of Education Child Nutrition Programs worked with the OSBA to develop the nutrition

When a parent called concerning what was happening around food in a school, the issue was passed to food services.
It mostly ended up not being food services issue because it was what was being available in other places. Refer to the
grid passed out this morning, the place where there is a deficient are the places where there are no USDA guidelines on
foods served outside of mealtime. There is an assumption at the school level that if they are doing what USDA asks
they are meeting the standards. There are no USDA guidelines and we know from Congress there never will be
guidelines in the area of foods served outside of mealtime. They look to those guidelines to see if they are doing a good
job. There is an express need for guidelines.

Comment: The schools have done a great job with food, but we are not talking about exercise. We are not talking
about getting kids away from game boys, computers and going outside to place. No one is addressing that issue.
Response: That important issue is outside of the scope of what this task force will talk about. We are focusing on the
nutritional aspect.
Clarity and confirm objectives:
This task force was formed to have a conversation with a cross-section of representatives from the school, business and
health community concerning student nutritional health, childhood obesity and related health issues, financial problems in
the schools (how we fund activities) and the role of competitive foods in this area. We want to have a frank and open
conversation about all issues and about any recommendations to be made to the State Board or other actions. The
desired goal is to have a summary document ready by January.

Confirm scope:
                               IN                                                          OUT
 •   K-12                                                            •   Entities outside of walls?
 •   Non-federal programs (A la carte foods, student stores)         •   Items not sold? (Teacher gives candy, etc.)
 •   Other foods sold in schools                                     •   Outside of school hours (need to define)
 •   Fundraisers (sold during school hours)                          •   Fundraisers (outside of school hours)
 •   School day (school hours only)                                  •   Contracts terms & conditions negotiations
 •   Fiscal impact on schools                                        •   Advertising
 •   Span of control (local control)                                 •   Vending machines
 •   Effect on existing contract                                     •   Economic incentives
 •   Health effects on children                                      •   Length & time of meal periods
 •   Pricing (best practice)
 •   Nutrition standards (USDA, local)
 •   Link between nutrition & performance
 •   Breakfast/Lunch Program (low priority)
 •   Open/closed campus (low priority)
K-12 vs K-6
Breakfast/Lunch Program: move to Out or low priority
Ala carte/student stores: change to Non-federal programs
Fiscal impact on schools, Span of control (local control), Effect on existing contract: important of overall
School Day: clarify that focus in only during school hours
Open vs closed campus:
   (Chuck) Being consistent, we look at the 100% of food consumed by school children, the issue is obesity and nutrition
   and health of children. How do you walk away from open closed/campus and only as it applies to ability of children to
   access food during lunch hours or afterwards. If for no other reason than to acknowledge that it exists as part of the
   mix, determine the percentage of activity that occurs. Look at economic impact, it is part of what kids eat, part of the
   55% that are not eating the under the USDA program. It is worth acknowledging.

(Ron) From a scope standpoint concern, would be it hits a boarder area, difficult to dive into concepts.
(Chuck) If our under lying consideration is the health of children and obesity and all the other stated goals. This is
clearly part of the problem, how do we get a handle on the problem. Unless we have predetermined it has something
to do with what is going on in schools.
(Kristy) Good idea, it could have a positive financial impact on the school but does not want it to stand in the way of
(Pat) When is it said that open/closed campus issue is a component of the totality of food consumed by kids. But it is
a local school issue. Not in scope of this task force. After the last task force we got a lot of heat from school districts
on this issue. It was not true. We do not have the authority. That is a local school issue. If we say that this body is
going to consider closing campuses that takes this conversation politically in a very different direction. It is not in the
scope of this work. I agree that looking at where do kids exercise their choice to eat. Yes, they choose to eat off of
school grounds. We are not trying to say that a solution would be to close campuses.
(Chuck) Maybe it is saying it differently. Figure out a way to deal with student access to food. What worries me is that
if we keep the scope confined. We may miss what the real problem is because we won’t look at the totality of this
because it is politically unpopular. I think the whole thing is local policy.
(Pat) Competitive foods (by the federal definition) and foods of nutritional value fall within USDA guidance and ODE
responsibility to manage. Open/closed campus is not our realm of guidance in regulations. It is a local issue.
(Chuck) Then you need to narrow the focus of this discussion to truly to what is being discussed here. It is not
childhood obesity it is not their health. It is some other agenda.
(Pat) Focus on competitive foods that are why we came together in the first place.
(Chuck) The problem with competitive foods is that there is enormous competition. Look in lunch bag, look in the
happy meal box, and see what is there. We can tell a little better what the problems look like. I am worried that we will
get ourselves in a narrow focus in the wrong area and do a quick blame game. Come up with a quick policy that does
not fit the totality of the problem.
(Pat) We need some kind of comprehensive strategy. ODE is not interested in closing campus. That is not our
agenda. We are looking for comprehensive discussion in a way to promote student health. But this becomes a straw
man or lighting rod that people focus on and miss the conversation. We do not have the authority to close campuses.

