The board of this city’s local Jewish federation overwhelmingly rejected a controversial resolution to prohibit support of events and groups that “defame” Israel or partner with those who call for boycotts, divestment or sanctions (BDS) against Israel.
Instead, at its Nov. 19 meeting, the board of directors passed a differently worded resolution opposing the anti-Israel BDS movement.
After what acting federation CEO Jennifer Gorovitz called a “lively and respectful and open discussion,” the board rejected two resolutions proposed by San Francisco resident Anat Pilovsky. Among the some 40 directors present, Pilovsky provided the only aye votes and resigned from the board the next day.
“The board was rejecting not the principle but an overly simplistic formula that would have made the federation the decider and enforcer-in-chief of very subjective language,” Gorovitz said.
The vote was the latest chapter in a debate over the limits of criticizing Israel and whether the local federation should use the power of the purse to enforce any red lines.
The controversy dates back to last summer’s San Francisco Jewish Film Festival—which regularly receives support from the federation, including $35,000 this year—and the screening of “Rachel,” a documentary about pro-Palestinian activist Rachel Corrie, who was killed in 2003 by an Israeli army bulldozer in Gaza. (Israel insists the incident was an accident.)
Particularly upsetting to some federation and festival donors was the festival’s decision to invite Corrie’s mother, Cindy, to speak at the event. Some critics also were upset that one of the sponsors of the “Rachel” screening was the group Jewish Voice for Peace, which according to its Web site supports divestment from companies that “profit from Israel’s occupation of the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem.”
Upset over federation funding of the film festival, an ad hoc group of federation donors, board members and community activists began lobbying federation staff, lay leadership and donors to demand the organization take action.
The activists drafted a resolution that called on the federation to withdraw support of “events or organizations that demonize or defame Israel. Nor will it support organizations that partner in their events with individuals or groups that call for [BDS] against Israel.”
A full-page ad in the Nov. 13 issue of the local Jewish newspaper included the text of the proposal and urged board members to pass the resolution. Three dozen community members signed the ad. In the final resolution put before the board, the word “demonize” had been removed.
Instead, the board opted to replicate a resolution passed Nov. 9 in Washington at the General Assembly of the Jewish Federations of North America that called for an “effective response” and “proactive strategy” to oppose the BDS movement, along with training, education and community mobilization efforts.
Gorovitz said the goal of the resolution passed at the GA was “to heighten awareness of all federations of the urgency of the BDS issue, and to ensure that the national system is committed to exploring how best to respond to the tactic.”
At last week’s meeting in San Francisco, which was closed to the press and other visitors, the board approved a change in the local federation’s grant transmittal letters to beneficiary agencies stressing the need to “utilize resources such as the Jewish Community Relations Council in advance of potentially controversial programs,” according to a federation statement.
The board also voted to form a working group to explore “various diverse pro-Israel voices regarding the boundaries of grantees expression on Israel beyond BDS,” according to Gorovitz.
Pilovsky proposed that several community activists, none of whom currently sit on the federation board, join the working group to help devise solutions and give them voting power. This proposal also was rejected.
Pilovsky said the passed measures are “a good start” but do not go far enough. Referring to the festival’s “Rachel” event, she said the approved resolutions “do not address the issue of this kind of fiasco happening again.”
The Israel-born Pilovsky, a two-time co-chair of the federation’s annual campaign, lobbied her fellow board members for several weeks before the board meeting.
While she admitted she did not expect her resolutions to pass, she also did not expect to be the only person voting aye.
“I was shocked,” she said. “I talked to six people [who] said, ‘Yes I will support you, I’ll be there,’ and when it came to the vote, suddenly there was nobody. When the meeting was over, I took my papers and I walked out. Nobody said a word to me.”
Despite her disappointment, Pilovsky said she does not advocate donors upset about federation policy withholding their annual gifts.
“The only reason I am doing what I’m doing is I want the federation to be successful,” she said. “I’m trying to help them. I hope they will turn around, change the resolution and go back to business as normal.”
In response to Pilovsky’s resignation, Gorovitz said, “We’re saddened that a disagreement about how to handle this has caused her discomfort.”
Even as Gorovitz defended the board’s decision, she said that one reason the controversy has lingered is because the federation was not more forceful last summer in criticizing the festival.
“One reason this festered … was the festival not only crossed the line from art to politics but did so in a way that was careless,” Gorovitz said. “When that led to an event that was abhorrent to the community, the federation ought to have been out in front by declaring outrage over the behavior.”
At the time of the screening, the federation released a cautiously worded statement noting the organization “objected to the recent Film Festival event that featured Rachel Corrie’s mother as a speaker. The Federation expects its grantees to exercise responsibility and respect with regard to sensitive program choices.”
More news and opinions than at a Shabbat dinner, right in your inbox.