By Leyna Krow, Assistant Editor, JTNews
King County Court judge Steven Gonzalez has ruled that I-97, which would compel the city of Seattle’s retirement board to divest from some companies who do business with Israel, exceeds the scope of initiative power and, as a result, will not appear on the November ballot.
“The funds in question are pension funds,” Gonzalez said. “The city cannot tell that board how to invest those funds, because the funds do not belong to the city…they belong to the future and present retirees. Given that, I believe that the attempt to direct the investment of those funds is beyond the scope of the initiative process.”
Initiative 97, titled “Seattle Divest from War and Occupation,” targets companies known to be profiting from either the war in Iraq or Israel’s occupation of the Palestinian territories. The bulk of I-97 (roughly two thirds of the language) is dedicated to corporations that do business with Israel, although Caterpillar is the only company named specifically by the initiative in regard to Israel.
A number of local Jewish and Israel-advocacy organizations, including StandWithUs Northwest, The Jewish Federation of Greater Seattle and the American Jewish Committee, have been challenging the initiative, both in court and on the streets, in an attempt to prevent it from making it onto the ballot.
The legal battle against I-97 began in May, when opponents appeared at King County Superior Court to address what they considered flawed and imprecise language within the initiative, claiming that the ballot title did not accurately reflect the degree to which Israel was included. Gonzalez agreed, revising the initiative summary to make clear its impact on companies that do business with Israel, as well as those involved in the Iraq war.
The plaintiffs returned to court on Sept. 5 to challenge the legality of the initiative, with attorney Judith Endejan arguing that since state law prohibits city councils from directing pension investment decisions, voters do not have that authority to do so by initiative either.
“Pension funds are to be managed by professionals, not guided by the wills of the voters,” Endejan said. “It’s beyond the scope of local municipal authority.”
Neal Fox, attorney for Seattle Divest from War and Occupation, countered that there has been precedent for I-97, citing the city’s 1984 divestment from companies doing business with South Africa in protest of Apartheid.
He also stressed that I-97 ought not be struck down by the court until its impact, as well as whether or not it would be supported by Seattle voters, could be seen.
“If the opponents want to go out in the streets, as they have, and argue, that’s their right,” Fox said, referencing the tactic opponents of I-97 use whereby they trail signature gatherers in an attempt to dissuade people from signing their petitions. “But at this stage, no one is being harmed. So the court should not be in the position of shutting [the initiative] down.”
Gonzalez issued his ruling on Sept. 10, saying that voters do not have the ability to dictate where the pension funds of city employees can and cannot be invested. He sited Article Four, Section One of the city charter, which deals with the breadth of municipal initiative power, as the basis for his decision.
Rob Jacobs, regional director for StandWishUs Northwest, said that he was pleased by the outcome of the hearing.
“We felt the judge made exactly the right decision — to protect the pension funds from outside interference,” Jacobs said.
However, he was quick to point out that the work of those who oppose the initiative is far from over, anticipating that Seattle Divest from War and Occupation will attempt to appeal Judge Gonzalez’s decision.
“This doesn’t mean we can sit down,” Jacobs said. “We expect they will stay out there trying to gather signatures and we’ll stay out there too.”
Representative from the I-97 campaign could not be reached by press time to confirm or deny Jacob’s suspicions.
For Carol Gown, chair of the No on I-97 Steering Committee, the biggest challenge that remains is fundraising. The No on I-97 campaign is still about $50,000 short of the money needed to cover its legal fees.
“We’re still in the process of raising money,” she said. “We’ve seen a very nice grassroots response. But we haven’t met the need.”
She added that the Steering Committee will continue to request donations from the community until that need has been filled.