close

Вход

Забыли?

вход по аккаунту

код для вставкиСкачать
Habonim Dror North America
Veida XVIII
The Minutes
Table of Contents
Opening Ceremony ................................................................................................................. 3
Candle Lighting ........................................................................................................... 3
Mazkirut Artzit Updates…........................................................................................... 3
Eizor/Kenim Updates ................................................................................................. 4
T’nuat Bogrim Reports ………………………………………………………………… 6
Veida Procedure and Setting of Quorum................................................................................. 6
Plenary Session I: Constitution …............................................................................................ 6
Proposal I - 1: ***Lawless………………………………………………………………. 6
Proposal I - 2: Constitution Maintenance………………………………………………8
Proposal I - 3: A Reaffirmation of Chalutzic Aliyah as HDNA’s Hagshama………..10
Proposal I - 4: #Maapilimlyfe…………………………………………………………. 13
Proposal I - 5: Employees of Unionized Companies Are Required to Pay Dues And
So Should You Be………...……….………………………………….....15
Plenary Session II: Ideology……………………………………………………………………15
Proposal II - 1: Chultzat Tnua, or Chali Tuna………………....………………………15
Proposal II - 2: How I Met Your Veida Resolution……………………………………18
Mazkira Elections……………………………………………………………………….19
Proposal II - 2: How I Met Your Veida Resolution (Continued) ………………….…23
Proposal II - 3: Twerkshop Unleashed…………………………….…………………..24
Proposal II - 4: Redefinition of Movement Tikkun Olam…………………………….26
Proposal II - 5: Passing the Green Line with an Olive Branch in Hand….………….28
Proposal I - 5: Employees of Unionized Companies Are Required to Pay Dues And
So Should You Be………...……….………………………………….....36
Letter from 58 Garin in Israel…………………………………………………………………..38
Plenary Session III: Implementation…………………………………………………………..40
Proposal III - 1: SOS Please Someone Help Me………………………………………40
Proposal III - 2: My Chultzah So Fly………………………….……………………….43
Proposal III - 3: Talkin’ Bout Mas……………….…………………………………….45
Proposal III - 4: Asher Roth: Good for the Jews….……………………………………46
Proposal III - 5: A New Policy for Consequences Regarding Sexual Interactions
and Hadracha…………………………………………………………49
Proposal III - 6: Cash rules everything around us: C.R.E.A.U……………………….54
Proposal III - 7: 1948 Revisited……………………….………………………………..55
Proposal III - 8: Ken I Kick It? Yes, you May! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59
Proposal III - 9: Howie is the Cutest Boy in the Movement…………………….………60
Appendix A: Regulations and Procedures for the Implementation of the Constitution…… 63
Appendix B: The Constitution (as used at Veida XVIII)……………………………………..66
Resolutions from Habonim Dror North America’s Veida XVIII
Dingmans Ferry, Pennsylvania, USA
December 27-31, 2013
Opening Ceremonies and Reports:
Mazkira Klalit, chavera Kali Silverman, opens the veida. Candle lighting ceremony begins.
Kvutzat WS 56: George Stevens
Kvutzat WS 57: Kali Silverman
Kvutzat WS 58: Matan Naamani
Kvutzat WS 59: Shuli Carroll
Kvutzat WS 60: Nadia Hecker-O’Brien
Kvutzat WS 61: Raphy Tischler
Kvutzat WS 62: Zak Newbart
Kvutzat WS 63: Aaron Meyer
MBI Kaf Aleph: Eve Friedland
MBI Kaf Bet: Matthew Shnaidman
The veida sings Od Lo Gamarnu.
Mazkirut Artzit update:
Gizbar report:
Chaver David Meyer gives an update about the process the Mazkirut Arzit has been undergoing to
fix the financial situation in the movement for the past year including the transition from the
previous gizbar, Elliot Shriner-Cahn, to the current gizbar, David Meyer, who joined the mazkirut
Artzit this August. Chaver Meyer will be writing up an end of quarter report to see how the finances
have improved. Major accomplishments: Transitioning to better accountant, cutting down debt from
programming tuition, improving budgets with the intent to close the deficit gap, hiring a bookkeeper
in addition to an accountant.
Tochniot report:
Chaver Jeremy Oziel, who joined the mazkirut atzit with chaver Meyer in August, gives an update on
the current state of our Israel programs, MBI and Workshop. Last year was the first kavaret in which
a workshop kvutza lived in Rishon Lezion. The workshoppers just moved into the kavaret houses in
Rishon Lezion and Akko! Registration is going strong for Workshop 64, and chaver Oziel is
working with Tamar Levi to improve workshop programming. Chaver Oziel recently went on a
successful eizor tour giving workshop and MBI talks, and it was a lot of fun!
Chinuch report:
Merkezet Chinuch is the replacement for Merkezet Ma’apilim. As Merkezet Chinuch, chavera Zoey
Green has begun coordinating logistics and education rationale for seminars, which eases the
logistical process for seminars. This has helped the mazkirut achieve their goal of no longer running
seminars at a loss. They have also been working hard on raising scholarship money with help from
organizations like the HDF. We gave $20,000 in scholarships for this veida/winter seminar! The
monthly mercaz call has been successful and very helpful with communication and dissemination of
information throughout the movement. The mercaz includes representatives from each eizor,
kvutza, va’ad, the shlichim, the mazkirut artzit, and soon there will also be representatives from each
mazkirut for the summer. This year we’ve started the Shana program, an educational program for
our workshop aged chaverim who are not on workshop. Two chaverim from Kvutzat 58 have been
running online peulot for them, and have had many successes with the program. There has been
increased collaboration amongst Mercazei Chinuch before the summer with a new structure of
having calls together, coordinated by chavera Green.
Shaliach report:
We welcome our new Central Shaliach, Eitan Tako who joined the mazkirut artzit in August. He is
working hard to improve our shlichut program. We are also welcoming three new yearlong shlichim,
Yossi Argov from Miriam, Noa Swisa from Galil, and Efrat Indig from Moshava who join our other
two shlichim, Yael Polinsky from Gesher and Zlil Simchon from Gilboa.
Mazkira report:
Chavera Kali Silverman is doing a great job being the “face of the movement,” and representing
HDNA to outside organizations. She also works closely with each individual machaneh, as well as
playing a part of a huge number of projects that the movement is doing. We recently became an ally
of the Jewish Social Justice Roundtable. Chavera Silverman has also started working more closely
with the Jewish Education Project and would like to give a shout out to Operation Game Changer.
We were happy to announce the results of our recent alumni survey. There were many interesting
statistics about attitudes and values of our Habo alumni. After veida, chavera Silverman will be
traveling to Israel to meet with all of our partners for our various programs.
Fun fact: 9 people in the movement have made Garin Aliyah since August and have joined the olim
community in Haifa.
Eizorim/kenim updates:
Eizor Miriam:
Ken Vancouver: Represented by chaverim Slobin, Tischler, and Kool. They have a newsletter! They
also have 2ish ken events a month. There are 13 active ma’apilim in Vancouver as well as 2 batim.
They ran fall seminar in Vancouver not at a loss.
Other Miriam Kenim include Portland and Calgary.
Eizor Gilboa:
Ken SoCal: Represented by chaver Goldblatt (the elder). Trying to run peulot by shichvah to have
age appropriate conversation. Unfortunately there was no Winter Camp this year but there was a
SoCal seminar.
Ken NoCal Represented by chaver Bar-El (the elder). They’re improving on getting kids to the ken.
There will be a NoCal seminar soon.
Eizor Tavor:
Ken Ann Arbor: Represented by chavera Pressman and chaver Max Ledersnaider. There is a new
bayit in Ann Arbor and they run ken events every other week. They now get usually over 20 kids at
each event. Going to be running a shabbaton in January.
There are lots of kenim in the Midwest. The Chicago ken is struggling because of a lack of
ma’apilim, shout out to the nachshonim running the ken. And Tavor had Fall Seminar!
Eizor Gesher:
Ken Toronto: Represented by chavera Shenfeld, chaver Rakoff-Bellman, and chaver Lichtblau. They
run peulot almost every Sunday and are doing lots of tikkun olam. They had fall seminar in Ontario
with over 80 people. Planning a winter seminar run by post-bogrim as well as spring seminar. They
ran about 5 outreach programs this semester, and ma’apilim go to some fun conferences.
Other kenim include Ottawa and Kingston.
Eizor Na’aleh:
Ken New York (KeNYC): Represented by chavera Bogad. They are running successful ken events
twice a month as well as creating partnerships in local synagogues. They also have an incredible,
amazing, and beautiful bayit in Brooklyn (No minute taker bias…promise) with six strong,
hardworking ma’apilim (no minute editor bias…promise).
Ken Boston (Chowda): Represented by chavera Sieradzki and chaver Diner. They have many active
ma’apilim and they had two successful ken events for kids. They’re building a partnership with a
local Jewish Day School.
Eizor Galil:
Ken Philadelphia: Represented by chavera Goldberg. They had a successful Fall seminar with about
100 kids. Other ken events included Shabbat dinners, a Rabin Community event, and a Hanukkah
sleepover with 60 kids.
Eizor Moshava:
Ken D.C.: Represented by chaver Merin and chaver Katzman (the elder). They had great turnouts at
their events with increased programming for parents. Fall overnight was pretty successful and they
just had their Hanukkah sleepover with around 50 kids. They have also had a lot of recruiting events
with the help of local ma’apilim.
Ken Baltimore: Represented by chavera Kopp. The Baltimore ken has been restarted this year.
They’ve had two successful events and have more planned for next semester.
Tnuat Bogrim Reports:
Kvutzat 58: Represented by chavera Green and chaver Naamani. They’re kvutza has 5 members
who have recently arrived in Israel to start exploring garin life, living together, doing messimot, and
ulpan. They are known as Gal Aleph and they arrived in August and October. Gal Bet consists of
other members who are still in North American and engaging at different levels of commitment and
deciding whether or not to join their garin in Israel.
Kvutzat 56 (formerly): Represented by chaver Stevens. Their kvutza is known as kvutzat Chatzav.
They are part of the community of garinim of Habonim Dror bogrim in Haifa that is made up of 4
garinim of olim from Habonim Dror North America, Australia, and the UK. They do things like
working in the “shnatisphere,” and after school programs in Haifa, and as full-time educators in
Israeli society, etc.
Mazkira Klalit, chavera Silverman officially closes the opening ceremony and welcomes the first
yoshev rosh, chaver Thomas Corcoran to the podium to begin the Quorum and Rules session.
Approval of Veida Procedures and Quorum:
Yoshev Rosh: Chaver Tom Corcoran
Approving the Regulations and Procedures for Implementing the Constitution (RPIC):
Motion to Amend: (Chavera Shenfeld, Chaver Rov): Article 4 sec 24: second sentence would read “If
it is accepted by the proposers, it becomes a friendly amendment and is added to the text of the
proposal. If it is not accepted it must be voted on immediately, or acclaimed by the veida and if passed,
becomes an unfriendly amendment to the proposal.”
Motion to Vote -- Amendment does not pass.
Motion to Acclaim the RPIC (Chaver Kanter, Chaver Edelman)
Acclaimed and the Rules and Procedures are set.
Quorum:
Quorum is set at 62.63% or 115 people.
Plenary Session I: Constitution
Proposal I - 1: ***Lawless
Whereas:
Mazkirut Artzit

“Habonim Dror North America is an independent, autonomous entity organized as a New
York not-for-profit corporation and incorporated under the name “Habonim Labor Zionist
Youth, Inc.”” (Article 1: Name)

Habonim Dror must follow New York State and United States Laws.

Laws governing non-profit organizations change over time.

Sometimes laws change at inconvenient times, i.e. not right before a Veida and therefore not
giving us (all Habonim Dror members) enough time to deliberate and amend our
Constitution to reflect the laws.

We, the Mazkirut Artzit, recently received this statement from our Accountant in their
Material Weakness Suggestion Letter from our 2011 Audit, “2. Board of Directors –
[Habonim Dror Labor Zionist Youth]’s management and Board of Directors are the same.
In order to provide oversight over an organization’s activities, a Not-For-Profit (NFP)
organization should have a Board of Directors consisting of several “independent” Board
members. [An] exact number is not required but the number should be sufficient to provide
adequate oversight. Should the recently passed bill by the NYS legislature becomes law,
beginning July 1, 2014, no NFP Chairperson or Board leader will be allowed to receive
compensation if the organization has revenues in excess of $1M.” After speaking to many
lawyers, we, the Mazkirut Artzit, learned that though this bill was passed, it has not yet been
signed by Governor Cuomo (and it is not certain that he will). If this bill does become a law,
we, Habonim Dror, will have to change our Constitution and our organizational structure to
reflect this law, but we, the Movement, will not be able to wait until the next Veida.

To clarify, Article VII: Officers Section 18 reads, “The Mazkir/a shall serve as the
president and chief officer of Habonim Dror and preside at all meetings of the
Mazkirut Artzit. The Mazkir/a shall perform all duties customary to that office and
shall oversee all of the affairs of Habonim Dror in accordance with policies and
directives approved by the Mazkirut Artzit. The Mazkir/a shall be the official
spokesperson of the movement.”

If this bill would become law, the Mazkir/a would either not be able to be
compensated or the Mazkir/a would not be the ‘Board Leader.’
Therefore, let it be resolved that,

Article XII: Amendments, Section 31 reads, “In the case that any law that governs HDNA
requires a change to Habonim Labor Zionist Youth, the Mazkirut Artzit will have the power
to provisionally amend the Constitution and institute those changes to abide by the Law
change(s). Any such amendment will stay in place until ratified by the next Veida, or
replaced by another proposal that maintains compliance with the law.”

In event of such changes, the mazkirut artzit will inform and solicit input from (Chavera Kaplan,
friendly) the movement through the appropriate channels (such as the HDNA listserve and the mercaz).
(Chavera Mayer, friendly)
Motion to Caucus (Chavera Michaels, no second)
Point of order: Chaver Feinberg - Ask for questions of clarification
Questions of Clarification:
Chaver Siden: What does this mean in plain English for the movement?
Chavera Silverman: currently National Director and board chair of HDNA are the
same. We don’t differentiate between board and Mazkirut Artzit because the board is
the Mazkirut Artzit. A bill came through state legislature changing oversight structure
for nonprofits. Fixes potential power consolidation for huge nonprofits with tons of
money; but we are a different kind of animal. Currently there is no situation in which
Mazkir/a has more power than the rest of maz artzit, but the law will still affect
nonprofits like, and including, HDNA. The bill has been on Cuomo’s desk for a
while; not certain that he will sign the bill to make it a law. That’s basically it. This
gives maz artzt the ability to make legal changes that need to be made when there
won’t be a Veida (or even possible emergency veida) so that HDNA can adhere to
the law.
Chavera Marantz: This proposal doesn’t respond to the bill, it gives maz artzit ability to
respond to these kinds of changes?
Chavera Silverman: yes.
Motion to Acclaim (Chaver Shnaidman, Chaver Schaffer)
Objection: Chavera Mayer
Motion to Amend: Chavera Mayer - Friendly
Motion to Caucus (Chaver Rappaport, Chaver Gluck)
Motion to Acclaim (Chaver Shai, Chaver Fernandez)
Objection: Chavera Sieradzki
Motion to Caucus (Chavera Sieradzki, Chaver Rappaport)
Notes from Caucus reports:
Generally people support this proposal. Should we talk more about what provisional
structures should look like? Maybe the maz artzit should inform the movement as well as
solicit input. (Need to wait to propose an amendment.)
Maz artzit is qualified to make these decisions. Maybe should be more specific about
what maz artzit can and cant do but that might not be possible.
This proposal would only be used in emergency situations and states that the
changes would only reflect changes in law. Therefore it is a smart proposal. Breaking the law
is the last thing we want.
Like it. Halacha says that the law of the land is the law. As a Jewish organization we
should make sure that we are following the law of the land. Their new name involves a lot of
singing…and Supertramp (!!)
Yoshev Rosh Corcoran pauses for Kabbalat Shabbat
Motion to Acclaim (Chaver Friedman, Chavera Behrmann)
Objection: Chavera Kaplan
Motion to Amend: Chavera Kaplan - Friendly
Motion to Acclaim (Chaver Shnaidman, Chaver S. Popper)
PROPOSAL ACCLAIMED.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Yoshev Rosh Switch: Yoshevet Rosh Emily Mayer
Proposal I - 2: Constitution Maintenance
Mazkirut Artzit
Whereas our Constitution should reflect our practices;
Whereas it is beneficial that the Board of Directors have the flexibility to decrease in number, but
still have the constitution reflect the tafkidim that currently exist;
Whereas seminars that act as advisory bodies have changed over the last several years in name, in
who participates and in which months they take place in;
Whereas Tom and Jordan are NOT Rakazei T’nua, even if they claim to be;
Whereas the Mercaz is becoming an important structure for movement-wide communication and
discussion, as well as a forum for the empowered wearing of silly hats;
Let it be resolved that the HDNA’s constitution be amended in the following ways:
1. Section 10 of Article VI of the constitution will now read:
Section 10.
Habonim Dror shall be managed by its Board of Directors, which shall be
known as the Mazkirut Artzit, and shall consist of not less than three individuals. The
Mazkirut Artzit shall include, but not be limited to, the Mazkir/a, Gizbar/it, the Merakez/et
Tochniot, the Merakez/et Chinuch, and the Shaliach/a Merkaz/it. The Mazkir/a shall be
elected to the Mazkirut Artzit for a two-year term by the eligible voting membership at the
Veida or at Winter Seminar if the election occurs during a year when there is no Veida. The
remaining members shall be appointed by the current Mazkirut Artzit in consultation with
the incoming Mazkir/a. The members of the Mazkirut Artzit appointed shall serve for a
term of two years, unless determined otherwise by the Mazkirut Artzit, and until their
successors are appointed and qualified, or until their earlier resignation, removal or
death. All candidates for the positions within the Mazkirut Artzit, except for the Shaliach/a
Merkazit, shall be Ma’apilim who are members in good standing of Habonim Dror.
2.
Part (a) of Section 21 within Article VIII of the constitution which previously read as:
(a)
A committee which shall be known as the Mercaz shall consist of the Rashei Eizor,
Rashei Ken, Shlichim and the Mazkirut Artzit. All decisions made by the Mercaz shall be in
accordance with the decisions of the Veida. The Mercaz shall meet at least annually.


Will now read:
(a)
A committee which shall be known as the Moetzet Kenim shall consist of the
Rashei Eizor, Rashei Ken, Shlichim and the Mazkirut Artzit. All decisions made by the
Moetzet Kenim shall be in accordance with the decisions of the Veida. The Moetzet
Kenim shall meet at least annually.
3. Part (d) of Section 21 of Article VIII of the constitution which previously read as:
 (d)
A committee which shall be known as the Moetzet Chinuch consists of the Rosh
Machaneh and Merakez/et Chinuch Chavera Sacks) of all the machanot, Shlichim and the
Mazkirut Artzit. All decisions made by the Moetzet Chinuch shall be in accordance with the
decisions of the Veida. The Moetzet Chinuch shall meet annually in March.

Will now read:
(d)
A committee which shall be known as the Moetzet Mazkirut consists of the Rosh
Machaneh, Merakez/et Chinuch, and the Techni(s) Mazkirut members of all the machanot,
including (Chavera Sacks, friendly) Shlichim and the Mazkirut Artzit. All decisions made by
the Moetzet Mazkirut shall be in accordance with the decisions of the Veida. The
Moetzet Mazkirut shall meet annually in March.
4. Part (e) of Section 21 of Article VIII of the constitution which previously read as:
 (e)
A committee which shall be known as the Moetzet Machanot consists of the Rosh
Machaneh, Merakez/et Chinuch, Merakez/et Techni, and Madrichei Madatz of all the
machanot, Shlichim and the Mazkirut Artzit. All decisions made by the Moetzet Machanot
shall be in accordance with the decisions of the Veida. The Moetzet Machanot shall meet
annually each May.

Will now read:
(e)
A committee which shall be known as the Moetzet Madatz consists of the
Madrichei Madatz of all the machanot, and the Mazkirut Artzit. All decisions made by
the Moetzet Madatz shall be in accordance with the decisions of the Veida. The Moetzet
Madatz shall meet annually each April.
5. Part (f) of Section 21 of Article VIII of the constitution which previously read as:
 (f)
A committee which shall be known as the Rakazei T’nua shall consist of one or
more Ma’apilim in Good-Standing who fill volunteer positions as needed by the Mazkirut
Artzit. In addition to their specific roles, the Rakazei T’nua shall be included in the running
of movement seminars.

