H.B. 350 Foods Available at Schools Amendments

What this bill does

This bill would bar schools from serving breakfast and lunch containing certain food additives, such as synthetic dyes, and would extend that requirement to rural district and charter schools. Schools with 5,500 or fewer students would have until the 2027-28 school year to comply, and food pantries are exempt.

Plain-English summary written by AI from the official description. Check the official text below.

Your legislators on this bill

Enter your address to see what your own representative and senator did on this bill.

Quotes come from the official recordings' automatic captions, which can mishear words. Speakers and summaries are identified by AI and can be wrong. Use the ▶ links to check the recording.

Take action

This bill's session is over, but your legislators still want to hear from you. Ideas that died often come back next year.

Enter your address to get your legislators' contact information and a ready-to-send message about this bill.

Every vote

• 11 yes, 0 no, 3 absentHouse Health and Human Services Committee: Amendment Recommendation · Feb 17, 2026Who voted how
• 11 yes, 0 no, 3 absentHouse Health and Human Services Committee: vote to approve it · Feb 17, 2026Who voted how
• 67 yes, 1 no, 7 absentFinal House vote · Feb 23, 2026Who voted how
• 5 yes, 1 no, 1 absentSenate Health and Human Services Committee: vote to approve it · Mar 2, 2026Who voted how

Hearings and debates

• Feb 17, 2026 House Health and Human Services Committee▶ Watch
  Transcript (43 turns)

  1. Committee chair (presiding)43:59

     All right. Representative Schier for your presentation. Go ahead.

  2. Rep. Kristen Chevrier44:03

     Thank you, Madam Chair and Committee. This is the food additives bill that I ran last year for large schools that were over 5,500 students, and we are now implementing it for the schools that are under 5,500 students. And the charter schools. This bill prohibits certain food additives in school, lunch and breakfast. These additives serve no purpose other than aesthetics and are implicated in numerous health problems, including hyperactivity, neural behavior, behavioral disorders, aggression, sleeplessness, hormone disruption, and even cancer. The four new items that we're adding in the bill this year are charters in rural districts, as I mentioned at the request of some school board members who were concerned that food donations would dwindle otherwise, we removed not without mixed feelings, the requirement that food pantries be synthetic dye and petrochemical free. We added titanium dioxide as most other states did last year. And, um, there's an amendment online that delays implementation for the 5,500 and under group to school year 20 27, 28, at the request of some of the charter schools. Um, and that's because the other group got a year to implement. So last year, rural districts and charter schools were excluded because there was pushback from some of the charter schools. We lost votes on both the, the floors of both houses because of that. And I got messages from rural and charter parents asking why their children were excluded. So I met with the rural districts. After the session ended, I had a presentation ready for them about why I thought they should be involved and do this. And they just said, we don't, we don't wanna see the presentation. How do we do it? What do we need to do? And asked to be included under statute. So I've talked with the Utah Charter Network and the Utah Association of Public Charter Schools. There are still mixed feelings in the charter community, but with most of them feeling like delayed implementation would, would be a sufficient, um, help to them. So we put that in. The parents seem to be in favor of the food, the food supplier, for at least some of the charters. Nicholas and Company does have die free options. This bill affects 3% of foods served on the tray and only 2% of foods served a la carte passing legislation makes it easier for the nutrition managers because more companies will be encouraged to exclude these harmful additives. Many schools are already collaborating for purchasing, excuse me, and will not be left on their own to figure out the swaps. And I have already supplied the rural superintendents with materials and contacts to help them make the switch. This is not removing foods completely from the menu, just replacing them with similar items that do not have the toxins. Many comparable options already exist in the US and are currently available to our schools. And we've seen over the last year, a whole lot of options open up. Um, the FDA does not regulate 99% of the chemicals used in food due to limited resources and heavy opposition from powerful industry forces. Over 10,000 chemicals have come in under the generally recognized as safe, also known as grass loophole, which was originally meant for items like vinegar and baking soda. But now companies are only asked to self-report on safety of any chemicals and food additives. And even that is not technically required. Most synthetic dyes come from petroleum synthetic dyes affect neurotransmitters in the brain and actually cause microscopic changes in the brain structure. So let's give our students and teachers an environment free from additives that can affect learning and focus, behavioral issues, aggression and physical health. There's really no downside to this legislation. It can only help our students thrive. Every time I talk to people about this legislation, they express gratitude that we are moving in this direction. I would appreciate your support on this bill. And that concludes my presentation.

