\u201cMomentum is definitely on our side,\u201d Drusie Kazanova, co-founder of the group San Jose Against War who has been leading divestment organizing, told San Jos\u00e9 Spotlight. \u201cThere\u2019s a mass movement in resistance to the Trump administration and their attacks, both domestically and abroad.\u201d<\/p>\n Kazanova said local organizers initially launched the divestment effort in response to Israel\u2019s conduct during the Israel-Hamas war. Over the past two years, however, their demands \u2014 advanced through rallies, a letter-writing campaign and an\u00a0online petition<\/a>\u00a0\u2014 have expanded to include other corporate practices as well.<\/p>\n Even as the momentum grows, some councilmembers have voiced skepticism about the divestment calls, amid concerns such a policy could undermine the city\u2019s financial standing at a moment when its budget is already under\u00a0considerable strain<\/a>. In a March 2 message to residents, Mayor Matt Mahan said the city is looking at a $56 million shortfall.<\/p>\n The divestment conversation got a boost from District 5 Councilmember Peter Ortiz in October, when councilmembers approved\u00a0his proposal<\/a>\u00a0directing staff to study the potential consequences of withdrawing the city\u2019s investments from all companies that do business with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).<\/p>\n Conflicting allegiances<\/p>\n The review<\/a>\u00a0identified just one company, Microsoft, in San Jose\u2019s investment portfolio that holds a contract with ICE. The computer software giant was awarded a $600,000 contract with the federal agency in 2025, according to a city memo. The city holds more than $8 million in the company\u2019s bonds.<\/p>\n In his memo urging the review, Ortiz cited President Donald Trump\u2019s immigration crackdown, as well as San Jose\u2019s\u00a0past efforts supporting immigrants<\/a>. Ortiz was not available for comment.<\/p>\n \u201cDivesting from corporations tied to ICE builds on that legacy and reaffirms the City\u2019s commitment to safeguarding the safety and dignity of all residents, regardless of national origin or immigration status,\u201d Ortiz wrote.<\/p>\n Ortiz\u2019s memo did not address advocates\u2019 calls for divestment from companies with ties to prisons or the defense sector.<\/p>\n \u201cDivesting from corporations tied to ICE builds on that legacy and reaffirms the City\u2019s commitment to safeguarding the safety and dignity of all residents, regardless of national origin or immigration status.\u201d<\/p>\n Councilmember Peter Ortiz<\/p>\n San Jose\u2019s $2.5 billion investments cover a variety of accounts, such as the city\u2019s retirement funds and a number of funds used for housing efforts, according to a\u00a0recent financial report<\/a>. Corporate investments make up 22% of the portfolio.<\/p>\n It\u2019s not clear what sorts of divestment proposals councilmembers might consider at their upcoming meeting, or whether any policy vote will take place. The issue became a flashpoint during the Feb. 19 meeting of the city\u2019s Public Safety, Finance and Strategic Support Committee.<\/p>\n After reviewing the existing report on divestment impacts, District 1 Councilmember Rosemary Kamei proposed that staff analyze additional strategies to divest the city\u2019s funds from companies with ties to ICE.<\/p>\n \u201cGiven that the community wants to know, I think we should fully know what it means for our general fund,\u201d Kamei said during the meeting. \u201cI think our public dollars do reflect our values.\u201d<\/p>\n Divestment could come at a cost<\/p>\n But her proposal at first received pushback from District 10 Councilmember George Casey, who voiced skepticism about considering far-flung policy matters to determine the city\u2019s investment strategy.<\/p>\n \u201cI just think it\u2019s a separate conversation entirely from this process, whether or not we are going to embark on these types of decisions and conversations,\u201d he said.<\/p>\n The staff report also warned divestment could harm San Jose\u2019s financial standing by reducing the diversity of its investment portfolio and forcing it to buy and sell assets at unfavorable terms. Advocates contend such concerns are overblown.<\/p>\n Ultimately, Casey joined the unanimous committee vote to advance the package to the full City Council.<\/p>\n The annual investment review had originally been set to go before council March 10, but the item has been delayed as staff prepares a \u201csupplemental memorandum,\u201d a spokesperson for the City Manager\u2019s Office told San Jos\u00e9 Spotlight. The spokesperson declined to provide further details.<\/p>\n Meanwhile, residents supporting divestment said their expectations remain high.<\/p>\n \u201cThe absolute bare minimum is that the San Jose City Council make ethical investments in our local community and not financially support Israel and the genocide and horrific murder of the Palestinian people that the world has bared witnessed to,\u201d resident Elizabeth Agramont-Justiniano told San Jos\u00e9 Spotlight.<\/p>\n Contact Keith Menconi at\u00a0keith@sanjosespotlight.com\u00a0or @KeithMenconi on X.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us-ca\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/03\/1773049571_191_LNM-20250616-SJSPOTLIGHTLOGO-01.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\n