Local News
JNF Canada loses appeal to retain charitable status—days before a deadline to disburse remaining assets
By ELLEN BESSNER (Canadian Jewish News) November 10, 2024 Jewish National Fund of Canada has lost its first major legal battle to stop the tax department’s revocation of its charitable status, which came into effect three months ago.
Late in the afternoon of Friday, Nov. 8, a Federal Court judge dismissed JNF Canada’s application for a judicial review—and the judge also dismissed a request for an injunction to force the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) to remove the official revocation notice that was printed in the Canada Gazette on Aug. 10.
Printing that notice triggered a series of steps JNF Canada was ordered to take under the Income Tax Act rules regarding revoked charities.
Firstly, it could no longer issue tax receipts for charitable donations made by Canadian supporters to fund a portfolio of social service projects in Israel.
Secondly, it was also required to wind down operations that date back to 1967—during which time the charity fundraised in Canada to support tree planting and other work in Israel. The CRA gives revoked charities the option of trying to disperse its remaining assets (JNF Canada’s asserts were stated as about $31 million in 2023) by giving them to another approved charity.
JNF Canada was also instructed to file a special form and remit a cheque to the tax department to pay what is known as a revocation tax. This amount is 100 percent of its remaining holdings after calculating the fair market value of the assets and money the charity had left, once all debts are paid. (The amount could be further reduced should the assets be legally given to a qualified donee.)
The deadline for that tax payment is Nov. 13, according to a letter the CRA sent to the now-former charity in mid-August.
The judge’s ruling came 24 hours after JNF Canada lawyers argued their case via video conference on Nov. 7, alongside lawyers for the Department of Justice, representing the Minister of National Revenue.
JNF Canada asked for a motion to reverse the publication of the Aug. 10 notice, which would save the organization from forced closure.
In her 17-page written decision, Justice Allyson Whyte Nowak explained why she dismissed the appeal. She ruled that her court was the wrong place for the charity to try to seek relief, because the Income Tax Act specifically designated the Federal Court of Appeal as the correct venue for such cases. Earlier court cases have established this fact, she wrote.
Justice Whyte Nowak did acknowledge that JNF Canada’s lawyers are raising a “novel issue,” but said it must be left up to the Federal Court of Appeal—or even Parliament—to correct any gaps in the inner workings of the CRA’s revocation process.
The day before the judge’s decision was released, JNF Canada issued a statement about how it will “never stop fighting for our community and our mission.”
“We stood our ground, and our lawyer made a compelling case in our defense [sic], arguing for procedural fairness, legitimate expectations, and the rule of law,” JNF Canada CEO Lance Davis and the revoked charity’s president Nathan Disenhouse announced together on Nov. 7.
JNF Canada has not commented publicly since learning it had lost this legal appeal. A video conference briefing for supporters has been scheduled for 8 p.m. tonight (Nov. 10), in the evening when JNF Canada’s annual Negev Dinner gala for supporters had been scheduled in Toronto, before its cancellation.
Rally for Humanity, a Sunday afternoon event at Nathan Phillips Square in downtown Toronto—which will feature speakers from Muslim, Hindu, Christian and Catholic organizations in alliance with 13 different Jewish community groups—also lists JNF Canada as a sponsor.
‘Nearly impossible to resurrect the charity’: CFO
JNF Canada’s chief financial officer Edit Rosenstein, in an affidavit submitted to the court on Oct. 30, outlined the impact of the Aug. 10 revocation.
“As we will not have the necessary funds, a total of 31 charitable projects will need to be stopped, which will have a huge impact on the vulnerable populations we serve.”
The affidavit claimed 48 employees would be terminated, with JNF Canada obliged to make severance payments. Four contractors will have their contracts terminated, with JNF Canada liable for the breaches. And other vendor contracts will also be terminated “resulting in penalties to JNF and exposure to further claims for breach of contract,” explained Rosenstein.
“If JNF is forced to shut down, I believe it will be nearly impossible to resurrect the organization, even if it is successful in its appeal before the Federal Court of Appeal,” Rosenstein’s affidavit said.
A separate court document from JNF Canada’s legal team added another consequence should the Federal Court not reverse the CRA’s revocation. The court was told it will result in further irreparable harm such as “the Applicant losing its chance to salvage its reputation.”
CRA explains the revocation and next steps
The CRA told The CJN on Friday it does not normally comment on specific court cases involving taxpayers, due to confidentiality clauses in the Income Tax Act. However, an email from spokesperson Nina Ioussoupova clarified why revoked charities must pay a revocation tax.
“The purpose of this tax is to ensure that charitable property is applied to charitable use,” she said, adding that the remaining assets include all income and gifts made to a revoked charity during its wind-down period.
In the JNF Canada case, the CEO Lance Davis told The CJN in an earlier interview in August that the charity continued to receive donations from supporters after the revocation, even though tax receipts could not be issued.
