On Tue, 8 Jul 2003, Donna Metler wrote:


"Byron Canfield" wrote in message
news:9SrOa.3991$H17.2910@sccrnsc02...
"Nan" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 07 Jul 2003 08:01:37 GMT, "Byron Canfield"
wrote:

That last bit is my point exactly. It is not necessary to obtain
funding
from sources that damage the health of the children. Vending machines
can
vend healthy food and drink just as easily.

I maintain that it is necessary when the funding is lacking so sorely
from the other sources. Sad, but true.
Let's see..... We have the Pepsi Co or Coke Co coming to the schools
and saying, "we'll outfit your entire school with brand new computers
if we can put some vending machines in the cafeteria".
We don't have the local farmers coming in with apples and oranges, and
offering to upgrade the computers in exchange for allowing a fruit
stand.

Nan

And then you tell them: "Yes, that's all well and good; we accept your
offer. And here is the list of what we will allow you to stock in the
vending machines. Any deviation from the list will be cause for immediate
termination of power to the vending machines to prevent their further use
by
students until such time as the stock is made in conformance with the
list."

And CocaCola, at least, has no problem with this. In fact, since the price
on bottled water and juice is higher than soda, they may even make more
money from it. In addition, water/juice machines don't violate the USDA
rules, so can be turned on all day, instead of only after lunch is over.

Actually, the people who complained the most were the teachers who wanted
their diet coke fix!


We have a separate vending machines in the staff mail room for staff
use. The prices are different and the selection is voted on. I suspect
that could stay the same regardless of what was made available in
student machines (hypocritcal tho that may be).