Forget fundraising doom and gloom
I am troubled by the recent commentaries of those who bemoan the current state of Jewish giving in the Bay Area. (“The other side of post-Oct. 7 generosity: Some local Jewish orgs take financial hit”)
Far from seeing doom and gloom and a dire warning, I see a vibrant Jewish ecosystem — one of constant reinvention, changing delivery models, new services to meet evolving needs and enhanced revenue models.
For the past 20 years, I have worked as a consultant, board member and volunteer with a number of nonprofits, many of them Jewish. Each has faced growth and financial challenges and found ways both to meet ever-changing needs and to fund their critical work.
My synagogue, Congregation Sha’ar Zahav, for example, eliminated dues, communicated operational costs and set appropriate ask amounts for each household. The result has been a doubling of support over the past three years from “membership commitments.” Increased support has come from everyone, not just from a wealthy few. We also eliminated tickets for High Holy Days but encouraged voluntary support. The resultant funds now exceed those from purchased tickets and the seldom-loved pitch from the bimah. These changes provide our community the opportunity to focus more on teshuvah and tefillah and less on tzedakah.
Sha’ar Zahav has also initiated select campaigns for projects that have each met with success, including the creation and publication of our own siddur that now provides annual fee-based income.
I could also cite many examples of success by Jewish Family and Children’s Services and the Jewish Community Center of San Francisco. They have responded to the needs of the community with new programs and creative revenue models.
There is no silver bullet to ensure the vibrancy of our treasured Bay Area Jewish institutions. However, I remain confident that if we assume a community of generosity and continue to be creative, we can and we will ensure success.
Martin H. Tannenbaum
San Francisco
Funding anti-Zionism
The news in “Anti-Zionist org gets $100K grant as Walter and Elise Haas Fund changes direction” could not be more awful.
The Oct. 7 responses of communities that had been aided by Jewish benefactors firmly demonstrates that many decades of money and work and positive support were actually counterproductive and that the Jewish community has no choice but to turn inward to support its own. Yet the exact opposite is happening. This is finding yourself in a deep hole and responding by feverishly digging downward twice as fast.
Jason Jungreis
San Francisco
Toothless condemnations
If Hillels across the country have long been targeted by “activists” because of “perceived ties to Israel,” then anything or anyone with ”perceived ties to Israel” is potentially likely to be justified as a target by “activists.” (“San Francisco Hillel vandalized with violent, far-left graffiti”)
Perhaps we should consider the use of the term “activists” to be a whitewash instead of an actual descriptor. No doubt “activists” quake in their boots at the thought of toothless condemnations that invariably constitute most responses to their “activity.” Real, effective consequences for antisemitic vandalism are rare.
Julia Lutch
Davis
BDS is inherently antisemitic
Andrew Scharlach’s letter “Defining antisemitism” is an example of why the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance definition is so important. The IHRA definition has been adopted by many countries, as well as the State Department.
The claim that the definition is a tool to censor Palestinian rights is simply not true. Critics of the IHRA definition claim it will unfairly label critics of Israel as antisemitic. Along with all the important examples of what is and what is not antisemitism, the IHRA definition makes clear that “criticism of Israel similar to that leveled against any other country cannot be regarded as antisemitic.”
Indeed, the Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism, which Scharlach supports, also includes examples. In contrast to IHRA, the JDA definition states that the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement against Israel is not inherently antisemitic. The JDA’s definition also omits examples found in the IHRA’s. The JDA, for example, excludes as antisemitic the denial of Jewish self-determination in Israel and comparisons of Israel to Nazi Germany. If you back BDS, deny the Jewish people rights to their ancestral homeland and want to compare Israelis to Nazis, you will want the JDA definition to become widely accepted.
In reality, one only needs to criticize Israel fairly in order not to be labeled an antisemite.
Sheree Roth
Palo Alto
I count as a Jew too
The story, “Alameda County policy will advance BDS, opponents say” cites concerns that an ethical investment policy will foster antisemitism and unfairly target Israel. Both of these contentions are untrue.
When quoting one speaker’s remarks about how “few Jews” were at the board of supervisors meeting on Dec. 10, the author fails to mention that dozens of Jewish attendees raised their hands to contest this false assertion. We packed the chambers and the overflow room that was necessary to accommodate the massive crowd. We also listened and commented via Zoom.
The story does not quote a single Jew who spoke in favor of the policy, even though a number of us raised our Jewish values as the driving factor behind our support. One speaker said, “As a Jewish American, it is my moral responsibility to stand for humanity, and I refuse to be a bystander to the genocide in Gaza.” Another added, “Stopping genocide and forced removal of people using U.S. weapons is not antisemitic.”
I was one of those Jewish supporters, although I did not have the chance to speak. I live in Alameda County and, like a number of other supportive Jewish speakers at the Dec. 10 meeting, I am a descendant of survivors of the Nazi Holocaust.
The images I’ve seen from Gaza since last October are hauntingly reminiscent of the horrors that I heard about from my family members and in my community when I was a child. Jewish tradition teaches us to stand against injustice and to do what we can to repair the world. Alameda County’s decision to stop investing our tax dollars in corporations that enable Israel’s human rights abuses is entirely consistent with those values. I, along with countless other Jewish Alameda County residents, wholeheartedly support it.
Brandon Vesely
Oakland