Our Town

On Tuesday (March 9), as expected, the Planning and Zoning Commission approved the town’s plan to turn the former Cos Cob Power Plant site into a park that includes an athletic field. This is a green light for the town to proceed to develop the entire property of approximately 9.7 acres exclusively for recreational and open space use.

The main issue of contention during the public comment period on Tuesday concerned lighting at the park. Riverside residents on the other side of the Mianus River, across from the proposed park, wanted a “dawn to dusk” park without lighting. In the end, the Commission approved a plan that allows lighting only in the parking lot for safety reasons, but not inside the park.

While lighting was the big issue, it is interesting to note that the really big issue of affordable housing was a non-issue. Earlier in the approval process the Planning and Zoning Commission did raise the question of the state’s affordable housing requirement for the site. The town submitted written answers to this and other questions posed by members of the Planning and Zoning Commission.

Here is the written answer to the question on affordable housing: ” This has been discussed with the Town’s legal department and director of community development. Further correspondence with the State Housing Authority to be completed by the Office of the First Selectman.”

Apparently this was a satisfactory answer.

The fact that the state requires the town to use 25% of the property for low or moderate income housing, or senior housing, has been conveniently overlooked. This state affordable housing mandate is still in force, but the town is acting as if this is not the case. This attitude is unwittingly reflected in today’s (Thursday March 11) Greenwich Time report by Frank MacEachern on Commission approval of the park plan.

MacEachern writes that, while the state originally required the town to build affordable housing on the site, “…in 1997 the two sides agreed the site wasn’t appropriate for affordable housing because of the contamination from toxins and its location abutting the Metro-North Railroad.”

In other words, according to this version of things, the state affordable housing mandate simply went away in 1997. In gaining approval for this park plan, without any accompanying affordable housing plan, the town is in fact acting as if the requirement for affordable housing has indeed gone away.

But this is a far cry from the truth.

The state conveyed the Cos Cob Power Plant property to the town for $1 nearly 23 years ago, on July 7, 1987. The original legislation required that 25% of the site be used for low income, moderate income, or senior housing. The remainder of the site was to be used for “public open space” purposes. It seems fair to say that the state legislature would never have agreed to turn the property over to the town without the affordable housing requirement.

In 1986, in anticipation of the town’s acquisition of the property, First Selectman John Margenot appointed a committee to recommend a plan for the Cos Cob Power Plant site as well as for the Mianus Pond which the state also turned over to the town in 1987. Having served on this committee, it is my recollection that the housing plan for 25% of the site eventually called for a low density development of 24 units.

However, nothing moved forward over the next 10 years. The old, ever-deteriorating power plant continued to dominate the site and was not demolished until 1999-2000. Any plan that there may have been for affordable housing fell by the wayside. It became increasingly apparent that, if and when the town ever developed the property, it would be exclusively for recreation and open space. The contaminated fly ash was given as the reason why there should be  no housing there, although, if there were no fly ash, I am sure another reason would have been found.

On July 8, 1997, 10 years after the town’s acquisition of the property, the state legislature amended the original legislation at the town’s request. The 1997 CGS Special Act 97-20, which amends section 5 of the 1987 CGS Special Act 87-101, retains the requirement that the town use 25% of the property for low, moderate, or senior housing, but allows the town to use the entire site for “public open space” if the town has provided equivalent housing units on other property in town on and after October 1, 1997.

The determination as to whether or not the town has met the housing obligation is up to the state. According to the legislation, only the Commissioner of Economic and Community Development has the power to waive the housing restriction, and only if the Commissioner determines that the town has provided , ‘on or after October 1, 1997, housing units on other properties in said town which are equivalent to the housing units required under this subsection.’ If the town is not in compliance with the provisions of this legislation, the property reverts to the state.

Clearly, if the town goes ahead with the park plan approved this week by the Planning and Zoning Commission without having the state approve an affordable housing plan that meets the original housing obligation, then the town is not in compliance with the state mandate.

Last year the Town Attorney espoused the highly questionable position that the town has already met its housing obligation for the property. In making his argument, he counts special needs and senior congregate living units that were developed by private, non-profit organizations without town involvement and that, at the time of development, were never intended to meet the town’s obligation to provide affordable housing at the former Cos Cob Power Plant site. The after-the-fact argument that the town was involved in developing this housing because some of the funding came from federal Community Development Block Grant money is a flimsy one.

It will be a sad day for the future development of any affordable housing in Greenwich if the state buys the town’s argument that the affordable housing requirement for the former Cos Cob Power Plant site has already been met. In the meantime, the town cannot go ahead with its plan for a park and an athletic field on this property without violating the provisions of the legislation under which the property was acquired.