  3. Committee chair (presiding)48:46

     Thank you. We'll bring it back to the committee for any clarifying questions. Uh, vice chair Monson.

  4. Rep. Logan Monson48:53

     Yeah. Thank you for, um, speaking with and talking to the rural folks. I, I've, I've heard good things from him. I, I just have a, a quick question and maybe you can help walk me through kind of the thought process on it. So in in lines like 42 through 54, it's talking about, um, that the student's parent can provide this food or, or food that's, that has these things in it. Um, and that a teacher may provide students with this, but the teacher has to get permission from the student's parent. So basically anything coming through the school is then the teacher's responsibility at that point. Just In the classroom. In the classroom, I meant, sorry.

  5. Rep. Kristen Chevrier49:32

     Yes. Not at like lunch or anything, But like provided. So they just need to get permission.

  6. Rep. Logan Monson49:35

     I think the way it's worded is they get permission at the beginning of the school year. Each Semester. Oh, each semester. Okay. Sorry. No, You're good.

  7. Rep. Kristen Chevrier49:45

     Um, but anyway, they just get permission. And then if there are kids who, whose parents prefer that they not have the dyes, like for example, I have some grandchildren who self-describe as going loco crazy after they get red dye. Um, and it's true. So there would be parents who would prefer that their children don't have those dyes at all because even a tiny amount can have a big effect on a child who is affected by it. So yes. Um, they need to get permission.

  8. Rep. Logan Monson50:20

     Do most districts have some kind of a policy in place for, for food that's being provided in the classroom anyways? Do you know? You know, I, I, I dunno. I don't know.

  9. Rep. Kristen Chevrier50:28

     I haven't actually asked that. I'm sorry.

  10. Committee chair (presiding)50:30

      No worries. Thank you. Thank you. Uh, another question. Representative Abbott.

  11. Rep. Nelson T. Abbott50:38

      Thank you, Madam Chair. So I do have some questions, um, specifically about the part where we're applying it to all schools. So last year you ran this bill and I was very supportive because I recognized that it may be difficult to find vendors that are willing to sell unless there's a large demand. And so we passed it, but didn't apply to all schools. Right. I've seen 57, you're kind of taking that out, but, but since it passed last year, can't these schools go ahead and just voluntarily do this? Or couldn't the Utah State Board of Education do this?

  12. Rep. Kristen Chevrier51:13

      That's an Excellent question. And why are we going back to the legislature to manage down to this level? Thank You for asking that question. The reason is that having it in statute gives them more leverage with the companies that sell the food. And so they asked specifically, I asked them if they wanted to do it voluntarily, and they said, no, please include us in the bill.

  13. Committee chair (presiding)51:38

      Mm-hmm. Thank you, Representative Abbott, um, representative Daley Pro.

  14. Rep. Jennifer Dailey-Provost51:43

      Thank you, Madam Chair. Um, thank you representative. I'm reading some research on at the, uh, NLM right now. This is good policy. Um, this is just technical question, so I apologize. Titanium dioxide, if it's in a food shows, is it say on the list of ingredients titanium dioxide, or does it have other,

  15. Rep. Kristen Chevrier52:07

      It actually is not required to say titanium dioxide. It can say, I think it's natural flavors or something like that. But it can say, um, I don't know if that's something that we need. Maybe the schools can ask specifically if it has titanium dioxide. There are certain things that it's likely to be in. Um, and we just changed from low fat and skim milk to whole milk so that it would not need to be in milk anymore. Because the reason they put it in milk is to make it look white when it's really Blue.

  16. Rep. Jennifer Dailey-Provost52:42speaker not certain

      Got it. Okay. So this bag of chips, which is very tempting by the way. You'll notice I haven't opened it yet. Oh,

  17. Rep. Kristen Chevrier52:48speaker not certain

      It got all the way to you without being opened. It actually tastes just like the other ones. Um, I think if you were presenting this mid-afternoon, it'd probably be a different outcome. Yeah, that's true. I should have brought cinnamon oils.

  18. Rep. Jennifer Dailey-Provost53:01

      I just, you know, I'm looking at the ingredients on here, and I noticed that titanium di dioxide isn't in there, and that's intent. I, I understand. But were it a regular bag of Doritos? I wonder what it would say. I don't know. I'm just, just curious what, what people would look for to know if this was in food or, or not in food. That is a good question. I I don't think that it's clear. Okay. Thank you.

