Episode 41: Jessie Kornberg
President and CEO of the Skirball Cultural Center in Los Angeles
00:45:04
Subscribe and listen on…
Apple Podcasts | Stitcher | Spotify | Google Podcasts | Amazon Music | PocketCasts | iHeartRadio | Player.FM Podcasts
Watch Full Interview
Show Notes
Skirball Cultural Center CEO Jessie Kornberg - who set the leadership framework for Ms. J.D. and led public interest organization Bet Tzedek in Los Angeles- brings two decades of civil rights work to Skirball’s leadership team. In this episode, she sits down with M.C. Sungaila to reflect on that journey and share how she navigated these leadership paths and transferred her legal skills to the cultural space.
This episode is powered by Immediation
Jessie Kornberg
Jessie Kornberg became the President and CEO of the Skirball Cultural Center in July 2020.
To the Skirball’s leadership team, Kornberg brings two decades of civil rights work—a career dedicated to dismantling systemic inequality. This commitment began with frontline anti-poverty services at the largest provider of homeless family housing in New York City. Kornberg went on to work with the NAACP and NOW before founding Ms. JD, an online community dedicated to supporting and advancing the careers of women in the legal profession. Next, she co-chaired the pro bono program at the Beverly Hills litigation boutique Bird Marella, focusing the firm's resources on prison condition reform, including a groundbreaking class action on behalf of the death row inmates at Angola state penitentiary in Louisiana.
In 2014, Kornberg became the CEO of Bet Tzedek (Hebrew for "house of justice"), one of the nation's leading free legal aid providers. Under her leadership, the agency grew to address the most pressing legal issues facing low-income families, including the establishment of the nation’s first transgender medical-legal partnership and a family preparedness program to respond to growing concerns surrounding the deportation of undocumented parents.
In 2020, Kornberg co-chaired LA Represents, an unprecedented pro bono legal initiative in scope and scale, established to support residents and businesses in need during the COVID-19 crisis. She currently serves as a trustee for the Los Angeles Urban League, the Motion Picture & Television Fund, and UCLA School of Law, where she earned her JD. Kornberg lives in the Silverlake neighborhood of Los Angeles with her spouse, Aaron Lowenstein, their young children, Asa and Sadie, and a rescued black spaniel mix named Laila Tov.
Transcript
I am thrilled to have on the show Jessie Kornberg, who is a serial entrepreneur in the non-profit sector and the President and CEO of the Skirball Cultural Center in Los Angeles. Welcome, Jessie.
Thank you so much, MC. I'm thrilled to be in conversation with you.
You have done some amazing things throughout your career, from the very beginning of founding Ms. JD to then having a leadership role at Bet Tzedek, a legal nonprofit in Los Angeles, and now at the Skirball Center. I wanted to speak first to the question of how did you decide to go to law school? What were you interested in accomplishing in becoming a lawyer?
I had thought about law school for a while. I took the LSATs while I was in college, and I didn't go right away. I ended up working for a couple of years. I worked in a homeless shelter in New York, in The Bronx. At the time I applied to law school, I did have a very specific reason for wanting to go. I felt sure that I would study Tax Law and Policy and work as a tax lawyer. I executed significant parts of that plan. I was concentrated on Tax Policy and Case Law all through law school, in addition to anti-poverty work and founding Ms. JD. I continue to have a passion for that and have a tax lens on a lot of the things I see in the world, still.
I was motivated to do that because I was working in a homeless shelter system, serving homeless youth and families, which is a euphemism for teen moms and the young children that they are raising and supporting. I was young myself and interacting with women who were very similar to me in age and then so dissimilar to me in circumstance.
When I saw the incredible strength of character and work ethic that they brought to the problems that they faced and how punishing the environment was, there were few ways out of the chronic poverty that they were in. I looked at the way that various entitlement, benefits programs, and the tax code interacted with those circumstances. I was furious there.
What kind of things do they encourage and discourage?
I came to see tax as the most powerful engine for social change. There are a lot of important things to focus on in public life but tax was an area where I felt like there weren't a lot of people with my point of view contributing to the conversation. Other things I also felt strongly about had lots of super-smart people already expressing my viewpoint but I didn't hear or see people who looked like me had my lived experience or cared about the world in the way I cared about it in shaping tax policy.
Hold yourself accountable to the highest vision of true equity in all your work.