Will be removed from the constitution. In its place a new Part (f) will be added that reads:
(f)
A committee which shall be known as the Mercaz shall consist of representatives
from each Eizor, each Shichvah of Ma’apilim, relevant Va’adot t’nua, the Mishlachat
Shlichim and the Mazkirut Artzit. All decisions made by the Mercaz shall be in accordance
with the decisions of the Veida. The Mercaz shall meet at least annually.
Question of Clarification:
Chavera Zebovitz: It says that there should be no less than three Mazkirut Artzit members, but
then lists 5 tafkidim. Can you explain?
Answer: Important to be able to decrease the number of board members if/as necessary
Chavera Kaplan: Why mention which months Moetzet Madatz and Moetzet Mazkirut will be
held in? Why not be more flexible?
Answer: Need to create structures that push collaboration and have conversations to shape
the summer at an early enough time. From maz artzit perspective it would be difficult for
those seminars to exist in another space due to other seminars and machaneh tours. This
reflects the needs of maz artzit and past changes.
Motion to Caucus (Chaver Bordoley, Chaver Diner)
Any noteworthy caucus discussions: Cool to formalize structures that are already in place;
Motion to Amend: Chavera Sacks - Friendly
Motion to Acclaim (Chaver Shnaidman, Chaver Miller)
PROPOSAL ACCLAIMED.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Yoshev Rosh Switch: Yoshev Rosh Noah Finkelstein
Proposal I – 3: A Reaffirmation of Chalutzic Aliyah as HDNA’s Hagshama
Lior Bar-El
Whereas HDNA has historically been involved in the founding and upbuilding of Israel, and plans
on continuing to do so in the future;
Whereas the constitution of Habonim Dror North America states in Article III V: Membership In
Good Standing (Chaver Bordoley, friendly) that ma’apilim in good standing are expected to “Creat[e] a
personal relationship with the Jewish Homeland by returning to Israel on a long term basis;”
Whereas this is the only mention of aliyah to Israel without a caveat in our entire constitution[1] in a
the movement that (Chaver Miller, friendly) has an expressed goal of, and supposedly is defined by
the path towards, aliyah (shown in our Preamble: “Aliyah to communal frameworks actively working
in pursuit of our ideological aims is an effective path to the actualization of our movement goals”);
Whereas I will now summarize George Stevens’ letter to Kvutzat 61/62, to help frame our
conversation about hagshama in the Movement: The Movement creates a target to aim for, and to
deny the existence of that target because it is scary or feels alienating is denying the right of the
Movement to shape history, to move. Here at Veida, we must set the bar high, we must establish our
ideals, and we must demand the most of our members. Veida is about choosing and reaffirming that
ideal, not denying its existence. Our movement is based on dedication, but that dedication is
voluntary and should not be guilt-driven; “You are free to choose whatever life path you want.” The
Movement will go on;
Whereas Habonim Dror North America is committed to chalutzic aliyah as its ultimate form of
Movement hagshama;
Therefore, let it be resolved that: Article II: Aims paragraph six reads with the addition of “in Israel”
after the word kvutzah (obviously spelled without the h, and giving the Movement a capital M), so
that it reads:
To develop within its members the will to realize their own capabilities and to develop a
collectivist attitude to actualize the Movement’s goals through cooperative frameworks
(kvutza), ultimately (Chavera Horowitz, friendly) in Israel.
[1] The word Israel exists 5 times in our constitution. Trust me, I pressed ctrl+F. The only other
mention of Aliyah is in Article II: Aims paragraph three and includes North America: “the upbuilding of a renewed Jewish culture in both Israel and North America”. (Chaver Miller, friendly)
[2] The word America exists 9 times in our Constitution. 3 of those 9 call for active engagement in
North America.
Proposal Seconded (Chavera DeVarti)
Question of Clarification:
Chaver Fox: What is the emphasis on Israel- building frameworks in Israel or the frameworks
built elsewhere are connected to or emphasize Israel?
Answer: Either-Or
Motion to Acclaim (Chaver Goldstein, Chavera A. Cooper)
Objected: Chaver Diner
Motion to Caucus (Chaver S. Popper, Chaver Zadok)
Noteworthy conversation: Is this proposal actually adding anything substantial to the constitution of
its spirit?; some caucuses torn; how will it affect the validity of collective frameworks in NA; should
we say Israel in the constitution more for the same cause; this is about emphasis and ideology;
Doesn’t delegitimize that NA batim are important but affirms that Israel is a focal point; this might
challenge people being leaders in NA because they want to get to Israel pronto; do we provide for
people who want to create frameworks in NA without devaluing Zionism?; Captalize “Movement”
we are a proper noun; should be fluid communication and strong partnership between NA and
Israel  are collective frameworks in NA as well as in Israel important?; Calls attention to our
bogrim but leaves out the mention of article 2 paragraph 2: Aliyah calls first and foremost for
collective Aliyah frameworks- this contradicts a whereas clause in the proposal
Motion to Amend: Chavera Horowitz, Chaver Marsh - Friendly
Motion to Amend: Chavera Roberts-Sampson, Chaver Fernandez - Unfriendly
To develop within its members the will to realize their own capabilities and to develop a
collectivist attitude to actualize the Movement’s goals through cooperative frameworks
(kvutza) ultimately (Chavera Horowitz) continuing to have a focus on in Israel.
Yoshev Rosh Finkelstein: This amendment is equivalent to voting no on proposal: amendment does
not pass
Motion to Amend: Chaver Bordoley, Chaver Katzman - Friendly
Motion to Debate (Chaver Ness-Cohn, Chavera Greenfeld)
Chaver Peacock: We need to understand that the constitution is a document; this proposal is
discussing Aliyah as a goal of the movement- aliyah is a means to end of fulfilling our vision.
Chaver Siden: This article already contains high expectations (eg new social order etc) and
therefore the proposal is not a momentous change.
Chavera Newman: While we are able to round about discuss garinim structures, this is not
what the proposal is about.
Chavera Hecker-O’Brien: This proposal is not suggesting anything new but people are trying
to have a conversation about larger ideological questions about our aims- which ultimately
already are garin Aliyah.
Chavera J. Cooper: Adding Israel here is hard because kvutza is not a place based process.
This proposal too closely connects kvutza and being in Israel.
Chaver Peacock: It is not possible or worthwhile to separate the paragraphs of article II into
separate things. They are our 5 paragraphs to clarify the direction of the movement- not 5
distinct thoughts or goals.
Chaver Steve-ens: Kvutza is an ideal that was invented in Israel. People call it a “garin” or a
“kvutza” and not a commune because it is was invented in Israel and is uniquely Israelikvutzot tend to/always wind up in Israel- Israel and Kvutza are not distinct constructs.
Chaver Miller: debate the facts of Chaver Steve-ens last point. Sometimes we get really
attached to concepts in Hebrew and in the Labor-Zionist narrative but don’t acknowledge
these ideas in other contexts. We value the Hebrew language, but collectivism can be
divorced from Israel.
Chaver Freedman-Hutter: There are lots of people in the world doing lots of cool things. We
aren’t trying to do lots of cool things, we are trying to be Zionists and garin Aliyah is our
tool.
Chaver Corcoran: Our aims are to make garin Aliyah etc. but right now we are talking about
our aims in the constitution, and our aim for upbuilding the state of Israel is already there
but this clause is talking about collective frameworks specifically.
Chaver Hansen: We talk a lot about equal importance of people who will and will not fill all
of the Movement’s aims. Just because people’s goals may not align with the movement’s
doesn’t mean what they are doing isn’t important or is wrong.
Motion to Caucus (Chaver Newbart, Chaver Haven)
Noteworthy Conversations: Is ideology the right thing to be talking about this much in the
constitutional plenary session; communal frameworks in NA not being the ultimate hagshamah
doesn’t mean that they are not awesome; the aims dedicate one paragraph to each pillar and this is
the socialism one; it is not necessary as if we are in a moment of crisis to which this will rally us
behind a solution.
Motion to Vote (Chaver Rappaport, Chavera Fogel)
SUPERCEDING MOTION: Motion to Amend: Chaver Miller, Chavera DeVarti - Unfriendly
Original amendment rescinded and new amendment proposed: Chaver Miller, Chaver S. Popper Friendly
Motion to Vote (Chavera Marantz, Chavera Sieradzki)
Proconos:
Pro: Chaver Bordoley: Reaffirm that making chalutzik Aliyah is the ultimate hagshamah of
our movement and the addition of ultimately gives credit to kvutza life before aliyah
Con: Chavera J. Cooper: There are other places in the constitution that state garin Aliyah as
the ultimate form of hagshamah (but not the only form of hagshamah). This resolution
says/implies (?) that our goals need to happen in Israel always, but this is not the case.
Be’ad: 47
Neged: 94
Nimna: 34
Shlichim Be’ad: 8
Shlichim Neged: 0
Shlichim Nimna: 0
Proposal does not pass.
----------------------------------------------------------------------Yoshev Rosh Switch: Yoshevet Rosh Emily Mayer
Proposal I – 4: #Maapilimlyfe
Jordan Cooper & Thomas H. Corcoran
Whereas the final aim listed in Article II of the constitution reads, “To develop within its members
the will to realize their own capabilities and to develop a collectivist attitude to actualize the
movement’s goals through cooperative frameworks (kvutzah);”
Whereas we regard socialism as one of the pillars of our ideology, which we use to educate our
chanichim, and our educational philosophy values madrichim educating on items they are
continuously grappling with themselves;
Whereas the movement validates efforts among its active ma’apilim to experiment with creating
collectivist structures and spaces for and with other movement members, including, but not limited
to, batim, kvutzah/ shlav bet processes, kupa structures and practices, etc;
Whereas Section 9 of Article V of the constitution lists the primary goals that individuals should be
striving for to be considered “A member in good-standing of the Ma’apilim,” including “Becoming
knowledgeable in the Hebrew language, Jewish History, a pluralist Jewish Culture, Jewish Traditions,
and Jewish Sources,” “Being an activist in the Jewish Community,” (Chavera Seiradzki, friendly)
“Being an activist and a leader in the Jewish Community,” “Being an activist and leader in the
struggle for Social Justice in the world,” and “Creating a personal relationship with the Jewish
Homeland by returning to Israel on a long term basis,” but makes no mention of building
collectivist frameworks;
Therefore, let it be resolved that: a fifth goal is added to Section 9 of Article V of the constitution so
that it reads:
5) Creating collective structures and cooperative spaces where Ma’apilim come together to
develop their understanding of socialist principles through active participation.
Questions of Clarification:
Chaver Ledersnaider: Is there a specific structure for maapilim that you have in mind?
Answer: No, we want maapilim to experiment but we gave some examples in the whereas
clauses. Those are cool but you can find more.
Chaver Kay the younger: Do “collective structures” and “cooperative spaces” refer to the same
things?
Answer: They can both be present but are not exactly the same thing. May be a little
redundant.
Proposal Seconded: Chaver Bogad
Motion to Acclaim (Chavera Stoler, Chaver Stanger)
Objection: Chavera Marantz
Motion to Caucus (Chaver Grossman, Chaver Shahar)
SUPERCEDING MOTION: Motion to Amend: Chavera Seiradzki, Chavera Smith - Friendly
Motion to Acclaim (Chaver Fox, Chaver Zadok)
Objection: Chaver Berman
Motion to Vote (Chavera Stoler, Chavera Biegel)
Motion to Acclaim (Chaver Kanter, Chavera Starkman)
PROPOSAL ACCLAIMED.
-------------------------------------------------
Proposal I – 5: Employees of Unionized Companies Are Required to Pay Dues And So
Should You Be
Mazkirut Artzit and Howard Stanger
Whereas the HDNA Central Office depends on Mas payments from machanot and individuals in
order to operate and therefore run programs such as MBI, Workshop, and movement seminars;
Whereas the current language in the Constitution does not reflect the reality of how machanot
collect Mas from ma’apilim;
Whereas everyone should pay Mas as long as they can afford to do so;
Let it be resolved that the Constitution is amended as follows:
Add Section 24.a. For tzevet members who do not consider themselves movement members, a
portion of Mas is still required for support of movement services provided to the machanot,
mazkiriyot and madrichim. Those who do consider themselves movement members will pay the full
mas which includes both the portion for support of movement services provided to the machanot
and the balance which is the movement membership fee Per Section 22, the specific amounts are to
be fixed by the Mazkirut Artzit.
Replace Section 25.
If a Ma’apil/a is unable to pay mas they are encouraged to utilize the kupa system.
If after exploring this option they still find themselves unable to pay, they should notify the
Mazkirut Artzit.
Motion to Temporarily Suspend the Rules (Chaver Corcoran, Chaver Sturman): table this proposal until after
the peulah about mas that will be happening tomorrow morning. This means discussing a constitutional amendment in
a different plenary session- rather than tabling.
Motion to Acclaim the Suspension (Chavera Roberts-Sampson, Chaver Haven)
Objections: none
Rules suspended- End of Constitutional Plenary Session is extended to after this proposal.
(Move to Ideology Plenary Session until then)
------------------------------------------------PLENARY SESSION II: IDEOLOGY
Yoshevet Rosh Emily Mayer
Proposal II – 1: Chultzat Tnua, or Chali Tuna
Jordan “Can’t Stop The Beat” Siden
Whereas the chultzat tnua is a unifying, non-hierarchical symbol of movement membership and
participation, and not a symbol of hadracha;
Whereas there are no official expectations of when a chultzat tnua should be worn in a movement
setting;
Whereas summers are HOT HOT HOT and it would be tough to wear a chultza everyday, all day...
(Chavera Bogad)
Therefore, let it be resolved that: Habonim Dror ma’apilim, nachshonim and workshoppers should
be expected to wear their chultzat tnua while pariticipating in Habonim Dror programing when appropriate.
(Chaver Rov) at appropriate times (Chavera Michaels) while participating in Habonim Dror seminars,
and encouraged for as (Chavera Greenfeld) as (Chaver Rov) when appropriate while participating in Habonim
Dror seminars, as madrichim running a ken peula, and during peulat shichva while at machaneh (Chavera
Newman).
Questions of Clarification: Chaver Boyar: Is it contradictory to say that chultzot whould be worn at
machaneh even though it is HOT HOT HOT?
Answer: The chultza should be expected just during peulot shichva
Question of Clarification: Chaver Shahar: What does it mean to be running a peulah vs. being at a
peulah?
Answer: Madrichim are present or actively running a peulah for chanichim
Question of Clarification: Chaver Fernandez: How will this be affective if, in the future, chanichim
receive chultzot?
Answer: This proposal is for nachshonim and up because we don’t know what form giving
chanichim chultzot will take
Question of Clarification: Chaver Gross: If a ken were to run a tikkun olam project, would it count as a
peula?
Answer: yes
Question of Clarification: What is the current policy on when madrichim have to wear chultzot?
Answer: there isn’t one
Motion to Caucus (Chavera Zebovitz, Chavera Volk)
Motion to Amend: Chavera Greenfeld - Friendly
Motion to Amend: Chaver Rov, Chavera Marantz- Friendly
Motion to Amend: Chavera Bogad, Chaver Bordoley - Friendly
Motion to Amend: Chavera Michaels, Chaver Berman - Friendly
Motion to Debate (Chavera Hecker-Obrien, no second)
Motion to Caucus from a while ago (Chavera Zebovitz, Chavera Volk)
Motion to Vote (Chaver Stanger, Chavera Friedland the younger)
Motioin to Debate (Chaver Ledersnaider, Chavera Smith)
Chaver Katzman: We shouldn’t be just prioritizing one part of the day. We do important
chinuch throughout the day. Should be up to the tzevet’s discretion while at machaneh.
Chavera Pressman: This summer when the madatz went on Tikkun Olam the chanichim
suggested not wearing chultzot because it created a division between them and the people
they were serving. Do we create a division between us and the chanichim by doing this?
Would this create divisions between tzevet members who do and don’t want to wear the
chultzot? Would this make this division more visible to chanichim?
Chaver Rappaport: Chultzot do not breathe. As someone who sweats a lot, my chultza gets
disgusting after a single day.
Chaver Bar El the Younger: Put out the sentiment of setting the bar high to say that
obviously at Veida we create things that we want to be followed but at the end of the day
people do what they do. Its worthwhile to say that we expect/want something because we
think its important even if we know that some people won’t do it.
Chaver Friedman: A division between tzevet members at machaneh would be detrimental to
chanichim. Being a tzevet member at machaneh makes you a movement member and this
proposal forces everyone to engage with the movement in some way.
Chaver Siden: The idea is to create a standard and expectation to wear a unifying symbol.
Chultza is an anti-consumerist symbol that can unify us. I understand the tensions
mentioned above but at the same time this is an attempt to normalize the chultza. NOAL is
a great frame of reference for integrating the chultza.
Chaver Rov: If you go to machaneh that is hot and/or you sweat a lot, the constitution is
not binding to everyone and you don’t have to wear it.
Chaver Fernandez: Because this is a rule we should still care even though it is not binding.
Everyone is involved in their own way, having freedom of expression in how to express this
involvement is an important part of being in Habonim Dror. The chultza is already
normalized and organizing it into a schedule would make it into more of a staff uniform than
a symbol.
Chaver Stanger: The issue of taking a proposal as symbolic has been voiced. Whether or not
you see it as symbolic…I think…I think…I think we should close debate.
Chaver Edelman: It’s a big problem to consider proposals with a mindset of “we don’t have
to actually be responsible to carry this out.”
Motion to Vote (Chaver Koppel, Chaver Shnaidman)
SUPERCEDING MOTION: Motion to Amend: Chaver Rov, Chavera Cooper - Friendly
Motion to Vote (Chavera Gross, Chaver Rakoff-Bellman)
Motion to Divide the Question (Chaver Marsh)
Motion to Amend: Chavera Newman, Chavera DeVarti – strike previous amendments that seem to
change spirit of the proposal - Friendly
Motion to Vote (Chavera Kaplan, Chaver Merin)
SUPERCEDING MOTION: Motion to Divide the Question (Chaver Marsh) – withdrawn
Return to Motion to Vote.
Pro: Chaver Berman: My connection with the chultza and that of others is the connection
between me and Israel, my mahcneh, and the movement. It represents the movement and so
should be put in writing that madrichim are encouraged to wear their chultza tnua at these
times
Cons: Chavera Pressman: A lot of people have said a lot of different things against the
proposal and I will get some of them: it will divide tzvatim based on connection to the
movement; we decided at the last Veida that the chultza is a symbol of membership and not
leadership; people want to have freedom of expression in their wardrobe; it might have
tzevet members that don’t agree with the values of the movement wear the chultza and
devalue its meaning; it would be like a uniform; it may put pish on a pedestal as the place
where we actualize our ideology.
Be’ad: 27
Neged: 101
Nimna: 31
Shlichim Be’ad: 2
Shlichim Neged: 3
Shlichim Nimna: 1
Proposal does not pass.
------------------------------------------------------------------Proposal II – 2: How I Met Your Veida Resolution: Communication and Accountability?
CHALLENGE ACCEPTED!
Sam “Shmuli Oydelman” Edelman and Gabe “Gahv Katzmanos” Katzman
Whereas veida is an incredibly meaningful, intentional, and empowering process in which
Nachshonim and Maapilim put an enormous amount of effort and intention into drafting, debating,
and passing resolutions;
Whereas ideally, all Veida resolutions should be fully implemented, but in reality, this does not
always occur;
Whereas it negates the significance of Veida and disempowers participants when resolutions that
have been passed are ignored;
Whereas: Actively acknowledging this problem, rather than passively allowing Veida resolutions to
be ignored, reaffirms the significance of Veida and can increase accountability,
Whereas: In the past, some passed resolutions have been passed over, then re-passed in subsequent
Veidot, only to be looked past yet again, and we wish for a repast from this cycle (and a Cowman’s
Repast from Broom’s Bloom Dairy, in pastoral Bel Air, MD),
Whereas engaging in conversations about our feelings is the official pastime of the movement and
increased conversation on implementation of Veida resolutions can make movement members who
did not participate in Veida feel more connected and involved;
Therefore, let it be resolved that: Every summer after each Veida, the mazkiruyot of each machaneh
and at the beginning of each year, the mazkirut of each eizor will ensure that a sicha for the madatz and tzevet is run
facilitate a tzevet sicha (Chavera Michaels, friendly) about how they will actualize the resolutions
from the previous most recent Veida (Chavera Winrob, friendly).
Let it be further resolved that: In the event that a machaneh, eizor, bayit, or other movement-related
group feels that they are not in a position to comply with a Veida resolution that has been passed,
they will write a letter to the Mazkirut Artizit Movement (Chavera Winrob, friendly) that will include,
but not be limited to, explanations of the following:
 What aspect of the resolution they cannot comply with, and why
 What actions they will take that deviate from the resolution
 How their actions will still incorporate the movement’s ideology
 How they will address this situation in the future
 Their name, shichvah, and favorite ice cream flavor,
 Any other relevant (or irrelevant, or irreverent) details
Let it be further resolved that: The Mazkirut Artzit will distribute this letter to movement members
in whatever way they see fit work closely with those who wrote the letter to distribute it in the way they both see fit
(be it song parody on the listserve, carrier pigeon, a game of broken telephone...). (Chavera Winrob,
friendly)
Let it be further resolved that: This process should in no way be seen as a loophole or excuse to
avoid upholding resolutions.1
1
Ideally, these conversations will be a means to encourage critical and honest engagement with
Veida, including its strengths and weaknesses as an ideological structure and as a pragmatic
structure. We hope that these conversations will enable future Veidot to approach proposals with
the expectation that all passed resolutions will be fully enacted.
Question of Clarification: Chavera Kaplan: Are you expecting that this would also be implemented for
proposals that apply to individuals?
Answer: You need to be in a situation where you can determine if you should follow a
proposal or not. If you are unclear you can contact Maz Artzit about whether or not you
should explain a decision to the Movement.
Question of Clarification: Chavera Kaplan: Do you see this applying to the constitution or only to
proposals?
Answer: Since we consider amendments to the constitution at every veida this will be
considered in implementing this proposal. As far as membership in good standing, people
need to strive for the goals rather than to accomplish them to be members in good standing.
Not entirely sure what this would pragmatically mean.
Question of Clarification: Chavera Mayer: Are the mazkiriut only supposed to facilitate a conversation
about resolutions from the past veida or are they only reading resolutions related to machaneh
(versus all resolutions)?
Answer: The spirit is about implementing things that have been passed. Conversation about
resolutions that didn’t pass could also be interesting. Because it is about changes it should
focus on the last veida and on proposals most related to machaneh but mazkiriot should be
able use discretion in bringing resolutions not directly about machaneh. Right now it reads as
saying only last veida and all resolutions (machaneh and other).
Question of Clarification: Chaver Gross: Does this include madatzim?
Answer: We didn’t specify. It could.
Motion to Temporarily Suspend the Rules – in order to move to Mazkira Election (Chaver Feinberg,
Chaver Zadok)
Motion to Acclaim (Chaver Feinberg, Chaver Rappaport)
Motion Acclaimed and Mazkira Elections are opened.
Chavera Kali Silverman: introduces candidate Sara Zebovitz and exclaims how the elections will take
place (Speech, questions, vote!)
Chavera Sara Zebovitz: A little background -- Camp Galil, Madatz 2008, Workshop 59, Tzevet Galil,
madricha for MBI Caf Aleph, Madatz Madricha 2013, Rosh Eizor Galil, Rosh Galil 2014. History:
Dressed up as a clown, cut hair. I’m a Jewish and an educator. Check her out at the bio page at
beyonce.com
Some Central Points:
-
-
-
-
I follow through. We’re an incredible tnua that empower ourselves, empower those younger
than us and inspire those older than us. We are building a vision for the Jewish people and
build communities based on understanding. We have the power to make the change we want
to see. Being in Uganda this year I saw a Jewish community that was entirely run by youth
who chose to take on that responsibility. We can and should do that to.
We push towards a just Israel. We partner with other organizations and build structures like
batim to create change in our communities. I’ve noticed that we separate things into
