The crusty old maxim goes that children should be seen, not heard. But so far as Seattle's School Board is concerned, that's only half true. The district, and the board, is going out of its way once again to ensure that all citizens--not just kids, or their parents, or teachers--are neither seen nor heard. The issue this time is a particularly egregious exclusive contract the district secretly negotiated with Coca-Cola, and the latest occasion was the School Board's public (aarrggh!! there's that word!) meeting on Wednesday evening, August 5.

The deal up for approval that night would supposedly bring $6.1 million to Seattle schools in exchange for an exclusive ten-year contract with Coke for all district schools. It was all set for approval, with the contract to take effect September 1. Then that annoying public showed up.

The mobilization for the meeting by parents and concerned citizens, on short notice in the middle of summer, was impressive; speaker after speaker lambasted the deal. As more than one speaker pointed out, the timing was no accident; the district was burned in 1996-97 over its ill-fated policy to solicit corporate advertising (overturned after massive public outcry--see most recently ETS! #29, March 25, 1997), and its response since has been to dump responsibility for determining district advertising policy into a citizens' committee that was first not convened at all, then (when citizens complained) stacked with business advocates, then (when citizens complained) dumped into bureaucratic nether-land. The committee was given no notice at all of the deal, but had been conveniently adjourned for the summer. Indeed, General Stanford's minions seemed particularly anxious to get this one on the books before the start of the new school year--and before parents, teachers, and students could talk and compare notes.

What they'll find, when they do, is that the district's numbers don't add up. The district uses a 6.5% discount factor to calculate the Net Present Value (future income in 1998 dollars) of projected Coke revenues over 10 years. The 6.5% is what it normally costs the district to borrow money or what they can typically get if they invested money. Hence, their actual projected revenue includes anticipated investment income; without it, the figure is only $4.7 million. Deduct the $2.7 million current pop sales in district schools (many through local school clubs, and many with Pepsi), and it's suddenly a $2 million benefit--a third of what the district is selling it as, and about $4.25 per student per year. Or the cost of two overpaid administrators, or one particularly lucrative consultancy, either of which could be slashed out of SSD's budget at far greater benefit to the students.

Meanwhile, Coke gets exclusive market share to 47,000 kids x 1 can a day @ $1 each x 180 school days a year x 10 years = $84.6 million dollars. Not a bad deal for Coke. The wonder, as with the district's previous ad policy, is how cheaply it is willing to sell our kids. It's an ad exec's fantasy: a young, impressionable audience just waiting to develop brand loyalty, required by law to be exposed to daily advertising for a corporation, and to availability of its products, with the benediction of the state.

While the nutrient value (or lack of it) of Coke is an easy target, the real issue for both sides in this debate is advertising. School Board member Don Nielsen, who has long been the board's most forceful proponent of school ads, says, "This is the single biggest thing we'll do in advertising." District lawyer Ron English, the former WPPSS (Whoops!) lawyer who helped cut the deal, says the logos on the vending machines are an integral part of the deal. "If the logos are removed from the machines, neither of the two vendors is willing to enter into the contract."

Aware that the Coke deal, after it made the papers, might remind some folks of the last ads debacle, the district's response was instructive: it hired (your tax dollars at work) four security guards for the regular board meeting, presumably just in case some of those bomb-throwing bolshie parents showed up. The contempt for public process couldn't be clearer, or more instructive; the district regularly requires 24 hours notice to give "public comment" at a public hearing--often scheduled during the day, when the working public can't attend--and Board members rarely acknowledge or interact with citizens presenting input, looking instead like they'd rather be somewhere else eating freshly poured asphalt. Simply put, the Seattle School District hoped to get away with one.

They failed. With all the speakers and media present, the board deferred a decision on the contract to its next meeting August 19, hoping that activists don't have the stamina to show up to two (or more) meetings in a row. They're wrong.

The Seattle School Board will meet--with security guards--on Wednesday evening, August 19, and is set to vote on the Coca-Cola contract at that time. To sign up in advance to speak at that meeting, call 206-298-7040. For more information, contact Citizens' Campaign for Commercial-Free Schools; 206-726-4142.