Two months ago, JNF Canada launched a public relations effort to lobby Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and national revenue minister Marie Claude-Bibeau to intervene on the file and reverse the revocation. Supporters were asked to donate money that would go to plant trees in areas of northern Israel where Hezbollah rocket attacks have burned forests.
The revoked charity vowed to send thank-you cards to the two federal politicians, which would advise them of trees being planted in their names—and also urging them to support JNF Canada’s cause.
How did JNF Canada end up here?
July 2024 brought the first public word from JNF Canada of its decade-long dispute with the tax agency. JNF Canada announced that it had been “blindsided” by the CRA decision it would be moving to shut the charity down, after a confidential 2014 CRA audit painted a harsh picture of its non-compliance with tax rules. JNF Canada vowed to fight any revocation through the courts, and immediately filed an appeal July 24, to the Federal Court of Appeal. A parallel appeal was filed to the Federal Court soon after.
The agency’s findings in the audit ranged from where the charity’s books and records had been kept in 2011 and 2012 (mostly in Israel, which was a no-no), to what language the paperwork and receipts were kept in (mostly in Hebrew, which is not illegal but makes work difficult for auditors), to the conclusion that JNF Canada’s founding charitable purposes of relieving poverty in Israel by paying the salaries of indigent labourers, were not being met.
Another major issue was that because of missing paperwork and superficial oversight on the ground in Israel, it was felt the Montreal-based JNF Canada hadn’t been in control of or directing its own operations overseas. CRA believed the charity was acting merely as a funnel of money to the Jerusalem-based agency, the Jewish National Fund/Keren Kayemeth LeIsrael, which ran the projects.
A further red flag for auditors were several projects in 2011 and 2012 that benefited the Israel Defence Forces, such as construction of buildings and green areas on IDF military bases. Registered charities are not permitted to support a foreign military financially, under Canadian laws. Some other projects were located in the West Bank and on other disputed land, the CRA found, something which Canada’s foreign policy frowns on.
JNF Canada disagreed with the CRA’s view of that last category—and still does. But in 2019, the charity assured the public that it had stopped funding both kinds of projects after 2016, in order to comply with CRA requirements in good faith.
The CRA officially informed the charity in August 2019 that it still wasn’t satisfied with JNF Canada’s efforts to come into compliance, and intended to revoke its charitable status.
Three months later, in November 2019, JNF Canada filed an objection with the CRA’s in-house appeals branch. That move put the revocation process on hold until the objection was reviewed.
The review by the agency’s appeal team took about four years.
In documents submitted to the Federal Court as part of the latest hearing, the CRA acknowledged the lengthy time it took. However, it blames the delay partly on “disruptions” caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, when in person meetings were cancelled, and when many federal workers switched to remote offices and worked from home. But the CRA also contends it was JNF Canada’s fault the review was held up when the charity filed an Access to Information request seeking confidential CRA documents about this dispute, which caused more delays.
The CRA finished its review of JNF Canada’s objection in 2023, and told the charity it still was planning to proceed with revocation of its charitable status due to the “repeated and serious non-compliance” with the Income Tax Act.
The now-revoked charity has publicly slammed the tax agency for repeatedly refusing to meet with them during the process to discuss concrete suggestions for improving things, such as adopting a new, acceptable charitable purpose. JNF’s Canada’s CEO Lance Davis told The CJN Daily this August that his team has made many internal changes in recent years to come into compliance, and as a result were now “running a tight ship.”
On June 26, 2024, the charity received a further confirmation letter of the CRA’s 2019 Notice of Intent to Revoke.
JNF Canada decried the decision, blamed the department for being procedurally unfair, even biased, and accused tax officials of caving in to anti-Israel activist groups—such as Independent Jewish Voices—which have long been pressuring the government to shut pro-Israel charities such as JNF Canada down. JNF Canada officials have since pointed to internal CRA documents it obtained showing a 2017 meeting between anti-Israel activists and a senior director with the revenue agency.
Procedural fairness disputed by JNF Canada lawyers
JNF Canada lawyers Adam Aptowitzer and Elizbeth Egberts of KPMG told the court this past Thursday that the CRA had given JNF Canada written assurances—dating back as far back as 2019—it would not pull the trigger by having the revocation notice published yet in the Canada Gazette.
Aptowitzer argued this assurance included a promise the CRA would wait until any objections or court appeals were dealt with. He told the court there was a long-standing internal CRA policy that gave audited charities as long as 90 days after the revocation notice was sent out to file an appeal in the Federal Court of Appeal before publication of the revocation.
Aptowitzer told the court that JNF Canada felt the 90-day policy used in 2019 was actually a “commitment” that “had created a legitimate expectation” of how things were going to be handled in 2024.
The lawyers submitted copies of an internal CRA briefing note from May 2024 stating no publication of the revocation notice would happen if JNF managed to submit its appeal in time to the Federal Court of Appeal, which it did on July 24, 2024.
