Local News
Michael Paterson and Gail Asper talk about their lives and why they’ve given their support to this year’s JNF Negev Gala
By BERNIE BELLAN On June 2 the Jewish National Fund will be honouring Gail Asper and Dr. Michael Paterson, a couple that has long been associated with many aspects of the Jewish community, whether it’s been Gail’s storied philanthropic endeavours or Michael’s years of service on the board of Jewish Child & Family Service.
Recently I had the opportunity to interview Michael and Gail via Zoom. Gail was a little bit late joining in, so I thought I’d take the opportunity to ask Michael to give me an update as to what his sons, Stephen and Jonathan, are doing these days, and to ask Michael about his own activities in the scientific realm, which has been his lifelong passion.
“Jonathan is now a lawyer,” (with Duboff Edwards Schachter) “and Stephen is pursuing his PhD at St. Mary’s University in Halifax,” Michael said.
“He’s studying invasive species,” Michael added. “He’s studying earthworms.”
Now, while I would hardly have thought earthworms would be considered an “invasive species” per se, Michael explained that “they all come from Europe.”
“Really?” I asked. (You never know what you’re going to learn when you set about to interview someone without any pre-conceived questions.)
“Yah, pretty much,” Michael added. “There are a few native earthworms that are primarily in the Yukon, which is where he’s heading this summer.”
Later in the interview, I had the chance to ask Gail about her own attitude to Stephen’s area of study. I don’t think it would surprise you to learn that she’s not a real earthworm aficionado.
“I hate earthworms!” she offered by way of answering how she feels about Stephen’s chosen area of study.
“We have this Covid dog,” she continued. “And every night we take him out for a walk and I’m seeing foxes and coyotes, deer and raccoons – and huge owls. Lately the sidewalk has been littered with disgusting, fat earthworms. It’s so disgusting.”
But, I added, “I didn’t know they immigrated here from Europe. That’s so interesting” – to which Gail added this rejoinder: “And no good can come of it! They should go back where they came from!”
As for Michael’s own particular area of interest, I asked him whether he’s still involved in the study of freshwater lakes. He said he is, with the “experimental lakes area” in “Northwestern Ontario, where we basically study the effect of human activities on water quality.”
The experimental lakes area encompasses 58 different lakes in a part of Ontario which has remained largely untouched by human habitation and which offers an excellent area in which scientists can study the effects that introducing various elements have on otherwise pristine bodies of water.
The experimental lakes project, however, was in danger of being shut down completely as recently as 2012, Michael explained.
At that point Gail joined in the discussion and noted that Michael played a pivotal role in keeping the project alive. It is now under the auspices of the International Institute for Sustainable Development, which is a private institute (that receives funding from the federal government as well as a number of private sector sources). The experimental lakes project also receives funding from the provinces of Ontario and Manitoba.
The fact that Michael Paterson is a scientist who is deeply concerned with the effects that humans have on freshwater lakes is significant in understanding the particular project that he and Gail have now involved themselves with through the JNF. (More about that later.)
I said to Gail that there was an interesting synchronicity in my talking to her prior to our next issue’s being published, as I told her I was also going to be doing a story about Aharon Harlap, the famous music composer, who just happens to be a cousin of Gail’s (once removed; he was actually a first cousin to her father).
Turning to the upcoming gala, which will be viewed virtually once again (as was last year’s gala, in which Ted and Harriet Lyons were honoured), I told Gail and Michael that I already had a heads up about what will be featured in the gala. (Keith Levit had spilled the beans to me.)
I said that I was told that this gala was a major production that will include some fabulous musical numbers.
“Yup, that’s all we know,” Gail noted. “We don’t know what they’re doing.”
“You don’t?” I asked in astonishment.
“No,” she said. “Big surprise.”
“Because I do,” I said. “But I’m not going to tell you.”
“Don’t tell us anything,” Gail insisted. “We heard a snippet when we were there for our taping, but we closed the door because we didn’t want to hear anything. So we’re going to be sitting on June 2nd with our little box of hummus and cookies or whatever they (the JNF) give you, and it’ll all be new for us.”
With that as preamble to the edgy interview that I had really wanted to conduct, I launched into what I thought would be a really tough question: “You must be a really hard ‘get’,” I suggested. “How many times have you been asked to be the honourees for the JNF Gala in the past?”