The Planning and Zoning Commission may have approved the park plan. But it is hard to see how the town can go ahead with a plan to use the entire property for recreation and open space without also obtaining state approval.

All indications are that on Tuesday evening (March 9) the Planning and Zoning Commission will grant final approval for a coastal site plan on “a 9.678 acre property located at 22 Sound Shore Drive in the R-6 zone,” so described in the tentative agenda for the Commission’s Tuesday meeting. This 9.678 acre property is otherwise known as the former Cos Cob Power Plant site. The plan for the property, according to the Commission’s agenda, includes a turf field, playscape, open air pavilions, walking trail and amphitheater.

Planning and Zoning approval of this coastal site plan could be construed as a green light to finally move forward after the passing of so much time. It has been almost 23 years since the state conveyed the property to the town for $1 on July 7, 1987.

It should, therefore, be very good news that we are finally taking this step. The possibility of having a new playing field in place by the summer of 2011 is most welcome. After all, the town desperately needs more fields.

But wait a minute. Not so fast. Isn’t there something wrong with this picture?

The coastal site plan application makes no provision for the affordable housing that was supposed to be built on this site. But this application is not the complete plan. Technically, it is an application “for placement of earthen cap” and “stabilization of existing shoreline for remediation.” Such a plan for “capping” the site is required by the state for remediation approval. This is what the Planning and Zoning Commission is being asked to act upon. The application has been framed in such a way that the housing issue is not before the Commission.

There is an irony here. The town has come up with a “capping” and remediation plan for state approval that includes recreational and open space uses of the property with no mention of affordable housing on the site and no provision to build housing units elsewhere. And yet, the state legislature would never have turned this property over to the town in the first place were it not for the requirement that a portion of it be used for low and moderate income, and/or senior, housing. Affordable housing was the driving force behind the state’s conveyance of the property to the town in 1987. This seems to have been conveniently forgotten.

The original state stipulation in 1987 was that the town use 25% of the site for low and moderate income housing, or for senior housing. The remainder of the property was to be used for public open space purposes. Unfortunately, the legislation gave no time frame for developing the land for these purposes. After 10 years, on July 8, 1997, at the town’s request, the state legislature amended the original legislation to allow the town to provide ” on or after October 1, 1997, housing units on other property in Town which are equivalent to this requirement.” Another 13 years have passed since that amendment. And still there is no plan for equivalent housing on other property in town.

Last year the Town Attorney took the strange position that the town has already met the housing requirement for the former Cos Cob Power Plant site. This is a highly questionable premise. In the first place, he considers the 40 bedrooms at the Parsonage Cottage senior residence as counting toward meeting the obligation in spite of the fact that Parsonage Cottage had already opened its doors prior to the October 1, 1997 date. He also counts special needs units developed by Pathways since October 1, 1997 as well as the units at the Hill House senior congregate living facility, also developed after the October 1997 date. But these units were developed by private, non-profit organizations without town involvement.

The legislation clearly states that the town should provide equivalent units to meet the requirement. At no time did the town ever claim that Pathways and Hill House were meeting the town’s obligation to provide affordable housing on the former Cos Cob Power Plant site while these private, non-profit organizations were planning and building their housing. Such an idea never entered anyone’s head. To claim so now, after the fact, is absurd, based only on the flimsy argument that these non-profits used federal Community Development Block Grant money as part of their funding packages.

In any case, the Town Attorney’s opinion is of little consequence. According to the 1997 amended legislation, the obligation to use 25% of the site for affordable housing can only be waived by the Commissioner of Economic and Community Development and only if “he determines that the Town has provided” the equivalent housing units elsewhere in town. In other words, only the state can rule on whether or not the town has met the requirement. And it is likely to be quite clear to the state that the town has not met this requirement.

Perhaps Planning and Zoning approval of the coastal site plan on Tuesday will not be a green light to move forward after all. If we want our much needed playing field, maybe it behooves us, after 23 years, to finally come up with a plan for affordable housing. Or maybe we should do this in any case, simply because it is the right thing to do.

Most people in town probably do not know that Greenwich is partnered with Afula, a city in northern Israel’s Jezreel Valley. It is a partnership worth knowing about.

The Greenwich Jewish community is one of 13 Jewish communities in Connecticut, Massachusetts and Rhode Island, a group known as the Southern New England Consortium, that fifteen years ago entered into a special relationship with Afula and the Gilboa Region in Israel. This relationship grew out of  ”Partnership 2000″, a program created by the Jewish Agency for Israel in cooperation with the Jewish Federations of North America,which includes the UJA Federation of Greenwich.

