An effort to establish a boycott of businesses with ties to Israel in Pittsburgh's Home Rule Charter appears to be suspended, at least for this election cycle.
Organizers of the campaign to put the boycott before city voters this November say they lack the number of signatures required, a move that came on the eve of a court hearing to gauge whether the question could be placed on the ballot.
In a statement posted online, No War Crimes on Our Dime said that "politicians and interest groups have poured resources into pushing us off the ballot" and that "their efforts ... succeeded."
Still, the statement continued, "This was never about ballot access, this was about a ceasefire and a Free Palestine. We refused to let Palestine fade from the local news, and we forced the conversation about divestment from Israel into public discourse in Pittsburgh and beyond."
At least as of Sunday evening, it appeared a hearing to withdraw the ballot question would be still be held, if only as a formality.
The measure could have had a sweeping effect on city operations, since the question would have asked voters whether they favored "prohibiting the investment or allocation of public funds, including tax exemptions, to entities that conduct business operations with or in the state of Israel" until peace and human rights in Gaza were restored. (Though for the measure to take effect would have required enabling legislation that may have taken the question's language at something less than face value.)
A spokesman for the effort did not return a call Sunday night. But City Controller Rachael Heisler, a vocal critic of the measure who filed suit challenging its legitimacy, welcomed the development. "We feel very confident in our legal argument." And whether the question was withdrawn or removed by a judge, "Either way for us it's a win, because I think this would have been wildly disruptive to city operations, and to the health and well being of our residents."
Heisler's suit was one of two filed over the ballot question. Her filing challenged the substance of the ballot question, which she argued would violate state and federal law and make it difficult, if not impossible, for the city to hire any vendors given how many firms have global operations. Another court challenge, filed by local Jewish clergy and the Jewish Federation of Greater Pittsburgh, echoed some of those arguments but also challenged the legitimacy of the petitions filed with the county elections department to put the question on the ballot.
For that to happen, petition-gatherers would have had to collect just under 12,500 valid signatures from voters registered in the city of Pittsburgh. But the Federation suit argued that while organizers had filed petitions with over 15,000 signatures, more than two-thirds of those were deficient.
Common Pleas Court Judge John T. McVay consolidated the two court challenges into one hearing, which could have been a lengthy proceeding. Petition challenges can be drawn out affairs as judges are often called upon to review the merits of each challenged signature and the filing as a whole. And court documents filed by the Federation indicated that it might call a half-dozen witnesses, including Jewish leaders who would testify about the ballot question's impact on the operations and tax-exempt status of their faith communities.
That testimony now appears unlikely to take place Monday morning, but the debate surrounding it has already left a mark: Maria Montaño, a spokesperson for Mayor Ed Gainey, resigned from her post amid criticism that she was among a handful of city employees who had signed the petition.
And it's unlikely that the issue has been put to rest. While the precise legal mechanism by which the ballot question was withdrawn were unclear Sunday evening, it appears to be based solely on organizers conceding that they lacked the necessary petitions. That likely means McVay will not consider the underlying arguments about whether the ballot question itself was legally valid.
In a follow-up statement, the Pittsburgh Chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America — a key backer of the effort — said the move was "a strategic withdrawal, and by no means a loss." The group said it would hold a press conference and rally Monday morning, and plan future steps later in the week.
"We are not stopping until Palestine is free," it pledged.