  19. Committee chair (presiding)53:27

      Okay. Seeing no further questions from the committee right now, we'll take it to the public. Um, for public comment, is there anyone that would like to comment on this? Okay. Come on up. And just a reminder, make sure you sign the paper and when you introduce yourself, give us your name and who you represent.

  20. Tamara Watson, Utah Association of Public Charter Schools53:45

      Okay. Hello, friends. My name's Tamara Watson. I'm the Director of Communications, uh, for the Utah Association of Public Charter Schools. I've had many great conversations with this representative, and we thank her for her good work. Um, for some perspective, I also have 15 years in local agriculture and food and have, uh, spent a lot of time in this sphere. So when this bill was proposed, uh, we did reach out to our member charter schools and received about 38 responses. And the representative is clear that there were mixed response. We have some that are proactively seeking to remove these ingredients from their school lunches already and are centered around that, uh, because of parent concern. But the one concern that that came up repeatedly from these smaller charter schools are, are the operation costs that this will impose on them? And consider this your school districts like, uh, Representative Abbott said, um, they have collective buying power. They can approach US foods and Nicholas and Foods and say, Hey, we've got this many students that we're feeding a charter school approaches with a, a van at Costco. And they go and they walk the aisles to be able to feed those students that may be 500 or less. And so when you, you look at weighing those options, uh, their main concern was, this is going to squeeze an already very tight operating budget that we have and requested. Is there any way We appreciate the delay, but is there any way that there's some grant funding, some fiscal notes that can help offset these costs? Again, we understand the intent and we believe that as charter schools, everyone wants the best ingredients for our children. Um, the other question that was raised by our community is who's going to regulate this? As we just noted, like a bag of Doritos, you flip it around, it's got red dye 40 in it, a regular bag of Doritos. Why? I know that. 'cause I'm sensitive to it. Um, but parents also educate their children to be sensitive to those things. My nephew Christopher, knows that he can't have Doritos. Why? 'cause he goes loco. And so they send their children proactively, uh, to lunch with good meals. But for those, like in Senator Escamilla bill that are getting one meal a day on a budget from $2 to $2 and 50 cents a day that don't have collective buying power, we're significantly concerned about the amount of food or ingredients that we can provide for these students attending what we would consider a Title one charter school. And so we just appreciate the, uh, good conversations that we'll continue to have. But for now, as an association, we can't get behind this bill with the exemption in line 57.

  21. Committee chair (presiding)56:34

      Thank you. Thank You. Um, Tamara, we have a question for you, representative? Oh, sure. Representative Eliason.

  22. Rep. Steve Eliason56:41

      Uh, thank you. Thank you for being here today. Um, I've, I've been around here for quite a while and, um, worked a lot on charter school, uh, formation and their related issues and challenges. We, we, the initiation and throughout the process we're told charter schools can do it better, cheaper, faster, et cetera. So, um, I guess one question I have is just like we have municipalities tag onto the state's AAA bond rating. Why haven't charter schools partnered with districts on their, their buying for, uh, you know, collective buying power for not just these particular foods, but food in general? It seems like a huge missed opportunity and the fact that now all of our districts have to do this, there shouldn't be any issues that supply chain isn't supplying the, the, the, the acceptable ingredients that, you know, um, this bill and the bill last session, uh, requires. So could you just respond to that

  23. Tamara Watson, Utah Association of Public Charter Schools57:45

      For sure. Uh, I, I think that that's a great question and, um, I can offer opinion as to perhaps why that this isn't happening, especially here on the Wasatch front. Um, as you may well know, we are also, uh, talking about HB 2 41 that gives a charter school an equal opportunity to access an underutilized or undervalued building from a district. There's, there's been lots of opposition regarding that. There continues to be in the public space. Charter schools aren't public schools, and hence, to link arms with our very much loved district partners is still, there's still hesitation there. Um, and we hope with time that that will, uh, solve and that rift will heal. But as for now, um, policies, operations, even food safety flow is not permitting them to order from the same truck.

  24. Rep. Steve Eliason58:48

      One last question if I may, Mr. Chair? Yes, go ahead. Uh, Madam Chair, sorry. Um, so bottom line, the opposition is, is just too expensive to supply healthier foods to kids. Okay, thank you.

