SEARCHING FOR PURPOSE

In his superb summary of the General Assembly, JTA Editor-in-Chief, Andrew Silow-Carroll,     cited JFNA Board Chair's address:

"Federations are much more comfortable, and unifying, when they stick to what they do best: Richard Sandler, chair of the JFNA board of trustees, described that threefold mission as relief for the needy, support for Jewish education and identity, and inspiring a connection to Israel."
https://www.jta.org/2017/11/14/news-opinion/opinion/federations-rally-around-pluralism-but-wish-they-didnt-have-to?utm_source=JTA Maropost&utm_campaign=JTA&utm_medium=email&mpweb=1161-1688-27384

We might debate whether these are JFNA's or Federations' most pressing purposes, but, inasmuch as JFNA has for 9 years now, has not articulated (and stayed focus on) any mission, these three would be a magnificent mission for the organization.

Let's dig down and see where we are on this "threefold mission:"

1. Relief for the needy: Federation agencies have been and are engaged on this Mission as they have been for decades; in some instances, for over a century. I recall our communities, including my own, confronting the "new Jewish poor" in the early 1980's, as the Council of Jewish Federations exposed the issues, the best practices, and highlighted the emerging challenges at at least two GA's. That was then; today? JFNA, the successor to CJF, is doing nothing.
2. Support for Jewish education. Federations have dramatically increased allocations to Jewish education and, yet, Jewish education remains underfunded generally, teachers are severely underpaid, and, as a general rule, Jewish education does not, although it should, inspire our fund-raising. Meanwhile, what has JFNA done under this leadership to lead "support for Jewish education?" Well, while JESNA died away from underfunding, JFNA's leaders, lay and professional, did nothing, said nothing. Then, a few years later, Silverman led the theft of over $1 million from the National Agencies Funding Pool to fund a "Jewish Education Unit" that his budget couldn't support. JFNA is doing nothing.
3. Inspiring a connection to Israel. Laughable...that's L.A.U.G.H.A.B.L.E. With no advocacy (and, no, the JFNA-Israel "Envoys" thing, isn't) for our institutional "connection(s) to Israel," at this date, year-end 2017, allocations to JAF/JDC/WorldORT are at the lowest levels ever, just as the year before these allocations reached the lowest levels ever, and the year before that...Worse, national Missions have reached such a nadir that in 2017 the Prime Minister's Mission, once the crown jewel of national Missions was canceled, another national Mission traveled to Argentina, etc., etc. JFNA-Israel is an unmanaged black hole of no accomplishments deveouring millions year-in and year-out. JFNA is doing worse than nothing.

Sandler's mission trifecta for JFNA was nothing more than words. The dots don't connect; does Sandler realize that reality?

No, the dots don't connect. Under Sandler/Silverman they never do.

Have a wonderful 2018.

Rwexler

TAX "REFORM"

Friends, I cannot believe that any federation leader, lay or professional, believes that Congress' version of "tax reform" will benefit those of our People most in need in any way -- just the opposite. With predictions that the law could reduce charitable giving by $13 billion per year, the impacts could well be catastrophic, the safety net unraveled. 

So I thought I would investigate what JFNA did during the negotiations that resulted in this legislation. And what I learned should make all of us proud. 

Examining JFNA Action Alerts, reports to JFNA's governance bodies, even FedWorld (!!), the effort became clear. And here's what emerged: JFNA's Washington Office was at work from the outset. Senior tax policy counsel Steven Woolf led the efforts on the tax bill, and in fact helped lead the efforts of the entire charitable sector through the Charitable Giving Coalition. (Visit the website at:  https://www.givevoice.org/)

JFNA's major focus was to push for an “above the line” or “universal” deduction that would have allowed anyone who makes charitable contributions to have a deduction, regardless of whether they itemize (obviously more important because the bill will significantly reduce the number of itemizers). The JFNA and the Coalition succeeded in getting this position into the “Manager’s Amendment” in the Senate, but unfortunately it ended up not gaining sufficient support to get into the final Senate-passed bill. 