“Partnership 2000″ is intended to connect Jewish communities throughout the world with specific cities and regions in Israel, creating sister-city relationships. The program is designed to enable Diaspora communities to have relationships with Israel that are tangible and result in collaboration and friendships at individual, organizational and community levels. These are partnerships among equals, not relationships between benefactors and beneficiaries. Each partnership is led by an independent steering committee with co-chairs from both Israel and the community abroad.

Two weeks ago, during a 10-day interfaith trip to Israel, members of Temple Sholom and Christ Church visited the Emunah

A Building at Emunah Children's Center, Afula

Children’s Center in Afula, Greenwich’s sister-city. And this past weekend, a group of 18 young people from the Emunah Center visited Greenwich accompanied by the Center’s Executive Director, Shlomo Kessel. The dancing and singing group, known as the Emunotes, gave performances after the Purim Megillah readings at Temple Sholom on Saturday night and Sunday morning. Kessel did much of the Megillah

Shlomo Kessel Reading the Megillah at Temple Sholom

reading on Sunday morning. That morning, the Emunotes also gave a performance in the Parish Hall at Christ Church during the Church’s coffee and education hour.

This was the group’s third visit to Greenwich.

The Emunah Children’s Center was opened in 1949 to provide a home for children orphaned during World War II. No longer a home for orphans, it is a residential community for children and teens at risk. It serves between 180 and 190 young people, ages 4 through 18, sometimes as old as 19, most of whom can’t live at home for one reason or another. Only 3 or 4 of the children are orphans. The rest have at least one living parent. Some do live at home.

Emunotes Dancing in Aisles at Temple Sholom During Purim

Kessel, the Executive Director, welcomed our interfaith group and gave us a tour of the Center when we visited  exactly 2 weeks ago today, on Thursday, February 18. He described Emunah as providing a “therapeutic quilt” for the children and teens. “Many tragic circumstances bring the children here,” he said. The children come to this therapeutic environment from a variety of backgrounds. Some are Israeli born, others came to Israel as immigrants, mainly from Ethiopia and the former Soviet Union. Some are not Jewish. Many of the children come from single parent families. Many  have behavior problems, and many of the parents, particularly those from the former Soviet Union, have substance abuse problems, mostly with alcohol.

The Center works with parents and tries to involve them in its programs.  ”We have a Mom’s and Dad’s Club,” Kessel said.

“How do we know that we have succeeded ?” Kessel asked. The measure of success is “How these children will raise their own children.” Kessel said that the Center strives to help the children and teens deal with the fears that prevent them from forming meaningful relationships with significant others.

Emunotes Performing at Christ Church

The Center, with a staffing ratio of 1 staff member for every 2 children, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, has an annual budget of $2.1 million. Between 60% and 65% of the funding comes from government sources. The rest is raised from private sources, mostly in the United States. Kessel said that much of his time is spent in fund raising.

The UJA Federation of Greenwich has been providing financial support to the Emunah Children’s Center in Afula through designated gifts since 2004 as part of the “Partnership 2000″ program in which Afula is a Greenwich’s sister-city. The Federation also supports the Ha Emek Medical Center that serves Afula and its surrounding area.

The Emunah Children’s Center also receives financial support from Temple Sholom. “This is Kids in Crisis in Israel,” said Rabbi Mitchell “Mitch” Hurvitz of Temple Sholom. He said that there are a number of Temple Sholom families for whom this is an important place for charitable giving, or tzedakah.

Jared Making a Mezuzzah Case in Emunah Center Art Room

Relationships such as the one Greenwich has with the Emunah Children’s Center in Afula constitute what the Jewish Agency for Israel calls “a living bridge” between sister communities. Other “Partnership 2000″ programs that contribute to this link include the Young Emissary Program which brings students who have just graduated from high school to the United States for a year, allowing them to defer military service for this period of time. This is the fourth year that Greenwich has participated in the Young Emissary Program. This year the emissaries are Or Geisinger and Hamutal Zimberg. The Jewish Agency views the Young Emissary Program as a “flagship program” that constitutes a “2-way living bridge.”

Afula, an urban center known as “the Capital of the Jezreel Valley,” has a population of 40,000. A third of its residents are recent immigrants to Israel who come mainly from Ethiopia and the former Soviet Union. It is only 8 miles from the West Bank city of Jenin, and has in the past been the target of terrorist attacks. The larger Gilboa Region has a population of 23,000 and is made up of kibbutzim, moshavim, Jewish villages and Arab villages. Forty percent of the Gilboa Region’s population are Arab Israelis.