Nevertheless, the CRA went ahead and had the revocation notice published on Aug. 10, which was 30 days after that final confirmation letter was sent out.
JNF Canada also felt it should have been clearly informed that CRA 2019 policy had been changed, since had it been informed about the shorter deadline, the charity would likely have gone much earlier to the Federal Court of Appeal to try to block the publication, before it was too late.
For its part, CRA lawyer Linsey Rains told the court JNF Canada should have been smart enough to figure out the previous, 90-day timeline process wasn’t guaranteed any longer.
“[JNF Canada] is a sophisticated organization and there is sophisticated counsel as well,” Rains said Thursday.
She reminded the judge that under the tax code, the CRA doesn’t have to wait for the final outcome of legal appeals to be exhausted through the courts, and the CRA can publish a revocation in the Canada Gazette after 30 days, as was the case here.
Lawyers for the government argued the tax department was acting to protect the tax base, and wasn’t required to give JNF Canada its own personal treatment and notice.
“Counsel… was told that [the 90-day waiting period in place back in 2019] assurance wasn’t necessarily guaranteed this time around,” said Rains. “The policy changed and it can change and the reason it changed is… the Minister’s statutory duty to publish the revocation.”
While the 90-day policy was followed for many revocation cases before and since 2019-2020, the court heard that, in the last few years, the agency has moved to the much speedier revocation: 30 days.
Moves made to protect taxpayers: CRA
“The CRA now has a risk-based approach towards compliance in the charitable sector,” according to senior CRA official Melissa Shaughnessy in a written affidavit submitted to the court in advance of the hearing.
She said it will cost the Canadian government $4.6 billion in 2024 to give tax deductions to people and corporations who donate money to charities. So, the CRA wants to make sure the charitable sector operates according to the law. That is why it moved more quickly on the JNF Canada case.
“The decision to proceed with revocation now, despite the Organization’s appeal with the Federal Court of Appeal, is to stop the continued flow of tax-receipted donations going overseas to fund the non-charitable activities of a non-charitable third party,” Shaughnessy wrote, referring to the JNF’s partner in Israel.
“The Organization has publicly stated that it will continue receipting donations and distributing funds. Awaiting the conclusion of the legal appeal process could take over a year which would enable the Organization to continue to send millions of dollars in tax-receipted donations to fund foreign non-charitable programs were it not revoked.”
While the CRA acknowledged it had received assurances from JNF Canada that funds were not being used in IDF projects or the West Bank since 2016, the tax agency pointed out the charity didn’t furnish proof to back up this promise.
‘Irreparable harm’ due to revocation
As part of its case claiming irreparable harm from revocation, JNF Canada argued in court that Israeli children with cancer are being jeopardized by the CRA’s revocation. Aptowitzer, one of the JNF Canada lawyers, said the organization promised to help fund the renovation of a building on the grounds of Sheba Medical Centre’s Tel ha-Shomer site near Tel Aviv, where families of young cancer patients are housed while their kids are undergoing lengthy oncology treatments.
The facility is operated by the Israel-based Rachashei Lev charity. Since 2007, the building has offered 20 apartments to temporarily house the families. Aptowizer told the court JNF Canada made an obligation to fund this renovation project.
“The facility is currently turning away sick children,” he said, and the court was told an estimated ten patients have had to be turned away to date, due to the renovations underway. “There is harm to unknown people yet to be diagnosed.”JNF Canada committed $292,500 to fund the renovations, according to the affidavit submitted by CFO Edit Rosenstein.
According to the JNF Canada’s website, the reason the children’s house is being renovated is because since Oct. 7, 2023, the hospital has now commandeered the 20 apartments also to accommodate an influx of Israeli survivors’ families, including next of kin of severely wounded Israeli soldiers who were injured in battle.
“With the increased demand from families of wounded soldiers, they need to quickly renovate and split the current apartments into two thereby doubling the number of families served for a total of 40 apartments,” explains JNF Canada on its website. “Each suite will consist of a bedroom, a kitchenette, private bathroom and a balcony. Renovations include new flooring, electrical, paint, plumbing, replacement of doors and installation of more countertops and sinks.”
JNF Canada’s website adds that donations are required before the Canadian project can send money.
Donations almost completely stopped: CFO
In her affidavit, Rosenstein revealed that after her charity’s status was revoked in August this year, JNF hasn’t been receiving the expected flow of donations.
“As a result, donations to JNF [Canada] have almost completely stopped,” Rosenstein said. “Without the ability to raise funds, or draw on assets, JNF will have no choice but to cease its charitable operations and terminate the employment of its employees.”
CRA lawyer Linsey Rains told the court she wondered about JNF Canada’s claim of irreparable harm and argued it should not factor into the judge’s decision.
