New York Readers: Legislation to Help Protect Your Children
NonPublic School Employee Background Check Bill
Assembly bill number A. 11399, and Senate bill number S. 07381
I received this message from Mr. Elliot Pasik and am reprinting it for my New York readers. Please act immediately to support this important legislation and please pass this mesage onto your friends in New York now.
Here is the first message from Mr. Elliot Pasik:
Please pardon the long hiatus, but I have a good reason. Together with some friends, I've been working on getting a new law in New York State that will allow all nonpublic schools to fingerprint their employees, and run FBI national criminal background checks. In this manner, our schools can avoid hiring convicted sex offenders and other dangerous criminals who should not be working near children. (42 out of 50 states, including NY, require their public schools to fingerprint their employees; about 10 states require their nonpublic schools to fingerprint.)
Such a bill has been written, and officially introduced to the State Assembly and Senate. The bill is supported by Agudath Israel, the Orthodox Union, and the Rabbinical Council of America. Most recently, the New York Jewish Week reported on the bill, see, Friedlin, "State Mulls Background Check for Yeshivas", The Jewish Week, June 9, 2006 (JewishWeek.com). I strongly suggest that you read this article, in which I am quoted.
Your support for the bill would be very, very helpful. As parents, responsible for the physical safety and health of our children, we should have the most to say about this issue. Can you please, therefore, go to the separate websites of the New York State Assembly and Senate, and click onto the webpages for the following key legislators:
1. Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver;
2. Assembly Education Committee Chair Catherine Sullivan;
3. Assembly member Harvey Weisenberg (bill sponsor);
4. Senate Deputy Majority Leader Dean Skelos (original bill sponsor);
5. Senate Education Committee Chair Steven Saland.
The next few days are absolutely critical, because the legislative session ends next Thursday, June 22, 2006. If the bill fails, we have to wait a year. Currently, under New York law, it is illegal for nonpublic schools (and many other employers) to fingerprint their employees. We may well currently have convicted sex offenders and other dangerous criminals working in our schools, but we don't know about it.
Here is the second message from Mr. Elliot Pasik:
I forgot something. In your emails to the legislators, you should refer to Assembly bill number A. 11399, and Senate bill number S. 07381. You should also refer to it as the nonpublic school employee background check bill.
Here is the third message from Mr. Elliot Pasik:
To assist us, my friend Arthur Gober reports the following about important email addresses:
Silver: speaker@assembly.state.ny.us
Weisenberg: weisenh@assembly.state.ny.us
For Senators Skelos and Saland, go to www.senate.state.ny.us, and click on "senators". You will there find email forms to fill out.
What should you write? How about the following: I am joining with other yeshiva parents in asking you to support the nonpublic school criminal background check bill, A. 11399 and S.07381. We do not want convicted sex offenders and other dangerous convicted criminals working in close proximity to our children.This will take you a few seconds to do. Relatively speaking, there aren't many of us who are "in on this", so your emails are both important, and a good way of expressing our community's hakaros hatov.
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Pasik. Sort by date Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by relevance for query Pasik. Sort by date Show all posts
Sunday, June 18, 2006
Tuesday, September 04, 2007
Elliot Pasik: Two Building Solution
My last guest post on tuition created a bit of discussion in the comments. Another idea that is being floated in regards to tuition comes from the New York State Yeshiva Parents Association lead by Elliot Pasik. In a February 2007 letter to various NYS Senators and Committee Chairs, the association writes these points about the cost of Yeshiva Education and how the NY governments can partner with religious parents to help alleviate the costs associated with a Yeshiva/Day School Education. (Note: This is NOT a push for a miracle such as vouchers. It is a long read for a blog post, but please hang in there. . . especially since I couldn't remember how to copy text from a PDF document and I typed this manually. . . . thank goodness I type fast, my parents insisted I take typing in summer school, which I did more than once). And, of course, add your comments.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. The tuition burden for nonpublic religious school parents is well past the breaking point. The norm is for middle-class orthodox Jewish families, with two full-time working parents, and three-to-six children, annually paying between twenty and forty thousand dollars per year, every year, for k-12 yeshiva/Hebrew day school education. This backbreaking tuition burden contributes to numerous negative social consequences including, debt, substance abuse, family instability, divorce, and kids-at-risk. The Jewish media is filled with recent articles addressing the yeshiva tuition problem, but unfortunately, little of practical nature is being done on a comprehensive basis. See, “The Tuition Squeeze: Paying the Price of Jewish Education”, Jewish Action, Fall 2005, Vol. 66, No. 1 (published by the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America); “The Tuition Dilemma”, The Jewish Observer, Jan/Feb. 2007, Vol. 40, No. 1 (published by Agudath Israel of America)’ Pasik, “Resolving the Tuition Crisis”, The Jewish Press, January 11, 2006, p. 1.
Government intervention, through the rule of law, can help. Public schools are, of course, required to reveal their finances, budgets, and salaries. Public scrutiny and Government oversight can and has led to taxpayer savings, and wiser spending.
Nonpublic religious schools should be subject to the same rules of financial transparency. Again, as required by law, education, whether public or nonpublic, is a public trust. How can nonpublic school parents determine whether their hard-earned tuition money is being wisely spent unless we see the financial books and records? How can the professional parents amongst us, with backgrounds in business and accounting, make suggests that will reduce spending, and lower tuition? Financial transparency is simply common sense.
9. The tuition burden for orthodox Jewish families can also be alleviated by a “two-building” solution for many. The First Amendment clearly prohibits religious instruction within public school buildings during the school day (McCollum v. Board of Education, 333 U.S. 203 (1948)), but there is no constitutional impediment for religious children studying secular subjects (e.g., arithmetic, reading, spelling, etc.) in public schools during, let’s say, the morning hours, and religious subjects in a yeshiva building in the afternoon. A two-building program like this could cut religious school tuitions by nearly half, and revitalize numerous public school districts by brining in new students. Educ. Law 3210(b) provides that, “Absense for religious observance and education shall be permitted under rules that the commissioner shall establish.” Under this statute, it would appear that public school districts could arrange for a program for the children of religious families to attend public schools for the study of essential secular subjects for a portion of the day, and then release them for religious education.
The is, however, a regulatory obstacle. Rule 109.2 of the Rules of the Commissioner of Education (8 N.Y.C.R.R. 109.2(e)) onerously provides that released time for religious education shall be a maximum of one hour per week. The rule states, “(A)bsense for a released time program, grade K-12, shall be for not more than one hour each week. . . “
We believe this is a patently unconstitutional regulation, that interferes with the First Amendment guarantee of Free Exercise of Religion. One hour per week for the study of the Jewish religion is simply not enough. We would expect that members of other faiths may feel the same about their religious educational needs.
Released time for religious instruction was held to be constitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in, Zorach v. Clauson, 343 U.S. 306 (1952), affg. 303 N.Y. 161. Justice William O. Douglas wrote the following, for the majority:
According to the web site, ReleasedTime.org, 31 states do not establish any hourly maximum for religious study released time. These 31 states flexibly allow public school districts to establish their own policies. Only 9 state, including New York, set a rock bottom maximum of one hour per week. The remaining states establish varying amounts of maximum released time.