  25. Tamara Watson, Utah Association of Public Charter Schools59:02

      Yeah, and I, I would also add, um, the one comment that we got is why are we imposing this on schools instead of just going to the manufacturing manufacturers and letting them take care of this? And, you know, as a local food person, I believe that the industry is going to take care of this. We're seeing it with Red Dye 40. It's already disappearing from our market. And so it's a matter as we see it go across Europe, as we see it go across California, West Virginia, these ingredients are going to be eliminated. Let's just not jump the budget fiscal note, uh, too quick until that price has time to adjust to that demand.

  26. Committee chair (presiding)59:42

      Thank you. We have another question from Representative Clancy. It's more for the, more for the sponsor, if that.

  27. Rep. Clancy59:49

      Is that okay? Okay. Or should I wait? Should I wait to do that? Um, can I read this? Yeah, sorry. I, let's see.

  28. Committee chair (presiding)59:54

      Do we have any more in the room that wanna comment? I don't see any, yeah, go ahead.

  29. Rep. Clancy59:59

      Um, thank you Representative Ivory. I noticed as you passed the Doritos around, I was following that very closely. Um, but, uh, something I've noticed is it seems like a lot of the companies that are making products like this, that maybe in the past had some of these artificial dyes and chemicals. It seems like they're stepping away from that. Can you speak to any of the conversations you've had with industry in general? Is that, is that an accurate statement? That they're trying to make things more, less toxic, I guess you could say?

  30. Rep. Kristen Chevrier1:00:30

      It is actually. It's been actually really gratifying to watch it happen. I had no idea what we were going to see after we passed the bill last year. There have been numerous manufacturers who have said they're removing their dyes, including Doritos, um, Skittles, um, Mars Company, um, Walmart, uh, just, there's a whole long list. And so I think that the foods are becoming more available, more readily, readily available. And obviously the more we purchase them, the better, which is one reason that we are doing it this direction. Instead of waiting for the manufacturers, we are, we are pushing the envelope by saying, we're not going to accept this. And I would ask a rhetorical question of the charter schools, if their budget is so dependent on foods that are full of dyes and chemicals, that it would really harm their budget to switch over. I'm kind of curious to know what they're feeding the kids. So, um, because I know that this is only 3% of the on plate budget for most schools and 2% of the a la carte budget. So does that answer your question? Does, thank You. Okay.

  31. Committee chair (presiding)1:01:50

      Thank you, Representative Clancy. Okay. We have one, we do have one comment online. Um, Megan Larson, if you can turn on your camera and remember to state, um, your name and where you are. Okay. Hold on one second.

  32. Megan Larson, resident1:02:14

      Can everyone see me? Yep.

  33. Committee chair (presiding)1:02:15

      We can see you. Go ahead.

  34. Megan Larson, resident1:02:17

      Hi, I am Megan Larson. I am from Lehi, Utah. And I just have a quick comment. Um, I'm a parent of children who attend a charter school, and I strongly support HB three 50. As parents, we wanna feel confident that the food available to our kids during the school days supports their health focus and long-term wellbeing. This bill takes an important step by strengthening standards around food additives and helping create a more consistent, healthier environment for students across schools. I especially appreciate the proactive approach to protecting children while still allowing parents to make individual choices for their kids. Policies like this, help schools prioritize student wellness without placing unnecessary burdens on families. I hope this bill continues to move forward so that our children, including those in charter schools like mine, can benefit from safer high quality food options. Thank you for your work to support the health of Utah's children.

  35. Committee chair (presiding)1:03:18

      Thank you, Megan. All right. Seeing no further public comment, we'll bring it back to the Committee for Action or Motion. Representative Clancy.

  36. Rep. Clancy1:03:32

      Thank you Madam Chair. And is, is there any, are there any substitutes that we need to adopt this Morning? There is an amendment online. I'll motion to adopt the first amendment, uh, to hb uh, 3 5 0.

  37. Committee chair (presiding)1:03:45

      Motion is to adopt First Amendment, um, to HB 3 5 0. That motion is in order. We'll bring it back to the committee for any discussion on that. Seeing none to the sponsor, I'll waive. Thank you. All right. And back to the maker of the motion. I'll waive. All right. So motion is to adopt, um, motion is to adopt amendment one, two, HB three 50. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? All right. That motion passes. Do you wanna keep going?

