What's the story with the 99 year lease to Chabad Youth? I thought they were part of "yeshiva". Is this another scam like the W Hall?
Curious | 24.05.08 - 10:11 pm | #

Curious, How is W Hall a scam?
whatever | 25.05.08 - 9:47 am | #

I believe the price for hiring the mezzanine and hall doubled last week.
Expensive | 25.05.08 - 1:15 pm | #

What I mean is private individuals (or family groups) building on yeshiva's land.
Curious | 25.05.08 - 2:21 pm | #

If it’s a part of the Yeshivah Centre than why do they need a lease, in fact if something went wrong you cannot remove the Chabad Youth Management
Curious | | 25.05.08 - 3:07 pm | #

Will a particular donor's name be attached to the new building?

The 99-year lease appears to be a mechanism to retain control of the building separate from the school management. This can have many implications. For example, if a donor retains control of a building directly/indirectly, they may not be legally entitled to a tax deduction for the 'donation'.
scam? | 25.05.08 - 4:42 pm | #

Does anyone know what happened at the meeting in A'Beckett St today?
wondering | 25.05.08 - 6:03 pm | #

The issue is very simple, a 99 yr. lease for a minimal fee is the same as if he got a $1 million dollars as a gift and there isn't any öne donor"for the building, there will be a major fund raising campaign to raise the money.
As far as tax deduction, Chabad Youth have their own facilities.
The end result of all this is it will be a Chabad House for Chabad Youth and Young Marrieds. A private entity with a gift of a $1 million dollars from the Yeshiva.
Curious | | 26.05.08 - 5:12 am | #

as I am led to believe, Chabad Youth did the menshlich thing and met with the residents very early on - in fact, they have made a number of key changes to the initial plans based on concerns raised by the residents
'keen observor' | 28.05.08 - 11:55 am | #

How is it "menshlich" to build a private chabad house on community land?
farshtei nit | 28.05.08 - 2:38 pm | #

farshtei nit

indeed, you do not seem to understand

my comments relate to the issues raised by neighbours which has nothing to do with from whom the land is being leased - I make no comment nor observation on that issue
'keen observor' | 28.05.08 - 7:25 pm | #

The talk in Shule is that the expense of chinuch, a million dollar gift was given to a private entity instead of being used for the purposes of Chinuch. Just think of what could be done with a million dollars for the purposes of improving the Education our children are getting. Better pay for teachers, etc, etc.
There are an awful lot of people upset at this situation.
M.S. | 29.05.08 - 12:20 pm | #

You say "Hopefully the Yeshivah Executive will make an honest attempt to answer the objections in a sensitive way." Such over-the-top sarcasm is (not) warranted. When pigs become kosher l'osid, and I see them flying outside my window, maybe.
a concerned shul member | 29.05.08 - 12:28 pm | #

To 'keen observor': I believe one of the "key changes" was from 4 to 3.5 floors. And "issues raised by neighbours" include those bothering other people in Yeshiva centre: bosor b'cholov, v'dal.
a concerned shul member | 29.05.08 - 12:37 pm | #

MS: "The talk in Shule is that the expense of chinuch, a million dollar gift was given to a private entity instead of being used for the purposes of Chinuch"...who/what drove this decision?
whatever | 29.05.08 - 4:12 pm | #

How is it "menshlich" to build a private chabad house on community land?
who cares about 4 floors
or 3 floors or bothering people
he issue is
gift of a $1 million dollars
M.S. | 29.05.08 - 4:27 pm | #

MS wrote: "a million dollar gift was given to a private entity instead of being used for the purposes of Chinuch. Just think of what could be done with a million dollars for the purposes of improving the Education our children are getting. Better pay for teachers, etc, etc."
Wouldn't the million dollars come from a Building Fund which is not available for day to day chinuch expenses?
whatever | 29.05.08 - 4:44 pm | #

i cannot believe that this is an issue. Chabad youth has changed the lives of so many young people in our community and it is a disgrace that people are making such a big deal about this
anon | 29.05.08 - 4:51 pm | #