categories and separate our ideology into different conversations. I want us to bring those
together.
Actualizing can be scary and we can’t do that separately. Each chaver/a has passion and
ideas of how to make change. We can bring all of these ideas together. I was inspired by the
real depth of sharing of ideas and information that I saw on MBI. This happens on
workshop too and throughout the movement. I want to use my organization and
communication skills to help this sharing.
We can continue the legacy of fighting for justice and valuing life above all else and treating
people with respect. As we educate ourselves and others we can experience. I want to
challenge and I want to be challenged. Together we can continue to move. I would love to
help lead that movement!
Crazy amounts of applause and a standing ovation.
Questions:
Chaver Shore: One part of this job that a lot of us don’t know is going to meetings where you have
to represent the youth movement. Can you elaborate on what that part of your tafkid is and how
you plan on effectively representing the movement?
Chavera Zebovitz (CZ): First of all, I know about the tafkid mostly what Kali has told me. I
have been in the working world for several years and have the ability to express my
viewpoints with confidence. I think it’s important that we are getting our voices into the
conversations and bring our ideas, abilities and skills to the Jewish youth future.
Chaver Levy: At Tavor, we have a fence with all the pillars of Habonim Dror. If there were a
tornado and one part fell, what one would go?
CZ: They’re all connected and would support each other.
Chaver Shahar: In the past you have championed Hebrew as an expression of Zionism in the
movement? Do you have newer ideas of how you want to see Zionism expressed in the movement?
And who rules the world?
Chavera Zebovitz: In my travelling, I really felt that Hebrew is one of the things that
connects the Jewish people. I think there are many other ways to express Zionism. I think
the way that we talk about Israel and educate about Israel. The way we get our voice out
into the community. And I’m not going to say girls, but…
Chavera Mayer: A phenomenon happening in the Jewish community is that there is a split between
older and younger progressive Zionists. What do you feel is your role in engaging with the former’s
perspective.
CZ: There are ways to be partners with organizations without sharing 100% of our ideology
with and there is a balance that has to be reached in working with those organizations
Chaver Newbart: Kali mentioned connecting with Jewish Social Justice Round Table. Do you have a
concrete idea of what you want to do in terms of building up our social justice actions?
CZ: Should be doing a lot of the things that we’re already doing with other organizations.
We should be engaging in those organization as Habonim and I don’t have a specific idea
because I think we have to come up with it together. There has to be a larger conversation
about what we’re going to address and how we’re going to address it. It is not my place to
say ‘we’re doing this’ but to bring ideas and brainstorm with the tnua.
Chaver Henderon: Elaborate on how we should do actualization in the movement.
CZ: Many levels, doing tikkun olam, talking about our socialist values and engaging in the
larger community. Having a messima, having a bayit for example, there’s a wide variety
Chavera Chertock: You emphasize increasing the levels of communication throughout the
movement. How do you plan to make this a reality?
CZ: We’re good at communication on a smaller level (e.g. eizorim). We need to be utilzizing
new structures and the technology at our disposal to be more communicative and
responsible. We also don’t need to start fresh, we have so many ideas and projects going on
and can collaborate and increase our communication across the movement.
Chaver Siden: Is lowering the cost of MBI and Workshop a priority for you?
CZ: I would love for them to be affordable but that also has to work with the realities of the
actual costs of running those programs.
Chavera Sieradzki: How can we enrich and improve the way we celebrate Judaism in our machanot,
eizorim and movement?
CZ: I’m very proud of us, this marks the 2 year anniversary of starting parshat hashavuah
and that has shown our ability to step outside of our box and engage with Jewish texts and
make them relevant to the tnua. We can utilize that chag resources put out by Mazkirut
Artzit. We can get together for chaggim, there is a tradition of studying together and I would
love to see structures that allow for more of that. We have changed traditions and there is so
much space to roll with that.
Chavera Winrob: One of my criticisms of Habonim is being insular and I love how much you do
outside of Habonim. What is your vision for how we should be engaging with outside communities
and organizations? What do you take from the things you do outside of Habonim Dror.
CZ: Educationally, we utilize effective methods to make education engaging and I think it’s
awesome to also be helping others develop experiential and engaging education. There is
also a lot of ways we can collaborate with organizations and build new projects together.
Chaver L Bar-El: What current events in Israel are important and what are some of your views on
them?
CZ: Something that has become really important to me in how I form my ideas is talking to
others and I think it’s important for us as Zionists to know what’s going on and criticizing
and loving/engaging with Israel.
Chavera A Cooper: What room do you see for non-Zionism in the movement?
CZ: As Habonim Dror we are a Zionist organization. I feel very strongly about that. That
Zionism is one of socialism, Judaism, etc. As a movement we need to remain a Zionist
movement.
Chavera Levy: How do you want to portray HD to people who don’t know about the movement?
CZ: There are really key parts to what we do. A lot of that is our ideology and the way we
build ourselves. We build confidence in our chanichim. We are leaders and our movement
creates leaders, that’s what we’re trying to do with ourselves and our chanichim. Another
thing that’s really central is our ability to have conversations, with people that we agree with
and with people that we don’t agree with.
Chavera Lerman-Sinkoff: Can you think of specific organizataions in the Jewish world that are our
partners? In the non-Jewish world? Are there parts of our ideology that haven’t been focused on and
how would we get there through organizations we partner with?
CZ: I think that looks different if every area, but there are so many organizations that we can
partner with in social justice. In general we need to be increasing our partnership. I think
there are lots of ways to do that. We don’t only have to partner with only organizations of
Jews sitting in cubicles but I see our ideology as very intertwined and so I don’t think it’s
about pushing just one component in our partnership.
Chaver Kool: How does the Mazkira interact with shlichim and what ideas do you have with that?
Chavera Silverman: I haven’t told her about that yet.
Closing the questions section and moving to vote.
Chavera Silverman: She’s done a really wonderful job answering these questions but one of the
realities of this is that she is only beginning the process of learning what this tafkid looks like and so
much goes into developing. She invited you to continue talking to her about the ideas she’s brought
up today and you really, really should.
JUST DANCE INTERLUDE!
Vote results:
Be’ad: 179
Neged: 6
Nimna: 6
SARA ZEBOVITZ IS ELECTED MAZKIRA OF HABONIM DROR NORTH AMERICA!!!!!!!
Sara Zebovitz thanks the movement AND Mac n cheese is for lunch, it’s gunna be a great future!
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Continue with Proposal II – 2: How I Met Your Veida Resolution: Communication and
Accountability? CHALLENGE ACCEPTED!
Question of Clarification: Chavera Horowitz: Which summer does this refer to?
Answer: The summer after veida. In this case, durig the beginning of the summer of 2014.
The letters would be written as decisions are being made, ideally in the beginning of the
summer.
Question of Clarification: Chevera Michaels: Could conversations happen after Winter Seminar?
Answer: Sure, if they’re needed.
Question of Clarification: Chaver Katzman (younger): How many tzevet members on this vaad? Is it a
vaad?
Answer: During construction the conversation would happen with all of tzevet.
Motion to Caucus (Chavera Michaels, Chavera Friedland the elder)
Motion to Debate (Chaver Pekarsky, Chaver Friedman)
Chavera Shenfeld: It seems like we’re all into this mostly. There are a lot of small
admendments that people possibly proposed, but we should focus on passing it than making
a lot of small changes.
Chavera Horowitz: I think this proposal is a great way to discuss institutional memory and
accountability for institutional memory. Those are the kind of conversations for what needs
to happen and if this proposal meets this need I don’t want to hear conversations about little
changes.
Chaver Pekarsky: We should encourage (without an amendment) madatz and MBI
madrichim to bring these conversations to Madatz and MBI during the summers as well.
Chavera Smith: Yesterday we were talking about enforcement for veida proposals. I think
these chaverim want to engage in a conversation of how seriously we take the Veida. I take it
seriously and you should too so we can strive for our movement ideals.
Chavera Winrob: It is important to remember that even though we have different tafkidim,
we are a non-hierachical movement and we need to make sure conversations are had
between letter writers and letter distributors.
Chaver Edelman: I just wanted to respond to some feedback from caucus reports and
debate. Specifically, We don’t think theres any language in here that would impede the jobs
of EDs and Camp Committees. We want to acknowledge that we sometimes pass things and
for practical reasons they can’t be implemented. We want to have intentional conversations
about those decisions and how we can make Veida a more practical space for the movement.
We did not mean for this to put any decision powers of what has to be explained on the
mazkiruit artzit, just that they could help with distribution (ie at machaneh).
Chaver Merin: I think this could be a burden for eizorim and batim who “break” proposals.
I think we should definitely discuss the issues as a tzevet, but feel as though the letters could
be like an apology or asking for permission.
Chavera Hope Newman: Expanding on the thoughts of Chaver Edelman, if we are going to
pass resolutions, that means that it’s important for the movement and if people want to do
something different they should explain themselves directly to the movement.
Chavera Sieradzki: To address a concern about making “non-movement” people
uncomfortable – every machaneh is part of the movement and every tzevet is part of the
movement. We should be pushing ourselves to feel more connected and I don’t think a sicha
would make anyone uncomfortable and if it does maybe that’s good. To Chaver Merin,
laziness is not an excuse for anything.
Chaver RosenHanst: We shouldn’t look at it in terms of what we are not going to do, but
rather to examine the decisions that were made and how that can be implemented. The letter
is not self-policing ourselves, but rather continuing the dialogue of the Veida even after
Veida.
Chavera “MoneyB” Green: It’s not really more work for the Maz Artz. Particluarly in the
situation where people might feel like they are defending their actions, we acknowledge that
there is a lot of sensitivity with that and we think it might be helpful to make sure statements
and arguments can be constructed with more perspective. I don’t think the letter is an
apology but an opportunity to share the different contexts at our different machanot.
Chaver Warshai: There seems to be two separate parts, the sicha and the letter. I don’t see
the connection. Maybe also after this sicha tzvatim can run peulot for their kids?
Chaver Goldstein: At HDCA kennes, something came up about how different movement
structures play with each other and create a holistic movement. I think this proposal suggests
that veida isn’t just a seminar, but something that continues throughout the year.
Chaver Rice: This is a great opportunity to express how their eizor/machaneh is doing in
general as well, which would be positive for the movement I think.
Chavera Silverman (once the Tor was closed, BTW): There is an informal procedure where I
take the resolutions to the EDs and boards after veida and engage in the relevant
discussions. Proposals are also talked about on the chinuch calls as well. But maybe we need
more formal structures.
Motion to Split the Question (Chavera Devarti) - Withdrawn
Motion to Amend: Chavera Michaels, Chaver Goldblatt - Friendly
Motion to Amend: Chavera Winrob, Chaver Jaffe - Friendly
Motion to Acclaim (Chavera Slobin, Chaver Warshai) No objections
PROPOSAL IS ACCLAIMED.
Yoshev Rosh Switch: Yoshevet Rosh Nadia Hecker-O’Brien
Proposal II – 3: Twerkshop Unleashed
Abigail Friedland, Maia Volk, Carmel Laniado,Yael Horowitz, and Doron Shore
Whereas HDNA is a part of HD Olami (HDO), which encompasses multiple countries around the
world;
Whereas other HDO gap year programs do not call their gap year program ‘Workshop’;
Whereas America already does not use the metric system;
Whereas the Workshop tochnit involves seminars and programming with other participants from
other HDO movements;
Whereas in the last few years it has become common for members of other HDO movements to
participate in the Workshop program;
Whereas our constitution emphasizes the importance of being familiar with the Hebrew language
and its role in our movement as seen in Article II of HDNA’s Constitution which states a goal of
HDNA to be: “To strengthen the relationship between North American Jewish youth and Judaism
through…the full expression of the Hebrew language;”
Whereas Workshop is a year of training for movement leadership and Shnat Hachshara
(‫ )שנת הכשרה‬translates to ‘year of training’;
Whereas it is extremely difficult and ugly to write Workshop in Hebrew: ‫;וורקשוף‬
Therefore, let it be resolved that: the HDNA gap year program in Israel be referred to from here on
out as “Shnat Hachshara” (recognizing that the full name is Shnat Hachshara v’Hadracha l’Aliyah).
Let it be further resolved that Habonim Dror North America continues to refer to each cohort of
shnat participants by their shichvah number in recognition that HDNA’s gap year program is the
longest running gap year program in Israel.
Let it be further resolved that the name change will start with Shnat Hachshara 64 or Shnat 64. The
word Workshop will be replaced by Shnat Hachshara in all places (i.e. applications, advertising,
chultzot).
Questions of Clarification: Chavera Friedman-Hutter: Does this mean that past Workshops will be
called Shnat?
Answer: Not necessarily
Questions of Clarification: Chaver Katzman: Because the literature for 64 is already out, when will it
take affect?
Answer: As much as possible for 64, especially on the program.
Proposal Seconded by Chaver Zager
Motion to Caucus (Chaver Shnaidman, Chaver Rodriguez)
Motion to Debate (Chavera Bogad, Chavera Biegel)
Chavera Roberts-Sampson: Whatever we decide, it needs to be true across the movement.
Chaver Friedman: Keeping workshop is important because our program is distinct from the
others run by HD Olami (expectation for kupa, etc).
Chaver Siden: Irrational attachment to “workshop,” but it’s too significant to pass by.
Chavera Biegel: It should be Workshop 64’s decision whether or not they want to call their
program shnat, we should get rid of the “transitional period.”
Chaver Fox: It would be great to show that Veida can change things; HDNA feels alienated
from HD Olami.
Chavera Green: MazArtzit would prefer for it not to change, but recognize that they serve
the Veida; Workshop is a brand that people have worked to shape and will create work to
change.
Chaver Kay the Elder: The program is the same regardless of what we call it; workshop isn’t
a powerful brand in the NA Jewish community.
Chaver Miller – Historical perspective on Workshop; shlav hachshara bet is really the
hachshara prep for making Aliyah, not workshop; the whole Hebrew name has significance.
Chaver Wilen – my whole family did workshop!!!!! And changing the name would necessitate
changing the rikud song.
Motion to Close Debate (Chavera Stoler, Chaver Rov)
Motion to Acclaim the Close of the Debate (Chavera Mayer, Chaver Jaffe)
Objection (Chaver Gross)
Vote on Motion to Close Debate:
Be’ad: 95
Neged: 34
Nimna: 21
Debate is Closed.
Proconos: Pro – Chaver Horowitz, Con – Chaver Fernandez
Motion to Vote (Chaver Fogel, Chaver Fine)
Be’ad: 68
Neged: 62
Nimna: 63
Proposal does not pass.
Yoshevet Rosh switch: Yoshevet Rosh Shula Smith <3 <3
Proposal II – 4: Redefinition of Movement Tikkun Olam
Aaron Kay (With Influence and Assistance From Many Other Maapilim - You Know Who You
Are)
Whereas systemic injustice of all sorts is widespread in North American and Israeli Society (racism,
sexism, economic injustice, homophobia, ableism, etc).
Whereas a constitutional requirement of a Ma’apil in good standing is to strive to be “an activist and
leader in the struggle for Social Justice in the world.”
Whereas: tikkun olam is a primary method through which HDNA attempts to create a new social
order and actualize on the principle of social justice.
Whereas in HDNA, tikkun olam is typically carried out in a way that simply lessens the effects of
injustice (e.g. soup kitchens lessen the effects of hunger and systemic inequality, seashore clean up
lessens the effects of pollution), but does not necessarily combat the source of systemic injustices
(e.g. participating in a campaign to change a local minimum wage ordinance, pressuring a
corporation to change its practices or partnering with a local anti-racism initiative).
Whereas HDNA already has many formal partners working in systemic social change on a national
and local level.
Therefore, let it be resolved that:
All HDNA tikkun olam education and activity should strive to work against systemic injustice, as
opposed to preferably over (Chavera Schwartz, friendly) merely lessening the impacts of injustice. This
work should be accompanied by education about systemic injustice and methods of sustainable
change. These projects should be carried out in partnership with other community organizations in
an attempt to maximize the impact of our work.
Let it be further resolved that each HDNA machaneh must include one peula during their respective
chalutz/construction periods to educate each tzevet about systemic social change and its practice.
Machanot and eizorim whose chalutz/construction periods do not allow for this activity should
arrange a more appropriate time for it.
In order for machanot and eizorim to implement this ideological shift, a movement va’ad will form
to build a tochnit of resources (such as texts, media, examples of projects, suggested organizations to
partner with, etc.) regarding sustainable social change.
Question of Clarification: Chaver Fox: Would this entirely replace other form of tikkun olam
mentioned?
Answer: The spirit of the possible suggests a replacement. However, there is room for
service-based activities in that kind of activism.
Question of Clarification: Chavera Marantz: Can you explain better what systemic injustice is, and what
the kind of change you’re looking for is?
Answer: Things that seek to change the social order, rather than just extend services that
make-up for the discrepancies of the system. Band-aid metaphor.
Question of Clarification: Chaver Shnaidman: Does this place restrictions on tikkun olam done at
machaneh?
Answer: We’re not restricting, but it’s a suggestion. Doesn’t want to restrict what we already
do, we just want to do something more encompassing.
Question of Clarification: Chaver Katzman: Would the vaad created work until the summer? Or work
through the summer with the mazkiriot to help search for projects and places?
Answer: Ideally, the tochnit will be finished before the summer so they can be used during
the summer
Question of Clarification: Chavera Weintraub: Can you give an example of another organization besides
an old folks home?
Answer: The point is to emphasize that tikkun olam cannot happen in individual moments,
and we should strive to connect with partners for the long hall so that the projects can be
constructed in partnerships. It is difficult, but we should be partnering with organizations
that address social change with a systemic lense so that change can be done. For example,
working with an organization such as Jewish United for Justice (in DC), and being able to
use that partnership to construct a partnership that would allow chanichim to participate
during the summer. Example planning rally supporting campaign etc.
Question of Clarification: Chavera Laniado the Elder: Does this apply to madrichim and chanichim?
Answer: Yes.
Question of Clarification: Chavera Roberts-Sampson: Would the activities be differentiated for different
age groups?
Answer: It depends entirely on what kind of organization you’re partnering with.
Proposal Seconded by Chavera Zebovitz
Motion to Caucus (Chaver Diner, Chaver Summers-Berger)
Motion to Acclaim (Chaver Berman, Chaver Matthews)
Objection by Chaver Oziel
Motion to Debate (Chaver Oziel, Chaver Miller)
Chavera Cooper: We should set our standards high and this does that; We should recognize
that some eizorim and machanot are already doing this.
Chavera Weintraub: Noar Tzedek Is awesome!
Chaver Pekarsky: This is trying to integrate people who already work in these efforts and
those who work in the ken
Chavera Kaplan: This is great, hard on Gabriola, but it’s gonna be a great convo
Chavera McElreath: This proposal is striving towards progressive change and we are a
progressive youth movement
Chaver Finkelstein: We need maapilim and dugmot for what it looks like to actualize
working on systemic injustice
Chaver Diner: Incredible opportunity to engage with the communities our machanot are in;
socialism is about facing systemic injustice.
Motion to Close Debate (Chaver Corcoran, Chaver Naamani)
Motion to Acclaim Closing the Debate (Chavera Horowitz, Chavera Smith)
Objection: Chavera Schwartz
Motion to Acclaim the Proposal (Chaver Kay, Chaver Jaffe)
Objection: Chavera Schwartz
Motion to Amend (Chavera Schwartz, Chaver Goldblatt ha katan) - Friendly
Motion to Acclaim the Proposal (Chaver Kay, Chaver Jaffe)
PROPOSAL ACCLAIMED.
Proposal II – 5: Passing the Green Line with an Olive Branch in Hand
Adina Cooper, Jordan Cooper, Yael Horowitz, and Nadia Hecker-O’Brien
Whereas Article II of the Constitution states that an aim of Habonim Dror is, “To upbuild the state
of Israel as a progressive, egalitarian, cooperative society, at peace with its neighbors”;
Whereas ending the Occupation is a vital to the continued security and existence of Israel;
Whereas in order to engage with Israel properly we must see and learn about it in its entirety and be
aware of all that needs to change;
Whereas the Occupation and the socioeconomic conflicts within Israel are inextricably connected;
Whereas Workshop chanichim are taken on socioeconomic siyurim of various cities and learn about
class inequalities in Israel but are not taken on tours of the Occupied Territories;
Whereas a major reason for not going to the West Bank in the past has been safety, yet this issue is
irrelevant considering resources such as the Department of State Travel Bureau as well as other
security structures available to Habonim Dror; as well as examples set by seasoned programs from
progressive organizations like Breaking the Silence, Encounter, Ir Amim, and other youth
movements like Young Judea;
Let it be resolved that: Israel education throughout the movement emphasizes the Occupation as a
major obstacle to achieving movement ideals “a just and lasting peace.” (Chaver Stanger, friendly).
Let it be resolved that there should be develop a chinuch program prior to MBI and Workshop prepare chanichim to
deal with the complexities of the multiple narratives in Israeli and Palestinian societies regarding the conflict.”
(Chavera Simchon, unfriendly)
Let it be resolved that: the Merakez/et tochniot and (Chaver Oziel, friendly) MBI Mazkirut ensure that
there is programming in which Chanichim engage with the nuances of the conflict to some extent
(Chavera Kaplan) as well as visiting East Jerusalem, (Chaver Merin) and be made aware if and when
they cross the Green Line and what that means.
Let it be resolved that: the Merakez/et tochniot and (Chaver Oziel, friendly) Workshop madrichim and
rakazim plan a seminar focusing on the Occupation that includes visiting the Occupied territories.
Said program will be one that the madrichim and rakazim create by themselves or with a partner
organization so that it reflects and challenges (Chaver Stanger, friendly) our progressive values in
regards to recognizing Israel’s role in the Occupation and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with the
understanding that not all programs that visit the Occupied territories express our values. This
aforementioned seminar will include education that recognizes the multiplicity of voices and opinions in the Palestinian
community. (Chavera Mayer, friendly)
In this vein, let it be resolved that the Workshop tochnit will strive to include the multiple voices of Palestinians living
in the occupied territories, Israel Proper, and refugee camps (Chavera Mayer, friendly) as well as many narratives
of Iaraeli and Jewish society (Chavera Simchon, unfriendly).
Let it be resolved that: Mifgash seminars visit the occupied territories and explore how the
Occupation plays into the movement vision of upbuilding the Jewish State, using the same
considerations in programming as in the above resolution.
Let it be resolved that the Mazkirut Artzit will look into the potential costs of such changes to our Israel programs.
Should such changes significantly increase the costs of these programs, the Mazkirut Artzit will act at their discretion
to do the best they can to work towards the spirit of this proposal while ensuring that it will not prevent anyone from
participating in movement programs. If a decision is made to not follow through with this resolution, the Mazkirut
Artzit would begin a conversation with the movement according to the resolution passed by Chaver Edleman and
Chaver Katzman (2013). (Chaver Oziel, friendly)
Point of order (Chaver Edelman): Check Quorum, Quorum still exists.
Question of clarification: Chavera Slobin: It’s a rule on Workshop and on MBI that you can’t cross the
Green Line. What does that mean for this program?
Answer (Chaver Oziel): You can cross the Green Line on these programs as long as you
have permission from the cheder matzav. If you wanted to do, for example, on chofesh on
Workshop the tzevet can get it cleared from the cheder matzav. This was looked into before
Veida- nothing in the proposal is breaking rules; but safety and security will still need to be
taken into account.
Question of Clarification: Chavera Volk: Can you explain third whereas clause? Why is socio-economic
inequality in Israel related to the territories?
Answer: We look at inequalities and situations of injustice in Israel proper and this ignores
inequalities in the Occupied Territories which is relevant to Israeli society. It would be
hypocritical to call Israel egalitarian when it occupies Palestine. Proposers cite examples of
connection between Israeli economy and the occupation.
Question of Clarification: Chavera DeVarti: How does this relate to the Golan?
Answer: These programs already go to the Golan. Our concern is therefore not adding that.
Question of Clarification Chavera Roberts-Sampson: Is the plan to comply with security standards in
Israel?
Answer: See answer to first question.
Quesetion of Clarification: Chaver Sturman: Why should MBI specifically visit East Jerusalem?
Point of Order: Chaver Pekarsky: not a question of clarification
Motion to Caucus (Chaver Diner, Chaver Fox)
Noteworthy conversation: People think that seeing the West Bank is important and it is
important to hear naratives from oppressed people; similar to how we learn about things and
then visit relevant sites in the Workshop tochnit; maybe the second whereas clause “what
that means” should be better defined; peace is not mentioned and that should be the core of
the proposal for us to feel comfortable and see a direction in the proposal (misinformation:
it is in the first whereas clause and is referred to later in movement aims); unclear about the
goal of the site-seeing aspects- are we privileged American Jews looking at oppressed
people? Maybe the idea of getting Palestinian activists to come speak would be more
comfortable and less appropriating; had issues with the MBI aspect where parents are
making decisions for their kids; Dilemma of power dynamics inherent to this, but maybe this
potential exists in other programmatic elements like the SES tour; going on a siyur is more
powerful than having a seminar; should we divide the question to differentiate between MBI
and Workshop; how could this effect parents; point of information: we have crossed the
Green Line before; need to understand the connections between Israel’s society and
economy and society; could be good to root the conversation in broader education about
Jewish and Zionist ideology in the good way that we do it in the movement; could it help
these programs by setting them apart from other Israel programs and help with registration?;
do we know that it won’t breed more cynicism/disenfranchisement/anti-Zionism?; There
are a variety of perspectives within caucus tables; what does it mean to mandate
programming about one perspective of an issue and a conflict?; This is a necessary part of
our education; its not just about the other side- there are people within Israel that feel like
they are threatened by the Occupation and we should be careful of simplifying and
dichotomizing language; this is important and we should be focusing on why educating
about the Occupation is important to us; add an opt out clause where parents could opt their
kids out of it? The clause could also be negative by dichotomizing chanichim and
programming- especially this kind of programming- should not be optional; the growing
issue that MBI and our Israel programs are facing: competition from a free one-week
program- we have a great program but it should be taken into consideration that how
parents see this resolution could also affect future enrollment of our Israel programs- if
parents don’t like this will they send more of their kids on programs like birthright; the trust
that we have in our rakazim and madrichim in creating critical, engaging and empowering
programs trumps fears of voyeurism/site-seeing and privilege; we should consider ideology
as more important than what parents think- we can figure those things out but we should set
the standard high; the proposal’s emphasis on the economic implications of Occupation
were uncomfortable - what about other political oppression; its worth losing enrolment for
this to happen; this is frustrating for post-MBIers; having people living in the Occupation
leading these programs is really important; this is so cool; fear is not a legitimate reason to
not have this sicha; the Occupationis also linked to the Gaza strip and the Golan Heights
and education between the three occupied territories should be linked; Point of misinformation:
Golan Annexed and Israel has a military presence in Gaza; Point of misinformation: the
annexation of the Golan Heights is considered illegal under international law so it is
controversial to call it unoccupied; There are other programs that go to the Occupied
Territories and don’t make it a thing, they just go to settlements and consider it a part of
Israel and that is important to acknowledge; the implementation of this could include
conversations with parents because none of us have children who are going on MBI; the
purpose of MBI is to learn about Israel in an immersive experience and you need to have an
intimate knowledge of a core issues in Israel, specifically the Occupation, to be a Zionist;
Point of Personal Privilege (Chavera Silverman and Chavera Zeobivitz): EAGLES BEAT THE
COWBOYS!
Yoshevet Rosh Smith: Out of Line
Motion to Amend: Chaver Stanger - Friendly
Motion to Amend: Chavera Mayer, Chaver Corcoran - Friendly
Motion to Amend: Chaver Bar El, Chaver Marsh - Unfriendly - Withdrawn
Let it be resolved that: Mifgash seminars visit the occupied territories and explore how the
Occupation plays into the movement vision of upbuilding the Jewish State, using the same
considerations in programming as in the above resolution.
Motion to Amend: Chaver Oziel, Chaver Tischler - Friendly
Motion to Amend: Shlicha Simchon, Chaver Zadok – Unfriendly – Pursued.
Add a let it be resolved clause:
“Let it be resolved that there should be develop a chinuch program prior to MBI and Workshop prepare
chanichim to deal with the complexities of the multiple narratives in Israeli and Palestinian societies regarding
the conflict.”
Add to end of the clause “In this vein, let it be resolved that the Workshop tochnit will strive to include
the multiple voices of Palestinians living in the occupied territories, Israel Proper, and refugee camps”:
“as well as many narratives of Iaraeli and Jewish society.”
Intention of first part is to ensure that there is context in our education in a centralized way
before the Israel programs.
Point of Misinformation: There is a spiralized tochnit
Second part of the proposal: although we are a leftist movement we need to have a full and
complex understanding of the issue. The intent is to have different views presented to
balance different ideas.
Proposers explain why it’s unfriendly: This proposal is not about adding to something we already
do, its about adding something that we don’t already do. This proposal is not about our
comprehensive Israel education, it is about filling a deficit in education about Palestinians
and the Territories.
Motion to Debate (Chavera Green, Chaver Diner)
SUPERCEDING MOTION: Motion to Caucus (Chaver Feinberg, Chaver Frankfurter)
SUPERCEDING MOTION: Motion to Acclaim the Amendment. Objected
Then return to Motion to Debate and debate is opened.
Chaver Schaffer: More education is only good. It can’t hurt us.
Chaver Rov: I disagree. All of our official documents guide our education. This amendment
distracts from the intention to add a new aspect to our education.
Chaver Katzman the elder: I think there should be some more serious form of a
standardized Israel education before MBI.
Chaver Pekarsky: On a procedural point, we should be debating the preferences of the Veida
towards this amendment. This reminds me of the past proposal to change the movement
ideology with reference to Tikkun Olam in the fact that it seems many people have had
vastly different experiences in this topic.
Chaver Gross: Often congress puts irrelevant things into bills and then pass them. We
should be like congress.
Chaver Bordoley: I’m still unclear as to what the first clause of the amendment attempts to
do. I think it’s distracting.
Chavera Green: I’m very nervous to talk about this. Just because I’m on the mazkiruit artzit
does not mean it’s easy for me to articulate my views. This amendment is much less about
the education before MBI and more about bringing in multiple Israeli views as well. I would
prefer this conversation to be about dealing with the multiplicity of perspectives. There is a
deeper question at hand. Are we actually doing this education already? Why does adding this
make us feel uncomfortable?
Chaver Kay the younger: I respect people’s time and withdraw from the tor.
Chavera Starkman: In a lot of ways, I think we are more comfortable speaking from Jewish
perspectives and in Jewish voices because we are Jewish. I think the goal of this proposal is
to address the lack of Palestinian narratives and because of that I think we need to consider
what our programming consists of and what, as non-Palestinians, can we fill? Beacause of
this, I am not sure if specifically including an amendment that considers the Jewish
perspective is in the spirit of this proposal or is necessary.
Chaver Diner: This proposal deals with one part of the conflict, the occupation, and not
with our holistic education about the conflict.
Chavera Miller: I strongly agree with the opinion that was voiced earlier about how this is a
more controversial amendment because it’s from the schlichim. Of course it is necessary to
have balanced preparatory education in order to properly experience a more intimate
education later on.
Chavera Mayer: I am conflicted on this amendment, but feel the need to clarify my previous
amendment. When you boil the conflict down to “different voices”, you lose the structure
that creates these different voices. Potentially we lose that when we shift the focus from a
language of Occupation to a language of conflict. I want this proposal to make us consider
and listen to voices we do not encounter and do not see or hear on a regular basis.
Chaver Corcoran: I think what Chavera Green touched on is the essential question here. I
want to encourage the shlichim to not go about this through this amendment, which is not
in the spirit of the proposal, and rather through a debate of the spirit of the proposal where a
yes vote would affirm the need to include more Palestinian voices and where a no vote
would say that is not enough or that there are too many logistical challenges.
Yoshevet Rosh Smith takes a straw poll on the amendment. In the humble view of this note taker, it looks like it
would pass.
Proposers would like to change their opinion. But they can’t do that.
Motion to Suspend the Rules in order to let the proposers change their opinion on whether it is friendly:
Chaver Pekarsky, Chaver Tischler
Motion to Acclaim suspending the rules (Chavera Shenfeld)
Objection: Chaver Marsh
Motion to Vote on Suspending the Rules (Chaver Feinberg, Chaver Merin)
Motion to Suspend the Rules withdrawn
Motion to Vote on the amendment (Chaver Rov Chaver Ledersnaider)
Amendment Passes (76 Be’ad, 39 Neged, 31 Nimna)
Motion to divide the question to separate MBI from the rest of the proposal (Chaver Merin, Chavera Friedland)
Straw Poll on Dividing the question – the room looks divided with a slight majority against dividing the
question.
Motion to Debate on dividing the question (Chavera Carmeliado, Chaver Peacock)
Point of Order: dividing the question is not a superceding motion. We return to a Motion to Debate as
the proposal stands and debate is opened.
Chavera Shlicha Yael: I have a lot of respect for the proposers for bringing forward an idea
that I believe is trying to touch on something very important. I have a problem with a lot of
the spirit of the proposal because I feel it is caving to a problematic dialogue in North
America around what is occurring in the Middle East. I think the problem with this dialogue
is that it is centered on hate and an attempt to flatten the dilemma or the conflict in general.
Even though there was some dialogue around peace in the beginning of the proposal, it did
not make it to the resolution portion and I believe we need to have a more complex
understanding of the conflict. There exists an attempt in North America to delegitimize the
complexity of the conflict.
Chavera Appel-Kraut: During my time on Workshop, I made an intentional decision to take
a tour with Breaking the Silence. It became clear to me that I was experiencing a lack of
conversation and voices of Palestinians, around the Occupation. I think this is important
that this passes. After we went, I was sad that this was not something I shared with my entire
kvutza. I believe my experience would have been more robust if it was a shared experience.
Breaking the Silence is not Habonim, and I believe that if I had been given the opportunity
to experience this education with the movement, it would have been beneficial for my entire
kvutza and much more in line with our values. Before this trip, I did not want to engage with
Israel. But after the trip, I made the decision to continue engaging with my relationship in
Israel and continue as an activist and educator.
Chavera Lerman-Sinkoff: My main argument is ultimately in support of this proposal. 1.
Intelectual and educational honesty. There is a lot of hard economic data to show that
changes in Israel’s economy is most strongly influenced by changes in the Occupation. To
not engage in this significant portion of Israel’s reality is irresponsible. We educate towards a
two state solution, but if we will really advocate for this we need to allow in the voices of
those impacted. Finally, there is an interesting phenomenon where as Habonim we want to
include challenging the Occupation as part of our holistic identiy because challenging the
Occupation is not in itself a Jewish identity. The Occupation is not a joke and cannot be
expressed in coasters.
Chaver Bordoley: At this point I see the impacts as putting Habonim members on trips to
the occupied territories and I see this as the begging of a much larger process and I am
excited to see where this leads.
Chaver Corcoran: It is important to affirm that this is something we want on Workshop. For
the benefit of the Veida, I think it is important to focus on what the impact is for MBI and
think about what Chaver Merin addressed. Some of these questions are ideological and some
are logistical. Is this something that will turn off families from MBI? What is the ideological
benefit? We are taking our chanichim to Israel and starting them on a Masa that will
potentially lead them to Aliyah. I honestly think that more people would make Aliyah
because this would be an affirmation that ending the occupation is something that the
movement is engaging in and especially the Tnuat Bogrim. Logistically, a parent asked
Chaver Oziel about conversations with Arabs and the West Bank. But the question was not
about safety, but askng why we are not doing this. Some families may be turned off, but
others may be turned on. What does this mean for implementation? Luckilly the Merakez
Tochniot and rosh mbi are in this room.
Chavera Mayer: I’m getting the feeling that many people are thinking “yeah!” I think the
proposal to divide the question needs to be addressed so I will move Dekel to the front of
the Tor and we will try to discuss the concept of dividing the question
Chaver Merin: I support the vast majority of this proposal. I would want to remove part of
the requirements of MBI and leave much to the discretion of those people running MBI.
Chavera Jordan Cooper: The thing about MBI is that it was the first time I went to Israel or
really engaged with Israel in a serious way. I think the education we give on MBI is essential
to how our chanichim think about Israel. I don’t understand why we feel like we need to
build up a love for Israel before letting them realize that Israel isn’t perfect. Why do we want
people to go through that shock? MBIers are not 10. I think it would be a wasted
opportunity to not allow these sorts of interactions.
Chaver Peacock: I think the question we are at the moment skirting is the importance and
centrality of Zionism within our movement. I can’t understate the degree to which Zionism
is essential and integral part of our movement. That is why I think this is beneficial. I think
the core root of Anti-Zionism within the movement is a resentment of a lack of education
about the occupation and there is no one I trust more to educate about the occupation
within a Zionist concept than the makiruit artzit and TB.
Chavera Kaplan: I think that visiting East Jerusalem is very important because we visit West
Jerusalem without referring to it as such. Maybe we don’t need to visit it and maybe we can
just look at a lot of maps but this is important considering the dialogue around Jersualem as
the “undivided unified capital.” My madrichim on Workshop brought me to concentration
camps and made me think about the Holocoast as I never had before. I want those same
madrichim to take me to Hebron and Jenin and help me to engage with the occupation in
the same way.
Chavera Shenkar: I want to address something very specific in the proposal and that is
mifgash. I think that it might not be practical and it is a place to engage with Israel, yes, but it
is also a space to engage with your kvutza.
Chaver Rice: I think that talking about the occupation without talking about the Golan and
Gaza and the rest of the conflict is irresponsible. All of these topics are linked and it’s
important for every person in this room to think about those consequences.
Chavera Shenfeld: What does it mean to have successfully educated a chanich? If they come
to a different conclusion based on our education, is that still a success? Should we be trying
to show or conceal certain things to help chanichim reach the same conclusions as us?
Motion to Amend: Chaver Merin - Friendly
Motion to Amend: Chavera Kaplan - Friendly
Motion to Amend: Chaver Oziel, Chaver Burman - Friendly
Motion to Acclaim (Chavera Friedland, Chavera Beadle)
Objection: Chaver Feinberg
Motion to Vote: (Chaver Diner, Chaver Shore)
Pro: Chavera Stoler: This proposal is important because it revolutionizes programs that have
evolved in many ways but not in this way or in this political climate. This moves us in the
right direction and moves us as a movement with the new political climate. This is an
important opportunity.
Con: Chaver Stanger: In its original form this was a strong proposal that I was in favor of.
The amendments- amount and content- have diluted the proposal to an extent that I don’t
believe the proposers are happy with and that I am not happy with either. Like last year’s
Veida, this is similar to encouraging to demand.
Be’ad: 114
Neged: 8
Nimna: 9
Shlichim:
Be’ad: 4
Neged: 2
Nimna: 0
PROPOSAL PASSES.
Because we suspended the rules to discuss mas, we are now returning to the Constitution section.
Proposal I – 5: Employees of Unionized Companies Are Required to Pay Dues And So
Should You Be
Mazkirut Artzit and Howard Stanger
Whereas paying Mas is an expression of our Socialist, collectivist ideology (Chavera Chertock, friendly)
Whereas the HDNA Central Office depends on Mas payments from machanot and individuals in
order to operate and therefore run programs such as MBI, Workshop, and movement seminars;
Whereas the current language in the Constitution does not reflect the reality of how machanot
collect Mas from ma’apilim;
Whereas everyone should pay Mas as long as they can afford to do so;
Let it be resolved that the Constitution is amended as follows:
Add Section 24.a. For tzevet members who do not consider themselves movement members, a portion of Mas is still
required for support of movement services provided to the machanot, mazkiruyot and madrichim. Those who do
consider themselves movement members will pay the full mas which includes both the portion for support of movement
services provided to the machanot and the balance which is the movement membership fee In addition there will be an
opt-in membership fee to affirm financial commitment where possible to the movement stability and growth. This
membership fee is required for all members in good standing (Sieradzki, friendly). Per Section 23, the specific
amounts are to be fixed by the Mazkirut Artzit.
Replace Section 25.
If a Ma’apil/a is unable to pay mas they are encouraged to utilize the kupa system. If
after exploring this option they still find themselves unable to pay, they should notify the Mazkirut
Artzit.
Seconded by Chavera Friedland
Question of Clarification:
Chaver Gross: If this proposal was to pass, when would it go in effect?
Answer: Summer 2014
Chaver elder Goldblatt: Is chanichim Mas included in this proposal?
Answer: No it is not, Mas is being fixed by HDCA, which involves the Mazkirut Artzit,
EDs, professionals, board members and ma’apilim.
Chavera Newman: When you mean utilize kupah system, do you mean tzevet kupah system?
Answer: Yes.
Chaver Merin: Would it be taking out from paychecks no matter what, and then 25 added to
that payment? (This was based off of a statement by Chaver Meyer in which he gave the
example that it could be broken down to be $60 for services, and $25 for membership.
These particular numbers may not be reflective of the way that Mas will be divided into
these two components.)
Answer: Yes, the fee is already mandatory already.
Chavera Friedman-Hutter: What would happen if ma’apilim consider themselves movement
member but didn’t work at machaneh the past summer?
Answer: Any maapil that attends a movement seminar that didn’t work at machaneh the
previous summer is required to pay Mas to pay for the seminar.
Chaver Warshai: Just to clarify, if a tzevet member does not consider themselves a part of the
movement and is unable to pay mas, would they also be encouraged to contact mazkirut
artzit?
Answer: Yes, but also the mazkirut of machneh should speak on their behalf.
Chaver Miller made a joke and people laughed with a little pity.
Point of misinformation: Chaver Levy - in the amended section, you are only addressing
chanichim mas not tzevet mas, must fix that section to be Section 23 at the end of the let it
be resolved.
Chavera Shenfeld: What about people who work at machaneh who are youth but are not
ma’apilim or movement members but may be registrar or caretaker of the machaneh etc.?
Answer: I am referring to tzevet members but the requirement is really for maapilim not for
tzevet members. If your caretaker or maintence person is a 28 year old non-movement
member than this doesn’t apply to them. The mazkirut artzit is in conversation with
mazkirut of machanot and we need to be in better communication with machanot and are
developing those relationships to help ma’apilim pay mas and improve in that relationship.
Chaver Feinberg: Do you mind taking off the second I on mazkiriyot and replacing with u?
Answer: OMG TOTS we will!
Motion to Caucus (Chaver Warshai, Chaver Diner)
Motion to Acclaim (Chaver Finkelstein, Chaver Merin)
Objected: Chavera Sieradzki
Notes from Caucus Reports: Like the proposal, but the idea that we are putting it into the
Constitution that people who aren’t a part of the movement can work at machaneh which made
some groups feel weird. Mosh and Galil would make a big difference to actually get the mas from
tzevet. General feel is that people are really into this proposal, and see minor problems with it, for
example machanot in difficult financial situations.
Note: both of the caucus table leaders of do you want two cds are sleeping in the back of the room.
It’s adorable.
Motion to Vote (Chaver Ledersnaider, Chaver Jaffe)
Motion to Acclaim (Chavera Roberts-Sampson, Chaver Goldblatt)
Motion to Debate (Chavera Sieradzki, Chaver Friedman)
Yoshev Rosh Corcoran: In interest of time, we will debate by Pro-Con speakers (everyone agreed)
Pro Speaker: Chaver Shnaidman: Whether or not people want to be a part of the
movement or not a part of the movement, they need to recognize that machaneh is a part of
the movement and need to take a level of responsibility to pay Mas. It’s a good showing of
the responsibility it takes to work at machaneh.
Con Speaker: Chaver Sieradzki Agree everyone should be paying mas, the problem is
validating the difference between movement members and non-movement members in the
constitution. The constitution should be striving for an ideal, and adding this to the
constitution makes it ok not to strive to make all tzevet members as movement members.
Also recognizing the tension that exists and the need for people to pay Mas. Also a weird
distinction between service fee and membership fee, if you are working at machaneh you are
a movement member and we should push people to confront those issues.
Motion to Amend: Chavera Chertock, Chavera Roberts-Sampson - Friendly.
Motion to Amend: Chavera Sieradzki, Chavera Fox - Friendly.
Motion to Acclaim (Chavera Newman, Chaver Jaffe)
Objected: Chaver Sturman
Be’ad: 139
Neged: 1
Nimna: 12
Shlichim: 6 be’ad
PROPOSAL PASSES.
This concludes the constitutional section of veida, before we begin implementation. Chaverim
Green, and Naamani will read a letter on behalf of their garin in Israel in accordance with the RCIP
section mentions garinim approval at veida.
Shalom HDNA
We, selected members of Shichvat 58, do hereby declare the establishment of a new Garin b’Eretz Yisrael, and request
your acceptance as a Garin in the framework of Habonim Dror North America, as stated in Article VII: Garinim
and Aliya Frameworks, Section 37 in HDNA's Regulations and Procedures for the Implementation of the
Constitution.
While It might not be a surprise to many of you that 58 has established a garin in Israel, maybe it’s a surprise that
58 is now coming and asking for your approval for this garin. ‘What do we have to do with this new garin?’ some of
you may ask yourselves. ‘Sure! Do whatever you want, why do we care?’ you might say. Well, contrary to what you
may be thinking, we’re not doing this purely to feed our egos or draw attention to ourselves as 58. Nor are we doing
this in order to give precise definition to a nascent garin that is still evolving. We are, moreover, a group of different
people with different beliefs. We would like to briefly explain what we are currently attempting, and perhaps give you a
sense of your involvement in the attempt we’re making. Indeed, rather than draw attention to ourselves, what we want
to do now is draw attention to all of you gathered here, and to draw all of you into the choice our kvtuzah has made.
Maybe it’s not obvious, but this choice did not occur in a vaccum by 58 and for 58. It was a choice that was made
with the entire movement in mind after a process in which the entire movement took part. It was not just a 58 choice,
but also an HDNA choice.
As you all know, there is currently a growing T’nuat Bogrim community in Haifa. Thisl community is essentially a
network of urban collectives, each of which engages in an intimate kvutzah process while simultaneously working to
affect change in Israeli society. The kvutzot within the community, and the individuals within the kvutzot do not and
cannot ever constitute a homogenous, static ideal. People are different from each other, and they grow and change every
day. Yet beneath this diverse, evolving community there lies a common foundation that provides sustenance, coherence,
and direction. This is true of the movement as a whole and of 58 itself: We are united by our desire to shape the world
around us, knowing that we must start with ourselves, the Jewish people, and with Israel, the belly of the beast [center
of Jewish civilization]. We are committed to a lifestyle that puts shivyon erech ha’adam at the center of our day-to-day
lives. We intend to push Israeli society closer to our vision of a just, peaceful, democratic, and socially responsible
nation.
Our kvutzah has gone through a bumpy process of self and collective exploration of our values and identities. We have
struggled deeply with conflicting and complementary visions for our lives. By choosing Israel and choosing kvutsah, we
have not resolved all of the tensions and questions facing us as North American, Zionist, socialist Jews who have
various other identities, passions, and interests. But what we do know is that for now we are choosing to engage with
our Jewish and Zionist identities and our socialist values as both a means and an ends to tikun olam. Five of us are
currently beginning our lives in Israel, and more of us are planning to join in the months and year to come. We are also
in a process with Habonim Dror olim from other parts of the world who are also seeking a kvutsati and mesimati
lifestyle.
With all that being said, we are coming to you today as partners in our decision to make aliyah in a collective
framework. You have been our partners, if indirectly, in our process so far and we don’t see ourselves as somehow
detached from you in our hagshama. Exactly the opposite: we feel that our hagshama is born out of responsibility to
you. But the inverse is also true: we believe that all of you here have a responsibility to carefully consider the choices you
make in your day-to-day lives and to question whether your praxis mirrors your values. We are giving thanks for all
you have done already, because it has helped make us who we are. We are also challenging you to recognize the
centrality of Israel to the Jewish people and the need to see any true long-term movement Hagshama as necessarily
taking place in Israel.
So we’re really asking for more than just approval. We’re asking for a genuine, deep partnership between us in Israel
and you in North America. We’re excited to share this responsibility with you, and proud to continue the
revolutionary work of our movement with you.
Aleh V’Hagshem.
Love,
58
Questions of Clarification:
Chaver RosenHanst: Can you tell us what praxis means within your garin?
Chaver Naamani gives a brief defition of praxis. For the 58 garin, the praxis is still being
figured out, but it relates to the leadership roles taken and their larger place in the
movement, as well as representing the goals of the movement.
Chaver Kaplan: Affirms the leadership that 58 has given to the movement during their time in
SHB. How do you plan on balancing between providing dugma’ot in making Aliyah, and the
need for North American movement leadership?
Preface: all of these answers have a limited extension to how much they can represent
people that aren’t in the room. There needs to be a balance kept between going to Israel and
really taking it into their lives, which is what we call first and foremost for as hagshama, and
leaving North America with responsible leadership in North America. We don’t claim to
have perfected this balance because of all of the complexities (because of individual needs
and the movements needs etc.) There is something important within this question. To make
a choice to stay in North America for the growth of HDNA, you must be asking serious
questions about about moving to Israel. Also important to look for relationships with
individuals in kvutzot and asking questions with individual leaders in the movement.
Chaver Marsh: Are you and Ben Marsh going to make Aliyah?
I can really only speak for my own questions and decisions. It’s hard to stand in front of the
Movement and answer that question, when I am still in a process of finding my answers. I
have found lots of meaning within my tafkid and ask every single question over and over
again.
Chaver Kay Katan: Can you explain if you are asking for approval with this Veida will change
any behaviors to the garin in Israel?
It creates a platform to ask what are we doing and why are we doing it? Whether it means
they are going to change what they are choosing is hard to say exactly, but this is opening a
conversation and an invitation to feel connected to this and feel partially responsible.
Chaver Gross: What exactly do you plan on doing when in Israel?
Also a difficult question when speaking for a whole group, because there is different
thoughts about what that would look like. As a garin, they want to assert a commitment to
movement lifestyle and participation in a broader Shlav Gimmel process. What this looks
like for individuals is inherently dynamic and hard to speak about on an ideal process. It is
both terrifying and totally exiting because they don’t feel bound to the past but feel bound to
the questions they want to ask each other.
Motion to Acclaim (Chaver Bordoley, Chavera Biegel)
GARIN ACCLAIMED.
PLENARY SESSION III: IMPLEMENTATION
Proposal III – 1: SOS Please Someone Help me it’s Not Healthy for Me to Feel This Way
and Not Talk About It
Jordana Starkman, Adina Cooper, Nadia Hecker-O’Brien, Nina Pressman
**trigger warning**
This proposal deals with topics including consent and sexual assault. These topics can be triggering
and emotional for individuals to address. As the nature of this proposal is sensitive, it is extremely
important that no assumptions about the experiences, views, or feelings of individuals be made. This
proposal is not intended to bring up conversations of specific events that may have happened in
movement history, but instead to acknowledge the reality we as a movement face regarding unsafe
sexual attitudes. If anyone should feel that they need to excuse themselves from this conversation at
any point we support that decision. Additionally, if anyone should need support in coping with any
reaction to this conversation, the authors of this proposal as well as other tzevet members will be
available.
Whereas machanot and other Habonim Dror settings are places where sexual experimentation often
happens between chanichim and between tzevet members;
Whereas both chanichim and tzevet members should feel safe and comfortable exploring their
sexualities;
Whereas hook-up culture often can and does feel unsafe in movement settings;
Whereas sexual assault and potentially harmful sexual situations are realities at many machanot and
movement spaces;
Whereas understanding consent is necessary for the understanding of sex and sexuality, and the
practice of consent is essential to realizing the “Equality of all people and the equality of human value” as stated in
Article II of our movement aims in the constitution. (Chaver Goldstein, friendly)
Whereas if we do not speak explicitly about consent to chanichim they may be less likely to
approach madrichim about harmful or non-consensual sexual experiences;
Whereas lack of information about consent potentially leads to more problematic sexual encounters;
Whereas a goal of Habonim Dror is to provide an alternative education around all topics which
includes the topic of consent;
Whereas although all machanot and movement structures have different rules and
regulations regarding sex it is still necessary to include education about consent;
Whereas consent education contributes to a larger effort to resolve issues of sexual violence. (Chaver Goldstein,
friendly)
Therefore, let it be resolved that:
Prior to the start of machaneh, tzvatim receive workshops and proper training about consent and
sex education
Tzvatim will use these trainings to provide age-appropriate, and non-heteronormative education to their
chanichim, as well as to participate in a facilitated discussion about consent between tzevet members, (Chavera
Lieberman, friendly) so that every schichvah participating in the program has at least one sicha
dedicated to consent at the beginning of the summer/session (even if it is not brought up directly in
the context of sex);
For Madatz and older schavot, these peulot will be in the context of sex, and other forms of physical
intimacy.
If the kvutza is having an SOS (session on sex) or peulot on sex, this kvutza should also be discussing
sexual consent, regardless of age, wherever the consent conversation is appropriate and relevant. (Chaver Miller,
friendly)
Peulot around this topic will also be included in Workshop and MBI programming;
There will be a va’ad consisting of the authors of this proposal and other interested movement
members to oversee implementation of this proposal, whose purpose will be to create a resource for
implementing consent education in movement spaces. This education will also stress how the normalization
and presence of sexual assault and rape culture in our machanot, eizorim, and greater society is a manifestation of
systems of patriarchy.(Chaver Finkelstein + Chavera Slobin, friendly)
Let it be further resolved that at the next veida, a permanent va’ad will be created to ensure the continued
implementation and adjustments of the resources and training. (Chaver Gross, friendly)
Question of Clarification:
Chaver Merin: What does older Schavot mean?
Answer: It means younger than Madatz, but it varies based on the discussion.
Chaver Mayer: in the second paragraph after the therefore, let it be resolved… What is meant
by participating shichvah?
Answer: Every person should participate as a shichvah.
Chavera Laniado Katan: In terms of the workshop and training, where is the content coming
from? Will there be a standard people will follow?
Answer: Idea was to have the workshop come from an outside source which would be
determined by the va’ad to find and develop resources such as peulot that can be done at
machanot and on other programs.
Chaver Gross: Would the vaad be a permanent structure or just until you create the resource?
Answer: Imagining that the vaad would be created to create the resource, and that would be
a constant part of our programing though we recognize that that resource would have to be
updated which would need to be addressed later.
Chavera Friedman-Hutter: Is there a specific age where consent will be in the context of sex?
When you talk about age appropriate education not in the context of sex?
Answer: When kvutzot start talking about sex it is different from schivah to shichvah, it
should be at a relevant time when they start exploring questions of sexuality. Give tzvatim
agency in that. Consent for younger schavot can come in many forms, especially in terms of
safe space with others, showering together and other sharing ways. It does not have to only
be sexual it can also be about sharing.
Motion to Caucus (Chavera Selick, Chaver Fox)
Motion to Amend: Chaver Finkelstein/Slobin, Chaver Warshai - Friendly
Point of Priviledge: Chavera Bogad: Can Chavera Slobin explain what the gender binary is?
Now we need to define all of our terminology.
Motion to Amend: Chavera Lieberman, Chavera Klein - Friendly
Motion to Amend: Chaver Jaffe, Chavera Schwartz – Unfriendly. Not pursued.
Motion to Amend: Chaver Gross, Chavera Gross - Friendly
Motion to Amend: Chaver Miller, Chaver Rodiguez - Friendly
Motion to Amend: Chaver Stanger, Chavera Harmon – Unfriendly. Not pursued.
Caucus Report Notes: Different machanot have different policies that are more sex policies
than others. It has been acknowledged, in reference to the amendment about the patriarchy,
that we see ourselves as more progressive than we actually are. It’s easy for us to get behind
this proposal but we need to step up our game in terms of education and discourse. We’re
proposing a big culture change in our movement and as we move forward we should make
sure we’re not making individuals feel guilty for existing in a previous cultures, because that
is detrimental to this process. Parents may feel uncomfortable with some sort of education
on sex. General support of this proposal from the Veida, and a respectful tone in the
discussion. Sometimes these discussions are difficult and then after become a running joke
and we really want this not to happen with this proposal.
Motion to Acclaim (Chaver Cooper, Chaver Friedman-Hutter)
Objection: Chaver Shahar
Motion to Vote (Chavera Markovitz, Chavera Rosenfield)
Motion to Amend: Chaver Goldstein, Chavera Rodwin - Friendly
Pro speaker: Chaver Warshai: Consent is an issue that is extremely important and relevant
and one in which we need to improve our knowledge base, and this proposal is trying to
make that happen.
Con speaker: Chaver Finkelstein: Some chaverim believe that there needs to be more male
voices in developing our discourse around gender, and all of the proposers identify as
female.
Motion to Acclaim (Chavera Pressman, Chaver Ness-Cohn)
Motion to Suspend the Rules to allow Chavera Winrob to speak: Chaver Sagorin, Chaver Ber-El
Chavera Winrob: Wants people to undestand the seriousness of the topic, wants to be seen as more
than just a box of someone who talks about gender and consent. It’s okay to be vulnerable and say
that you haven’t thought about this and it’s okay to feel vulnerable and learn from each other. It’s
important to create a language that everyone will understand together and that will make people
want to engage more if they understand what is going on.
Motion to Acclaim (Chavera Mayer seconded by Chaver Rice)
PROPOSAL ACCLAIMED.
Proposal III – 2: Veida Proposal- My Chultzah So Fly (But I Don’t Have Enough $ For It!?)
Rachel Fishman, Aaron Meyer
Whereas the passing of veida proposal IV-5: “One Chultzah to Empower Us All” at Veida XVII
resolved to provide chultzot for all chanichim regardless of age;
Whereas we understand other financial struggles the movement and specific machanot face, and we
want to help this resolution succeed to its fullest potential to show how financial restrictions will not
subjugate our ideology;
Whereas we are a movement that prides itself on one of our founding pillars, hagshama
(actualization);
Let it be resolved that chultzot be added to the machanot program budgets for the summer of 2015
and for all following summers at a time in the future. (Chaver Shahar, friendly)
The 2015 deadline does not apply to machaotn running a budget defecit. These machanot will pursue providing
chultzot to chanichim once they are in a stable financial position, which is to be determined by the ED, and/or other
professionals, and the mazkirut of the machane. (Chaverim Corcoran and Diner).
Furthermore, let it be resolved that a new va’ad chultzah be created with representatives from each
machaneh to work closely with their respective machaneh Executive Director/Registrar/Business
Manager (as well as the central office) to achieve this goal;
Let it be further resolved that the mazkiruyot, ED’s, and the chultza va’ad will look into the potential costs of such a
proposal. Should such changes require that machanot incur costs that are prohibitively high (and require that one or
more machanot would not be able to participate in this resolution), the mazkiruyot, ED’s, and the chultza va’ad will
act at their discretion to do the best they can to work towards the spirit of this proposal, while ensuring that it will not
force the machanot to incur costs they cannot realistically bare. If a decision is made to not follow through with the
resolution to issue chultzot to each chanich/a, the mazkiruyot, ED’s, and chultza va’ad would begin a conversation
with the rest of the movement according to the resolutions passed by Chaver Edelman and Chaver Katzman.
(Chavera Kaplan, friendly)
Let it be resolved that we reaffirm the approval of “One Chultza to Empower Us All” from Veida XVII (2011).
We will continue to pursue the goal of the chultzot as a symbol of membership in Habonim Dror North America, and
entrust the va’ad to conduct the necessary research and pursue the necessary action in order to bring chultzot to
chanichim. (Chaver Shahar, friendly)
Questions of Clarification:
Chaver Ledersnaider: To what extent were EDs and registrars informed about this proposal?
Answer: There were people a part of this va’ad that were contacting different EDs and
different boards, the main problem has been the financial aspect. The EDs have not been
consulted about this specific resolution.
Chaver Bar El: Is the vaad that exists now going away?
Answer: A refreshment of people will be on the new va’ad.
Chaver Marsh: What comination of the ED/registrar etc. as mentioned are in this proposal?
Answer: Whoever we need to work with we will work with.
Chaver Shahar: Can you clarify a more precise burden on the budget?
Answer: 10 dollars and 5 cents per chultzah, and 10.68 Canadian dollars. Does not include
shipping and handling costs.
Chaver Gross: Where would the money in the budget come from?
Answer: Some machanot proposed the idea that a chultzah replaces a camp t-shirt. Added to
budget of future years. The vaad would work to find ways to make this accomplishable.
Chavera Gross: Is each machaneh budget towards the movement or to each individual
machanot?
Answer: Not exactly sure yet about that.
Chaver Gluck: What is the purpose of the vaad?
Answer: They have been working with the Rashim. It’s a lot of work. Kali can’t do it all
though we know she is a superhero.
Chaver Corcoran: Can the budget line be zero?
Answer: If we possibly got a grant for buying chultzot, the budget line can still say zero.
Chavera Bryan: What was the original proposal?
Answer: The original proposal lacked goals regarding what the vaad would do in order to
implement what the original idea intended. This proposal does not affirm or negate the old
one, only creates new goals.
Motion to Amend: Chavera Kaplan, Chaver Shnaidman - Friendly
Motion to Amend: Chavera Lermie - Withdrawn
Motion to Amend: Matan David Diner & Chaver Corcoran, Chavera Friedland
Point of order: Chaver Shahar: It seems like these amendments are the equivalent of voting no.
Motion to Table: Chaver Shahar, Chaver Levy - This topic is too convoluted and it’s clear that there
is a lot more work that needs to be done in cooperation with our professional staff members, etc.
before we can make a responsible financial decision.
Seconded by Chaver Levy
Motion to Debate the Motion to Table (Chaver Rosenhanst, Chavera Friedland)
Chaver Corcoran: Shouldn’t table because we should take a stand and find a way to
implement this
Chaver Rosenhanst: Confused about why implementation isn’t just being carried forward by
the va’ad, and instead being presented to the veida
Chavera Shenfeld: Proposal is specifically proposing to add a line to the budgets of summer
2015
Chaver Bordoley: Proposal is trying to keep this conversation in the limelight; regardless of
what the proposal says, if there’s no money it won’t happen.
Chavera Klein: Proposal should be withdrawn and a conversation should happen in the
va’ad
Chaver Shahar: Fine details are lacking, should find a way for the movement to financially
take on this proposal rather than individual machanot
Chaver Marsh: More people need to step up and join the va’ad
Chaver Gross: Worried about costs of this proposal
Chavera Silverman: A va’ad is an important structure, but the maz artzit and the mazkira
klalit also need to work with the professionals to find a solution. I don’t see people stepping
up for the va’ad, this concerns me. This proposal is a call to action, and we shouldn’t table it,
because that’s CRAP. Let’s look for fundraising and grants! But that’s on you all.
Motion to Suspend the Rules (Chaver Corcoran, Chaver Shahar) to vote on the proposal right away
instead of voting on whether or not to table it
Motion to Acclaim Suspending the Rules (Chavera Devarti, Chaver Shai)
Objection - Withdrawn
Point of Order – Quorum
Quorum has been reached at 140
Motion to Suspend the Rules: Chaver Corcoran, Chaver Shahar - to allow Chaver Shahar to withdraw
his Motion to Table
Motion to Acclaim Suspension of the Rules (Chaver Feinberg, Chaver Grossman) - No objections
Motion to Table has been withdrawn
Amendment by Chaverim Corcoran and Diner is withdrawn
Motion to Amend (Chaver Shahar, Chaver Schaffer)
Motion to Acclaim (Chavera Shenfeld, Chaver Diner)
Objection: Chaver Marsh
Motion to Vote (Chaver Jaffe, Chavera Pasternack)
Proconos – Pro (Chaver Schaffer), Con (Chavera Shenfeld)
Be’ad: 81
Neged: 23
Nimna: 35
PROPOSAL PASSES.
Yoshevet/et Rosh switch: Yoshevet Rosh Kali Silverman
Proposal III – 3: Talkin’ Bout Mas
Jordan Cooper, David Meyer, & Howie Stanger
Whereas our mas collection policy requires that all tzevet members, whether or not they identify as
movement members pay a portion of mas;
Whereas the implementation of this new mas policy will require a common understanding of the
ideological and logistical content among tzevet members of varying levels of identification with the
movement for the process to go smoothly;
Whereas mas collection affects tzevet members that may not be present at movement-wide
seminars, which currently constitute the primary spaces for building common understanding and
consensus on movement-wide policies;
Whereas many nachshonim are limited in their understanding and involvement of the Movement due to being unaware
of contributing to mas and the values that stem from it. (Chavera Greenfeld, friendly)
Whereas nachshonim quickly become ma’apilim where they will soon be deciding in what way they will be contributing
to mas. (Chavera Greenfeld, friendly)
Therefore, let it be resolved that: each summer the mazkirut of each machaneh, and in the beginning of
the academic year the mazkirut of each eizor within their ken (Chaver Goldblatt, friendly), will facilitate a
conversation with their tzevet regarding mas, mas payment policy, and the values that surround mas
payment.
Furthermore, let it be resolved that: tzevet will run a peulah with both the year before MBI and madatz about mas.
The peulah will include discussion explaining what mas is as well as how it affects the Movement, why it is necessary,
and whatever else tzevet, at the time, sees fit to discuss (Chavera Greenfeld, friendly)
Question of Clarification:
Chaver Bar-El the elder: Is the idea that this conversation is every year or just this year
Answer: it should read that “each summer….”
Chaver Siden: Is this a response to the other mas proposal?
Answer: no
Chaver Bar-El the elder: Is this only being proposed now because it is a new plenary session
and this is part of the idea of how to ‘implement’ and create awareness of the changes to
mas?
Answer: exactly. This could be thought of as accompanying the previous proposal.
Seconded by Chavera S. Smith
Motion to Acclaim (Chavera Roberts-Sampson, Chaver Merin)
Objection: Chavera Greenthal
Motion to Caucus (Chavera Newman, Chaver Jaffe)
SUPERSEDING MOTION: Motion to Amend: Chaver Goldblatt - Friendly
Noteworthy conversation: This was brought up earlier; one question is what function the
eizor conversation will serve since there is usually no compensation for eizor work
Motion to Amend: Chavera Greenfeld, Chavera Spooner - Friendly
Motion to Acclaim (Chaver Wilk, Chavera Ben-Yishay)
PROPOSAL ACCLAIMED.
Proposal III – 4: Asher Roth: Good for the Jews
Zak Newbart, Anya Friedman Hutter, and Dan Weiss
Whereas it is a priority of Habonim Dror North America to have flourishing Kenim and Eizorim &
sustainable Ma’apilim communities;
Whereas Kenim depend upon the strength and connectedness of Ma’apilim communities in North
American movement centers;
Whereas Kenim have the potential to provide recruitment for the respective Machanot;
Whereas it is an aim of the movement to expand its role in communities around North America;
Whereas there is not currently a structure for nachshonim to stay connected to their national kvutzah and that kvutza
can be an important platform to making decisions in the future; (Chavera Zebovitz, friendly)
Whereas there is not a formal space for nachshonim to discuss their involvement in the movement
after high school;
Whereas structures should be set in place for nachshonim to consider their options for continued
involvement in the movement as a collective and with the Madatz Madrichim;
Therefore, let it be resolved that: A tochnit will be created as a series of peulot for nachshonim, to
begin after the MBI during the madatz program, which would include the following:






One online during the fall after MBI, discussing the involvement and responsibility of sharing ideas and
working in the ken
One during Winter Seminar, led by the madrichim on the Winter Seminar tzevet assigned to that kvutzah,
which would focus on the importance of maintaining an identity as a national kvutzah and factors in deciding
to participate in the Madatz program.
One online during the spring after MBI – focused on bringing new ideas to machaneh and the importance of
taking a hadracha role. (Chavera Zebovitz, friendly)
One during the second session of the Madatz program – introducing the movement and the
ken as potentials factors in planning for one’s future.
One online in the early fall following the Madatz summer – allowing the post-Madatz to
engage in a discussion with their national kvutza about future university options and the needs
of the various communities. The first part of this peula should be the same for all chanichim.
The second part, in conjunction with the madatz madrichim, should include either an active
member from an HDNA Eizor, an HDNA ken, or a Ma’apilim community, and should
consist of a discussion on the meaning of engaging in these specific communities.
One at Winter Seminar – led by the Madrichim on the Winter Seminar tzevet assigned to that
kvutza, which would provide a space for nachshonim to process their experiences with
applying to colleges, as well as other future options and would encourage them to consider the


movement as a factor in their college decisions for the fall. plans for the future (Chavera Levy,
friendly).
One online in the spring following the Madatz summer – discussing decisions that have been made and how
to communicate and maintain relationships with those decisions. (Chavera Zebovitz, friendly)
One during Workshop and other programming for the Workshop-aged shichva (Chaver Naamani,
friendly) – led by the respective Workshop Madrichim and will provide a more comprehensive
discussion, of their greater responsibility towards the movement as they prepare to reenter
the HDNA community as maapilim.
Let it be further resolved that: A va’ad including the Merakez/et Chinuch, a variety of representatives
of past Tzvatim Madatz, and interested Ma’apilim, will create a Choveret of resources and outlines for
these peulot for relevant Madatz/Workshop madrichim to facilitate them, including a resource of different
anecdotes from ma’apilim about their experiences in ma’apilim communities (Chaver Finkelstein, friendly).
Let it be further resolved that this tochnit will take a critical look at the current state of kenim, specifically in regards to
Tikkun Olam (as defined by Chaver Kay’s resolution, which addresses systemic injustice). (Chaver Finkelstein,
friendly)
Question of Clarification:
Chaver Koppel: Will this occur during the Winter Seminar for nachshonim too?
Answer: No
Chaver Goldblatt: One for people who aren’t going on workshop as well?
Answer: The proposal doesn’t include that, but the proposers would be friendly to an
amendment like that one.
Chaver RosenHanst: Who do you envision running the second peula? Is it vague intentionally?
Answer: These peulot would be run by the madatz madrichim from the last summer. The
vagueness exists to be left to the discretion of the facilitators to give them agency.
Chaver Matthews: What does it mean to have a peula about involvement in the movement?
Answer: To discuss possibilities of working at machaneh or in the eizor.
Chavera Roberts-Sampson: Does this proposal mandate uniformity between machanot?
Answer: No, we don’t want to detract from the unique nature of machanot. The template of
the choveret would be the standard.
Chaver Wilk: What is different in the second part of the peula (following the madatz summer)?
Answer: This difference is that the peula is supposed to take into account the eizor or area
that people are thinking about interacting with after high school. The first part primarily
exploring future options and needs of various communities, which can remain standardized.
The second part is geographically specific.
Chavera Mayer: Are you talking about each eizor or those with specific needs?
Answer: Up to the discretion of the madrichim.
Chavera Horowitz: Can you clarify the goals of this peula?
Answer: We wanted to propose this because we don’t see a formal space within our movement
structures for chanichim to consider a movement life in high school (and what it might look
like).
Seconded by Chaver Koppel
Motion to Amend: Chaver Finkelstein, Chaver Goldblatt Hakatan - Friendly
Motion to Caucus: (Chaver Sturman, Chaver Jaffe)
Caucus Report Notes: This proposal is college normative, there should be other options, it
could be potentially problematic to have three different tzvatim plan three separate peulot,
this seems like a helpful proposal for decision making (and some nachshonim and ma’apilim
expressed disappointment that they had not had this opportunity). This proposal breeds a
conversation more than anything else, We also need resources for schools that provide an
ideology and philosophy we’re in line with, not just about eizorim. If different chanichim come
to each peula, does it detract from the effectiveness of the process? These peulot should also
start post-MBI because a lot of kvutzati relationships develop during that time and affect
decision making, should be done by grade, not shichvah.
Motion to Vote (Chaver S. Popper, Chaver Summers-Berger)
Motion to Amend: Chavera Levy, Chaver Shnaidman - Friendly
Motion to Debate (Chaver Shai, Chaver Haven)
SUPERCEDING MOTION: Motion to Amend: Chavera Zebovitz, Chaver Corcoran - Friendly
Motion to Amend: Chavera Zebovitz, Chaver Rakoff-Bellman - Friendly
Motion to Vote (Chaver Boyar, Chaver Jaffe)
Point of Order: Chaver Shai - Already a motion to debate on the floor
Motion to Amend: Chaver Goldblatt Hatzair, Chaver Haven – Unfriendly. Not pursued.
While the proposers reviewed the amendment, Mazkira Silverman asked the Magic Eight Ball a
number of questions. It was concluded that neither Chaver Katzman nor Chaver Warshai will ever be
able to touch Chaver Katzman’s toes.
Motion to Amend: Chaver Naamani, Chavera Devarti - Friendly
Return to original Motion to Vote
Pro Speaker: Chaver Berman: “Um, so… um…in..this Veida..um..in this Veida.” Chaver
Berman noted that in other movements in Habonim Dror Olami, the ken is prominent and
important. He believes that this proposal will allow us to strengthen kenim across North
America “as a clear manifestation of our values.”
Con Speaker: Chaver Shai: It was really interesting and valuable for Chaver Shai to have a
year in the United States while his kvutsa was on Workshop. His fear in approaching the
proposal was that he does not want to prevent chanichim from having the experience of
engaging with communities outside of Habonim during their time in university. But also, he
supports the proposal.
Be’ad: 108
Neged: 10
Nimna: 27
PROPOSAL PASSES.
Yoshev/et Rosh Switch: Yoshevet Rosh Nadia Hecker-O’Brien
Proposal III – 5: A New Policy for Consequences Regarding Sexual Interactions and
Hadracha
Joel Rice & Rachel Sacks
Whereas madrichim are prohibited to engage in sexual activity with chanichim of any age at Habonim
Dror events per rules of movement seminars, eizorim, and machanot on an individual basis;
Whereas the movement does not currently have a policy regarding consequences for movement
members who are post-Madatz and up who have sexual interactions at Habonim Dror events with
chanichim of any age;
Whereas movement members who are post-madatz age and up who engage in sexual activity with
chanichim, violate hadracha principles, put said chanichim at risk physically and emotionally, regardless
of the chanich/a’s age, and are destructive to the rest of the movement community;
Therefore, let it be resolved that:
Movement members post-Madatz age and up[1], who have sexual interactions[2] with chanichim[3] of
any age are prohibited from participating in all movement activities[4]. After one year, members who
have shown both interest and commitment to amend the damages caused to the movement community,
have the option to petition the consequences by demonstrating in writing and conversation to Mazkirut
Artzit their regret and dedication to acting as a positive hadracha figure. The Mazkirut Artzit then has the
discretion of deciding their further participation at movement events with chanichim. The statute of
limitations for this offense would last one year.
If movement members are previously engaged in a situation(s) that would violate this policy the involved
parties would approach the organizers of the movement activity to conduct a conversation(s) based on
how the situation should manifest itself in order to preserve a healthy and responsible culture regarding
safety and hadracha.
The option to petition is not open to repeat offenders[5], and a repeat offense revokes their permission
to participate in all Habonim Dror events.
[1] For the purposes of the proposal, we define “movement members who are post-Madatz age and up”
as any individual who participates in a movement seminar or is hired at and works at a machaneh. This
excludes individuals who are in their madatz summer or younger.
[2] For the purposes of enforcing this policy, “sexual activity” will be defined on a case-by-case basis
according to the discretion of the rosh machaneh, rosh eizor, or mazkir/a of the movment depending on
the event in question, in conversation with the involved parties.
[3] For the purposes of the proposal, we define “chanichim” as any individual who is in their Madatz
summer or younger who participates in a movement seminar or attends a machaneh.
[4] Movement activities include all movement seminars, machaneh, and ken activities. In the case of
kvutza seminars, the decision to allow the offender to participate will be between the kvutza and the
madrachim of the kvutza.
[5] A repeat offender is when someone continues to engage in sexual activity with a chanich after being
caught
Question of Clarification:
Chaver G. Katzman: Are there any consequences for the chanich involved in said prohibited
hook-up?
Answer: No.
Chaver Berman: If the sexual act was illegal does that mean the madrich/a is not allowed back
into the movement?
Answer: Yes.
Chaver Jaffe: What is the stance on relationships between post-MBI and chanichim? What
would be the policy for these kinds of interactions during the year at non-movement events?
Answer to question 1: This proposal does not address those relationships.
Answer to question 2: This proposal does not apply to the activities in question during nonmovement events.
Chaver Bar-El: What is the proposers idea for a timeline for these consequences?
Answer: It says one year. Later on it says other things. Read it.
Chaver Katzman Hatzair: The conversation between two already involved parties, is that about
the culture of their relationship?
Anwser: It’s about the greater culture, but including their relationship.
Chavera Mayer: How do you define statutory rape?
Answer: Chaver Miller rose to report his research about this topic. What he has been able to
conclude is that most, if not all, sexual interactions between the in loco parentis (the madrich)
and a camper for whom they are responsible is illegal.
The In Loco Parentis charge might be defined by state laws and so vary….?
Answer: Chaver Miller: I think these vary less between states. The context is mostly about
the schools.
Chavera Seiradzki: How will this relate to machaneh policies?
Answer: Machanot policies will remain, this imposes a movement-wide policy for all
movement events.
Chavera Shenfeld: What constitutes a year?
Answer: One year is a calendar year = 12 months. If something happens at a seminar that
falls more than 12 month later the following year they can return to that seminar.
Chaver Newbart: Does the let it be resolved clause about “previously engaged” individuals
imply reprimanding people retroactively?
Answer: No.
Chaver Fernandez: Madatzim are in a position of power over chanichim, would this not put
them under in loco perentis?
Answer: This proposal does not deal with madatzim-chanichim interactions.
Chaver Corcoran: Going back to when someone asked if there was a statute of limitations- did
you say “no” and that means that if someone had committed one of these acts and it was
found out years later they would still be removed from the Movement in that situation
Answer: Added a statute of limitations to the proposal.
Chaver Jaffe: How is it that a post-madatz chanich is treated differently than a maapil in a
setting like a winter seminar?
Answer: Related to the part that was struck from the amendment.
Motion to Caucus (Chaver Katzman, Chaver Zadok)
Motion to Table the proposal (Chaver Koppel)
Motion to Suspend the Rules: Chaver Newbart - Go back and make a motion to object to the
consideration of the proposal. This motion can only be made immediately after questions of
clarification at the latest. Therefore we need to suspend the rules.
Intense discussion ensues
Straw Pole to get a sense of how people feel about the motion to object to the consideration of the proposal
Motion to Object to the Consideration of the Proposal (Chaver Newbart, Chaver Jaffe)
Ok because we haven’t started a real debate
Motion to appeal the Yoshev Rosh (Chaver Shahar, Chaver Koppel) - Withdrawn
Motion to Vote on the Motion to Object to the Consideration (Chaver Rov, Chaver Rakoff-Bellman)
Motion to Debate (Chavera Pressman, Chaver Fox)
Chaver Edelman: Too many issues with this, it would be stronger and would have more
substantive discussion if the issues were resolved. It would be better not to consider it now.
Chaver Newbart: I have thought about this a lot and in looking at our structure as a veida and
in thinking about our previous consideration of consent and the fact that our veida has been
dominated by certain voices shows that this is not a safe space for this conversation. I agree
with the sentiment of the proposal and think it is important but this is not the right venue. I
don’t know what it is but certain people have been/do dominate in this space, even in
caucus groups, and this is not a safe space for this conversation.
Chavera Volk: We have opened a can of worms where this conversation will take place. We
can have the conversation where everyone can do it together in the veida or through
murmurings and gossip
Chaver Shahar: Agree with Chavera Volk. Also this is a big step in keeping things away from
the case-by-case machaneh-by-machaneh basis that we currently have which sets up a lot of
contention and ambiguity. This is intricate and the intracacies may not all be right but this is
important and we could deal with them and amend them correctly through caucuses. This is
a strong proposal with the wording that we like.
Chaver Friedman: I think that I agree with some of the sentiments that Chaver Shahar
expressed but if we are to have this conversation there are some things I am really word
about about the implications of accepting or not accepting this proposal. If we have the
conversation and don’t pass it it will inaccurately reflect what we think of the topic in the
movement. On the other hand, accepting the proposal as it stands now is problematic in the
language and specifics of the proposal.
Chavera Roberts-Sampson: agree with a lot of what peole are saying but this conversation has
been discussed at this point and if we decide not to talk about it it will be discussed in other
forums and we wont be able to deal with it for two years. This is something that machanot
do face and I shouldn’t even know that because I am coming off of MBI and the fact that I
do know says something.
Chaver Berman: The conversation at hand is extremely sensitive. The bad parts of us talking
about it are not as heavily weighed as the good of talking about and passing this proposal.
Chaver Katzman: Much in agreement with Edelman and Friedman. At the beginning of the
tore the room seemed to emotionally charged to properly have this conversation. Now
everyone is quiet and respectful so I may reconsider my mindset. Still don’t know if I would
consider debating but would table til later tonight.
Chaver Sacks: Ultimately the purpose of the policy is that there is no policy right now. We are
trying to create a policy to protect chanichim and hold hadracha to a high standard.
Shouldn’t hold off on this, not bad for the veida, we need to grapple with this.
Chaver Kay HaKatan: This seems insensitive as a legal document instead of personal statement
(I may have written this wrong. This doesn’t feel like it was written with sensitivity to the
members of the veida. To move forward everyone in the veida needs to think about how
much they have and have not spoken and what they have and have not said.
Chavera Shenfeld: Using this motion to silence conversation is an inappropriate use. Whether
or not you support the proposal shouldn’t affect us talking. You said it was important but
using this topic to bring out discussion to the veida is irresponsible. We are talking about this
because it happens in our movement so there are probably people in this room who have
been on both sides. We are talking about things that are not consentual (like earlier proposal)
because of power dynamics and other things which lead to or are sexual assault. Not fair to
ask people who have been effected by this to stand up and speak infront of over 100 of their
peers to make their voices heard. Those people have really important things to say and cant
here.
Chaver Sagorin: Opinions already spoken
Chaver Sieradzki: there has been a framing of conversation that we can only talk about things
here or we can gossip. But the majority of machaneh rashim are here as well as future
machanot mazkiriot and madatz madrichim. Their ability to frame these conversations at
machaneh and in the future is important to remember. I agree with the sentiment of the
proposal but don’t think this is where to have the conversation.
Return to Motion to Vote to Object to Consideration fo the Proposal
A vote be’ad is in favor of considering the proposal. A vote neged is in favor of objecting to
the consideration of the proposal.
Be’ad: 24
Neged: 86
Nimna: 34
-
Shlichim
Be’ad: 2
Neged: 0
Nimna: 0
Proposal is objected.
Yoshev/et Rosh switch: Yoshevet Rosh Jordan Cooper
Proposal III – 6: Cash rules everything around us: C.R.E.A.U.
Mazkirut Artzit
Whereas:

