Nonprofits fight donation regulations

Goodwill signMarch 27, 2013

By John Hrabe

If you’ve started your spring cleaning, or are in desperate need of a last-minute tax deduction, there’s probably a pile of clothes in your house marked for charity. Now you’ve just got to remember to drop it off at a donation bin before April 15.

That task could soon get more difficult, thanks to a proposal by a Central Valley lawmaker, who is looking to impose new state regulations on secondhand donation bins.

For the second year in a row, state Sen. Cathleen Galgiani, D-Stockton, has introduced legislation at the behest of Goodwill Industries that would authorize local governments to adopt ordinances regulating the placement and removal of donation boxes.

The legislation is a mixed bag for property owners. For bins that have been placed without the property owner’s consent, the bill would grant the owner civil immunity for any damages in removing the unauthorized bins. However, if the property owner changes their mind and removes a bin that was previously authorized, the property owner could be slapped with a $1,000 fine if they fail to follow the bill’s notification and removal provisions.

Assemblywoman Kristin Olsen, R-Modesto, a co-author of S.B. 450, told that the bill will better protect property owners and provide a legal method for removing unwanted bins.

“My interest is property rights,” Olsen said. “This is a reasonable measure that is about respecting the rights of property owners and businesses.”

Olsen expressed concerns that, under current law, property owners could be held civilly liable for removing unauthorized bins on their property. But some charitable organizations say that the bill’s new regulations are unnecessary. They say the bill is an effort by Goodwill Industries to shut them out of the secondhand clothing market.

Property owners

“Property owners aren’t asking for the protections in this bill,” said Jonathan Franks, a spokesman for a coalition of organizations that are fighting the new regulations. “It’s a bold-faced, anti-competitive measure fronted by a team of lobbyists and political consultants.”

Franks describes the bill as Goodwill’s “attempt to corner the clothing donation market and make more money.” In 2011, Goodwill Industries generated nearly $3 billion of its $4.4 billion in annual revenue from its secondhand clothing stores. Goodwill would benefit from collection bin regulations because it commonly uses larger tractor-trailer donation centers, the bill’s critics say. Smaller charities, on the other hand, use smaller bins, and therefore must go through the bureaucratic process for each location.

“It’s really unfortunate that Goodwill has devoted so much money to a statewide attempt to make it impossible for legitimate charities like D.A.R.E. and Planet Aid to place clothing donation boxes in California,” Franks said. “We believe Californians should have the right to choose the cause they donate to, and it’s unfortunate that Goodwill doesn’t share that position.”

John Lindsay, vice-president of development for D.A.R.E. America, expressed similar concerns last year when Gov. Jerry Brown vetoed another Galgiani-authored donation regulation bill. Lindsay said it’s not always easy to obtain permission from the property owner compared to the lessee or primary business.

“Many properties are owned by large corporations and companies,” Lindsay told us last year. “Actually obtaining the written permission of the ‘property owner’ vs. permission from the agent or lessee are two different things.” asked Olsen to address the concerns raised by smaller charities. She said she would be open to amendments in order to make sure that “fantastic organizations like D.A.R.E. are able to raise money.”

“I do believe the author’s intent is to be collaborative — to make sure that it’s effective for everyone,” she said.

Bad will from Goodwill

The 800-lb. pound gorilla in the secondhand clothing market, Goodwill has pushed for more government regulations of donation bins, including an annual donation registration fee. Last year, Goodwill unsuccessfully backed an Oakland ordinance that would have “imposed an annual fee of $450 per box, included a cap on the number of bins citywide (60) and per vendor (15), and would have imposed fines on organizations for boxes that aren’t maintained or are without permits.”

The organization has also come under fire for exploiting a loophole in federal wage laws that allows it to pay some disabled workers less than the federal minimum wage.

Last year, a investigation revealed that five California-based Goodwill charities pay hundreds of employees less than the minimum wage, while providing lucrative compensation packages to top executives. In 2010, the five CEOs of Goodwill Industries of Sacramento Valley & Northern Nevada, Goodwill of Silicon Valley, Goodwill Industries of Orange County, Goodwill Industries of San Diego County and Goodwill Southern California earned a combined $1.78 million in total compensation.

