Upset in Seattle High Schools Over Lunchtime
I first heard about this news at the West Seattle Blog:
Starting next Monday, less than two weeks into the new school year, high-school lunchtime will be split into two.
The district apparently isn't explaining this change, just announcing it. Messaging from principals on 9/9:
To ensure our schools remain aligned with state requirements and district policies, SPS is moving all comprehensive high schools from one lunch period to two lunch periods. This new schedule will begin on Monday, 915. This change supports important goals across all our comprehensive high schools including:
- ensuring all students have adequate time to eat lunch while meeting the state's required instructional minutes
- protecting staff lunch breaks and supporting our food service teams' contractual rights
- providing equitable access to meals for students attending off-site programs like the Skills Center
As a district, we understand that your student may experience a slight change in their daily schedule, and we are working to make this transition as smooth as possible. Our goal is to support a healthy, safe, and equitable school environment for all students.
Thank you for your continued support as we make this important adjustment. We will publish the new bell schedule by the end of the week.
There is NO announcement at the SPS website.
To note, the Board is having its first meeting of the school year on Wednesday, September 17th, starting at 4:15 pm. It's also the first Board meeting for the student directors and I hope they speak up on this issue. I'm thinking the speaker list is going to be very long for this meeting.
To be clear - are the students' going to be greatly harmed by this? Probably not. BUT this district is NOT being fair or transparent. That issue should be communicated to the SPS Board of Directors. Here's what I said in another post in the name of student mental health:
That the district cannot manage this - either because of union demands or budget problems - is really sad. Because it sounds like these students WANT and NEED this human connection that they get at lunch when eating together OR using the time for club meetings. THAT'S what the district is supposed to be fostering.
One, where was this worry about students having enough time to eat in prior years?
Two, see the SPS second reason? THAT'S the real reason and it seems to fly in the face of SOFG.
Three, you don't change an entire schedule for just one program (Skills Center students).
Four, apparently this change may mean some students at some high schools will have to wait until after 1pm for lunch.
Five, I see this in the WSB comments:
However, this change means Sealth has to lose the one long lunch period they have had on Wednesdays, which they have done to allow for longer club meetings. I’m sympathetic to that argument and am interested to hear SPS address how students should organize and participate in those kinds of activities.
I wonder how many schools were doing the same as Sealth to facilitate club meetings.
There is very little teacher support for clubs after or before school, and many members of clubs participate in schools, blocking off their time. We only have two club meeting blocks a month, which means students in multiple clubs have to choose one club to join and drop all others.
Six, why didn't the district do this BEFORE school started? I wonder if they knew this would raise a ruckus which they will go tsk, tsk and move on. I am disappointed in Superintendent Podesta.
From The Seattle Times:
Three out of 11 comprehensive SPS high schools were already operating on a two-lunch schedule when the 2025-26 school year began last week. Franklin, Rainier Beach and Chief Sealth High Schools have had two lunch periods for several years, while Cleveland High School made the change before school started this year.
Within hours of the announcement email, students began organizing to oppose the change. A student created an online petition Tuesday, which collected more than 3,000 signatures by noon Wednesday. Students are planning a multi-school walkout on Monday at 11 a.m., according to a new Instagram account called “OneLunchSPS.”
Thoughts from SEA:
The announcement and rollout of the change is “very unusual,” said Girard Montejo-Thompson, president of the Seattle Education Association teachers’ union. Typically a school’s principal and the building leadership team would decide on a schedule and the rest of the staff would vote on it, he said. “We are confused about the sense of urgency the district has around it.”
He noted that implementing the change will put a substantial large burden on registrars and school counselors, who are in charge of reworking schedules. Montejo-Thompson added that he would have preferred the change occur between semesters, when it would be less disruptive for students, teachers and staff.
Here's the issue for many students as written by a West Seattle High School senior, Lemuel Turpaud (bold mine):
I am a member of West Seattle High School, their ASB, and many clubs, and I have an important message to share to the community. Seattle Public Schools will be requiring all high schools in the district to change from one unified lunch to two separate lunches on Monday.