The people who collect money for Yeshivah and take around 50% commission must be laughing. Is that $500,000 commission to them or $1M.?
Yeshivah | 29.05.08 - 6:28 pm | #

'Private Chabad house'?! What does that mean? Yeshivah/chabad intl./Chabad Melbourne/Chabad youth, are one and the same: public service that benefit tons of people, amongst them, some of the neighbors complaining!
I don’t get this whole thing of 'private Chabad house' on yeshivah property. It’s the same Rabbi Groner behind both!!
anon | 29.05.08 - 4:51 pm, i cant agree with you more!!
stam | 30.05.08 - 1:32 am | #

ANON
I agree Moishe Kahn does an excellent job,but so do Rabbi Yurkowitz and Rabbi Mendy Groner but they didn't receive a million dollar gift from the Yeshiva to set themselves up.
One also has to take into account that Rabbi Kahn is on the Yeshiva payroll but he is running his own private entity.
M.S. | 30.05.08 - 4:42 am | #

Where are all those many people who respect Rabbi Groner? Can't they see how he is now being taken advantage of, in he old age, when he doesn't have the koach to stand up to these people siphoning off bits of yeshiva land and mosdos to their family members??
farshtei nit | 30.05.08 - 1:15 pm | #

farshtei
you are so right
M.S. | 30.05.08 - 5:00 pm | #

Clearly the people living in A'beckett St will have an issue with the twice a week "upto midnight" functions.
There is nothing wrong with Chabad Youth having there own complex.But my concern is that it takes away from the very much needed playing area that our school needs. If Moshe Kahn wants to have his own set up.. by all means, but he should do it elswhere.
The kids of our school don't need to see the comings and goings of boys and girls, whose timing will inevitably be mixed, no matter how much policing is promised.
This reeks of nepotism anyway.
Farshtei yeh | 03.06.08 - 4:35 pm | #

Clearly the people living in A'beckett St will have an issue with the twice a week "upto midnight" functions.

And clearly if they do they will respond to the letters which they have been clearly sent, and respond to the clear notices that have been clearly posted in accordance with Council regulations asking for their clear views on this subject. Clearly.


There is nothing wrong with Chabad Youth having there own complex.

You lack faith in yourself. Of course you'll be able to find something wrong with it if you put your mind to it.


But my concern is that it takes away from the very much needed playing area that our school needs.

So do the school buildings and the synagogue. The plan is to demolish two semi-derelict houses and to replace them with a single building. The actual playing area loss will be minimal.

If Moshe Kahn wants to have his own set up..

I'm not Moshe Kahn, but I think that Chabad Youth ought to have had its own building years ago. I count many of its past directors as friends, and I well recall the soul-destroying grovelling they had to do to get the least bit of support or use of amenities. This is a wonderful and exciting era for Chabad Youth.

... by all means, but he should do it elswhere.

And thereby preserve the back of Yeshivah as a monument to Ick.

The kids of our school don't need to see the comings and goings of boys and girls,

Indeed not. To start with, the building's entrance is outside the school. I presume that few of the activities at the centre will be during school hours, and that even fewer will be during the moments that the kids of "our school" (do you have any children there yourself?) spend outside the classroom. And, in any event, if they want to leer at members of the opposite sex walking into a building then they can see this any day of the week, on any street in Australia.

This reeks of nepotism anyway.

See, I knew you could think of a reason if you tried!
Joe in Australia | 04.06.08 - 7:33 am | #

Joe, your sarcastic wit, so typical, but thanks for your "Raivad type" commentary on my comments.
we have agreed on most of the points.
Farshtei yeh | 04.06.08 - 10:20 am | #

It not "menshlich" to build a private chabad house on community land is the issue
ms | 04.06.08 - 11:16 am | #

Will someone please explain..

