Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Speaker 0]: You're welcome. Alright. Good morning. It is Tuesday, February 17, and it's a great day. And today we're going to look at S-twenty six. We've been looking at that bill a little bit regarding artificial dyes and foods and beverages sold in schools. And we have two folks to testify this morning, Scott say you're here and Laura Lovaca. Both here. So, Scott, why don't you come up? You're first on the list. Did you want to go together or no? No. Okay. Thanks for the

[Scott Fay]: Right.

[Speaker 0]: Wasn't a bad drive. Oh, no. Yeah.

[Scott Fay]: We've done it before. Good morning. Thanks for having me.

[Speaker 0]: Good to have you here.

[Scott Fay]: My name is Scott Fay. I serve as the school nutrition director for the Essex Westford School District. I'm also a committed advocate for school meals and the critical role they play in student health, learning, and their overall well-being. And I really thank you for the opportunity to speak today. First of all, I share the goal behind this bill. I we all want students to have access to high quality nourishing food at school. School professionals are equally committed to student wellness and operate under this some of the most rigorous federal nutritional standards in the country. With that in mind, I'm here today to respectfully urge the committee not to move forward with this legislation as written. Every day, see how school meals impact students. This year, we've changed our meal operations at EWSD Therapeutic and Alternative Schools. One of the directors recently shared this story. Since shifting to delivering prescribed prepared lunch, we have a 100% of students eating almost every day. They read the lunch menu and talk about their favorite meals almost every day and get excited about what they could get to have. They love Jen and often meet her at her van to help carry James or shovel a pass if it's been snowing. We've had several times when students tell us that lunch is the only reason why they came to school on days when things are tough. That's the power of a strong school food culture and healthy meal program. Participation isn't an abstract number. It reflects trust, consistency, and relationships. Schools need to support to create good stories like this, connecting with students, fostering engagement, and providing healthy, welcoming food environment every day. That's why I believe we should be thoughtful about how we approach this issue as 26 proposes prohibiting certain artificial dyes and foods served or sold in schools. While well intentioned, it functions as an unfunded mandate and adds another layer of compliance to programs that are already highly regulated and struggle to be financially self sustaining. It also places responsibility solely on schools rather than addressing these additives more broadly in the food system. School nutrition programs operate under detailed federal meal pattern requirements that specify calorie ranges, sodium targets, whole grain thresholds, fruit and vegetable subgroup minimums, and milk specifications. We follow strict procurement standards, production record requirements, civil rights compliance, wellness policy mandates, food safety plans, on-site administrative reviews, financial audits, extensive reimbursement related reporting. Every menu, recipe, and product must comply with layer federal and state regulations before it reaches a student's plan. Adding another standalone compliance requirement without additional funding or staffing doesn't simplify the system or improve coherence. It further complicates an already highly regulated program. As Vermont State's Director of Child Nutrition, Rosie Krueger mentioned last week, national manufacturers have already reformulated many products to remove these additives, and we anticipate additional replacement products formulated specifically for school meal programs by the enactment date. This means the bill may ultimately impact a relatively small subset of products while still requiring schools to implement ongoing time consuming monitoring and documentation systems. When the market forces are already driving reformulation, it may be worth considering whether additional regulation targeted only at schools is the most efficient approach. If the goal is to reduce artificial additives in school meals, one of the most effective strategies is to invest in and incentivize fresh cooking using whole and local foods. Many schools are already moving in this direction. This year, grant requests exceeded the local foods incentive grants program annual appropriation, and three quarters of Vermont school food authorities are already engaging with the local food incentive grant. This demonstrates that the incentive is working, helping schools purchase more whole and multiple. When schools prepare meals from basic ingredients, fresh produce, whole grains, and unprocessed proteins, artificial dyes, and food additives largely disappear naturally. Rather than focusing on prohibition, we could invest in equipment, infrastructure that supports scratch preparation. Could expand culinary training and workforce development for school kitchen staff. We could expand farm to school and local procurement incentives. We could offer grant funding trans to transition away from highly processed foods. In other words, let's spend our time and our resources cooking real food, diversifying our menus to reflect our student populations, and connecting with students, like, really connecting with students rather than documenting and more regulations. This approach strengthens local agriculture and build staff skills. It improves meal quality and reduces the use of additives, all without creating an additional compliance burden. School nutrition programs are one of your most powerful public health tools available. If the legislature's goal is to improve the nutritional quality of school meals, investing in scratch cooking capacity will deliver broader and longer lasting results than an ad a targeted additive bank. We are already we're ready to continue improving. We simply need a policy that aligns with our operational realities, supports long term transformation rather than layering additional regulation onto an already complex system. For those for these reasons, I respectfully urge the committee not to move forward with f '26, but instead to consider alternative strategies that strengthen Vermont's school meal programs in a sustainable and meaningful way. Thank you.