Firstly, Rains asked the court why payments couldn’t be sent to the hospital project, regardless of the revocation. She also suspected JNF Canada wasn’t the only organization donating to this Israel-based children’s house project. Rachashei Lev has several fundraising chapters outside of Israel—including in Teaneck, New Jersey, and London, England.
JNF Canada annulment request explained
Even after JNF Canada received the recent June 26 confirmation that its charitable status was going to be revoked, the charity proposed what CEO Lance Davis has previously called an “off-ramp.”
Lawyers asked the CRA on July 12 to pause the revocation, and instead act to annul JNF Canada’s 57-year status as a registered charity.
An annulment would help avoid paying the revocation tax, and would also allow JNF Canada donors to keep the tax receipts they’d been issued prior to the granting of the annulment.
In court, CRA lawyer Linsey Rains told the judge the federal revenue minister didn’t reject the idea, but rather put a pin on the suggestion while the current dispute over revocation plays out in the courts.
The head of the CRA’s charity directorate, Sharmila Khare, wrote on July 24 to David Stephens—another lawyer representing JNF Canada—confirming that the annulment request would be “held in abeyance.”
Rains suggested JNF Canada tried to keep its non-compliance problems out of the public eye. She told the court JNF Canada wanted to “keep it quiet” and “close to their chest” hoping instead, they could get an annulment, and avoid paying the revocation tax in the process.
Briefing notes prepared by CRA staff in April and May 2024 which were submitted to the Federal Court ahead of the hearing show JNF Canada being very concerned about the dispute being made public. The CRA notes also show the agency itself expected to receive additional attention because of its timing.
“Consideration should be given to raising the risk level on this to high, when and if an appeal is filed at the FCA,” the CRA briefing document said. “The Organization is a prominent charity with overseas operations in Israel and given the current Israel/Palestine conflict, this revocation could be contentious for the CRA. There has been recent media attention on charities potentially funding activities related to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.”
The authors of the briefing note cited nine published articles, including one published by The Canadian Jewish News last October. However, five of the pieces were negative coverage citing anti-Israel sources— including one penned by Yves Engler, a prominent anti-Zionist from Montreal. A cited story from the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs begins by saying the U.S. branch of Jewish National Fund supported “Israel’s occupation by financing illegal settlement building on Palestinian land.”
What’s next for JNF Canada?
Right now, at least two significant questions remain unanswered.
Have any JNF Canada funds been disbursed to new charities, who could then legally send the money to JNF’s partners in Israel?
And, can the Nov. 13 filing deadline for the revocation tax be met?
JNF Canada’s communications have emphasized it will be left with no funds to pay for court challenges to fight what it feels has been unfair treatment by the CRA.
Despite losing the first court case on Nov. 8, there is still a second appeal in the pipeline—this one was filed with the Federal Court of Appeal on July 24. However, court documents show that any Federal Court of Appeal hearing won’t likely be scheduled any earlier than May 20, 2025.
There could also be other legal avenues, such as an appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada—and also to the federal Tax Court.
JNF Canada has two major events scheduled in the coming week, before the Nov. 13 payment deadline. It’s not known if they will be impacted by the appeal being dismissed.
The annual Negev Dinner in Toronto, honouring philanthropist Jeff Rubenstein, was originally scheduled for tonight (Sunday, Nov. 10) before JNF Canada decided to cancel it in September—former Israeli prime minister Naftali Bennett had been booked as keynote speaker.
But an event was subsequently scheduled for Nov. 11 featuring a panel discussion on the aftermath of the U.S. presidential election as it relates to Israel, featuring former IDF spokesperson Jonathan Conricus and New York Times columnist Bret Stephens, with journalist Jonathan Kay serving as moderator.
Two additional JNF Canada supporter events in Toronto remain scheduled for Nov. 21 and Dec. 2.
JNF Canada did not cancel its Negev Gala event in Ottawa, scheduled for Nov. 13, honouring Lisa MacLeod, the outgoing Ontario PC MPP for Nepean. Political consultant Warren Kinsella was later added as keynote speaker.
Proceeds from the Ottawa dinner are going to build a resilience centre for people living with PTSD in Sderot, with charitable donations administered by the Israel Magen Fund of Canada, rather than JNF Canada.
Local News
Local foodie finds fame by trying foods on Facebook Marketplace
By BERNIE BELLAN Disclaimer: The subject of this story is my daughter, but don’t hold that against me.
Shira Bellan is an intrepid adventurer when it comes to trying out new foods. A while ago, as she explained in an interview conducted with her by CJOB’s Hal Anderson on January 28, Shira was just laying on her couch scrolling through Facebook Marketplace when she came up with the idea of trying different foods and posting her reactions to them – first on Facebook, then when she developed a following – on Instagram, followed by a YouTube channel and, at my suggestion, on TikTok. She now has tens of thousands of followers all over the world, with her audience growing every day.
Following are excerpts from the interview:
Anderson: How did you come up with this idea?
