Shrinking community demands consolidation not duplication

One theme has come through clearly in the National Jewish Dialogue: the need for consolidation in our shrinking community. The closure of King David Victory Park is another reminder that consolidation isn’t only a subject of discussion, but a reality in our schools. Yet while these developments highlight the urgency, little tangible action has been taken elsewhere.

This brings us to the elephant in the room, the necessary conversations we must begin. Big changes start with small, practical steps. If we want a sustainable future, we cannot continue to function as if nothing has changed.

Last year, Pine Street Shul announced that it would sell its property and relocate to The Gardens. Pine Street has a proud history of serving Orange Grove, Orchards, and surrounding communities. But its current site lies in an area that has deteriorated, while its proposed new location is in a suburb already home to several shuls, including Chabad of Norwood, Kollel, and Great Park.

About a kilometre from Pine Street stands another institution, Sydenham Shul, which has long served Sydenham, Highlands North, and surrounds. Like Pine Street, Sydenham faces an ageing and declining membership as families have emigrated or moved east to Glenhazel or Linksfield.

It’s time to put forward a necessary step: Pine Street and Sydenham should seriously consider a merger. The rationale is clear. Both serve overlapping areas; both are rooted in similar communities; and both appeal to the same kind of congregant. A united shul could pool resources, reduce duplicate overheads, and focus funds on building one vibrant institution rather than sustaining two struggling ones. Such a move would not only save costs, it would foster renewed energy and spirit, giving members a sense of belonging to something bigger and stronger.

By contrast, Pine Street’s plan to relocate requires new infrastructure spending when community funds are already scarce, and risks weakening other nearby shuls by drawing away members. In short, it diverts resources from sustainability into duplication.

Over the past few weeks, multiple shuls ran Charidy campaigns, appealing to the same shrinking pool of donors. Donor fatigue is real. Sustainability cannot come from repeated fundraising alone. It requires practical, bold steps, and willingness to embrace change.

It’s time for our leadership, and for all of us as members, to confront reality honestly. Consolidation isn’t a loss. It’s an opportunity to build a stronger, sustainable community for the future.

• Adam Marcus, Jared Abelson, and Jonti Hetz, Johannesburg