The average compensation was $356,000 a year.

These same organizations paid some disabled employees less than the federal minimum wage. In Orange County, 595 Goodwill employees work an average of 20-30 hours per week for less than minimum wage.

“I have nothing but positive things to say about the mission of Goodwill, but their tactics over the last few years are despicable,” Lindsay, vice-president of development for D.A.R.E. America told last year. “They should be ashamed that they feel the need to use their clout to squeeze out their competition in such a manipulative manner.”


Write a comment
  1. us citizen
    us citizen 27 March, 2013, 17:21

    I dont give anything to goodwill. Most of their profits go to over head/ salaries and not the needy. A better charity is the Salvation Army, where almost everything goes to the needy.

    Reply this comment
  2. WackoCaliBird
    WackoCaliBird 27 March, 2013, 21:03

    Yup. Salvation Army gets my support.

    Reply this comment
  3. Bill - San Jose
    Bill - San Jose 28 March, 2013, 09:43

    “It’s a bold-faced, anti-competitive measure fronted by a team of lobbyists and political consultants.”

    Two words: Salvation Army

    Two other words: Catholic Charities

    I can’t think of two better organizations to spread the donations effectively.

    Reply this comment
  4. LGMike
    LGMike 28 March, 2013, 11:05

    The public here in California never seem to learn. Have you seen any official response to all the complaints of “fire” money collected during the 2003 and 2007 fires in San Diego. Have all the homeowners seen an apology for mishandling the funds, NO. My few donations will always go to Salvation Army, not Goodwill or American Red Cross.

    Just think what $356,000 could provide to the “people” that Goodwill says it is helping.
    If you take the salary of one CEO and reduce it to only $100,000 per year, that would free up $256,000 to help. This would equate to at least 15 full time employees at only $ 8.00 per hour minimum wage. Multiply this by 5 of the cities mentioned in this article, this would help 75 persons. Then take the rest of the senior executives of these organizations that get over $100,000 per year and I would bet it would at several 100’s of employees to the work force (at only $8.00 per hour, should be more like $10). When you donate, ask what the executive compensation is, then ask what percentage of donations goes to actual benefit to its charter. If its anything less than 80%, then you need to re-consider your donation.

    Reply this comment
  5. Bo&me
    Bo&me 6 April, 2018, 01:49

    I detest their history, but must trade with their monopoly on goods. My treatment is progressive worse. I want to formulate a coalition in protest and end their (in my concidered openion) monopoly.

    Reply this comment
  6. Terry Lewis
    Terry Lewis 14 August, 2019, 00:05

    it isn’t sufficient that we in the US do our part-every country regardless of how little needs to do their part also. Going into an arrangement causes everybody to include focused on the reason and responsible to the others in the arrangement much like when you sign an agreement with the phone organization, on the off chance that they didn’t keep their piece of the agreement you can consider them responsible in light of the fact that it was a commonly settled upon arrangement. As much as we cherish our nation and we all in our very own altogether different ways and fluctuated thoughts need to confront the way that we can’t do only it, we as a whole all around offer the seas as water simply like air voyages, since we clean our corner it others don’t spotless theirs, their rubbish will in the long run end up in our corner as well –

    Reply this comment
  7. Merlijn Van De Langenberg
    Merlijn Van De Langenberg 16 August, 2019, 03:52

    I don’t agree with the most topics in this article, but you are correct this is very important to talk about it

    Reply this comment

Write a Comment

Leave a Reply

Related Articles

‘We are destined to live with a growing and permanent underclass’

It may be building very slowly, and years later than it should have first appeared. But there is beginning to

CA Supreme Court curbs Jessica’s Law

In a closely-watched San Diego case, the California Supreme Court dealt a blow to Jessica’s Law. Officially called Proposition 83, it was passed in

Aussies dump carbon tax

AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, was enacted by the Legislature and signed by Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger