Jews in St. Paul Differ on Sanctions by United Jewish Fund

A decision by the United Jewish Fund and Council here to impose “ethically sound community sanctions” against persons holding positions of leadership or responsibility, whose pledges to the Fund and Council are considered inadequate, has been received with mixed reactions by people active in local Jewish community life, it is reported in the American Jewish World of Minneapolis and St. Paul.

Some leaders, the American Jewish World reports, termed the new policy as “immoral, ” “dangerous, ” and “un-democratic”; others described it as “wise, ” “effective, ” and “the best way to raise additional money.” A suggestion was also made that the board of directors of the UJFC withhold any action until the matter can be presented to the 3,400 contributors, either at a mass meeting or through the mails.

The decision to impose sanctions on community leaders whose giving is regarded inadequate was adopted by a vote of 23 to 2. The UJFC is preparing letters for mailing to its 3,400 contributors notifying them that the 1954 campaign is “a failure” and citing the reasons why it is necessary to put into practice a program of “ethically-sound community sanctions” as a means of raising an additional $50,000 to achieve its minimum goal of $400, 000.

“Such sanctions are based on the principle that an individual’s adequate discharge of major community responsibilities must be precedent to his occupying a position of leadership or favor in our community organizations, “the board resolution states.

UJFC PRESIDENT EXPLAINS PROPOSED SANCTIONS PLAN

The board decided that in each case, if after re-solicitation, the UJFC board determines that the giving remains inadequate, it will inform the organizations involved of the “full facts” and urge them to ask such leaders to forfeit their rights to their positions on such boards.

“That will be followed,” UJFC President L.H. Heller added, “by similar action with regard to such individuals who may be on the boards of local chapters or lodges of national organizations which are beneficiaries of the Fund and Council. This would include our local religious institutions as well. Then our own social clubs will want, we feel sure, to consider the implications for them if any of their members are involved.”

The board voted to put into practice a program of “ethically sound community sanctions, ” in cooperation with all social welfare, religious, fraternal and organized social club institutions of the Jewish community.

The American Jewish World of Minneapolis and St. Paul commented editorially: “It is potentially a hazardous policy, and it would be extremely short -sighted not to recognize that bitterness and animosities which might result from sanctions could create community disunity and factionalism that may take many years to eradicate.

“If giving, as we have said many times before, is primarily a product of conscience, goodwill and self-appraisal, then we find it difficult to see how anyone can adequately and fairly say how much another should give. In the absence of accepted criteria for determining how much a man ought to contribute, the danger is that injustice will be done some persons who, for reasons known only to themselves, already are giving what they consider they are able to give.

“We know of no precedent for the imposition of such sanctions in community life, and we pray the UJFC board will tread warily on this new path on which it is pioneering. We hope that those who are re-solicited will appreciate from the very nature of the policy, how extreme is the emergency,’ and that re-solicitation will accomplish what is sought without any necessity for sanctions. The experiment will be watched closely by other communities; for they, like St. Paul, may also be driven to such drastic procedures, even though they do so as hesitantly and reluctantly as St. Paul has done.”