1. The new propsed building always remains the property of the Yeshivah?

Yes or no?

2. Is the Yeshivah funding this project?

Yes or no?

3. If not, i.e. Moshe Kahn's backers will, what is the problem? The Yeshivah owns the asset but leases it out, I assume as a guarantee to Moshe's backers that that he/Chabad Youth will not be evicted, unless they breach (consistantly) the conditions of the lease.

Is that a problem?

Yes or no?

All the other issues such as neighbours, parking etc, will no doubt be addressed by Council.

Assuming all the building permit requirements are dealt with and Council subsequently gives it's approval, what is still bothering people?

Let's face it, neither Kahn nor anyone else will be able to sell that asset, thereby no-one is really profiteering from this whole exercise.....no one will be around at the end of the mooted (how true is it anyway) 99 year lease, so what the heck is all the fuss about?

That Kahn is related to the heirarchy? So what? He's either the right man for the job or he is not.

So far he appears to be the right one.
Nu? | 04.06.08 - 7:03 pm | #

I think you guys are missing the point. This is nothing to do with personalities or the Yeshivha Centre as such. As a neighbour to Yeshivah the protests are against the noise and parking issues which this centre will create. If you look at the website www.92HothamStreet.org you can see some well worded letters from other neighbours. I just noticed that photos of the plans have appeared on that website. From the plans it looks like this new building will be taller than the New and Mochkin buildings. Fortunately my backyard is not overlooked by this so I will be spared some of the noise. Wjat will effect me is the parking issues on Hotham Street.
I don't think anyone is against Chabad Youth haviing their own centre but this location is not the one that is suitable for it.
A neighbour | 04.06.08 - 8:34 pm | #

NU, The issue is very simple, a 99 yr. lease for a minimal fee is the same as if he got a $1 million dollars as a gift.
The end result of all this is it will be a Chabad House for Chabad Youth and Young Marrieds. A private entity with a gift of a $1 million dollars from the Yeshiva.
ms | 04.06.08 - 11:43 pm | #

Just received Zephania's email. Very sad to see nothing has changed at Yeshivah. The Golden Rule at work.
Yeshivah | 05.06.08 - 3:18 am | #

I think that everyone is missing the point, there is nothing wrong with Moshe Kahn having a Chabad House but as many opinions say it shouldn't be on A'Beckett St. And you have to ask yourself why does he want it on A'Beckett Street, the answer is very simple if he went anywhere else he would have to pay a million dollars for the land, while here a 99 year lease is the same as a gift of the land and because there is a lease in place it becomes a private entity.
ms | 05.06.08 - 9:23 am | #

The neighbours opposing the development have valid reasons; if I lived there I'd probably do the same. There's a process for weighing the interests of neighbours against those of the broader community, and it looks as though that process is underway.

My own view is that the location is presently underutilised: it has two decaying houses that are unsuited to any reasonable use the Yeshivah Centre might make of them. I think that any redevelopment would necessarily be a multi-story building. There simply isn't enough available land to build anything less.

As for the suggestion that the Chabad Youth Centre be built elsewhere: where do you suggest? It isn't as though there's a lot of land available in this neighbourhood. Furthermore, there are good reasons to think of Chabad Youth as a feeder for both the Yeshivah school and synagogue, much as B'nai Akiva is a feeder for Mizrachi/Yavneh. Making it physically part of the Yeshivah Centre (where it has historically been) maintains that link.
Joe in Australia | 05.06.08 - 5:19 pm | #

A $1, 99-year lease on the property ??? it becomes a private entity not the Yeshivah Centre
ms | 05.06.08 - 9:27 pm | #

Yeshivah, Zephania's email?...Golden rule?...please enlighten us
email | 05.06.08 - 10:43 pm | #