  38. Rep. Clancy1:04:21

      I'd like to make a motion that we favorably recommend, uh, HB 3 5 0 as amended onto the full body of the house for, for a vote.

  39. Committee chair (presiding)1:04:32

      All right. That motion is in order. We'll take it to the committee for any comments on that? Not seeing any, I'll just make a quick comment.

  40. Unknown speaker1:04:44speaker not certain

      Um, I just wanna thank the sponsor for bringing this forward. I think this is important. I think it's interesting to note that, that it hasn't been as big a transition for these manufacturers. And I think part of that is because they were, they were already making some of these to other countries. If you've ever traveled outside the US things taste and look a little different. And so it's good to see that we're, we're doing it and pushing the envelope to get it done here in, in the States. So I appreciate that.

  41. Committee chair (presiding)1:05:10

      And so, back to the sponsor for any final word. Okay. Back to the maker of the motion.

  42. Rep. Clancy1:05:16

      I would just say, um, as someone who's very passionate about school lunch, working on HB 100 last year, I actually think it's more important that we take on policies like this for, for families that have the, the means to do so. A lot of families are shifting away from some of these, you know, to these non-toxic foods and taking some of these ingredients out, which I think is great. But, um, if we have the research, uh, that shows that this is something that, uh, could be potentially harmful, then we certainly should do it for individuals that, uh, maybe school lunches where they're getting the critical mass of their, uh, nutrition for the day. And so, um, that's, that's, uh, just one of the many reasons I'll be supporting, uh, representative Chev in this bill.

  43. Committee chair (presiding)1:06:01

      Thank you. So again, the motion is to favorably recommend HB three 50 as amended. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That motion passes unanimously. Congratulations. Thank you. Okay. All right.

• Feb 23, 2026 House floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (9 turns)

  1. Unknown speaker1:08:46speaker not certain

     House Bill three 50 Foods availability at schools amendments by Representative Shelley. This bill was heard in Health and Human Services with a vote of 11 0 3.

  2. Speaker Pro Tem (presiding)1:09:01

     Representative ch

  3. Rep. Kristen Chevrier1:09:03

     Thank you Mr. Speaker ProAm. This food additives in school schools Bill is the same one that we we ran last year, um, with a couple of changes we are in, including the rural schools and, oh, do I need to make a motion to adopt the sub first?

  4. Speaker Pro Tem (presiding)1:09:21

     That's first. There should be a sub one that just came online about 15, 20 minutes ago. Just a moment for sub. Okay, that's in order.

  5. Rep. Kristen Chevrier1:09:37

     Motion is to adopt first sub house bill three 50. We'd like to speak to it. Yes. In this um, substitute, we removed titanium dioxide and clarified some language that was misworded that made the bill not do what it was supposed to do. So we just fixed it.

  6. Speaker Pro Tem (presiding)1:09:58

     Thank you. Representative Shelley moves to adopt first substitute house bill three 50. Discussion to the motion. C None Representative Shelley for summation, Waive Motion is waived. They'll place the motion to adopt first substitute house bill three 50. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say no. Motion carries the adopt the substitute is adopted. Representative Shelley.

  7. Rep. Kristen Chevrier1:10:19

     Thank you Mr. Speaker Pro tem. This is the same bill that we ran last year. This year we are including rural schools and charters schools with 5,500 students. And under we're also clarifying the food pantry exemption because there was some confusion last year about whether people could donate to the food pantries, um, without being subject to the restrictions for the school prepared food. So we're clarifying that. And then the other change in this one that we've made is that we're delaying implementation for the new schools that are being added this year to 27 28 school year. Um, in making these changes, we worked with the rural districts. I Uintah present to them after the last session and before I started the presentation, they asked if they could just be included. I asked them if they wanted to me to run it as a bill or they just wanted to do it. Um, just by their of their own volition, they said they wanted to be included in the bill. I've talked to the Utah Charter Network and the Utah Association of Chart Public Charter Schools. There are mixed reactions there, but for most of the people that delayed implementation was sufficient to, to make this palatable. Parents are in favor. Nicholas and Company, um, is the company that most of the charters buy their food from and they do have die free options available. The food affected by this bill is about 3% of the food on the tray and 2% of the food that is a la carte. And the additives that are used don't serve any purpose except for aesthetics. And, um, they do cause uh, they are implicated in hyperactivity, neurobehavioral disorders, aggression, sleeplessness, hormone disruption, and even cancer. So I would ask for your support in including the rurals and charters in this bill.

