Dozens of residents used the council’s open‑comment period on Oct. 16 to press the Boulder City Council to divest city pension and investment funds from companies they said are complicit in Israeli military operations in Gaza and the West Bank.

Speakers including Evan Ravitz, Dr. Enrique Maestas, and several others urged the council to disentangle Boulder investments from Microsoft and Caterpillar, which some commenters said together represent roughly $17 million of city funds. Commenters alleged Microsoft’s cloud and AI products are used for surveillance and that Caterpillar equipment has been used in demolitions. Speakers asked the council to adopt formal divestment or boycott actions.

Other public commenters offered competing views about international law and the legal standard for genocide. One speaker urged councilors to consult Geneva Convention and International Court of Justice standards and argued that some human‑rights reports adopt different analytical frameworks.

Council and staff responses
Council did not take any formal vote on divestment during the meeting. After open comment, staff responded to a separate request on crime statistics: Police and city staff said they will provide the requested public crime update for North Boulder and that staff can draft a written update for council. On the investment issue, no staff motion or analysis was recorded during the meeting; council members asked for clarifications and some councilors said they would like additional information and public outreach before considering formal action.

Why it matters: Residents framed the investment requests as a way for local government to align public funds with Boulder’s stated values; petitioners asked the city to consider whether holdings comport with local sustainability and equity commitments.

What was not decided
Council did not adopt a position on divestment at this meeting and no formal motion was made or voted on during the Oct. 16 session. Several speakers encouraged voters to elect candidates who support divestment; others criticized public commenters and questioned legal standards cited by protesters.