From: OC Green Party Labor Caucus
>
>To: All progressives
>
>(Gordon, please post on announcement listserve)
>
>***Tell HB City Council to sever ties with Coca-Cola for allowing death squads to threaten and kill union workers in Colombia and for destroying water resources for peasants in India!!
>
>***Tell HB Officials not to do business with corporations that don't respect fundamental human rights, including the right to belong to a union and to have safe drinking water.
>
>***Tell HB officials not to allow the name of Huntington Beach to be used to support advertizing for corporate predators.
>
>JOIN THE INTERNATIONAL CAMPAIGN TO BOYCOTT COKE AND TO SUPPORT WORKERS RIGHTS, ENVIRONMENTAL INTEGRITY AND FAIR COMPETITION
>
>DATE: Monday, April 5th, 2004
>
>WHERE: Huntington Beach City Council, Huntington Beach City Hall, on the corner of Yorktown and Main St., across from Huntington Beach High School.
>
>TIME: Please arrive at 6:30 PM for briefing and to sign up for public comments. Public comments begin at 7:00 PM.

Contents below:
--Brief background
--Links to killcoke, etc.
--Sample email letter to City Council
--Background articles
>
>Brief backgound:
>
>In 1999 the Huntington Beach City Council signed a precedent setting agreement with the Coca-Cola company that allows it monopoly status on all city property, including beaches, parks and city facilities. In return, the Coca Cola company paid the city millions of dollars and gives the city $300,000 in cash each year plus another $300,000 directed at park maintainence. The company is also allowed to use the city's "Surf City" logo in its advertising.
>
>But the Coca Cola company has been accused by its workers at bottling plants in Colombia of direct collaboration with death squads that have assasinated 7 union organizers and made death threats against 67 other union members at bottling plants throughout the country. Coca Cola is has routinely violated its collective bargaining agreement with the union and has illegally used intimidation to force the retirement of hundred of union members, according to union members.
>
>In the meantime, Coca-Cola bottling plants in India have destroyed local water supplies while intimidation and violence has been used to silence critics. Yet, hundreds of thousands of Indians have staged protests and a movement is underway to ban Coke from the country.
>
>In Mexico, the company uses its economic clout to kill local bottling companies and establish a monopoly in the soft-drink business in that country.
>
>The Coca-Cola company has a terrible labor record in the USA as well.
>
>The campaign against "Killer Coke" has reached international proportions and is supported by mainstream and progressive labor organizations throughout the United States and many parts of the world, as well as by many members of the United States Congress.
>
>OUR GOALS: 1)To ask the HB City Council to look for legal ways to back out of its contract with the Coca-Cola bottling company if it does not immediately begin to respect the fundamental and internationally recognized right to belong to a union and does not live up to appropriate environmental standards wherever its plants are located; 2) To apply public pressure to the Coca-Cola company to respect labor rights and environmental standards; 3) To ask the city council to establish human rights (including labor organizing rights) and environmental standards that would apply to all future business deals between the city and giant corporations that will use city property or its good name for profit.
>
>Go to http://www.killercoke.org for complete information and references.
>
>http://www.toddgallina.com/huntington.html
>
>http://www.badads.org/town.shtml
>
>(Coke Executive surrounded by die-in protest as he lectures students about business ethics and community responsibility: http://www.yaledailynews.com/article.asp?AID=25539
>
>Hunger strike ends, but Coke boycott continues: http://www.killercoke.org/janahng.htm


Please Immediately Send Email to the HB City Councilmembers (before 4PM today) at:

hbdac@hotmail.com
DSULLIVAN@socal.rr.com
cboardman@surfcity-hb.org
CBoardBCLT@aol.com
Hbmissjill@aol.com
glcoerp1@gte.net
CB4Council@aol.com
cgreen@surfcity-hb.org
gcoerper@surfcity-hb.org
jhardy@surfcity-hb.org
phouchen@surfcity-hb.org
dsullivan@surfcity-hb.org
ppcgreen@aol.com
city.council@surfcity-hb.org

Subject Line: Public Comments: Please reconsider contract with Coca-Cola.

Body of email:

Dear Mayor Green and Huntington Beach City Council:

I am writing to ask that you reconsider your contract with Coca-Cola.

