December 31, 2009

Evelyn Solomons
15604 Bottlebrush Cir.
Delray Beach, FL 33484
To: Board of Trustees

Temple Beth Am

I am one of the last remaining members of the original 1954 steering committee who met to discuss a Reform Synagogue in the suburbs.

We were successful then and remain successful now even though we had many ups and downs financially and otherwise.

Why weren't some of the older members, who held Temple Beth Am together at its lowest level, asked to assist in these discussions? We have always been our own "unique" group and have kept ourselves a viable congregation and religious school.

If the rumor that the Broder Building is for sale becomes a reality, it would certainly benefit Beth Zion. Perhaps we would gain members who live in the suburbs and need religious school facilities, but why overcrowd our Glickman school building? We finally eliminated double Saturday and Sunday classes (which many of you don't remember) plus extra teacher's salaries for multiple classes. It was a relief to our members both physically and financially to have one session. Let's not go back to that way of life by suggesting a joint religious school.

I had 56 years to join Beth Zion but the warmth, ideals, and friendships and success of our Temple have always been my priority as well as that of a closing congregation. They joined us for the same reasons, warmth, ideals, friendship and success.

What happened to our "Family of Families?"

Sincerely,

Evelyn M. Solomons

January 4, 2010

Robert Kanner

rk207@verizon.net

432-3267

Nothing concentrates the mind like economic hard times.  With that in mind, and as a relatively new member (since 8/08), I would like to send you some ideas.

First of all, as the discussions begin, nothing can be off the table.  While things may be taken off the table at later stages of discussion, there should be nothing that cannot be discussed and considered at the beginning of the process.

I note from David's letter that discussions have been held with Beth Zion.  I approve of discussing things with our "brother/sister" Jewish organization.  Having said that, I do not understand why Temple Sinai has been left out of the discussion.  They are surely having the same problems as exist for Beth Am and Beth Zion.  Unless they have expressed a desire not to participate in the discussions, Temple Sinai should be asked to participate.

In addition, whether it was intended or not, David's letter implies a future merger between Beth Am and Beth Zion.  If there are not enough money and Jews "to go around" for each Temple separately, the logic of the letter is towards an eventual merger.  But, I would think that merger would be a last resort if all else fails.

The following are some ideas that are worth considering:

--A Western New York Jewish office supplies purchasing co-op.  It has to be more expensive than necessary for each organization to buy pens, copy paper, copy toner, printer ink, etc. on their own than it would be for all area Jewish organizations to have one central purchasing co-op to buy things in bulk.  And, when I say all area Jewish organizations, I mean ALL--reform, orthodox, conservative, the JCC, the Bureau of Jewish Education, and any other organization with the word "Jewish" in it.

--The same would apply to books and articles of religious significance--siddurs, kippas (don't know the plural of kippa), talit, etc.

--The same would apply to employee health insurance.  (I'm not sure if this could be done for worker's comp and unemployment insurance.) For each Temple and Jewish organization to purchase health insurance on its own has to be very expensive.  The only way to cut this expense is to buy "in bulk" in a health insurance purchasing co-op.

--As someone who attended Temple Sinai before joining Temple Beth Am, I noticed how old and out of date were the heating, cooling and l lighting systems.  The same applies to Beth Am and the North Forest building of Beth Zion.  (I've never been in the Beth Zion Delaware Ave building.  I assume that their heating. cooling, lighting systems are similarly aged.)  With this in mind, I would suggest joining forces to have a contractor assess how the buildings can be updated to save on energy costs and, of course, at what price and long term savings.

Having made these suggestions, I recognize that even if they are completely successful, they can only go so far to help alleviate the chronic financial problems felt by all Jewish organizations.  The only long term solution is to get new members through the door on a

sustaining basis.  Here are some ideas worth considering:

--As a new member, I have only a passing knowledge of Beth Am's history.  I have heard that about 5-7 years ago, there was a big upheaval which resulted in a mass exit of a large portion of Beth Am's members.  I am not interested in stirring up old waters.  But, in an era of declining enrollment and finances, we do not have a single "Jew to waste".  Who, and where, are the members who left? How many of them are there?  Are any of them unaffiliated with another Temple?  What would it take to bring some of them "back home"?  Suppose that even 50 members returned "home"?  At $1000 each, that adds up to $50,000.  I don't know about you, but I'll take $50,000!  I'll even take $30,000!