[Speaker 0]: Well, thank you. And you did hear Rosie Krueger's testimony.

[Scott Fay]: I did. Yeah. Good.

[Speaker 0]: And then one of the things that's not in the bill is any compliance or requirements. Right. Yeah. So it's really to ensure that we're not seeing the little bits die

[Senator John Benson]: creeping in.

[Scott Fay]: Right. And I don't think you're gonna find one school nutrition director that wants to bring those items in, and I think most people are working to bring mold down. And I did know I do know that there was that was part of the conversation. I think the only way really to ensure they don't creep in is to upgrade the clients, to build them into our administrative reviews. And I just wanted to make the point that that it's really complicated already. We spent a lot of time doing all these regulations. And one thing we really learned from University School Meals, which I truly appreciate, and I think everybody would stand with me on that one. So thank everybody who voted yes on that, is we all we do so much better when we're spending our time in the kitchens when we're actually cooking and doing the thing that kids need us to do rather than collecting money, providing documentation. It's just so much time is so much better spent when we get to do do that, and we're not facing administrative learning.

[Senator Martine Larocque Gulick (Vice Chair)]: Go ahead, Senator. Thank you, madam chair. Thanks for being here, Scott. Good to

[Laura Lavaca]: see you. I was wondering if there's

[Senator Martine Larocque Gulick (Vice Chair)]: a way to shift, if we were to move forward with this bill, is there a way to shift the administrative burden to like the AOE so that school districts wouldn't have to bear that burden or

[Scott Fay]: I'm not sure. I think they would have to, I think it would be on both sides, right? I believe the way it would work, like all of the other policies that are in place, Andy, is they figure out how to check and balance us, and we figure out how to prove to them. So I'm preparing for an administrative review over the next couple of months, and the hours and hours and hours that my staff has spent collecting all the documentation that our meals are meeting the meal plan requirements, that we're doing our procurement right, the amount of time spent on that is a lot. And and I get it, and I and I do believe we should hold food authorities to a high standard. I absolutely believe that. And I think with this piece, we're all I I don't believe we're not on the same page. I have not gone and talked to every other school director, but I've I've talked to a lot of people about this. I think we're all on the same page, and I think we're all going in the same direction. I think manufacturers are going in the same direction because the market's forcing them to.

[Speaker 0]: Well, actually, it's because of the EU reach and that there that is a much larger market for these foods and they're they've banned these things already, then the manufacturers are responding and now they're seeing it's more difficult to produce two different types of So there's a legitimate reason for the reason that that is happening, but I'm not sure it's the good faith of the manufacturer. So once we've seen Robert F. Kennedy start talking about processed foods and food dyes, things automatically have become a discussion at General Mills and other producers. Yeah, there's a lot of reasons for it. I'm not disputing what you said.

[Scott Fay]: The why.

[Laura Lavaca]: I'm not

[Speaker 0]: sure the manufacturers are all thinking this is the right thing to do. Right. Yeah. Question.

[Senator John Benson]: We heard in earlier testimony, we heard in your testimony, that most of the dyes are not in spoofing anyway. So and I heard what you've kind of said is that maybe we don't even need this. But in one of the amendments that was put forward to us, there were some additional elements added to the list besides dyes, I don't know whether you've seen that list and whether those are things that you believe aren't already in the food or not, but it's just trying to understand where we stand on Yeah. There was

[Scott Fay]: I did see the most recent markups, I believe, with the additives, and I did not. I haven't had a chance. I don't know. I did see a list that Rosie provided. Yeah. I don't know if those new items are in that list or not. I assume not, but I haven't had a chance to really look at it. And I would need to go back

[Senator John Benson]: and For us to know.

[Scott Fay]: Yep. Yep. That's something we look at. But again, wasn't sure if that was taken into consideration with the list that I had seen for Rosie, if

[Senator John Benson]: it is for us. I can't Other answer

[Speaker 0]: questions? You for being here. You're welcome. Bring your I'm always happy testimony. It is very helpful. Good.

[Scott Fay]: I'm always happy to talk after school meals.