When we visited the Emunah Center two weeks ago, the children were making Purim masks and artifacts for the Emunotes to sell during their upcoming visit to the United States. The Emunotes also sell CD’s of their singing performances.

When asked in an interview what he hoped the children would get out of performing tours such as this, Kessel replied that these performances “build self-esteem.” Saying that it was an important element in their “empowerment,” he went on to tell the story of a little girl who was in the audience during a previous Connecticut tour. She had bought a CD and was waiting for the Emunotes after the performance because she wanted them to sign the CD. “I want the stars to sign my CD,” she told Kessel.

Kessel said that it meant so much to the teens to be considered “stars,” because “they have not had the opportunity to experience success” in their lives before this. Their school work improves as a result, and their families are proud. “It is a life changing experience,” he said.

Members of the town’s newly created Housing Task Force held their first meeting yesterday morning (Monday, February 22). This is the first time in many years that Greenwich has a broad based community group looking at affordable housing.

The Board of Selectmen appointed the members of this task force in response to a recommendation in the Plan of Conservation and Development (POCD). The POCD, which was approved by the RTM last June, also recommended that the First Selectman create task forces for the downtown, for parking and transportation, for town properties and for the implementation of the plan. All 5 task forces are now in place.

First Selectman Peter Tesei attended yesterday’s meeting to give task force members their marching orders. He expects the task force, chaired by the town’s retired Director of Community Development Nancy Brown, to provide him with an initial report by the end of May, and quarterly thereafter. Tesei, who chairs the Implementation Task Force, plans to give his first report on the implementation of the POCD at the RTM’s June meeting. His report will incorporate the information that he receives in reports from all the task forces. Tesei said he expects the duration of the task forces to be no longer than 2 years.

In welcoming the members of the task force and thanking them for agreeing to serve, Tesei said that, although diverse points of view are represented, he hopes everyone will come to the task with an open mind. Brown said she wants to be sure everyone understands the task force is starting with a clean slate and without preconceived agendas. She asked task force members to suspend their ideas about what they think the answer is pending research into “the multitude of information that is available.” Her expectation is that the task force will develop a profile of the town and its housing needs, and put forward various tools for addressing these needs.

Both Brown and Tesei asked members of the task force to familiarize themselves with the housing recommendations in the POCD, as this document provides the basis for what the task force is to report on.

Tesei said that one of the actions identified in the POCD is an action that can be taken right away. He wanted assurance there would be follow-up on a suggestion made in regard to this action item at the United Way Legislative Breakfast where our state legislators were asked to seek modification of Section 8-30g of the Connecticut General Statutes (CGS). Such modification would define affordable housing in terms of the Stamford-Norwalk Metropolitan Statistical Area median income rather than in terms of the state median income which is too low to be workable in Greenwich. Section 8-30g is the statute that allows a developer to use a fast track appeals procedure if a municipality turns down an application that includes affordable housing as defined in the statute. It exempts municipalities from this appeals procedure if 10% of the municipality’s housing is affordable according to the statutory definition.

The definition of affordable housing is one of the challenges the task force faces. This is not just a matter of the considerable difference between definitions in terms of the state median income as opposed to definitions that use a Metropolitan Statistical Area median. There are also differences in definition depending on funding sources for affordable housing. And definitions specifically geared to Greenwich’s affordable housing needs point to higher incomes than are generally considered eligible for affordable housing. The very terms ‘affordable housing’ and ‘moderate income housing’ call for better definition.

Peter Sweetser, a representative from Greenwich Hospital, said that the income of hospital employees “wouldn’t under anyone’s standard be considered low income.”

Depending on different definitions, the town currently has different amounts of affordable housing. The most recent United Way study has the number of affordable units in Greenwich at 1,100. Princess Erfe, who heads the Community Development office, said that in her reports to HUD the number of affordable units in Greenwich, by the definitions she uses, is 1,800. Erfe said that the matter of definition was complex, with different definitions. Brown suggested the task force also take a look at the various funding sources to see what definitions they use.

Erfe asked that at the next meeting the task force have basic information regarding definitions and the housing that currently exists in town. She said that members of the task force must first have a basic understanding of what the town has now and who is served.

Mark Schroeder, an RTM representative to the task force from District 2, suggested that the group limit itself to a definition that qualifies as affordable housing under state statutes. Bill Finger, the BET representative to the task force, disagreed, saying that the task force “should not be held to the state definition.”

