SUMMARY OF THE OCTOBER 23, 2013 MEETING
OF THE KEHILLAT YEDIDYA EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE
Executive committee members: Kobi Abelman, Gary Ginsberg, David Gleicher, Donna Goldberg, Adina Golombek, Avital Ordan, Daniel Rohrlich, Bruce Rosen (chair of meeting).
Audit committee members: Eliezer Finer, Josh Schoffman
Observers (for part of the meeting): Penina Arbit, Dov Cooper, Anna Kochin, Hana Levine, Eudice Winer, others?
Finance Committee Report (Gary Ginsberg)
Gary gave the report of the finance committee referencing a handout of slides.
The proposed timeline for the budget had the finance committee reminding committee chairs in November to propose a budget or any proposed changes to their previous budget line. The final budget would then be proposed to the VM for approval in January.
The slides included a breakdown of annual income and expenditures detailing each with a pie chart. One more slide showed fluctuations in annual income over time.
Members of the Va’ad Menahel asked, and Gary agreed, that time be set aside, possibly in December, for discussing the proposed budget at a sufficiently early stage in order to provide time for a discussion of setting priorities for the community and analyzing existing programs and expenses. The 2014 budget will then be presented for approval of the Va’ad Menahel in January.
Review of Chagim
Members were asked to submit feedback to Linda via email. She was not present to give details but summarized to Bruce that most feedback was very positive. There were some specific suggestions for improvement.
There was an opinion expressed by observers and members of the VM that there was not enough programming for children above the age of gan. Adina will bring concerns to the Youth Committee.
Discussion of the chagim led to a discussion of the new “Kehillat Yedidya Manual” and of how helpful it had been in planning for the chagim.
Members of the VM discussed how and where the manual will be stored and kept up-to-date. Adina will present various options at the next VM meeting. Pnina Arbit was unanimously voted in as the ongoing editor of the manual.
Discussion of Decision on Kabbalat Shabbat
The discussion of kabbalat shabbat centred around the decision-making process and not the substance of the debate.
There was general agreement among all present of the importance of maintaining a respectful discussion and debate. There were multiple opinions offered on whether comments about leaving the community were disrespectful or a legitimate expression of opinions.
The VM was reminded that there is no pressure to resolve this issue in a specific time frame.
Background: The current plan as proposed by the Minhag and Halacha Committee is to have a panel discussion with invited rabbinic and lay leadership from outside the community, followed by a survey/questionnaire, to be written by an appointed committee and to be sent to the community membership. The results of this survey would be analyzed by the Minhag Committee which would then bring a proposal to the VM on how to proceed.
Two options for making the final decision were considered: a binding referendum of the membership or a vote by the VM.
Members of the VM and the observers present discussed who should be polled both in a non-binding survey of the membership and in a possible referendum voting on the final proposal. Some members felt that they wanted to hear the opinions of non-members who regularly attend kabbalat shabbat while others felt strongly that only members should have a say in the decision.
The question of who is a member, especially with regard to adult children of members who belong to the community as part of a family membership was discussed. Josh S. will clarify who is a voting member according to the rules of the amuta.
Several VM members emphasized the need for transparency in the decision-making process and a need for clear communication with the membership.
Several VM members expressed the opinion that the final decision should be made by the VM. Others felt that the results of the survey might clarify how the membership wishes to proceed and so prefer to wait for these results before deciding on the next stage in the process. No members of the VM expressed the opinion that a final decision should be made by a vote of the membership.