'Counterproductive incentive': Hardest-hit Gaza border towns slam gov't canceling return grant

Yahoo

9 hours ago

The lawyers stated in the letter that the heads of the towns in question will petition the High Court of Justice if the government decision is not repealed.
Leaders of the eleven towns hit hardest in the October 7 Hamas massacre, in a meeting labeled 'urgent' in the Knesset Economics Committee, criticized on Monday the government's decision on June 29 to cancel grants to families who return to the towns.
The government's abrupt decision on June 29 stated that the 'security obstacles' preventing residents from returning had been removed, and therefore, residents were permitted to return to the area. However, contrary to prior commitments, the governments announced that families are no longer eligible to receive grants, which, based on different criteria, could reach tens of thousands of shekels.
In a letter to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Minister in the Finance Ministry Ze'ev Elkin, and Tkuma Directorate head Aviad Friedman, lawyers representing the 11 towns - Be'eri, Kfar Aza, Nir Oz, Nahal Oz, Kissufim, Nirim, Holit, Netiv HaAsara, Re'im, Nir Yitzhak, and Sufa – wrote, 'Retroactively, and without any real discussion, the government of Israel has decided to reverse previous government decisions and explicit commitments made to residents of the 'red zone' communities—those who suffered the worst during the October 7 massacre—regarding one-time 'return home' grants.'
The lawyers argued that in similar cases, such as the return of residents to northern communities in March, residents were given a grace period to return home, during which they were still eligible for the grants. In this case, the eligibility was removed without warning. The decision was thus unfair, and also harmed families who had included the grants in their economic planning.
The lawyers wrote that the residents were 'stunned' by the decision.
'In an almost incomprehensible move—these are the very residents who bore, and continue to bear, the catastrophic consequences of the October 7 massacre, and who were displaced from their homes for the longest period (nearly two years)—they are the only ones denied a meaningful grant intended to help evacuees return home,' the lawyers wrote.
'The government's breach of its commitment to the red zone residents not only contradicts the prime minister's promise that 'the government of Israel is determined to mend the fracture,' but also severely undermines the trust of these residents in the state—trust that was already shattered by the events of October 7,' the lawyers wrote.
'This decision discriminates against red zone residents compared to evacuees from other communities displaced by the Iron Swords War. While evacuees in both the South and the North received return grants, residents of the red zone are the only ones excluded. Given that these communities were the hardest hit on October 7, the extreme unreasonableness of the decision is even more stark,' the lawyers wrote.
'Furthermore, the decision of June 29, 2025 directly contradicts previous government resolutions that aimed to incentivize residents to return home once security conditions allowed it. While those grants previously encouraged return and community recovery, their cancellation—alongside financial support for those delaying their return—undermines the rehabilitation of the affected communities and creates a completely counterproductive incentive,' the lawyers wrote.
They also pointed to procedural flaws that they claimed made the decision illegal, claiming that the government decision was made in a 'rushed process (an expedited phone approval), without any substantive prior discussion n; without any factual basis laid out to justify deviation from previous government decisions; without any preparatory staff work followed by conclusions that might have supported the decision; without the position of the red zone residents being heard; without any relevant considerations being taken into account; without the decision being properly reasoned, based on substantive and weighty arguments; and contrary to the government's obligation to consider the T'kuma region as a national priority area that requires rehabilitation, in accordance with the Broad Rehabilitation Law for the T'kuma Region.'
The lawyers stated in the letter that the heads of the towns in question will petition the High Court of Justice if the government decision is not repealed.
The Economic Committee meeting concluded with committee chairman MK David Bitan (Likud) setting a meeting with representatives of the Tkuma Directorate and the finance ministry in order to negotiate a solution and set the source of funding for it. Bitan said that he would not enable representatives of the towns to attend the meeting.