Think twice before banning boxes

Collection boxes for the poor have been around for decades. Man-sized receptacles for old shoes and coats and books mostly, a place to drop off what you no longer need after spring cleaning. A source for a charitable rush, knowing that someone would be a little warmer or better equipped, thanks to you.

But Goodwill is out of that business now. They have drop-off centers/stores that illustrate very plainly the circle of life of your old clothing and books and household items.

The Salvation Army still does some of its collections through these big bins, but new, colorful competitors are springing up in suburban parking lots. Some for charitable causes, others for profit, others that donate some of their profits to worthy causes.

The proliferation of these boxes has some in Schaumburg upset — to the point that the village board next month will consider banning them.

The proposal is that organizations may post one of these boxes only if they are the owner or tenant of the land on which it sits.

That also goes for nonprofits like Women In Need Growing Stronger (WINGS) and Salvation Army as well as for-profits like USAgain, a venture whose stated goal is to keep textiles out of landfills, thereby reducing the garbage stream and greenhouse gases. The village’s target is the for-profit businesses whose boxes sometimes appear without the endorsement of the property owner. But, Schaumburg and other towns with similar concerns, let’s not throw the baby out with the bath water.

We suggested in this space two weeks ago that the village of Wheeling and any other communities that have a mind to eliminate on-street charitable solicitation think hard about the ramifications of a blanket policy.

The Wheeling village board now is leaning toward limiting organizations to solicit money on the streets for a few days once a year. Schaumburg officials should take a similar breather and consider the downside of essentially eliminating all such boxes. The current proposal is overreaching.

This debate is not new. In researching the issue, Schaumburg learned that a number of suburbs already have decided to ban the boxes: Algonquin, Crystal Lake, Elgin, Geneva, Hoffman Estates, Lombard, McHenry, Mount Prospect, Villa Park and Warrenville. They all should think twice.

If the primary issue is going after for-profit companies, then licensing and enforcement would seem a more appropriate route.

All organizations should have to comply with appearance standards. And that means ensuring the boxes are where they should be, that they be regularly maintained and that bags of goods that we all donated in good faith not be left outside to rot.

But eliminating all the boxes takes away a convenience that can shortchange both people in need and our environment.