Voters in the Boston suburb of Somerville approved a nonbinding referendum last week, instructing city leaders to end business with companies that “sustain Israel’s apartheid, genocide and illegal occupation of Palestine,” the first time such a measure has passed at a US municipal ballot.
The vote on Election Day was 11,489 in favor to 7,920 against, according to the city’s unofficial results, which also note that certification typically follows within two to three weeks.
Mayor-elect Jake Wilson, who won the mayoral race the same night as Zohran Mamdani won in New York City, has cautioned that the core demand of the measure conflicts with Massachusetts procurement law. “The ballot question’s central ask … isn’t compatible with state public procurement law,” he wrote in a campaign post, citing Chapter 30B’s requirement that awards be based on quality and cost. “So I can’t support this ballot question as written.”
Wilson also told The Tufts Daily that the issue “might be best pursued at the state level, given the fact that the central asks for this are not allowed under the law,” reiterating that he cannot support it “as written.”
The ballot language is advisory, not binding on city officials, but organizers framed it as a political mandate to change city spending. A background explainer by Boston’s GBH News noted Somerville had “spent more than $1.7 million in the past decade” with Hewlett Packard, one of several firms often cited by activists in similar campaigns.
How the fight reached the ballot
Somerville’s Election Commission certified more than 8,000 signatures to place “Question 3” on the ballot after months of local organizing by Somerville for Palestine. An opposition group, Somerville United Against Discrimination (SUAD), challenged the petition and later went to court, but requests to block the measure were not successful before voting began, local outlets reported.
The Tufts Daily recapped the certification decision and the arguments on both sides, including testimony that the question was “nonbinding” and targeted corporate conduct rather than identity or nationality.
In election-night and post-vote statements, opponents said the margin was not a broad mandate and argued the question will neither help Palestinians nor unify the city. Boston.com quoted AJC New England calling the measure ineffective and SUAD saying the result “is clearly not the mandate supporters … have claimed.”
Organizers, for their part, have described the campaign as the next step after a city ceasefire resolution, an attempt to use local purchasing and investment as leverage. Truthout published a detailed account of the coalition’s strategy, quoting State Rep. Erika Uyterhoeven, a Somerville for Palestine organizer, on moving from resolutions to “divestment and boycott” that target weapons and surveillance companies.
Even with voter approval, the text is advisory and any practical change would have to comply with state law. Wilson’s campaign memo points to Chapter 30B as limiting the city’s ability to disqualify bidders for political reasons, since contracts must be awarded based on price and quality. His comments indicate the city is unlikely to enact a categorical boycott policy that conflicts with those rules.
The city’s election page stresses results are still unofficial and that certification usually occurs two to three weeks after Election Day, which was Tuesday, November 4. Only then do results become final.
While several US cities and universities have considered similar proposals, the Somerville vote is notable because it succeeded at the ballot box. Local coverage emphasized both the symbolic nature of the question and the legal friction around implementation. Cambridge Day noted the lawsuit by SUAD and reported Wilson’s view, stated during the campaign, that the measure as drafted was not legal to implement.
Since Election Day, Wilson has repeated that his administration will focus on lawful governance and open communication while acknowledging community divisions over Question 3. The Tufts Daily’s post-election piece on Wednesday, quoted him saying he is “looking forward to getting to work for the people” and will “hit the ground running on Day One in January,” while again flagging the legal limits on Question 3.