The recent controversy surrounding a proposed referendum that would ban the city of Pittsburgh from doing business with companies with ties to Israel during the Gaza war has pitted representatives of the Jewish community against some city employees and the elected officials they serve.

About a dozen employees — from Mayor Ed Gainey’s administration and council members — signed the petition. Some opponents called it anti-Semitic and said it could have devastating consequences for city operations.

But city officials and First Amendment advocates stressed that their employees could express their political views without fear of reprisal – even though one of them, the mayor’s communications director, who signed the petition, resigned in the midst of the dispute.

“It is important to reaffirm my administration’s commitment to supporting the full civil and political rights of our people, who are free to represent their interests, whether or not their views align with mine,” Gainey said in a statement. “I will always defend their freedom to participate in our democracy and express their moral and political beliefs.”

Maria Montaño, who served as Gainey’s communications director for two and a half years, resigned this week.

She did not respond to several messages requesting comment.

In a statement, Gainey said the war in Gaza was a volatile issue that had created new divisions between and within communities.

“As mayor, my priority is the safety of every resident and creating unity,” he said.

In his statement, Gainey praised his efforts to listen to members of the Palestinian, Muslim and Jewish communities while negotiating a solution to the camp at the University of Pittsburgh earlier this year. He also condemned anti-Semitic acts.

“Maria’s decision to step down from her post was her own and reflects her selfless desire to keep the administration focused on the necessary work and mission of creating a safe and welcoming city for all,” Gainey said.

The mayor did not respond to several emailed inquiries.

At a press conference earlier Thursday, he refused to answer reporters’ questions on the issue, referring them only to the upcoming statement.

On Tuesday, the Jewish Federation of Greater Pittsburgh and the City of Pittsburgh Auditor’s Office filed a lawsuit in Allegheny County District Court challenging the referendum petition.

A hearing on this issue is scheduled for Monday.

In their court filings, they argue that the proposed ballot question is too broad, violates state law by discriminating against Israel, and that the petitions do not have a sufficient number of qualified signatories.

Opponents of the referendum said the city’s ability to provide essential services such as public safety and health care could be seriously compromised.

“We care about the impact – how it would affect the Jewish community and the city as a whole,” said Laura Cherner, the association’s director of public relations.

Jeremy Kazzaz, executive director of the Beacon Coalition, a nonpartisan Jewish advocacy group, said his organization has mobilized volunteers to review signatures on the petition for possible objections.

During that review, it was discovered that about a dozen city employees, including staff members of Councilwoman Barb Warwick and employees of Gainey’s administration, had signed the bill.

The city employs about 3,600 people.

“We are disappointed by the silence and involvement of the Gainey administration and Barb Warwick’s staff in this dangerous action,” Kazzaz said.

While the Jewish Federation’s main goal is to prevent the referendum question from getting on the ballot, Cherner said she also wants to know whether the city employees who signed the petition represent the officials they work for.

“Nobody has explained this to us directly,” Cherner said. “When you work in government or in a position where you advise an elected official, the policy decisions you make are representative of the official.”

Are these signatures, she continued, an approval of the referendum?

“I think it’s up to officials to really clarify and act accordingly when their staff takes that view,” Cherner said.

The fact that the referendum could potentially lead to the closure of city businesses makes its signing by city employees all the more worrying, she continued.

But Warwick said in a statement that her employees were free to engage in political activities even after working hours.

“And quite frankly, as their employer, I find it disturbing to be contacted about such a passive and peaceful action as signing a referendum,” she said. “It is completely understandable and human to want an end to this war.

“But attacking the livelihoods of individual Pittsburghers because they express their opinions in one way or another is a dark road, and I sincerely hope none of us would want to go down it.”

Witold Walczak, legal director of the American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania, said Thursday that simply working for the government does not mean a person gives up their rights under the First Amendment.

But there may be limits, he said.

If an employee’s comments undermine important interests of the employer, he or she could face disciplinary action, Walczak said.

However, he does not believe that this is the case in this case.

“It’s a balancing act. What is the interest of the government employer versus the importance of the speech?”

By signing the petition, Walczak said, one is essentially making a comment on foreign policy – ​​a fundamental political statement.

“Whether you call it anti-Semitic or not, it is clearly protected by the First Amendment,” he said. “There is no First Amendment exception for anti-Semitic, racist or misogynistic speech.”

“If you live in Pittsburgh and have the right to sign, I can’t imagine a scenario where a government employer could fire or discipline an employee for signing a petition.”