Through the author’s guidance, the measure reorients California’s pupil nutrition framework by creating a comprehensive regime that defines ultraprocessed foods of concern and restricted school foods, and then sequences a phased removal of those items from school menus and vendor offerings. The core alignment is to establish new regulatory definitions, set timelines for phasing out restricted and ultraprocessed items, and require systematic reporting and training to support implementation across schools and vendors.
The bill would establish a new Eating for Health framework, with the State Department of Public Health instructed to define ultraprocessed foods of concern and restricted school foods by a June 2028 deadline and to develop associated regulations. It would require schools to begin phasing out restricted foods and ultraprocessed foods of concern beginning mid-2029, and would prohibit a vendor from offering those products to a school beginning mid-2032. In addition, the bill would set thresholds and ingredient restrictions for competitive foods and beverages sold on campus, including specific nutrient limits (for example, per-item calories, fat, saturated fat, sugar, sodium, and trans fat) and a prohibition on certain artificial colorings and additives beginning in 2027 and 2035, as applicable to different grade levels. Beginning July 1, 2035, nutritionally adequate breakfasts and lunches served under state guidelines would also be required to exclude restricted foods or ultraprocessed foods of concern, excluding USDA Foods in Schools programs.
To operationalize these changes, the bill amends multiple Education Code provisions governing meals and competitive foods, and adds a Health and Safety Code article that defines the categories of foods, the notion of a “food product” (with UPCs), and what constitutes a “health promoting eating environment.” It requires annual reporting by food vendors to the Public Health Department on products sold to schools, including quantities, product names, UPF status, nutritional information, and ingredient lists, with supplementary Legislature- and Governor-facing analyses published each year. The department would, in consultation with the Department of Education, provide compliance training and establish a structure to deliver technical assistance to local educational agencies, potentially contracting with external providers to support implementation.
The bill’s findings and intent statements frame the policy as a shift to reduce ultraprocessed and “of concern” foods in school settings and to prioritize agricultural and whole-food products in meals. It envisions ongoing regulatory updates every five years to accommodate new scientific knowledge, with a staged sunset for certain provisions and a prohibition on private rights of action for the phaseouts. Implementation would hinge on state funding for meal reimbursements and on federal approvals where applicable, while allowing public entities to adopt more stringent restrictions if they choose. In the broader policy context, the proposal seeks to create health-promoting eating environments in schools through data collection, regulatory definitions, and guidance that align procurement and menus with stated nutritional and public health objectives.
![]() Shannon GroveR Senator | Committee Member | Not Contacted | |
![]() James GallagherR Assemblymember | Bill Author | Not Contacted | |
![]() Benjamin AllenD Senator | Bill Author | Not Contacted | |
![]() Ash KalraD Assemblymember | Bill Author | Not Contacted | |
![]() Phillip ChenR Assemblymember | Bill Author | Not Contacted |
Email the authors or create an email template to send to all relevant legislators.
Through the author’s guidance, the measure reorients California’s pupil nutrition framework by creating a comprehensive regime that defines ultraprocessed foods of concern and restricted school foods, and then sequences a phased removal of those items from school menus and vendor offerings. The core alignment is to establish new regulatory definitions, set timelines for phasing out restricted and ultraprocessed items, and require systematic reporting and training to support implementation across schools and vendors.
The bill would establish a new Eating for Health framework, with the State Department of Public Health instructed to define ultraprocessed foods of concern and restricted school foods by a June 2028 deadline and to develop associated regulations. It would require schools to begin phasing out restricted foods and ultraprocessed foods of concern beginning mid-2029, and would prohibit a vendor from offering those products to a school beginning mid-2032. In addition, the bill would set thresholds and ingredient restrictions for competitive foods and beverages sold on campus, including specific nutrient limits (for example, per-item calories, fat, saturated fat, sugar, sodium, and trans fat) and a prohibition on certain artificial colorings and additives beginning in 2027 and 2035, as applicable to different grade levels. Beginning July 1, 2035, nutritionally adequate breakfasts and lunches served under state guidelines would also be required to exclude restricted foods or ultraprocessed foods of concern, excluding USDA Foods in Schools programs.
To operationalize these changes, the bill amends multiple Education Code provisions governing meals and competitive foods, and adds a Health and Safety Code article that defines the categories of foods, the notion of a “food product” (with UPCs), and what constitutes a “health promoting eating environment.” It requires annual reporting by food vendors to the Public Health Department on products sold to schools, including quantities, product names, UPF status, nutritional information, and ingredient lists, with supplementary Legislature- and Governor-facing analyses published each year. The department would, in consultation with the Department of Education, provide compliance training and establish a structure to deliver technical assistance to local educational agencies, potentially contracting with external providers to support implementation.
The bill’s findings and intent statements frame the policy as a shift to reduce ultraprocessed and “of concern” foods in school settings and to prioritize agricultural and whole-food products in meals. It envisions ongoing regulatory updates every five years to accommodate new scientific knowledge, with a staged sunset for certain provisions and a prohibition on private rights of action for the phaseouts. Implementation would hinge on state funding for meal reimbursements and on federal approvals where applicable, while allowing public entities to adopt more stringent restrictions if they choose. In the broader policy context, the proposal seeks to create health-promoting eating environments in schools through data collection, regulatory definitions, and guidance that align procurement and menus with stated nutritional and public health objectives.
Ayes | Noes | NVR | Total | Result |
---|---|---|---|---|
79 | 1 | 0 | 80 | PASS |
![]() Shannon GroveR Senator | Committee Member | Not Contacted | |
![]() James GallagherR Assemblymember | Bill Author | Not Contacted | |
![]() Benjamin AllenD Senator | Bill Author | Not Contacted | |
![]() Ash KalraD Assemblymember | Bill Author | Not Contacted | |
![]() Phillip ChenR Assemblymember | Bill Author | Not Contacted |