jewish cemeteries, synagogues, and mass grave sites in ukraine

The example of the Czech Republic is useful in this respect. Return to the small Jewish
community of income producing apartment buildings and other resources has created a
significant and ongoing source of revenue that has allowed the restoration of hundreds of Jewish
cemeteries throughout the country, and the restoration of historic synagogues as branch museum
sites.
Transfer of properties will not automatically resolve problems of planning and reinvestment for
the legacy of Jewish monuments, and, indeed, may raise new problems. An agreement on
property restitution should include a process, linked to monuments and planning laws, to ensure
that historic, cultural, and architectural values in privatized or transferred properties are
appropriately assessed. It should also ensure that designation, in turn, provides access to
incentives and subsidies, perhaps from a fund created as part of the compensation system.
Complete documentation of the full range of significant sites and properties associated with
Jewish life would be of value. So far, many categories beyond synagogues and cemeteries –
prayer houses, ritual baths, burial preparation buildings, schools, orphanages, hospitals, and
communal offices – have not been systematically surveyed. Current government estimates of the
numbers are believed to be far too low.
It would be helpful if the development of the National Registry of Protected Historic Places for
Jewish sites is accelerated. Registry listing is a signal that officials and private owners should
consult with the oblast conservator throughout planning and development of property.
It would also be helpful if stronger links are forged between the National Registry of Protected
Historic Places Listing and local planning, development, and investment. Given the evolution of
quasi-autonomous local governments with planning powers and access to funds, clarification
appears to be needed in some cases about the respective roles of oblast conservators and town
planning authorities. Conservators also need funds to add clout to their legal authority. At the
same time, it is critical to raise local officials’ awareness of conservation values and of the
importance of encouraging investment in historic urban centers.
It would also be helpful if regulatory processes and penalties are strengthened (assuming that this
can be accomplished without imposing unneeded bureaucracy and constraints to needed
investment).
Recognition of the importance of non-regulatory incentives in a market economy would also
make a contribution. Reforms to encourage private investment and private donations through
tax, subsidies, have been important spurs in the United States and Western Europe, and would
help in Ukraine.
Guidelines could be developed that would implement historic town and conservation zones, and
would continue efforts to negotiate preservation solutions that combine authenticity with more
flexibility than in the past. Some places need to be set aside for no change and other places need
to respond to change without compromising authenticity and historic values – a new challenge
for Ukrainian preservation. The example of Zhovkva (Lvivska oblast) is encouraging in this
respect.
Collaborative opportunities could be sought out, in major urban and regional
development/tourism schemes. Funds for documentation, sensitive planning, and restoration of
76