(Pat) ODE does not want to control prices. It is not ODE’s responsibility, and is outside of the scope of authority. Lou did
things that encouraged healthy choices. One is best practice or good idea the other is a level of control. In terms of
contract language what the price charged at a local school district would be. No. It is a local issue between school board
and vendors. Not anything that will be dictated at the state level.

Nutrition Standards: (Chuck) The concern is that we are creating a very large problem for us to deal with. Nutrition
standards may be a huge issue on it own. Task force does not have expertise but will add to the problem.

 (Joan) This task force will not create nutrition standards but recommend nutrition standards and stated that we would go
 to a professional group who had set up and identified nutrition standards for the adoption of those standards.

 (Chuck) Who is this professional group? To try to go down this road is to add to the size of the problem. It is a much
 bigger issue than close campus.

 (John) You can talk about nutrition standards you can talk about it in a lot of different way. One of the nutrition
 standards is OSBA. I am assuming that OSBA thought it was worthwhile.

Economic incentives:
 Chuck) Create interest in school districts to offer funding to change. One of the issues is lack of food nutritionist in the
 district. Use ODE budget money to hire nutritionist. Can take other parts of ODE budget and use it in other places.
 There is no other source. It ultimately comes out of the classroom. Use that money to take us down a certain road so
 you get strong buy in by school districts. If you deal in an area that has a $30 million fiscal impact, offering a financial
 package make sense.

 (Paul) Not a realistic suggestion that this group spends any of its time concerning ODE budget. We could say in report it
 is nice to add economic incentives to help school district. Beyond that I do not see where we are going.
 (Chuck) If you take money away from the schools it comes out of the state school funds. There is a way to do this that
 might help schools.
 (Pat) There is another way to look at this. It is a lot of money. ODE budget is facing another 10 million cut. Parameter
 for the conversation is either cost neutral or cost negative solutions. By the use of technology to provide good guidance
 to who ever is making these decisions. It is a relatively inexpensive way.

 (Patti) Incentives do not mean money.

Length and time of meal periods:
(Pat) Not interested in this agency or this group trying to run school into the depth of penetration that determines how
long lunch period is. There is 1200 school in this state. How they feed their kids and balance out their instructional period.
The issue is if the lunch period is too short with long line may determine choices student makes. We would not have
recommendations what the length a lunch period is.

Report to state board of education: Link between nutrition & performance, Economic incentives, encourage the
district to look at the length of the lunch periods. Use language “due consideration be given at the local level
regarding length of time of meal periods and open/closed campuses for financial and nutritional benefits of the
district. Include adequate exercise be provided.