JFNA also worked to stop the repeal of the Johnson Amendment (which prohibits 501(c)(3) charities from endorsing political candidates), to save Private Activity Bonds (which were eliminated in the House-passed bill), to oppose the repeal of the state and local tax (SALT) deduction, and more.

There were dozens of meetings with Members of Congress, Senators, and their staff. JFNA kept relevant federation professionals alerted, which resulted in dozens of more interactions with Congress; and also communicated positions on our behalf to the White House and Treasury Department even though the real action was in the House and Senate. JFNA and federation lay leaders were mobilized from Richard Sandler's working the Hill to federation leaders with strong contacts with individual Senators and Congresspersons working their contacts. This was a planful strategy even if that strategy ultimately did not succeed.

Articles in the press including one in the New York Times --https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/15/business/charities-tax-bill.html -- predicted up to $95 billion in decline in charitable deductions claimed, not actual giving. Estimates are of a $12-20 billion based on 5 percent of taxpayers itemizing (as distinct from the 35 percent who currently itemize). I'm told that the actual number of itemizers will probably end up being higher due to the $10,000 SALT level. But one estimate is that the loss will likely be 10 percent of taxpayers who end up itemizing, so the $12-20 billion loss is thought to be overstated. Even so, the loss will be devstating.

JFNA leaders and the members of the Coalition were clearly swimming against the tide on this one. They fought the great fight for all of us. The question remains whether only a battle was lost or the war itself; either way this is not over. 

AND, NOW FOR MORE STUFF --MALADMINISTRATION

1. An almost miraculous suggestion recently appeared on FedCentral in response to a more or less universal question:

...but since almost all Federations deal with this could JFNA give us some guidance?

Oh, if only it were so. As we have noted, FedCentral was created by the Silverman maladministration to effectively remove JFNA from the Federation-assistance business, leaving federation professionals to just plain fend for themselves.

2. The gross advocacy failure on behalf of the overseas beneficiaries who were once our system's true partners is this maladministration's most egregious failings. Year after year after year JFNA has delivered fewer core dollars to JAFI/JDC/WorldORT than over the prior annum. We weren't terriby successful in the UJA era in gaining increased overseas commitments from the federations but, at the least, we were there recognizing a moral obligation to advocate. 

Then, at the outset of JFNA we obtained a two-year "commitment" from the federations to freeze the allocations (as an express condition of the merger) -- a two-year commitment first abandoned by Boston after year one and then by a large number of communities. (I traveled to Boston with Steve Solender, JFNA's first CEO in an attempt to make an allocations agreement. We were unsuccessful and as I left for the airport, I remember telling Solender, "we can't agree to Boston's proposal, it abandons the overseas beneficiaries." I talked with Steve the next day: "How did it end up, Steve." "Richard, I made that deal." "What deal?" I asked. "You know, the one they put on the table.")  The die was cast. Instead of using the two year freeze to develop an allocations strategy, JFNA's leaders did nothing; just watched the allocations evaporate under the aegis of the infamous ONAD "process." 

At least within ONAD (for those fortunate enough not to remember it, that was the Overseas Needs and Distribution "process" that brought the federations, JAFI and JDC to the "table" --ostensibly together, but, in reality...not so much.) there was substantive discussion and focus on the "Needs." It failed within JFNA's first 4 years. Since, with intermittent failed advocacy attempts (first, one chaired by Jane Sherman and staffed by Doron Krakow, that lasted barely one year; then the sad JFNA-Israel "Envoys Program"), the current maladministration has presided over the precipitous fall that brings us to today, at the end of Calendar Year 2017:

• JAFI - $85 million
• JDC - $31 million
• WorldORT - $2.4 million (my error corrected)

Kind of makes a mockery of Richard Sandler's assertion that "never have relations with our overseas beneficiaries been better," doesn't it?

3. In an epic demonstration of maladministration, JFNA under Silverman has totally mismanaged the relationship between the federations and the legacy National Agencies -- from the demise of the National Foundation for Jewish Culture to that of JESNA to the imminent financial collapse of the Federations-National Agencies Alliance itself, JFNA has been there every step of the way looking out for...itself. Yes, no surprise, JFNA looking our for JFNA. How, you ask?