“We actually have not been asked,” Gail answered. “I mean our family was honoured a few years ago. The Asper Foundation and my family were honoured, so we were up on stage a few years ago. So, this was the first official ask for us. I didn’t think we needed to be asked because the Foundation has been recognized – and we’re part of that. But, it was with a lot of trepidation (that we accepted) because along with the honour comes a lot of responsibility.
“I happen to be very fond of the work the Jewish National Fund does,” Gail continued, “and the project this year – the Climate Solutions Prize, is also meaningful, so we felt it was appropriate to accept this wonderful honour.”
I turned to Michael to ask him about his own involvement in fund raising for the Jewish community. I noted that I had received a phone call from him back in the fall when he was phone soliciting for the Jewish Child & Family Service. I wondered whether that was something he’s been doing on a regular basis, i.e., phone soliciting for different organizations?
“Oh yah,” he answered. “Frankly, I don’t know why I’m being honoured. I am involved with a bunch of organizations. I sat on the board of Jewish Child & Family Service, on and off, for over 20 years, and I was the chair of the board many years ago,” to which Gail added, “and he was the first non-Jewish chair of the board, for which he received a Shem Tov Award.”
Of course, Gail being Gail, she had to add: “He received the Shem Tov Award for being the only chair who started and ended the meetings on time. He was so beloved!”
Michael also observed that, in addition to being on the JCFS board for many years, “I was also on the (Jewish) Federation board. I’ve been on the Federation Allocations Committee in the past, I’ve been on the (Jewish) Foundation’s Allocations Committee.” In addition to those Jewish organizations, Michael noted that “another organization I’ve been very involved with has been the Nature Conservancy of Canada. I’ve been on the regional board and the national board, on and off, since 2000. I’m currently the regional co-chair and I have been the chair in the past.”
He added that he’s also been involved with the Public Interest Legal Centre “on their board.”
I said that I wanted to take a step back and ask how Gail and Michael had met? (I had remembered reading that they had met at university, but I had the wrong university in mind when I asked whether they met in Halifax?)
“We met at the Elizabeth Dafoe Library,” Gail corrected me. “We both worked part time there. It was 1979. I was in Arts and Mike was in Science.”
I asked whether they met in the stacks?
“That would be a good story,” Gail retorted: “Love among the stacks. No, I was actually in ‘circulation’,” (to which I had to comment: “What a great double entendre”), “but every time Mike from ‘reserve’ would walk by, all my friends would look at cute ‘Mike from reserve’ as he bounded by to his little reserve area, and Thursday nights, for 20 minutes, we had our break together in the cafeteria. I got to know him, he got to know me, I would give him rides home; I really liked him so I asked him out on a date in March of the following year (1980). I asked him out to a Jets game in March – and it was a very wonderful night, but like, nothing happened, so I thought, ‘Okay, I guess we’re just going to be friends’ and I was going off to Europe with Jonathan Kroft – my dear friend – just a platonic friend, and I went to the Trevi Fountain in Rome, and there’s a song: ‘Three Coins in the Fountain’ so I stood on the edge of the Trevi Fountain, and I sang that song, and I wished for true love with Michael James Paterson – threw my coin in the fountain, and the next day I went to American Express to pick up my mail, and there was a letter responding to a letter I had written to Mike where I expressed my affection for him and wondered what was wrong with him to not feel the same way about me – and he wrote back, saying ‘I thought anyone traveling in Europe with a guy is otherwise engaged – and, if you’re not, let’s get together’,” and so, when Gail did get back they did get together and, as she noted: “We’ve been together ever since.”
“We got married in June of ’84,” Gail noted. “I was going to law school here.”
Mike explained that he had been “doing a Masters in Indiana” prior to their getting married, “and then we went to Halifax where I started on my PhD at Dalhousie.”
It was in Halifax also that Gail articled as a lawyer. “So it was in Halifax that we started our married life together,” she said. “We had no family, we didn’t know anyone. It wasn’t a bad way to start out,” she observed.
The discussion turned to politics and how both Michael and Gail have been able to navigate the sometimes choppy waters of dealing with politicians of different stripes (and bureaucrats) at various times in their lives – Michael in his efforts to kept the experimental lakes area alive, and Gail, most notably in her efforts to get the Human Rights Museum built.