Schroeder saw what he called “two buckets.” On the one hand there are housing needs unique to Greenwich, he said, and then there are the state requirements. He expressed concern that the task force could create its own definition of affordable housing to meet Greenwich needs, but that any such housing would not be counted by the state.

Brown, however, pointed out that there is no state housing requirement for municipalities. There is nothing that the state requires, and there are no state penalties for municipalities that do not have affordable housing.

While Section 8-30g of the CGS exempts from the fast track appeal municipalities that have 10% of their housing affordable by the statutory definition, the statute does not require non-exempt towns to have 10% of their housing affordable by this definition.There is no such state mandate.

This exemption from the fast track appeals procedure came about because legislators at the time felt municipalities such as Hartford, New Haven and Bridgeport already had more than their fair share of low income housing. Although some have since interpreted it this way, the 10% threshold was not originally intended as a standard that all municipalities should attain.

Margarita Alban, a task force member who serves on the Planning and Zoning Commission, suggested that the task force look at affordable housing definitions in terms of local needs.

Schroeder asked that the task force not just look at the town’s housing needs, but at the same time take into consideration the effect of additional housing on neighborhoods, the effect on the town in terms of density and the cost to the town, both direct and indirect. He also suggested ’swapping out’ affordable housing by locating it in surrounding communities.

Bea Walko, from the Byram community, suggested the task force look rather at surrounding communities in order to see what other communities have done, particularly with regard to housing for teachers. It would be helpful to the task force to know what has been successful elsewhere, she said. Stuart Adelberg of the United Way echoed this suggestion, saying that members of the task force could learn by looking at examples from other communities, and seeing what works and what doesn’t work.

Brown said that, although a very different community from Greenwich, Stamford has a considerable variety of affordable housing that might be worth looking at.

Brown said she would like to establish a sub-committee to look at 6 -110 (g) of the local zoning regulations and perhaps tweak this provision for affordable housing to provide more of an incentive for developers to use it. According to Brown, this regulation has worked well in Greenwich, resulting in 7 affordable units in the housing development at the former Clam Box site and 4 units on Prospect Street. This zoning provision is intended to encourage moderate income units as part of market rate housing developments.

Seeing this as one type of subsidy, Bernadette Settlemeyer, a representative from the Housing Authority, suggested the task force identify all possible types of subsidy, as well as ways in which zoning regulations can encourage affordable housing development.

Town planner Diane Fox emphasized that all such development needs to take place where there is adequate infrastructure, which is why the POCD looks to the Post Road for additional density.

Sam Romeo, however, seemed disinclined to limit the scope of task force research to multifamily development, noting that many town employees and teachers want a house with a backyard.

The task force adjourned its first meeting after an hour an a half of discussion with the understanding that the group will meet every other week on Mondays, alternating between an 8 a.m. morning meeting and a 7 p.m. evening meeting.

NOTE: This is the fourth of a series of postings from Israel, a journal account of the Temple Sholom/Christ Church interfaith trip.

Yesterday (Wednesday, February 17) was Ash Wednesday. We marked this first day of Lent with a service in a mountain forest about 3 miles north of the city of Tzfat (Safed) in the Upper Galilee. It was already evening when we arrived for dinner at Bat Ya’ar, an American style ranch in the middle of the woods. It had been a long day that began with morning jeep rides over muddy, bumpy trails from which we could see the streams that flow from the Golan into Lake Kenneret (the Sea of Galilee), an important source of water for Israel. In the afternoon we had gone to the Golan Heights on the Syrian border, a place of strategic importance for Israel, and then to the Golan Heights Winery in Katzrin. By sunset, we were in Tzfat, the seat of Jewish mysticism, a mystical place in the mountains where the 16th Kabbalists lived.

We assembled before dinner to mark Ash Wednesday in an open area outside the Bat Ya’ar restaurant. The Reverend Lemler led the service, first explaining for the Jews in the group that Ash Wednesday is the beginning of Lent, a 40 day period culminating in Easter. He noted the significance of the number 40 in both Jewish and Christian traditions as a number associated with the theme of  ’purification.’ The Israelites wandered in the desert for 40 years until they were spiritually ready to enter the land that God had promised to the patriarch Abraham. Jesus spent 40 days in the Wilderness until he was spiritually prepared to undertake the task for which he had been called. The 40 days of Lent are a period of spiritual preparation for receiving the Easter message.

Referring to Easter as a ‘Feast,’ the Reverend Lemler said that the crucifixion and resurrection are ultimately about life, even in death.

