U of M votes against Israel divestment and future divestment proposals

The University of Minnesota’s Board of Regents voted Tuesday to reject student calls for divestment from Israel — and to block most future student divestment campaigns.

The resolution commits the board to “neutrality” in its investments. The university will consider only financial reasons — not social or political ones — when deciding where to invest its $2.27 billion endowment.

Board chair Janie Mayeron said the policy will allow the university to focus solely on finances without curtailing students’ ability to voice opinions. 

“It does not address the right and ability of anybody in our university community to express their views in a variety of ways, including protests,” Mayeron said. “We are anticipating that there will be dialogue, there will be protests, and we encourage that.”

Dozens of student and community protesters attended the meeting. As the board deliberated, protesters held up signs that said “vote no,” and “there is no neutrality in genocide.” After the vote, regents exited the room to chants of “shame, shame.” 

Students said the vote was a disappointment after the extensive protests for divestment in the spring semester. In April, students took to the U of M’s Northrop Mall with tents, joining student encampment movements nationwide. Nine people, most students or recent students, were arrested during those protests. 

Student organizers struck a deal with administrators in May to end their encampment. In exchange, the university agreed to disclose its investments in Israel, which it did a week later. Students from the pro-divestment coalition, and from anti-divestment Jewish student organizations, were also given a chance to speak at a Board of Regents meeting in May. 

But junior Fae Hodges said, with the passage of the investment neutrality resolution, student protesters are feeling cut out of communication following their agreement in May.

“The board and the administration have continued to show us that they will take every avenue possible to stall or block our proposal, even after claiming to work with us in good faith,” Hodges said.

Students from Minnesota Hillel, a Jewish student organization, had previously spoken out against the divestment proposal.

“My honest reaction is relief,” Hillel student president Alex Stewart said after the vote. “I am proud of the university's commitment to listening to Jewish students and hearing our voices. I am proud of the Jewish student leaders who met with university leadership and who continue to advocate for our campus community.”

The neutrality resolution directs the president to establish an official process for future divestment proposals. Any requests will need to show that the investments are “fundamentally incompatible with the university’s core mission and values,” and demonstrate a “broad consensus” on the issue — not only on campus, but also state- and nationwide.

The resolution notes that all previous divestment decisions stand. Most recently, in 2021, the board agreed to phase out investments in fossil fuels. In 2007, it pulled funding from companies operating in Sudan during a genocide; in the 1980s, the university divested from apartheid in South Africa.

Hodges said the new policy will be a barrier for future student movements. They noted that “broad consensus” is rare, including in previous divestment decisions.

“There was a lot of political turmoil on campus when those issues were voted on,” Hodges said. “This policy is damaging the university’s ability to be a progressive space, for them to be a leader on social issues like they claim they want to be.”

The board’s vote was nearly unanimous, with eight in favor and one against. Three regents were absent. 

Regent Robyn Gulley was the sole “no” vote. Before voting on the resolution, she proposed an amendment to scratch the commitment to “neutrality” and instead vote only to reject the proposal for divestment from Israel. 

“This clearly identifies ways that we’ve made decisions about our endowment in the past, and calls those out specifically in order to protect them,” Gulley said. “I really feel challenged by using the word ‘neutrality’ in this way. It kind of makes my brain spin to try to figure out how we’re neutral and how we have other positions that are not neutral.”

Gulley’s amendment received no other votes.

University President Rebecca Cunningham, who took up the position this summer, said she’s been working to prepare for responses to any student protests this year, following last spring’s demonstrations around divestment.

“We’ll continue to work closely with our student groups as well as our faculty and staff throughout the fall semester so that together we can cultivate a safe and welcoming environment for everyone, while ensuring voices and ideas can be freely expressed,” Cunningham said. 

Students said they’ll continue organizing as fall semester classes begin, though this marked the end of their work towards divestment. 

“I don’t think we are interested in going through the proper channels when those are set up for us to fail,” Hodges said. “It’s disappointing, but if anything I think it will mobilize more students to make their voices heard, because this affects students’ ability to voice their concerns on any issue, social or political, that relates to the endowment.”