Medford City Council passes reading of a values-aligned local investment ordinance

By Neil Zolot | Correspondent

Editor's note: This story has been updated to include additional testimony from the meeting and to correct two quotes.

After lengthy debate and comment from citizens, the Medford City Council passed the first reading of a Values-Aligned Local Investments Ordinance on Aug. 5.

The vote was 5-1, with Councilor George Scarpelli dissenting and Councilor Anna Callahan absent.

“We’re at a unique moment when we’re seeing eco-cide with our planet being destroyed by corporations interested in profit,” ordinance sponsor and Council President Isaac “Zac” Bears said. “We’re seeing weapons manufacturing fomenting violence, and prisons for profit and earnings. The federal administration and the global right wing have pursued numerous human rights violations around the world. It’s essential all of us, whether as individuals or a community, say if we have public funds we won't invest into a global effort that demeans people.”

“I believe our investments are an expression of our values,” Councilor Justin Tseng added. “We should be able to say no when talking about the investments we make.”

Scarpelli’s objection was based on the fiduciary responsibility of the City Council. Citing a memo from Chief-of-Staff Nina Nazarian and financial consultants Hilltop Securities, he said the measure violates the Massachusetts General Laws Prudent Investment Act.

“It is our responsibility to make sure what we’re doing is best for Medford,” he said. “We should slow things down to vet this properly. Legal and policy issues about compliance with state law warrant further vetting regarding city finances.” 

“People say we need to slow down all the time, but this has been in the works for months and we frequently get a laundry list of concerns just before a meeting,” Councilor Matt Leming countered. “It’s a delaying tactic.”

The matter had been taken up at council meetings in mid-June and July but was tabled and then reworded. The rewording was due, in part, to perceptions the ordinance singled out Israel for human rights violations and the American government and weapons manufacturers for supporting an alleged genocide in the Gaza Strip following the Oct. 7, 2023, attack on Israel by Hamas.

Bears said sections of the ordinance mention oppression and violence suffered by the Uyghurs in China, people in Ukraine, Sudan and Syria, and Palestinians and Israelis.

“For folks who say it targets one group, it’s just not true,” he said. “It’s not without context. There is a genocide going on in Gaza.”

“Going by the text, it doesn’t explicitly target any one country, although the rhetoric around this has been very different,” Leming added. “The text is a general framework for divesting from a number of countries for a number of reasons, although people project their own experiences onto a text.”

Tseng also acknowledged anti-Semitism is a problem, but he said it should not be conflated with the proposal.

“Reading the text, the question remains if we invest in companies endangering our future and violating human rights,” he said.

Public reaction

Many people in attendance, including Palestinian immigrants and Palestinian-Americans, singled out Israel and weapons manufacturers like Lockheed Martin claiming Medford money is used to violate human rights and pursue genocide. Many related stories of their own families suffering in Gaza.

“I'm here tonight to urge you to support an ordinance that can save the rest of my 75 family members in Gaza," Dina Alami said from the podium. "As we know, Medford currently has $12 million invested in accounts that include Lockheed Martin, the world's largest weapons manufacturer. And, again, as we know, Lockheed Martin supplies Israel with fighter jets that have been used extensively to bomb Gaza."

Alami talked about family members who have been killed in Gaza. A pregnant cousin and her entire family were killed in an air strike, she said, and a cousin's 7-year-old daughter was shot and killed by an Israeli sniper as she looked out a window.

"Every minute that is wasted not ending our complicity in the genocide is another minute of my family's life at stake," Alami said.  

Clare Sheridan said, “I’m sick and tired of my tax money going to weapons manufacturers."  

“The city’s investment portfolio will not suffer," Sheridan said. "There are hundreds of alternatives. If my personal portfolio can reflect values, so can the city’s.”    

Owen Berson said, “Medford should divest our dollars from companies committing human rights violations around the world. This goes beyond genocide in Palestine. I’m angry our tax dollars are going to companies benefiting from genocide. I’m heartbroken. Genocide violates my values.”  

“I want to make a personal statement in favor of values based investment,” Michael Dewberry said. “We should have something that reflects our values on a municipal scale.”

“This ordinance is prudent and rational,” Jennifer Yance agreed. “There’s lot to invest in. We don’t need to be investing in weapons manufacturing or corporations contributing to the destruction of the environment. We can be financially responsible and responsible to future generations.”    

“I want to voice my enthusiasm for this,” Sam Goldstein said. “I want to express my dismay in conflating anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism. From Israel’s beginning there have been fascistic and ethno-national elements and I appreciate this small step to divest. Capitalism is destroying our planet.”     