While I understand the financial attractiveness of the City's soft drink
contract with Coca-Cola dating to 1999, recent charges involving the Coca-Cola
corporation are very disturbing and warrant your careful investigation and
consideration of whether the City of Huntington Beach should have its good name
associated with this company.

There are allegations that Coca Cola is involved with serious human rights
abuses, including some very serious charges involving death squads and killing
of union workers in Columbia, and destroying water resources for peasants in
India.

I encourage you to research these charges, and engage Coca-Cola in a
discussion of these charges. If substantiated in any way, the City should consider
terminating its contract. In any case, discussing this matter with Coca-Cola may
help bring an end to these abuses whoever is causing them.

Thank you for considering this very important human rights issue. Because of
its business linkage, the City has an interest in what Coca-Cola is doing in
the rest of the world.

Sincerely,

Name
Address
Phone Number

>
>Background from mainstream press.
>
>Now, Brought to You by Coke (or Pepsi): Your City Hall
>by Verne G. Kopytoff
>The New York Times, November 29, 1999
>
>Beachgoers who become thirsty while strolling on this surfing town's pier had better like Coke. Every vending machine on and around the pier offers only Coca-Cola beverages.
>
>The selection is just as limited in the city's parks and civic center. As on all municipal property here, there is little evidence that Pepsi, Coke's main competitor, even exists.
>
>In an effort to raise money, Huntington Beach in February sold Coca-Cola exclusive rights to soft drink sales on its property for nearly $6 million in cash and services the next 10 years.
>
>"That goes a long way in putting grass in the soccer fields for kids and repainting City Hall," said Donald R. Schulte, president of the Public Enterprise Group, a consulting company that helped Huntington Beach negotiate its soft drink deal. "None of it would come from taxpayers."
>
>Nearly a dozen cities across the nation have since approved similar contracts with soft-drink companies. The largest to do so is San Diego, where the city council voted in November to make Pepsi its official soft-drink in exchange for at least $6.7 million the next 12 years.
>
>Soft-drink companies believe that buying rights to city property is good business for several reasons. In addition to eliminating competition, they hope the access will allow them to build customer loyalty and create a sense of goodwill in the community.
>
>Officials in Huntington Beach, a middle-class city of 200,000 in the Los Angeles suburbs, chose to solicit a soft-drink contract in an effort to increase revenue and make park improvements. A city consultant, who has experience selling sporting event sponsorships, approached the major soft-drink companies with the idea.
>
>Both Pepsi-Cola and the Coca-Cola Bottling Company of Southern California submitted proposals. The city council eventually approved Coca-Cola's proposal, which offered $300,000 a year in cash and $300,000 a year for in-kind maintenance.
>
>In exchange for the money, Coca-Cola got exclusive access to sell its soft drinks, bottled water and juices on three miles of city beach, 60 parks and handful of city buildings. The company can install up to 180 vending machines on city property and use Huntington Beach's Surf City logo in its advertising.
>
>Peter Green, the mayor, who prefers to drink tea rather than soft-drinks, applauds the deal for helping to balance the city's budget.
>
>Fears that Coca-Cola would flood the city with unattractive advertising have proved to be unfounded, he said. In fact, he added, the agreement prohibits such practices.
>
>"It's not like we now have Coca-Cola Pier," Mayor Green said. "It hasn't been intrusive at all. In fact, I haven't noticed at all."
>
>Cities are not the first government entities to negotiate soft-drink rights.
>
>School districts, for example, have been selling soft-drink companies exclusive access to school property for at least the last few years.
>
>But bundling all of a city's municipal property for such a contract is a relatively new phenomenon. Negotiating a deal for a large territory is more practical for a soft-drink company than doing business park-by-park, the soft-drink companies said.
>
>The marriage of big business and government worries some consumer advocates. They complain that sponsorship deals subvert government oversight of corporations that contribute money to the community's budget.
>
>"It's not just the pragmatic problem of a municipality pushing a brand that over-caffeinates and over-sugars children," said Jamie Court, advocacy director for the Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights in Santa Monica, Calif. "It's also the symbol that government can be bought for a small pittance and branded with a cola company's emblem."
>
>Sanctioning a company also raises fears of price gouging. Mr. Court said that eliminating competition on city property could allow soft-drink companies to raise prices.
>
>Whether prices in Huntington Beach have increased since Coca-Cola eliminated its competition is unclear. For a 20-ounce Coke, the company charges $1.50 at the beach and $1 at City Hall.
>
>Bob Phillips, spokesman for Coca-Cola Bottling of Southern California, based in Los Angeles, said the company always charges fair prices with or without competition and does not have exclusive access to the handful of restaurants on city property.
>
>"People have to remember that city property is only a very small portion of the total land mass of any municipality," Mr. Phillips said. "Yes, at this park, there may only be a machine that carries our products. But you can walk across the street and buy Pepsi from someone else."
>
>How much extra revenue is flowing to Coca-Cola because of the deal is unknown. The company's vending machines at the pier did not muster a single sale over an hour on a recent cool Friday afternoon, but they will almost certainly attract more business during the summer when the beach is blanketed with thousands of people.
>
>Cities with outdoor activities are particularly attractive targets for soft-drink companies looking for an exclusive contract, said David DeCecco, spokesman for Pepsi-Cola, a unit of PepsiCo, based in Purchase, N.Y. Residents in such places are more likely to visit a park and work up a thirst, he said.
>
>"I don't know if we would get as much out of a city in Saskatchewan as in Southern California," Mr. DeCecco added.
>
>That is not to say that northern cities have no chance to enlist in the soft- drink wars. Pepsi-Cola sponsors Amherst, N.Y., and Lynn, Mass., while Coke is the official soft-drink of East Lansing, Mich.
>
>Some cities, like San Francisco, are philosophically opposed to the notion of exclusive soft-drink contracts.
>
>"San Franciscans tend to be very independent-minded and promoters of small business," said Kandance Bender, spokeswoman for Mayor Willie L. Brown. "I can't imagine that this would be something that San Francisco would do."
>
>Mr. Schulte, Huntington Beach's consultant, said that the city may enter into other corporate deals worth millions of dollars a year. One idea is to sell the exclusive right to install automated teller machines on municipal property.
>
>For the most part, residents and visitors were unaware or did not care about the city's contract with Coca-Cola. James Gonzales, a college student who was carrying his surfboard past the vending machines at the pier simply shrugged his shoulders when told about the deal and said: "Coke or Pepsi, what's the difference?"
>
>Background links:
>
>(everything you need to know, links, documents, letter, etc: http://www.killercoke.org
>
>Coke managers consort with death squads, says union: http://www.fightbacknews.org/2004/01winter/colounion.htm

