Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Vended Beverages Contract topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Michael Engel recommends PepsiCo for Aurora East USD 131 vending contract; item to go to full board
Summary
District staff reported three bids for the vended-beverage contract and recommended PepsiCo, which offered a 27.5% commission to schools; the committee heard the recommendation and the procurement will go to the full board for action.
Get email alerts on the Vended Beverages Contract topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Michael Engel, a district staff member, told the Finance & Personnel Committee the district solicited Reyes Coca-Cola, PepsiCo and a Department of Human Services business-enterprise vendor for the district’s vended-beverage contract and received three proposals. "PepsiCo had a straight 27 and a half percent commission," Engel said, adding that Reyes Coca-Cola offered $2,000 plus a 10% commission and the DHS vendor would return about 5%.
Engel said the commission percentage was the deciding factor in his recommendation. "At this time, we’re recommending going forward with PepsiCo as they had the highest commission percentage going back to the school at 27.5%, and they were the previous incumbent prior to Coca-Cola coming in," he said. Engel estimated the higher commission would return roughly an additional $1,000–$1,834 in annual proceeds to schools compared with the Coca-Cola offer, based on current sales patterns.
The committee did not vote on the contract tonight. Engel said the procurement recommendation will be presented to the full board for action. He described the solicitation process as including direct outreach to the three vendors, posting on the district website and a public notice; he also noted that the commission-based proposals result in no direct cost to the district and that a portion of proceeds would return to individual schools with vending machines.
The committee asked questions about the quoted commission amounts and how they translate into expected annual income for schools; Engel replied with the district’s estimates but did not present a formal revenue guarantee. The committee did not take a formal vote in the meeting; the timeline for board consideration was not specified beyond the item being forwarded for board action.