THE ISSUE IS NOT ZEPHANIA, The issue is very simple, a 99 yr. lease for a minimal fee is the same as if he got a $1 million dollars as a gift.
The end result of all this is it will be a Chabad House for Chabad Youth and Young Marrieds. A private entity with a gift of a $1 million dollars from the Yeshiva Centre
ms | 06.06.08 - 1:16 am | #

isn't Chabad Youth raising it's own money. If so Yeshivah is only giving the land
email | 06.06.08 - 7:48 am | #

AM I THE ONLY PERSON HERE ABLE TO RECOGNIZE THE SECURITY RISKS??? 92hothamstreet.org published plans that include the ENTIRE yeshiva (not including Beth Rivkah) complex... THIS IS A JEWISH SCHOOL!!! Whoever posted those is a complete moron...
Rachmiel Travitz (at least im | 06.06.08 - 3:50 pm | #

Yes, it is certainly a security risk and those responsible should take it off the net immediately!

Anyone who complains about the building plans will be bullied the Powers That Be with threats regarding their jobs if they work at Yeshiva, or threats regarding taking away educational services for their kids, or with general demonisation and loshon hora. The PTB will also use divide and conquer tactics to make sure the aggrieved cannot achieve anything to stop the PTB's plans. These communistic tactics have been used by them for years and they work simply because too many people in our community are so easily intimidated and they cave in like soft mush.
SS | 07.06.08 - 9:07 pm | #

if i was a resident of abeckett you'd have my vote against this building. my property would go down down DOWN.

secondly,
how can a building be separte for both boys and girls? are you going to make specific hours? is the building going to be split into 2?
id ont' get it - at the busy times of the year - yomim tovim, functions, camps - both boys and girls need access to the building at all hours of the day.how do they propose to make it feasible that they wont' mix?
i don't see it as ideal at ALL.

whoever brought up the point about mendy groner not getting a million bucks for a chabad house is 100% right.
so if i want to open up something tomorrow, will yeshivah give me the land too?
(we need more kinders btw - we could use the land for that...)
thank G-d my house isnt' on ab | 07.06.08 - 10:32 pm | #

Do other people understand, the PTB could care less about the mixing of the kids. Its all about numbers: quantity of kids and making kesef, full stop.
SS | 07.06.08 - 11:22 pm | #

I don't want to spoil SS's fun, but 92hothamstreet.org actually opposes the proposed development. I can't see why Yeshiva's administration would be bothered if you complained about the plans being up there. Anyway, the building plans are available from the Glen Eira council if nowhere else, so any terrorists with an interest in depressingly plain Miesian boxes need do no more than pay the council a visit.
Joe in Australia | 08.06.08 - 12:25 pm | #

THE ISSUE IS NOT SECURITY RISKS. The issue is very simple, a 99 yr. lease for a minimal fee is the same as if he got a $1 million dollars as a gift.
The end result of all this is it will be a Chabad House for Chabad Youth and Young Marrieds. A private entity with a gift of a $1 million dollars from the Yeshiva Centre
ms | 08.06.08 - 3:11 pm | #

I don't think the executive nor R Groner should have the RIGHT to give away yeshiva property to anyone. Eventually (hopefully before 99 years) yeshiva management will change, but the 99 year lease will last for generations. Seems to me, they are trying to preempt that very situation with "facts on the ground". The community should not allow this.
farshtei nit | 08.06.08 - 4:17 pm | #

im no fan of the yeshivah ideals and the people that run it but also no fan of the abeckett street people. BUT just IMAGINE you lived there and the noiuse ...comon people wake up and smell the coffee! it is destined to be a disaster. just read ZW email and am appled thge way the yeshivah admin have gone about things. would you have done anything diffrently if you lived in abecket street. i KNOW I WOULDNT HAVE, maybe kahn would be here if i had my way
please understand | 09.06.08 - 3:31 am | #

I don't understand what is involved in a 99 year lease.

