Newsom signs law to define and phase out ultra‑processed foods from California schools

Governor Gavin Newsom signed AB 1264 at Belvidere Middle School in Los Angeles, enacting a law that creates a statutory definition of “ultra‑processed foods” and directs a phased removal of the most harmful ultra‑processed foods from California public schools.

The measure gives the California Department of Public Health authority to identify the worst ultra‑processed foods and to guide school districts toward healthier, locally sourced alternatives. Supporters called the law a major step for child health and said it builds on earlier state actions to ban certain additives and synthetic colors from school meals.

Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel, the bill’s author, said AB 1264 “will provide the first ever legal definition of what constitutes an ultra‑processed food, and it will establish a science‑based framework to remove the most dangerous ultra‑processed foods from our schools.” He told the signing audience the measure is the culmination of a three‑year effort and credited doctors, scientists and advocates who helped craft the bill.

Scott Faber, senior vice president for the Environmental Working Group, called the law “historic” and said California was enacting “a first ever statutory definition of ultra processed foods and by phasing out the worst of the worst UPFs from California schools.” Kim Johnson, secretary of the California Health and Human Services Agency, said the change was grounded in science and public‑health partnerships and described the action as “the most monumental policy change of their careers” for staff in the Department of Public Health nutrition division.

Governor Newsom framed the law as part of a broader, preventive‑health strategy. He told the crowd that California already serves locally sourced meals in places such as Los Angeles Unified, and he pointed to state investments intended to build kitchen and procurement capacity. Newsom said the first phase of the bill’s implementation begins July 1, 2029, and described the law as a multi‑year process; he also said the statute provides additional reassessments every five years.

Speakers emphasized that the bill is intended to reduce students’ exposure to additives and ingredients linked in some research to long‑term health harms and to increase procurement from local farms. The governor and other speakers noted prior state measures that banned certain additives and synthetic dyes from school meals and cited broader state investments: Newsom referenced roughly $850,000,000 in incremental infrastructure investments to help districts upgrade kitchens and refrigeration, and other budget items aimed at regenerative agriculture and farm‑to‑school connections.

Officials described the phase‑in timeline as intended to give districts and food‑service professionals time to adjust procurement and menus. Assemblymember Gabriel and other speakers said many districts may move faster than the statutory deadlines because of existing local efforts. The bill author and the governor said the California Department of Public Health will assemble science‑based lists and guidance to help districts comply.

Supporters at the signing also tied the law to other state health initiatives. Kim Johnson said nutrition contributes to several leading causes of death and framed the law as part of preventative health; Newsom referenced the Office of Health Care Affordability and other state programs designed to reduce health costs and integrate prevention into public health planning.

The event included remarks welcoming the governor and acknowledgement of local school officials, and speakers repeatedly described the measure as bipartisan and rooted in science. There was no formal local vote at the signing event; the formal legislative process that passed AB 1264 occurred in the Legislature before the governor’s signature.

Implementation details the law assigns to the California Department of Public Health include producing the definition of ultra‑processed foods, identifying items to phase out, and issuing guidance to schools. Supporters said the law will be reassessed periodically under the statute’s review provisions. Further operational questions — including district‑level procurement schedules, costs to local foodservice operations, and precise lists of banned items — will be answered by department rulemaking and guidance during the multi‑year phase‑in.