Gallery comments:
(Patti) Not sure what the outcome is. I understand that we all have our own agendas. My agenda is to have no unfunded
programs. Some people agenda may be no vending machines, no pop machines in schools. All of our agenda is Healthy
kids. Every time something is brought up I hear Pat say that we have no desire to regulate that. I did not know that this
committee’s outcomes and goals were to regulate something. I thought it was a discussion around healthy kids without
open campus discussion. I am not saying regulate it. I am saying how can you produce a report or recommendations out
of this committee. You cannot disregard that kids go off campus. You cannot disregard incentives you can get a grant.
Length and time of day maybe people don’t know what happens at an elementary. Kids are inundated at her lunch period
with the boy scouts, little league interrupting her lunch with come and join us. At our school district we are looking at
saying no one can talk to our kids they need to settle down, eat a health lunch, go back to class or get a little exercise.
There is lot more that goes into this healthy kids than what you guys want to. Your recommendations have to say
wouldn’t it be nice if...this is an issue. Overwhelming individual agendas are taking over because someone does not want
to take that over. I did not come to this meeting thinking that you were going to regulate anything. It does not matter what
you want to regulate to. It is not about ODE.

(Pat) The healthy kids network which almost everybody in the room certainly OSBA and others has been part of this
agency. It does get to that comprehensive view how do you promote this type of thing at the local community level. It is
very effective in doing that it has some money behind it through federal grants. I am not trying to interfere with that. What
I am responding to is what happened after the first task force meeting, which was a lot of incoming heat that ODE was
trying to close campus, regulate pricing, and control the length of time that students were served meals. None of that was
true. That is the part I am trying to make. I agree with everything that you just said. Is it worth talking about in terms of is
this part of creating conditions that students make healthy choices and get good nutrition. I know that it is a financial
burden on school districts to have kids leaving campus and not participating in federal free and reduced price lunch
program. Every kid that walks off campus that is one more reimbursable meal that just walked out the door. If you are
asking me if I am interested in regulating that the answer is NO. You just made it easier for me to loose money.

If I close the campus, I have been a principal in eight buildings and three states closing a campus without the physical
capacity to serve all the kids in a decent time frame the cafeteria size and size of the food service operation the
complexity of building a schedule particularly at the high school level to accommodate the rest of the school operation I
know to be very complicated. What was coming into ODE was trying to take over or regulate this. We are not. I agree it
should not be about regulation. The message had gotten out that we were trying to regulate. I get nervous by saying that
we are going to talk about it is it may be seen as we put on the table that we want to regulate closing campuses. I am not
interested in doing that. If there is need to talk about a comprehensive approach that might include looking at where do
kids eat or what do they eat and what choices they make. It is worth talking about. I am not interested a recommendation
that says we think that all the high school campuses in the state or Oregon should be closed. It is not something I want to
(Patti) I understand why you said it but every time you say it, it was taken off the list of thing to talk about. I think we are
talking about two different things. It is yet to be decided whether this group going to make recommendations and how they
are going to implement and spread those recommendations and get people to buy them. And also offer help to buy into
them or are we talking regulating something. When you say that you are not interested in regulating people are saying
yes because they are not interested in regulating other things. I am not interested in this group coming up with any
regulating for anything that does not reimburse us for.
(Pat) Regulations apply to competitive foods and food of minimal nutritional value. You do not get reimbursed for
competitive foods but the idea of competitive foods is within the box of school day nutritional program. That is where it
fits. That is the parameter of regulation. As opposed to whether or not I want to say that we will regulate whether a
campus is open or closed. That is the difference I am making. The State board does not have the authority.
Question: There is the HKLB coalition already in place with representation across different organizations working on
obesity issue and how that relates to what kids are learning in the classroom. Why was this group organized in addition to
that as opposed if this coalition already existed and in place why are they not tackling this issue? Why do we have so
many doing the same thing?
Answer: They are and they will and we will make sure this work will linked to them. Idea her was around competitive
foods and food of minimal nutritional value, which is not necessarily part of the HKLB is doing. They are related. They are
doing excellent work and it will continue.

Obesity is not in the HKLB program. They talk about nutrition, physical activities and drugs things like that. Genevieve
Remus, the ODE representative, is in the gallery if you want to find out more about it.

