Senate Health Committee advances AB 1264, directing state to identify and phase out certain ultra‑processed foods in schools

The California State Senate Committee on Health on an unspecified date voted to advance AB 1264 by a 10–0 vote, directing the California Department of Public Health (CDPH), working with the California Department of Education (CDE) and the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA), to identify "ultra‑processed foods" (UPFs) of concern and create a phased timeline for removing those items from school food service.

Supporters told the committee the bill is intended to protect children’s health by targeting a subset of highly processed products that emerging research links to chronic disease. Opponents from food and ingredient trade groups said the bill’s technical definitions and nutrient thresholds risk unintended consequences for school meal programs and manufacturing, and requested additional amendments.

Assemblymember Gabriel, the bill’s author, told the panel the measure had taken more than 50 amendments addressing stakeholder concerns and asked for an "I vote." Scott Faber of the Environmental Working Group and Dr. Ravindra Khera, a board‑certified pediatrician representing the American Academy of Pediatrics, testified in support. Faber said, "AB 1264 does not ban UPFs," and described the bill as a first step that would require CDPH to "work with CDE, CDFA, and industry stakeholders to identify UPFs of concern." Dr. Khera said, "As pediatricians, we don't just see numbers, we see kids," and cited studies linking high intake of UPFs to obesity and other chronic conditions in children.

Multiple school food professionals and public‑health nonprofits also testified for the bill, including representatives from Eat Real Certified and school food directors from Morgan Hill Unified and Western Placer Unified. Ryan Spencer read in support on behalf of several medical and consumer groups, including the California Podiatric Medical Association, the California Medical Association, the Crohn's & Colitis Foundation and Consumer Reports.

Industry witnesses raised technical objections. Erin Radin of the Consumer Brands Association said the bill's expanded UPF definition—which ties sodium to calories and restricts added sugar, saturated fat and sodium in certain ways—could conflict with federal and state school‑meal frameworks and inadvertently penalize lower‑calorie items. She also asked why the bill contains an alcohol exemption and noted the need to align exemptions for infant formula and medical foods with existing California law. Other opponents included the Food Ingredient Safety Coalition, the American Chemistry Council, the National Pork Producers Council, the American Beverage Association and the California Poultry Federation; several agricultural associations including California Citrus Mutual and the California Fresh Fruit Association moved to neutral.

Committee members pressed the author on cost and scope. Senator Richardson said he supported the bill but asked whether schools would incur higher costs. The author responded that some districts that have already reduced UPFs reported savings after switching to less processed or locally produced ingredients. The author and proponents repeatedly emphasized the bill’s stated focus on foods "served in schools," and said any broader changes to adult food environments would require separate legislation.

A substantive technical debate in testimony addressed how the bill treats non‑nutritive sweeteners, fortification, fermentation and gases used in packaging; industry witnesses asked for additional refinements to avoid classifying culturally important or nutritionally fortified foods as UPFs. The author said scientists and multiple rounds of stakeholder negotiation informed the current list of ingredients and treatments included in the bill’s definition.

The motion before the committee—"do pass" on AB 1264 as introduced—was moved by Vice Chair Senator Valadares and carried on a roll call vote of 10 ayes, 0 noes, 0 abstentions, with one member absent. The committee clerk announced, "That bill is out 10 to 0." The bill will proceed to the next legislative step; the transcript and committee remarks indicate CDPH will use a regulatory process and stakeholder input to produce the list of UPFs and implementation details. The bill text, regulatory schedule, and the department's eventual list will determine compliance timelines and specific items that schools and vendors must phase out by 2032.

Votes at a glance: AB 1264 — Do pass (moved by Vice Chair Senator Valadares); tally 10–0; outcome: advanced from Senate Committee on Health.