This proposal will kill clubs at the high school. Last March the West Seattle Rocketry Club reached out to the West Seattle Blog, and from our amazing community received over $1,200 to fund our rocketry competition. This support from the community allowed for the team to continue their project, and have financial safety going into the next year. Now with the change of school lunch policy, the Rocketry Club and other student run clubs will be facing a much larger problem than funding.
Splitting the lunch period divides students’ only shared free time to meet and join clubs. This decision will kill many clubs, specifically the smaller clubs that are created as passion projects by dedicated members of the school; Rocketry Club being one of those.
Students districtwide from almost ten schools are planning on walking out on Monday, September 15th ,if the policy is not reversed.
We ask the West Seattle community to stand with us. Please contact the school board and urge them to preserve a unified lunch period so student clubs, opportunities, and community can continue to thrive. Thank you.
-There is a planned walkout on Monday at JSCEE. Students need a signed Civic Engagement Activity Form to participate without incurring a marked absence.
- Letter to SPS directors from parents.
Comments
So we are left thinking that 1) the real reason is too awkward or sensitive to openly and clearly explain; or 2) students and parents don't deserve a clear explanation; or 3) there is no real reason. Whatever the case, they clearly enjoy the way these condescending rituals reinforce the hierarchy -- they are in charge, and students and parents don't even have the right to know the reasons, much less influence the decision.
And agree, quite the flail to wait a week and a half into the school year to roll this out. This should have been ready to go from day one, why did they wait?
Eye Roll
Doing it a few weeks into the school year probably saved high school counselors a lot of schedule changes in the aggregate from kids who needed to finagle to be with their friends.
In the meantime, it distracts us from poor test scores, dropping enrollment, misaligned funding priorities.
SP
"Dear SPS families,
"Seattle Public Schools (SPS) has received feedback from families, students, and staff on the implementation of a two-lunch schedule at all comprehensive high schools starting this school year. We appreciate everyone who has shared feedback.
"We’re writing to provide additional clarity on why some schools will experience a change and what comes next. If your student’s high school is shifting schedules, you have already received communication directly from your school’s principal.
"We made this decision to best serve our students given the time and resources available, while staying compliant with applicable laws and policies. The Seattle School Board was not involved in this decision.
"We apologize for the disruption this may have caused and remain committed to supporting our students and families as we move forward.
"Why the Change Is Necessary
"Getting healthy food during the school day is essential for student success. For many students, school meals are a key source of nutrition, and we must make sure everyone has access.
"In recent years, safety concerns have increased—especially during lunch. Having fewer students eating at the same time helps improve safety and access to meals.
"Also, state law and district policy require that schedules allow all students to have enough time to eat and care for personal hygiene while complying with required instructional minutes.
"While we regret that all school schedules did not align with these expectations going into the school year, this schedule change will ensure that all schools are now fully aligned.
"Other Important Needs
"We understand that students also need time for clubs, friendships, and support—both emotional and academic. Our school leaders will continue to work with their students and staff to find ways to keep these experiences going. Some ideas include:
"Clubs meeting before or after school
"Using advisory or flexible periods (in schools that have them)
"Having clubs hold smaller sub-group meetings and then coming together for larger full club meetings
"Looking Ahead
"In the coming week, some schools will adjust their schedules. We ask for your patience during this time.
"We remain committed to making sure every student is fed, safe, and has access to meaningful opportunities. Thank you for your patience and partnership as we work through this together.
"Sincerely,
"Fred Podesta
Superintendent
Seattle Public Schools
"Dr. Rocky Torres-Morales
Associate Superintendent
Seattle Public Schools "
1. The vast, vast majority of RHS students don't eat in the cafeteria. They get food off campus or bring it from home, and eat somewhere other than the cafeteria. The argument about access to food doesn't hold water at RHS. Same with the argument about safety concerns.
2. This new plan doesn't get students any more time to eat. What would give them time for eating and personal hygiene would be a return to the 1 hour lunch breaks that RHS had in 2023-24.
