2025 Boulder City Council election: Where candidates stand on the council’s role in foreign affairs

In the lead-up to the Nov. 4, 2025, election, Boulder Reporting Lab asked each of the 11 city council candidates to answer our questionnaire. Their answers are presented in a random order, but you can jump to each candidate’s responses (listed alphabetically by last name): Matt Benjamin, Lauren Folkerts, Rachel Rose Isaacson, Rob Kaplan, Max Lord, Montserrat Palacios Rodarte, Jenny Robins, Nicole Speer, Rob Smoke, Aaron Stone and Mark Wallach.

Read all the responses as they’re published here. Check out the BRL Election Guide here.

For nearly two years, a group of residents has urged the Boulder City Council to take a stand on the war in Gaza. They’ve packed meetings, organized disruptions and, at times, dominated open comment, calling on the council to pass a ceasefire resolution or to divest from certain companies that operate in Israel. Some have singled out Jewish councilmembers with verbal attacks during these meetings.

The council has declined to weigh in several times. Most members have said council rules discourage such debates or that taking a position would distract from pressing local issues. In February 2024, a majority voted against considering a ceasefire resolution. A year later, they decided not to revisit the city’s investment policy to potentially exclude additional weapons makers.

Councilmembers have repeatedly changed meeting rules to curb disruptions from residents demanding they take action. Those changes include giving the city manager the power to suspend people from attending meetings for violating rules of decorum, restricting signs and flag-waving, and reducing the overall time for open comment. The most recent restrictions came after the Molotov cocktail attack on Pearl Street that killed 82-year-old Karen Diamond and injured others during the weekly Walk for Our Lives event in support of hostages still held in Gaza.

Most candidates running for city council indicated they support the council’s current approach and oppose taking a stance on the war, while supporting giving people the space to voice their opinions before council. Some argue it would open the door to weighing in on other international conflicts and that any statement would carry little practical impact. Others said the council should stay focused on local issues. At least one candidate suggested adding metal detectors at council chambers in response to the sometimes heated meetings.

At least four candidates said the council should condemn Israel’s actions in Gaza. They argue that even if Boulder’s stance won’t sway a foreign government, the council can take a moral position by divesting from companies they say are complicit in war crimes. They said the issue has generated enough local concern that the council should respond. (Note: This questionnaire was sent out and responses were received before the ceasefire deal between Israel and Hamas.)

Question: Should the Boulder City Council take positions on foreign affairs? Regardless of your answer, what actions, if any, should the city council take in response to Israel’s war in Gaza and the related disruptions and demonstrations in council chambers (e.g., open comment rules, safety, hate speech, First Amendment considerations)?

Rob Kaplan

No. Boulder City Council should stay focused on local governance, not foreign affairs. Our responsibility is to ensure safety, uphold free speech, and keep meetings productive and accessible to all.

Recently, we’ve seen troubling escalations of threats and violence against Jewish members of council and the public. Allowing hate speech and threats to go unchecked are the embers that can ignite tragedies like the June 1 attack on Pearl Street, which claimed the life of a peaceful demonstrator. The city must enforce open comment rules consistently, protect First Amendment rights, and draw a clear line: peaceful protest must be protected, but hate speech and threats of violence will not be tolerated. Given these escalating risks, I would suggest stronger security measures, including installing metal detectors at council chambers to ensure the safety of everyone who participates in our local government.

Lauren Folkerts

Yes, I believe City Council should acknowledge global events when they deeply impact our residents, while staying focused on local challenges. In this case, I believe we should condemn all violence against civilians, and stand firmly against hate. We don’t have to solve international conflicts, but we should respond publicly and swiftly so that our community feels heard and we can better focus on the substantial local, regional, and federal issues before us.

I strongly believe in the importance of the First Amendment. Protecting free speech not only reflects our values but also helps us avoid costly lawsuits if we overreach. At the same time, I support reasonable, content-neutral restrictions so that city business can move forward. That means maintaining order during meetings, ensuring everyone has an opportunity to speak, and applying our rules consistently.

Through this balanced approach of condemning violence, upholding free speech, and keeping our primary focus on Boulder’s local needs, we can honor our community’s values and move forward on the critical work of housing, climate, and safety.

