Rabbi’s Pleas to Residents

By Daniela Forte, Litchfield County Times

LITCHFIELD-Chabad Lubavitch of Northwest Connec­ticut held an informational meeting Tuesday night at the Litchfield Community Center that centered on its mission but played out against a backdrop of questions about building plans that caused a controversy in 2007.

“Our big thing really tonight is to speak about Chabad, our program, our mission, which hopefully will eliminate some of the misconceptions, misunderstandings and hope­fully build bridges,” said Rabbi Joseph Eisenbach, the leader of the local Chabad.

Nearly 100 residents attended the 40-minute event in hopes of hearing the current status of plans for a synagogue and community center on the edge of the West Street business district.

Residents’ primary concerns Tuesday had to do with the pro­posed size of the building, the site of the former Wilderness Shop, and while Rabbi Eisenbach said at one point that nothing about the plans had changed, he declined to address when and how the Chabad planned to move forward.
“Our ideologies are extreme in the sense that [Chabad’s] whole mission is not to bring out families, Chabad’s mission is to reach out to local families,” said Rabbi Eisenbach to the residents who gathered.

As a sign of religious harmony in town, the Rev. Robert F. Tucker of St. Anthony of Padua Church and the Rev. William Considine of the Lourdes Shrine in Litchfield sent a letter to residents, inviting them to the meeting. It said, in part, “There have been many misconceptions and misinformation about the project and we want to give you the opportunity to hear about it firsthand.”

Rabbi Eisenbach began the meeting by showing residents a video about Chabad.

“I thought he was going to give us more information. Instead they gave more information on their beliefs,” said Litchfield resident Patty Laury after the meeting.

In late 2007, the town’s Historic District Commission denied an application to relocate the Chabad’s headquarters from Village Green Drive to Litchfield center in a building that would have been renovated and significantly expanded.

The commission based its denial on the scale of the proposed expansion and restoration of the 135-year-old building. In 2007, the commission said it would be willing to consider a revised plan, including a downsized version.

The commission’s motion for denial stated that the proposal would overwhelm the town’s central historic district. A written statement by the commission’s attorney, Jim Stedronsky, said the plan would have “dwarfed the house, altered the streetscape and been incompatible with standards of the historic district.”

Mr. Stedronsky said in 2007 that a downsized version could involve a doubling of the original square footage of the building, and that the commission would consider a plan totaling about 5,000 square feet.

However, Rabbi Eisenbach said at Tuesday’s meeting that the plans had not changed. They call for an expansion totaling 21,000 square-feet, with a four-story addition off the back of the old house.

It would include a synagogue, a community center, classrooms, several kosher kitchens, offices, a swimming pool and a ceremonial pool.

“In our new place, the focus is to have a synagogue, to have a center outreach, to have places where people can come in and poke open a book from our Judaic library where people can learn another heritage, another faith,” said Rabbi Eisenbach.

“Chabad’s mission is to do mitzvahs, to do good deeds. Chabad does not in any way, shape or form look at labels, labels are for food packages not for brothers and sisters,” said Rabbi Eisenbach.

The facility would also have residential quarters for Rabbi Eisenbach and his family, as well as housing for visitors and staff.

The historic building was pur­chased by the organization in 2006.

When asked whether the plan would move to the Historic District Commission once again, Rabbi Eisenbach made no comment.

Residents were given a chance to ask questions and make comments.
“I understand you don’t want to discuss legalisms, but this is unavoidable. Are you suggesting that you are going to erect the building without permission if it comes to that?” asked Litchfield resident Arthur Aaron during the meeting. “Do you have per­mission? No,” Mr. Aaron said.

Mr. Aaron said after the meeting that he didn’t understand what it all meant, as Rabbi Eisenbach has no permission to put up the building.

One resident said he thought that the synagogue would be a welcome addition the community.

Litchfield resident Nathan Zimmerman found it to be a good meeting and thought there were a lot of positive comments. He noted the acceptance of the Jewish synagogue in the community as expressed by churches centered on other faiths.

“It was so positive. My feeling was it was [a] welcoming positive meeting. The feeling was that they want to keep the historical feeling of the town. They also felt that the Jewish religion could be added to the town,” said Torrington resident Sherry Ginsberg.

“It was heartwarming that the Catholic priests reached out to the Jewish community,” said Joseph Ginsberg.