The Brief

You may have noticed something different at your favorite restaurant lately.

That coveted “A” health grade sign — which means a restaurant has passed inspection with few, if any, issues — has a different color. It’s changed from blue to green, along with color changes for every other letter grade in the system.

It’s part of a switch by the Los Angeles County Department of Public Health, which manages health inspections.

What’s changed?

The change seems to have happened quietly over a few years. 

Cards featuring “A” grades changed from blue to green; “B” cards changed from green to blue, and “C” cards changed from red to yellow.

The old colors had been the department standard for decades. Health inspectors have been replacing the grade cards with the new style as they do their inspections, which are supposed to happen one to three times a year. Some old colors are still out there, though.

The decision to switch the colors came in 2022, according to the Department of Public Health, and was rolled out over time. County health officials worked with food industry representatives to simplify the grade system that year.

The department did not respond to LAist’s questions about why the change was made or whether the information was shared publicly, but it’s not the first time the grading system was refreshed. In 2016, health officials changed how point deductions worked to make serious health violations clearer.

Who follows the grade system?

Counties and cities in California can mandate publicly posted grades, though it’s not required under state law. However, inspection results do have to be shown upon request.

Public grades are mostly a system meant to increase awareness and encourage strong food safety habits. From 2022 to 2024, Public Health issued more than 120,000 grades — 96% of inspections earned an “A,” 3% got a “B,” and less than a half percent were given a “C,” according to department figures.

All cities have food safety and inspection requirements even if they don’t require businesses to post a grade card.

In most of L.A. County, retail food facilities — including restaurants, markets, bakeries, and bars — have to post grades. The rule applies to unincorporated L.A. County and cities that adopted a county ordinance.

The only L.A. County cities that haven’t adopted the ordinance are: Avalon, Bradbury, Hidden Hills, La Habra Heights, San Marino, Sierra Madre, and Signal Hill. (Pasadena and Long Beach have their own health departments that run inspections.)

Decoding the colors

It’s likely still safe to eat at a restaurant with a “C” grade, according to the Department of Public Health, but this is essentially the minimum standard. The lower the score, the more violations exist.

Although it may be off-putting to some, spots with a “B” or “C” are considered to have “acceptable” food safety practices based on the county’s requirements. In this case, it makes sense for “C” to go from red to yellow because red is more associated with a sense of danger or risk.

Here’s a breakdown of each letter grade:

• “A” grade (90 to 100 points): Generally superior in food handling practices and overall food facility maintenance.
• “B” grade (80 to 89 points): Generally good in food handling practices and overall food facility maintenance.
• “C” grade (70 to 79 points): Generally acceptable in food handling practices and overall general food facility maintenance.
• Score card (0 to 69 points): Poor in food handling practices and overall general food facility maintenance. 

Owners that score below 70 points are required to post a score card instead of a letter grade so the public can see the actual number they got. Spots that score this low twice within a 12-month period are subject to closure.

The University of Southern California board of trustees has appointed interim president Beong-Soo Kim to be its 13th full president.

Kim was named as the interim leader in February 2025 and began the role this summer. He most recently served as USC’s senior vice president and general counsel, and as a lecturer at the law school. Prior to joining USC, he worked at Kaiser Permanente and was a federal prosecutor for the Central District of California.

Kim succeeds Carol Folt, who was brought on to stabilize the university following a series of scandals under the administration before hers. She formally stepped down from her role in July, following criticism of her ability to handle student protests and concerns over fiscal stewardship.

Soon after his term began, Kim oversaw the university’s effort to manage a $200 million deficit, which also led to hundreds of layoffs.

“We did have to make some difficult decisions last year with respect to our budget and layoffs,” Kim told LAist. “And I'm really pleased that as a result of those difficult decisions, we're now in a much stronger financial position and really for a number of months have been really focusing on the opportunities that we see on the horizon.”

In a call with LAist, and joined by USC board chair Suzanne Nora Johnson, Kim touched on bright spots and some of his priorities. He also touched on the relationship between USC and the Trump administration before a sudden ending to the call.

This interview has been lightly edited for clarity.

LAist: You've talked about addressing the mass layoffs and budget challenges. What do you see as the way forward?

Beong-Soo Kim: Our research expenditures have actually been going up over the last year, over the last couple of years. We're focusing on: How do we provide the best possible educational value to our students? We're focusing on how to maintain and strengthen our academic culture of excellence, open dialogue and engagement with different viewpoints.

And we're also really kind of leaning into artificial intelligence and asking questions as a community about how we incorporate AI responsibly into our education, into our operations, into our research. And there are obviously a lot of important ethical questions that we're working on, and it's really an quite an exciting time to be in the position that I'm in.

What are you excited for?

Well, a couple things that we're really looking forward to are, as part of the anniversary of the United States, we're going to be hosting a National Archives exhibition [of] founding documents in late April. We're also looking forward to helping host the L.A. Olympics in 2028. We have our 150th anniversary coming up in 2030 as a university.

So there's a lot that's on the horizon. We also have the Lucas Museum opening up across the street later this year and, of course, George Lucas is one of our most beloved Trojan alumni. So there's so much vitality, so much energy on the campus right now.

USC has, for the most part, avoided the sort of conflicts that the University of California system and elite private institutions across the country have had with the Trump administration. What can you share about how you plan to manage USC’s relationship with the federal government?

Well, we really make an effort to engage with all levels of government, as well as foundations, the private sector, community groups. That kind of engagement is really more important nowadays. Universities can't just go off on their own. It's important for us to partner and find opportunities to work with others. And that's what we've been doing.

And that's part of the reason why I think that our research has continued to go strongly. And I give a lot of the credit to our faculty and researchers who can continue submitting grant applications and continue to do research in areas that are critically important to the benefit of our community, our nation, and our world. And I think that we -—

Suzanne Nora Johnson: —Actually I'm so sorry, but we have to complete the board meeting, and we've got to run. Thank you so much for your time. I really appreciate it. We'll be in touch. Bye. Thanks. Bye.

Huntington Beach will ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review a decision striking down the city’s controversial voter ID law.

What’s the backstory?

Huntington Beach voters approved a measure in 2024 allowing the city to require people to show ID when casting a ballot. That contradicts state law — voters in California are asked to provide ID when they register to vote but generally not at polling places.

The ensuing court battle

The state and a Huntington Beach resident promptly sued the city over the voter ID law and won an appeals court ruling striking down the law. The California Supreme Court declined to review the decision earlier this month. The state also passed a law prohibiting cities from implementing their own voter ID laws.

Then, the City Council voted unanimously this week to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in.

Does the city have a shot?

The Supreme Court gets 7,000 to 8,000 requests to review cases each year. The Court grants about 80 of these requests, so the city’s chances of getting the court’s attention are statistically slim.

There’s also a question of whether or not the city’s voter ID case meets the Court’s criteria for review — SCOTUS addresses questions of federal law. Mayor Casey McKeon said it does, in a news release, noting a 2008 Supreme Court decision that upheld a state’s voter ID law — in Indiana. But Huntington Beach is a city, and the question in its voter ID case is whether or not a city can implement its own requirements for voting, even if it clashes with state law.

Go deeper

• Huntington Beach's controversial voter ID law is illegal
• Huntington Beach clashes with California over voter ID requirement in court
• HB Mayor defends Voter ID measure as Gov. Newsom seeks to ban it
• Listen 26:32

  The Trump Administration wants your confidential voter data. What’s behind their battle with CA and other states?