Weekly Update 18

December 27, 2024

Hello everyone.

You are welcome to comment, ask questions, and of course invite friends and acquaintances to subscribe to the newsletter—send me their email addresses and I’ll add them to the mailing list. Thank you to everyone who sent in questions and highlighted issues that need to be addressed or investigated.

People have contacted me saying the newsletter is too long, so they don’t read it. So from now on, I’ll include a summary at the beginning of the newsletter for the longer topics. But I still recommend that you continue reading the full text below.

Summary of the first topic: At the last council meeting, the council head succeeded in convincing the council members to vote in favor of the council joining as a developer in a construction plan to build a conference/event hall for the “Ohel Yaakov” Great Synagogue in the center of the town, on the public open space located on the western side of the synagogue (where there is currently a large tree and benches). This area and the synagogue building are owned by the council, so it is completely unclear why the council needs to act as a developer for a construction project—this is only required when the land is not fully owned by the council or when the party promoting the plan is the landowner.

Important—it is important for you to know that the Haifa District Planning and Construction Committee has already rejected an identical plan in the past because, after all, this is a historic site of national value. This fact was concealed from the council members. Worse still, the council head has once again, during his current term, submitted the plan to the District Committee without going through the council’s Preservation Committee and without preparing a documentation file as required by law or presenting such a file if one actually exists. Only the district committee’s demands forced him to disclose his intentions regarding this site to council members. I was the only one who voted against it because this is a historic site also designated as a national site, and because once again they withheld important information from us and caused the other council members to vote in favor without full information.

This is an area belonging to the council, and to prevent the council head from deciding on it alone, the law requires a series of approvals within the council. Abutbul did not bother to obtain them. Only the district committee’s demand prompted him to suddenly request the council’s approval to prepare documentation files or to enter the construction plan as a developer. And despite the concealment of this important information, the council members voted in favor of the plan.

The second issue relates to the lack of attention paid to the moshava; unfortunately, it is brief and does not require a summary.

The first issue combines history, preservation, development, and the withholding of information from council members. The Great Synagogue, Ohel Yaakov, was built in 1886 by Baron Rothschild, and as a mark of respect, the moshava’s founders immortalized his father’s name—Yaakov—within it. This is the most magnificent of all the synagogues built by Baron Rothschild; the Baron used to converse with the residents of Zichron Yaakov there. The synagogue is one of the most important historical sites in the town and among all the First Aliyah settlements. This synagogue belongs to the council but is operated and maintained by the synagogue committee.

Adjacent to the synagogue is a plot of land that currently features a large tree and benches. The synagogue committee is requesting this area to build a conference/event hall where they will host, for a fee, Shabbat Chatan meals, refreshments for Bar Mitzvahs, study sessions, and more. However, the building and the land are owned by the Council, so the committee needs the Council to submit development plans for the event hall. Who will finance the construction if it is approved? It is unclear.

I personally believe it is a mistake and a historical folly to build an event hall in the heart of the moshava, adjacent to a historic heritage site. There is historical beauty in the area, and it can be enhanced with appropriate paving, lighting, landscaping, and more. But the council head thinks otherwise, and already during his previous term he promoted a plan to build the event hall. We were fortunate that the district committee at the time rejected the plan because, after all, it is a heritage site.

In his current term, Abutbul has once again submitted the plan to the district committee without holding a preliminary discussion in the council’s preservation committee, as required by law regarding historic buildings—and all the more so for a national heritage site. This is land that belongs to the council, so the law establishes a comprehensive approval process to ensure that the council head does not act arbitrarily with council assets. But Abutbul simply bypassed the Allocations Committee (apparently, they aren’t responding to me), the Preservation Committee (he certainly didn’t receive their approval, and only after the plenary session was it announced that there would be a discussion in this important committee), and the council members (he didn’t approach us and didn’t receive our approval). Only the demands of the District Committee in this round as well forced it to bring the plan to the council meeting. Otherwise, we would have known nothing again.

At the last council meeting on 12/3/24, we discussed the submission of the plan to the District Committee and the council’s entry as a developer—it is unclear why the council wants to define itself as a developer for an area of which it is the sole owner. You will agree with me that constructing such a new building in the heart of the historic-tourist area requires caution, careful consideration, and a series of approvals from various bodies. Exactly the opposite happened at the meeting—neither caution nor transparency in the information. The way the meeting was conducted regarding this important clause is yet another example of what appears to be intentional withholding of information and the presentation of a partial picture to council members.

