Just over a month into the new administration of the Student Government Association (SGA), led by President Alexander Stanczak and Vice President of Operations Shane Mitchell, the SGA has read a proclamation regarding the Stevens Divest From War Initiative (SDFWI). Presented by Senator Osinachi Uga and by members James Hooker and Mohamed Bengabsia of the student body, this proclamation calls upon the Board of Trustees of the university to divest the school’s endowment from any companies or investments that violate the outlined principles of international law and human rights. The proclamation is accompanied by a proposal titled “Proposal for Stevens Institute of Technology’s Divestment and Dissociation from Violations of International Law and Human Rights,” which outlines the specifics of the divestment strategy.
To provide context, a proclamation is a type of bill that can be proposed by the SGA Senate, meant to represent the collective opinion of the Senate. Historically, proclamations voted on by the SGA have been rare, and usually elicit a response from the university. Two have been made recently: the first calls for all undergraduate classes to be suspended on the day of the Innovation Expo, and the second endorses the student-led effort to rename Gianforte Family Hall.
James Hooker, one of the writers of the bill and its accompanying proposal, shares that the school’s $318 million endowment funds scholarships and research, and therefore students deserve to know that their funding is coming from ethical places. Hooker clarifies the meaning of divestment as the selling of all financial assets and the disassociation from organizations that don’t meet the criteria in the policy statement for supporting the principles of the divestment criteria listed in the proposal:
Principle 1: Against Apartheid and Occupation
Principle 2: Against Genocide, Ethnic Cleansing, War Crimes, and other Crimes against Humanity
Principle 3: Against Weapons Development
Principle 4: Against Manufacturing Consent for Crimes Against Humanity
Principle 5: Against Complicity in Crimes Against Humanity
Principle 6: Against Economies of Crimes Against Humanity
When asked about what the successful implementation of this initiative looks like in their opinion, Hooker stated that they would like to see:
- an official statement of support for divestment from the SGA Senate.
- the inclusion of the following divestment policy into the Investment Policy Statement by the Board of Trustees: “Stevens Institute of Technology is committed to divesting its endowment of entities that enable or facilitate human rights violations or violations of international law including illegal occupations, apartheid practices, and plausible acts of genocide.”
- the creation of the Committee on Investor Responsibility (CIR), which would consist of students, staff, and faculty who work in conjunction with the Investment Committee of the Board of Trustees and the Outsourced CIO Goldman Sachs to ensure that the divestment criteria are being met.
This proclamation and proposal have been supported by various student organizations, students, and outside organizations, including formal endorsements from Stevens Amnesty and Ceasefire Now New Jersey.
The Stute had the opportunity to interview Senator Osinachi Uga regarding her motivations behind proposing the proclamation to the SGA Senate. “I decided to help because the proposal had a lot of merit,” Uga stated. She cited the large number of student organizations who have come together to work on the proposal and her subsequent recognition of the effort as something with which a lot of students agree.
In addition to the proclamation and proposal, a student petition in favor of SDFWI has been floated around campus. At the time of writing this article, the petition had 518 undergraduate signatures, of which 497, or 96%, support the initiative. This represents approximately 12.4% of the undergraduate student body. The methodology used to collect signatures included tabling in the UCC and attending various club meetings to seek signatures.
While there has been a large amount of vocal support for the initiative, others have expressed concern. The Stute had the opportunity to interview Maeryn Erdheim and Shelly Pertsovsky, respectively the President and Vice President of Stevens Hillel, who spoke on behalf of Hillel and the Jewish student community at Stevens. Erdheim and Pertsovsky expressed concerns that the proposal disproportionately focuses on Israel, noting that it is the only country explicitly mentioned, which they believe alienates Jewish students. According to Erdheim and Pertsovsky, many members of Hillel and the school’s Jewish community at large have raised concerns about the references to Israel and fear the implications of such an initiative getting passed. Regarding the upcoming vote for the proclamation, Erdheim states, “I am not completely against the idea of divestment under the provisions of human rights violations. However, I am not at all for the proposal as it is currently written. The writers claimed to be unbiased, but this is very clearly not the case as Israel is the only country mentioned. I hope that this can be an opportunity of growth for our campus and that this proposal can be rewritten in an unbiased and more effective manner.”
The discussion regarding the proclamation took place during last week’s Senate meeting on Sunday evening. The meeting began with a public discussion on the initiative, followed by a presentation from Uga, Hooker, and Bengabsia. Their presentation outlined the proposal, referencing the six principles of the divestment criteria, the establishment of the Committee on Investor Responsibility (CIR), and a timeline for implementing the proposed changes.
After the presentation, a public forum, and a Q&A session, SGA members engaged in their own discussion. A key point of contention was the perceived political nature of the proposal, particularly its references to Israel. Senators questioned whether it was appropriate for the SGA to endorse a controversial stance that wouldn’t be supported by all students. Additionally, concerns were raised about the logistical feasibility of SDFWI, as the SGA does not have direct control over the Board of Trustees’ investment decisions.
Financial implications were also central to the discussion. Some argued that the primary goal of the university’s endowment is to maximize returns, and restructuring the investment portfolio could be costly, potentially reducing funding for scholarships and research opportunities. Others pointed out the complexity of supply chains and the difficulty in determining ethical boundaries that aren’t clearly defined. The proposal also stated that Stevens’ endowment is mostly invested in exchange-traded funds (ETFs), which are bundles of multiple assets, making it challenging to determine whether each bundle is ethical based on its constituent investments.
Several representatives questioned how the proclamation would impact the SGA and school’s relationship with the Board of Trustees, alumni, and donors. Some argued that passing the proclamation could strain these relationships, making it harder for the SGA to advocate for future changes. At other universities, divestment proposals have led to faculty resignations and donor withdrawals, raising concerns about potential financial impacts at Stevens. However, others contended that aligning investments with ethical standards could also attract new financial support.
Supporters of the proclamation pointed to student backing, noting that 12.4% of the student body had signed the petition, with 96% of those signatories in favor. They argued that this level of support should be taken into account.
At the conclusion of the lengthy discussion, a motion was passed to temporarily table the bill, allowing for amendments to be made to the proposal and effectively shifting the vote on the proclamation to this upcoming week’s Senate meeting. Pertsovsky, who spoke at the Senate meeting about Hillel’s concerns regarding bias against Jewish students, was frustrated by the decision to table the vote, viewing the delay as an unnecessary prolonging of the issue. Hooker shared that supporters of the SDFWI will be working with the SGA throughout the week to discuss potential amendments ahead of the upcoming Senate vote this weekend.
The Stute discussed the outcomes of a proclamation vote with SGA President Stanczak. If the vote were to pass, Stanczak states that “as President of the Student Government Association, I will deliver both the Proclamation of the Stevens Divest from War Initiative and the accompanying Proposal for Stevens Institute of Technology’s Divestment and Dissociation from Violations of International Law and Human Rights to President Farvardin and our Board of Trustees.” If the vote fails to pass, he states that the SGA would continue to serve the student body and be a platform for all students.
The vote on the SDFWI proclamation will take place on Sunday, March 2, in the UCC TechFlex at 7:30 pm, and is open to all members of the Stevens student body.