  8. Speaker Pro Tem (presiding)1:12:21

     Thank you representative ch. Discussion to the bill. Seeing none represent ch for summation, I'll waive Summation is waived. Voting is open on first substitute house bill three 50 available at schools amendments. Representative Burton seen all present having voted voting will be closed. First substitute house bill three 50 having received 67 yay votes and one eight vote passes the house and will be transmitted to the Senate for further consideration matter.

  9. Unknown speaker1:14:04speaker not certain

     Meeting clerk,

• Feb 23, 2026 House floor debate▶ Watch
  Transcript (8 turns)

  1. Speaker (presiding)1:09:37

     Motion is to adopt first sub house bill three 50. We'd like to speak to it.

  2. Rep. Kristen Chevrier1:09:41speaker not certain

     Yes. In this um, substitute, we removed titanium dioxide and clarified some language that was misworded that made the bill not do what it was supposed to do. So we just fixed it.

  3. Speaker (presiding)1:09:58

     Thank you. Representative Shelley moves to adopt first substitute house bill three 50. Discussion to the motion. C None Representative Shelley for summation, Waive Motion is waived. They'll place the motion to adopt first substitute house bill three 50. All in favor say aye. Aye. Opposed say no. Motion carries the adopt the substitute is adopted. Representative Shelley.

  4. Rep. Kristen Chevrier1:10:19

     Thank you Mr. Speaker Pro tem. This is the same bill that we ran last year. This year we are including rural schools and charters schools with 5,500 students. And under we're also clarifying the food pantry exemption because there was some confusion last year about whether people could donate to the food pantries, um, without being subject to the restrictions for the school prepared food. So we're clarifying that. And then the other change in this one that we've made is that we're delaying implementation for the new schools that are being added this year to 27 28 school year. Um, in making these changes, we worked with the rural districts. I Uintah present to them after the last session and before I started the presentation, they asked if they could just be included. I asked them if they wanted to me to run it as a bill or they just wanted to do it. Um, just by their of their own volition, they said they wanted to be included in the bill. I've talked to the Utah Charter Network and the Utah Association of Chart Public Charter Schools. There are mixed reactions there, but for most of the people that delayed implementation was sufficient to, to make this palatable. Parents are in favor. Nicholas and Company, um, is the company that most of the charters buy their food from and they do have die free options available. The food affected by this bill is about 3% of the food on the tray and 2% of the food that is a la carte. And the additives that are used don't serve any purpose except for aesthetics. And, um, they do cause uh, they are implicated in hyperactivity, neurobehavioral disorders, aggression, sleeplessness, hormone disruption, and even cancer. So I would ask for your support in including the rurals and charters in this bill.

  5. Speaker (presiding)1:12:21

     Thank you representative ch. Discussion to the bill. Seeing none represent ch for summation,

  6. Rep. Kristen Chevrier1:12:30

     I'll waive Summation is waived.

  7. Speaker (presiding)1:12:32

     Voting is open on first substitute house bill three 50 available at schools amendments. Representative Burton seen all present having voted voting will be closed. First substitute house bill three 50 having received 67 yay votes and one eight vote passes the house and will be transmitted to the Senate for further consideration matter.

  8. Unknown speaker1:14:04speaker not certain

     Meeting clerk,

• Mar 2, 2026 Senate Health and Human Services Committee▶ Watch
  Transcript (15 turns)

  1. Committee chair1:49:46

     We'll now call, call HB three 51st Sub Foods available at Schools Amendments. Welcome representative.