Well, as those of you who read this Blog with any regularity know, JFNA (make that Silverman himself) demanded over the past two years that over $1 Million from the National Agencies Funding Pool be reallocated away from the National Agencies to JFNA to ostensibly fund an "Education and Planning Unit" -- and the Alliance acquiesced thereby breaching its fiduciary duty to the National Agencies. In other words, after inducing the collapse of JESNA, JFNA took over $1 million to somehow create something like it (but within JFNA). 

And, how's that "Unit" doing? Yep. And what are the National Agencies doing? What you would expect them to -- though some don't have a clue how to do it -- they are out in the field raising money within the federations. 

It's tragic-comedy all the way.

Rwexler

HARSH TRUTHS

I am constantly impressed with most -- not all, most -- of your Comments, any one of which could readily be the subject matter of a Post. Recently, one of you, anonymously, wrote the following with regard to the pitiable JFNA-Israel:

"> Israel advocacy should be located in the New York office - not in Jerusalem.
> Advocacy for Israel should be directed to the Federations and donors, not to the Knesset and Israeli politicians.
> The Israel office should be a small, minimally staffed back office support operation.
> JFNA should stop trying to be a direct service provider in Israel. There is no need, no core competency, no added value and certainly no efficiency in continuing to attempt to compete with our partners under the guise of "global operations."
Everyone knows all of this this but will anyone be willing to make the required changes?
Is there a leader in the house?"

In this Comment, the author could have been referencing back to one of the formative documents of merger -- a Report from the then Newco's "Israel Task Force," under the Chairmanship of Marvin Lender, written by Detroit's CEO Bob Aronson. 20 years old now, those recommendations, including those quoted above, as relevant now as then if not more so. 

After all, JFNA-Israel in its current iteration is a failure; has failed time and again; for the last decade, there is not one success to which the Silverman-Caspi "team" can point that would suggest that what JFNA has in place works. In fact, JFNA-Israel is JFNA in microcosm. A model of dysfunction; a black hole into which you, federations, have dumped millions for which the return on investment has been an overstuffed office filled with professionals who are either ill-supervised or undirected with the inevitable lack of results.

Jerry Silverman still has a job; it's half the job he was hired to perform while he's paid as if he were actually a powerful CEO. Becky Caspi still has a job, as much a reflection on Silverman and his consigliere, Mark Gurvis, as it is on her. Everybody still has jobs. They can’t do those jobs, but they still have them. Why? Why isn’t Richard Sandler pissed off? Doesn't he want to do his job? (Someone, who shall be nameless, wrote me last week to observe: "This wouldn't be happening if Richard Sandler were still alive." But, did he lose interest -- at least since he became Board Chair?) After his first year in office came to an end, I told Richard he was risking the same fate as his predecessor -- allowing the waste of his Terms as Board Chair through inaction. And, yet, before Michael Siegal left office, over the objections of his woeful CEO ("If the Global Planning Table doesn't succeed, it will mean the end of JFNA") and the objections of Michael's predecessor, he directed the termination of the GPT. 

Sandler could still snatch some form of victory from the jaws of defeat by doing what he must know needs be done; or he faces the reality of three wasted years.

Is there a leader in the house?

Rhetorical question.

Rwexler

CORPORATE SILLINESS

Immediately after the GA, new Board Members (at least the language suggested it was for the "new," not for those who have served on the Board for, let's say 19 years) received a "welcome" letter -- so did I. The letter kicked off as follows:

"Mazal Tov on your appointment to JFNA’s Board of Trustees. I look forward to working with you and appreciate your acceptance of the role and the commitment it entails. Our Board has an opportunity to make an impact on the challenges faced by our community. Your experience and counsel, as well as that of our Board guests* will help guide The Jewish Federations of North America in providing value to the Federation movement and the Jewish community at large. As a Board member, you will help our organization determine overall corporate policy and strategy, address programmatic issues, elect officers and vote on the budget. We look forward to your active and thoughtful input."