Michael described his experiences to me, but in the end he put it succinctly: “It’s not that I don’t have political opinions, but I like to think that I’m reasonably respectful of different points of view.”
Although ordinarily one might have expected that, this having been an interview that would be published just prior to the JNF Gala, I would have led off my questions by asking about the particular project for which Michael and Gail agreed to lend their support by becoming this year’s Winnipeg honourees for the Gala. Instead, in a short piece following this article, you can read about the Climate Solutions Prize, which is that project.
For Gail, the notion of contributing to further scientific study in an area as important as the climate crisis is an extension of what the Asper Foundation has been doing for years with various Israeli institutions of higher learning, she observed.
“I’m involved with Hebrew U, we’ve supported Tel Aviv University, Ben Gurion (University), lots of other places. It’s strengthening Israel – and that’s aligned with our values; it’s helping the world, and that’s aligned with our values. I like to think that Israel can come up with something that will help the world – and that’s good for Israeli ‘hasbara’.”
As well, Gail noted that she “likes the idea of the JNF getting back to its ‘roots’ (“no pun intended,” she added), “and doing something more environmentally focused.”
For his own part, Michael noted that some years back he was invited to attend a water quality conference in Israel sponsored by the JNF. “I had the opportunity to meet some of the researchers on water quality in Israel and they were really an amazing, inspiring group. It was a reminder of all the research power in Israel.
“Of course, I’m deeply concerned about the environment and one of the biggest threats to the environment is climate change. It’s stating the obvious, but any threat to the environment is a threat to all of us if we care about the future – of our economy, our health, our way of life, our well being in general. I’ve given my professional career to protecting the environment, so the idea of bringing together Israeli innovation and research power and the environment is very attractive, so when the JNF brought this project to us for us to lend our support – of course, it made a lot of sense.”
In addition, some of the proceeds from the Gala will be going to JCFS, along with the World’s Jewish Museum in Tel Aviv (which is also a project in which Gail is deeply involved).
Local News
Epic court battle shaping up between Etz Chayim Congregation and two former members who are now barred from setting foot in Etz Chayim
By BERNIE BELLAN Introduction: This story had originally been posted Friday morning, August 14, with a photo of Etz Chayim Synagogue. Then we received an email from Morissa Granove, COO of Etz Chayim Congregation:
“Hi Bernie.
“This request is not about the article itself but the safety of our shul. We have been advised not to post the address or photos of our Jewish organizations publicly for some time for security reasons. Can I please ask that you change the image posted online (and planned for print if needed) and that in this be kept in mind for the future?
“Thank you so much for your understanding,
“Morissa”
We replied:
“Gee Morissa – I’ll do that but maybe you better ask Google to remove any mention of any Winnipeg synagogue because all anyone has to do is do a Google search and they’ll come up with a complete list of Winnipeg synagogues and their addresses – also photos! Do you want me to contact Google for you? Can’t be too careful, can we?
Now, here’s the story as it was originally posted:
The date October 7 carries a huge amount of significance for Jews around the world: It was the date that members of Hamas and other terrorist groups launched a murderous attack on innocent Israelis (and members of other nationalities) that resulted in the deaths of more than 1200 people and the abduction of 251 others.
But it is also a date that may have a significance of a different sort come this October 7 when a Winnipeg courtroom will be the scene of a court case in what is shaping up to be a momentous legal battle between Congregation Etz Chayim and two former members of the congregation who have been barred from attending services – or even setting foot inside the building that houses Congregation Etz Chayim.
Before publishing this article I had sent copies to both sides in the dispute – and offered both sides the opportunity to correct any mistakes they might have found in what I had written. I did receive responses from both sides and have incorporated their suggested corrections into what follows.
The two individuals involved at the heart of this dispute are both former longstanding members of Etz Chayim – and before that, Rosh Pina Congregation: Dr. Emet Eviatar (previously known as Hadass), who had been the Torah reader at Etz Chayim for many years, and who had also led Sunday services; and her husband, well known scientist Dr. David Hoult (who played a leading role in the development of MRI technology and was also very active in the congregation). Drs. Eviatar and Hoult have filed suit against CEC over what they claim was the illegal termination of their membership.
In response, however, Congregation Etz Chayim asserts that it was not a question of membership when CEC exercised its right to refuse entry on the advise of the WPS and security experts who were consulted after a deeply concerning letter was received from one of the plaintiffs by the synagogue.