Bellan: Honestly, I was just, uh, laying on my couch browsing Marketplace like I often do, and I kept seeing food pop up and I just thought it would be hilarious to start buying food and then reviewing it because I thought there were some very interesting food items on there. And I was pretty surprised that people were trying to sell them on Marketplace. And it just made me laugh. And so I thought, “Let’s do this.”
Anderson What have you found out?
Bellan: Yeah, I kind of think that it’s a bunch of family members that say to each other, “This is so good. You should sell this.” And it’s not easy to get your food into a restaurant or into a bakery. And Facebook Marketplace is thriving and it’s super easy to use for anyone of all ages, and I think Facebook is just super well known.
So I think people started putting super simple food items up there and I really think my page has made it explode a lot bigger as of lately. But I think there’s always been food on there. I just don’t think it was as big until very recently.
I’ve always seen people selling food, and I’ve gone, “Well, I wouldn’t want to try that, that doesn’t look very good, or man, that looks great. I would love to try that.”
And I think in many cases it’s food tied to an ethnicity of one kind or another that maybe we wouldn’t normally get to try in a restaurant in Winnipeg.
Anderson: Right. So good for you for doing this because you’re sort of, without me having to do it, you’re saying, “Yeah, this is worth it, or, or this one isn’t.”
Bellan: That’s exactly what I’m doing. And it’s been interesting. I’m loving chatting with the different people, the different languages, and just exploring all the foods and, and there’re some foods that I’m trying that people from that specific ethnicity are saying, “Oh God, do not eat that.”
I’ve had some good ones, I’ve had some bad ones. And for the most part though, it’s really good. I think it’s just cool to learn about other people’s heritage and what they eat and like.
Anderson: So you said – in the clip I just played (referencing a clip he played before Shira came on the air) I love that one – the butter chicken. But if you had stuff that you bought that you went, “Oh man, this is a miss.” What would you say?
Bellan: I’m quite nervous to post some of the ones I don’t like because I’m called racist multiple times a week. And I’ve tried to make it clear that when I don’t like something, it has absolutely zero to do with the culture, ethnicity, or country that the food’s from, it has everything to do with how the food tastes.
And I need to remind people that these are home chefs. I don’t know how they made the recipe. I don’t know that they followed a recipe. I don’t know that they didn’t put dog food in it. So, if I don’t like something, it doesn’t mean that it’s bad. It means that I personally did not like it.
I try to be very open-minded to foods. I don’t eat meat. I’ll occasionally eat chicken – so that kind of eliminates a lot of the foods that I’m able to buy on there. But I am very interested in all the different ethnicities and their foods. Some of ’em are very scary ’cause they’re not foods I would eat every day, but it would be very boring if I was just buying chicken fingers and fries off marketplace.
Anderson: Well, that’s how I feel sometimes, right? I mean, even, you know, even with these delivery apps now, if we decide, well, we’re gonna order in, we’ll spend sometimes way too long deciding what we’re gonna have. Because it feels like even though we have all these incredible choices, it feels like it’s the same, four or five things and we don’t feel like it.
So I I like what you’ve done. Listen, on people being critical when you say you don’t like a certain food. You’re gonna have those people – trust me, being in the business I’m in, you’re gonna have people that are gonna make that connection. And just based on what I’ve seen of your stuff I don’t get a hint at all that it’s about the people you bought it from or their ethnicity.
It’s just you aren’t a fan of that particular food. And they may have made it perfectly, but you’re just not into that food.
Bellan: Exactly, and I’ve tried some North American foods that just tasted disgusting, too. And again, it’s home chefs and as for myself – I am the worst cook on the planet.
If I put something on Marketplace and someone ate it, they wouldn’t be ridiculing me. They’d be ridiculing my horrible cooking skills. What’s more fun for me is trying these foods that I consider strange. I had a really interesting one today. It was like a slippery, slimy, gooey shrimp. I couldn’t do it.
Someone might like it, but nope. Wasn’t for me.
Anderson: Yeah, and you’ve had some really cool ones, like a fairly recent post is the marshmallow flowers. I mean, incredible, incredible.
Bellan: They tasted unbelievable too. They did not taste like a store-bought, packaged marshmallow. They had a very unique flavour and texture.
They tasted amazing. I would eat them every day and the girl who makes them puts so much time and love into them. She told me that it takes about two days to make with all the processing and all the different steps it takes, and they were so beautiful. I didn’t want to eat them, but of course I did.
Anderson: Here’s the other thing too, about what you’re doing it, and you tell me, you probably didn’t realize this when you started doing it, but in some cases where you do this and you got a lot of followers, you’re getting a lot of views.
And when you say, “man, this is really good.” That person then gets maybe more orders than they can handle, but many of them are really happy about that. You had them call you up in tears after the fact and say, you know, “I was selling these dishes to make a couple of bucks ’cause my, my family is struggling” and now they’ve got more orders than they know what to do with.
And, you have really helped them make ends meet.