We respectfully submit that New York should repeal its rule limiting religious study released time to one hour per week. New York, with its long history of commitment to civil liberties and civil rights, should joint he majority of those states that wisely allow local school districts to flexibly establish their own policies and rules, and thereby meet local needs. This would be particularly appropriate in New York, where we have significant orthodox Jewish populations venued in certain regions and neighborhoods throughout New York City, Long Island, Westchester, and Rockland County. Local school districts arranging for a “two-building” program could simultaneously alleviate the tuition crunch facing orthodox Jewish and other religious families, and revitablize their public schools. The recent October 24, 2006 annoucement by the U.S. Department of Educaiton that same-sex public schools will be allowed under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 gives impetus to this proposal. Orthodox Jewish children, and children of other faiths, can thereby partially attend same-sex public schools for the study of required secular subjects, without compromising their beliefs.
10. Finally, we support Gove. Spitzer’s proposal of $1,000 per child tuition tax credits for nonpublic school parents. This proposal can do much to alleviate the crushing tuition burden faced by nonpublic religious school families.
My last guest post on tuition created a bit of discussion in the comments. Another idea that is being floated in regards to tuition comes from the New York State Yeshiva Parents Association lead by Elliot Pasik. In a February 2007 letter to various NYS Senators and Committee Chairs, the association writes these points about the cost of Yeshiva Education and how the NY governments can partner with religious parents to help alleviate the costs associated with a Yeshiva/Day School Education. (Note: This is NOT a push for a miracle such as vouchers. It is a long read for a blog post, but please hang in there. . . especially since I couldn't remember how to copy text from a PDF document and I typed this manually. . . . thank goodness I type fast, my parents insisted I take typing in summer school, which I did more than once). And, of course, add your comments.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
8. The tuition burden for nonpublic religious school parents is well past the breaking point. The norm is for middle-class orthodox Jewish families, with two full-time working parents, and three-to-six children, annually paying between twenty and forty thousand dollars per year, every year, for k-12 yeshiva/Hebrew day school education. This backbreaking tuition burden contributes to numerous negative social consequences including, debt, substance abuse, family instability, divorce, and kids-at-risk. The Jewish media is filled with recent articles addressing the yeshiva tuition problem, but unfortunately, little of practical nature is being done on a comprehensive basis. See, “The Tuition Squeeze: Paying the Price of Jewish Education”, Jewish Action, Fall 2005, Vol. 66, No. 1 (published by the Union of Orthodox Jewish Congregations of America); “The Tuition Dilemma”, The Jewish Observer, Jan/Feb. 2007, Vol. 40, No. 1 (published by Agudath Israel of America)’ Pasik, “Resolving the Tuition Crisis”, The Jewish Press, January 11, 2006, p. 1.
Government intervention, through the rule of law, can help. Public schools are, of course, required to reveal their finances, budgets, and salaries. Public scrutiny and Government oversight can and has led to taxpayer savings, and wiser spending.
Nonpublic religious schools should be subject to the same rules of financial transparency. Again, as required by law, education, whether public or nonpublic, is a public trust. How can nonpublic school parents determine whether their hard-earned tuition money is being wisely spent unless we see the financial books and records? How can the professional parents amongst us, with backgrounds in business and accounting, make suggests that will reduce spending, and lower tuition? Financial transparency is simply common sense.
9. The tuition burden for orthodox Jewish families can also be alleviated by a “two-building” solution for many. The First Amendment clearly prohibits religious instruction within public school buildings during the school day (McCollum v. Board of Education, 333 U.S. 203 (1948)), but there is no constitutional impediment for religious children studying secular subjects (e.g., arithmetic, reading, spelling, etc.) in public schools during, let’s say, the morning hours, and religious subjects in a yeshiva building in the afternoon. A two-building program like this could cut religious school tuitions by nearly half, and revitalize numerous public school districts by brining in new students. Educ. Law 3210(b) provides that, “Absense for religious observance and education shall be permitted under rules that the commissioner shall establish.” Under this statute, it would appear that public school districts could arrange for a program for the children of religious families to attend public schools for the study of essential secular subjects for a portion of the day, and then release them for religious education.
The is, however, a regulatory obstacle. Rule 109.2 of the Rules of the Commissioner of Education (8 N.Y.C.R.R. 109.2(e)) onerously provides that released time for religious education shall be a maximum of one hour per week. The rule states, “(A)bsense for a released time program, grade K-12, shall be for not more than one hour each week. . . “
We believe this is a patently unconstitutional regulation, that interferes with the First Amendment guarantee of Free Exercise of Religion. One hour per week for the study of the Jewish religion is simply not enough. We would expect that members of other faiths may feel the same about their religious educational needs.
Released time for religious instruction was held to be constitutional by the U.S. Supreme Court in, Zorach v. Clauson, 343 U.S. 306 (1952), affg. 303 N.Y. 161. Justice William O. Douglas wrote the following, for the majority:
“We are a religious people whose institutions presuppose a Supreme Being. When the State encourages religious instruction or cooperates with religious authorities by adjusting the schedule of public events to sectarian needs, it then follows the best of our traditions, for it then respects the religious nature of our people and accommodates the public services to their spiritual needs. To hold that is may not would be to find in the Constitution a requirement that the government show a callous indifference to religious group. That would be preferring those who believe in no religious over those who do believe. We find no constitutional requirement which makes it necessary for government to be hostile to religion and throw its weight against efforts to widen the effective scope of religious influence.”
According to the web site, ReleasedTime.org, 31 states do not establish any hourly maximum for religious study released time. These 31 states flexibly allow public school districts to establish their own policies. Only 9 state, including New York, set a rock bottom maximum of one hour per week. The remaining states establish varying amounts of maximum released time.
We respectfully submit that New York should repeal its rule limiting religious study released time to one hour per week. New York, with its long history of commitment to civil liberties and civil rights, should joint he majority of those states that wisely allow local school districts to flexibly establish their own policies and rules, and thereby meet local needs. This would be particularly appropriate in New York, where we have significant orthodox Jewish populations venued in certain regions and neighborhoods throughout New York City, Long Island, Westchester, and Rockland County. Local school districts arranging for a “two-building” program could simultaneously alleviate the tuition crunch facing orthodox Jewish and other religious families, and revitablize their public schools. The recent October 24, 2006 annoucement by the U.S. Department of Educaiton that same-sex public schools will be allowed under Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 gives impetus to this proposal. Orthodox Jewish children, and children of other faiths, can thereby partially attend same-sex public schools for the study of required secular subjects, without compromising their beliefs.
10. Finally, we support Gove. Spitzer’s proposal of $1,000 per child tuition tax credits for nonpublic school parents. This proposal can do much to alleviate the crushing tuition burden faced by nonpublic religious school families.
Wednesday, February 22, 2006
United Yeshiva and Hebrew Day School Fund, Part II
Stiff Necked Opposition
In Part I, I reviewed an excellent article by Elliot Pasik "Resolving the Yeshiva Tuition Crisis." In this article, Mr. Pasik proposes a central address where donations, especially large donations, can be received to benefit Yeshivot and day schools. For many reasons I believe that this idea is not only an excellent one for the reasons I addressed, but I believe it is a necessary idea if Orthodox schools intend to attract major donations. A fund that is run by competent professionals with transparency and integrity has the potential to with attract large donations as well as the donations of people who are not closely connected to a specific school. The funds would be much more secure as individual schools would not have the potential to "borrow" against restricted funds. A fund would bring creative and innovative ideas to the forefront, making Orthodox education a concern of the entire community rather than individual schools. Lastly, large fund generate larger returns. Small and non-existent funds that were spent yesterday cannot generate anything.
