Soda brand fight brews in schools

Hillsborough schools' plan to sign an exclusive beverage deal raises concern about commercialism on campus.

By SARAH SCHWEITZER

© St. Petersburg Times, published July 17, 2000

TAMPA -- If all goes according to plan, there soon will be one beverage company peddling its products in Hillsborough County schools. Just one brand of soda, water or sports drink sold in school hallways, at football games, in teachers lounges.

This week, with little discussion, the Hillsborough County School Board voted to seek proposals from beverage companies for a 10-year exclusive contract that would replace existing school-by-school vending arrangements.

By contracting with a single company, the district expects to have more financial leverage and get more in return for access to the young soda guzzlers of Hillsborough County.

Since vending machines already dot school campuses, officials say, little will change other than the logo on the machine fronts and the contents inside.

But elsewhere, similar agreements have sown controversy and, critics say, a creeping influence of commercialism in schools.

"This is about making Tampa students brand-loyal customers and getting as much visibility in the schools as possible to achieve that," said Andrew Hagelshaw, the executive director of the California-based Center for Commercial-Free Public Education.

Hillsborough would join a growing number of districts if it signs an exclusive beverage contract. Nationwide, roughly 175 school districts have entered into such contracts in the past five years, according to the Center.

Locally, Pasco and Hernando schools both have such agreements, with Pepsi and Coca-Cola respectively, and Pinellas is considering one.

Problems with the contracts have garnered national attention. In one widely reported case, a teen in Evans, Ga., was suspended from school when he wore a Pepsi shirt on a Coke Appreciation Day.

Not every district has embraced the contracts. Several dozen have decided against them, in part because of the commercial intrusion into public schools, according to the Center.

Last February, the Philadelphia School District rejected a $43-million contract with Coca-Cola, a deal thought have been one of the most lucrative proposed.

In Madison, Wis., board members are expected to end an exclusive three-year deal that was one of the first such contracts in the country. Too many parents have protested what they see as crass commercial influence into their schools.

Hillsborough officials say they are aware of the risks and will not allow unfettered advertising in schools. Banners in the hallways are not anticipated, signs in classrooms will not be allowed.

Willie Campbell, director of purchasing for the district, said the contract will restrict logos and product mentions to vending machines, scoreboards and scholarships that the company will be expected to provide.

It will also, he said, ensure that the company does not place machines willy-nilly throughout schools or sell beverages without restraints. (Currently, vending machines are turned on only after school.)

But Hagelshaw, of the Center for Commercial-Free Public Education, said regardless of a school district's intentions, several consequences are invariable.

"Whenever a school district signs an exclusive contract, the number of machines increase, the level of advertising goes up and consumption goes up because the size of containers in the vending machines goes up," he said.

Moreover, he said, the contracts set up a conflict for schools: Because the schools get commissions for each soda sold, they have incentive to hope for, perhaps encourage, sales of an admittedly non-nutritious substance.

In Colorado Springs, Colo., he noted, a district official eager to drum up sales had written a letter to principals speculating how to do just that.

"These contracts make schools dependent on the sales of sodas," Hagelshaw said.

Hillsborough expects to receive commissions for sodas sold along with an as-yet-unspecified amount for what the documents refer to as "the opportunity to lock up long-term brand name loyalty among youthful consumers."

Some 50 percent of this "premium" would be paid the first year of the contract and the rest would be paid out in equal amounts during the contract's remaining nine years.

Officials say it is this premium that some schools now miss out on with their individually bargained contracts. Campbell said most schools received about $5,000 to $10,000 per year in commissions under the current arrangement. With the premium money funneled into schools as well, that amount is expected to increase, although the district can not yet say by how much.

Which is just the point, said Terry Boehm, the president of the Hillsborough Education Foundation, who has studied the influence of commercialism in schools.

"The soda advertisements are already on the machines and the scoreboards," he said. "What schools are trying to do is band together and see if they could get a better deal and get more dollars to support our programs."

Boehm said the beverage deal is clearly a form of advertising for the vendors, but passes muster since it does not enter the teaching domain, like the book covers splattered with advertising that teachers often hand out because they're free. "I don't see this manipulating the classroom curriculum," he said.

School Board chair Carolyn Bricklemyer echoed the thought.

"My feelings are that the Coke machines are already in the schools and it makes good business sense so long as there are safeguards in there that make certain we are not abusing the students in the process," she said.

The School Board is expected to vote on the contract sometime in August.

- Times researcher John Martin contributed to this report.

© St. Petersburg Times. All rights reserved.