If you would like to see any of Shira’s food review videos you can look for them on Instagram by entering winnipegmarketplacefoodfinds or on YouTube enter @shira_time
Local News
The Simkin Centre received over $500,000 in charitable contributions in 2025 – so why is its CEO complaining that “it cannot make the same number of bricks with less straw?”
By BERNIE BELLAN (This story was originally posted on January 14) I’ve been writing about the Simkin Centre’s aacumulated deficit situation ($779,000 according to its most recent financial report) for some time.
On January 14 I published an article on this website, in which I tried to find out why a personal care home that has an endowment fund valued at over $11 million is running such a huge deficit.
Following is that article, followed by a lengthy email exchange I had with Don Aronovitch, who is a longtime director of the Saul and Claribel Simkin Centre Foundation. My purpose in writing the original article, along with the update, is I’m attempting to ascertain why the Simkin Centre simply doesn’t use more of the charitable donations it receives each year to address its financial situation rather than investing then under the management of the Jewish Foundation:
Here is the article first posted on January 14: A while back I published an article about the deficit situation at the Simkin Centre. (You can read it at “Simkin Centre deficit situation.“) I was prompted to write that particular article after reading a piece written by Free Press Faith writer John Longhurst in the August 5 issue of the Free Press about the dire situation personal care homes in Winnipeg are in when it comes to trying to provide their residents with decent food.
Yet, Longhurst made one very serious mistake in his article when he wrote that the “provincial government, through the Winnipeg Regional Health Authority, has not increased the amount of funding it provides for care-home residents in Manitoba since 2009.”
In fact, the WRHA has given annual increases to personal care homes, but its allocations are not broken down by categories, such as food or salaries. As a spokesperson for the WRHA explained to me in an email: “PCHs receive per diem global operating funding based on the number of licensed beds they operate. This funding model is designed to support the full range of operating costs associated with resident care, including staffing, food services, utilities, building operations, and other day-to-day expenses.”
Now, one can make a perfectly valid argument that the level of funding from the WRHA has not kept up with inflation, especially inflation in food costs, but the Simkin Centre is in an even more precarious position because of the skyrocketing cost of kosher food.
“In recent years,” according to an article on the internet, “the cost of kosher food has increased significantly, often outpacing general food inflation due to unique supply chain pressures and specialized production requirements.”
Yet, when I asked Laurie Cerqueti how much maintaining a kosher facility has cost the Simkin Centre, as I noted in my previous article about the deficit situation at Simkin, she responded: “approximately $300,000 of our deficit was due to food services. I do not have a specific number as far as how much of the deficit is a result of kosher food…So really this is not a kosher food issue as much is it is an inflation and funding issue.”
One reader, however, after having read my article about the deficit situation at Simkin, had this to say: “In John Longhurst’s article on Aug 5, 2025 in the Free Press, Laurie (Cerqueti) was quoted as saying that the annual kosher meal costs at Simkin were $6070 per resident. At Bethania nursing home in 2023, the non-kosher meal costs in 2023 were quoted as $4056 per resident per year. Even allowing for a 15% increase for inflation over 2 years, the non-kosher food costs there would be $4664.40 or 24% lower than Simkin’s annual current kosher food costs. If Simkin served non-kosher food to 150 of its 200 residents and kosher food to half of its Jewish residents who wish to keep kosher, by my calculation it would save approximately $200,000/year. If all of Simkin’s Jewish residents wished to keep kosher, the annual savings would be slightly less at $141,000.”
But – let’s be honest: Even though many Jewish nursing homes in the US have adopted exactly that model of food service – where kosher food is available to those residents who would want it, otherwise the food served would be nonkosher, it appears that keeping Simkin kosher – even though 45% of its residents aren’t even Jewish – is a “sacred cow” (pun intended.)
So, if Simkin must remain kosher – even though maintaining it as a kosher facility is only adding to its accumulated deficit situation – which currently stands at $779,426 as of March 31, 2025,I wondered whether there were some other ways Simkin could address its deficit while still remaining kosher.
In response to my asking her how Simkin proposes to deal with its deficit situation, Laurie Cerqueti wrote: “There are other homes in worse financial position than us. There are 2 homes I am aware of that are in the process of handing over the keys to the WRHA as they are no longer financially sustainable.”
I wondered though, whether the Simkin Centre Foundation, which is managed by the Jewish Foundation of Manitoba might not be able to help the Simkin Centre reduce its deficit. According to the Jewish Foundation’s 2024 annual report, The Saul and Claribel Simkin Centre Foundation, which is managed by the Jewish Foundation, had a total value of $11,017,635.
The Jewish Foundation did distribute $565,078 to the Simkin Centre in 2024, but even so, I wondered whether it might be able to distribute more.