On the opposite side of the debate, Zachary Chertok said, “It’s indefensible this doesn’t involve Israel and is an attempt to isolate the Jewish state.”  

He also said the ordinance is “too vague to be effective. There needs to be re-definitions to reflect fiduciary responsibility.”

Mike Cohen said that while the intentions of the ordinance are good in a lot of ways, there’s something missing from the conversation.

“What we’re seeing tonight is there’s too much going against Israel, which is literally fighting for her survival," Cohen said.

“What Israel’s doing is wrong,” Cohen said, “but then no-one is stopping to say, well this would not have happened if Hamas hadn’t attacked Israel.”

He talked about atrocities being committed by Hamas and said the group's members are “filthy scummy animals who have no right to live."

“We need to take that into account before we pass something like this,” Cohen said. “It shows we’re not ready to do that yet.” 

Somerville resident Evan Fontana said, “I keep hearing this isn’t targeting Israel, but everyone is focused on Israel. It’s reasonable to assume it’s targeting Israel. Definitions are important. Sudan is a genocide. Gaza is not. This is a farce and a calculated attack on Israel.”

He also said divesting from certain companies will affect “products you love,” like cellphones.

“This is legally questionable and morally dubious,” Ezekiel Silverstein said. “It’s too broad and vague and is ideological grandstanding. Medford’s finances are already strained, and to put aside our finances for political issues is irresponsible.”

Silverstein also said, “Passage of this will be divisive.”

Anne Castner-Williams countered with, “Our goal shouldn’t be non-divisiveness.”  

“It’s not our responsibility not to be divisive,” Bears said. “Maybe it’s just little old Medford saying this, but maybe others join us to bring down the elites.”

Environmental concerns

“I want to know my tax dollars are not supporting companies responsible for increasing global heat or detention centers,” Castner-Williams said.

“Fundamentally the world I want to be part of values children and is a safer world,” Anna Meyer said. “The way we spend our dollars is political. If the ordinance says we can’t invest in companies benefiting from fossil fuels, that’s the point. We can put pressure on companies benefiting from fossil fuels.”

“We support green initiatives,” Ken Gareau said. “We can shift to green initiatives. Our technology can be modified.” 

“There’s a false argument Medford should only concern itself with local affairs,” Takeo Rivera said. “All of us are affected by climate change.”

Robert Paine, of the Energy and Environment Committee, asked if Medford was prepared for the aftermath of passage of the ordinance based on the Trump administration withholding aid to communities and states in disagreement with its policies.

“Is Medford prepared for possible sanctions and loss of funds,” he asked. 

“Trump is a tyrant, and tyrants always punish their enemies,” Castner-Williams responded. “We can’t capitulate.”

“When a tyrant or bully comes after you, you don’t give in,” Bears agreed.

Council Vice President Kit Collins took the gavel from Bears during debate. She stayed silent except for brief comments before the vote.

“I believe this is a stand by many residents that we don’t want investments with things we don’t want to see and believe the issue as to whether this will be harmful to our city has been answered,” Collins said.

She is also pointed out she is the only Jewish person on the City Council and the ordinance reflects the Jewish value of Tikkun Olam, translated as Repair the World.

The ordinance

The following is the text of the ordinance:

“The city will strive to invest its funds in ways that promote the well-being of our communities and our environment, favoring investment in entities that support the needs of peacetime daily life and meet the stated goals of the preamble of the proposed City Charter to conduct local government in an accountable, transparent, innovative, stable, ethical, representative and responsible way. No public funds under the care and custody of the Treasurer-Collector of the city shall be invested or remain invested in the stocks, securities or other financial instruments of any company which derives more than 15% of its revenue from the combustion, distribution, extraction, manufacture or sale of fossil fuels, which shall include coal, oil and gas, or fossil fuel; the operation, maintenance, servicing or supply of jails, prisons, or detention facilities; invested or remain invested in the stocks, securities, or other financial instruments of any company which derives any of its revenue from the manufacture or sale of weapons of any kind, including defense contractors; invested or remain invested in the stocks, securities or other financial instruments of any company or entity that is directly, knowingly and over time contributing to severe violations of human rights and international humanitarian law as determined by international legal and humanitarian bodies and conventions including the United Nations, including, but not limited to, complicity in killings, physical abuse, displacement or other rights violations, confinement, forced labor, human rights violations based on racial, gender or LGBTQ+ identity, war crimes, crimes against humanity, apartheid, genocide, ethnic cleansing and illegal occupation, and complicity with such actions by governments or other parties.”