Dear Members of the Brown Community,

On Monday, Sept. 30, Brown’s Advisory Committee on University Resources Management (ACURM) submitted to me its report regarding the student-led proposal asking that Brown divest from a set of 10 companies described as “facilitating the Israeli occupation of Palestinian Territory.” This concludes the first step of a long-standing process Brown has followed, since the 1970s, in considering proposals for divestment submitted by members of our community.

ACURM, a committee composed of faculty, students, staff and alumni, is responsible for reviewing whether the investment and expenditure of the University’s financial resources is conducted with “ethical and moral standards consistent with the University’s mission and values.” After my initial review of the report, I am writing to inform the Brown community that ACURM has completed its work in line with its charge, and I am proceeding with the next step of formally submitting ACURM’s report to Brown’s highest governing body, the Corporation of Brown University, for a vote that will take place later this month.

We know that many members of the Brown community have a strong interest in the content of ACURM’s report, and as I wrote in my Aug. 1 communication to the campus, we are committed to making ACURM’s report public. Consistent with past practice, the report will be shared later this month at the same time that the Corporation’s decision on divestment is announced. The ACURM report will remain confidential until released in the context of the final Corporation vote on the question of divestment. 

This aligns with established University processes for recommendations from advisory bodies, working groups, task forces and committees charged by the president to put forth a recommendation on matters of concern to the campus community. The administration typically releases recommendations alongside actions to be taken on those recommendations, or in some instances, to seek input to inform a process for pursuing action steps. In this case, further input is not being sought. ACURM completed a robust process for collecting community input and feedback in developing its report, and there are clear next steps in Brown’s long-standing process for considering proposals for divestment. It is the role of the president to decide to forward the committee opinion for a Corporation vote, which I committed to do in the spring. 

Maintaining the confidentiality of the ACURM report until the vote should help minimize the likely proliferation of misinformation — including any premature and unfounded claims about the direction of a Corporation vote that has not yet taken place — while also safeguarding against activity that may be harmful to the well-being of members of our community. 

The remainder of this letter offers an update on the process to date, and outlines next steps for the Corporation’s consideration of this issue.

ACURM’S Work Now Complete

The Sept. 30 delivery of ACURM’s report to my office completed the committee’s work. Throughout August and September, ACURM led an independent process to engage the community as it considered the student-led Brown Divest Coalition proposal submitted to the committee in July. The detailed guidance I provided to ACURM this summer as it embarked on its charge remains available online.

I want to express my deep gratitude to all the committee members for their thoughtful efforts to manage an inclusive process that included engaging with students in support of and opposed to divestment, as well as other members of the Brown community and interested members of the public. The committee’s approach reflects Brown’s decades-long commitment to encouraging open discourse on difficult issues. 

I continue to remind our community that the path we are following is not new. For decades, through ACURM and its predecessor committees, any member of the community may submit a proposal for divestment. As part of the agreement reached with students to peacefully end the unauthorized encampment on the College Green in April, the students agreed to pursue this well-established process for consideration of any divestment proposal, and I agreed to forward ACURM’s recommendation to the Corporation.

But it’s worth noting that this process would not be possible without the commitment of faculty, students, staff and alumni on ACURM who are willing to play an important role in helping our community perform a close examination of proposals the committee receives. This becomes particularly difficult on issues where individuals hold deeply-held beliefs and sharply contrasting views. I want to thank all of ACURM’s members for their part in bringing clarity to an open and divisive question that has been the focus of significant community interest at Brown for years.

Next Steps: Corporation Consideration of ACURM Report

In preparation for receiving ACURM’s report, the Corporation over the summer and early fall reviewed issues of law, ethics, governance, financial and investment policy, and fiduciary obligation. This included preparing to review ACURM’s report in line with the committee’s charge, to:

“…balance the gravity of the social harm, the potential effectiveness of various means of influencing relevant policy or conduct, the University’s need to maintain a sound financial policy, and the consistency of various proposed recommendations with the maintenance of an environment at Brown conducive to teaching and scholarly inquiry, including the Corporation Statement on Academic Freedom for Faculty and Students.”

In the coming weeks, the Corporation will carefully review ACURM’s report and the materials prepared by students in favor of and opposed to divestment. After further deliberation, the Corporation will vote on whether or not to accept ACURM’s advisory opinion. I anticipate that the Corporation’s decision will be made public some days after the vote, providing time for trustees and fellows to participate in the development of a statement about the decision prior to dissemination. 

The Corporation remains committed to a fair and balanced review that is well-informed by perspectives of members of the Brown community, and that preserves the integrity of Brown’s long-standing processes and policies surrounding board governance. 

In Conclusion

I understand that the coming weeks for those in our community with strong views on all sides of the divestment issue may continue to bring to the forefront sharp differences in perspectives. I remain committed to respecting a process Brown has maintained for almost 50 years, and to holding a vote that will bring clarity to our community on the divestment question. 

Brown has a strong history of doing the hard work to tackle difficult issues, and it’s important that we remain true to our values of open discourse and respect for others as we confront those issues.

Sincerely,

Christina H. Paxson
President