One of my readers opposes the idea stating:
It seems that there is a misunderstanding as to what a central fund is and what it is not. The proposed idea is a fund for Orthodox schools. A central fund is not meant to divert donations that a particular parent or a particular community member wants to direct to a particular school. A central fund is meant to collect funds from people who want to donate to Orthodox education, but who do not have a particular "pet" school or who do not want to limit their donations to one particular school. In addition, the fund is needed because many donors of significant means want to ensure that the funds donated are treated with the fiduciary duty that they should be treated with. The bottom line is that individual schools do not usually have this capability, nor do they have the fiscal know how required to grow funds. **You wouldn't give your hard earned money to a Rosh Yeshiva to invest because he has neither the time nor the expertise to do so. So, why would you give large sums of money to an individual school that you know does not have the time or expertise for investing? **
The other subject of only supporting what one agrees with 100% that I figured would (sadly) come up sooner or later. The pessimistic side of my personality often says, why even bother trying to get involved in tuition issues. Eventually Jewish education will collapse on itself because the Jewish people are a "stiff-necked" people and are unwilling to bend and compromise even when their own pocketbooks and the future of their own grandchildrens' education is at risk. They are unwilling to work for the greater good if it does not meet the exact specifications that they deem as worthy. Achdus died long ago and we are a fragmented people. We can't even agree on basic issues, how are we ever going to even make a dent in a huge issue?
Mr. Pasik's article is full of great ideas that are solid from a communal and an economic standpoint. But, from the moment I read the article, I said to myself that despite the solid ideas it seems like a far off pipe-dream to institute common sense ideas because we just don't seem to be able to see the big picture. Readers, I'm calling on you to see the big picture and hopefully prove to me that there is hope for the future of Jewish education and that the future is a bit brighter than it seems to look in my current pessimistic state.
I know I have readers since I have a site meter. Please add your comments.
Stiff Necked Opposition
In Part I, I reviewed an excellent article by Elliot Pasik "Resolving the Yeshiva Tuition Crisis." In this article, Mr. Pasik proposes a central address where donations, especially large donations, can be received to benefit Yeshivot and day schools. For many reasons I believe that this idea is not only an excellent one for the reasons I addressed, but I believe it is a necessary idea if Orthodox schools intend to attract major donations. A fund that is run by competent professionals with transparency and integrity has the potential to with attract large donations as well as the donations of people who are not closely connected to a specific school. The funds would be much more secure as individual schools would not have the potential to "borrow" against restricted funds. A fund would bring creative and innovative ideas to the forefront, making Orthodox education a concern of the entire community rather than individual schools. Lastly, large fund generate larger returns. Small and non-existent funds that were spent yesterday cannot generate anything.
One of my readers opposes the idea stating:
"I have to say, I'm not sure I wholly agree. There are several day schools and yeshivot in my "out of town" community. There's a community day school that has more money than they know what to do with. There's the mod orthodox school where my kids go, and there's the yeshiva. I don't want to split my limited $$ to go to schools with which I fundamentally disagree, on either side of the spectrum. I want to support my school. It's not so much selfishness, as it is disagreement with the other schools. Coeducation is important in my family, so I don't want to support a non-coed school. Orthodox education is important, so I don't want to support the non-Orthodox school."
It seems that there is a misunderstanding as to what a central fund is and what it is not. The proposed idea is a fund for Orthodox schools. A central fund is not meant to divert donations that a particular parent or a particular community member wants to direct to a particular school. A central fund is meant to collect funds from people who want to donate to Orthodox education, but who do not have a particular "pet" school or who do not want to limit their donations to one particular school. In addition, the fund is needed because many donors of significant means want to ensure that the funds donated are treated with the fiduciary duty that they should be treated with. The bottom line is that individual schools do not usually have this capability, nor do they have the fiscal know how required to grow funds. **You wouldn't give your hard earned money to a Rosh Yeshiva to invest because he has neither the time nor the expertise to do so. So, why would you give large sums of money to an individual school that you know does not have the time or expertise for investing? **
The other subject of only supporting what one agrees with 100% that I figured would (sadly) come up sooner or later. The pessimistic side of my personality often says, why even bother trying to get involved in tuition issues. Eventually Jewish education will collapse on itself because the Jewish people are a "stiff-necked" people and are unwilling to bend and compromise even when their own pocketbooks and the future of their own grandchildrens' education is at risk. They are unwilling to work for the greater good if it does not meet the exact specifications that they deem as worthy. Achdus died long ago and we are a fragmented people. We can't even agree on basic issues, how are we ever going to even make a dent in a huge issue?
Mr. Pasik's article is full of great ideas that are solid from a communal and an economic standpoint. But, from the moment I read the article, I said to myself that despite the solid ideas it seems like a far off pipe-dream to institute common sense ideas because we just don't seem to be able to see the big picture. Readers, I'm calling on you to see the big picture and hopefully prove to me that there is hope for the future of Jewish education and that the future is a bit brighter than it seems to look in my current pessimistic state.
I know I have readers since I have a site meter. Please add your comments.
Monday, June 18, 2007
NYS Mandatory Fingerprinting Bill
The following is a message from Elliot Pasik. If you live in NY State, please take appropriate action.
Dear Friends,
Last year, the NYS Legislature passed a law allowing the yeshivas and all nonpublic schools to fingerprint their employees, and conduct national FBI criminal history background checks. The law becomes effective July 1, 2007, and enables our schools to avoid hiring convicted sex offenders, and other dangerous criminals who should not be working near children.
The law received a good reception in our community, and this year, State Senator Dean Skelos, the Deputy Majority Leader, has sponsored and introduced a bill that will make the fingerprinting and background checks MANDATORY, just as it is for all public schools. Mandatory fingerprinting has twice been endorsed by the Rabbinical Council of America, in formal Resolutions enacted in May 2005, and May 2007 (they can be read on the RCA web site, rabbis.org; click onto Policies and Positions).
The bill was introduced in the State Senate on April 20, 2007, and was ordered printed on Thursday, June 14, 2007. That is usually the last step before a bill is voted upon. The Legislature session ends Thursday, June 21, 2007.
You can make a difference. PLEASE email the following State Senators and Assembly members, and express your support for the MANDATORY NONPUBLIC SCHOOL EMPLOYEE FINGERPRINT BILL - S. 04707A.
Senator Skelos: skelos@senate.state.ny.us;Senator Saland (Chair, Educ. Comm.): saland@senate.state.ny.us;
Assembly Speaker Silver: speaker@assembly.state.ny.us;Assembly Member Nolan (Chair,Educ.Comm.): nolanc@assembly.state.ny.us;Assembly Member Weisenberg: weisenh@assembly.state.ny.us.
You can also be a big help by immediately spreading the word about this bill, such as by sending similar emails through other Yahoo groups in our community.
