January 28, 2025 — San Francisco
The following column originally appeared in J--Jewish News of Northern California.
By Teresa Drenick
The flawed decision by Alameda County Treasurer Henry Levy to divest from Caterpillar and support the boycott, divestment and sanctions (BDS) movement should alarm county residents, regardless of their opinion on Israel or Middle East politics.
The county’s investment policy clearly states: “The Treasurer will consider additional socially responsible and impact investing criteria. Such criteria shall be consistent with values promulgated by the County of Alameda.”
In Levy’s Jan. 10 op-ed in J., he left no doubt as to the faulty rationale behind his decision: It is based on his personal feelings and biases including a narrow, incomplete interpretation of Jewish ethics.
Levy happens to be Jewish, but his elected office does not grant him the power to speak on behalf of the entire Jewish community. Indeed, he cannot substitute his personal beliefs for those of county residents. To do so smacks of an antidemocratic action based upon a personal opinion rather than a representative process. Public officials must subsume their own values to the laws that empower them to act and represent the interests of their constituents. By divesting based on personal convictions, the treasurer has overstepped the role of his office.
Likewise, using his experience of traveling to Israel with a local Jewish organization as justification for his decision is disingenuous. He seems to cite his ties to the organization as proof that he is representing the opinions of our community when, in fact, his views on divestment are not mainstream.
A broader problem with this action is how it conflates business practices with moral responsibility in a way that is reductive. Divestment conveys a notion of illegitimacy directed solely at Israel. Accordingly, it cannot bring about the kind of change needed to address the root causes of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, let alone forge a path for peace and coexistence.
While Levy seeks to align his actions with Jewish values, the Jewish community broadly considers BDS as harmful to peace efforts and de facto antisemitic in nature. He points to support from Jewish Voice for Peace as another cover for his actions — a claim that rings hollow, in that JVP’s anti-Zionist stance on Israel reflects a fringe minority.
Perhaps most alarming about divestment is the precedent that it sets. Today, the county has a treasurer who has strong personal opinions about Israel and its government. In the years ahead, a newly elected treasurer may hold deep-seated, personal positions on an array of issues. It’s a significant problem when divestment and investment decisions are driven by the personal beliefs of a treasurer rather than the fiduciary responsibility to manage taxpayer money.
The fact that Levy followed his divestment action by the purchase of bonds supporting Palestinian economic development appears, on the surface, to be an attempt to balance protest with positive action. Economic development initiatives on the local level, while important, can in no way substitute for a comprehensive and sustained peace process. Peace can only be achieved through dialogue, negotiation and a deeper acceptance of the needs, fears and aspirations of both Israelis and Palestinians.
Given the power currently vested within the office of the treasurer, how do we address these issues going forward? How do we ensure that any single individual elected to this office must abide by the democratic consensus of the county rather than their own set of beliefs?
One step in the right direction would be the adoption of and adherence to a positivity screen. This is the practice of selecting investments based on companies that demonstrate strong performance on environmental, social and governance (ESG) factors, with a focus on including companies with positive sustainability practices rather than excluding those with negative ones. A positivity screen must then be applied in a consistent manner prior to any divestment decisions, ensuring that important financial and moral decisions cannot be made without undergoing a truly democratic process.
Levy cited the example of Rabbi Abraham Joshua Heschel — but Heschel’s activism was rooted in Jewish values, including an abiding love for and understanding of the unbreakable Jewish bond to the Land of Israel. He was also unwavering in his commitment to the principle of Jewish self-defense. The actions taken by Levy and his stated justification for his decisions not only misrepresent Jewish values but also disregard the democratic principles he is sworn to uphold.
Teresa Drenick is Deputy Director of AJC Northern California.