--In addition, just because there are less Jews "out there" than there used to be doesn't mean there are no Jews "out there".  I have no desire to "steal" Jews from other synagogues, but it seems to me that there have to be Jews who are not affiliated with other Temples.  Suppose we challenged our existing members to bring new Members to Beth Am.  As an incentive, we should offer existing members a financial incentive because nothing succeeds like capitalism.  For every new member brought in by an existing member, the existing member will receive $100 (or some other appropriate amount) off their dues.  The money lost in rebates would be far outweighed by the new income.

As another suggestion, we need to do some thinking about how to attract unaffiliated Jews into Beth Am.  I wonder if there are Jews "out there" for whom full time membership is not something they are willing to contemplate.  If so, we should explore the idea of "part-time" or "partial" membership.  In order to avoid reducing income from existing members, we could offer "partial" membership (but find a better name for it) only to people who have not been members within the last 2-3 years.  "Partial" members would have less privileges than "full" members but would enable them to be affiliated with Beth Am at a lower cost.  Suppose we get 50 "partial" members at $500 each, that adds up to $25,000.  I'll take $25,000!  I'll even take $15,000!  And, maybe over time, some of these people will convert to full time members.

And, lastly, maybe we need to think about why unaffiliated Jews are unaffiliated.  Perhaps it's time to think about what would attract these people "into the fold".  Do they have spiritual needs which are not answered by the way Beth Am currently does its worship?  If so, what can we do to answer their needs?  Are there unaffiliated Jews who do not necessarily want to worship but are interested in Jewish education?  If so, what can we do to answer their needs?  Are there unaffiliated Jews who want neither worship nor education but might like to socialize with other Jews?  If so, what can we do for them?

I hope these ideas help.

Bob Kanner

From:                     mglickman5@cs.com

To:                         Trustees of Temple Beth Am

Date sent:               Tue, 12 Jan 2010 00:08:29 -0500 (EST)

Subject:                  Letter regarding TBA and TBZ

My dear friends,

 I understand that the letter that went out to both of our congregations was written by Larry Rubin, pres. of TBZ, with the approval of David Berghash and Blaine Schwartz.

 Part of the letter stated that the community, the Federation, the JCC and so forth agree that the Jewish community is getting smaller each year and that within 10 years we may need to have one Reform Congregation as it will not be possible to support two congregations even if they each have 500 members or so. A five hundred member congregation is a viable number and one that can operate solo and successfully.

 As for working together in various areas such as special joint services, as we are doing now, and possibly combining religious schools, this, in itself, is something that will need a lot of work on both ends.

 I am writing this letter to remind you that our philosophy on Judaism, education, worship and so forth, are at different levels. Please do not let our philosophy dissipate; please do not let the history of Temple Beth Am dissipate; and, most importantly, we look at our membership with the kind of love and caring that other congregations do not...  specifically TBZ.

 I would like to remind all of you that we are most fortunate to have Blaine, Shelley, Ellen Reis, Marianne Wisbaum, Mindy, and several other people serving on the boards of the Federation, JCC, the Bureau and so forth. Their input is most valuable. I would also like to state that in many cases, the spouses of many of these people are also involved in the community. I would also like to remind you that TBZ has many members who also have spouses in joint positions such as Debra Chernoff, pres. of the JCC who is also the wife of Larry Rubin. This is also valuable to TBZ.

 What we need to remind ourselves is that we, the board of TBA, must not be swayed by spouses and friends because in many cases, their agenda may differ from ours. Our first allegiance is to TBA and how we function, our history and idealism's, our family of families, our premise on education and worship. These, in most cases, are totally different from Temple Beth Zion.

 Temple Beth Am is my life and I am sure, many of yours. We need to look at the issues being placed before us very carefully. The future of Temple Beth Am is in your hands along with the members of our congregation.

 Thank you for listening to me. I really started out planning to write one paragraph and look what happened.  I miss all of you and look forward to seeing you in the spring.

Marlene Glickman