Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the School Meals topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Rolling Hills board hears new food‑service plan from Nutrition Group, including salad bars and allergy accommodations
Summary
The district introduced Nutrition Group as the new school meals provider; the vendor described menu options, plans for salad bars, allergy accommodations, sample trays at open houses, and said catering revenue would go to the district while the vendor receives a management fee.
Get email alerts on the School Meals topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
At the meeting the board introduced a new food‑service vendor, Nutrition Group, and heard a detailed presentation about menu plans, staffing and outreach ahead of the school year.
A Nutrition Group representative who identified herself as Kim, vice president of operations for the company in Ohio, said the vendor plans to offer expanded choices — multiple daily options in elementary settings and many more at high school — and to work with principals and nurses to accommodate food allergies and gluten‑free needs. The representative described plans for sample trays and menus at district open houses and said the vendor will run training for local staff. The district also announced it hired a local staffer (Katie) into the vendor’s training program.
The Nutrition Group speaker emphasized contract economics: "We don't make money off of that. The district does," she said, adding the company earns management and administrative fees while any additional revenue from catering or a snack cart goes to the district.
Board members asked about turnaround for menus, how to communicate choices to parents, and how the vendor will work with unionized cafeteria staff; the vendor said it will respect existing contracts and meet with union representatives before raising unresolved issues. The vendor also said some freezers suffered power interruptions and that some food items may need replacement before the start of school.
The board did not record a separate vote on the contract at the meeting beyond placing the item on the agenda for approval as part of consent items; the contract and related personnel changes appeared among approved motions listed in the superintendent’s agenda items (a–p).