If after 10, 30, 50 years, the community or even the PTB, wants the space for classrooms etc or does not agree with how the place is being running, where does that leave you.
Ignoramus | 11.06.08 - 1:03 am | #

The residents of A'Beckett street have a right to lodge their protest to the proposed building to the council. The residents should not have anything to apologise for since they are protecting their own personal interests. At the same time, certain residents are trying to make this into a community issue when it is not. This is an issue between the parties involved and only them.

The intimidation and the bullying tactics being used by the PTB are already having their desired affect At least one resident openly admits to backing down from protesting because he is afraid his children will be made to suffer in yeshiva.

The PTB are made up of certain individuals who feel the Yeshiva is their own private enterprise for themselves and their families and they can do with it whatever they please. The original founders had awesome mesiras nefesh to establish this mosod and one can just imagine how disgusted and ashamed they would be at how certain people use it for their own selfish gain with no regard for its original mission.
SS | 11.06.08 - 2:55 am | #

Ignoramus: V'ahavta l'reacha c'mocha implies that you have to love yourself as well. I'm sure people don't consider you to be an ignoramus.

Leases are contracts. As long as the lessee (Chabad Youth) follows the terms of the contract then they have a right to use the premises. I haven't seen the contract, and it's quite possible that it has a term which would allow Yeshiva to break the lease if, e.g. Chabad Youth went and leased the building to someone else. I know that I'd be concerned about things like this if I were responsible for the lease.

Readers of this web log will remember that I generally support the right of Yeshiva to keep its commercial decisions private. In this case I don't: financial agreements between two community-supported organisations ought to be made openly. Mind you, for all I know the lease has been made publicly available, or at least would be made available if anyone were to ask for a copy. Perhaps someone here would be interested in asking for a copy?
Joe in Australia | 11.06.08 - 9:23 am | #

I don't understand what is involved in a 99 year lease.The 99 yr. lease for a minimal fee is the same as if he got a $1 million dollars as a gift.
ms | 11.06.08 - 4:06 pm | #

Thank you Joe in Australia for your kind words.

I am an ignoramus, as the older I get, everything that I thought was important to be being an ethical Jew, seems contradicted by the PTB in so many communites. One consolation is ms doesn't understand either. PS, Why would the PTB need a lease in the first place?

I think Beth Rivkah should be given to Mr G, who had done an amazing job, for 99 years too.
Ignoramus | 11.06.08 - 7:57 pm | #

This 99 year lease is interesting.
If Chabad Youth is part of the Yeshivah Centre, why does it need a lease at all?
Does Mr G and company pay anything or have any sort of lease for Beth Rivkah?
Does Ohel Chana pay anything or lease the property? Even thought it may be considered an entity in it's own right?
Does the Kollel Menachem pay any rent or lease that part of building? Amd it is an entity in its own right!
And what about Daminyan, also run by Moshe Kahn, does it pay any rent for its' use of the sections of the building in Beth Rivkah.
People, you can arrive at your own conclusions.
If it is a gift of land to Moshe Kahn, as many have suggested here, who is giving it? In this instance Ich farshtei NISHT. where is the transparency?
Farshtei yeh | 12.06.08 - 3:08 am | #

Joe in Australia,
Everyone knows that a 99 year lease cannot be broken since the plans that are with the council are self-explanatory for the use of the premises and no one will vary the lease. Therefore its impossible to break that lease.
As most people in the community are asking, why is the lease necessary? The simple answer is,it becomes a Chabad House that will be totally under the control of Moshe Kahn, it definitely will not be a part of the Yeshivah and the Executive will have no say in it whatsoever.
I definitely agree that if you are going to give away the Yeshivahs assets that Beth Rivka would be the most eligibile to get a 99 year lease under the same terms as Chabad Youth.
The issue is very simple, a majority of the people in the Yeshivah are very upset that Real Estate is being transferred to a private entity.
pp | 12.06.08 - 10:55 am | #

As long as they are handing out freebies, would it please be possible for me to have a kindy. I would be happy there amongst honest people.
Ignoramus | 12.06.08 - 11:24 am | #

Joe in Australia,
Everyone knows that a 99 year lease cannot be broken since the plans that are with the council are self-explanatory for the use of the premises and no one will vary the lease.

