Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Civic Affairs topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents and Jewish community members tell council to defend divestment; calls grow to limit L3 Harris
Summary
Multiple Northampton residents — including Jewish community members — urged the city council to resist a lawsuit challenging the council’s divestment resolution and asked the city to consider actions against L3 Harris, a local defense contractor.
Public comment at the March 31 Northampton City Council meeting focused heavily on the council’s recent divestment resolution and a lawsuit challenging it.
“Every day it’s more horrific than the day before,” Priscilla Lynch said, referring to violence in Palestine while urging the council to “remain strong and courageous” in the face of legal pressure against the divestment action.
Mark Irvich, identifying himself as a member of Congregation Benet Israel, told the council that many Jews in the area support the resolution and cautioned against equating criticism of Israeli government policy with anti‑Semitism: “Are what people talking about really concerned? Is it really ‘anti‑Semitism’ or is it really an attempt to shut down discussion on the whole Israeli situation?” he asked.
Other public commenters who identified as Jewish echoed that their views were not represented by the advocacy group that mounted the lawsuit. Cohen Guyther, who said he is Jewish, called the lawsuit “baseless” and called for further steps by the city, including a weapons ban aimed at L3 Harris. He said the Northampton L3 Harris plant “makes electro optic targeting equipment and imaging masks” and urged the council to consider local restrictions on arms manufacturing.
Several councilors listened without immediate policy action; no formal motion related to the lawsuit or an arms ban was taken at the March 31 meeting. Councilors told speakers they appreciate public input and said they would consider the suggestions as part of ongoing, separate policy discussions.
What happens next: The divestment lawsuit remains an external legal matter; council decisions about restrictions on contractors or local procurement would require separate ordinance or procurement actions and were not advanced at the meeting.
Context: The divestment resolution had been passed earlier by the council and has attracted both support and pushback. Multiple residents told the council they felt the advocacy group that brought the suit did not speak for many local Jews who support the resolution.