Rabbi Mitch told a story about two brothers, illustrating how caring for one another ultimately gives this life meaning.

Karen Halac, a member of Christ Church who has a Master of Divinity degree from Yale University, as well as a Masters in Sacred Theology, and who is now in the process of being ordained, read the 51st Psalm, a psalm of remorse and repentance that asks for cleansing and purification. Before she read, she asked us to stand in a circle, not in the amoeba-like form in which we had been standing. So, as has been our custom since we first arrived in Jerusalem, we were together in a circle as we stood in prayer before God. William Darling, a parishioner at Christ Church and a student at Brunswick, sang the 23rd Psalm … the Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want… yea, ‘tho I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will not fear… You are with me … I shall dwell in the House of the Lord forever. William’s song was beautiful. Our Ash Wednesday service ended with the Reverend Lemler passing around a container of dirt for us to touch, or to take, as a reminder that we are dust and shall return to dust, even as we believe in eternal life.

After the service, as we sat down to dinner in the ranch dining room where Country and Western music was playing, David and George Darling of Christ Church, both students at Brunswick, recited the Lord’s Prayer and the Temple Sholom children sang Ha Motzi, the blessing over the bread.

It seemed to be the consensus of the group that the Ash Wednesday service had been a most lovely and moving way to close a long and tiring day.

It was also a good way to begin the next day, which from a Jewish perspective, had already begun, as the Jewish day goes from sundown to nightfall, based on the Genesis creation story in which there is evening first and then morning, one day. This was the day we would visit the sites where Jesus lived and taught in the Galilee.

Rabbi Mitch Leads Prayer Service at Masada

Yesterday (Monday) we went down from the mountains of Jerusalem into the Judean Desert.

On our way, we passed the oldest city on earth. Although smaller settlements elsewhere may have been this old, archaeologists have as yet found no walled city as old as Jericho. This oasis city, twelve thousand years old, dates back to 10,000 B.C.E.

Shortly after passing the oldest city on earth, we catch sight of the lowest place on earth. We are at the Dead Sea. We have descended to 1200 feet below sea level. The sea, which has been rapidly receding in recent years, is increasingly becoming dry desert land, just as the Jordan River is being reduced to a trickle. The Jordan River runs from Lake Kenneret, or the Sea of Galilee in the north, into the Dead Sea. However, over the years, water has been diverted from the Kenneret for human use, cutting off the water supply to the Jordan River and the Dead Sea. David Keren, our guide, tells us that Israel is planning a joint project with Jordan and perhaps the Palestinian Authority to bring in water from the Red Sea, although this is not likely to happen in the near future.

To our right are the Judean Hills … desert hills. The Judean Desert stretches before us, the Dead Sea now to our left. It is hot, the sunlight hazy. The temperature outside the air conditioned bus is in the eighties, and it is still morning. As the day progresses, the temperature will climb into the nineties. We pass camels belonging to Bedouins. A group of wild Ibex stands by the roadside. Neatly cultivated groves of date palms can be seen from time to time.

Arriving at Qumran shortly after 9 a.m., we are only a half hour away from Jerusalem, a day’s walk in ancient times. Here two thousand years ago lived the community known as Essenes. It was here, in 1947, that a young Bedouin boy, tending to his goats, accidentally found the first of the Dead Sea scrolls to be recovered. He had stumbled upon a cave in the Judean Hills overlooking the Dead Sea and discovered earthen jars that contained scrolls. The lack of humidity in this hot, dry desert climate with a temperature that is constant throughout the year has allowed these scrolls to be preserved in caves for 2000 years.

Dead Sea Scrolls Caves

The scrolls include pieces of the Bible, the oldest Biblical texts in existence. Until the discovery of the Dead Sea scrolls, there were no original Bible scrolls in existence that were this old. The scrolls include a complete scroll of the prophet Isaiah. The oldest original Isaiah up until this discovery dates from a thousand years later. In addition to the Biblical works, the scrolls also include information about the people who lived in this community 2000 years ago. Scholarship seems to indicate that they were from families associated with the Temple in Jerusalem who had come into the desert to isolate themselves from the corruption at the Temple in order to live more pure lives. They brought the scrolls from Jerusalem, probably hiding them in the caves during the Jewish revolt against Rome, at the time of the destruction of the Temple. The Romans destroyed Qumran in 68 C.E.

This community may have had some connection to early Christianity. Although John the Baptist was probably not a member of the community, he lived and preached in this area, and performed baptisms in the Jordan River near to Jericho, where Jesus was baptized.