I don't follow your logic here. Let's say that the lessor (I presume is Chabad Youth) decided to rent the building to Habonim Dror. Is this contrary to the proposed use? No. But if it's contrary to the terms of their lease then the Yeshiva Center might be able to void the contract.

Alternatively, suppose that Chabad Youth decided to rent the building to some other sort of operation entirely - like a gymnasium. I don't know if the Council would have any way of objecting as long as the use fits within the area's zoning, but in the worst case scenario all that the gymnasium would need to do is apply for a variation. Unless the lease prevents Chabad Youth from subletting the building they could just rent it out to a gym (or whatever). This is why it all depends on the terms of the lease.

As most people in the community are asking, why is the lease necessary?

I presume it's because Chabad Youth wishes to have security of tenure in its occupation of land belonging to to another legal entity. In the old days Chabad Youth was a part of the Yeshiva Center, but I note that it's been incorporated for the past five years. If Chabad Youth didn't lease the land then the building would belong to the Yeshivah Center, which could expel Chabad Youth from the building any time it wanted to. The lease is the obvious and correct way to handle the legal issues.

[It]will be totally under the control of Moshe Kahn ... the Executive will have no say in it whatsoever.

Not necessarily. For all I know the Executive of the Yeshivah Centre are also the directors of Chabad Youth Inc. I'd be interested in knowing who the directors and shareholders are - does anyone know?

I definitely agree that if you are going to give away the Yeshivahs assets that Beth Rivka would be the most eligibile to get a 99 year lease ...

But Beth Rivkah is actually part of "The Yeshiva and Beth Rivkah Colleges Inc". It is only administratively distinct from the boys' school. In contrast, Chabad Youth is (I presume) Chabad Youth Inc, a distinct legal entity.
Joe in Australia | 12.06.08 - 8:34 pm | #

The freebies are only given to the chosen few (the PTB, their families and associates), the rest of us are still stuck making a a living the old fashioned way: by earning it.

I would much rather work hard and honestly, than live off the backs of the community like a parasite.
SS | 12.06.08 - 8:38 pm | #

The issue is very simple, a 99 yr. lease for a minimal fee is the same as if he got a $1 million dollars as a gift.
The end result of all this is it will be a Chabad House for Chabad Youth and Young Marrieds. A private entity with a gift of a $1 million dollars from the Yeshiva Centre
Chabad House next door to Yeshiva
ms | 12.06.08 - 9:49 pm | #

Joe,
If one is setting up a Chabad House obviously he is not going to change its use or sublease it.
As you state that Chabad Youth was incorporated for the past 5 years and you said the reason for the lease is because the Chabad Youth could be expelled by the Yeshivah Centre, clearly indicates that Chabad Youth is a private entity and therefore if it is seeking to build a Chabad House it clearly shows that Chabad Youth received a $1,000,000 gift from the Yeshivah Centre.
As far as the Yeshivah Executive board having some members on the Chabad Youth board, to my knowledge there is only one member involved in
Chabad Youth, but one would have to know the structure of the Executive Committee.
If one takes their time and reads the incorporation of the Yeshivah Centre, it clearly states that very few Executive members legally have any say whatsoever.
pp | 13.06.08 - 4:45 am | #

If one is setting up a Chabad House obviously he is not going to change its use or sublease it.

If that were to be the case I wouldn't see any problem. Formerly Chabad Youth had premises in one building of the Yeshivah Center; now it will have premises in a new building. Why should it matter if it has technically been leased to a different party? However, that is not the case. Suppose the lessor (Chabad youth) wanted to move to a new location. Surely it would be a good idea (from a financial perspective) for it to lease out its old premises. This might cause problems for the Yeshivah Center, and this is why the lease ought to prohibit sub-leasing.