According to John Diamond, CEO of the Jewish Foundation, however, the bylaws of the Foundation dictate that no more than 5% of the value of a particular fund be distributed in any one year. There is one distinguishing characteristic about the Saul and Claribel Simkin Centre Foundation, in that a portion of their fund is “encroachable.” The encroachable capital is not owned by JFM. It is held in trust by JFM but is beneficially owned by Simkin, similar to a “bank deposit”. While held by the JFM, these funds are included in the calculation of Simkin’s annual distribution.
I asked John Diamond whether any consideration had been given to increasing the distribution that the Jewish Foundation could make to the Simkin Centre above the 5% limit that would normally apply to a particular fund under the Foundation’s management.
Here is what John wrote in response: “The Simkin does have an encroachable fund. That means that at their request, they can encroach on the capital of that fund only (with restrictions). This encroachment is not an increased distribution; rather, it represents a return of capital that also negatively affects the endowment’s future distributions.
”It is strongly recommended that encroachable funds not be used for operating expenses. If you encroach and spend the capital, the organization will receive fewer distribution dollars in the next year and every year as the capital base erodes. Therefore, the intent of encroachable funds is for capital projects, not recurring expenses.”
I asked Laurie Cerqueti whether there might be some consideration given to asking for an “encroachment” into the capital within the Saul and Claribel Simkin Centre Foundation?
She responded: “We are not in a position where we are needing to dip into the encroachable part of our endowment fund. Both of our Boards (the Simkin Centre board and the Saul and Claribel Simkin Centre Foundation board) are aware of our financial situation and we are all working together to move forward in a sustainable way.”
At the same time though, I wondered where donations to the Simkin Centre end up? Do they all end up in the Simkin Centre Foundation, for instance, I asked Laurie Cerqueti on December 15.
Her response back then was: “All donations go through our Foundation.”
I was somewhat surprised to read that answer, so I asked a follow-up question for clarification: “Do all donations made to the Simkin Centre end up in the Simkin Centre Foundation at the Jewish Foundation?”
The response this time was: “No they do not.”
So, I asked: “So, how do you decide which donations end up at the Foundation? Is there a formula?”
Laurie’s response was: “We have a mechanism in place for this and it is an internal matter.”
Finally, I asked how then, the Simkin Centre was financing its accumulated deficit? Was it through a “line of credit with a bank?” I wondered.
To date, I have yet to receive a response to that question. I admit that I am puzzled that a personal care home which has a sizeable foundation supporting it would not want to dip into the capital of that foundation when it is facing a financial predicament. Yes, I can see wanting the value of the foundation to grow – but that’s for the future. I don’t know whether I’d call a $779,425 deficit a crisis; that’s for others to determine, but it seems pretty serious to me.
One area that I didn’t even touch upon in this article, though – and it’s something I’ve written about time and time again, is the quality of the food at the Simkin Centre.
To end this, I’ll refer to a quote Laurie Cerqueti gave to John Longhurst when he wrote his article about the problems personal care homes in Winnipeg are facing: “When it comes to her food budget, ‘we can’t keep making the same number of bricks with less straw.’ “
(Updated January 24): Since posting my original story January 14 I have been engaging in an email correspondence with Don Aronovitch, who is a longtime director of the Saul and Claribel Simkin Centre Foundation.
On Jan. 19 I received this email from Don:
Hi Bernie,
Your burning question seems to be “Do all donations to the Simkin Centre end up going to the SC Foundation.”
In our attempts to explain the subtle workings of the Simkin Centre PCH, the Simkin Centre Foundation & the role of the Jewish Foundation of Manitoba, we somehow have failed to answer your question. I trust that the following will do the job.
All donations to the Simkin Centre (PCH & Foundation) go to the SC Foundation as a ‘custodian’ for the PCH.
Then, at the direction of the PCH, the monies, in part or in whole, are transferred to the PCH either immediately or subsequently. Further, again at the PCH’s direction, a portion may be transferred to the Foundation’s Encroachable Building Reserve Fund at the JFM.
Regards,
Don Aronovitch
I responded to Don:
But how are the monies that are transferred to the PCH treated on the financial statement?
Is everything simply rolled in as part of “Contributions from the Saul and Claribel Simkin Centre Foundation?”
On Jan. 22 Don responded:
Bernie,
I said previously and I repeat that the Simkin Centre has many sharp minds and therefore, it is eminently able to effect asset management strategies appropriate to the Simkin Centre’s ‘Big Picture’ which they understand fully. Having said that, please note that:
Other than the Simkin Stroll which brings in about $100k and goes directly into the Home’s operations to support the program being promoted, the annual contributions to the Simkin Centre are relatively nominal.
The suggestion that there may be a sub rosa plan to ‘starve‘ the PCH by stashing money in the Building Reserve Fund at the JFM is absurd, totally absurd!!
Don
I responded to Don:
Don,
According to the Simkin Centre Foundation’s filing with the CRA it received $205,797 in charitable donations in 2025 plus another $387,000 from other registered charities.