  2. Rep. Kristen Chevrier1:49:53

     Thank you Mr. Chair and thank you committee members. Um, this is a cleanup for the food additives bill that I ran last year that, that passed. Um, it was for the, the one last year was for over school schools that had more than 5,500 students. Um, this bill pre prohibits certain food additives in school lunches and breakfast. The additives that are prohibited serve no purpose under other than aesthetics. Oh, I could you can you guys, oh, you already have one. Wow. I'm impressed. It's the Senate. Thank you very much. Okay. Um, is that from last year? Oh, nice. Look at, look at us being proactive. We already got our votes all figured out and everything, so. Okay. So, um, the, the things that we're prohibiting are implicated in numerous health problems, including hyperactivity, neurobehavioral disorders, aggression, sleeplessness, hormone disruption, and even cancer. We're adding four new things to the bill. Actually three new things to the bill. Um, this year we're adding the charters and rural districts. Um, the rural districts actually asked to be included in the bill. I Uintah them after the, the session last year to talk to them about it. And they asked how they could get on board and asked to be part of the bill. The charter schools are split. Um, I've talked with Utah Charter Network and Utah Association of Public Charter Schools. And for most of them, delayed implementation was the number one request, which we did, uh, address. Um, at the, the second thing, at the request of some school board members who were concerned that food donations would dwindle otherwise, um, we removed the food pantries from the requirement to not have any of these ingredients. Um, there is a zero fiscal note. This bill passed 11 to zero in the house and 67 to one on the house floor. Parents are in favor. I haven't heard from any parents who didn't love this. The food supplier for at least some of the charters, Nicholas and Company does have die free options. This bill affects 3% of food served on the tray and only 2% of food served a la carte passing. This legislation makes it easier for nutrition managers because more companies will be encouraged to exclude the harmful additives. Many schools all already collaborate on purchasing and school Nutrition managers already have flexibility to choose what they will purchase from thousands of USDA options. Granite School District has been doing this for four years now on their own. Um, the FDA does not regulate 99% of the chemicals used in food due to limited resources and heavy opposition from powerful industry forces. Over 10,000 chemicals have come in under the generally recognized as safe loophole referred to usually as grass loophole. This was originally meant for items like vinegar and baking soda, but now companies are only asked to self-report on any, on the safety of any chemicals in food additives. And even that is not required. Most synthetic dyes come from petroleum, synthetic dyes effects, affect neurotransmitters in the brain and actually cause microscopic changes in the brain structure. So our goal is to give our students and teachers an environment free from unnecessary additives that can affect learning, focus, behavioral issues, aggression, and physical health. And I ask for your support on this legislation.

  3. Committee chair1:53:49

     Okay. Thank you. We'll bring it back to committee for further discussion. Senator Plumb.

  4. Sen. Jen Plumb1:53:57

     You know, this is such an interesting rabbit hole right? To go down. Yeah. And we think, we talk about last year with the, um, kind of sodas and stuff and mm-hmm. As someone who cares deeply about children's wellness, I, I, I, I think you're onto something here. I do worry a little bit about how we work through distributors and the systems and the funds and that sort of a thing that, so that's one of those like kind of burrs stuck under my saddle on that. But I think that, um, I, I think that there is really something for us to be thinking about in terms of the quality that we do provide our kids in schools. Um, that being said, I also really want them to be fed. So I, I'm stuck between this balance of resources and how much, and, and how can you, but I, I just, I applaud further continued discussion about this because our, our nutrition really is something that's been left out of a lot of health dialogues. So I, I appreciate you keeping us on this topic. Thank you.

  5. Committee chair1:54:52

     Okay. And thank you. Okay. We'll go to the public. Anyone for the public would speak to this. Bill, please come forward and introduce yourselves. And after you're done, write your name down there. Write your name down. I'm already on, so fill that out.

  6. Maryann Martindale, CEO, Utah Academy of Family Physicians1:55:11

     Marianne Martin de Utah Academy Family Physicians. Um, we, we like this bill. I really appreciate Representative Shelley looking at all of the ways that we can improve the health of our kids. I mean, this is the most vital time for them to get the right kind of food. I do also agree a bit with Senator slash Dr. Plum that, um, there's challenges sometimes in the delivery of that, but I like the delay that she added into this of implementation, which will help 'em kind of figure out if there's some, some issues that maybe need to be addressed further. But, um, we appreciate this and we do need to be feeding our students better. They do need to be fed, but we also need to be feeding them them better food than a, a lot of the process stuff that we're, that they're getting now and all the additives. So we appreciate this and I urge your support. Thank you.