That's why I went to law school. I wanted to be in those rooms. I joked because some things did not go to plan. I joked that I still dream of maybe retiring and becoming a staffer to the Senate Finance Committee and geeking out on the tax code. I'm not done yet.
You have plenty of opportunities to do that but that's always interesting what motivates you. I originally thought I would do International Law, and then found out there wasn't a whole lot of International Law, and it meant doing a lot of corporate and business things. That wasn't what I was interested in doing. It morphs overall but you have had a significant impact on policy and on the lives of people who are in similar circumstances to the girls you were working with.
As I said, I'm still chafing, feeling like I have fully scratched that itch but not now.
You have other things to do. Ms. JD is a phenomenon now for newer lawyers and women Law students. How did you have that brainchild? Where it is now, is that what you imagined it would be?
First, you are giving me credit that I don't deserve. The real idea was born by Elizabeth Peterson, who was a Law student at Stanford Law School at the same time that I was a student at UCLA. Her original idea was to bring women Law students together from more than one law school. We were tagged along to a conference organized by Deborah Rhode at Stanford Law School for academics and professionals to think about the Law of Women in law and the Law of Women in the profession. She had not planned to invite students. You have been to lots of these conferences, and they do not invite students.
Elizabeth was a student at Stanford and maybe was a research assistant to Professor Rhode or in some capacity knew about the conference and said, "Can I get a little pot of money to invite a few students from other schools to come to this?" She got the go-ahead. I'm not kidding. This is not an exaggeration when I tell you I was walking by the Dean of Students Office down the hallway, and it was like, "Kornberg, do you want to go to a conference at Stanford over at spring break?" My parents live in Palo Alto and so I said, "Yes," I’ve got a ticket to go home.
What happened was we’ve got together, and we learned a fair bit about what the conversation was like. This was 2004 at that time. We all stayed in touch but it very quickly became clear to us that each of us twenty women was having experiences in law school that we were not connecting to our gender identity. Once we started sharing the experiences across the group, it became clear that gender was a layer of all of our experiences.
Having come up as we all did and being part of a generation where gender parody was the norm in academic settings, where the conversation about gender discrimination, stereotype, bias and were not as obvious. It's not part of what you automatically were going to be thinking about as a minority member of the community.
We all were ill-prepared to identify when gender was impacting our experience. It was this a-ha moment for a lot of us, "It matters." That was in law school. Forget even being in the workplace where we would be a real minority. We stayed in touch by email. The idea of creating a virtual community so that more women in positions like the ones we were in, just starting in the conversation could get clued into this sooner rather than later. Finding one another was the initial germ.
From there, what we then started talking about that was important to us there was a horrible incident. One of these groups was the target of a horrific cyberbullying assault that was organized through what was, at that time, a very popular website called AutoAdmit. It was the precursor to Above the Law. Unbeknownst to her, she and a few other women at law schools around the country became the subjects of a chat called Top Ten Hottest 1Ls.
It was very lurid, graphic, violent, disgusting, inappropriate, and damaging. The reason she learned about it is that she couldn't get a job because the first thing that came up when you googled her name was all of this content. A lot of things came out of that experience, including the first lawsuit under Circular 230 that gets a lot of attention now, which is what is the platform's liability for the defamation and damage to her character and professional pursuits.
In addition to that groundbreaking and terrible litigation for us at Ms. JD, in those very early days, what we also realized was essential was creating a positive place for women on the internet. This was in 2004. Now, that idea has been flushed out, and there are lots of online communities for women but at the time, that was a relatively new conversation and understanding that the internet was dangerous for women. That was the second piece at Ms. JD.
I laugh a little bit when I hear a Facebook, an Instagram or whoever complained that they don't know how to monitor content, the volume is too big. It turns out it's completely terrifying and damaging to teen girls. We knew that in 2005, which is why we monitored all comments and had complete editorial control of everything that was posted on our website because we were intentionally trying to be a place that was safe and healthy.
We wouldn't make as much money if we were responsible, safe, and healthy not it's not possible. I know because we have done it, and we did not make as much money as Facebook. You will be shocked to learn but we were successful and the idea caught fire. It turned out there was a deep hunger for a safe place for women to connect online. Also, a deep hunger for intergenerational connection.