Would you describe those contributions as “relatively nominal?”
But – there is no way of knowing what portion of those donations was given back to the Simkin Centre for immediate use and what portion was invested by the Jewish Foundation.
Can you tell me why not? (Laurie says that is an “internal matter.” Why?)
By the way, I never wrote there was any plan to stash “money in the Building Reserve Fund at the JFM.”
I was simply asking what is the point of building up an endowment for future use when the Simkin Centre’s needs are immediate, viz., its accumulated deficit of $779,000.
Also, have you or any other members of the board had meals for a full week at the Simkin Centre? I have spoken to many residents during my time volunteering there who told me they find the quality of the food to be very poor.
Why I’m so persistent on this point Don is that Laurie Cerqueti has been making the case – quite often – that the amount of funding the Simkin Centre receives from the WRHA is far from adequate.
But, if it’s actually the case that the Simkin Centre receives a substantial amount in charitable donations each year, but chooses to invest a good chunk of those donations rather than spend them, then it’s hardly a valid criticism to make of the WRHA that it’s funding is inadequate.
Why is it so gosh darn difficult to come up with the amount Simkin has been receiving in charitable donations?
Could it be that it’s because a lot of people would be dismayed to learn the reason is that money is being invested rather than being spent?
-Bernie
Don responded:
Bernie,
I add the following to this, my last contribution to the thread below.
First, let’s stick with individual donors as those were the references you started with. Starting with the 2025 figure of $206,000 total, deduct $105,000 (from the Simkin Stroll) and also deduct the healthy 5 figure donation (from a longtime Simkin supporter). We then have approximately $60,000 from 20/30 individuals and YES, it is what I would call “relatively nominal”.
As an fyi, I am in Palm Springs and in the past several days, I have asked 4 individuals what would be their spending expectations of a charity to which they donated $25,000. The responses were almost identical and they can be summarized as “We only support organizations where we value their mission and trust their management. In trusting their management, we believe that they know best if our money should be used for current operations, for future operations or for both.“
Don
Does it make sense to say, as Don does, that when considering the amount of charitable dollars the Simkin Centre receives, one ought to deduct the proceeds from the Simkin Stroll and a “healthy 5 figure donation?” I don’t see the logic in that.
And, I’m still wondering: How much of the more than $500,000 in charitable donations the Simkin Centre received in 2025 came back to the Simkin Centre to fund its immediate needs and how much was invested?
Local News
New community security director well-suited for the challenge
By MYRON LOVE Despite his still-young age, William Sagel, our community’s newly appointed director of security, brings a wealth of experience to his new role.
“I have always been drawn to protecting others,” observes the personable Sagel. “It may reflect the difficult time growing up, being bullied throughout elementary school. I was small for my age, and I usually found myself breaking up fights.”
His early years, he recounts, were spent growing up in Nice, on the famed Riviera, where his father worked in construction management. At the age of 10, the family moved back to Montreal.
Back in Montreal, Sagel continued his studies, graduating from high school and CEGEP, then enlisting in the armed forces.
Following his army service, he began his career with the Dutch Diplomatic Security Service. While working abroad, a banking executive encouraged him to return to school and earn a university degree.
“I chose to come back to Montreal,” he says. “That is where my family is.”
Armed with a degree in political science, he embarked on a career in security consulting.
In 2023, after years of working in Canada, William began training security forces in Mali. “I was responsible for the training department. We had around 400 security personnel, providing them the tools and skills to be more effective at what they do,” he explains.
Sagel arrived in Winnipeg on December 1 to assume his new position.
“The major focus in our security program is to build resilience and empower the community,” he explains. “Developing a plan to be able to respond properly to future crises. We establish a baseline, where you are now and where you hope to be in five years’ time.”
He notes that our Jewish community can learn from the national network and security networks already established in Montreal and Toronto to provide security and peace of mind for community members.
“I plan to work on raising security standards,” he says. “With the rise in antisemitic incidents over the years and after October 7, we need to do more to mitigate threats. We must raise awareness through education and empower community members through training.”
He speaks about encouraging more people to contribute their time to strengthening our community in any way they can, especially through volunteering. He encourages anyone who is willing to participate to reach out to him directly.
“Over the next few months,” he reports, “I will be working with institutions to put programs in place that will build resilience. The goal is to provide long-term security not only for ourselves but also for future generations.”
When asked about the hostile environment for Jewish students on university campuses, he says that he has had positive discussions with both the Winnipeg Police Service and the University of Manitoba’s director of security, who are committed to providing a more conducive learning environment for students.
As to his impressions of his new Jewish community, he has only positive things to say. “I came here alone, but everyone has been super friendly and welcoming,” he comments. “A lot of people have reached out to me. I have had a lot of dinner invitations, but unfortunately have been very busy trying to get organized and settled.”
“I am looking forward to the next few months of exploring Manitoba, its parks and museums, and seeing what the city has to offer.”