Objective of the task force: The reasons for convening the task force is for foods sold during school hours and fall within
the scope of our conversation about making a recommendation to the State Board Of Education. We have had four
meetings now and there is only so much you can do in four meetings. I agree with everyone that all of these are important

things. Sometimes you can only do one thing at a time and when you dilute yourself you cannot get anything done and
have nothing to show.

Discuss future process:

   •   Prioritize and focus on highest priorities first (John)
   •   Regulatory or fact finding (Chuck)
   •   Ask advisory committee to put together information
   •   Understand where everyone is coming from – look at documents submitted during or after the meeting
   •   Clarify who the recommendation will be made to
   •   Push forward a recommendation that will focus on nutrition
   •   Recommendation (Pat)

Question: Does this group in this point in time believe based on the issues that in two more meetings this group can
actually accomplish whatever goals it ultimately have. There has been a lot of discussion of can not go into this or that
because it so limited. What can we accomplish within two more meetings that is reasonable and that is going to be
meaningful to anyone.
What process do we want to use in the next two meeting to get the most out of the meetings?

(Chuck) One of the questions with process is an anticipated outcome. Whether we are here to develop some sort of
regulatory recommendation or a fact-finding recommendation. That results in two different processes. If is regulatory this
process may not be appropriate. If it is fact finding this may be the right forum.

(Ron) If it is regulatory it is a longer process. It is more complex.

(Chuck) Are we going on the regulatory route or fact finding?

(Ron) It is this group’s decision. If this group decides to go regulatory you cannot get there in two more meetings. If you
are going a different route a far as suggestions and guidelines that you present in a report. You may or may not get what
you want in two meetings but you have a better chance. I say that only in the standpoint of respecting your time and the
amount of time you have to participate and what you hope to get out of it.

(Paul) I would suggest this process going forward. If we can ask ODE and OHSU advisory to start putting together some
draft or outlines on health and performance, how those pieces of the report, we can quickly say that is the direction that
we want to go. Including pieces of the report like closed campuses are suggestion we want to look at. Prioritize the items
and deal with these in this order. What we get done, we get done.
(Noelle) Do we think we can get to an outcome in two meetings? We cannot get to any type of regulatory
recommendations. Take time over the next two meetings so we can use the opportunity to understand where everyone is
coming form so that everyone feels like they have had the opportunity to express their position and why they are here.
Encourage us to take time during the meeting to look at the documents that people thought were important enough to
send us in between the meetings. By doing that we get some tangible examples we can agree with or disagree with but it
is a way to more forward. There are a lot of ideas on how to improve competitive foods. We need to have that discussion.
(Chuck) It is important that we understand whether we are heading toward a regulatory report/recommendation. This is
not the right forum for any kind of regulatory. It is a fact-finding or discussion group or whatever. When you head into that
regulatory side you have to stop and take a whole new look at how this is constituted as stakeholders and the rest of it to
make sure that we are headed in the right direction. I am willing to accept assurances that are not why it was constituted.
(Ron) Look at the people around and how this group’s time can best be used out in whatever community stakeholder
group we want to present the report to. What do you see as the ideal outcome of this?
(Chuck) Take a batch of the information that we have developed, the minutes, the level of discussion without
recommendations just with notification that this has been a substantial discussion with substantial interest and let them
decide whether they think this is an issue that deserves response than going into a regulatory function and allow them to
constitute a stakeholders group to take up the discussion on the regulatory side.
Process for the next meeting: Will the presentation be made to the State Board of Education?
(Ruby) I would like to see this group push forward a recommendation that basically focuses on what we came here to do,
which was to continue the discussion as it relates to nutrition on what I call the outside foods. Whether they take it to the
legislative or regulatory arena that is someone else’s responsibility. I will participate in that as well, but it is important for
us to push forward recommendations. Some recommendations need to come out of these meetings.
(Lou) Local school districts are doing a good job as how they are functioning now. Any recommendations to the state
board I would like to keep it in that context. Any recommendations go through some association of the board of education
to them.
(Pat) One thing to say that you are going to have a set of recommendation for the State Board to consider which could
cover many things, public communications, health education standards. It is different than saying that you are going to
develop a specific recommendation. The state board has its prerogative under state law to say that it wants to consider a
regulation. That is different in whether our purpose is to develop regulations or to look at fact finding. I want to apologize,
in my rush to get you invited when I sent the email out I states a possible OAR change. I created confusion that the role of
this task force was to create new OAR. That was not my intent. I am very comfortable with idea of fact finding or