As you state that Chabad Youth was incorporated for the past 5 years and you said the reason for the lease is because the Chabad Youth could be expelled by the Yeshivah Centre, clearly indicates that Chabad Youth is a private entity ...

It's not necessarily a private entity: that word implies that it's for the benefit of one or more individuals. It's legally distinct from The Yeshivah & Beth Rivkah Colleges Inc, but so is the Yeshivah - Beth Rivkah Parents' Association; so is the library; so is the tuckshop and the uniform shop. They're all separate legal entities. It is my belief that Chabad Youth Inc is more separate from the rest of the Yeshivah organisations than, say, the uniform shop - but that would be because its mission is not involved with the other activities of the Yeshivah Center to the same extent.

As far as the Yeshivah Executive board having some members on the Chabad Youth board, to my knowledge there is only one member involved in
Chabad Youth, but one would have to know the structure of the Executive Committee.
If one takes their time and reads the incorporation of the Yeshivah Centre, it clearly states that very few Executive members legally have any say whatsoever.

I don't know anything about the corporate structure of the Yeshivah Center. The Center's annual reports to ASIC will document this structure, but I suspect that Yeshivah's accountants have better things to do than supply me with copies of them and my interest doesn't extend to paying for corporate searches.
Joe in Australia | 13.06.08 - 12:21 pm | #

interesting to see this blog. some comments are spot on, some miss the point, some are 50/50. eg ss says "certain residents are trying to make this into a community issue when it is not": my email made it quite clear why some of the issues are most definitely community issues. anyone from the yeshivah community who wants further info etc is free to discuss it with me. by the way, i was approached by the jewish news today, after they received a composite email (not mine at all) from a yeshivah community member & interviewed the architect.
zephaniah waks | 13.06.08 - 3:42 pm | #

Joe, A $1,for a 99-year lease on the property you must be joking
pp | 13.06.08 - 5:05 pm | #

Joe, A $1,for a 99-year lease on the property you must be joking

I know nothing about the lease other than what has been reported here, but why do you think it's wrong for the Yeshivah Center to financially support Chabad Youth? It's been doing that for as long as I can remember.
Joe in Australia | 14.06.08 - 9:00 pm | #

I don't dee how the community can solve this matter. What are we suppossed to do about it? It can only be solved if thr aggrieved parties win their case through council.

The system of patronage and treating the mosod like a private enterprise has been going on for years but people only seem to worry about it when it affects them personally. So I do not see how this community is going to show any will to change anything. That is the reason I feel that bringing it out into the open as a community issue is futile and all it does is give people something to talk about.
SS | 14.06.08 - 9:35 pm | #

I also know nothing. Either MK is on the Yeshivah payroll or not. If he is on the payroll why would he need a lease? If he is not, why would he be getting 5,000 sq ft (or whatever it is) of Yeshivah for 99 years for free?
Ignoramus | 14.06.08 - 10:19 pm | #

Would the residents' concerns be addressed if the building was as per the plan but there was no entrance from A'Beckett St so that users of the building after hours would be encouraged to park in the school.
maybe | 15.06.08 - 12:37 pm | #

Ignoramus, MK is on the Yeshivah payroll
ms | 15.06.08 - 4:51 pm | #

So does that mean the PTB will sign a lease, with the PTB the lessee and the (same?) PTB the lessor? Boy am I confused.
Ignoramus | 16.06.08 - 1:53 am | #

Ignoramus,The issue is very simple, a 99 yr. lease for a $1 is the same as if he got a $1 million dollars or a block of land from Yeshivah. Chabad Youth is a private entity
ms | 16.06.08 - 9:15 am | #

So does that mean the PTB will sign a lease, with the PTB the lessee and the (same?) PTB the lessor? Boy am I confused.

I think this "PTB" nonsense makes everything more confusing than it needs to be. Basically, you have to remember that a company has many of the rights that a natural person has. Companies can enter into contracts and they do - every day.

