Description
Recently Salem announced free meals at all schools. Why? Many families are more than able to either send food or pay for their child's food at school. Taxes keep going up, we are also spending a large amount of money on parks even though very few people use them and maintenance is non existent. The new park on New Derby is crazy. No parking and no parent should want their child to ride a bike to that location. Who is paying for all this?
31 Comments
Nancy Gilberg (Registered User)
From this Salem News article, http://www.salemnews.com/news/local_news/free-meals-at-all-salem-schools-next-year/article_11c3812d-7bdb-5695-a69d-19c51694399b.html
"The program is covered by federal grants, Ruiz said, which means it doesn't come out of the district's budget or taxpayers' wallets."
Pedestrian Paul (Registered User)
An anonymous SeeClickFix user (Registered User)
Skipper (Registered User)
Got it
Of course the New Derby park will be taken over by the homeless and the police cost will go up. Will that be paid by taxpaers or taxpayers?
Pedestrian Paul (Registered User)
Nancy Gilberg (Registered User)
Skipper (Registered User)
Pedestrian Paul (Registered User)
Closed Mayor's Office (Verified Official)
Thanks for your inquiry! The free lunch program is federally funded and parents or guardians who wish to send a lunch from home instead of having their child get the school lunch are still free to do so.
The acquisition of the land at 289 Derby Street was through a bond and the construction of the new park is being made possible through a state grant.
Tim (Registered User)
Robyn (Registered User)
Skipper.
"At this festive season of the year, Mr Scrooge, ... it is more than usually desirable that we should make some slight provision for the Poor and destitute, who suffer greatly at the present time. Many thousands are in want of common necessaries; hundreds of thousands are in want of common comforts, sir."
"Are there no prisons?"
"Plenty of prisons..."
"And the Union workhouses." demanded Scrooge. "Are they still in operation?"
"Both very busy, sir..."
"Those who are badly off must go there."
"Many can't go there; and many would rather die."
"If they would rather die," said Scrooge, "they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population."
Robyn (Registered User)
Reopened George Coelho (Registered User)
Helaine Gelin Berg (Registered User)
Pedestrian Paul (Registered User)
Skipper (Registered User)
Closed Mayor's Office (Verified Official)
Robyn (Registered User)
Yes, exactly.
Also:
Can we all agree that raising each other up is for the best of society? Not supplying food for our children in the community is an attack against all that is right in the world.
I understand your concerns about paying for food for kids who aren't in need, but I have to say I think it's a good equalizer. Have any of you ever been the kid in the "free lunch" group? The kids whose only vegetable is a dab of ketchup? The kid whose only meal is lunch? I know these things may still happen, but for the love of human kind - can we all give a tiny bit so the children in our city are well-nourished and can learn?
Pedestrian Paul (Registered User)
How is my paying for food for those that can easily afford it a "good equalizer"? Maybe their parents would be so kind as to pay for my new swimming pool and Lexus SUV? That would be a nice "equalizer" too.
Robyn (Registered User)
Because it isn't actually about you and your desire to have a Lexus or a pool.
Did you read the states in the Salem News article? 40% or more of the families in our schools need assistance to feed their children. This is a huge problem. Kids going to the nurse at 8:00 because they're bellies ache because they are hungry? That's not good for your tax dollars either. These kids are missing class time to go to the nurse to eat, then fail their tests, then fail their standardized tests, can't graduate... and guess who has to help them pay to survive? By feeding them, we are only setting them up to succeed.
Additionally, it's about the fact that currently, the children all know who the "free lunch" kids are. This can cause they to be bullied, or to avoid lunch all together... or to cause embarrassment for their families and the children just plain don't eat. In part because of the stigma you are so elegantly explaining. I won't try to change your mind, but I do hope you take a moment to step back and look in the bottom of your heart to think about how this is actually a very good thing for our community - even if it means we each pay a little tiny bit more. More educated children who aren't hungry is nothing but good for our city.
Tim (Registered User)
Pedestrian Paul (Registered User)
George Coelho (Registered User)
Robyn (Registered User)
Helaine Gelin Berg (Registered User)
George Coelho (Registered User)
Robyn (Registered User)
Skipper (Registered User)
Back in the 80's Salem was on a path to become a bedroom community for urban professionals. We were courting empty nesters, working professionals living in Boston and so on.
How did Salem deteriorate over the past 30 years to end up like Lawrence where our children even need meal assistance?
What's going on in DC now has not had time to be relevant so let's not go there. This is a slow deterioration of our city over a longer period. How did we go from that upscale plan 30 years ago to having to provide meals at school? Other towns succeeded at it but Salem failed to pull it off. Why?
Robyn (Registered User)
Pedestrian Paul (Registered User)
Skipper (Registered User)