Free school meals can help students avoid hunger during the school day, potentially boosting development and academic performance.

At its simplest, passing Colorado Proposition LL would allow the existing Colorado Healthy School Meals for All (School Meals) Program to keep and spend revenue that has already been collected above the limit set under the Taxpayer’s Bill of Rights (TABOR). This type of measure is commonly called a “TABOR override,” and these types of measures ask voters if they approve of a governmental body keeping and spending money above the TABOR cap.

Passing Prop LL would increase available revenue for the School Meals program by about $14 million in its first full year compared to if it fails. It would do so by maintaining 2025 tax deduction levels instead of allowing them to increase, plus would allow the state to keep about $12.4 million in so-called “excess revenue” collected above the TABOR cap.

If the ballot measure fails, about $12.4 million would need to be refunded, split among about 200,000 taxpayers, but the School Meals program would still exist.
Prop LL is statutory, not Constitutional, and would pass with a simple majority vote (50% + at least one).

Why Was Prop LL Proposed?

School Meals Program funding has not recently been able to meet demand. The program took in about $100 million last year but had a $56 million shortfall, per Colorado Public Radio and other sources. The state is required under current law to make up for School Meals Program funding shortfalls using State Education Fund (SEF) money, but SEF money is only approved through FY 2025-26 at this time.

The state legislature passed HB 25-1274 this year to put Prop LL on the ballot, along with a separate ballot measure (Proposition MM) that would provide up to $95 million in new revenue for the School Meals Program and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).

If either or both ballot measures (LL and MM) pass, the measures could reduce or even eliminate School Meals funding gaps without seeking other sources of revenue.

If both LL and MM fail, the state would need to make cost adjustments to the program or work toward identifying other sources of funding. In particular, fewer schools would be able to participate in the program, since a state bill passed this year (Senate Bill 25-214) would limit participation if MM fails to “eligible sites,” defined as “those that currently participate in the USDA’s Community Eligibility Provision (CEP)” or are identified by the Colorado Department of Education based on free meal eligibility.

What Does the School Meals Program Do?

As the name suggests, the School Meals program is geared toward funding free school meals for students in participating schools. According to the Colorado Department of Education, its broad purpose is to “ensure all students have access to a healthy meal during the school day, to promote equity and reduce the stigma associated with participating in school meal programs and to support the nourishment students need to achieve academic success.”

All Colorado public schools (including charters) and qualifying childcare institutions can “opt-in” to the School Meals Program – that is, it’s not mandatory. Boulder Valley School District and St. Vrain School District both currently participate in the program.

Before voters approved the current School Meals Program in 2022, there were already school meals programs in Colorado schools, including federal programs like the National School Lunch Program, but the School Meals Program provided funding that helped significantly boost participation numbers.

According to the Colorado Department of Education, the School Meals Program increased the number of students eating school lunches on a daily basis by about 30% in the program’s first year – from 54,364,553 to 70,834,396. School breakfasts increased by about 37%, from 21,955,643 to 29,978,677.

For a great deal of additional information on the School Meals program, visit https://www.cde.state.co.us/nutrition/healthy-school-meals-for-all-program

School Meals History Primer

The School Meals program was established after Colorado voters passed Proposition FF in 2022 by about 57% – 43%. Prop FF provided revenue by limiting state income tax deductions for people earning more than $300,000 in federal adjusted gross income. Prop FF also required state and school meal providers to participate in certain federal programs to bring in additional federal funds.

The state also passed HB 24-1390 in 2024 to consider program adjustments after the early phases of School Meals implementation. The bill authorized a technical advisory group to examine items like: maximizing federal funding; cost management; equity; long-term resiliency; and revenue options.

In case Proposition MM does not pass, the state legislature passed SB 25-214 this year as a contingency plan to manage School Meals expenses if revenue is insufficient.  As noted earlier, the bill would restrict School Meals Program participation to “eligible sites” if Prop MM fails.

Prop LL PRO:

  • More funding for the School Meals program will literally fund more meals.
  • Some families really need financial help, and the School Meals program helps these families save money on food costs.
  • Prop LL is primarily a TABOR override, which just lets the School Meals program use the revenue that’s already been collected instead of refunding it to taxpayers.
  • Proper nutrition can help better ensure adequate physical development for growing students.
  • Students who are hungry might not perform well academically, and the lack of hunger might help them better concentrate on their studies.

Prop LL CON:

  • Some people believe the state should not have the responsibility for feeding students, although defeating Prop LL would not end the School Meals program.
  • The state might be able to operate the School Meals program without Prop LL money, by limiting eligibility or otherwise reducing costs.
  • Some of the taxpayers who fund the School Meals program might be able to use a TABOR refund for other purposes.
  • Some people question whether School Meals program funding shortfalls are more due to loose eligibility guidelines than lack of funding.

Campaign Proponents:

  • Keep Kids Fed Colorado: As of the Oct. 31 Secretary of State’s disclosure report, this committee had raised $739,235 in campaign contributions.
  • Proponent Website: https://www.yesonllandmm.com/

Richard’s Take

Vote YES on Prop LL. It’s an easy decision for me. For the most part Prop LL is only a TABOR override letting the state keep money it already collected, and I’d rather feed kids with a relatively small amount of money (by statewide budget standards) than refund it to taxpayers who probably shouldn’t be hungry.

Some of the opposition points seem worthy of consideration, maybe in my opinion into the longer-term, but they won’t change my vote on Prop LL. If the state’s having a tough time fully funding a program, that can always be a sign it’s worth reviewing the program, although I’d review other programs first because this one is about feeding growing kids. It’s not a good society that lets kids go hungry, in my opinion, but in the “new abnormal” there might be increased danger of doing just that.

I grew up on “reduced-price” lunches during my school years. It reduced some of the burden my existence put on my loving parents, who could then spend some of that time and money on other needs. So, maybe I’m a bit biased because I know what it was like to get a hot lunch every day at school, but even if I hadn’t gotten my Sloppy Joes from the Lunch Lady, I think as an adult I’d easily be able to appreciate that it would be a real benefit for others.