When a natural person like you or I makes a contract we can do it in a number of ways. We can sign a piece of paper, we can "Yes, I agree," or whatever. Companies don't have hands or mouths and so they enter into contracts when the company directors (or the people they appoint) sign them on behalf of the company.

Now, the same person can be the director of more than one company. In fact, you can have any number of companies with the exact same directors and they are all legally distinct entities. Let's suppose that Fred Bloggs is a director of two companies: Bloggs Building Management and Bloggs Catering. He can sign a lease between those two companies on behalf of each of them. He signs it on behalf of Bloggs Building Management as the lessor, and on behalf of Bloggs Catering as the lessee. It's all very straightforward if you keep in mind that Fred Bloggs is just the agent through which the companies act. He isn't signing the leases personally.
Joe in Australia | 16.06.08 - 10:19 am | #

Ignoramus,I also know nothing. Either MK is on the Yeshivah payroll or not. If he is on the payroll why would he need a lease? If he is not, why would he be getting 5,000 sq ft (or whatever it is) of Yeshivah for 99 years for free? 1.Ignoramus, MK is on the Yeshivah payroll. 2.The issue is very simple, a 99 yr. lease for a $1 is the same as if he got a $1 million dollars or a block of land from Yeshivah. Chabad Youth is a private entity
ms | 16.06.08 - 3:16 pm | #

Joe, have you just landed in Melbourne, or are you in Sydney. Those of us who have been here for many years understand full well what CY and their friends on the exec are trying to achieve.
farshtei nit | 16.06.08 - 3:34 pm | #

Joe in Australia, a mosod is not just another business, it shouldn't exist only for the bottom line. And pure nepotism with little regard to competence, self interest of the PTB with little regard for community welfare or quality chinuch, a closed shop with no accountability, and an opaque financial structure should not be elements of a Chabad mosod's value system, otherwise it betrays everything the Rebbe taught us as Chassidim.
SS | 16.06.08 - 7:46 pm | #

[A] mosod is not just another business, it shouldn't exist only for the bottom line.

Nobody suggests that it should.

And pure nepotism with little regard to competence [...]

I hope you're not trying to denigrate Moshe Kahn. I think he's doing a great job.

And pure nepotism with little regard to competence, self interest of the PTB with little regard for community welfare or quality chinuch, a closed shop with no accountability, and an opaque financial structure should not be elements of a Chabad mosod's value system, otherwise it betrays everything the Rebbe taught us as Chassidim.

Um. Er. Aren't all of those criticisms applicable to 770 during the Rebbe's lifetime?
Joe in Australia | 17.06.08 - 11:12 am | #

farshtei nit, "what CY and their friends on the exec are trying to achieve" is too tantalising, you can't leave it there. Is CY, as I suspect, Chaim Yukel, and what are they trying too achieve? Stop teasing.
lost | 17.06.08 - 11:38 am | #

CY=Chabad Youth
farshtei nit | 17.06.08 - 2:51 pm | #

Joe in Australia, I am speaking in generalities about the issue of rampant nepotism in the mosdos, and not about the competence or lack thereof of anyone in particular. Please do not try and derive slanderous connotations from my postings. However, we all know of individuals who are not suited for their jobs and are only there because of their connections.
SS | 17.06.08 - 3:57 pm | #

farshtei nit, thanks for explanation of "CY", now what are they trying to achieve?
lost | 17.06.08 - 6:27 pm | #

SS You are so right.
ms | 17.06.08 - 7:27 pm | #

I don't relish being right about such a sad state of affairs.
SS | 18.06.08 - 6:13 pm | #

zw you are spot on and their are many that support you, most not vocally but keep on fighting mate.
joeish | 19.06.08 - 1:47 am | #

AJN reports that zionist youth groups are selling their premises, not because of membership issues, but because it makes economic sense to use the money more wisely. Does CY need the planned colossus apart from all the buildings already on Yeshivah campus?
building? | 21.07.08 - 10:57 pm | #