Yerushalayim Deputy Mayor Denies Ideological Motive After Blocking Givat Masua Mikvah
After boasting publicly about blocking the construction of a large mikvah and a major shul in Yerushalayim’s Givat Masua neighborhood, Deputy Mayor Yossi Havilio is now pushing back against claims that the move was ideologically driven or anti-religious.
The controversy erupted after Havilio published a social media post celebrating what he described as a successful struggle to preserve the neighborhood’s “liberal character,” following efforts to stop the establishment of an expansive mikvah and shul complex. The language of the post quickly sparked a heated debate in Yerushalayim, with critics accusing him of framing the issue as a cultural or religious confrontation rather than a planning dispute.
In an interview on Kikar FM, Havilio sought to strip the decision of its ideological overtones and reframe it as a matter of urban planning. He stressed that he did not act alone, saying the opposition was led together with city council member Laura Wharton and local residents, who formally filed objections to the revised plan.
According to Havilio, the neighborhood is largely secular, with a presence of what he termed “moderate religious residents.” He said the original proposal involved a standard shul, which did not face opposition. The dispute began only after the plan was altered.
He explained that the municipality moved to replace a relatively small community structure with a four-story complex that would include a mikvah, a shul, and a multi-purpose hall, situated on a narrow, one-way dead-end street. “It simply doesn’t fit there,” Havilio argued, citing transportation concerns, planning limitations, and potential harm to residents’ quality of life.
Havilio said that when the majority of a neighborhood opposes a project of that scale, especially when alternative locations exist nearby, there is no justification for forcing it through. He rejected the idea that opposing the project amounted to religious coercion, noting that Yerushalayim is home to hundreds of mikva’os and shuls that he does not object to.
At the same time, he stood by his use of the term “liberal character,” saying neighborhoods have the right to protect their identity when faced with unusually large developments. “If most residents don’t want this mikvah and this shul, that needs to be respected,” he said. “This isn’t a fight against religion, it’s about fitting into the environment.”
Havilio also pointed out that additional mikva’os already operate in the surrounding area, including one in nearby Kiryat Menachem, which he said could serve residents of Givat Masua who are interested. He added that many women prefer not to use a mikvah in their immediate neighborhood in any case, questioning the need for what he called an oversized facility in a location ill-suited for it.
During the interview, criticism was raised over the way the struggle had been portrayed publicly, particularly the impression that it was an ideological victory over the religious or chareidi public rather than a narrowly defined planning objection. Havilio rejected that characterization, though he struggled to explain why his original post emphasized the neighborhood’s liberal identity.
“I didn’t say there shouldn’t be large shuls or mikva’os in Yerushalayim,” he said. “Don’t put words in my mouth.”
Still, the tension between his technical explanations and the value-laden language of his social media post remained unresolved, leaving the sense that the issue extended beyond zoning and infrastructure and into the realm of identity politics.
{Matzav.com}
