After a failed attempt last summer, another effort has begun to get enough signatures to trigger a ballot referendum asking Pittsburgh residents if the Home Rule Charter should be amended to align the city’s finances with “moral standards,” which would include divesting from Israel.
Not on Our Dime, a volunteer-led campaign “made up of a coalition of Pittsburghers who are fed up with our public money going to support war crimes and apartheid” is spearheading the signature collecting efforts ahead of the May primary election, according to its website.
Groups across the country have been calling for governments, both local and federal, to divest from Israel as part of ongoing concern over the conflict in Gaza. On Wednesday, it was reported that Israel and Hamas have reached a ceasefire agreement to pause the war.
They’re asking city residents to sign onto their petition that, if they gather enough signatures, would add a ballot question asking whether Pittsburgh’s Home Rule Charter should be amended to “align Pittsburgh's finance with the city’s moral standards,” the petition reads. Their goal is to reach 25,000 signatures by the deadline of Feb. 18. To get on the ballot, they have to have about 12,500 valid signatures.
The realigning would happen by creating a financial policy to divert funds from government “engaged in genocide and apartheid — such as the state of Israel — and corporations doing business with them,” the proposed ballot question said. It also proposes adding investment policies that have the explicit goal of reducing arms production and increasing transparency regarding the city’s business relationships and investments.
“We wanted to put something on the ballot that wasn’t purely symbolic,” Ben Case, one of the organizers, said on a recent episode of a podcast called The Field Between hosted by University of Pittsburgh professor Yasmine Flodin-Ali and local activist Ahmed Amer. “We wanted it to have some kind of material impact on our city’s policy.”
Not on Our Dime also has published proposals for how the Home Rule Charter should be amended, if the measure were to pass.
The group has seemed to learn from some of the criticisms that were lobbed against last year’s efforts, including the limiting language and lack of clarity around how and when the changes would be implemented.
“Activists across Pittsburgh have been working to make sure this issue makes it to the ballot and wins,” the Not on Our Dime website said. “We’ve been writing legislation to back up our effort, consulting with lawyers and local partners and conducting training for volunteers to put ourselves in the best possible position to strategically and democratically advance Palestine solidarity in our city and beyond.”
Last summer’s ballot question specifically called on the city to divest from Israel. This new effort has broadened that language so that the city would be required to not invest or do business with any country that partakes in “morally reprehensible behavior.” The amendment uses Israel and the conflict in Gaza as a specific example of this.
Addy Lord, an organizer for both campaigns, said on the Field Between podcast that this was “much looser legal language.”
“We’re basically saying as far as its legally possible, the city cannot do business with companies that are doing business with governments enacting genocide or apartheid or ethnic cleansing,” they said.
Many critics of last year’s ballot referendum noted that these policies, specifically not doing business with any entity that does business with Israel, could severely cripple the city’s operations. They wouldn’t be able to pay the electric bill or buy gasoline for city vehicles among myriad other resources the city uses daily.
The amendment to the Home Rule Charter includes investment strategies that say the city should take all actions necessary to not invest in organizations that develop or manufacture things like chemical or nuclear weapons, fighter jets, artillery systems and other munition-related products and tactical vehicles.
It’s unclear how, if at all, the city would be able to implement this in regards to its pension fund investments. Based on state law, the home rule charter cannot make any changes to the city’s pension fund. Any changes in investment strategies for pensions would have to be introduced by a pension board member and voted upon.
In addition to achieving some level of divestment, an additional goal of the ballot measure is to have the city be more transparent about where city money is being spent and invested, Lord said.
If passed, the Controller’s Office would be required to complete an annual report that lists each corporation the city has bought or sold goods or services to and include a list of “all corporations and governments that are issuers of securities or constituent securities held by the City of Pittsburgh, the City of Pittsburgh Comprehensive Municipal Pension Trust Fund and subordinate funds.”
Last summer’s effort — organized by No War Crimes on our Dime and financially backed by the Pittsburgh chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America — was short-lived but caused lasting ripples in Pittsburgh’s political environment.
Mayor Ed Gainey’s communications director Maria Montano had signed the petition and resigned shortly after it became public. Her position has yet to be filled.
Others have been critical of Mr. Gainey — who is up for re-election this spring — for not filing a challenge against the petition when City Controller Rachael Heisler and the Jewish Federation of Greater Pittsburgh did.
Mr. Gainey’s office did not respond to questions regarding the petition efforts.
The Jewish Federation is exploring “all avenues” in response to the petition, which could include a future challenge, according to Laura Cherner, the federation’s director of community relations.
Ms. Cherner said that the referendum’s “inflammatory language” would be a “significant burden on the city” and could prevent the city from doing business with local Jewish foundations and synagogues.
“I think that it's absolutely a priority for the Jewish community to challenge this referendum,” she said.
The legal challenge, in addition to questioning the validity of all the signatures, raised concerns that the petition violated the state’s anti-boycott, divestment and sanctions law enacted in 2016. Often referred to as the Prohibited Contracts Act, the law bans any business that does work with or for the state from working with a company that boycotts Israel for political reasons.
That means state entities like the Department of Transportation and the Department of Environmental Protection would not be able to contract with the city. For smaller businesses it would leave the choice of doing business with the city or the state.
Ultimately, Judge John T. McVay ruled the petition was set aside because “it lacks the requisite number of signatures by qualified, registered electors residing within the city of Pittsburgh as mandated.” However, No War Crimes on Our Dime organizers withdrew the petition before a thorough legal assessment was completed.
Pittsburgh DSA said at the time that they had withdrawn the petition “so that we can come back stronger, more experienced and fully ready to continue fighting for a free Palestine with all avenues available to us,” they posted on X.
Despite the legal loss, organizers last year said that they were confident if the ballot measure had been put to voters in November, it would have passed.
On the Field Between podcast, Lord said that they were anticipating challenges this time around as well.
First Published: January 16, 2025, 10:30 a.m.
Updated: January 17, 2025, 1:27 p.m.