Newton VOL 1, NO 8
NEWTON’S VOICE
Dec. 27 – Jan. 10, 2017
CJP admits forgiveness for Shrage’s home loan Photo | Joshua Resnek The beautiful young women at Ceri in Newton Centre – Jackie, Tali and Brittany (from left) – all appear to be welcoming shoppers into their lovely store. They know how to make a shopping experience everything it should be.
The decision not to run for mayor By Alex Culafi
The Voice Newton City Councilor Rick Lipof is going to be seeking reelection for city council. What he will not be seeking in 2017, however, is mayorship. “After serious consideration I have decided that now is not the right time for me to run for the office of Mayor,” he said in a letter to friends, family, and supporters on December 5. The Ward 8 Councilor at Large’s decision not to run for election comes after a period of indecisiveness, when he was figuring out whether to run for office and his fellow councilors, Scott Lennon and Ruthanne Fuller, had already decided to cross the threshold into candidacy. I got very curious. What makes someone decide not to run for public office? “It comes down to balancing everything. Balance is really the word,” Lipof told me. “You’ve got to balance your personal life with your professional life and your political life.” After serving on City Council for 12 years, Lipof took 6 years off to focus on his family before coming back to serve another 4 years. “The kids were getting to that age where they were doing homework and they’re saying, ‘dad, stick around,’ you know?”
The idea of taking time off from public office is nothing new. Lipof ’s father did the same when he was an alderman in the 1970s, as did Lisle Baker and John Stewart, according to Lipof. “When you run for public service – when you run for mayor – it must fit in with the rest of your life: your profession and your family. Both are important, although I would say family comes first,” he said. “I do see myself running for mayor someday. It’s just that today is not the day.” He says that he has more than enough time to work on city council, but with his 25year business, Lipof Real Estate Services, flourishing, and with his children being in the middle of high school, candidacy just doesn’t make sense for him right now. “The tug to be engaged and there with my kids for the final three years before they go off to school is a strong pull. I was taking my time with this decision because I was being encouraged not only by my family, but also by others. They said this was the time. In my heart, I knew that I didn’t want to miss out on some things, and I have a business that needs me fully engaged.“
By Joshua Resnek
The Voice Combined Jewish Philanthropies CEO Barry Shrage's home loan was forgiven by the CJP Board of Directors as part of his compensation package, but the CJP did not announce this advantageous arrangement for Shrage to its contributors, or make any direct mention of it when it was forgiven in increments between 2008 and 2012. Although the CJP disclosed the existence of the loan in its annual and public Form 990 tax return during the years it existed, Shrage’s connection to the loan was one of the charitable organization's best kept secrets. The CJP Board’s failure of oversight to inform the charity’s contributors and employees of this privately-arranged perk for its long time leader conflicts with the Board’s ethical requirements. Personal loans to charity heads are frowned upon by the Internal Revenue Service, but they are not considered illegal. In admitting to the personal loan, CJP officials noted that it was part of Shrage’s compensation package, but referred to it as a relocation loan when he came from Ohio to Boston to head the CJP in 1987.
office admonishes against conflicts of interest between personal financial interests and duty to the charity. It warns such transactions may look questionable to the public. Charitable boards are expected to remain pristinely transparent about compensation arrangements with its CEO and operating officers, according to protocol measures written and endorsed by the AG’s office. A closer look into the financial shadows of one of Boston’s major charities reveals hundreds of thousands of dollars of perks for the CJP’s chief employees in addition to rich compensation packages for its top ten paid employees. Thirty-two of the CJP’s 199 employees received salaries of $100,000 or higher during the 2014-2015 fiscal year. The richest compensation package of them all is Shrage, whose $1.9 million 2014-2015 salary and benefits have raised eyebrows, caused some concern and a great deal of discussion throughout the Jewish community in Greater Boston and on the Internet.
Will that be different in four years, or eight years?
“In 2006, the Committee determined that Barry’s compensation was below that of peers in his cohort, and as a result began a program of loan forgiveness as one component of his overall compensation. In June of 2008, the Committee made a recommendation to the Board to forgive the balance of the loan over a period of years,” this, according to a statement from the CJP to the Voice.
Continued on page 4
The Massachusetts Attorney General’s
Continued on page 3
Shrage’s package from the Board included an alleged retirement bonus of $1.3 million.