I was the only one who voted against it. All other council members—coalition and opposition alike—voted in favor. My fellow council members and party members have the right to think differently and support the construction of an event hall on historic land. But for their decision to be well-founded, they must know all the facts. If the reasons why the District Committee had already rejected the plan twice had been read aloud during the meeting!!—perhaps they would have been convinced that the committee was right and not the council chair. If it had been stated during the meeting which approvals had not been received (from the council’s Preservation Committee), perhaps they would have voted differently. If the members of the Allocations Committee participating in the plenary session had spoken up during the discussion, but that information was not provided. I warned during the meeting that information was missing; I tried to reveal some of it—but I was the only one. I want to believe that if they had understood that the council head had bypassed them and the entire process and had already submitted the plan during the previous and current terms without informing them—they would not have voted in favor of it.

I didn’t receive any answers during the meeting, so afterward I emailed the council’s Allocation Committee, and for nearly a month now they haven’t responded to my follow-up emails.

The Allocation Committee consists solely of the authority’s professional staff, namely: the legal advisor, treasurer, secretary, engineer, and deputy treasurer, who is also responsible for managing the authority’s assets. At the conclusion of the process, they submit their recommendations for approval by the plenary session, which is the sovereign body responsible for deciding on the committee’s recommendations. The law specifically stipulates that approval of allocations of land belonging to the council shall not rest with the council head (you understand why), but only after a professional committee makes a recommendation to the council plenary following an orderly procedure; only then, and only then, will the council members decide—not the council head.

Below are the questions to which I requested answers due to the missing information:

1. During Abutbul’s current term, the district committee has already rejected a similar request submitted by the council to build the hall. What is in the plan submitted by the council, and how was the preparation of the plan funded if the council did not approve it and was unaware of it?
2. Given that the building is a strictly protected historic structure, was an opinion from the Council for the Preservation of Historic Sites obtained before the plans were submitted to the District Committee, or did the council consult with them on the matter and receive their opinion?
3. Why did the Council’s Preservation Committee not discuss the matter before submitting it to the District Committee, and only after the plenary session was it noted that the Preservation Committee would discuss the matter?
4. What is the connection between a new association that was suddenly established and this entire process? My investigation prior to the meeting revealed that, remarkably, the “Ohel Yaakov Synagogue Association” was established in August of this year; the association’s address is the address of the synagogue. It was unclear to me—is it possible for a private association to register its address as the address of the synagogue, which is public property that has not undergone an allocation process? Or is the council’s approval, through its authorized signatories, required to register a private association at a public property?  

I am attaching a link to the Registrar of Associations website: https://www.guidestar.org.il/organization/580797108

I will continue to appeal up the chain of command to the Ministry of the Interior and the State Comptroller, as it is unacceptable that they refuse to provide me with information they are legally obligated to disclose. I have already written in previous newsletters about my many other inquiries that went unanswered. A great deal of information has not been provided to me.

The second issue: Are young people in Zichron Yaakov only half a person?

Are soldiers, young people, and reservists not important to the mayor?

The mayor has decided to cut the position of Youth Center Director to a half-time position (from a full-time position to 50% starting in January 2025).

Precisely at a time when the town’s youth community needs expanded services, activities, and resources, the mayor has decided to cut the important position of Youth Center Director.

In recent years, the Youth Center Director has successfully managed:

• the entire scholarship program of the council and the Israel Lottery (approximately 80 scholarship recipients each year)
• Appreciation events for soldiers, assistance with all matters related to community support for soldiers and reservists,
• successful collaboration with the local branch of the Association for the Well-being of Soldiers
• Providing discounts and free admission to soldiers at council events,
• Workshops for discharged soldiers – “Journey to the Horizon,”
• The “Accelerator” program—a regional entrepreneurship center for young people,
• Parenting workshops for young families, and more.

This cut is simply unacceptable, and unfortunately, it adds to other facts on the ground that demonstrate the appalling treatment of young people in the community:

The council head decided not to establish the youth center at 100 HaMeyasdim (where everything is almost ready for occupancy)—a space prepared for activities and gatherings for the town’s youth. 

Plans developed during the previous term to support young people—including hiring a dedicated coordinator for active-duty soldiers, a coordinator for young families, a career placement coordinator, and more—are not being advanced. These are initiatives that exist in other communities and are very successful.

Happy Hanukkah

Limor Zar-Guttman