The part that's so interesting about it is because it's morphed. The intergenerational connection of women in the legal profession has been done through Ms. JD. I love it because it flips things on the head in terms of thinking, “It's the senior person or whatever who needs to decide that they are going to mentor you or provide some advice.” It can only go that way but in fact, the one moving that conversation is the potential mentee and is engaging the other generations to become involved and create a larger community. That, to me, is the most remarkable outcome of Ms. JD. That's why I was asking, "Is that what you imagined?" From this story, no. It moved along with each thing.
I was tapped to be the first professional leader of the organization when it became a going concern. To me, when I think about what we envisioned, what's come true, and what I'm proud of, first, I'm proud that it continues to exist at all because what we always conceived of is that it would be student-led. The board and the professional management of Ms. JD are always either current students or very recent grads. That's how you keep it relevant and fresh for that population but that also means you are completely replacing your entire leadership structure every couple of years. I'm proud that it remains relevant, that they have stuck to that, that it is still student-led, that it continues, and it continues to be meaningful.
It’s so important for a profession to be able to point to a model of success.
The other thing I would say is it was always a standard operating procedure that we would hold ourselves accountable to the highest vision of true equity in all of the ways in which we engaged in our work. It is not an accident that, as a result, the organization has been led by women of color and Black women for 2 out of the last 3 iterations of leadership ever since I stepped away from the organization. I'm the last White leader of the organization. That is so important for our profession to be able to point to a model of success.
This is a mainstream organization that is relevant to any firm, law school, conversation in the country but has shown that all you need to do is create equal opportunity, and fantastic candidates of color will rise to the top very quickly to lead good work. Ms. JD is not only successful because of all that great leadership but a great example itself of how there is no pipeline problem. There is a bottleneck problem.
I also think that it's such a great opportunity in itself to grow the leadership capabilities of women Law students and newer lawyers very early. The organization itself perpetuates that, and they create more opportunities for themselves having had that experience.
That's by design. I'm 1 of 4 Emeritus board members and we sit on the sidelines. We are ready to reshare what we learned about corporate governance, operational budgeting, various legal compliance for nonprofit organizations, and insurance requirements. The nuts and bolts of the operation, we stand on the sidelines ready to reshare that with each generation of leadership, and we think of that as part of the service that the work provides.
It's because of that constant turnover, you need the wisdom of those who have come before in terms of, "You need to pay attention to this." You don't have to relearn all the lessons that were learned in the organization previously. It's always nice to have that. We have that in the ABA, too. There are some very experienced leaders you can bounce things off of, and that's very helpful. After Ms. JD, did you go directly to Bet Tzedek after that? You were also in law practice prior to that.
I still did not become a tax lawyer. I tried. I went to the only boutique litigation firm left in LA that was doing tax defense work but the IRS Attorney's Office is not bringing tax cases, not for many years. There's not a ton of that work but I’ve got to be around smart, expert trial lawyers and learned so much from them. I’ve got to build out their pro bono program and engage in community work differently from a very different resource position, which was a lot of fun. I'm incredibly grateful to my colleagues at Bird Marella for all of those opportunities.
I was at Ms. JD bandying the word mentorship around a lot, and then I remember the end of my very first small assignment at Bird Marella, and I'm sitting in main partner Terry Bird's office, and he's talking to me about the case that we have closed, that is over, matter resolved. I'm sitting there trying to think, "What am I supposed to build this to?" I realized I was like, "He's mentoring and telling me things. He's sharing with me reflections of what happened." I was like, "I'm so grateful for this." I share it to say that I worked with the best people, and it was a great experience.
You can have those moments to describe what mentorship is and what it looks like. It can show up in many different ways, and that was one way. To have that realization, that epiphany like, "It's happening now."
Often people say mentor and mean, "Get me a job." "I'm in law school. I want a mentor who's going to help me get my first job. I'm in a law firm. I want a mentor who's going to help me become a partner," which is great. That's nice if mentors do that but that's not what mentorship is. It's not the fun part. The fun part is the relationship. I'm happy to say Terry and I haven't worked together in the better part of a decade. I saw him a couple of months ago for lunch because he's an amazing human. I will take any chances I can to learn from him about the law but also about life or just laugh. A mentor is a different word for a friend.
You are very good at building and maintaining relationships. You have a gift for connecting with people, and that's very valuable, especially in your non-profit work where you need to bring different stakeholders together. There's a lot of value in that.
I think of you as being good at maintaining relationships. I always want to share this with people who are thinking about fundraising, whether you are trying to raise money for a project at the ABA, a community organization that you care about or it's your job to do it as it is mine. I feel a real passion and a sense of urgency about the work that I do.
