A Utah House committee passed a bill that would allow more students to qualify for free school meals — but not before some Republican lawmakers argued that increasing the state’s role in food assistance could contradict the “principles of limited government.”
“What mechanisms are in place to make sure that this program does not create long-term dependency on the state as far as funding goes?,” asked Rep. Nicholeen Peck, R-Tooele, during Tuesday’s hearing of the House Education Committee.
HB100, sponsored by Rep. Tyler Clancy, R-Provo, would eliminate the reduced-price lunch category from the state’s school meal assistance programs, providing free lunches to an estimated 40,000 students in kindergarten through sixth grade who qualify for reduced-price meals.
Currently, to qualify for free school meals, a family’s income must be at or below 130% of the federal poverty level — about $40,560 annually for a family of four.
Students qualify for reduced-cost lunches if their family’s income is at or below 185% of the federal poverty level — about $57,720 for a family of four.
On average, a reduced-price school meal in Utah costs 40 cents, yet schools have amassed about $2.8 million in lunch debt, as many families still struggle to afford it.
“This is still accruing so much debt for our families in the state, and many of these families are actually going to collections,” Emily Bell McCormick, founder and president of The Policy Project, told lawmakers Tuesday.
The nonprofit is working with the bill’s sponsor to raise money, in hopes that the state will keep the Summer EBT (Summer Electronic Benefit Transfer) program going.
Summer EBT is a permanent federal program established by Congress in 2022. It provides eligible families approximately $40 a month per child to help with food costs during the summer months.
The national program launched last year, but Utah, along with several other Republican-led states, chose not to participate. This year, however, the state has decided to give it a try, though future participation isn’t guaranteed.
HB100 would require Utah to keep supporting the Summer EBT program beyond this year. While the program is federally funded, states must contribute a share of the cost.
For Utah, that’s about $618,600 to secure over $31 million in summer food assistance for approximately 260,000 children across the state.
The Policy Project, along with other philanthropic organizations, would contribute Utah’s portion for the summer of 2026, but the state would be responsible for those funds in 2027 onward.
Clancy noted that, of the state’s roughly $7 billion education budget this year, the investment required by the bill to assist children in need totals around $2.5 million.
“We’re trying to be very precise and take a scalpel-like approach to hit those few students who really need the help, so they can move along that pathway to human dignity [and] self sufficiency,” Clancy said.
Concerns over federal dollars to feed children
Some lawmakers at Tuesday’s hearing said they opposed HB100 because of the Summer EBT funding requirements.
“I am concerned whether or not public education is the right mechanism to address food insecurity during the summer,” said Rep. Neil Walter, R-St. George. “I’ll be supportive of the direction that we’re going, [but] I’ll be opposing the bill primarily because of the inclusion of that provision.”
Rep. Carol Moss, D-Holladay, countered that the benefit of the bill is “profound.”
“If we look at this in comparison to other programs we fund, this is such a small amount, but it can do so much good,” Moss said. “When we have appropriated $82.5 million for vouchers, ... this is such a small part of government spending.”
Moss concluded: “No child should go to school hungry. I think that’s the bottom line.”
Rep. Mike Kohler, R-Midway, said he was concerned about “leaning” on federal dollars. He offered conditional support in committee, but did not commit to backing the bill on the floor. He argued that existing programs already meet the need and he preferred not to create another.
Even with other programs, Clancy said families continue to rack up school lunch debt, and community food assistance organizations are increasingly being stretched thin.
“There are students who are still food insecure, so we’re trying to fix that gap,” he said. “We know that hungry students aren’t going to learn.”
Peck suggested there are other “boxes we could be looking into, besides more government money.”
“Even though I care deeply about the children, ... I’m going to have to be a ‘no,’” Peck said.
Peck was one of three lawmakers on the committee to vote against the bill; eight voted in favor. The bill now awaits House floor consideration.
