Friday, January 25, 2008

The Good Old Bad Old Days

Let's end a contentious week with a little nostalgia.

Several Comments this week with regard to the halcyon days of yore -- the years of the UJA -- a couple dissing UJA and UJA lay and professional leaders almost in rage and others questioning what was it really like, inspired us to examine what we see and ask ourselves that very question: "what was it like"? In Tateh's Comment earlier today she related a former Federation exec's memories:

"....he said that in the old days UJA provided speakers and outside
solicitors, gave a good brand name for the campaign (UJA), ran good
missions and a young leadership cabinet...and about once a year sent
someone to berate the allocations committee.....(whom) nobody listened
to..."

We understand that to be a pretty good summary if one also adds: created the Lion of Judah Endowment, the Campaign Chairs/Directors Mission; the Voyage of Discovery and every Special Campaign. We know much of this from history because so few of the old UJA leaders walk our halls any more -- Arlene Kaufman, Rani Garfinkle, Rich Wexler, Mark Wilf, Joel Alperson, Jane Sherman and maybe a few others whom we can count on the fingers of our two hands. Many have moved on to lead other organizations and chair their federations. And the professional staff has become denuded of those who once toiled at UJA.

We have heard that UJA was a "self-perpetuating oligarchy" but we have also heard that these were leaders who "cared," gave to their capacity and beyond and, in their demands on others to meet their own giving standards, created jealousies, some of which have so lasted to these days that we have received bizarre Posts from a few who can't get beyond those days that ended 8 years ago. We have been told that UJA Budget meetings lasted two days over which lay and professional leaders battled over priorities in a respectful (and sometimes not so respectful) give and take focused on how best to use donors' money in the best interests of the Jewish People. Today, we know, the UJC Budget meeting lasts maybe four hours including lunch with no "battles" tolerated..

One thing we know first-hand is that these leaders -- these men and women -- were nuts!! They would see each other in the halls at 111 (when more of them walked those halls) and suddenly they would be hugging and kissing, reminiscing in laughter. They actually loved each other -- a love that grew from sharing a common passion and a common cause...and some leaders outside UJA or on its fringes resented the love and passion that those crazy folks shared.

Sounds idyllic? Maybe because it ended eight years ago, and culturally at 111 Eighth Avenue we bear no relationship to those "UJA years," it's more mythic than real to us. Today we're owned by the federations who, but for a few, seem to have little interest in how their resources are being spent and no interest in the joyless space we occupy. If they cared, UJC could and would be so different.

Could that culture of passionate expression that was UJA be revived? We think so -- really restructure UJC; divide responsibilities between Campaign/ Community Building (Annual and Supplemental) and Allocations/Program/Washington/UJC Israel; restore the National Campaign Chair to her/his rightful role (as contemplated in the merger that created UJC) as a co-equal to the Chair of the Board (but responsible only for fund raising), elevate the Campaign Cabinet to Vice-Chairs status and raise the profile of the CEO/Campaign-Capacity Building sufficiently to attract once again the best and brightest to the position -- for starters.

And, find lay Chairs like a Marvin Lender, a Shoshana Cardin, a Charles Goodman, a Carole Solomon, a David Hermelin, z'l, to take us there with a chief professional partner who emulate Stanley Horowitz, Steve Nasatir, Bob Aronson, Steve Hoffman or John Ruskay. Then, see how we do!!!

Shabbat shalom

4 comments:

Jon said...

History may be bunk, but nostalgia can be dangerous when it mythologizes the past and misleads the present. UJA and CJF were complex organizations and cultures, both individually and in their relationship to one another. Both had strengths and flaws. Both had vision and blind spots. There were some wonderful leaders then, and there are some wonderful -- no less caring and committed -- leaders now. (And some less so, then and now.)

To boys/girls: I think you know who I am and where to find me (down the hall). Come by and I'd be happy to talk about what UJA and CJF were like, how they got that way and why, the whole geschichte. Also, why going back to the past won't solve the problems of the present, much less build the future you obviously care deeply about. And I promise I won't "out" you. Or you can email me privately.

Shabbat shalom.

Ploni Almoni said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
tomtug said...

Dear Disunited,

veteran said...

Dear Disunited,
My name is Tom Tugend. I am an LA-based journalist for the LA Jewish Journal. JTA, Jerusalem Post, London Jewish Chronicle, etc. I wrote an article on the Bubis/Windmueller critique of UJC when it first came out and I want to take another look at the situation in light of your Dec. blog. I talked to Jerry and Steve, who backed the accuracy of your statements. Could you please let me know:
(1) why you dicided to resurrect the matter at this time? What is happening within UJC to make the earlier Bubis criticisms and recommendations valid and relevant now? Is power now more concentrated in the hands of big city federation executives and has the share going to Israel proportionately declined? What are some of the key people on both sides (with phone nos. if possible) whom you would interview if you were in my shoes?
I'm new at the blog game, and it would probably work best if you could e-mail me at tomtu@pacbell.net or phone me at 818-783-4135.
Thanks a lot, Tom