Tizku l'mitzvos, and feel free to contact me by email with any questions.
Elliot Pasik,
Esq.NYS Yeshiva Parents Association
Long Beach, New York
efpasik@aol.com
The following is a message from Elliot Pasik. If you live in NY State, please take appropriate action.
Dear Friends,
Last year, the NYS Legislature passed a law allowing the yeshivas and all nonpublic schools to fingerprint their employees, and conduct national FBI criminal history background checks. The law becomes effective July 1, 2007, and enables our schools to avoid hiring convicted sex offenders, and other dangerous criminals who should not be working near children.
The law received a good reception in our community, and this year, State Senator Dean Skelos, the Deputy Majority Leader, has sponsored and introduced a bill that will make the fingerprinting and background checks MANDATORY, just as it is for all public schools. Mandatory fingerprinting has twice been endorsed by the Rabbinical Council of America, in formal Resolutions enacted in May 2005, and May 2007 (they can be read on the RCA web site, rabbis.org; click onto Policies and Positions).
The bill was introduced in the State Senate on April 20, 2007, and was ordered printed on Thursday, June 14, 2007. That is usually the last step before a bill is voted upon. The Legislature session ends Thursday, June 21, 2007.
You can make a difference. PLEASE email the following State Senators and Assembly members, and express your support for the MANDATORY NONPUBLIC SCHOOL EMPLOYEE FINGERPRINT BILL - S. 04707A.
Senator Skelos: skelos@senate.state.ny.us;Senator Saland (Chair, Educ. Comm.): saland@senate.state.ny.us;
Assembly Speaker Silver: speaker@assembly.state.ny.us;Assembly Member Nolan (Chair,Educ.Comm.): nolanc@assembly.state.ny.us;Assembly Member Weisenberg: weisenh@assembly.state.ny.us.
You can also be a big help by immediately spreading the word about this bill, such as by sending similar emails through other Yahoo groups in our community.
Tizku l'mitzvos, and feel free to contact me by email with any questions.
Elliot Pasik,
Esq.NYS Yeshiva Parents Association
Long Beach, New York
efpasik@aol.com
Thursday, September 14, 2006
NYS Yeshiva Parents Association: Kickoff Meeting
I am thrilled to post an announcement from Mr. Elliot Pasik regarding the first meeting of the newly founded NYS Yeshiva Parents Association. I really, really wish that I could be present. You should see only continued momentum, bracha, and hatzlacha. I welcome guest posts from readers attending the meetings about the different ideas generated. Below is the announcement:
A meeting intended to explore new ways to address the modern challenges facing our yeshivas and day schools will be held Sunday, September 17, 2006, at 7:30 p.m. at the Young Israel of Long Beach, 120 Long Beach Blvd., corner West Penn St., Long Beach, NY.
Initially addressing the gathering will be Elliot Pasik, the attorney who successfully spearheaded the effort to pass a new law in New York that allows all nonpublic schools to fingerprint their prospective employees, and conduct national criminal background checks.
Additional issues the group plans to address include, the soaring cost of tuition; improved secular studies; health and exercise; and other areas of interest to yeshiva and day school parents. Legislative and other solutions to these areas of concern will be explored. Other parents and activists are expected to speak.
People with skills who want to get directly involved in the formation of this new group and its ongoing work are invited to attend, as well as those who simply want to learn about the challenges facing our schools, and families. RSVP is encouraged, but not required, at efpasik@aol.com; or, 516-578-0250.
I am thrilled to post an announcement from Mr. Elliot Pasik regarding the first meeting of the newly founded NYS Yeshiva Parents Association. I really, really wish that I could be present. You should see only continued momentum, bracha, and hatzlacha. I welcome guest posts from readers attending the meetings about the different ideas generated. Below is the announcement:
A meeting intended to explore new ways to address the modern challenges facing our yeshivas and day schools will be held Sunday, September 17, 2006, at 7:30 p.m. at the Young Israel of Long Beach, 120 Long Beach Blvd., corner West Penn St., Long Beach, NY.
Initially addressing the gathering will be Elliot Pasik, the attorney who successfully spearheaded the effort to pass a new law in New York that allows all nonpublic schools to fingerprint their prospective employees, and conduct national criminal background checks.
Additional issues the group plans to address include, the soaring cost of tuition; improved secular studies; health and exercise; and other areas of interest to yeshiva and day school parents. Legislative and other solutions to these areas of concern will be explored. Other parents and activists are expected to speak.
People with skills who want to get directly involved in the formation of this new group and its ongoing work are invited to attend, as well as those who simply want to learn about the challenges facing our schools, and families. RSVP is encouraged, but not required, at efpasik@aol.com; or, 516-578-0250.
Monday, June 19, 2006
New York Legislation II:
Please Act Quickly
I received another message from Mr. Elliot Pasik, and am posting it below in full for my New York readers. Please take the time to pass this important message onto all of your friends and co-workers. It appears that the legislation is also supported by the New York State Catholic Conference. So, please also pass the message onto your Catholic co-workers and friends.
Dear Friends:
A bill that, if passed, will allow New York yeshivas and other nonpublic schools to fingerprint their employees, and obtain their criminal histories, if any, is extraordinarily close to either passage in both houses of the New York State Legislature, or, being delayed for at least another year.
The New York State Senate will vote on the bill Wednesday, June 21, 2006, and the bill is fully expected to pass, since it is supported by the leadership there.
Hopefully, the New York State Assembly will vote on the bill Thursday, June 22, 2006, the LAST DAY of this year's Session. The Assembly situation is a little bit different, however. The sponsors there are Assemblyman Harvey Weisenberg (D-Long Beach), and, most happily, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver (D-Manhattan). However, I believe the bill has been sitting in the Assembly Codes Committee for a few days, where some of the Assembly members and/or their staff may be considering some minor amendments.
I thus believe we need to persuade Speaker Silver and his Assembly colleagues to bring the bill to the floor for a vote, where it will likely pass. Speaker Silver has been a long-time friend to our community, and that is why he is co-sponsoring the bill. The Legislature, in its last few days, has a full plate, to say the least, and we need to bring this situation to the Speaker's attention, so this bill can become law.
Please email:
1. NYS Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver: speaker@assembly.state.ny.us;
2. NYS Assembly member Harvey Weisenberg: weisenh@assembly.state.ny.us;
3. NYS Senate Deputy Majority Leader Dean Skelos: skelos@senate.state.ny.us;
4. Your own local Assembly member and State Senator - you can obtain their names and email addresses from the respective websites of the New York State Assembly and Senate.
I suggest the following language, which you can certainly personalize as you wish: "Please support the nonpublic school employee background check bill. Please bring the bill to a vote on the Assembly and Senate floors. The bill numbers are A. 11399 and S. 07381. Thank you for all the work you have done on this important measure." You should give your name and address, or at least the city/town where you live.
As you may have read in the New York Jewish Week of June 9, 2006, p.10 (Friedlin, "State Mulls Background Check for Yeshivas"; you can read it on http://www.jewishweek.com/), the background check bill is supported by the Rabbinical Council of America, the Orthodox Union, and Agudath Israel. Privately, the New York State Catholic Conference has been participating in the drafting of the language, and implicitly supports it.