Habonim Dror is a Socialist Youth Movement;

Equality is an essential Jewish Value we aim to actualize in our lives and the lives of others;

We strive for similar pay and equality across machanot for our members;

We recognize the effect of inflation is to reduce the value of tzevet pay;

Habonim Dror machanot, as educators of social justice and equality, must pay our tzevet
fairly and justly;
Therefore let it be resolved that:

We declare our firm expectation that the machanot institute a minimum 13% increase in
tzevet salaries for Summer 2014, to compensate for the loss due to inflation since 2007.

We declare our firm expectation that every two years tzevet pay is increased to reflect the
cost of living (inflation) changes of the previous two years. The next cost of living increase
after Summer 2014 will be for Summer 2016.

The formula for inflation adjustments will be based on the CPI of the Bureau of Labor
Statistics. The Mazkirut Artzit will publish the formula for the expected inflation adjustment
by June 1st of the year prior to application of the expected increase.
Motion to Temporarily Suspend the Rules (Chaver Katzman, Chaver Shnaidman): Reset quorum to
100 people due to the lateness in the night.
Motion to Debate: (Chaver Warshai)
Motion to Vote on the Suspension of the Rules: (Chaver Shnaidman, Chaver Sturman)
Motion to Temporarily Suspend the Rules (Chaver Katzman) – Withdrawn. (But can’t withdraw with a
motion on the floor)
Motion to Acclaim Suspension of Rules (Chavera Beigel, Chaver Rov) –Acclaimed.
Quorum reset to 100.
Question of Clarification:
Chaver Goldblatt (Elder): Can all machanot afford this? Are EDs already aware of this
proposal?
Answer: Yes, they have been collaborating for the last two years.
Chaver Koppel: Is inflation applied evenly to America and Canada?
Answer: The rate of inflation will be set according to American inflation and then the
exchange rate will come into play afterwards.
Chavera Kaplan: Does this only apply to base pay? How did this conversation develop? Does
this pay increase only apply to those who are paid on the Habonim pay scale?
Answer: This applies to tzevet who are paid on a scale. It applies to the total of each salary.
FYI, the machanot wanted to make this change as well.
Chavera Kaplan: Is this part of an effort to standardize pay across machanot?
Answer: yup, but in this regard the machanot are independent/autonomous entities.
Chaver Siden: he just doesn’t get it.
Answer: Kali explains
Chaver: Is cutting budgets on the table to afford this?
Answer: Theoretically no.
Seconded by Goldblatt the Elder
Motion to Acclaim (Chaver Shahar, Chaver Marsh)
Objection: Chavera Kaplan
Motion to Caucus (Chaver “Ben from Tavor” Grossman, Chaver Zadok)
Motion to Acclaim (Chaver Katzman, Chavera Mellinger)
MOTION ACCLAIMED.
Yoshev/et Rosh switch: Yoshev Rosh Tom Corcorsn
Proposal III – 7: 1948 Revisited
Matan Diner (with help from Erica Shenfeld)
Whereas Palestinian perspectives on the Arab-Israeli War of (Chaver Siden, friendly) 1948 are different
from those of the Labour Zionists (Siden). For example, a commonly used term amongst
Palestinians about 1948 is “the Nakba” (the catastrophe), which is in reference to the displacement
of Palestinians from their homes;
Whereas movement education prioritizes the Labor Zionist narrative of the Arab-Israeli War of 1948
at the expense of but does not include (Chaver Merin, friendly) other narratives including those of
Palestinians, which results in a general lack of knowledge within the movement about Palestinian
perspectives;
Whereas a holistic education about the Arab-Israeli War of 1948 will help to enhance movement
member’s exploration of their connection to Israel;
Whereas a goal of Habonim Dror North America (as stated in the aims) is the up-building a State of
Israel that is a “progressive, egalitarian, cooperative society,” and that is “actively involved in a Peace
Process with the Palestinian people with the common goal of a just and lasting peace,” and a greater
understanding of Palestinian narratives is fundamental in working towards this goal;
Whereas workshop is a primary movement structure for Israel education;
Therefore, let it be resolved that a va’ad will be formed (lead by the proposer), to create a resource
book on Palestinian perspectives on the Arab-Israeli War of 1948. Tzvatim of the machanot (including
MBI) can use this resource at their own discretion.
Let it be further resolved that the workshop tochnit will include significant education on Palestinian
narratives of the Arab-Israeli War of 1948, in conjunction with the current tochnit. The va’ad will work
with the Mazkirut Artzit and those creating the workshop tochnit to add the Palestinian perspective on the ArabIsraeli War of 1948 into the workshop tochnit.(Chaver Oziel, friendly)
Let it be further resolved that the movement encourages members to explore Palestinian
perspectives on the Arab-Israeli War of 1948 and grapple with this topic on their own.
Examples could include: reading texts, bringing in speakers, viewing art, watching films, etc, that
portray Palestinian narratives on 1948.
Question of Clarification:
Chaver Siden: Is there a significance to using “1948” as a term to describe the events of the
time?
Answer: It’s a neutral term.
Chavera Pressman: What do you mean by the “labor Zionist narrative of 1948”?
Answer: The idea in the 1948 war that Israel was able to create an independent state as well
as kibbutzim and a somewhat Socialist utopia.
Chaver Katzman: Will the resource book be physical?
Answer: Likely online.
Chaver Sagorin: What is a significant amount of education? Does that just mean more than
what we have now?
Answer: It’s intentionally vague, but definitely more than one token peula.
Chaver Naamani: Is there a conversation with workshop educators about this proposal? If
so, what were their thoughts?
Answers: No, but Chaver Diner is willing to take an active role with those creating the
workshop tochnit
Motion to Caucus (Chavera Biegel, Chaver Schaffer)
Motion to Amend: Chaver Siden, Chaver Marsh – change all places where it reads “1948” to read “the
Arab-Israeli War of 1948” - Friendly
Caucus Report Notes: The sentiment of this proposal comes from a place of far-right pro-Israel
reaction, this narrative may exist in the rest of Jewish America, but it’s inappropriate for Habonim
because it’s not how we educate, wondering what the goal of the proposal is except presenting more
information, this proposal is good because it attempts to diversify the perspectives that the
chanichim receive, wondering how we do justice to a Palestinian narrative when we are Zionists.
Motion to Divide the Question (Chaverim Finkelstein and Stanger, Chaver Kanter) – Separate the
resolution about workshop education from the other ones.
Motion to Vote on Dividing the Question (Chavera Horowitz, Chaver Jaffe)
Motion to Debate Dividing the Question (Chaver Rov, Chaver Siden) – Using 2 pro and 2 con speakers
Pro: Chaver Stanger: The first two resolutions are non-controversial, but the question about
the programs is the important one.
Pro: Chaver Finkelstein: We want to discuss movement education on workshop, not about
Palestinian perspectives specifically. Dividing the question focuses the conversation on
workshop education.
Con: Chaver Rov: Splitting the question reduces one of the proposals to nothing since the
first two let it be resolved clauses can be implemented without the Veida.
Con: Chaver Oziel: Chavera Mayer’s amendment in “Passing the Green Line with an Olive
Branch in Hand” is in the spirit of this proposal, and thus this is redundant.
Motion to Suspend the Rules (Chavera Green, Chaver Feinberg): to allow the Motion to Divide to be
withdrawn.
Motion to Acclaim (Chaver Goldblatt, Chavera Biegel) – No objections
Motion to Divide the Question – Withdrawn.
Motion to Debate (Chaver Berman, Chaver Wilk)
Shlicha Polunsky: Educating about different narratives is wonderful, but not everyone can
decide what to educate on workshop. There should be a group which communicates directly
with workshop educators.
Chavera Cooper: We have a broad definition of Zionism and the intentions of the proposer
(Zionist or non-Zionist) shouldn’t be questioned.
Chaver Naamani: In theory I agree with this proposal since we need a holistic education
towards peace. However, this process needs to be in conjunction with workshop educators
and this proposal doesn’t neceassarily do that.
Chaver Matan David Diner: The resource book is intended for tzevet members, so they can
make decisions about education because it will give their perspective nuance. As for
workshop, their education dramatically influences the education in the rest of the movement
and we have the right to make demands on the workshop tochnit. A discussion with Uzi did
bring up the issue of communication, and it shouldn’t be an issue.
Chaver Steve-ns: Agrees with chaverim Naamani and Polunsky. Appreciates the proposal
because we must acknowledge Palestinian perspectives. However, the heart of the crisis of
the veida and the movement is that there is a debate without actually discussing Zionism. We
can tell the Palestinian narrative, but we should do it as Zionists. We shouldn’t sit in North
America and just talk about it, but actually visit the Middle East. On Hagshama: those who
step up and take responsibility are those who will really shape this. The proposals coming
from older ma’apilim are about Israel, but then they should go to Israel and make change.
Chaver Shore: Are we a movement exploring our Zionism or a Zionist movement exploring
our Zionism?
Chavera Biegel: It’s okay to be a Zionist youth movement and explore multiple perspectives.
Chaver Fox: If you give education with the right values and the right facts, then it leads
people to our conclusions. If it doesn’t, then we need to ask questions.
Chaver Finkelstein: We’re asking questions about Zionism, about statehood and claims to
land. Also, as a movement, we have a total right to question the workshop educators while
respecting them.
Chaver Siden: Instead of saying that workshop “will” include this concept, we could say that
it “should.”
Chaver Shenfeld: Addressing place of kind of Zionist movement we want to be. There is a
specific reason that the proposal is worded as it is with the Palestinian narrative- for peace.
Not a balancing act- we are showing labour Zionist for some goals, and Palestinian
perspective for other goals.
Chavera Green: Nuanced understanding of state’s formation is critical for ethical education.
Workshop tochnit should not be dictated by Veida - disempower educators if each peula of
their tochnit is dictated by people who aren’t working on the larger rationale. They also
confront these issues every day. Maz Artzit can be useful tool for how to shape this
education – intention is not to disempower veida! Believes in collective decision making!
Concerned about understanding of our activism- in certain places, with certain peopleoccupation is treated as a Jewish identity without other aspects and this is not enough. Want
to emphasize that there is a difference between a movement exploring Zionism and a
Zionist movement exploring Zionism
Chaver Bordoley: Are we coming from a place of care or bitterness when speaking?
Chavera Greenfeld: With peulot in HDNA, we get pushed into a certain opinion. Concerned
that chanichim will be pushed into one idea, which creates weak thinkers. Want educators to
back off and still have their advice/input but try to not lead chanichim to one idea- try to let
chanichim find ideas on their own. That will let the chanichim grow in a stronger way.
Chavera Egosi: Also for more education on Palestinian perspective, it is lacking. Not sure if
proposal is intended to be problematic. Difference between perspective and narrative.
Understanding Palestinian perspective needs to be added to conflict education. Identifying
with a contradictory narrative to our own is not serving that purpose. These are two
different things and we need to decide between the perspective and narrative of Palestinians
in the context of the conflict. Settler’s narrative in the West Bank is contradictory to ours,
and is also important to learn about. That is not in the let it be resolved part of the proposal.
Our education needs to be centered on striving for peace. The narrative we adopt/the lens
we look through needs to be clarified.
Chaver Corcoran: Please be brief.
Chaver Rov: Asking us to learn about and understand Palestinian narrative, not identify with
it. To present expression of Zionism as a Zionist movement. Veida’s responsibility to
express what we think the workshop tochnit should be comprised of, as we are the
movement members and we are the movement and the people running programming should
use our input to shape these programs. There is going to be communication between the
va’ad and people running the programming.
Point of Misinformation (Chaver Shachar): some people running workshop are not part of the
movement
Chaver Rov: The va’ad will be acting as partners with the workshop madrichim to help with
the program in a demanding sense.
Chavera Schuman-Stoler: Some people are speaking out of fear of talking about the Nakba,
but we should be afraid of not discussing it because we need to have a holistic Israel
education and to be prepared for discussions about Israel with people who have discussed
the Palestinian perspective.
Chavera Secular: She agrees with the proposal and it speaks to a fear she had about
workshop giving impressions of Israel she didn’t agree with.
Chaver Diner: The education received by workshoppers directly affects the movement and
the education brought back to HDNA in machanot/kenim. The movement members also
pay mas that helps workshop exist so we have a say in their program.
Motion to Amend (Chaver Oziel, Chaver Wilk) - Friendly
Motion to Vote (Chaver Bordoley, Chaver Eli Katzman)
Motion to Amend (Chaver Merin, Chavera Horowitz) - Friendly
Motion to Vote (Chaver Bordoley, Chaver Eli Katzman)
Be’ad: 74
Neged: 13
Nimna: 23
Schlichim:
1 Be’ad
4 Neged
0 Nimna
Point of Personal Privilege: Chaver Evan Goldblatt-personally offended about the way the veida is
addressing voting, when people who have not been a part of the discussion then come to voting to
reach quorum, it is disrespectful to the rest of the veida.
PROPOSAL PASSES.
Yoshev/et Rosh switch : Chaver Finkelstein
Proposal III – 8: Ken I Kick It? Yes, you May!
Mazkirut Artzit
Whereas strengthening the ken is in the best interest of Habonim Dror North America;
Whereas providing parents with Ken Calendars in advance will increase their awareness of year-round
programming and demonstrate the Ken leadership’s dedication to running
well-organized and cohesive year-round programming;
Whereas last minute planning and promoting of ken events often leads to lower attendance at ken
events, and more difficulties with logistics for tzevet;
Whereas providing a Ken Calendar to chanichim during the summer will increase chanichim awareness
of available year-round Habonim Dror programming while they are immersed in a Habonim Dror
context they know and love, as well as create opportunities for madrichim to promote year-round
involvement;
Whereas creating centralized timelines for kenim will strengthen the ability of Eizorim to collaborate
with each other for activities such as seminars or for planning similarly themed events such as chagrelated ken events;
Whereas establishing Eizor leadership in advance of the ken year allows for them to have more time for
relevant conversations with each other as well as with potential ken tzevet. Such conversations enable
more effective assignment of tafkidim and more thought-out programming;
Whereas running the ken should not be a last-minute decision;
Whereas is it necessary to establish who will be Eizor leadership before the summer in order to enable
Mazkirut Artzit to effectively organize Moetzet Kenim;
Whereas creating structures that strengthen kenim works towards the following aims:
 To participate in constructive activities in the North American Jewish community while advocating change where
necessary to foster Jewish continuity and creativity and the democratization of the community
 To strengthen the relationship between North American Jewish youth and Judaism through their involvement in
progressive Jewish communities with the purposes of enlisting their participation in the up-building of a renewed
Jewish culture.
Let it be resolved that a centralized Eizor timeline is created with the following guidelines:
 Eizorim will determine a preliminary Eizor Calendar before the arrival of chanichim at
machaneh in the summer preceding the Eizor calendar year. This Eizor Calendar will contain the
dates of central events for the first 4 months of the eizor year. It will also contain dates for all
seminars (regional, movement-wide, moetzot, etc.) and inter-machaneh events that take place
throughout the entire Eizor calendar year. While these dates can be subject to change if the