For purposes of this letter, it is important to understand the asterisk, the * above, inasmuch as the reference is to the following:

*Guests of the Board of Trustees include Federation executives, former Board & Executive Committee chairs, and JAFI & JDC leadership.

JFNA's leaders appear to have convinced themselves that they can, at their whim, ignore the By-Law requirements (the current iteration of which were drafted at the direction of JFNA's current Board Chair) and convert Board Members to "guests." 

This inanity is consistent with these same leaders' decision earlier this year to restrict attendance at and participation in a Board Meeting to "voting members only" because of a self-described "matter of extreme confidentiality." The reality, as disclosed in a newspaper story that preceded the meeting, was that there was to be a discussion of "allowing" missions to visit settlements in Judea and Samaria -- visits which were (a) on-going for decades and (b) JFNA merely authorized representatives of the Israel Action Network to do so. 

So, at the end of the day, JFNA wasted the time of its "voting Board Members" for this exercise in stupidity. Imagine: this organization, supported by Federation Dues to the tune of $30 million a year, and among its "accomplishments" is this narishkeit.

And, its Board Members sit by in silent approbation.

RWEXLER

THE CIRCUS TRAVELS ON

Leave it to JFNA, the organization with the reverse Midas Touch, the gang that couldn't shoot straight, to screw up anything it touches. And, most recently, it's the recommendation of the potential successor to Natan Sharansky as Chair of the Executive of the Jewish Agency.

As first reported in the Jerusalem Post --http://www.jpost.com/Diaspora/US-Jewish-leaders-give-Netanyahu-short-list-for-Jewish-Agency-head-515287 -- the 'short list" of "nominees" consisted of 6 men in various Israeli government positions or those who used to hold them. Commenting on the "candidates" in ejewishphilanthropy, Founder Dan Brown condemned the nominees for their age and their consequent irrelevance to the very communities worldwide that the Chair of the Executive would be called upon to rally in support of JAFI, Jewish Unity and Peoplehood. Dan's excellent piece --http://ejewishphilanthropy.com/old-men-want-an-old-man-to-succeed-sharansky/ -- is a must read as it also emphasized the reality that not a single woman leader appeared on the "list."

No women? The Jerusalem Post posed the question in http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Comment-why-are-no-women-being-tapped-to-lead-the-Jewish-Agency-515329  Therein: "It’s not that they should pick a chairwoman just for the sake of picking a woman. But not to have even one woman under consideration is simply insulting to half of world Jewry."

The Post reported:

"(Jewish) Agency board of governors chairman Michael Siegal, JFNA president Jerry Silverman and JFNA Israel and overseas vice-president Rebecca Caspi approved the names and asked Netanyahu for his nominee for the job."

Who appointed this threesome to act as an unauthorized Nominating Committee? Where was JFNA's, let alone the federations', lay representatives, where were UIA's leaders, in this non-process? Were were federation CEOs? I can think of few other examples of dysfunction that would further distance JAFI from the American Jewish communities than having Siegal, Silverman and Caspi serving as their representatives. 

Add to the list of questions: where did this short list come from? Who prepared it? Who submitted it?

Well, this "really short list" explains so much about how we've ended up with these non-representatives proffered to the Prime Minister. Back in the day I participated in the nomination process that led to the election of three Chairs of the Executive: Avrum Burg, Sallai Meridor and Natan Sharansky. In each of those nomination processes, most directly involved were Federation Executives, UJA and UIA (and, JFNA) lay and professional leaders, and leaders of UIA Canada and Keren Ha'Yesod -- compare and contrast with the three "leaders" who appear to have captured the non-process this time. 

And how serious was this "list" -- if it was vetted at all, wouldn't the serious allegations of corruption with regard to one prominent "candidate" have emerged and disqualified him; wouldn't the fact that another is in the midst of an investigation of those high up in his Ministry? But, no, these names were "sent on" as if fully vetted.