Can you please participate in what one gadol b'Torah described to me as a "tovah for klal Yisroel" by sending the emails described above, and forwarding this email to as many friends as possible. The Torah commands us, Lo sa'amod al dam ra'echa, Do not stand upon the blood of your friend. We need to secure our yeshivas to the fullest extent humanly possible. With our hishtadlus, we hope and pray that G-d will help, with siyata dishmaya. I humbly believe we should also daven for the passage of this important bill.
Very truly yours,
Elliot B. Pasik
Please Act Quickly
I received another message from Mr. Elliot Pasik, and am posting it below in full for my New York readers. Please take the time to pass this important message onto all of your friends and co-workers. It appears that the legislation is also supported by the New York State Catholic Conference. So, please also pass the message onto your Catholic co-workers and friends.
Dear Friends:
A bill that, if passed, will allow New York yeshivas and other nonpublic schools to fingerprint their employees, and obtain their criminal histories, if any, is extraordinarily close to either passage in both houses of the New York State Legislature, or, being delayed for at least another year.
The New York State Senate will vote on the bill Wednesday, June 21, 2006, and the bill is fully expected to pass, since it is supported by the leadership there.
Hopefully, the New York State Assembly will vote on the bill Thursday, June 22, 2006, the LAST DAY of this year's Session. The Assembly situation is a little bit different, however. The sponsors there are Assemblyman Harvey Weisenberg (D-Long Beach), and, most happily, Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver (D-Manhattan). However, I believe the bill has been sitting in the Assembly Codes Committee for a few days, where some of the Assembly members and/or their staff may be considering some minor amendments.
I thus believe we need to persuade Speaker Silver and his Assembly colleagues to bring the bill to the floor for a vote, where it will likely pass. Speaker Silver has been a long-time friend to our community, and that is why he is co-sponsoring the bill. The Legislature, in its last few days, has a full plate, to say the least, and we need to bring this situation to the Speaker's attention, so this bill can become law.
Please email:
1. NYS Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver: speaker@assembly.state.ny.us;
2. NYS Assembly member Harvey Weisenberg: weisenh@assembly.state.ny.us;
3. NYS Senate Deputy Majority Leader Dean Skelos: skelos@senate.state.ny.us;
4. Your own local Assembly member and State Senator - you can obtain their names and email addresses from the respective websites of the New York State Assembly and Senate.
I suggest the following language, which you can certainly personalize as you wish: "Please support the nonpublic school employee background check bill. Please bring the bill to a vote on the Assembly and Senate floors. The bill numbers are A. 11399 and S. 07381. Thank you for all the work you have done on this important measure." You should give your name and address, or at least the city/town where you live.
As you may have read in the New York Jewish Week of June 9, 2006, p.10 (Friedlin, "State Mulls Background Check for Yeshivas"; you can read it on http://www.jewishweek.com/), the background check bill is supported by the Rabbinical Council of America, the Orthodox Union, and Agudath Israel. Privately, the New York State Catholic Conference has been participating in the drafting of the language, and implicitly supports it.
Can you please participate in what one gadol b'Torah described to me as a "tovah for klal Yisroel" by sending the emails described above, and forwarding this email to as many friends as possible. The Torah commands us, Lo sa'amod al dam ra'echa, Do not stand upon the blood of your friend. We need to secure our yeshivas to the fullest extent humanly possible. With our hishtadlus, we hope and pray that G-d will help, with siyata dishmaya. I humbly believe we should also daven for the passage of this important bill.
Very truly yours,
Elliot B. Pasik
Tuesday, February 21, 2006
United Yeshiva and Hebrew Day School Funds,
plus Life Insurance Policies Can Benefit Yeshivot
I am currently doing a little research on different fundraising ideas that various day schools and Yeshivot throughout the United States are employing to raise funds for either the present or the future. Here I found an interesting idea that is very inexpensive for families and can yield large amounts down the road.
I have heard that in the Catholic Church it is basically a requirement for members to take out an additional life insurance plan that benefits the church and its schools. This looks to be a very inexpensive way for families to, after 120 years, give a major gift to benefit Jewish education.
However, I believe that planned giving and endowments where only one institution is a beneficiary, are highly unattractive for your average family. As Mr. Pasik states in an article titled "Resolving the Yeshiva Tuition Crisis," it is necessary that the Orthodox community establish a "The United Yeshiva and Hebrew Day School Fund." There are many ways to establish such funds. There could be a national fund or even regional funds. But, like Mr. Pasik points out there must be a central address for donations.
plus Life Insurance Policies Can Benefit Yeshivot
I am currently doing a little research on different fundraising ideas that various day schools and Yeshivot throughout the United States are employing to raise funds for either the present or the future. Here I found an interesting idea that is very inexpensive for families and can yield large amounts down the road.
"All of us can help the school simply by remembering Yeshivat Rambam in our estates. For younger families, joint life insurance policies are an inexpensive way to provide the school with a lump sum bequest at a modest cost. For example, a premium as low as $200 per year, tax deductible, can buy a $100,000 life insurance policy for the benefit of Yeshivat Rambam. Depending on your circumstances, and with interest rates now so low, a life-income gift to Yeshivat Rambam may offer some of us very special tax advantages."
I have heard that in the Catholic Church it is basically a requirement for members to take out an additional life insurance plan that benefits the church and its schools. This looks to be a very inexpensive way for families to, after 120 years, give a major gift to benefit Jewish education.
However, I believe that planned giving and endowments where only one institution is a beneficiary, are highly unattractive for your average family. As Mr. Pasik states in an article titled "Resolving the Yeshiva Tuition Crisis," it is necessary that the Orthodox community establish a "The United Yeshiva and Hebrew Day School Fund." There are many ways to establish such funds. There could be a national fund or even regional funds. But, like Mr. Pasik points out there must be a central address for donations.
- The future is uncertain and donors prefer certainty. There is no way to know that any Yeshiva will continue to exist into the future. Unfortunately, many Yeshivot come and go.
- Grandparents and great-grandparents want to benefit the schools that their grandchildren are attending or will attend. With large families spread throughout the United States and the world, it does not make sense to give large gifts to individual schools; it makes more sense to give to a central fund or regional funds that will benefit the grandchildren no matter what school they are attending or will attend.
- Charitable organizations, especially our schools, are notorious for living for yesterday and not the future. Donors want to see their large gifts outlive them and continue to provide a Jewish education l'dor v'dor. Knowing that the gift could be borrowed against does not encourage the type of giving that needs to be encouraged.
- And, naturally, donors want to be ensured that a fund is being run with integrity and professionalism. A central fund has much greater potential of fiscal transparency which is a necessity to attract sizable gifts. As this letter writer to the Jewish Press stated in last week's letters to the editor entitled "Financial Accountability" states, "We must eradicate the perception that yeshivas and Jewish schools are run by individuals who are gaining personally from donations and contributions from the Jewish public. Let us work together to ensure the integrity of our yeshivas and that they meet high standards of financial accountability."
We need to call upon our Yeshivot and Day Schools to unite when creating endowment plans. Sharing ideas will only be to everyone's benefit. An umbrella organization to collect the funds has a much greater potential to actually organize donors and start collecting the large gifts that are currently going to designated for more "attractive" causes.