circumstances require it, the dates should be created with the intent of being as accurate as
possible for the following year.
Within kenim that function on a September-May or September-June programming schedule,
Eizor members will discuss and determine Eizor leadership for the following year by the end of
May, barring any extenuating circumstances that make this infeasible. If such a case arises,
current Eizor leadership will communicate with the Mazkirut Artzit.
Let it be further resolved: that both the Eizor Calendar and who the Eizor leadership is must be
communicated to the Central Office of Habonim Dror, through the Merakez/et Chinuch, before the
beginning of machaneh each summer.
Question of Clarification:
Chavera Silverman: Please explain your intentions.
Answer: Over the past year and half Zoey has been working with eizorim and has been looking for
patterns in strengths and weaknesses. We have to increase our accountability to ourselves, our
chanichim, etc. to maximize the amount of people benefiting from our education. Our potential as
educators is increased so we can be appealing for parents and present for chanichim. It sets high
expectations for the level of organization of kenim. This is intentional because we need to expect this
of ourselves. Please talk to Zoey about ways in which this can be achieved or if you have other
concerns. The more we are accountable to the structures and content we want to create, the more
our education can get to other people.
Proposal Withdrawn due to lateness in the night.
Point of order: Check Quorum, Quorum still exists with 103 people.
Proposal III – 9: Howie is the Cutest Boy in the Movement
Howie Stanger
Whereas Rena and Jordan proofread this proposal and therefore took the responsibility over the title of
this proposal and changed it from “Untitled” to “Howie is the Cutest Boy in the Movement;”
Whereas machaneh is the primary manner in which we go about achieving our goals in HDNA;
Whereas movement seminars such as Winter Seminar and/or Veida and/or Ma’apilim Seminar represent
the largest gatherings of movement leadership, not limited to seminars devoted to “hired” positions
during the year or the summer (Moetzet Madatz, Moetzet Mazkirut, Moetzet Kenim);
Whereas @ the previously stated seminars, said leaders engage in conversations relevant to the upcoming
summer, ie. Identifying and having sichot with potential mazkirut machaneh and madatz madrichim;
Whereas @ these seminars a majority of the applicants towards “leadership” tafkidim at machanot are
present;
Whereas the rosh tafkid description at every machaneh stipulates that the rosh machaneh is responsible
for hiring their mazkirut and/or madatz madrichim;
Whereas the rosh is the representative of their machaneh and a leader for the ma’apilim and nachshonim
relevant community, and I like to think that Habonim Dror North America is a relevant community;
Whereas the precedent already exists that the Rosh Machaneh’s responsibility begins before the summer;
Let it be resolved that,
 A clause be added to each rosh tafkid description for every machaneh,
“As rosh, you will be required to attend Winter Seminar/Veida and Ma’apilim Seminar in
order to represent your machaneh.”
 7 spots be permanently saved by the Mazkirut Artzit for each Rosh Machaneh prior to the
opening of Winter Seminar/Veida registration
 As it is part of their tafkid, the Rosh will receive a subsidy from their Camp Committee (not
coming from the salary of said Rosh) for the Rosh Machaneh to attend Winter Seminar/Veida.
o If the Camp Committee is unable to pay, then a solution will be worked out in
conjunction with the Mazkirut Artzit.
 If the Rosh Machaneh is unavoidably unable to attend Winter Seminar, they should expedite
their hiring of mazkirut machaneh, and send one, or more of their mazkirut members in their
stead.
 Additionally, at least one member of mazkirut, preferably the Rosh Machaneh, will attend
ma’apilim seminar. The cost of the seminar will be discussed with the executive directors of the
individual machanot and Mazkirut Artzit in order to adequately subsidize registration.
Second: Chaver Evan Goldblatt
Question of Clarification:
Chaver Silverman: Are you doing this on your own or have you talked to others about it?
Answer: Chavera Silverman has contacted all of the EDs of the machanot.
Chaver Wilk: The last “let it be resolved” bullet- will the Rosh Machaneh be subsidized in attending
ma’apilim seminar?
Answer: Ideally yes. Will have to be worked out with Maz Artz.
Chaver Eli Katzman: Do they have to share the subsidy if multiple members of machaneh
mazkirut attend seminar?
Answer: Speak to Machaneh Mazkirut and figure it out.
Chaver Siden: What happens if the Rosh can’t come?
Answer: See clause.
Chaver Feinberg: Can you add language to add Ma’apilim Seminar so we don’t have to amend it?
Answer: Yes.
Chavera Pressman: Seminars are mostly related to a Kvutzah process. What should rashim do when
they are not involved in a kvutzah process but need to come to seminars?
Answer: This is currently happening, and they would figure out what to do with themselves. Also this
would be a conversation with the Mazkirut Artzit and the Tzevet.
Chavera Green: We are currently at capacity for seminar- should we save seven spots?
Answer: Leave this to Maz Arts.
Chaver Corcoran: Does this include Rosh MBI?
Answer: No. Chaver Silverman: We are lucky to have the current rosh at the seminar. At this time,
we do not have the finances to cover flights from Israel for the Rosh MBI. The Rashim go through a
process through the year together and this is an important part of that. Rosh MBI is included, but
not as much because it is a different structure.
Chavera Mayer: What is the significance of Rosh attending Ma’apilim seminar instead of the Chinuch?
Maybe both could be there?
Answer: Rosh should attend because Rosh is representative of machaneh community. Chinuch
should attend, but is not obligated. If the Rosh decides it would be more beneficial for the Chinuch
to attend that would be ok too.
Motion to Acclaim (Chavera Silverman, Weintraub)
Objection: Chavera Shenfeld
Motion to Debate (Chavera Shenfeld, Newbart)
Pro Speaker: Chavera Mayer: This proposal is important and as a future rosh she has seen first
hand how beneficial it is for Rashim to be at seminar to see where the movement is and to
communicate that to tzvatim. Also important for Rashim to be in communication with each
other at Winter Seminar. Machanot are a huge part of the movement and the rosh represents
machanot and not having that representation shows a break in the process.
Con Speaker: Chavera Shenfeld: It is important for Rashim to be here, she values the time she
spends here with the other rashim. She wants to consider the size of the demand this places on
people- we are all here so it’s easy to tell people to come. We are asking people to take a week
over break and a long seminar in spring. Acknowledge that that is asking a lot of someone. This
is asking more of people that are already busy with their tafkidim. Also, this is including people
at the seminar not because they want to be there, but because they need to be to represent a
machaneh. Other people can also represent machanot. Rashim are also busy leading up to
Moetzet Mazkirut. This is changing a tafkid a lot and we need to recognize that. This is a big
statement and we should observe that. Erica is the first rosh from Gesher to come to veida in
many years (since Shawn Guttman). This is a problem- that the rashim don’t have much of a
connection to the movement. Having a movement resolution that has people who don’t
necessarily identify as movement members making them come to a movement seminar isn’t
ideal.
Motion to Acclaim (Chavera Schuman-Stoler, Chavera Weintraub)
A point of something but Im’ not sure if it’s a point of anything (Chaver Fox) It’s 5:15 in the morning and it’s a
little tough.
Objection: Chaver Aaron Kay
Motion to Vote (Chaver Aaron Kay, Chaver Warshai)
Be’ad: 90
Neged: 7
Nimna: 9
PROPOSAL PASSES.
Motion to Adjourn (Chaver Feinberg, Silverman)
THAT’S ALL FOLKS!
APPENDIX B: Regulations and Procedures for the Implementationof the Constitution, as
adopted by the Veida
Article I: Veida Procedure Generally
The Mazkirut Artzit shall inform the Veida at its outset the schedule of the plenary sessions and
of any other decisions on the agenda, such as the consideration of a Gar’in or the election of a Mazkir.
Section 1.
Section 2.
At the beginning of every Veida, the Regulations and Procedures for the Implementation of the
Constitution (RPIC) must be approved by the Veida. This approval is treated as a proposal. During this process, the
procedures of the previous Veida apply. Amendments to the proposed Veida procedure change the RPIC, and therefore
changes carry over from the Veida during which they are proposed to future veidot, unless otherwise stated in the
motion to amend.
Section 3.
The Veida shall open with reports from each member of the Mazkirut Artzit, including the
Rakazei T’nua, then reports from each eizor.
Section 4.
The Yoshev/et Rosh is the chair of the Veida. They oversee the process of introduction and
voting on proposals. All questions from the floor must be directed at them. Only they may recognize chaverim from
the floor. It is their role to make sure that the person who has the floor is not interrupted by anyone else. The Yoshev/et
Rosh has the final decision in any point of procedure.
Section 5.
A Chaver/a who has the floor can only be interrupted in the following cases: 1) when there is a
point of personal privilege or 2) when there is a point of order.
Section 6.
Any chaver/a can submit a proposal which must be seconded. At least one of the proposers
must be present to introduce the proposal. In the case of proposals written by Workshoppers and studentim in Israel,
these proposals shall be presented on their behalf by the Mazkirut Artzit.
Section 7.
Once a proposal is presented, it must be seconded by a member of the Veida. That member’s
name should be noted.
Section 8.
When a proposal is brought forward and another chaver/a objects to having the Veida consider
it, because they feel it would harm the Veida to discuss it, they can motion to object to the consideration of the question.
This can only happen when there has been no debate on a proposal. This motion is debatable. It is then put to a vote
by the Yoshev/et Rosh: “Will the Veida consider this proposal?” If 2/3 vote no, then the proposal is no longer
discussed.
Section 9.
Substantive proposals must be presented in writing to the Mazkirut Artzit before the opening
ceremonies of the Veida.
Section 10.
Additional substantive proposals will not be encouraged during the Veida, but may be accepted
by the Mazkirut Artzit before the beginning of the appropriate session.
Section 11.
Two proposals may not both be presented if the passing of one and rejection of the other requires
contradictory actions to be taken. These proposals can be combined or one can be withdrawn. A contradictory
proposal can be presented through a motion to amend the proposal which it contradicts.
Section 12.
Before the Rosh states that it is open to debate, the presenters are allowed a chance to modify
their proposal or to withdraw it. After that, it cannot be withdrawn.
Section 13.
After a proposal has been presented, the Yoshev/et Rosh should ask if there are questions of
clarification for the proposers. Questions of clarification are questions about the nature of the proposal and not
opinion.
Section 14.
A tor will be created for debate. The Yoshev/et Rosh will call each person in turn. If a chaver/a
wishes to speak, they should stand up and ask the question to the Yoshev/et Rosh.
Section 15.
The role of Shlichim in Veida procedure is one of an advisor. Their opinions shall be taken
with equal weight; however, they cannot make privileged motions. The results of their votes will be reported to the
Veida but will not be calculated into the total and their presence will not affect the quorum.
Article II: Privileged Points
Section 16.
A point of personal privilege can be raised if a pressing situation is affecting a right or privilege
of the Veida or of chaver/a (e.g. noise, inadequate ventilation, feeling disrespected or directly attacked by another
chaver/a). This takes precedence over anything else.
Section 17.
A point of order is a point regarding proper Veida procedure. This takes precedence over
anything else, except personal privilege.
Article III: Privileged Motions
Section 18.
A motion to appeal the Yoshev/et Rosh’s decision is a motion a chaver/a can immediately make
if they believe that the Yoshev/et Rosh has made a decision that is out of order. This motion must be seconded and
requires a 2/3 yes vote. This motion is debatable. This motion takes precedence over all other motions. A member
of the Mazkirut Artzit shall preside over the appeal process.
Section 19.
A motion to temporarily suspend the rules is a motion to permit accomplishment of a desired
purpose that would be in violation of a parliamentary rule. This motion can be made when there is not a proposal on
the floor, or if there is a proposal on the floor, it must pertain to the proposal at hand. This motion must be seconded
and requires a 2/3 yes vote. The duration must be specified and shall not exceed the current Veida.
Article IV: Motions Pertaining to the Proposal
Section 20.
A motion to acclaim is a motion to unanimously accept the proposal and takes precedence over
any other motion in relation to the proposal. It must be seconded. This motion is not debatable. If there is any objection,
it does not pass and the discussion on the proposal continues.
Section 21.
A motion to caucus is a motion to have a chance to discuss the proposal within smaller groups,
after which the heads of the caucuses will report back what was the nature of the discussion and if there were any
proposed amendments. It must be seconded. This motion is not debatable. This takes precedence over a motion to
vote and a motion to debate. The Yoshev/et Rosh shall place a time limit on caucusing.
Section 22.
A motion to divide the question is a motion to the divide the proposal into separate proposals
that can stand alone. It must be seconded. This motion is debatable and amendable. This motion requires a majority
yes vote.
Section 23.
A motion to table is a motion to lay aside the pending proposal such that it will be considered
at the following Veida. It must be seconded. This motion is debatable and requires a majority yes vote.
Section 24.
A motion to amend is a motion to change something in the proposal. If it is accepted by the
proposers, it becomes a friendly amendment and is added to the text of the proposal. If it is not accepted, it must be
voted on immediately by the Veida and if passed, becomes an unfriendly amendment to the proposal. A motion to
amend must be seconded. A motion to amend can be called at any time except when the proposal is about to be voted
on. This motion is debatable and amendable. If an unfriendly amendment is passed and the original presenters no
longer want to present the proposal, the proposal goes under the name(s) of the individual(s) who presented the
unfriendly amendment. An amendment is out of order if the outcome of the amendment is equivalent to voting no or
if the amendment is not in any way related to the amendment of the proposal.
Section 25.
A point of misinformation is made when a member believes that what the previous speaker has
said is in factual error. This takes precedence over further discussion.
Section 26.
A motion to debate is a motion to open up the floor to debate on a proposal. It is not debatable
and it takes precedence over a motion to vote.
Section 27.
A motion to close debate is a motion on whether or not the Veida should take a vote immediately
on the proposal presented and this precedes any other motion in relation to the proposal except for a motion to acclaim
and a motion to amend. This also must be seconded. If a 2/3 majority are in favor of voting on the proposal at the time,
then a vote shall be taken on the proposal, otherwise the debate shall continue.
Section 28.
A motion to vote is a motion to vote on the proposal on the floor. This must be seconded. If it
is challenged by a motion to debate or a motion to caucus, those take precedence. The Yoshev/et Rosh should ask for
Proconos and give them a time limit to say their piece. If someone objects to voting at that time, the debate must
continue. But, as stated above, a 2/3 majority yes to close debate means a vote can be taken.
Article V: Voting
Section 29.
In order for a vote to be counted, one must be sitting at a caucus table.
Section 30.
When votes are taken, it must be asked in the following order: “for”, “against”, “abstentions.”
Voting is according to one person, one vote. In order for a proposal to pass, it must receive anything over 50% of the
yes-no votes. Abstentions count towards quorum but not towards calculating the majority necessary to pass or defeat
a motion or proposal.
Section 31.
The votes will be taken within caucus groups and then the caucus heads will report back their
results.
Section 32.
All proposals and amendments, both accepted and not accepted, will be recorded by a member
of the Mazkirut Artzit as well as discussion points. All accepted proposals and amendments must be handed to that
member of the Mazkirut Artzit in full clear writing.
Section 33.
The Mazkirut Artzit will be the guide for the Yoshvei Rosh in issues of Veida procedure.
Article VI: Local Organization
Section 34.
Any area with a kvutza of individuals who meet the requirement of membership in goodstanding and attend movement peulot on a regular basis shall constitute a ken of Habonim Dror.
Section 35.
Each ken shall determine its own system of democratic self-government.
Section 36.
The Mazkirut Artzit shall determine the subdivision of the United States and Canada into
eizorim.
Article VII: Garinim and Aliya Frameworks
Section 37.
The Veida, after a presentation by potential members of a Garin or Aliyah Framework, shall
decide if it is acceptable as a Garin or Framework of Habonim Dror North America.
Article VIII: Procedure of Election of the Mazkir/a
Section 38.
Nominations for Mazkir/a shall be closed 24 hours prior to elections.
Section 39.
All participants of the Veida shall be notified at that time as to who the candidates are. The
election shall be conducted by written ballot.
APPENDIX B:
CONSTITUTION OF HABONIM DROR NORTH AMERICA
The Labor Zionist Youth Movement
Preamble
Habonim Dror North America, The Labor Zionist Youth Movement, strives to upbuild a new social order
throughout the world, based on the principles of social justice, environmental sustainability, cooperative economics
and political democracy embodied in the vision of the Prophets and exemplified in the achievements of the Chalutzim.
The renaissance of the Jewish People is directly connected with the evolution of a just world, as is the selfdetermination of all peoples.
Aliyah to communal frameworks actively working in pursuit of our ideological aims is an effective path to
the actualization of our movement goals. We constantly seek alternative social forms based on the concepts of
collectivism, which are deeply rooted in our Jewish heritage. Developing a positive Jewish identity is fundamental to
the fulfillment of our ideology. We reject those institutions of modern society that repress and exploit the individual
and that mechanize and degrade human relationships. Furthermore, only active concern and personal involvement
can alleviate the ills of society and bring about this just world.
To these ends, we celebrate the creation of one united Labor Zionist Youth Movement based on the merger
of Ichud Habonim Labor Zionist Youth and Dror Zionist Youth and adopt this Constitution as a foundation for our
continued activism. Moreover, we call upon all who hold a progressive vision of Israel, the Jewish community, and
society at large to join in the implementation of these ideals.
Article I: Name
Habonim Dror North America is an independent, autonomous entity organized as a New York not-for-profit
corporation and incorporated under the name “Habonim Labor Zionist Youth, Inc.” and the organization shall also be
known as Habonim Dror North America. In Hebrew, the name is “Habonim Dror b’Tsafon America.” Henceforth
the organization will be referred to as Habonim Dror or the Movement.
Article II: Aims
As an autonomous Labor Zionist youth movement whose members strive for the concrete expression of its
ideals in their own lives and society, Habonim Dror has the following aims:
To upbuild the State of Israel as a progressive, egalitarian, cooperative society, at peace with its neighbors;
actively involved in a Peace Process with the Palestinian people with the common goal of a just and lasting peace; and
as the physical and spiritual center of the Jewish people. To this end, Habonim Dror calls first and foremost for Aliya
to communal and collective frameworks that actively work to achieve the aforementioned goal. In addition, Habonim
Dror also calls for active involvement in progressive Zionist and Jewish issues in Diaspora communities, using
collective-living frameworks as a foundation.
To strengthen the relationship between North American Jewish youth and Judaism through their involvement
in progressive Jewish communities with the purposes of enlisting their participation in the up-building of a renewed
Jewish culture in both Israel and North America. This will be accomplished by the development of individual Jewish
identities by means of promoting the exploration of Jewish spirituality, the full expression of the Hebrew language,
an understanding of Jewish history and a personal relationship with Israel.
To participate in the creation of a new social order throughout the world, based on the principles of selfdetermination, individual freedom, environmental sustainability, political democracy, and cooperative economics, the
equality of all people and the equality of human value.
To participate in constructive activities in the North American Jewish community while advocating change
where necessary to foster Jewish continuity and creativity and the democratization of the community.
To develop within its members the will to realize their own capabilities and to develop a collectivist attitude
to actualize the movements goals through cooperative frameworks (kvutzah).
Article III: Membership
Section 1.
Membership in Habonim Dror is open to all youth in the United States and Canada who
recognize, accept and adhere to the principles of the Movement.
Section 2.
designations:
Membership in Habonim Dror shall be divided into three groups with the following
CHANICHIM—Grades 2-10
NACHSHONIM—Graduates of the Hadracha programs (MBI and Madatz) and/or chaverim/ot of the
equivalent ages.
MA’APILIM—Members and graduates of the Workshop program and/or chaverim/ot of the equivalent ages
and all chaverim/ot of the pre-Workshop kvutza who work at a Habonim Dror machaneh.
Section 3.
Nachshonim and Ma’apilim members shall have the right to be represented and to vote at
meetings of members, provided they have paid the prevailing Mas. Each such member shall be entitled to one vote.
Chanichim shall not have the right to vote.
Article IV: Meetings
Section 4.
Winter Seminar: Habonim Dror shall hold an annual meeting of the voting members, at a
time and place determined by the Mazkirut Artzit, which shall be known as Winter Seminar.
Section 5.
Veida: Habonim Dror shall hold a biennial meeting of the membership, which shall be
known as Veida. The Veida shall be held at a time and place determined by the Mazkirut Artzit, to set policy and
direction for Habonim Dror. Veida decisions can be amended or set aside only by the Veida. Decisions are made in
this forum that relate to ideology, programming, movement projects and movement programs. Any member eligible
to vote may bring a proposal to the Veida. The Veida also elects the Mazkir/a. If the election or re-election of the
Mazkir/a occurs during a year when there is no Veida, the Mazkir/a shall be elected at Winter Seminar.
Section 6.
Quorum for any meeting of members shall be set at the lesser of one hundred votes or onetenth of the members eligible to vote.
Article V: Membership in Good-Standing
Section 7.
Chanichim: A member in good-standing of the Chanichim shall pay the prevailing Mas,
attend peulot regularly, participate in movement programs, and indicate interest and good faith in being in the
movement. Such a member may then vote in local decision-making forums and receive movement publications.
Chanichim recognize the principles of Habonim Dror.
Section 8.
Nachshonim: A member in good-standing of the Nachshonim shall pay the prevailing Mas,
attend peulot regularly, participate in movement programs, and be willing to assume positions and tasks of
responsibility within his/her kvutzah, ken, and/or eizor. Such a member may then vote in local decision-making
forums, participate in a Veida, and receive movement publications. Nachshonim recognize and accept the principles
of Habonim Dror.
Section 9.
Ma’apilim: A member in good-standing of the Ma’apilim shall pay the prevailing Mas and
assume positions and tasks of responsibility and leadership in an eizor, or machaneh of Habonim Dror, or be an active
participant in a Ken Ma’apilim, or in some other form of Zionist work in line with Habonim Dror’s values, such as J
Street U. Ma’apilim should take an active role in the ken unless there is a valid reason for one not to participate.
Ma’apilim recognize, accept, and adhere to the principles of Habonim Dror.
To be a Ma’apil/a in good-standing requires striving for the following goals:
1) Becoming knowledgeable in the Hebrew language, Jewish History, a pluralist Jewish Culture, Jewish
Traditions and Jewish Sources.
2) Being an activist and a leader in the Jewish Community.
3) Being an activist and leader in the struggle for Social Justice in the world.
4) Creating a personal relationship with the Jewish Homeland by returning to Israel on a long term basis.
Article VI: Board of Directors
Section 10.
Habonim Dror shall be managed by its Board of Directors, which shall be known as the
Mazkirut Artzit, and shall consist of not less than three individuals. The Mazkirut Artzit shall include, but not be
limited to, the Mazkir/a, Gizbar/it, the Merakez/et Tochniot, and Shaliach/a Merkaz/it. The Mazkir/a shall be elected
to the Mazkirut Artzit for a two-year term by the eligible voting membership at the Veida or at Winter Seminar if the
election occurs during a year when there is no Veida. The remaining members shall be appointed by the current
Mazkirut Artzit in consultation with the incoming Mazkir/a. The members of the Mazkirut Artzit appointed shall
serve for a term of two years, unless determined otherwise by the Mazkirut Artzit, and until their successors are
appointed and qualified, or until their earlier resignation, removal or death. All candidates for the positions within the
Mazkirut Artzit, except for the Shaliach/a Merkazit, shall be Ma’apilim who are members in good standing of
Habonim Dror.
Section 11.
Meetings of the Mazkirut Artzit may be held at any place within or without the State of
New York as may be fixed by the Mazkirut Artzit from time to time. The Mazkirut Artzit may fix times and places
for regular meetings of the Mazkirut Artzit and no notice of such meetings need be given. Special meetings of the
Mazkirut Artzit may be called at any time by the Mazkir/a, or by any two or more members of the Mazkirut Artzit.
Section 12.
Notice of a meeting need not be given to any member of the Mazkirut Artzit who submits
a signed waiver of notice whether before or after the meeting, or who attends the meeting without protesting, prior
thereto or at its commencement, the lack of notice. A notice or waiver of notice need not specify the purpose of any
regular or special meeting of the Mazkirut Artzit.
Section 13.
Quorum for all meetings of the Mazkirut Artzit shall be set at one-half of the entire
Mazkirut Artzit. Except as otherwise provided by law or by this Constitution, the vote of a majority of the members
of the Mazkirut Artzit present at a meeting at the time of the vote, if a quorum is present at such time, shall be the act
of the Mazkirut Artzit.
Section 14.
Any action required or permitted to be taken by the Mazkirut Artzit or any committee
thereof may be taken without a meeting if all members of the Mazkirut Artzit or such committee consent in writing to
the adoption of a resolution authorizing such action. Each resolution so adopted and the written consents thereto by
members of the Mazkirut Artzit or such committee shall be filed with the minutes of the proceedings of the Mazkirut
Artzit or such committee.
Section 15.
Any one or more members of the Mazkirut Artzit or of any committee may participate in
a meeting by telephone, webcast or similar equipment allowing all persons participating in the meeting to hear each
other at the same time. Participation by such means shall constitute presence in person at a meeting.
Section 16.
The Mazkirut Artzit, by resolution adopted by a majority of the entire Mazkirut Artzit, may
designate from among its members an Executive Committee and other standing committees, each consisting of three
or more members of the Mazkirut Artzit, and each of which, to the extent provided in the resolution, shall have all the
authority of the Mazkirut Artzit.
Article VII: Officers
Section 17.
The day-to-day affairs of Habonim Dror shall be managed by the officers of Habonim Dror,
which shall be the Mazkir/a, Merakez/et Tochinot and Gizbar/it, and such other officers as may be deemed necessary
by the Mazkirut Artzit.
Section 18.
The Mazkir/a shall serve as the president and chief officer of Habonim Dror and preside at
all meetings of the Mazkirut Artzit. The Mazkir/a shall perform all duties customary to that office and shall oversee
all of the affairs of Habonim Dror in accordance with policies and directives approved by the Mazkirut Artzit. The
Mazkir/a shall be the official spokesperson of the movement.
Section 19.
The Merakaz/et Tochinot shall serve as the secretary of Habonim Dror and shall be
responsible for the keeping of an accurate record of the proceedings of all meetings of the Mazkirut Artzit, shall give
or cause to be given all notices in accordance with this Constitution or as required by law, and, in general, shall perform
all duties customary to that office. The Merakaz/et Tochinot shall have custody of the corporate seal of Habonim
Dror, if any; and shall have authority to affix the same to any instrument requiring it; and, when so affixed, it may be
attested by his/her signature.
Section 20.
The Gizbar/it shall serve as the treasurer of Habonim Dror and shall have the custody of,
and be responsible for, all funds and securities of Habonim Dror; shall keep or cause to be kept complete and accurate
accounts of receipts and disbursements; and shall deposit all monies and other valuable property in the name and to
the credit of Habonim Dror in such banks or depositories as the Mazkirut Artzit may designate. Whenever required
by the Mazkirut Artzit, the Gizbar/it shall render a statement of accounts. The Gizbar/it shall at all reasonable times
exhibit the books and accounts to any officer of Habonim Dror or member of the Mazkirut Artzit and shall perform
all duties incident to the office of Gizbar/it, subject to the supervision of the Mazkirut Artzit, and such other duties as
shall from time to time be assigned by the Mazkirut Artzit. The Gizbar/it shall present a financial and budget report
each year. In a Veida year, this will take place at the Veida so that a vote of confidence may be taken. In odd years,
the budget will be presented at the Winter Seminar.
Article VIII: Advisory Committees
Section 21.
Habonim Dror shall have the following committees to provide advice and
recommendations to the members of Habonim Dror. These committees shall be advisory only and actions,
recommendations and opinions of individuals, either individually or collectively, while serving on such committees
shall not bind Habonim Dror, by agency, or otherwise, unless ratified in writing by the Mazkirut Artzit.
(a)
A committee which shall be known as the Mercaz shall consist of the Rashei Eizor, Rashei
Ken, Shlichim and the Mazkirut Artzit. All decisions made by the Mercaz shall be in accordance with the decisions
of the Veida. The Mercaz shall meet at least annually.
(b)
A committee which shall be known as the Camping Association shall be comprised of the
Mazkirut Artzit and representatives from each Habonim Dror camp, including MBI. The Mazkirut Artzit shall
represent MBI as one of the camps of Habonim Dror. Each camp shall have three votes in the Camping Association,
as shall the Mazkirut Artzit. The Camping Association is a forum for Habonim Dror and representatives from each
camp to discuss movement policies in respect to camping that ensure the well-being of Habonim Dror. It shall meet
annually.
(c)
Committees which shall be known as Camp Committees may be involved in
recommendations for the educational programming at Habonim Dror camps. Ultimate decisions concerning
programming shall be made by members of Habonim Dror.
(d)
A committee which shall be known as the Moetzet Chinuch consists of the Rosh Machaneh
and Merakez/et Chinuch of all the machanot, Shlichim and the Mazkirut Artzit. All decisions made by the Moetzet
Chinuch shall be in accordance with the decisions of the Veida. The Moetzet Chinuch shall meet annually in March.
(e)
A committee which shall be known as the Moetzet Machanot consists of the Rosh
Machaneh, Merakez/et Chinuch, Merakez/et Techni, and Madrichei Madatz of all the machanot, Shlichim and the
Mazkirut Artzit. All decisions made by the Moetzet Machanot shall be in accordance with the decisions of the Veida.
The Moetzet Machanot shall meet annually each May.
(f)
A committee which shall be known as the Rakazei T’nua shall consist of one or more
Ma’apilim in Good-Standing who fill volunteer positions as needed by the Mazkirut Artzit. In addition to their specific
roles, the Rakazei T’nua shall be included in the running of movement seminars.
Article IX: Mas (Dues)
Section 22.
A central mas shall be fixed by the Mazkirut Artzit and shall be collected annually by the
machanot, including MBI, along with tuition. This mas will apply to all members of the Movement, except Ma’apilim.
Section 23.
A membership mas for Ma’apilim shall be fixed by the Mazkirut Artzit and collected
annually. Mas shall be automatically deducted each year from the salaries of Ma’apilim who work at machaneh. For
Ma’apilim who do not work at machaneh, mas shall be included in the payment of the first national program attended
that year.
Section 24.
Mas collected at the Machanot shall be sent to the Mazkirut Artzit by the respective Camp
Committees and is non-negotiable.
Section 25.
If a Ma’apil/a is unable to pay mas they are encouraged to utilize the kupa system. If after
exploring this option they still find themselves unable to pay, they can appeal directly to the Mazkirut Artzit for a
refund and they shall be reimbursed. Requests must be received by September 30 th after the summer or one month
after the attended seminar.
Article X: Implementation of the Constitution
Section 26.
Regulations for the implementation of the Constitution shall be adopted by the Veida.
Section 27.
The regulations for the implementation of the Constitution shall be amendable by the
normal decision-making procedure at a Veida.
Article XI: Referendum
Section 28.
Upon the initiative of a three-quarters majority of the Mazkirut Artzit, the Mazkirut Artzit
shall conduct a referendum among all the members in good-standing of the Nachshonim and Ma’apilim of the
Movement to determine the sentiment of Habonim Dror on any question. Decisions supported by a majority of those
voting shall have the effect of a Veida decision, provided that 75% of the eligible ballots are returned.
Section 29.
At Veidot, a motion to refer any question to a referendum, if supported by a majority (50%
+1) “yes” votes, shall require the Mazkirut Artzit to conduct a referendum according to the procedure described above.
Article XII: Amendments
Section 30.
This Constitution, or any part of it, may be amended by a Veida decision according to the
Regulations and Procedures for the Implementation of the Consitution. The day before the start of Veida will be
devoted to discussion of constitutional amendments. Amendments must be submitted prior to the beginning of the day
of discussion.
1/--страниц
Пожаловаться на содержимое документа