Again, where were the lay leaders of federation, UIA, KH, UIA Canada? Where were the professionals? Who agreed that our representatives would be JAFI's Siegal and the ever-weak Silverman and Caspi? Where was David Butler, the new Chair of JFNA-Israel? Where were Andy Groveman and David Koschitzky, the Chairs, respectively, of UIA and Keren Ha'Yesod? Where was the JFNA/UIA delegation to JAFI? The answer appears to be: nowhere.

In an insightful article last February, once again in ejewishphilanthropy, the difficulty of finding a transformational leader to succeed Natan was underscored. http://ejewishphilanthropy.com/who-will-be-the-next-chairman-of-the-jewish-agency-and-when/
There are some excellent names on this list -- MK Nachman Shai and Amb. Ron Prosor are compelling leaders who certainly know the Diaspora -- but, let's be candid here, the list appears to have come straight out of the PM's Office; and Siegal, Silverman and Caspi have proved to be ever so compliant with the Prime Minister's wishes. The process appeared on the surface to be:

   PM list > Silverman/Siegal/Caspi list > Prime Minister selects from his/their list

Through this circular process, Prime Minister Netanyahu will certainly get his "man." Following up ejewishphilanthropy's excellent work on the subject, Dan Brown authored Israel's UN Envoy, Corruption and Our Global Jewish Organizations -- http://ejewishphilanthropy.com/israels-un-envoy-corruption-and-our-global-jewish-organizations/?utm_source=Nov+29,+2017&utm_campaign=Wed+Nov+29&utm_medium=email -- an indictement and a demand for change. Dan challenged our leaders to produce a non-politician -- all evidence suggests that these same leaders are unable to lead us through any change whatsoever.



Rwexler

EXPERIENCE...WANTED AND NEEDED

One of you wrote anonymously in response to Comments about the deteriorating circumstances in one of our major communities the following:

"As comments relate to the current complement of C suite executives in the Federation system, let us remember that you get what you develop. Capable professionals must be trained, gain experience and be nurtured by our Federations so that individuals understand just what Federations are sanctioned to do. Parachuting hasn't and will not work. There is no question that "outside" candidates are bright, caring and exceptional, but do they understand the work of Federation? Is it fair to those individuals and our Federations to have on the job learning? Many federations have gone adrift simply because their leaders do not understand the work. Keep hiring academics, attorneys, real estate developers and individuals from United Ways and that is what you'll get. Federations should fill a certain role but if leadership, both volunteer and professional, don't understand the "job" should we be surprised by the results. Volunteer leadership take note. Our collective relevance depends on it." 

I often wish you would attach your names to the Comments --in particular when they are as incisive as was this one.

Back in the day, when Jerry Silverman was hired I wasn't the only one, in 20/20 foresight, predicting the disaster that would soon follow. But we should all remember that this hire offered a cautionary tale. This "outside the box" hire was intended to offer the "new paradigm" not just for JFNA but for the federation system. The same ignorance of the experience that Kathy Manning and her claque first decided to set set aside, JFNA, with Silverman in tow, began to suggest to federation after federation that this was the way to go...the only way to go. When JFNA-Mandel was hired to lead federations in their CEO searches, the direction they would preach was to go the "Jerry way" -- never once considering the disaster that JFNA had become under his leadership. Those qualified by their federation training, CEO aspirants were counseled against applying for positions that ultimately went to those with no (or minimal) federation experience -- some even secretly blackballed because in the exercise of their current federation professional roles, they had questioned some action of JFNA. 

And, the results as they say, speak for themselves.

And position after position were filled by good people who just did not and, as our Commentator pointed out so well, "do not understand the work," just as Jerry didn't and doesn't. I don't have data to support my conclusion, but based on just observation of the comings and goings, the average tenure of these newbies who spoke not a word of the lingua franca of federation is far less than that of those who entered parallel positions with a broad federation experience.

One of my great disappointments over the "Silverman era" was the demonstrable fact that Jerry came into the position without a clue what "collective responsibility" meant and, eight years later, still doesn't. And not a single lay Board Chair over his contract and extension seemed to know or care either. Thus, the Global Planning Table which, if conceived, planned and implemented consistent with federation values, might have had a chance of success, instead disappeared under its Rube Goldberg design, while proposing a series of Signature Initiatives which stood collective responsibility on its head. (You can still get a glimpse of what I mean by taking a peak at I-rep, the sole, surviving coalition of the willing born of the still-born GPT). 