The filings in this particular case are in the hundreds of pages. I spent two recent afternoons at the Law Courts poring over the filings, and photographed pages of what I thought were some of the most relevant issues at hand so that I could quote accurately from those filings.
While the case may seem hugely complicated, given the number of pages of documents that have already been filed, it seems that it boils down to two essential issues: Did CEC violate its own bylaws (or its own constitution, as the case may be, because at the time of the events in question a bylaw which would have governed who might be excluded from belonging to the congregation had not yet been passed) by terminating the memberships of Dr. Emet Eviatar and Dr. David Hoult? The argument advanced by the plaintiffs is not that a congregation cannot decide who can belong to that congregation. Rather, it is an argument that CEC did not properly adhere to its own bylaws in the manner in which it has excluded the plaintiffs from attending – or even setting foot inside Etz Chayim.
But, a second issue in play – and one which is argued forcefully by CEC in one of its briefs is that the argument Emet Eviatar and David Hoult are advancing has no place in the courts in the first place. As is noted in one of the briefs filed on behalf of CEC: “The dispute is, at its core, about the internal governance of a religious congregation. It concerns who may participate in communal worship, who may participate in communal religious life, and how a synagogue governs itself in response to legitimate security concerns. If it is accepted that the dispute was about ideological differences, as alleged by the Applicants, then these are fundamentally religious questions. The court has no jurisdiction to adjudicate such matters, and ought not to intervene.”
How the parties arrived at this situation is a complicated – but very interesting story.
I, myself was first made aware that something unusual was going on between CEC and David Hoult when I received this email from Dr. Hoult on Friday afternoon May 30, 2025, at 12:42 pm:
“Hi Bernie,
“I have just had a pair of police officers at the door telling me that we are now banned from Etz Chayim and if we show up the police will be called, no reasons given. I suspect it was an accumulation of things, including a letter I sent.
“Shabbat shalom,
“David.”
Later that afternoon I received another email, this time from a member of CEC, who forwarded me an email that had been sent to congregation members by Morissa Granove, Chief Operating Officer of CEC. That email had a letter attached, which said, in part:
“On Tuesday, May 27th, we received deeply troubling correspondence from a member of our community. The nature of this communication raised serious concerns about the safety of our congregants and staff. After careful and deliberate consultation with our Board of Directors, Clergy, the Winnipeg Police Service, the Jewish Security Network, and the Secure Community Network (in partnership with the USCJ), and on their recommendations we have made the difficult but necessary decision to terminate the membership of this individual and all members of their household, effective immediately.
“These individuals are no longer permitted on the premises of Congregation Etz Chayim, nor may they participate in any of our synagogue’s programs or activities.”
The letter was signed by Morissa Granove, Chief Operating Officer of CEC, and Allan Cogan, President of CEC.
What the heck was going on? I wondered. So, I emailed Morissa Granove that same afternoon:
“Hi,
“I received an email from David Hoult telling me that he is now banned from the Etz Chayim. I assume Emet Eviatar is also banned too, judging by the way your email is worded.
“I don’t know David at all – other than having received a piece he wrote about Israel and Gaza that I published to my website. I can’t begin to imagine what he might have written, but in the interest of fair reporting and fuller disclosure, can you say anything more about what he wrote in his letter?
“-Bernie Bellan
“Publisher,
“jewishpostandnews.ca
“also Associate Editor,
“The Jewish Post Winnipeg”
But, Morissa Granove did not offer any more information as to what might have been contained in that “troubling correspondence” which was received by CEC.
It was only when I went down to the Law Courts on August 10 that I was actually able to see what was in that “troubling correspondence.”
But, before I get into what was in that particular communication, even more background to this strange case is necessary.
In an email I received from CEC COO Morissa Granove following my having sent her a draft of this article, she wrote: “Congregation Etz Chayim …has never taken action based on political views. Further, CEC argues that other members, congregants, and guests share Dr. Eviatar’s views and yet there has never been an issue with their behaviour and as such, Congregation Etz Chayim has never taken action against anyone, revoked a membership, or refused entry to anyone based on their political stance.” Dr. Eviatar, in her own words, notes that she had already provoked the displeasure of some members of CEC, including staff members, by certain of her behaviours while, according to Morissa Granove, “volunteering in a leadership role and officially representing Congregation Etz Chayim. CEC …is ‘a Zionist organization’.”