3. Clubs meeting after school is a nonstarter because that's when athletics meet. Meeting before school would cause membership to drop sharply; teens need sleep and early-morning events aren't optimal for how most teens function. RHS doesn't have an advisory or flexible period.
4. This also doesn't address the issue of allowing students time to meet with teachers and take make-up tests and get make up work. If you're invested in student success and maintaining good graduation and college attendance rates, this is perhaps the most important argument of all for keeping the schedule as it is (or resuming the 1 hour lunch break).
I received a brief reply from the RHS interim principal, Ruth Medsker, who said, "I had not seen this email. Roosevelt’s change to two lunches, along with 7 other high schools was a directive to meet state law, collective bargaining etc. is my understanding."
My conclusion is that this has pushed from the district, the principals don't have say in it, it's unpopular with faculty as well as students, and it's clearly getting pushed on short notice and at considerable political cost to benefit... someone? But not students or faculty.
Second, okay, this was not a Board call BUT the Board CAN say to the Superintendent, "Parents and students were not happy with how this was rolled out. Staff needs to do better on being transparent and timely in communications." That's not micromanaging; that's saying the process was flawed.
Third, it's access to food? Hygiene and safety? And this has been going on for years at the majority of comprehensives? Wow.
Fourth, clubs have teacher advisors. You can't make them come earlier or stay later so I'm not sure that's so helpful. Have "sub-club meetings?" Ridiculous.
They know better than to claim that somehow...someway...clubs can adjust. I advised a number of clubs and student unions and someone at Diatrict thinks it works to dividing them into two groups?! Really?!
And they'll meet as a whole group occasionally?!
"Clubs meeting before or after school
"Using advisory or flexible periods (in schools that have them)
"Having clubs hold smaller sub-group meetings and then coming together for larger full club meetings..."
And once it again showing, the district is all talk.
I've emailed into the Let's Talk tool on SPS website where the data is for the schools impacted that safety and access to meals were in jeopardy.
Same with violations to state law - from another public statement, they already said the state looks at lunch times and teacher breaks in aggregate and as a district SPS is in compliance. So what's out of compliance?
It all just seems so haphazard - why make the change 2 weeks into the year, with no data, and general statements like "student safety."
So as usual, if we expect teachers to advise clubs, we expect them to work for free.
I would like to see families hold Olympia accountable for some of this.
SP
SP
1) at some high school(s) with high consumption of cafeteria food, the lines for food were longer than permitted by district policy.
2) some high school(s) are having disciplinary problems at lunch that they don't know how to manage, and one approach they wanted to try is splitting lunch in two, so their supervisory resources can be applied to half as many students at a time.
It's recognized that split lunch is bad for students, but "equity" requires that if some high schools do it for their own internal reasons, all high schools must do it. All students must suffer equally, even if their particular school was doing fine with a single lunch. Schools with higher consumption of school food, or unmanageable disciplinary problems, are perhaps more likely to have less affluent student populations on average.
As the district's legal advisor, Mr. Narver should be prepared to clarify: Which specific statute or regulation requires this mid-semester schedule change? If state compliance was truly at risk, why wasn't this addressed before school started? How can some schools have operated with split lunches for years while others haven't, if there's a uniform state requirement?
Questions About Process: The district's own policies require board involvement in decisions affecting student outcomes. Either: The general counsel advised that board oversight wasn't needed (raising questions about that legal interpretation), OR This decision bypassed normal legal review (raising lquestions about process)
For Podesta: Under Student Outcomes Focused Governance, disrupting every high school's schedule mid-semester seems to prioritize adult/administrative concerns over students. The acting superintendent should explain: What crisis emerged between August and September requiring immediate action? Why weren't families given input as SOFG requires? What data shows this improves student outcomes?
The Pattern:The district repeatedly cites "state law" or "legal requirements" when making unpopular decisions. The board has a right to request written documentation of these requirements - not just verbal assurances. Taxpayers deserve to know if legal opinions are driving major disruptions, or if "legal requirements" is simply a convenient shield.