Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ethical Investment Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pasadena council adopts ethical investment policy barring funds from fossil fuels, weapons, tobacco and private prisons
Summary
After hours of public comment and debate about whether city policy could be construed as singling out nations, Pasadena's City Council voted 5-2 to amend its investment policy to prohibit investments in fossil fuels, weapons manufacturers, tobacco and private prisons and to ask the city's Fire & Police retirement board to consider similar language.
The Pasadena City Council voted 5-2 to amend the city's investment policy to explicitly bar city investment in fossil fuels, weapons manufacturers, tobacco and private prisons, memorializing practices staff said are already in place.
The policy language read into the record by staff states that "the city treasurer or any other authorized individual or company managing the investments of the city surplus fund shall not invest in companies that engage in the production of fossil fuel, weapons manufacturing, tobacco or private prisons." The council also requested the Fire and Police Retirement System board consider adopting comparable restrictions.
The vote followed more than four hours of public comment in which speakers were sharply divided. Supporters urged the council to use municipal investments to avoid complicity in human-rights abuses and to exclude companies they said profit from mass violence and surveillance. Critics, including representatives of local Jewish organizations, warned the measure could be used to single out Israel and could fuel anti-Jewish sentiment; some also flagged legal risks under state procurement law.
Council members described the issue as an attempt to align city spending and investments with stated values. "We're memorializing that to make sure that continues to be the case into the future," said a councilmember during debate, noting the city currently does not hold investments in the named industries.
Skeptical colleagues urged caution because of the intense focus in public testimony on a specific foreign conflict. "Given recent upticks in hate incidents, I'm concerned an action construed as singling out a particular nation could increase risk to our residents," one council member said during deliberations.
On roll call the motion passed 5-2: Cole, Hampton, Jones, Lion and Vice Mayor Rivas voted yes; Madison and Massuda voted no. Mayor Gordo was absent. The council directed city staff to post the adopted amendment and to convey the council's preference to the Fire & Police Retirement System board.
What happens next: The amended policy is now part of the city's investment framework; the council encouraged the retirement board to consider matching language. The city did not announce immediate changes to any existing holdings, and staff told the council the city currently does not hold investments in the named categories.
Why it matters: The vote places clear, written limits on future city investment choices and signals the council's intent that municipal funds avoid certain industries. The item drew unusually large turnout and sustained public comment, reflecting deep local divisions about how and whether municipal investments should respond to international human-rights concerns.