Vincentes Fox (Pres of Mexico) is also the former CEO of Coca-cola Mexico. Since the Fox admin came into power, the aquifers of Chiapas are now owned by Coca-cola..

from;

http://www.organicconsumers.org/chiapas/091202_chiapas.cfm

"Water is also an indispensable resource for the development of transnational agro-industries, which need irrigation systems for their plantations on the plains and their greenhouses.  The same thing is true for soft drink bottling companies, like Coca-Cola (Fox vis-à-vis Zedillo/Union Pacific), which, following the Fox victory, increased its facilities in Chiapas by obtaining a change in ground use for the extraction, processing and bottling of water in the richest aquifer in the Jovel Valley (San Cristóbal de las Casas), located in the Huitepec foothills, an ecological reserve administered by Pronatura (a conservation NGO, whose funding comes, in part, from Coca-Cola Mexico)."

Depleting the aquifers of Chiapas and then attempting to be environmentally friendly by funding a psuedo conservation group is a slap in the face to the indigenous community who depends on the pure agua for life..

The storys you Pepsi drinkers will come up with to try and get us Coke drinkers to switch. Well, it won't work. I tried Pepsi several times and it's just not the same. I'm sticking with Coke.

Are you serious in thinking that we are playing the advertising game to gain support for corp. that we are brand loyal too? You have no clue. I like Coke and Taco Bell. I like to buy gas from anyone including Shell and Texaco. I stop myself from doing what I want to do because, if I do, then I am giving financial support to an organization that violates other people's human rights. Would you give money to terrorists if they could give you a deal on merchandise? Well, hate to break it to you, if you still buy coke that is exactly what you are doing.
-----------------------------
CEO of Coca Cola Company Douglas Daft continues to lecture on ethics Luce Hall March 31 while surrounded by a “die in.”
http://www.yaledailynews.com/article.asp?AID=25539

I didn’t write that. It’s a forgery.

