Teachers, retirees urge CalSTRS to divest from Tesla and firms linked to Israel conflicts

Public comment dominated the Investment Committee’s May session, with about 20 speakers asking the California State Teachers’ Retirement System to sell holdings they said support human‑rights violations and to stop supporting firms tied to Israel’s military actions in Gaza. The speakers were largely teachers, retirees and union representatives who framed divestment both as a moral imperative and a prudent financial step.

“Every single one I talked to was appalled to hear that our pension fund had over $1,000,000,000 in Tesla stock,” said Ruth Riedetzky, a retired teacher from San Francisco (SEG 248). Several other speakers repeated calls to sell Tesla shares on grounds ranging from company governance to the conduct and rhetoric of Elon Musk.

Commenters also named other corporations they said were complicit in violence or occupation, including Caterpillar, Elbit Systems, Palantir and Maersk. Andrea Pritchett, speaking for the CalSTRS Divest campaign, said the coalition has endorsements from multiple teacher unions and seeks an ethical investment policy to guide decisions about companies that “consistently, knowingly, and directly facilitate or enable human‑rights violations” (SEG 20).

Union leaders and local federation presidents urged action as a matter of worker and beneficiary values. Jason Newman, president of the Los Rios College Federation of Teachers, noted his union’s motion calling on CalSTRS to divest from companies tied to production of weapons and other products “that fueled ethnic cleansing and military occupations” (SEG 23).

Speakers balanced moral arguments with claims about financial risk. Multiple commenters described Tesla and certain technology and defense contractors as financially speculative or exposed to reputational risk; Edward Hasbrook said holding Tesla “presents no financial basis for its price‑to‑earnings ratio” and urged selling while the fund could still realize gains (SEG 16).

CalSTRS staff and the chair responded by thanking participants and noting processes for follow‑up. Chair emphasized that staff will engage with commenters and that some matters require time and, when appropriate, closed‑session consideration; Diane Stanton was named as a staff contact for follow‑up (SEG 1029–1040, SEG 1012–1017).

The committee did not take any immediate action on the public requests during the meeting. Staff said comments and materials would be entered into the record and shared with relevant teams for consideration in ongoing fiduciary and investment reviews.