Yet, according to CEC, Dr. Eviatar’s family’s attendance at Etz Chayim was never in question – until a letter was received from Dr. Eviatar’s husband.
As is noted in a brief for the plaintiffs, the following is taken from an affidavit given by Emet Eviatar, which might suggest that her membership in CEC had been called into question long before May 2025:
“In July 2024, I co-founded Manitoba Friends of Standing Together, a chapter of the international support network created by Standing Together. Standing Together is a grassroots joint Jewish and Palestinian organization in Israel which was originally created in 2015 to fight for equal rights for Palestinian citizens of Israel. Since the October 7, 2023 attack by Hamas they have pivoted to protesting the war in Gaza.
“On October 6, 2024, I appeared as a guest on the local CBC Radio Weekend Morning Show, together with Mr. Ramsey Zeid, president of the Canadian Palestinian Association of Manitoba to discuss the importance of having local conversations between Jews and Palestinians…
“Later that week, I received a phone call from CEC Rabbi Kliel Rose and Cantor Tracy Kasner. They informed me that I would no longer be allowed to lead Sunday services. The rabbi also suggested that ‘for my own peace of mind’ I might want to consider finding another congregation (that aligns with my views.”)
“On November 4, 2024, I received an unsigned letter from CEC which was provided to me by the then executive director, Jonathan Buchwald…
“While the letter contains various false statements, and is clearly a reference to my having contact with Mr. Zeid and others in the local Palestinian community, the assertion that I was aligned with an ‘ideology which is mutually exclusive and contrary to the existence of the Jewish people and the state of Israel’ was extremely offensive and hurtful to my being an Israeli citizen, having family who live in Israel, and having served in the Israel Defence Forces.”
Later, on March 3, 2025, Emet Eviatar appeared a second time on the CBC morning weekend radio show, again with Mr. Zeid.
In an affidavit taken from Morissa Granove, Ms. Granove explained the CEC’s objection to Emet Eviatar’s publicly associating with certain individuals while officially representing Congregation Etz Chayim (noting that CEC’s objection bore no consequence to Dr.Eviatar’s or her the family’s membership.)
“This public alignment with parties opposed to Israel raised concern within CEC about potential risks surrounding the Synagogue, especially in times of heightened safety risks and awareness of antisemitic vitriol. These concerns were brought to the attention of Dr. Eviatar. She took no action to mitigate these concerns. As a result, she was removed from a volunteer leadership position she held with CEC. CEC took no action regarding either of the Applicants’ ability to attend the Synagogue as congregants.” In the email I received from Morissa Granove in response to a draft of this article, Ms. Granove added: “Still, her family’s membership was never in question.”
But, in May 2025 something happened that led the CEC to take drastic action against Emet Eviatar, David Hoult and the other members of their household. It should be explained that, according to an affidavit taken from Morissa Granove, who had stepped into the role of Chief Operations Officer of CEC in January 2025, in May 2025 CEC announced it would be adding new security measures, based on a “site security assessment from the Winnipeg Police Service. Officer Constable Justin Remillard (who) attended the Synagogue and provided guidance on improving security.
“Among other things, he advised:
“a) access to the Synagogue should be controlled;
“b) registration and entry lists should be used for programs and services at the Synagogue;”
On May 5, 2025 CEC held its Annual General Meeting. According to an affidavit taken from Ms. Granove, “During discussion relating to security protocols…David Hoult expressed opposition to security procedures such as locked doors at the Synagogue, registration requirements, and screening of visitors.”
The following is taken from an affidavit taken from Ms. Granove: “On May 22, 2025, CEC received a letter from Dr. Hoult. The most significant concern with the letter was that it stated:
‘If, G-d forbid, I wanted to attack the shul on Shabbat morning it would be trivial. A stolen motorbike, onto the lawn, Kalashnikov to shatter the windows, gun down the congregation, drive away, ditch the bike, gun, mask and clothes…” (Emphasis added)
The same affidavit states that, “In that correspondence, he again expressed opposition to security measures and described them as ‘hysteria,’ ‘paranoia,’ and ‘psychologically stupid.’ “
According to an affidavit taken from David Hoult, “My wife and I received no direct communication from CEC advising of the termination of our membership until a cheque with no accompanying letter was received in the mail on June 9, 2025.”