So it has come to pass that the paradigm that the Silverman hiring was to be for the future of federation CEOs has proved to be not a model of excellence but the opposite.

Pitiful. Pitiable.

Rwexler

BIZZARO-WORLD

To write that we live in strange and unusual times is to vastly overstate the obvious.

Examples abound:

1. JFNA.

2. Bret Stephens described a recent "gala" so perfectly:

"The Zionist Organization of America feted Stephen K. Bannon at a gala dinner in New York on Sunday night. What a disgrace.

What a mistake, too.

It’s a disgrace because no organization that purports to represent the interests of the Jewish people should ever embrace anyone who embraces anti-Semites. Jews have enemies enough. To provide those enemies with moral cover for the sake of political convenience or ideology corroborates the worst anti-Semitic stereotypes and strengthens the hand of those who mean us harm." https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/16/opinion/steve-bannon-israel-anti-semitism.html?em_pos=small&emc=edit_ty_20171116&nl=opinion-today&nl_art=3&nlid=53890580&ref=headline&te=1

 Maybe some would disagree. Perhaps some even believe that the ZOA exists for some purpose beyond the glorification of its "CEO for life." Perhaps, perhaps. 

3. Is it unfair to question whether the leaders of JFNA have any convictions, let alone the courage of them? Given the opportunity to directly confront Prime Minister Netanyahu as his interlocutor over Face Time at the Closing Plenary of the GA, Board Chair Sandler, first, accepted by silence the P.M.'s false assertion with regard to the deal on egalitarian prayer space at the Kotel and, then, as Uri Blau wrote in Haaretz:

"Sandler’s following questions were equally as fluffy and non-confrontational, and avoided challenging the prime minister on topics of key importance for many of America's Jewish community, such as the issue of pluralism in Israel or the lack of progress in peace talks with the Palestinians. Instead, they discussed Israel’s achievements and future goals."

read more: https://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/1.822845

Why? Here was a moment in real time opportune to engage Netanyahu on the issues raised in the just-enacted Resolution on the subject and, instead, bowing and scraping.

Perhaps, Sandler just proved why JFNA operates by letter and Resolution. We're just pals, buddies, BFF's.

4. Many of you have forwarded Kathy Manning's letter announcing her run for U.S. Congress and soliciting a contribution. I think she will make a great Congressperson. 

Bizarro-World.

Rwexler

"DEEP DIVING"

This will be the end cap to my commentary on the 2017 GA, may it forever rest in peace. Those of you who have chastised me for my criticism rendered from afar, not having been there myself -- your points are well-taken. This Post, however, is different from those that went before...

I draw your attention to the speeches -- the Prime Minister's, along with the Q & A which followed, and Silverman's -- speeches that began the First Plenary, Jerry's, and closed the last Plenary, Bibi's. These events said so much about the sorry state of JFNA.

Jerry never disappoints -- from the cliche/jargon-driven approach ("deep dive," "longitudinal" and on and on --to a litany of challenges totally unsupported by even one JFNA initiative that would focus JFNA to, in Silverman's words to "...take on the tough issues of the day." When Jerry spoke of "no room for small dreams" he was really pointing to a JFNA where there is apparently plenty of room for no dreams. Jerry's address was all the more disappointing in its reiteration from prior speeches of "goals" like -- reduce the cost of Jewish affiliation, and free Jewish pre-school for all, etc. -- goals never followed up with any plans for implementation whatsoever. I would say that there should have been great disappointment and challenge, but this is Jerry's JFNA after all.

And, as the GA ended, the Prime Minister appeared on the big screen and offered himself as the PM of all Jews everywhere. It was Bibi at his best and,then again, not so much. At the close of the Prime Minister's brief remarks, Richard Sandler had the opportunity to question him. Sandler led off with a "as you know, we passed a Resolution" on the Kotel, asked Bibi what he would tell those in our communities who sense that they are not welcome in Israel. The Prime Minister responded with an almost total distortion of the history related to egalitarian access to the Kotel. Everyone in that audience knew that the Prime Minister had built his response on a false set of "facts."