Spa on the Dead Sea

After leaving Qumran, we continue south along the Dead Sea to Masada, known as the last holdout in the Jewish Revolt against Rome. Here, high on a hill above the Dead Sea, King Herod built an impregnable palace refuge in the 1st century B.C.E. Herod, of non-Jewish, Idumean origin, reigned as King of the Jews with the support of Rome until his death in 4 C.E.

After the Jewish revolt against Rome that began in 66 C.E. and ended with the destruction of the Temple in 70 C.E., a group of 1000 Jewish zealots, including women and children, continued to hold out against the Romans in this fortress that had originally been Herod’s palace. They held out for 3 years after the Temple was destroyed, until 73 C.E. when they all committed suicide rather than be captured by the Romans.

We arrived at Masada shortly before 11 a.m., and here, high above the Dead Sea, our interfaith group held a prayer service, the Jewish Shacharit, or Morning Service, with everyone, Christians as well as Jews, participating.

Saying that Masada is often called ‘the Jewish Alamo,’ Rabbi Mitch described those who in this spot held out against the Romans for three years as having faced the end of the Jewish world. For the next 2000 years, Jews would be exiled from the land, and for 2000 years would harbor the hope of return to this land that is so much a part of the Jewish people.

Our standing here is bringing this dream to life, Rabbi Mitch said. It is a powerful thing, giving life to this dream that the Jewish world has not ended and will continue in its service to God, betrothed to God. It is even more powerful that we stand here with our Christian brothers, Rabbi Mitch said. This coming together is the service that does honor to God.

The Reverend Lemler’s prayer invoked the One God before whom we stand knit together in faith.

The service, which included the traditional elements of the Jewish morning service such as songs of praise, the call to worship, the Shema, V’ahavta, Amidah and Kaddish, was inclusive of the Christians in our group. Rabbi Mitch – in Hebrew – and the Reverend Lemler – in English – recited the Priestly Blessing while all the adults held the Jewish prayer shawl, the tallit, over all the children.

Both Christians and Jews use the Priestly Blessing in their services. As Rabbi Mitch points out, it is the oldest continuously recited blessing in the world. On Sunday, when we were taking a tour of the ancient City of David, we learned that a woman’s necklace containing the Priestly Blessing had been found in the archaeological excavations. The necklace is 2800 years old.

There are 27 people in our interfaith group, 28 including our guide, David Keren. Ten of these are children and teenagers. The Christian children as well as the Jewish children participated in the service.

David Darling of Christ Church read the 145th psalm. His older brother, William Darling, read the 23rd psalm. And the youngest Darling brother, George, recited the Lord’s Prayer, which, although wholly identified with Christianity, is really a very Jewish form of expression.

It was a very moving service, and a very special time of togetherness.

After leaving Masada, we went to a spa for a swim in the Dead Sea, and then back to Jerusalem for a tour of the tunnels along the Western Wall of the Temple Mount.

It was a full day, a happy day, and a rewarding one. A good way to start the month of Adar, a joyous month on the Jewish calendar.

Rabbi Mitch and The Reverend Lemler with Jerusalem in Background

An hour before sunset, as Shabbat was about to descend upon Jerusalem, the members of our group stood in a circle and held hands as we prepared to welcome Shabbat Shekalim, our first of two Sabbaths together in the land of Israel. The city lay before us, an awesome sight. The Reverend Jim Lemler of Christ Episcopal Church led us in prayer, asking for God’s guidance in our interfaith endeavor while Rabbi Mitchell “Mitch” Hurvitz commented on the Torah portion for Shabbat Shekalim saying that the commandment for each person to bring a half shekel to the Temple signifies that all are equal in God’s eyes. We were standing on the hill where, in all likelihood, Abraham once stood and looked toward the place that God would show him, Mount Moriah in the distance, where he sacrificed a ram instead of his beloved son Isaac in the place where many years later Solomon would build the Holy Temple. In all likelihood, Jesus too looked from this hill toward Mount Moriah in the days when the Temple was still standing in the place where now we see the Al Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock, holy to Moslems.

It was a special Shabbat in Jerusalem, if an unusual one for the Jewish members of our group. Saturday was beautiful, warm and sunny. I attended Shabbat Shacharit services, the Jewish morning services, with Rabbi Mitch and Temple Sholom youth director, Josh Altman. We went to an Orthodox Shul, the name of which can be more or less translated as the community of new song. The services were full of joyous song. And women’s participation was much greater than is the case in more traditional Orthodox synagogues. It was an uplifting experience.

