Schools are a key setting for curbing student intake of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSBs). While studies suggest that restrictions on SSBs, increased access to healthier beverages, and education about the importance of drinking water instead of SSBs can promote healthier beverage patterns among students, there is little known about the impact that teachers' own beverage choices can have on those of their students. Data were drawn from cross-sectional surveys administered as part of a larger evaluation of a drinking water access and promotion intervention in public elementary schools in the San Francisco Bay Area region of California. Descriptive statistics were used to examine teacher (n = 56) and student (n = 1176) self-reported beverage consumption at school. Mixed-effects logistic regression was used to examine associations between teacher and student beverage intake adjusting for clustering of students by teacher. Teachers were also surveyed via open-ended questions about strategies to increase student water consumption at school. Nearly all teachers reported drinking water during the school day (95%), often in front of students. Teacher SSB intake was rare (9%). Students whose teachers drank water in front of their classes were significantly more likely to report drinking water during the school day. Teachers tend to select healthy beverages at work and may serve as role models to encourage student consumption of water instead of SSBs.

The sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) industry has claimed that food and beverage retailers are opposed to SSB taxes. In 2018 and 2019, we formally evaluated retailers' perceptions of SSB taxes using semi-structured interviews (including open- and closed-ended questions) with 103 randomly selected retailers (50 corner and liquor stores; 28 chain convenience, drug, and mass-merchandise stores; 18 chain supermarkets and discount supermarkets; and 7 independent supermarkets) across 3 cities with SSB taxes (Berkeley, Oakland, and San Francisco); interviews occurred in 2018 and 2019 (approximately 3 years, 1 year and 6 months post tax-implementation, respectively). A majority of both small and large retailers reported the tax had only a minimal effect on their business (70%). About half of retailers believed that other cities should adopt SSB taxes (53%), and were supportive of a statewide SSB tax (53%), noting it would level the playing field and better support health in their communities. Retailers' responses did not differ based on neighborhood income, and only 2 responses differed significantly between large and small retailers. Only 2 of 103 retailers reported raising the price of a non-beverage product in response to the tax, specifically raising the price of snack foods of low nutritional quality and alcoholic beverages. A majority of retailers in 3 California cities with SSB taxes have no concerns regarding the tax, endorse the health goals of SSB taxes and support statewide expansion of SSB tax policies.