I am excited to talk to other people about what their passions are and what they feel is urgent. When we find that we have some of those same interests in common, I know that I'm giving them an opportunity to do something meaningful when they are supporting that work. I know that because I'm a donor to things that I care about, too. I know how good it feels to be able to support something I love. When it clicks, and you realize someone is going to be so excited to support a project, it's fun.
That's listening to people about what moves them as well. Asking the questions, and then listening and hearing what they are saying about what is important to them.
Listening is undervalued in almost everything we do.
Especially lawyers, we are supposed to be talking all the time or something, not listening but it's an important thing.
Lawyers are trained, in fact only to listen in preparation for what they are going to say, which is rarely how you want to be heard. Most of us are saying what we are feeling for another person to absorb and validate, rarely for another person to one-up or refute.
The mistake is not trying. The mistake is covering it up.
I have thought of it in terms of most people are always thinking about what's the next thing I'm going to say but I hadn't thought about it that way in terms of lawyers, in particular, are queued up that way to say, "What's my next line of questioning or whatever it is," instead of listening.
It doesn't serve lawyers that well in the courtroom or in the deposition because you can latch on very early in what someone is saying to the first thing you hear that how to respond to, and you can miss other stuff. One of the best trial attorneys I ever worked with as a partner at Bird Marella, Ekwan Rhow, I remember watching him in the courtroom because I would have these moments where maybe the judicial officer, the witness or someone was saying something that my initial reaction was like, "This is bad for us. This is a bad room. This is a bad decision. They are not hearing it the way we want them to hear it, etc."
I would get so caught in that first reaction, and then I would watch Ekwan ask his follow-up question or make the next point. He had found this any one word, phrase, idea, or feeling that he could latch onto an agree with and move the conversation back in his direction and say like, "Yes, exactly, your honor. That's exactly why we included this." He was so fast and good at it. I remember watching it and thinking, "This is mastery," but it's a good life skill.
I was thinking really quick thinking too in terms of, "What am I going to use to navigate with?" That's being very sharp and quick. That was a good discussion. From Bird Marella is when you went to Bet Tzedek.
I loved Bet Tzedek. I started volunteering for Bet Tzedek when I was in law school. I continued to volunteer for Bet Tzedek when I was at the firm. I would buy a table and be so proud that we were sitting at our fancy firm table. I was a huge fan of the work. One of my closest colleagues at Bird Marella was the person who recruited me to the firm, a partner there named Mitch Kamin had previously led Bet Tzedek. I was such a huge fan of his and talked about a mentor.
I remember sitting at the gala dinner at my fancy Bird Marella table, and they honor all the past presidents, including Mitch. There are these seven guys on the stage, and these are legendary lawyers. Terry Friedman, forget a legendary lawyer, he's the legendary leader. Stan Levy and Mike Feuer, who's now City Attorney. These are huge reputations, and they are all on stage together. I'm looking at them all.
I remember thinking. When Sandy Samuels, who was the President at the time, who had previously been General Counsel of a publicly-traded company, these were huge figures and I thought, “These are such amazing guys. When Sandy retires, and Bet Tzedek is hiring someone new, I'm going to make sure some kick-ass woman applies for this job or I'm going to apply for this job.” It was one week later that Sandy announced he was leaving. I was like, "No."
I didn't feel ready and qualified, not nearly but I also couldn't stop thinking about it. I realized I wasn't going to be able to sleep at night if I didn't give it a shot. My first conversation was with Mitch, and he took some convincing, the first time he and I talked about it. He was like, "What?" I was a real baby lawyer to him, and this was something he had done not that long ago.
I made a case and said, "I've got some non-profit experience. I have done some of this, just not at this scale." He shepherded and helped me think about how to apply and talk to other people about it, how to talk to people at Bird Marella. I was going to be a stronger applicant with their support but it's hard to talk to your current employer about it. He guided me through the whole thing. That still didn't mean I thought I was going to get the job.
If you are going to put your hat in the ring, you want to maximize the likelihood of positive results.
That's something I learned from my husband. I remember when I was applying for clerkships. I was not a competitive clerkship candidate. I wasn't a Law review student, and I wasn't a top student but I wanted to clerk. I had interned for a judge one summer. I loved being in the courtroom, and so I wanted to try, and I didn't get a lot of encouragement at school. Career Services were like, "It's a free country but we are going to focus our resources on these people who are going to get one of these jobs."
