Wednesday, Dec. 15, 2004
|
|
||
|
|
Wednesday, Dec. 15, 2004
|
|
||
|
||
|
Bad
Links? |
Some stores freeze out charity
lwilliams@TheCitizenNews.com Target joined a list of stores that has decided to ban Salvation Army bell-ringers from collecting money in front of their stores this year, and the issue is drawing mixed emotions from area residents. Some, like, Salvation Army Capt. Marion Platt of Atlanta said while he doesn’t condemn Target’s position, he fears the measure will cost the Christian-based organization hundreds of thousands of dollars in donations. Others speculate that Target’s decision to ban the bell-ringers, a policy also employed at Kohl’s and Barnes and Nobles, will be a boon for the agency. “Of course it’s a setback,” Platt said. “Last year, we made $250,000 campaigning in front of Target stores in the Atlanta area.” Despite the news, Platt is hopeful the agency’s Christmas collection totals won’t be greatly impacted. The agency uses the money raised during their Christmas Kettle Drive to fund programs year-round such as homeless shelters, food pantries and the Boys and Girls clubs, officials say. “As far as I’m concerned, I’m OK with their policy, and I feel like the Lord is going to continue to provide,” Platt said. Barbara Hanson of Ga. Highway 85 South, Fayetteville, questioned Target’s decision to ban the bell-ringers. “Why should we stop them,” Hanson said. “I don’t see any reason not to have them. They should be there. They should be everywhere. It’s an American tradition.” Target had a no-solicitation policy in place for years, but allowed the Salvation Army to raise money at Christmastime despite the policy. However, in January, Target officials informed the agency the no-solicitation policy would be equally enforced among all non-profit organizations. Target spokeswoman Brie Heath said the decision was made to be fair to all non-profits who ask to use their stores to raise money. “We receive a number of solicitation requests and it became evident as the requests increased over the years that we could no longer say ‘Yes’ to one and ‘No’ to others,” Heath said. Many organizations would use the Salvation Army exception as their chief rebuttal for why their ‘No’ decision should be reconsidered, Heath said. “It was a point of confusion for other non-profit organizations,” Heath said. Heath said Target knew its decision would likely draw ire from some customers, but the company believed the decision was the right thing to do. “This was not a decision that we took lightly,” Heath said. “We knew that guests would either embrace the decision or express concern over the decision. However, we have to ensure fairness for everybody.” Target officials notified the Salvation Army one month after the 2003 Christmas season to give them ample time to find other resources. In addition, Target and Salvation Army officials are working to find other ways to support the charity. Rita Briggs of Avalon Way, Peachtree City, said she doesn’t have a problem with Target’s decision. Briggs said she disagree with critics who say Target’s decision will affect the Salvation Army’s bottom-line this year. “It might be a boon to the charity,” Briggs said. “More people may decide to give to the charity anyway.” Jason Proffitt of Endicott Ridge, Peachtree City, agrees with Target’s decision. He said the policy should be equally applied to all. “If they are not going to allow one to do it, then they shouldn’t allow anybody,” Proffitt said. Proffitt said he suspects Target’s decision might generate some backlash from the community, but he added Target and other select retailers’ decision to ban the bell-ringers should have no affect on those who want to give. “I’m sure they will be upset, but they can go to any one of the 500 stores and give money,” Proffitt said. “Just because you can’t give money one place, it shouldn’t stop you from giving at another location.” Proffitt said if Target won’t take the donation, then give at Wal-Mart. |
|
Copyright
2004-Fayette Publishing, Inc.
|
