Share This Article
The Sudbury Public Schools School Committee deliberated on and voted to approve two one-year contract extensions for the district’s existing food service provider on Monday night.
Members Karyn Jones and Mary Stephens raised concerns they had about the food quality, and cited concerns shared with them by parents in the district.
“I don’t know if you’ve ever seen the food. I think that’s just my hesitation about extending it. Because I do know, not to talk about my own children, they used to buy and then there was a change. I’m just wondering what happened with the food quality.”
(1:06:50)
Superintendent Brad Crozier, who has apparently never tasted salt, responded:
“The USDA has continually decreased the amount of sodium that is in the food because they want to feed the kids less sodium. And what people have told me, is that when you reduce the sodium in the food then it doesn’t taste as good.”
(1:08:00)
Crozier indicated the he’d be willing to have a conversation with the vendor about the variety of options available.
Member Mary Stephens jumped in:
“I also have heard a lot of complaints. Some from my kids, but some just from the community also about the quality of the food, or sometimes even the quantity of things. So I would encourage those conversations.”
Vice-Chair Gerson later added in defense of the food quality:
“I will say, school meals are not like gourmet, like we all know. They’re not gourmet meals. Any parent that’s been in the school at any time has seen them and been like well that’s interesting, that’s an interesting way to meet the FDA requirements…”
(1:15:36)
The administration shared the fact that the existing vendor is the only vendor who has responded to the request for proposals in recent years, which was attributed to the fact that SPS is a smaller district. Gerson raised concerns that they do not want to sour the relationship with the only vendor that has responded to RFP’s.
The administration also questioned the validity of the concerns raised by Jones and Stephens, and claimed they are not receiving complaints about the food served in Sudbury Public Schools. Business and Finance Director Don Sawyer noted: “We’re not getting complaints either.” (1:18:00)
Crozier and Sawyer repeatedly pointed to USDA requirements for school lunches as a driving factor behind what is served, and how much is served. That was also the explanation for the food waste generated at the schools. Sawyer added:
“We hear a lot that students are required to take all the sub-groups even if they don’t want them. But they are required to take them, and most of it ends up in a trash can. And that doesn’t sit well with any of us, but we’re required to have the student take all of it by the USDA, or we lose our federal funding.”
(1:17:30)
So the government is responsible for the food, there are no complaints, and most of it ends up in the trash.
Mary Stephens asked to delay the vote to provide time to evaluate what other similarly-sized districts were doing for food service and gather more information. Jones asked for a delay so that the administration could have conversations with the vendor about possible improvements and report back.
The majority of the committee did not go for that. They voted 3-2 to approve the two one-year extensions. And that may prove useful to the Sudbury Energy and Sustainability Committee, which is awaiting a final answer on its offer to provide funding for a composting program at SPS. In the meantime, the administration said it would gather feedback and speak with their food service vendor.