We spent Shabbat afternoon following Jesus through his last hours. We began at the Church of the Holy Sepulchre in the Old City. According to tradition, this church marks the spot where Jesus was crucified. In the chamber commemorating the actual place of crucifixion, Jim Lemler offered a prayer, again in the spirit of understanding and sharing, a transcendence in our interfaith endeavor. Church bells were ringing out as we prayed. Rabbi Mitch, taking note of the bells, remarked on Jerusalem’s cacophony of sounds where church bells blend with the chants of the muezzin from the minarets, calling Moslems to prayer five times a day, and with the Hebrew sounds of  Jewish prayer, the chanting at the Western Wall. We recalled the welcoming of the Sabbath there at the Kotel, the throngs of worshippers after sundown, the joyous sounds of song and dance.

Rabbi Mitch expressed the hope that our coming together in this interfaith endeavor might in some small way contribute to a healing of the world, the tikkun olam that is central to Jewish belief.

As we left the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, we walked the Via Dolorosa in reverse, stopping last at the first stations of the cross. Then we walked out of the Old City through the Damascus Gate into all-Arab East Jerusalem where we went to the Garden Tomb, an alternate site for the crucifixion of Jesus, frequented by Protestants, who, of course, have no place in the Church of the Holy Sepulchre which is dominated by the Eastern Orthodox Church, the Armenian Apostolic Church and the Roman Catholic Church. The Ethiopians and the Copts also have places at the Holy Sepulchre, with the Copts relegated to a roof space. These different denominations are not at peace with one another, and a Moslem family has held the keys to the church for generations.

We ended Shabbat with Havdalah, the Jewish service performed every Saturday after nightfall, the ritual that separates the sacred space in time that is Shabbat from the ordinary time of the rest of the week. We ended the Shabbat in a circle just as we had before Shabbat when we overlooked Jerusalem. This time we had our arms about one another as we sang Eliyahu Hanavi, a song to Elijah the Prophet, the harbinger of the messianic age, the song that is always sung after Havdalah.

The traditional greeting then is Shavua Tov – a good week. May this indeed be a good week for all. Shavua Tov.

I am on an interfaith trip to Israel with a group of 28 people led by Rabbi Mitchell “Mitch” Hurvitz of Temple Sholom and the Reverend Jim Lemler of Christ Episcopal Church. This is the first of what will be a series of postings from Israel over the next ten days.

The day we left for Israel – Thursday February 11 – was a picture perfect day in Greenwich. Wednesday’s snowstorm had brought a beautiful winter scene that was clear with blue skies and a bright sun on the day of our departure.

The group gathered at gate 31B in the departures terminal at JFK, prepared to board El Al flight 002 for Tel Aviv. We assembled for the first time as a group around 5 p.m., the blinding oblique rays of the setting winter sun creating sharp contrasts of brightness and dark in the terminal.

We began with prayer. Josh Altman, Temple Sholom’s youth director, read a Hebrew prayer for safe travel, followed by the Reverend Lemler who recited an Episcopal prayer, also for safe travel.

Members of the group introduced themselves. For many this is a first trip to Israel. Others have been before, some of us many times. The Reverend Lemler has been on a previous interfaith trip. Rabbi Mitch, the immediate past president of the Greenwich Fellowship of the Clergy, has done much work in interfaith dialogue, but this is his first such interfaith trip.

I am traveling with my husband, Don Snyder. We both have been to Israel many times before. This is my tenth trip and my second interfaith trip. Exactly 20 years ago, on February 11, 1990, I arrived in Israel with an interfaith group led by Rabbi Rob Lennick of Greenwich Reform Synagogue, the Reverend Ed Deyton of Diamond Hill Methodist Church and the Reverend Art Kauffman of the Methodist Church across from the Greenwich YMCA.

How will the interfaith dialogue on this trip compare with that of 20 years ago, I am wondering as I board the plane.

We arrive at Ben Gurion International Airport at 12:40 p.m. on Friday, February 12, an hour later than scheduled due to a departure delay. My watch is still set to New York time, 5:40 in the morning. As we come in for a landing everything below looks green. It is a sunny day, if a bit hazy, and warm, almost summer-like, in sharp contrast to the winter scene we left behind in Greenwich.

We depart for Jerusalem, stopping at the lookout point in Talpiot, with its magnificent view of this ancient city that is holy to Jews, Christians and Muslims. Looking out over Jerusalem, an hour before sunset and the start of Shabbat, we stand together in a circle, holding hands while Rabbi Mitch gives a short Torah commentary and the Reverend Lemler offers a prayer.

And the we return to the bus, rushing to get to the David Citadel Hotel in time to prepare for Shabbat.