In an email received from Morissa Granove after I sent her a draft of this story she asked that this sentence be inserted: “Congregation Etz Chayim was interviewed extensively by the WPS before going to the home of Dr. Hoult for the service call and had all of the details which were required in order to qualify their actions.”
On September 16, 2025, Hadass (Emet) Eviatar and David Hoult filed an application in Court of King’s Bench to have the termination of their membership declared “null and void,” also seeking an “order to comply with bye-laws” (of the CEC).
In response, CEC asserts that it “has never terminated the Applicants’ membership. Rather the applicants were advised they were no longer permitted to attend the synagogue.” Morissa Granove asked that this be added: CEC “exercised its right to refuse entry on the advice of the WPS and security experts.’
Did it boil down to semantics? I wondered. CEC was saying that it hadn’t “terminated the Applicants’ membership,” yet it returned the cheque they had sent in to pay for renewal of their membership.
However, if it is the CEC’s position that, based on the plaintiffs’ claims as written, this matter is not one that should even be considered by the courts – as is noted at the beginning of this article, then arguments over whether CEC abided by its own bylaws would be moot.
Yet, if the courts might be willing to consider the issue whether CEC did not properly follow its own rules – as set out in its bylaws, then the Eviatar-Hoult case becomes more compelling.
For instance, the issue whether CEC “terminated” the memberships of Dr. Eviatar and Dr. Hoult might take on added importance.
As is noted in a brief for the plaintiffs, the letter sent out by Morissa Granove to members of CEC on May 30, 2025 states quite clearly that “We have made the difficult but necessary decision to terminate the memberships of this individual (Dr. Hoult) and all members of their household effective immediately.”
In this case the plaintiffs (Drs. Eviatar and Hoult) are arguing the nowhere within CEC’s governing constitution (which was adopted in 2014) were there “provisions for the termination of membership.” Therefore, their argument goes, “CEC had no authority to terminate their membership.”
Morissa Granove asked that this be added: “The defendant (CEC), however, argues that the CEC’s governing constitution says that “directors ‘may pass by-laws’ regulating, among other things, ‘the suspension and termination of membership by the corporation and by a member.’ The word ‘may’ is permissive.”
“Thus, CEC is arguing, therefore, that it had no obligation to actually pass a by-law governing the termination of a membership.”
As it was, the by-law was never voted upon, as, according to an affidavit given by Dr. Eviatar, CEC leadership “had not complied with the correct procedure, including giving proper notice.,
However, in her email to me Morissa Granove wrote that “the very same bylaw was passed at a Special General Meeting of the members when Congregation Etz Chayim and its lawyers provided clarity on the proposed changes, which was requested by the members at the conclusion of the AGM to clear up any issue or confusion.”
Further, the letter to CEC members that was sent on May 30, 2025, which said that “These individuals (i.e., Dr. Hoult and any members of his family) are no longer permitted on the premises of Congregation Etz Chayim, nor may they participate in any of our synagogue’s programs or activities” was signed only by the COO and President of CEC.
Whether or not CEC followed proper procedure in whatever happened to Dr. Hoult, Dr. Eviatar, and their other family members will be up to the courts to decide.
But, there is a larger issue at hand. Are there are any rules that might govern how a private organization such as a synagogue should govern itself? And, perhaps even more important, can the courts intervene at all in such a situation?
This case is shaping up to have some fascinating implications.
Local News
Ami Hassan returning as owner of Falafel Place
By BERNIE BELLAN In a surprise move – and after more than a six-year absence as owner of Falafel Place (Corydon at Wilton) the legendary Ami Hassan has decided to return as owner of one of Winnipeg’s most famous eateries.
Long known for his sometimes irreverent attitude to his customers, e.g., “If you’re finished, get out!”, Ami decided to return to running Falafel Place after having retired years ago (or so he thought) from running the Corydon Avenue restaurant.
We asked Ami whether he’ll be sending a special invitation to Julia Roberts to come visit him at Falafel Place. He asked again: “Who’s Julia Roberts?” (Just kidding – he really does know how Julia Roberts is.) Read the story how Ami told her to leave the restaurant and come back later at Julia Roberts turned away from Falafel Place
Ami did note that when customers saw him inside the restaurant one recent day as he was getting it ready for the reopening Monday, August 10, over 20 of them came in asking him if he was open already.
