Posted today from Nick Giurleo’s facebook account.

At its September 30, 2025 meeting, the City Council completely ignored a legal opinion and passed a major divestment ordinance in another 6-1 vote.

KP Law was asked to review the text of the ordinance, which if approved would require the Treasurer-Collector to refrain from investing public funds in, and divest currently invested public funds from, several very broad categories of areas. This includes companies that derive revenue from the sale of “fossil fuel products” and “defense contractors.” The ordinance also contains a poorly-disguised Boycott, Divestment, and Sanction (BDS) provision, inserted with obvious intent to target all investments connected to the country of Israel.

According to KP Law’s opinion, the ordinance as drafted raises “significant legal implications regarding the City’s compliance with state law.” It notes that modeling the ordinance off of Boston’s recently-approved divestment ordinance is problematic because Boston is exempted from state law rules on trustee investments. As Nick had noted in multiple public comments, “many of the criteria and legal terms set forth in the current proposed Ordinance are vague”.

The full text of the opinion is screenshotted below.

In summary, KP Law advised that the ordinance was legally problematic and should not be approved without vetting and revisions. The Council approved the ordinance anyway based on a slew of frivolous reasons. Here is a summary of what each councilor who voted in favor said in justification of their vote:

Councilor Bears: The opinion was not received in a timely manner so it should be disregarded.

Councilor Leming: The opinion is not “a serious objection” to the ordinance. The opinion was “politically timed”. It should not be taken “seriously”. Its timing was a “game of chicken.”

Councilor Tseng: The opinion is just a policy recommendation. It should have a “more legal perspective”. If the ordinance conflicts with state law, “let that be that.” If the ordinance is legally problematic, it won’t be “a hill we can’t climb.”

Councilor Lazzaro: The “assumption” that the city should not be divesting from the targeted areas is “insane to me.” The opinion should be disregarded because of its timeliness.

Councilor Callahan: Those investing assets on behalf of another should not have a fiduciary duty to maximize investment returns. The law should take a second seat to “values”. If the state wants to sue Medford, a lawsuit is welcomed.

Councilor Collins: The opinion was received “last minute.” The Council has been aware of the legal issues with the ordinance for “months.” They have already been talked about. There is no reason to believe the ordinance will “lose us money.”

Debate lasted less than half an hour. While our newly hired city solicitor appeared over Zoom to address another paper, he was nowhere to be found when the divestment ordinance was discussed. In response to the 6-1 vote, the mayor rightfully vetoed the ordinance. Whether the Council takes the time to amend the ordinance and change the legally problematic language as advised, or override the veto, will be on the agenda at tomorrow’s meeting.

Nick agrees that the Council should be appraised of legal opinions in a timely manner, but this is not a justification for ignoring the substance of an opinion and approving legislation anyway. Disregarding legal concerns based on frivolous justifications and approving papers that expose the city to legal liability is a level of reckless that calls into serious question the fitness of the councilors who voted in favor to hold office. Residents pay to defend lawsuits initiated against the city. Our councilors have a fiduciary obligation to protect Medford from these suits by not passing legislation that unnecessarily exposes the city to legal liability.

When elected, Nick will put an end to these practices. He will apply his expertise as an attorney to protect the city from expensive lawsuits. He will work to ensure legislation before the Council is in compliance with the law before it is approved.

Nick posted this from his facebook page – https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=61575246882228

Nick’s official website is here – https://nickgformedford.com/

Nick needs your vote on November 4th!