Monday, May 25, 2009
NNJKIDS: A New Kehilla Fund Is Rolled Out
I have no clue why it has taken so long for region to implement something so logical as to have a single address where community members can donate to area schools. I reported on this idea as proposed by Elliot Pasik before the inception of this blog. The advantages of a central fund (regional/city funds being my own preference) include placing money into day schools in general, rather than into a single day school that may fail (three years later I believe the cracks are r"l starting to form) and a greater ability to attract large donors interested in a cause rather than a particular school.
Fortunately there is finally a fund in Northern New Jersey. Time will tell just how successful the kehillah fund is. The goal stated is to near 100% participation in demonstration that funding schools is a communal obligation. I think the goal is a bit, uh, lofty given that at least 1/3 of students in modern orthodox schools are on some sort of tuition assistance. It would seem that those families should be directing what they can to their own schools, should they be able to give. It should be interesting to see how the fund develops. Hopefully it will thrive.
The fund as proposed is to collect funds centrally through participating Orthodox shuls, and then distributing these funds to the schools in the network based on the number of students.
But is distributing the funds per capita the best idea? I guess you could say that I was hoping for a little more supervision regarding distributing funds. I am told that in Northern New Jersey the modern Orthodox schools are bursting at the seams. So perhaps my comment is not particularly applicable to Northern New Jersey. But in other communities, there are schools with numerous empty seats, that could literally be absorbed into another school with some empty seats with little to hire additional administration, staff.
Of course the parents in these very small schools have chose these schools for good reasons. But having schools that are not filled to capacity not particularly efficient and distributing per capita does nothing to address this conjecture.
Unlike the Catholic Diocese, the Jewish community has no ability to combine smaller schools or close schools that are near death. What I do believe that the community has an ability to do via communal funds is to set up parameters regarding qualification. I hope those administering communal funds will consider setting up parameters regard transparency, enrollment, efficiency, hiring, debt load, sound financial management, etc. I think it behooves communities to invest only in schools that are a "going concern" if the talk of potential school failures isn't just hysteria.
At the end of the article are the following quotes:
"The kehillah fund will not solve the tuition crisis, but it is a good first step"
"Every dollar raised by the fund is a dollar the schools do not have to charge in tuition"
“The impact is going to be on funds available for scholarship, which will mitigate future tuition increases."
I'm a bit confused. If the funds are going to be used to increase scholarships, I don't see how tuition can be lowered across the board.
If the funds are going to be used to lower tuition at all, I don't believe you can also increase scholarships.
What am I missing? I'm sure I'm missing something.
Anyways, the fund is a good start. But like it says in the article, it will not solve the tuition crisis. I do think a communal fund administered with strict parameters could encourage the very things that will helpsolve mitigate the crisis.
I have no clue why it has taken so long for region to implement something so logical as to have a single address where community members can donate to area schools. I reported on this idea as proposed by Elliot Pasik before the inception of this blog. The advantages of a central fund (regional/city funds being my own preference) include placing money into day schools in general, rather than into a single day school that may fail (three years later I believe the cracks are r"l starting to form) and a greater ability to attract large donors interested in a cause rather than a particular school.
Fortunately there is finally a fund in Northern New Jersey. Time will tell just how successful the kehillah fund is. The goal stated is to near 100% participation in demonstration that funding schools is a communal obligation. I think the goal is a bit, uh, lofty given that at least 1/3 of students in modern orthodox schools are on some sort of tuition assistance. It would seem that those families should be directing what they can to their own schools, should they be able to give. It should be interesting to see how the fund develops. Hopefully it will thrive.
The fund as proposed is to collect funds centrally through participating Orthodox shuls, and then distributing these funds to the schools in the network based on the number of students.
But is distributing the funds per capita the best idea? I guess you could say that I was hoping for a little more supervision regarding distributing funds. I am told that in Northern New Jersey the modern Orthodox schools are bursting at the seams. So perhaps my comment is not particularly applicable to Northern New Jersey. But in other communities, there are schools with numerous empty seats, that could literally be absorbed into another school with some empty seats with little to hire additional administration, staff.
Of course the parents in these very small schools have chose these schools for good reasons. But having schools that are not filled to capacity not particularly efficient and distributing per capita does nothing to address this conjecture.
Unlike the Catholic Diocese, the Jewish community has no ability to combine smaller schools or close schools that are near death. What I do believe that the community has an ability to do via communal funds is to set up parameters regarding qualification. I hope those administering communal funds will consider setting up parameters regard transparency, enrollment, efficiency, hiring, debt load, sound financial management, etc. I think it behooves communities to invest only in schools that are a "going concern" if the talk of potential school failures isn't just hysteria.
At the end of the article are the following quotes:
"The kehillah fund will not solve the tuition crisis, but it is a good first step"
"Every dollar raised by the fund is a dollar the schools do not have to charge in tuition"
“The impact is going to be on funds available for scholarship, which will mitigate future tuition increases."
I'm a bit confused. If the funds are going to be used to increase scholarships, I don't see how tuition can be lowered across the board.
If the funds are going to be used to lower tuition at all, I don't believe you can also increase scholarships.
What am I missing? I'm sure I'm missing something.
Anyways, the fund is a good start. But like it says in the article, it will not solve the tuition crisis. I do think a communal fund administered with strict parameters could encourage the very things that will help
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
JO Review: Tuition Vs. Camp
The Jewish Observer "Tuition Dilemma" Issue has an interest transcript of a question and answer session conducted by Rabbi Shmuel Feurst, Rav of Agudath Israel of Chicago regarding tuition issues. Below I am reproducing the first question and answer regarding tuition vs. camp. Other questions to follow in upcoming posts.
My comments to follow.
It is really hard to know where to start with this discussion, but I will presume that this "psak" is practiced vis a vis tuition since I know mothers who send their children to summer camp who are on scholarship (and not every mother is working during the summer).
So I will start by asking a question: Why should a Yeshiva have to cut their costs so children can go to camp? Why shouldn't it be the opposite? Why shouldn't camps have to compete for whatever dollars are left after tuition, rather than Yeshivot trying to take whatever is left after camp?
Of course, no one wants their children to be idle during the summer. We want our children to keep up with their learning, daven, read, and explore their interests and talents that might lay dormant during the school year. Some would argue camp is a necessity to prevent such. I would argue that a summer could be productive for a whole lot less.
There is a saying that "necessity is the mother of invention." We have spent time on this blog exploring inventive alternatives to the current day school situation from homeschooling (which deserves its own post) to virtual schooling, to Elliot Pasik's Two Building Solution.
I would say that the alternatives to summer camp are nearly endless (even when a parent is not home all day everyday during the summer), while the solutions to receiving a Jewish education are more limited, but not unlimited. I hate to argue with a person far greater than me, but it seems unfair to put more burden on the the schools and on the other parents by declaring essentially declaring summer camp (with emphasis on camp) a necessity.
Have at it.
The Jewish Observer "Tuition Dilemma" Issue has an interest transcript of a question and answer session conducted by Rabbi Shmuel Feurst, Rav of Agudath Israel of Chicago regarding tuition issues. Below I am reproducing the first question and answer regarding tuition vs. camp. Other questions to follow in upcoming posts.