When I was at UCLA as well, I didn't know anything about clerkships or any of this stuff but it looked like an interesting thing to do. I need to support myself and all of this stuff, so I need to target where I'm going to apply and limit that clerkship to one year. As a result of that thinking, I have decided I'm only going to apply to the US Supreme Court. I walk into Career Service, and you can know the look on their face when I did this. "I have looked at this, and here's what I think," and they are looking at me like, "Who brought you in off the street? What planet did you come from? You know nothing about this stuff."
Now that I know, I think that is so crazy and silly but I have worked it out. They are like, "No, honey. That's not how it works. Let's see. Maybe let's start with the District Court." It was so funny but sometimes it's good not to know that you are doing such an outrageous request. I can only imagine. They looked at me like I had two heads when I came in and suggested that.
I would be in that boat. I remember talking to Aaron about it, and he shared with me this story of the first time there was a job he wanted. He spent a week thinking about the cover letter. Thinking about, "Who was going to read it, what was their day like, what would be meaningful to them and what's going to make their job easier about this position that they are hiring?" He practiced empathy. He tried to marshal every single resource at his disposal and further into that. That's how I approached clerkships and every job since. The worst that happens is you gave it your best.
You learned a lot in the process but you were successful and led Bet Tzedek.
I’ve got a clerkship.
You’ve got a clerkship in both. That approach is fully endorsed then.
There will be lots of stumbles in life, but if you're lucky, you'll have people around you who will help bring you back up and see the things you can learn from that mistake.
I don't know who's reading this but you told me you have been interviewing these legendary practitioners and judicial officers who have had a glass ceiling, breaking careers, and to all of us inspiration but sometimes those stories I find can also be intimidating, unreplicable and hard. They overcame so much. I failed at a lot of things. I do a lot of things wrong, is what I want to say. I owe my success and my opportunity to all the people who are forgiving of that all the time because they too are human and make mistakes and get it.
The mistake is not trying. The mistake covering it up. Don't expect to be perfect. There will be lots of stumbles. If you are lucky, you will have people around you who help bring you back up and help you see the things you can learn from the mistake but do not expect it to all go easily. If you do, then it will feel very hard. Whereas, if you are like me and expect things to be off the rails all the time, then when things go well, it’s not for good.
That's a good reminder. People have been very authentic and honest on this show. You hear the challenges. Everybody has a challenge of some type in their career or sometimes several in their life, too. It's how you handle that, whether you see it as a stumble or a failure in a particular setting but that doesn't mean I'm going to stop doing things or moving forward and contributing in ways I know that I alone can to make the world better or to contribute to the practice, my clients or whatever. That's inspiring to see that everyone has had different challenges and how they have met them.
It is amazing, and that's consistent with your skills with people, and it's an authentic skill. Some people will try to do things with a more manipulative skill. You are very good with people, and I mean that in a sincere way, in terms of, as you said, listening to people, figuring out, “What is it that would make their jobs easier, how can I present this in a way that would resonate with them.” Those are all key approaches and skills that are helpful in any setting in the vast array of settings that you have been in.
I certainly wasn't born that way. I doubt anybody else was, and as a mother of two young children, I can promise you it is not my experience that babies are good listeners. I had a lot of good teachers and examples to follow. I can think of a time I was at Bet Tzedek. I was in an all-staff meeting, which sometimes felt a little bit like I was under a magnifying glass. I would be up in front of everybody answering questions. It was sometimes very stressful for me, and I was often very quick to be defensive and take a good legitimate question that was cluing me in.
It is a gift when someone tells you what they are thinking and cluing you into something that's confusing, scary or obnoxious to them that they are probably not the only one. I would be so worried about appearing strong, I had it figured out and whatever that I would brush past it and say, "Remember we already talked about this that other time and we decided to do X and that. Problem solved." That's how a lot of people handle those situations. I learned from someone else's example.
I remember clearly being in a meeting, and one of those tough questions got lobbed up. Before I had a chance to be defensive and bat it down, one of my colleagues, another person in leadership with me, took it in and said, "This is such an important question for me to think about, and it makes me reflect and realize that you are operating with a different set of information than I am. That's my fault because I need to be communicating the basis for my decision-making. I'm going to do a better of that." I was like, "That's what leadership looks like. That's good to know." I give that as one nugget. I have had a million of them that all of those skills you speak of, which I aspire to, you can learn them.