Four general themes:
   1.   Existing policy
   2.   Curriculum and instruction
   3.   Research
   4.   Best practices (promote, capture)
(Chuck) Describes a way to go at this and have an outcome that is meaty enough to worth having sit here for this length
of time. Without venturing into the other area that takes us down the wrong rode. At least when we go into a policy
making discussion at some future date we have some agreed upon information that we all agree there certain things that
are true or at least we have discussed it. We have all heard each other so we know what the common ground sound like.
(Judy) We should have a resource packet available when finished. The best practice groups, the children’s organizations
that are already out there, have that resource to back up to statements that we are going to be making. If we do not have
that then we are not going to have the weight that we want on the documents. We have to have that resource.
(Keri) Are we going to reschedule last canceled meeting? Are actually having five meeting to meet?
(Ron) That is up to the Advisory Committee to decide.
(Pat) We have not scheduled a replacement meeting.
(Heidi) It would be helpful as part of the Advisory Committee to know what the task force members whether they want to
schedule four or five meetings, regardless of what we think.
(Ron) Does anyone have strong feelings to say that another meeting will not work? Scheduling is a separate issue.
(Lou) If we are doing recommendation we can gel this together and do recommendations.
(John) Staff doing work pulling together
(Ron) Approach for the next two meetings be a mix of sub committee work, each person would choose the area that they
want to work on. The subcommittee will come up with recommendations to present to task force review. That way we
have four groups working in parallel driving some things rather than one discussion at a time. That may be more efficient
for us. The full task force review and discusses.

(Chuck) Will this be done by consensus or by vote? In terms of arriving at an agreement, since it is non-regulatory, non-
legislative recommendations it tends to be fact driven rather than opinion driven. I assume we can arrive at consensus on
pure fact as long as we don’t try to put the legislative, regulatory spin on it.

(Paul) We may not arrive at consensus on recommendation, but we can deal with when get there.

(Ron) We want to have consensus – if someone does not agree with what the recommendation we can provide a minority
opinion we state your thoughts.

(Chuck) It is important to understand that if we go down the regulatory/legislative route. That is not part of the

(Paul) I understood that to mean that we are not going to try to fashion rules or legislation with which I completely agree.
But there may be some people who might want to at least discuss or consider whether we recommend to the board a
regulation that mandates that school districts look at this. I am not trying to predetermine what it is. It is inappropriate to
determine that it is not going to be a recommendation to be discussed. I thought that we would have a series of factual
stuff that we have concluded that I agree that I cannot imagine that most of that would not be by consensus.
Recommendations could go all sorts of ways. You may want to consider this or that. To say that the recommendation
might not be we recommend that you consider a rule is inappropriate at this point. We are not quite there.

Gallery comments:
(Victoria) Nutrition and health related to learning readiness document will be ready by the next meeting. Research has
done and ready to present. Provide you with the names of the people serving on the Nutrition Standards committee.
American Dietetic Association (ADA) survey conducted to look at food purchase habits reported by children versus what
their parent’s perceptions were. Interesting look at what parents think their children are doing, which is two different
things. It gets at the question of who is purchasing school lunch, ala carte, who is going to the convenience store. All of
the questions are addressed. It may give an additional perspective.

Next meeting: September 23, NW Regional ESD, 5825 NE Ray Circle, Hillsboro, 9:00 AM – 1:00 PM

Encourage members to read materials received during the meeting or between meetings and be prepared to use them as
part of the discussion at the next meetings. Look at the reports from the other states.

Thank you to Jennifer Parenteau (flip charts); Dana Christensen (scribe); Community Health Partnership (refreshments).


To top