My comments to follow.
Question -- Overnight camp can cost $2,000, $3,000, or even $4,000, and day camps can also cost $1,000-$2,000 if the child is enrolled for the entire summer. Can one apply for a scholarship from his child's school if he would be able to pay full tuition, were he not to send his children to sleepover or day camp?
Answer -- Today's culture can be very corrosive. A child goes to school for nine-ten months. If he does not attend a day camp or overnight camp in the summer, he can lose everything he gained in those ten months -- and even worse. To keep children on the derech HaTorah, one must keep them off the streets. One would then have a right to ask for a tuition reduction.
It is really hard to know where to start with this discussion, but I will presume that this "psak" is practiced vis a vis tuition since I know mothers who send their children to summer camp who are on scholarship (and not every mother is working during the summer).
So I will start by asking a question: Why should a Yeshiva have to cut their costs so children can go to camp? Why shouldn't it be the opposite? Why shouldn't camps have to compete for whatever dollars are left after tuition, rather than Yeshivot trying to take whatever is left after camp?
Of course, no one wants their children to be idle during the summer. We want our children to keep up with their learning, daven, read, and explore their interests and talents that might lay dormant during the school year. Some would argue camp is a necessity to prevent such. I would argue that a summer could be productive for a whole lot less.
There is a saying that "necessity is the mother of invention." We have spent time on this blog exploring inventive alternatives to the current day school situation from homeschooling (which deserves its own post) to virtual schooling, to Elliot Pasik's Two Building Solution.
I would say that the alternatives to summer camp are nearly endless (even when a parent is not home all day everyday during the summer), while the solutions to receiving a Jewish education are more limited, but not unlimited. I hate to argue with a person far greater than me, but it seems unfair to put more burden on the the schools and on the other parents by declaring essentially declaring summer camp (with emphasis on camp) a necessity.
Have at it.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
JO Review: These Are Solutions?
I got sidetracked from my Jewish Observer "Tuition Dilemma" Review, but now that Yeshiva World News has re-posted an article from that edition, I thought I would try to return to the review, at least temporarily.
At one time I had a draft on file regarding this article, but I deleted it because I couldn't hold myself back from making very rude comments in regards to assertions such as "Yeshivos have become very creative and entrepreneurial in finding ways to close their budget gaps." And "To an honest and realistic person, our school administrator knows his business very well. He has been successful in steering the ship through very choppy waters. This same executive director or administrator has become so talented at balancing the budget, his skills match those of any corporate CFO. The fact that he stays at the yeshiva is in itself real mesiras nefesh." While I don't doubt there is some stellar financial management going on, I would say this assertion is over-gratuitous. I'll hold try to hold my tongue, but we have discussed non-payment of Yeshiva employees and unsuccessful and even loosing fundraisers. Hopefully the author had something else in mind in regards to "creative and entrepreneurial ways to close the budget gap."
The main thrust of the article was to offer "solutions" to the problems of funding yeshiva educations. These "solutions" were put forward:
1. Solicit Big Money Donors.
2. Lobby for Tax Relief.
3. Lobby for Tuition Vouchers.
Oy! If this is the level of thinking that we are seeing, then I can only fear that nothing will be done to make a dent in tuition. Regarding #3, vouchers were just defeated on referendum in the State of Utah. Regarding #2, a frum family in Los Angeles already tried to deduct tuition for religious subjects, 55%, and fought their case up the latter in tax court with the backing of Agudah. They lost on appeal and in over 10 years there has been no light at the end of the tunnel. Vouchers and tax relief are just not happening (sorry to be so pessimistic and/or realistic). To put all of our eggs in this basket would be like adding a line item into the budget to buy lotto tickets weekly. I do believe we should lobby for vouchers and tax relief, but we cannot rely on a miracle and have to take a different approach.
Solution 1 is the best of the 3 that has been put forward by the author. But in my opinion there are major, major, major impediments to inspiring both major and minor donors. We have too much to support and no priorities. Kollelim and Kiruv have won out over day schools. Donors have been alienated. There is little to no financial transparency. There is duplicity and little to no unity (e.g. an Orthodox School Region/District). Donors/Parents have little control (elected boards for our regions/districts). For related reading see: Eliot Pasik (and here) and George Hanus (founder of the Superfund in Chicago).
Let's be honest. If you had millions to give, would you turn your money over? And to what school?
To be continued.
I got sidetracked from my Jewish Observer "Tuition Dilemma" Review, but now that Yeshiva World News has re-posted an article from that edition, I thought I would try to return to the review, at least temporarily.
At one time I had a draft on file regarding this article, but I deleted it because I couldn't hold myself back from making very rude comments in regards to assertions such as "Yeshivos have become very creative and entrepreneurial in finding ways to close their budget gaps." And "To an honest and realistic person, our school administrator knows his business very well. He has been successful in steering the ship through very choppy waters. This same executive director or administrator has become so talented at balancing the budget, his skills match those of any corporate CFO. The fact that he stays at the yeshiva is in itself real mesiras nefesh." While I don't doubt there is some stellar financial management going on, I would say this assertion is over-gratuitous. I'll hold try to hold my tongue, but we have discussed non-payment of Yeshiva employees and unsuccessful and even loosing fundraisers. Hopefully the author had something else in mind in regards to "creative and entrepreneurial ways to close the budget gap."
The main thrust of the article was to offer "solutions" to the problems of funding yeshiva educations. These "solutions" were put forward:
1. Solicit Big Money Donors.
2. Lobby for Tax Relief.
3. Lobby for Tuition Vouchers.
Oy! If this is the level of thinking that we are seeing, then I can only fear that nothing will be done to make a dent in tuition. Regarding #3, vouchers were just defeated on referendum in the State of Utah. Regarding #2, a frum family in Los Angeles already tried to deduct tuition for religious subjects, 55%, and fought their case up the latter in tax court with the backing of Agudah. They lost on appeal and in over 10 years there has been no light at the end of the tunnel. Vouchers and tax relief are just not happening (sorry to be so pessimistic and/or realistic). To put all of our eggs in this basket would be like adding a line item into the budget to buy lotto tickets weekly. I do believe we should lobby for vouchers and tax relief, but we cannot rely on a miracle and have to take a different approach.
Solution 1 is the best of the 3 that has been put forward by the author. But in my opinion there are major, major, major impediments to inspiring both major and minor donors. We have too much to support and no priorities. Kollelim and Kiruv have won out over day schools. Donors have been alienated. There is little to no financial transparency. There is duplicity and little to no unity (e.g. an Orthodox School Region/District). Donors/Parents have little control (elected boards for our regions/districts). For related reading see: Eliot Pasik (and here) and George Hanus (founder of the Superfund in Chicago).
Let's be honest. If you had millions to give, would you turn your money over? And to what school?
To be continued.
