Seattle activists hope to ask voters this fall to approve a measure they say would block the city from investing its pension funds in corporations that benefit from the Iraq war, or from certain other Middle East military occupations.
But it's unclear how city retirement officials might respond even if Seattle voters approve the policy, assuming backers collect sufficient petition signatures to put the idea on the November ballot.
"We would like them to not invest in companies that are actively profiting from occupation and war," said Carla Curio, a spokeswoman for the campaign, Seattle Divest From War and Occupation. Curio acknowledged uncertainty over whether the group will ultimately be able to gather the approximately 18,000 minimum number of signatures. Still, she said, "We want to get in the public's consciousness that there could be conscientious investments."
The measure would not restrict city investments in The Boeing Co., backers said. Rather, it takes aim specifically at Halliburton Holding Co. and Caterpillar Inc., they said.
The director of the city's retirement office declined to discuss whether the city has such holdings, or whether the office would ultimately divest should voters approve the measure.
"The (pension) board is just going to wait and get a response from (city) legal (advisers) on what steps we can and cannot do, and we'll make a decision from there," Cecelia Carter, director of that office, said in a brief telephone interview Wednesday. "It's not as easy as it sounds, but we are looking into it."
Carter declined to elaborate or to respond to several follow-up questions, including how -- or whether -- her agency would consider itself forced to divest should voters approve the initiative. She also declined to say whether the pension fund currently holds investments in Halliburton or Caterpillar.
It is difficult to know whether the city holds investments in such corporations because pension money is invested in broad funds -- and those investments can change from day to day, Curio said.
"They give money to fund managers and the fund managers are the ones who buy and sell stocks. But there's no guidelines," Curio said. "They can invest in whatever kinds of companies they want to. ... What we're actually trying to do is have the city set the policy for its investments."
In a stance against apartheid, the city and the University of Washington had policies years ago against owning stock in companies that did business in South Africa.
The latest proposal would prohibit the city from investing employees' retirement funds in corporations that participate in or profit from the U.S. occupation of Iraq or the Israeli government's activities within the West Bank, the Gaza Strip, East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights.
Also disqualified would be corporations with a presence in Israeli settlements in the occupied territories. Finally, the measure would require the city to divest from Israeli government bonds should Israel launch a military attack on Iran.
Councilman Nick Licata has been trying to find a way to ensure that the city's pension fund does not invest in companies that stand to gain from the brutal military conflict in the Darfur region of Sudan. So far, he hasn't had much luck getting city pension officials to divest, he said.
"The pension fund has said that they have to have proof that it's not going to hurt the recipients of the pension," Licata said. "They have to make sure that they aren't prejudging the investment."
Licata also was told that there is no practical way to track the specific holdings of the various funds that receive the city's pension investments. "To me, it seems like it's a really minor technical point, but it's been holding up Darfur," Licata said.
Carter indicated only vague familiarity with that effort, which began before she took her position as head of the retirement office, she said.
"They made a proposal that said we're going to look into some possibilities about how we could go about doing that," Carter said. She said she didn't know who made that proposal, nor what came of it. "We haven't heard back from them."
Regardless, Licata said efforts like the latest divestment initiative are worth the effort.
"It certainly sends a strong message," Licata said. "It will force us to really make an effort to think about where we're making our investments and what the larger impact is."
0 Have Your Say!:
Post a Comment