Soda issue is bubbling up at S.F. State
San Francisco’s battle against sugary drinks didn’t go flat when voters rejected a City Hall-backed soda tax last year. Instead, it’s bubbling up again in a perhaps unlikely place: San Francisco State University.
Last spring, the school quietly released a request for proposals for “pouring rights,” meaning it sought a beverage company to pay for the right to sell the vast majority of drinks on the campus and blanket the school in advertising.
Pouring rights contracts are common at universities, and Coca-Cola and Pepsi are both vying for the deal at S.F. State. According to the request for proposals, whichever company comes out on top would get to sell all of the fountain drinks in residential dining halls, athletic events and
vending machines. It would get 80 percent of retail shelf space for beverages at campus stores. As it is now, the various vendors on campus determine which beverages they wish to sell.
But many students at the university are having a hard time swallowing the idea. A group called Real Food Challenge protested a meeting between university officials and representatives of Coca-Cola last month, waving signs reading “Corporations kill” and “Student rights, not pouring rights.” They’ve secured a town hall meeting on the matter with university President Leslie Wong on campus Thursday.
Celia LoBuono Gonzalez, a 22-year-old junior majoring in communication and geography, is helping to lead the no-soda charge. She called it “enraging” that the university is apparently willing to emblazon the campus with corporate advertising for products that damage students’ health.
“This is a public institution — one that prides itself on social justice activism and community engagement,” she said, noting there was no engagement with the students before putting out the request for proposals. “The notion of a corporation putting their name on our institution and buying power at our school is problematic.”
The students have already lined up some big-name backers. Some members of the city’s Board of Supervisors are ready to write a resolution in support of the students and against the pouring rights contract. The university’s faculty association passed a resolution opposing the contract.
Greg Glassman, CEO of the exercise company CrossFit, plans to be at the town hall meeting and said in a statement, “Pouring rights contracts are just another vehicle for spreading the lie that sugary beverages aren’t to blame for diabetes and obesity in this country. CrossFit stands with the students of SFSU to say no more.”
Janna Cordeiro, a public health consultant who is helping the students fight the pouring rights contract, said the battle has gained international attention in the antisoda movement.
“This is a very big deal,” she said. “If these students can fight back a pouring rights contract, it’s a huge loss for Coca-Cola and Pepsi — every university has one. Every sports stadium, airline, city — and on and on and on — has these pouring rights contracts.”
University still ‘evaluating’
Wong said in a statement that the university has made no decisions and is “currently evaluating” whether to enter into an agreement with a beverage company.
“The input of our students, faculty and staff is incredibly important to this process, and as we proceed, I am committed to listening to all members of the campus community with an open mind,” he said.
But opponents of a pouring rights contract say a close look at the request for proposals shows the university is ready and willing to sell out in a big way.
Not only would the winning soda company get to sell loads of their drinks on campus, the contract could also include display space for ads in all of the university’s athletic venues, the right to name the university’s athletic complex for 10 years (Coke Stadium anyone?), permanent signage on all scoreboards, product sampling events and giveaways, in-game announcements and its logo on posters, programs and seasonticket brochures.
But wait, there’s more! The company might also get to sell its own branded coolers, towels, bottles and other gear at athletic events and would get loads of free tickets to men’s and women’s basketball games.
Still more! The company could negotiate for a student internship program created for it, its own career and recruitment day on campus, the right to “establish a corporate named endowed chair in the college of its choice” and the right to serve as the main sponsor for a variety of events, including the annual President’s Dinner and Alumni Hall of Fame Celebration, which was held earlier this month at the Ritz-Carlton.
The price tag for all this exposure to the school’s 30,000 students and its alumni? The request for proposals sets a minimum of a mere $2 million up front and an annual contribution that would vary depending on which benefits the soda company wants, but would range from $125,000 to $450,000 each year for the duration of the eight-year contract.
Opponents say it’s not a good trade-off.
“I’ve been doing my best to try to understand why San Francisco State would sell out to Big Soda, which it seems like it’s doing,” said Supervisor Eric Mar, an original backer of the failed soda tax that would have added a 2-cents-per-ounce levy on sodas and other sugary drinks. It got 56 percent of the vote in the November 2014 election, but needed two-thirds to win.
(Interestingly, 123,475 San Francisco residents voted for the soda tax — nearly 20,000 more than voted for Mayor Ed Lee for re-election earlier this month.)
Supervisors opposed
Mar, who was a lecturer in Asian American studies at the university for 16 years before becoming a supervisor, said he knows the university is “extremely desperate” for money after state funding cuts. But he said selling out to a soda company isn’t worth it. He said he’ll back a resolution opposing the pouring rights contract and is also working on another soda tax, which he hopes will be on the ballot in November 2016.
Supervisor Scott Wiener, another key backer of the soda tax, said he also supports a resolution condemning the pouring rights contract.
“This is really no different than if they entered into an exclusivity agreement with Philip Morris to encourage their students to smoke,” he said. “We need fewer of these drinks on college campuses, not more.”
Of course, the soda companies themselves don’t see it that way. They emphasize that they sell healthier drinks too, not just high-calorie, high-sugar sodas.
A spokeswoman for PepsiCo said in a statement, “We welcome the opportunity to work with San Francisco State University to offer the beverage lineup that works best for its students, including choices such as Gatorade, Lipton Iced Tea, Naked Juice, Tropicana and a variety of low- and nocalorie products.”
A spokeswoman for CocaCola said in a statement, “We are committed to supporting the students and community of San Francisco State University. Our partnership allows for a wide variety of beverage choices, innovation and joint community initiatives.”
Marion Nestle is a nutrition, food studies and public health professor at New York University and is renowned in the antisoda movement. She said the tide is slowly turning against Big Soda, and that the San Francisco State students could strike yet another blow.
“It’s a good time, because the soda industry is in retreat. The word is out that they’re not good for you, and sales are down,” she said. “I think it’s great the students are trying.”