For more about forgeries on Indymedia, click here:

http://www.sfimc.net/news/2002/12/1555696_comment.php#1692248

I boycott all Coke AND Pepsi products. Personally, I think Pepsi has committed even worse crimes than Coke.
As chronicled in The Trials of Henry Kissinger, both Pepsi and IT&T Copper appealed to President Nixon to overthrow Salvador Allende in Chile. (Pepsi had bottling facilities in Chile, and its then-CEO Don Goodall was an "old friend" of Nixon's.)
The consequences of our intervention in Chile, at the behest of Pepsi, far exceeds the crimes of Coke, in my opinion.
Pepsi's role in the overthrow of Allende may have occured long ago, but as one of my favorite quotes says:
"I am not a great believer in the death penalty for people, but I am a great believer in the death penalty for corporations." -- caller on KPFA Pacifica Radio, 2006.
I have been addicted to caffeinated cola since I was 16, but I now drink more obscure brands.
I keep a list of Coke products on my refrigerator, and I'm looking for a list of Pepsi products. (I do know that it owns Mountain Dew.)

Look up Pepisco.
Do you like KFC?

oh and BTW
Soda and hard candy are the killer of teeth and bones.
Go back to either beer or lemonade or pure drinking water...

sd wrote:

"Do you like KFC? "

I've been a vegetarian for over 21 years, so I haven't set foot in a KFC for quite a while.

I've heard of demonstrations held in front of KFCs but not much else. I imagine they treat the chickens pretty horrendously before killing them.

As far as eating healthy, I have respect for people that do, but I prefer to concentrate on the health of this planet. My own long-term health is irrelevant if there's no future for the planet.

The world needs to wean itself from the horrific practice of factory farming.
I was referring to the huge corporation of Pepisico and the many arms it has.
I agree in principle about the earth and it's current peril.
Coke & Pepsi are owned by the same families. None of which has any conception of morality and neither of which should be purchased.
I never drink soda of any kind although I do eat meat. I try to minimize the consumption of same because of the general health issues involved.
I've gone vegan for months at a time, with beans, rice,corn and other vegies but I do like a good Elk steak or roast now and then.

One reason factory farms still exist is split opposition. People who oppose the practice because it produces meat, and people who oppose the practice because it produces meat that is unhealthy to eat, wont work together.

"part of the problem" wrote:

"One reason factory farms still exist is split opposition. People who oppose the practice because it produces meat, and people who oppose the practice because it produces meat that is unhealthy to eat, wont work together."


Also, people who oppose the extremely unethical treatment of animals. This was my reason for becoming a vegetarian. (Another motivation for me is there is just too damned many people, resulting in problems like the depletion of sea life.)

But you're right, all these groups should work together. A problem with many causes is people won't unite on common goals.

Thank you, SD, for alerting me to the connection between Pepsi and KFC. In my research, I learned of other fast food chains owned by Pepsi: Pepsi-owned restaurants

I also learned about other Pepsi products. Besides Mounbtain Dew, they own Gaterade, Tropicana, Aquafina, Frito-Lay, and all Quaker products. See: Pepsico.com



Ross wrote:

I boycott all Coke AND Pepsi products. Personally, I think Pepsi has committed even worse crimes than Coke.

As chronicled in The Trials of Henry Kissinger, both Pepsi and IT&T Copper appealed to President Nixon to overthrow Salvador Allende in Chile. (Pepsi had bottling facilities in Chile, and its then-CEO Don Goodall was an "old friend" of Nixon's.)

The consequences of our intervention in Chile, at the behest of Pepsi, far exceeds the crimes of Coke, in my opinion.

Pepsi's role in the overthrow of Allende may have occured long ago, but as one of my favorite quotes says:

"I am not a great believer in the death penalty for people, but I am a great believer in the death penalty for corporations." -- caller on KPFA Pacifica Radio, 2006.

I have been addicted to caffeinated cola since I was 16, but I now drink more obscure brands. I keep a list of Coke products on my refrigerator, and I'm looking for a list of Pepsi products. (I do know that it owns Mountain Dew.)