[Speaker 0]: Good. It's a good thing. Yeah. Laura, Lavaca. Lavaca, good morning. Thank you

[Laura Lavaca]: for having me. The downside of being, following someone is I'm gonna repeat some of what Scott already said. Okay. But I'm gonna offer a few more details that might be helpful for the committee. So my name is Laura Lavaca. I'm the School Nutrition Director for the Burlington School District. I also serve as a co chair for the Vermont School Purchasing Group, and I'm the Executive Board for the School Nutrition Association for Vermont. And I am also here today, and thank you for the opportunity to testify in opposition of S-twenty six, which I do not believe is an effective or necessary approach to preventing the inclusion of the listed harmful ingredients in school meals. I've spent twenty years dedicated to providing healthy school meals for students, passionate about supporting our communities through farm to school initiatives, and finding innovative ways to engage students in their health and well-being. Over the course of my career, as Scott mentions, I've seen lots of changes, significant changes in the rules that govern the nutritional value of school meals. Most notably is the Healthy Hunger Free Kids Act, which as Scott mentioned, regulates fat, calories, sodium, most recently sugar, as well as ensuring that daily needs for micro and macro nutrients are met. Throughout my career, these regulations have been welcomed guidance through the work of feeding students well. In Vermont, I'm proud to be in Vermont. I feel like we are leaders in the nation who are required to provide nutraceutical meals through strong farm to school efforts, and focus on scratch cooking practices that ensure our meals exceed federal nutrition requirements. From our state agency to school nutrition staff on the ground, there's already a strong commitment to prioritizing fresh, minimally processed foods and avoiding harmful ingredients, some of which are listed in this legislation and some that go beyond that. The Vermont Go Local Foods Incentive Grant has played a key role in strengthening Vermont's school nutrition programs, already strong commitment to fresh, minimally processed foods. As noted in the Agency of Education's legislative report on 01/28/2026, the local foods incentive program is demonstrating strong results in helping Vermont schools purchase more locally grown foods, benefiting both student nutrition and the state's agricultural economy. There is clear opportunity to build on the success by ensuring that all eligible programs are fully reimbursed, providing targeted technical assistance for programs that are not yet meeting the required thresholds, investing in school kitchen infrastructure, and supporting Vermont based food manufacturing that complies with child nutrition program standards. Vermont University School Meals ensures that every student has access to breakfast and lunch without financial barriers, while removing the administrative burden of collecting payments and financial data from families. This allows school nutrition professionals to focus on preparing meals from whole ingredients, giving them greater control over food quality, ingredient selection, and overall nutritional value. As Rosie Krueger shared, only a nominal number of foods purchased by Vermont programs containing the die addressed in this legislation. I share this list with our broad line distributor, which serves most Vermont schools, to provide a usage report. These items account for approximately $219,000 of nearly $20,000,000 in food purchases in Vermont so far this year, roughly oneten of a percent of total purchases. This figure does not include additional spending on direct farmer purchases. We have shared this information with school districts statewide and offered alternative products where available. The School Nutrition Association, Vermont School Purchasing Group, and the Agency of Education Child Nutrition Programs collaborate to provide tools, guidance, and education to program operators to help them make informed decisions about the foods served in schools. These organizations can continue to identify foods containing the ingredients referenced in this legislation, and beyond that, and keep program operators informed. A more centralized monitoring system shifts responsibility from individual operators and creates an opportunity for collaboration and learning. School nutrition programs across Vermont are ready and willing partners in education. Initiatives like the local foods incentive and universal school meals legislation help improve outcomes by incentivizing quality and promoting collaboration. These investments return tangible benefits to the community. I encourage focusing on collaborative strategies that support the health and well-being of our students. Additional regulations require significant time and resources, and there are more effective ways to invest in our community and support the essential work of school nutrition professionals. Moreover, the responsibility for producing foods without harmful ingredients lies with the manufacturers, not the consumer. Existing legislation, H260, addresses this appropriately by directing requirements to the manufacturer and distributors. Our energy is better spent highlighting and expanding what is already working: scratch cooking, farm to school connections, and nutrition education. School nutrition program, schools, and communities need more collaboration in these areas. Additional regulations are unlikely to advance the positive strides that Vermont School Nutrition Programs are making to improve the children's health, which is why I am opposed to the public. Okay,

[Speaker 0]: thank you. And we get it. One of the best collaborations that we've had is Farm to School and Fresh Foods. We know that. In fact, my first session here, we started the bringing farm to foods to schools before there was a program working with, I wish we got her first name, it's Emma Boucher, anyway, in the ag agency and department. That was my Joe Boucher?