  7. Dave Hirst, Lunch Pro1:56:01

     Go Ahead. Uh, good afternoon. Thank you for your time. My name is Dave Hurst, and I currently coordinate school lunch for various charter schools through, uh, lunch Pro. I work on the front lines of school nutrition every day. School meals are already the most regulated, uh, and both, and the healthiest meals Many students receive carefully plan to be lower in sugar, sodium, higher in fiber, and rich in fruits and vegetables. My question is just fairly simple for all of you. If the goal is to improve student health, why add additional burdens to school meals? While other food sources during the school day, like Adam was brought from home, classroom celebrations, booster clubs, vending machines, and even food served by the schools or their teachers outside of the meal program are not held to the same standards. When non-approved items are already allowed to be served during the school day, it directly counteracts what we're working so hard to accomplish in the lunchroom. You're sending a mixed message to students and undermines the consistency that the USD is already forcing us to do. We're already managing tight budgets, rising costs, and food waste while trying to make healthy meals appealing and accessible to all of our students. If the long term solution and the goal is, um, if long term solutions are your goal, I invite you to come and spend times with us, sit at our tables, walk through our kitchens, and let's address the whole environment together, not just the one area, um, that we're already doing the most and we're already there. Thank you for your time and commitment to our students. Thank you.

  8. Tamra Watson, Utah Association of Public Charter Schools1:57:40

     Hi, my name's Tamara Watson. I'm the Director of Communications for the Utah Association of Public Charter Schools. Uh, I wanna thank the good sponsor for her work on this bill. She has come to us and, uh, debated and talked and discussed this issue, and we understand her intent. She wants kids to have the best ingredients possible, but I also got to know, uh, Representative Shelley through working with, uh, HB 1 79, which is a bill about choice. And when it comes back to this, this is about choice. And parents have the choice on what they feed their students. Uh, they have the right to, to send those ingredients, which he's carved out in this bill. What I'd like to say is that, uh, a school lunch person should also have the ability to choose those ingredients of which are coming through their programs. If it means that, uh, we have to put Doritos around chicken to get protein in that kid, then that kid is gonna get more protein with that Dorito. I'd also say that in my previous life, uh, previous career, I worked 15 years in the food system. And so I see the collective buying power that's trying to happen here, that we wanna push manufacturers to have better ingredients. But the reality is, is that schools aren't gonna be the people that determine who switches those ingredients. It's us as consumers. A quick statistic, a school lunchroom spends anywhere from 40 cents to $2 and 50 cents per lunch. Your per diem for your lunch is $22. That means that you sitting at this table have more power to move a manufacturer in food ingredients than a school lunch program has. And when it comes to charter schools, a school district can show up with a semi-load and buy 18 pallets of an ingredient. A charter school shows up with a minivan at a Costco, and that 40 cents goes really, really quick. So again, we support the good sponsor and her efforts to try to feed these kids the best possible. But we urge you to hold this bill so that we can talk about it and give food manufacturing the ability to modify as food manufacturing is already adjusting to these ingredients and don't make our schools bear that fiscal burden. Thank you.

  9. Committee chair1:59:56

     Thank you. Okay. We'll bring it back to committee for any further action.

  10. Sen. Keven J. Stratton2:00:02

      Represen. Senator Stratton Thank you Chair. I move that we pass House Bill three 50 for substitute foods available at School amendments favorable recommendation.

  11. Committee chair2:00:17

      That's in order discussion to the motion. See none. Back to Bill sponsor.

  12. Rep. Kristen Chevrier2:00:24

      Thank you, Mr. Chair. I just wanted to, to underscore what we saw last year after we passed this legislation, there was a wave of change across the nation. And believe it or not, you can now get Dai free Doritos, and that is a direct result of our pushing this legislation. Not just state throughout the states, but starting in Utah. So, um, we have also, um, delayed implementation to 2026 for the schools that have 5,500 and over, which we did last year and to 2027 school year for the smaller schools and charters. So schools have already shifted the market and they can continue to do that. And I would encourage you to pass this legislation. Thank you.

  13. Committee chair2:01:13

      Thank you. Back to the making a motion.

  14. Unknown speaker2:01:15speaker not certain

      Thank you. I I appreciate the discussion, the presentation. I recognize those that have, are on both sides of this. But, you know, one thing I I ask myself as we approach this, as I, I look at the accelerated, uh, impact that we're seeing our society of with autism, for example, and other, other, other issues, I think are, we need I to be certainly science database do through all we can, but we need to try and move the ball. And this is what we're trying to do, is trying to take, put measures in place that, uh, that, that we're trying to help. And, and I believe in the resiliency of our market free market system to adjust to good policy and principle and, uh, wish this, uh, moving forward the best, best, best successes. Thank you.

  15. Committee chair2:02:03

      Thank you. All in favor of passing out favor First favorably, first sub HB three 50. Please say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Stevenson. Aye. Any opposed? No. So we have one no center. Okay. That passes. Thank you. Thank you. One, that'd be five to one. Okay.