They are all learned but you have to be open to learning them and having the epiphany that you did in terms of, "That's a different way to handle that. It seems effective here. That might be something else I should look at." Moving from the practice of law to a legal nonprofit to now a nonprofit that's engaged in cultural activities, how did you decide that would be your next adventure?
It's a longer story but I wasn't looking for this job. I was very happy at Bet Tzedek, and I have plenty left to do there. When the Skirball approached me about succeeding their Founder, Dr. Uri D. Herscher upon his retirement after 40 years of leadership, I was a little like, "You want me to do what?" Over time and several conversations, the first was I did end up feeling, for me, Bet Tzedek might be the best thing I ever did with my Law degree. I loved so much what the organization was doing. It didn't seem like my next job would be to return to law firm practice or to a different legal job.
I wasn't going to stay at Bet Tzedek for another 30 years. That wouldn't have been good for me, and it wouldn't have been good for Bet Tzedek. Here was someone offering me an opportunity to learn about a whole new field of arts and culture, a very interesting and complicated facility to manage. We have 18 acres on top of the Santa Monica Mountains in the middle of a Fire Canyon. I'm going to learn all about that. First, it was very opportunistic, "This is amazing to get an opportunity to learn."
The substance, ultimately, what I came to feel and say to the board at the Skirball is that the work that Bet Tzedek is doing is essential and urgent, and it's not enough that there are too many days where the solutions offered in the courtroom are insufficient to the problems that we face. That's why we see the same cases over and over again. The solution is not a policy solution, either.
Too many times, we have a bad policy, bad law or a bad outcome in litigation because the entire system lacks humanity because all of the participants in the system have failed to understand the shared humanity that is in effect. The Skirball stands to be a place that could improve that. We are about establishing human connections and overcoming that, which would divide us to convince a greater group of people that our diversity is our strength.
The worst thing that could happen is giving it your best.
That's so interesting that you say it that way too because I have come to similar conclusions and epiphanies. I believe in the Rule of Law, the justice system, and feel that being a lawyer is powerful in that regard, especially in Appellate Law, where we can change things with one case way more than the case that's being decided. Part of what excites me about being an appellate lawyer is being able to make changes more quickly.
I have also seen circumstances where the justice system has failed either in particular cases or as a system-wide matter. People may be doing their jobs but their jobs are not focused on the larger good or context. They are walking through doing the various roles that they have but those roles don't require them to look more broadly. I have started to have that same scratching my head going, "There are circumstances where it's not appropriate. It's not enough. You need the cultural aspect." That's so interesting that that's how you presented it to them.
They agreed. That's a part of why the Skirball exists, and here we go.
I'm so excited for you in this new role and to bring your legal experience to it and see what the Cultural Center can do in terms of tackling some of the issues you have wrestled with at Bet Tzedek and in the law.
The Skirball Cultural Center has a beautiful mission. It ends with a promise to make the world a more justice society. We have our work cut out for us but I am hopeful.
I didn't realize that was part of the motto, and it's incorporated within that. It makes sense that you would be involved in that. Thank you so much for joining and discussing a lot of interesting things in terms of your career and what others should be thinking about in their careers. I wanted to close with quick lightning round questions. The first one is, which talent would you most like to have but you don't?
I wish I could sing.
Who are your favorite writers?
I'm not a great reader but I love Kiese Laymon. I read his memoir, Heavy, and I recommend it.
That's a good recommendation. Who is your hero in real life?
It's Dolly Parton.
She's amazing on so many levels because she contributes to the community in a significant way. Many of her initiatives are amazing. Given the choice of anyone in the world, who would you invite to a dinner party?
I have thought about this question before, and I was a dancer in a past life, and there was a moment in Paris many years ago where Diaghilev, Stravinsky, and other interesting people of that age were having dinner parties and rather than invite them to mine, I wish I could have gone to one of theirs.
Last question, what is your motto if you have one?
Leave it better than you found it.
That doesn't surprise me that you said that because that is how you have left each of your organizations so far to continue to grow Bet Tzedek and Ms. JD as well.
It's what my mom used to say to me about my room.
I like to think of it in a broader way but my mom said, "Put all the toys back in the toy box. All the toys you took out, make sure they are back in there before you leave the room." I like your way, it's a little more lyrical.
It applies to everything. MC, you have made my day better than you found it. Thank you so much for this chat. I appreciate it.
Thank you so much, Jessie. I appreciate it as well. Thanks so much for joining.