Readers Write: Free student breakfasts, paying it forward (maybe), Cedar Lake, polarization

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes letters from readers online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

I was appalled at the pictures on the Oct. 25 front page of the Minnesota Star Tribune and the accompanying article “Breakfast is free, but far from easy.” The breakfast offered to our young children only appears to be contributing to the obesity and prediabetes epidemic that is jeopardizing the future of our youngest citizens. In addition, sugary cereals and highly processed food, with its additives and preservatives, have been well documented to increase hyperactivity and decrease focus. This is not serving our teachers well, either.

The price tag of $480 million over two years will only continue to grow as food prices rise. I offer a different, more healthy solution. First of all, let’s start a new program to include only those families that qualify based on financial need. Why should all Minnesota taxpayers be on the hook for families that can afford breakfast for their own children? Now let’s take that $480 million and invest in our existing food shelf system. Food shelves already do a great job of food rescue partnership with grocery stores but to my understanding could use additional funding to purchase more protein-rich items, e.g. eggs, meat, cheese, etc., and additional fresh produce as needed. Travel vouchers would be included as necessary.

This new program would remove breakfast at school and address the core problem of food insecurity at home for parents and children who need it. If these children don’t have healthy food on the breakfast table, there is a good chance that the parents don’t either.

I realize for some, this version of free breakfast for all at school is a matter of convenience. And yet, as parents we take on the responsibility of feeding, clothing and teaching personal care to our children. Parents have had owned this task for thousands of years. Let’s help equip parents who need food assistance to obtain quality food from the food shelf system. Everyone will be healthier for it.

Tim Rubash, Apple Valley

•••

I’m writing in regard to the article today on free breakfasts. Does anyone else looking at this photo feel we could do better with the food choices we’re offering children? Most of the food and juice options are sugary and in single-use plastics. I’m not sure why cooked meals on site and reusable trays, silverware and cups sent through dishwashers and/or sanitizers have given way to so much plastic and sugar. We need better solutions to provide a healthy and less wasteful meal for our hungry students.

Rebecca Fredrickson, Burnsville

An article in the Oct. 26 paper detailed a new social media campaign where moms across the country are anonymously buying gift cards or leaving cash in baby items at Target and Walmart stores (”Gift cards in baby items pay it forward”). This started when a media influencer passed on the story of a young mother finding a silver clutch bag, price tag still on it, misplaced on a shelf in the baby aisle. She assumed that another young mom gave up buying the silver clutch in order to buy something for her baby. The influencer shared the story and it went viral with more than 20 million views, subsequently generating 150 TikTok videos showing people attaching money or gift cards to baby items in these big stores.

I had to reread this article to believe this is really happening. This is a very illogical way to help struggling young parents, although I’m sure that Target and Walmart love it. If helping needy parents is the goal, why not instead give money or gift cards to nonprofits that work with parents in need? They are easy to find (think food shelves, nonprofit clothing stores, churches, social service organizations, etc.) and they will make sure the financial help gets to the parents who need it, not just a random person who buys diapers or wants a silver clutch bag to go with their new dress and doesn’t really need help. No one needs a silver clutch bag. If that hypothetical young mom actually gave up a silver clutch bag in order to afford diapers, good for her. That’s what parents do and should do. That is not a real hardship.

I think this article says a lot about materialism, social media and the people who profit from it, and not much about how to recognize real financial need or effectively help others.

Mary Bolton, Stillwater

Maggie Koerth’s Strib Voices commentary from Oct. 24 “This land is our land. But it sure feels like their land” strongly resonated with me. Her submission was superbly written and laid out the unusual dyad between the Minneapolis Park and Recreation Board and the encroachments allowed to homeowners at southeast Cedar Lake and the south side of Kenilworth Channel. As described by Koerth in her attempt to walk the park lakeshore, these encroachments block public access to lakeshore acquired in 1933 by Theodore Wirth and the Park Board.

As a 32-year resident of the west side of Cedar Lake Park, a short two-block walk to the lake, I have never been able and still am unable to circumnavigate the lakeshore, all land owned by the Park Board — and therefore the public — and yes, this land is our land!

Knowing this public terrain that I am unable to get to, I still feel ire passing the south beach, and rather than continuing a lakeshore walk, I have to enter Burnham Road — a two-way traffic street with no public sidewalk — and re-connect to Cedar Lake Park three blocks away at Burnham Bridge. It is frustrating and uncomfortable along this three-block walk in the street.

It’s hard not to be resentful of the residents along Park Lane who reap the special privileges of private lakeshore, docks, patios, retaining walls and sole access to the public shore land from their backyards that abut public parkland. However, none of this could exist without the Park Board, which has supported, facilitated and condoned this exclusive situation for over 86 years, all under the umbrella of “temporary encroachment permits” issued back in 1938! It defies the term “temporary”!

Why has the Park Board not heeded the words of Frederick Law Olmsted (creator of New York’s Central Park) in his address to the first Board of Park Commissioners, that common green space must always be available to everyone and defended against private encroachment? He said that public land is not for the benefit of one or more individuals, and that failure to uphold this principle is a breach of the public trust!

It is time for the Park Board to define this parkland as public land and render it available to all!

A shout-out to Koerth’s walking companion, Andrew Tilman, for his 2021 MinnPost article, “Parks for all? Minneapolis should do better along Cedar Lake.”

Ron (Jake) Werner, St. Louis Park

The writer is retired from 34 years of urban forestry with Minneapolis Park and Recreation.

I often hear from people about how difficult it has become to disagree politically without damaging relationships. This distressing reality is something we’re all grappling with, and it’s more important than ever to find ways to reach out and connect with one another.

In response, I’ve committed to a personal challenge: to be a force for unity. Inspired by the timeless words, “Be the change you wish to see in the world,” I believe bridging divides begins with fostering empathy and respect, even when we disagree. Instead of labeling or dismissing others based on political or cultural differences, we should strive to understand the motivations and concerns behind their beliefs.

Finding common ground starts with recognizing our shared values — such as the pursuit of justice, safety, respect for others and well-being. These are goals we all desire for our communities. Engaging in civil discourse gives us the opportunity to express our views without hostility, aiming for constructive dialogue rather than deepening divisions.

Ultimately, this is about setting an example of patience and openness. Too often, we stop short at disagreement, failing to look beyond our differences to see the shared goals that unite us. By leading with understanding, we can guide our communities toward greater unity. I believe that, as a county, a country and a world we have the ability to come together around these common aspirations rather than allowing ourselves to be divided.

This is the kind of leadership we need — leaders who unite us based on shared values and goals, rather than exploiting fear and divisiveness.

Let’s take this step together.

Jane White Schneeweis, Mahtomedi