Peace has broken out at, of all places, New Haven’s Peace Commission. Over a chicken breast sandwich at Clark’s Pizza & Restaurant, the two guys pictured here patched up a spat — and produced a far-ranging new proposal that comes up for a vote Tuesday night. The proposal would steer the city toward thinking about a better world when it invests public money.
The chicken breast sandwich was consumed by East Rock Alderman Ed Mattison (shown in top photo). He met Peace Commission boss Al Marder (shown in other photo) for lunch last Friday to discuss their ongoing disagreement over a Commission-backed bill to have New Haven divest all its pension money from companies that produce nuclear weapons.
Mattison agreed with the bill’s sentiment, but criticized Marder and the commission for failing to produce data on how such a bill would affect city workers’ pension benefits. Mattison also called the bill poorly thought-out, leaving open the question of what other causes the city should support in its investment decisions.
The disagreement brought to the surface the frustrations some aldermen have had about the Commission’s work. It also led to a stinging article in the Advocate.
During last Friday’s lunch, the two discussed Mattison’s desire for a more comprehensive approach. They decided the city should look beyond the nuclear weapons issue and beyond pension investments. They came up with a proposal to have the city examine whether it can steer all its investments to socially responsible funds, which deal with issues ranging from environmental protection and nuclear power and globalization to military foreign policy.
The movement goes by names such as “shareholder action,” “shareholder activism,” “socially responsible investing,” and “mission-based investing.” Click here and scroll to page 6 for a summary.
Mattison plans to introduce the new version as an amendment when the original proposal comes up for a vote before the Board of Aldermen at its Tuesday night meeting. Marder plans to support it. After all, it goes well beyond what he introduced in the first place.
The proposal also satisfies Mattison’s original concerns. It doesn’t commit the city to switching its investments yet. It would gather information on what other cities, like Oakland, have done in this area. It would look at which investment funds truly support socially responsible causes and which are phonies. And it would lead to an investment strategy that would phase in gradually and protect the returns on the city’s money.
“We’ve got to figure out the practicalities. This is a long-term thing, not a one-shot,” Mattison said. “We can’t screw the pensioners.”