[Laura Lavaca]: Are you talking about from the USDA Child Nutrition Program? No, go From

[Speaker 0]: the agency of agriculture, Department of Agriculture, and we talked with her about how could we get more farms bringing apples into the school and were there other products that we could get. That's the beginning of it. One of the things that we really haven't focused on is what we're looking at here and how do we reduce the toxic chemicals that kids are being exposed to. That's really what this is about and what I'm hearing each of you say, and correct me if I'm wrong, I'm hearing you each say that these chemicals are not really a problem. They're diminishing rapidly and that you're seeing manufacturers move to other things. Some of it because of the federal discussion, but some of it because of the work you guys are doing to bring fresh booze in. So I hear what you say, and certainly we're not forgetting this, we're taking it into consideration. I don't see any requirement in here for you and maybe we should put a requirement in as Senator Gulick was suggesting for AOE, you brought up a good discussion for us.

[Laura Lavaca]: Appreciate both of you doing that. Generally speaking, think education is what our programs need. So if a requirement were to become part of the legislation, hopefully the requirement would be more centralized in informing our programs rather than asking individual operators to

[Speaker 0]: I understood. Yeah, that's loud and clear. Right. Then why reinvent the wheel in every single school district? That's what you're saying, right? Yeah. So it's on the list that says, be careful of this. One more fruit loops.

[Laura Lavaca]: And there were surprises. I mean, when I looked at the list that Rosie provided, I looked at each thing and as I said, I went to the front line distributor and there was one food on there that surprised me that had food down. And as it turns out, it likely surprised most of us because we ordered, as a state, more of that than any other product. Wow. And so that tells me, we all know because we're not ordering this, except that one was a surprise. And so education is really the kingpin that's going to move the needle for us, more than anything. Education, and again, targeting legislation at these manufacturers, not at the consumer. Thank you. Thank you. Senator Benson?

[Senator John Benson]: So I just want to go back to the same question I asked earlier, you said you reviewed the list. So was that the full list that we now have, or was that just the dyes?

[Laura Lavaca]: That was just the initial list that Rosie published. And I will go back to my office and look for the rest of the list. And so I have not reviewed those. But again, to repeat, if doing scratch cooking and using whole foods, none of that matters. You know, if we have more time for breakfast in the class, not having to send breakfast to the classroom and serving breakfast in the cafeteria, so not having to use packaged foods that then have to go out, that is an opportunity then to have more scratch cooking and more nutritious foods for kids.

[Senator John Benson]: Just a follow-up, another thing that we did hear is that some schools don't have the kitchen facilities, and so they're providing pre packaged food. That's a different piece.

[Senator Martine Larocque Gulick (Vice Chair)]: I'm on the Burlington School Board, so it's really great to meet you. But I think what Senator Benson is referring to is I had mentioned when BHS got closed down and we had to move to Macy's. I remember, you know, we really had to change our, obviously, cooking situation because we had incredible food at the high school and then at Macy's, was, there was kitchen. It was like the shoe department or something. It is Michael Kors cafe.

[Laura Lavaca]: Michael Kors cafe. That was my

[Senator Martine Larocque Gulick (Vice Chair)]: I was worried that as we see potentially other schools closing, you may have to pivot to a whole different way to put a great food. Not that I want the food to have red dye in it, but that again, this is the administrative burden and because you've got this chain, we have to turn on

[Speaker 0]: a dime as you know. Yeah,

[Laura Lavaca]: mean I think there are strategies, especially now we have the experience of doing this in Burlington, and that information can be shared with other school districts who might be facing similar challenges. When I came on board three years ago, one of the things we started doing is cooking some of the food at a different site that we could bring over. Yes, school nutrition programs are dependent on manufacturers for certain items, but we have control over what we decide to procure. So as a co chair for the Vermont School Purchasing Group, we engage the entire state operators to look at products and what's important to us. And overwhelmingly, clean ingredients are important. We're ordering chicken tenders, but what's important is that we have a whole muscle clean ingredient chicken tender that we procured for all schools in the state to purchase. So there are strategies and there's information in education, and yes, infrastructure is important for sure. For Burlington, I think it's fairly easy. We'll be in our new high school next year. Hopefully I'll be moving in in April. I'm very excited. And I'm looking forward to really furthering my vision for whole scratch cooking and sending it out to all the schools, right? But that's a little c. Geography is no problem. I think in some of this state, geography is an issue. That's a real challenge. And there are ways, as I was, prior to Burlington School District, I was at Addison Central School District, and geography was an issue there. There are strategies we can use to ensure that we're using more local, fresh, whole ingredients. It's possible. Thank you. This is great. Thank you both. You for having us.

[Speaker 0]: We're good. Thanks for coming in. And we'll continue our discussion on the bill. You know, we'll see how we can work to accommodate some of the concerns that you have about each school district having to have an eye on every single order. Thank you. Alright. The committee, what we're going

[Senator Virginia "Ginny" Lyons (Chair)]: to do is we're going

[Speaker 0]: to take a break. We're going to go on live and and then we'll have Katie come in but and we do that thank you