We asked Ami whether the menu will be the same as it was when he last ran the place and he said everything will be the same.
Falafel Place will be open 7 days a week from 7 am – 2 pm. Remember, if you’re finished – get out!
Local News
Bark Mitzvah at the Simkin Centre August 13, 2026
By BERNIE BELLAN On a beautiful summer day at the Simkin Centre residents and family members – along with staff, were treated to a delightful “dog day afternoon” when scores of dogs were brought to the front courtyard outside the centre to celebrate what was titled a “Bark Mitzvah.”
Now, no dogs were called up to the podium to read from the Torah – or even to bark out a blessing, although as I canvassed many owners of dogs that were there – inquiring as to whether their dogs had received any special training for the day, I was pleased to hear that many dogs came from good “Jewish homes” and were good “Jewish” dogs. (I would suppose, in the case of our own dog that would mean that she’s been spoiled rotten.)
Some owners though maintained that their dogs had been brought up quite disciplined – although to be honest none of the dogs that I saw seemed to be be rigorously paying attention to any commands. Most were of the Goldedoodle, Yorkie variety. There was one rescue dog in the midst. It seemed quite confused, surrounded as it was by all those lap dogs.
The entire event was presided over – with great humour, but also a certain amount of seriousness, by Rabbi Matthew Leibl, who explained to the very large audience why having a special day celebrating dogs was entirely consistent with Jewish tradition.
Following is part of the transcription of an interview I conducted with Rabbi Lebil following his remarks explaining why he thought holding a “Bark Mitzvah” would be a good event to have. (You can watch the entire video at the end of this story. But where there was a great deal of laughter coming from people who were listening to my interview YouTube inserted the word “laughter” – which should give you an idea how fun an interview it was.)
As Rabbi Leibl explained to me, “I’ll tell you a serious story. When I was training – and I trained with Rabbi Annabal Mass… our teacher, Rabbi Steven Glade, encouraged everyone to consider a blessing of the animals ceremony because he said it’s a monster event. Just look around. It brought out so many people. It’s one of those events you can tie in loosely to a Jewish event – which it is. I mean we did it on Rosh Chodesh Elul- the new year of the animals and this whole idea it’s very similar to Tu B’Shvat- reimagining something old from Mishna to do it like this – but look at the attendance. I mean everyone wants to bring their dog and at a personal care home they say that music, babies, and dogs are the three biggest things that get through to everyone.”
I had to ask about kashrut, however (as I’ve been told repeatedly that kashrut is an essential element of the Simkin Centre – no matter how few residents may care about kashrut. Look – if I’m sent to cover something as frivolous as a “Bark Mitzvah” you can hardly expect me to refrain from going after my pet bugaboo at the Simkin Centre – and how ridiculous it is to require that the centre remain kosher when most of the residents could care less about kashrut), so I said to Rabbi Leibl: “No milk bones here, I hope. I expect that this is a strictly kosher event.”
His response: “I’m not sure. I wasn’t put in charge of that, so I can’t say. But no one’s going to be serving them any of the food that we eat. I can tell [laughter] you that.”
I said: “I’m not sure how to read that. [laughter].”
I asked whether there were Jewish dogs mixed in with non-Jewish dogs? (Dog assimilation is a serious issue.)
Rabbi Leibl replied: It’s inter denominational. [laughter] . I guess I don’t think we check to see if the dogs were uh circumcised. “
I asked: “Are we… [laughter] Are we mixing Jewish and non-Jewish dogs?”
Rabbi Leibl: “I don’t know that dogs have a faith. I’m not sure. I think they do. I think they’re of all faiths. ”
I asked: “Okay. And you know where bark mitzvahs originated?”
Rabbi Leibl: I’m sure it’s probably something silly.
Me: “It was gay guys in New York.”
Rabbi Leibl: ” Really?”
Me: ” Yes. Because they didn’t have kids. They started having bark mitzvahs.”
Rabbi Leibl: “That was probably more of an individual dog thing. This is a communal thing. It’s just a catchy title for publicity, Bernie. It’s the blessing of the animals. That’s the real thing.”
Me: “I was told that some of these dogs are on medication – as are many of the residents.”
Rabbi Leibl: “That’s low hanging fruit, Bellan. Low hanging fruit.”
Here’s the complete video of my interview:
