What do you make of this? From The CT Post:
A local store owner is suing a church-run food pantry, claiming it’s hurting his business.
When Emmanuel Dieujuste opened his small store, Convenience Brand Grocery Store, at the corner of Stratford Avenue and Hewitt Street last October, he said his landlord promised he would not have any competition in the same building. But two months later, the Apostolic Ark Pentecostal Church opened its free food pantry in the storefront next door.
Read more: www.ctpost.com/local/article/Bridgeport-store-owner-sues-church-pantry-for-1339042.php
0
Doesn’t this story look really strange? Private business suing charitable program on competitive grounds. What “business person” would ever doubt the public would attempt to obtain same or similar goods from an organization at the lowest price? With grocery prices increasing and $4.00 gas at the pumps, free is probably the lowest price today!
So maybe the “business persons” understood an opportunity that really was not? Perhaps their landlord and lease may contribute to their current problem? There is more here than meets the eye. The subject was raised at the Council of Churches hunger outreach monthly meeting earlier in the week. The suit appears to offer no challenge to the many wonderful food kitchens and pantries that serve those in need daily and weekly in our community.
By the way there is a 2nd Annual Hunger Walk scheduled for Sunday, May 15, 2011 at Seaside Park with a choice of 2-mile or 3-mile distance at 2:00 PM. It will benefit the CT Food Bank that supplies groceries to many food programs in the area as well as food programs that send teams of volunteers and clients. On-line registration is at: www .ctfoodbank.org/walkagainsthunger.
You can make a donation without walking also. Reflect on being hungry … and please, do something about the feeling.
Hey, another non-profit!!!
Okay, just joking around. Seriously, he has no beef with the church’s food pantry that is open 4 hours once a week. If he has issues with this arrangement they should be directed to his landlord who implied a “No Competition” agreement. He should be understanding of the Food pantry & the church’s goal. In the long run he will be rewarded for helping the neighborhood.
I’m on the side of the food pantry. There was a time a couple of years ago that I was visiting food pantries to stay alive, going to a soup kitchen on Sunday mornings just to feel welcomed and human. The good people who prepare and serve Sunday breakfast at Faith Gospel Assembly (407 Lafayette Street) did more than a little to give us the strength to carry on.
*** More than meets the eye but could this store owner be looking for something for nothing? Sue frenzy is running wild in America, no? *** HERE WE GO! ***
Seriously?
This kid, the store owner, enters into a rental agreement with the building owner with a promise there would be no competing businesses in the same building. The building owner then rents the next-door space to a food bank? I’m all for food banks and have made many contributions over the years. The landlord should not have rented the space to the food bank because a promise was made to keep the building free from competitive businesses. Like it or not, the food bank is in the business of distributing food products to the public. The fact that it is charitable and free makes no difference. Anyone approaching both businesses looking for a loaf of bread and is given the choice of getting it for free will choose to get it free. The store owner should sue the landlord not the food bank. Especially if the landlord knew of the possibility of the food bank moving in at the time of negotiations with the store owner. The store owner is operating a business risking his own money. He is entitled to a fair playing field especially since he addressed the competition issue up front.
The food pantry is only open for three-and-a-half hours on Saturday afternoon. How is that unfair competition? I hear what you’re saying about human nature. If a person is given a choice between spending money or getting something for free he or she will choose the second option. That has a lot to do with the culture of dependence that has been allowed to flourish in Bridgeport.
I read that story yesterday, when, according to the headline, the store owner was suing a “panty.” Was it cotton or satin, and what color was it?
Seriously, this is Bridgeport. No one has sued the Archdiocese for giving food to the needy, and there are a few small grocery stores on Washington Avenue. None of the store owners are suing the Catholic church. There is no competition for business in Emmanuel Dieujuste’s building. The church’s food pantry is open 10:30-2:00 on Saturday afternoon. How can that be cutting into his business? The store is located on Stratford Avenue. Given the location Mr. Dieujuste ought to reconsider his inventory. The church doesn’t distribute malt liquor, condoms, Choreboy, or glass stems. (Or bulletproof vests, which might be a big seller given the recent shooting at the pool hall up the street.) Maybe he could offer those items to his customers.