6 hours Ago By Julia Maruca
Several members of Pittsburgh City Council hope to block a revived effort to bar the city from contracting with firms tied to Israel. Activist group Not On Our Dime is collecting signatures for a ballot initiative to divert funds away from “governments engaged in genocide and apartheid — such as the state of Israel — and corporations doing business with them.” The stated goal of the measure, which the group hopes to put before voters on the May 20 ballot, is to “reduce arms production and promote human dignity” while increasing the transparency of city business dealings Not On Our Dime proposed a similar ballot question last fall, but withdrew it following legal challenges.
And in an effort to thwart the group again, five members of council have proposed two ballot questions of their own. Introduced in council Wednesday, the first ballot question would ask voters to amend the city’s home rule charter to prohibit discrimination “on the basis of race, religion, national origin or association or affiliation with any nation or foreign state in conducting business of the City.” The second ballot question would give voters a chance to block any ballot initiative that could “add duties or obligations beyond the lawful scope of the city's authority.
" Councilor Erika Strassburger is one of five council members who sponsored the two measures. She said they are intended to “put guardrails on this and future processes and referenda aiming to amend the home rule charter.” She described the first bill as cementing the city’s nondiscrimination code into its home rule charter, and the second as stopping people from “forc[ing] the city to do something that is known to be illegal or would immediately face a challenge.
” Most efforts to amend the home rule charter begin with a public petition to place ballot questions before voters: That requires gathering more than 12,000 signatures citywide. But council can place its own questions on the ballot as well. It’s not clear that Not On Our Dime’s proposal would be legal in any case.
While its 2024 ballot question effort was abandoned amid challenges to its petitions, there were also challenges to the substance of the proposal: City Controller Rachael Heisler argued in court pleadings that banning the city from contracting with anyone who had business ties with Israel would paralyze its ability to contract. Those questions remain unresolved, and Strassburger noted that the new Not On Our Dime boycott could run afoul of a Pennsylvania state law that prevents government agencies from contracting with businesses that have boycotts of their own, unless the federal government is boycotting them as well. “It is in the interest of the United States and the Commonwealth to stand with Israel and other countries,” the law asserts.
Not On Our Dime’s new ballot question is worded somewhat differently than the previous one, which focused solely on Israel and which would have barred even granting tax exemptions to entities with ties to the country. The newer version of the question focuses solely on banning taxpayer-funded purchases from companies that do business “with any government actively engaged in or facilitating genocide, ethnic cleansing or apartheid” – practices Israel and its supporters say it does not engage in. The city‘s code already bars discrimination on the bases of categories like race, religion, and national origin.
Council’s ballot question, if passed by voters, would alter the home rule charter so that it also barred discrimination based on affiliation to foreign countries. “The ballot has to be voted on by the public,” Strassburger said. “It's a stronger way of cementing a nondiscrimination policy than just having it in our code.
” A spokesperson from Not On Our Dime said Wednesday that council’s ballot questions were “just introduced this morning, so we’re still looking into it and trying to understand what was introduced.” “It’s great to see other people using democratic tools that allow voters to make decisions,” said the spokesperson, who spoke on condition of anonymity. Councilor Anthony Coghill, joined Strassburger in sponsoring the bills alongside councilors Daniel Lavelle, Bob Charland and Bobby Wilson.
He argued that Not On Our Dime’s proposed rule could grind the city’s finances to a halt. “You’ve heard it many times, don’t cut off your nose to spite your face. As the fiscal overseers of city taxpayer dollars, we can’t go down that road.
It’s just not feasible,” Coghill said. “I understand that nobody wants to see innocent lives lost, but frankly though, in my opinion, I’m here to take care of the city of Pittsburgh’s business,” Coghill said. “It’s not something I choose to weigh in on — let the world leaders work that out, I guess.
But to put a question on the referendum that would kind of cripple us financially as to who we can do business with is not the answer.”.
