Committee advances bill limiting certain additives and capping added sugars in school meals after debate and amendments

The Senate Finance Committee on Thursday approved a committee substitute for SB 745, a bill that would ban a list of specified additives from meals served in school nutrition programs and phase in lower added‑sugar caps for school breakfasts and lunches.

Counsel told the committee the bill would ban certain additives beginning Aug. 1, 2027, and set a schedule for reducing added sugars in school meals to a weekly average of 10% of daily calories in 2027, 7% in 2028 and 5% in 2029. The measure also requires schools to post menus and ingredient information online and creates a waiver process when compliant products are unavailable.

Why it matters: Supporters said the measure would reduce student exposure to ingredients they view as harmful and raise nutrition standards; opponents warned of operational and fiscal burdens for local child‑nutrition programs and urged protections for small or resource‑limited counties.

Holly Best, president of the West Virginia School Nutrition Association and a Wood County child‑nutrition director, told the committee that school food programs operate on thin margins and federal reimbursements tied to participation. "Just by a 3% reduction in meals, you're gonna have 1,300,000 meals not served to students. That is a cost that will be to the state of West Virginia 5 to $6,000,000 not reimbursed to us," she said, stressing continuous menu monitoring and infrastructure gaps in some counties.

Environmental Working Group attorney Scott Faber urged tighter additive controls, saying many chemicals on the bill's list have not been recently reviewed and are linked in the literature to health concerns. "Some of the chemicals on this list cannot be used in foods in other nations," he said, noting that Arizona, Utah and Texas have restricted titanium dioxide in school foods.

Fayette County nutrition director Andrew Pence told the committee he surveyed products and found a relatively low prevalence of the listed chemicals in his ordering guides and supplied examples of substitutions — including a Hormel pepperoni he said cost less than his current product. He said previous reforms, including last year's dye ban, did not cause participation declines in his county and that his menu software could publish ingredient data.

Members pressed witnesses on waiver criteria, procurement costs and alignment with forthcoming USDA dietary guidance. Counsel said the bill defers to federal law where applicable and that cost alone, as written, does not automatically qualify a district for a waiver; committee amendments were offered to address those concerns.

The committee adopted a sponsor amendment allowing a waiver when a compliant replacement cannot be located at an equal or lower price within the vendor inventory, and adopted an amendment limiting the bill's application to meals served in public school nutrition programs. A proposed carve‑out to exclude dairy products was rejected after debate.

The vice chairman moved that the committee substitute for SB 745, as amended, be reported to the full Senate with a recommendation that it pass; the committee voted in favor and the bill will move to the Senate floor.

The committee will carry the amended committee substitute to the full Senate; supporters of the bill said the staggered effective dates and waiver language give districts time and flexibility, while critics said further attention to small‑district capacity and federal interactions will be needed.