Sandler's response to Bibi: "Thanks for the clarification." THANKS FOR THE CLARIFICATION!!!! And that was it -- given the chance to respectfully challenge the Prime Minister, Sandler could not, would not bring himself to do so for us...for us. Here was an opportunity for our leader to raise the serious questions about the impact on the Israel-Diaspora relationship raised by the Prime Minister's unilateral breach of the Kotel agreement and he could not/would not bring himself to do so. 

As I watched and listened I had the sense that the puerile questions that Sandler then posed were given Richard by the Prime Minister's Office: Iran, Israel's strengths and the ultimate: "what makes you most proud?"  Uri Blau and Jonathan Liss, writing in Haaretz,  observed: "Sandler's...questions were equally as fluffy and non-confrontational, and avoided challenging the prime minister on topics of key importance..." 

The "questions" were followed by thanks and a standing ovation and we'll see you in Tel Aviv for GA 2018. What a lost opportunity. Does anyone, including Sandler, believe that the Prime Minister's respect for our system and its leaders was enhanced by Sandler's refusal to raise serious issues?

Look, I would have loved it if for the moment Richard Sandler were Shoshana Cardin who, we all remember, as our Chair spoke truth to power when she challenged President George H. W. Bush for his suggestion that American Jews were a "fifth column." Instead, we stand by our Resolution -- that's all we need to do -- in silence and shame. 

A fitting ending to GA 2017 and to JFNA.

Nice.

Rwexler

PITIFUL AND PITIABLE

David Butler has now succeeded David Brown and JFNA's Chair of Israeli-Overseas. Perhaps there is now some informal succession plan where first one superb lawyer is appointed Chair of JFNA-Washington, and after success in that role, moves up/sideways/down to Chair of the JFNA Israel/Israel operation.

To David Brown's credit, he attempted to institute an advocacy effort for increasing the core budgets of the overseas partners through the still-born Envoys program. At least he tried...tried hard, in fact. And David Butler moves into a role for which he has had some training -- mainly as the articulate frontman for Kathy Manning's embarrassing and wasteful and, now, dead, Global Planning Table. Hopefully, Butler will have greater success without Manning's demands (or even presence) in leading JFNA-Israel forward than he had with the GPT.

Suffice it to say that David Butler has been dealt a bad hand -- first, as the GPT Chair, and now with an over-staffed under-performing JFNA-Israel office in Jerusalem. He confronts federation core budget allocations to JAFI/JDC/WorldORT estimated to reach the lowest levels yet, surpassing the nadir we thought reached last year; while, perhaps, trying to leverage these sad allocations (down more than $200,000,000 [yes, you read it right] from those in the first years of JFNA) to effect some influence over decisions of the Netanyahu Governmant on the Kotel and Conversion Laws that impact directly on a super-majority of North American Jews.

Now, David will be assisted by a small core group of excellent federation leaders appointed by Richard Sandler. My suggestion: starting with Butler himself, each of these leaders should ask themselves: what is my own Federation's allocation to overseas needs and how will I work to influence a dramatic increase -- and if they can't (or won't) do so, each will resign from this JFNA-Israel effort. 

In addition, perhaps Butler will take a serious look at the work of JFNA's Israel Office -- if "work" is really the right word for that feckless operation. (It isn't.) I would urge David, as I urged his predecessor, to read the Israel and Overseas Task Force Report authored by Bob Aronson, then the terrific professional leader of the Detroit Federation. (If JFNA can't provide David with a copy, I may still have one. Give me a call.) Its recommendations if followed would have enhanced the role of JFNA, and included, as its most salient direction that JFNA locate its Israel operation in the New York HQ with a senior, Federation-experienced professional at its helm. 

Let's leave this chapter on a very sad note. In his transmission of the sorry Calendar Year allocations results, the Board Chair offered a note:

"JFNA/Federations will pursue all possible avenues to increase the available amount."

Of course it will...as it always does.

Rwexler