Sunday, December 10, 2006
Looking Beyond the Kolko Case
There is no need for me to recount the sorrid accusations involving Yeshiva Torah Temimah and Rabbis Yehuda Kolko and Margulies. As I do not live in Brooklyn, my familiarity with this particular case only stems from various newspaper reports, blog posts, and their accompanying comments, most of which are a complete waste of time to read. While there are some commenters who offer constructive and purposeful comments, many commenters are throwing accusations that serve no purpose but to tar an entire set or subset of Jews and promote an unhealthy level of cynicism, while another set of commenters are out to convince us that the arrest and accusations spanning 30 years are completely baseless. These commenters seek to uphold the kavod of the Rabbinate by undermining the integrity of the alleged victims, labelling their accusations as "personal vendettas" and making comments alluding to their "problems." With these types of neighbors, it is no wonder that we are all so afraid of our own shadows!
Back in May 2006 when this topic came to light, I wrote a (hopefully constructive) post titled "Protecting Our Children, Protecting Ourselves: Sexual Abuse and Necessary Guidelines." I still stand by my original premises of the post including that "there are sexual predators in every community out there, including our own, that we need to protect our children from." In short, sexual predatorship (is that a word?) and sexual deviancy are human issues. And, frum society (both "Chareidi" and "Modern") are not immune to these issues.
My husband and I can claim more than a passing familiarity with a good handful of communities in the US: some small, some medium, and some large, and some super-sized. Outside of our current residence (for which I do not have enough historical knowledge), every single one of these communities that we have lived in has suffered from issues of sexual abuse perpetrated by authority figures. [And, even in our current community, there is a convicted sexual offender. While cries of lashon hara went out when someone publicly mentioned the offender database on the internet, I was personally glad to find out this tidbit of information as we were considering making a bid on a home within a stone's throw of this man's home at the time. While one man told us that his mistake that resulted in a conviction shouldn't affect our children, as a parent, I would rather play it safe and choose a different block to live on. (In the end, the home went for a price well above our range, and the issue became a non-issue-the story).]
Blame it on my professional background. . . but, while others continue to argue about the Kolko case, I prefer to concentrate on a different issue, one that extends beyond the shelf-life of this case, or similar cases. Namely, how can the Jewish community provide reasonable assurance that Jewish children are safe in day schools, camps, synagogues, and youth groups?
As it stands today:
*I have a list of numbers to call when I need to know if a product is kosher. And, if I find an unauthorized heksher, I know where to call to report it.
*I have a list of poskim who I can call for questions of all sorts.
*I know where to call when I need to borrow a wheelchair for my visiting grandmother or request a Shabbat box in the hospital.
*I know where to call if we need hospitality in an out-of-town community, and I even know where to call should we need to borrow a porta-crib or stroller.
*I know where to call when there is a family desperately in need of funds to pay their rent.
. . . But, I do NOT know where to call if (chas v'shalom, it should happen to no one) my child is abused by an authority figure!
When the Rabbis and the Yeshiva in question have had their day in court, the case will have come to a close. But, the issues that have come to light will be here to stay. And parents need to know where to turn to should there be a problem, and our institutions also need to know where to turn to before there is a problem.
While it is impossible to give a 100% guarantee of safety, we must institute a structure that gives us reasonable assurance that our children are safe. Fortunately, we have community members like Elliot Pasik who are actively involving themselves with these issues, especially on the lobbying end, which requires a special skill. However, I believe, as parents we also need to be asking the "hard questions" to let the administrators in our children's schools know that we want structure.
Your (constructive) thoughts?
Recommended links:
Rabbi Michael J. Broyde: Informing on Others for ViolatingAmerican Law: A Jewish Law View
Lecture by Rav Herschel Schacter "Nobody Talks About It"
Ari Kinsberg: "A Failure of the Orthodox Community"
P.S. Please keep it clean.
There is no need for me to recount the sorrid accusations involving Yeshiva Torah Temimah and Rabbis Yehuda Kolko and Margulies. As I do not live in Brooklyn, my familiarity with this particular case only stems from various newspaper reports, blog posts, and their accompanying comments, most of which are a complete waste of time to read. While there are some commenters who offer constructive and purposeful comments, many commenters are throwing accusations that serve no purpose but to tar an entire set or subset of Jews and promote an unhealthy level of cynicism, while another set of commenters are out to convince us that the arrest and accusations spanning 30 years are completely baseless. These commenters seek to uphold the kavod of the Rabbinate by undermining the integrity of the alleged victims, labelling their accusations as "personal vendettas" and making comments alluding to their "problems." With these types of neighbors, it is no wonder that we are all so afraid of our own shadows!
Back in May 2006 when this topic came to light, I wrote a (hopefully constructive) post titled "Protecting Our Children, Protecting Ourselves: Sexual Abuse and Necessary Guidelines." I still stand by my original premises of the post including that "there are sexual predators in every community out there, including our own, that we need to protect our children from." In short, sexual predatorship (is that a word?) and sexual deviancy are human issues. And, frum society (both "Chareidi" and "Modern") are not immune to these issues.
My husband and I can claim more than a passing familiarity with a good handful of communities in the US: some small, some medium, and some large, and some super-sized. Outside of our current residence (for which I do not have enough historical knowledge), every single one of these communities that we have lived in has suffered from issues of sexual abuse perpetrated by authority figures. [And, even in our current community, there is a convicted sexual offender. While cries of lashon hara went out when someone publicly mentioned the offender database on the internet, I was personally glad to find out this tidbit of information as we were considering making a bid on a home within a stone's throw of this man's home at the time. While one man told us that his mistake that resulted in a conviction shouldn't affect our children, as a parent, I would rather play it safe and choose a different block to live on. (In the end, the home went for a price well above our range, and the issue became a non-issue-the story).]
Blame it on my professional background. . . but, while others continue to argue about the Kolko case, I prefer to concentrate on a different issue, one that extends beyond the shelf-life of this case, or similar cases. Namely, how can the Jewish community provide reasonable assurance that Jewish children are safe in day schools, camps, synagogues, and youth groups?
As it stands today:
*I have a list of numbers to call when I need to know if a product is kosher. And, if I find an unauthorized heksher, I know where to call to report it.
*I have a list of poskim who I can call for questions of all sorts.
*I know where to call when I need to borrow a wheelchair for my visiting grandmother or request a Shabbat box in the hospital.
*I know where to call if we need hospitality in an out-of-town community, and I even know where to call should we need to borrow a porta-crib or stroller.
*I know where to call when there is a family desperately in need of funds to pay their rent.
. . . But, I do NOT know where to call if (chas v'shalom, it should happen to no one) my child is abused by an authority figure!
When the Rabbis and the Yeshiva in question have had their day in court, the case will have come to a close. But, the issues that have come to light will be here to stay. And parents need to know where to turn to should there be a problem, and our institutions also need to know where to turn to before there is a problem.
While it is impossible to give a 100% guarantee of safety, we must institute a structure that gives us reasonable assurance that our children are safe. Fortunately, we have community members like Elliot Pasik who are actively involving themselves with these issues, especially on the lobbying end, which requires a special skill. However, I believe, as parents we also need to be asking the "hard questions" to let the administrators in our children's schools know that we want structure.
Your (constructive) thoughts?
Recommended links:
Rabbi Michael J. Broyde: Informing on Others for ViolatingAmerican Law: A Jewish Law View
Lecture by Rav Herschel Schacter "Nobody Talks About It"
Ari Kinsberg: "A Failure of the Orthodox Community"
P.S. Please keep it clean.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)