Rachel Rose Isaacson

While City Council’s primary responsibility is to serve the needs of our local community, I believe there are circumstances where discussing international affairs can be appropriate. Global events often intersect with local issues such as climate change, trade policies affecting local businesses, human rights concerns, or immigration, and City Council can play a role in expressing our community’s values and advocating for responsible, ethical policy. 

Boulder is part of a global community, and international conflicts can and have reverberated deeply here. We cannot ignore the pain, fear, or anger felt by residents, and, we need to ensure that Council chambers remain safe and accessible for all.

In practice, this means upholding robust First Amendment protections during public comment while also maintaining that everyone has a chance to speak without intimidation or disruption. 

Beyond managing open comment, our role is to foster dialogue, ensure community members are heard, and focus our policymaking on keeping Boulder inclusive and safe, especially in moments when global conflict magnifies local tensions.

Jenny Robins

No, I don’t believe City Council should take positions on foreign affairs. Our responsibility is to focus on Boulder’s local needs and challenges. That said, it’s important to acknowledge that innocent people are suffering in conflicts around the world, and that is always a tragedy. Here at home, I think we need to maintain council chambers as a safe and respectful space for everyone. That means enforcing the rules of decorum that already exist and allowing people to express their views within the bounds of open comment, but stepping in when rules are broken or behavior becomes disruptive. Everyone deserves the chance to be heard, but we also need to ensure that meetings remain safe, respectful, and focused on the work of the city.

Montserrat Palacios Rodarte

No. Boulder City Council should not take positions on foreign affairs. We have very capable legislators that represent 100% of Colorado’s constituents with the Federal Government. The Congress, Senate and State Government are the right mechanisms to voice opinions and concerns about foreign affairs. City Council is frequently disrupted by out-of-topic issues, one idea that we could investigate is to have a special session once a quarter for the community to voice opinions about any topics (ie, International wars, attacks on free speech, the stock market), this measure would allow us to streamline regular sessions that are scheduled with a specific agenda in mind, and still allow the public to have a voice be heard.

Aaron Stone

Yes, we are witnessing a genocide being aided by our federal government through weapons and funding. In a recent forum, both current council members and candidates said foreign policy is out of the city’s scope. Yet, those same people pledged to protect undocumented residents during ICE raids — also a federal issue. The hypocrisy is striking.

While we cannot control federal foreign policy, we do control our investments. We have the power to divest from entities complicit in genocide and should exercise it. Council meetings must remain safe and inclusive, while I do not choose to personally disrupt council meetings, I have witnessed a council that is ignoring the people and taking active steps to silence speech. Including threatening to remove public comment and not showing video of people who are speaking. I certainly understand the passion behind why some are choosing to disrupt.

Max Lord

While I do believe as a local government we need to tend to the garden we can touch, and focus on policies that directly impact the citizens of our city, I also think part of that means listening to what our citizens want. I worked building water treatment for refugees in Burma, and I can say first hand that both sides of the conflict use technology like Toyota, and Microsoft. These are massive corporations, and while they have admittedly scrupulous ethics, overhauling our civil infrastructure to prove a point is going to cause more damage to our people than any good in the grand scheme. Still though, we can provide guidance, and moral standings. We condemn violence. We condemn harassing our public officials, we condemn attacks on our citizens, just as we condemn bombing children, or violence against people we politically disagree with. None of these acts solve problems, they add fuel to a fire. 

Matt Benjamin

I do not believe the Boulder City Council should take formal positions on foreign affairs. Our responsibility is to focus on the urgent challenges facing Boulder, housing, climate resilience, public safety, and good governance. When we wade into international conflicts, we risk dividing our community, distracting from local priorities, and making symbolic statements that do not materially affect foreign policy. 

That said, the terrorist attack in Israel and the subsequent war in Gaza has deeply impacted members of our community, and the emotions expressed in Council chambers are real and raw. Council has a duty to create a space where people can share their perspectives while also protecting safety, order, and respect in the public process. 

We must uphold the First Amendment while also speaking out against the gangrenous rise of antisemitism. We must enforce the rules that prevent disruptions, hate speech, or intimidation. City staff, Council, and the public deserve to feel safe in civic spaces. While foreign affairs should not drive Council’s policy agenda, we must remain a forum for civil discourse, protect constitutional rights, and model respect, even in moments of deep disagreement.

Rob Smoke

The world, generally speaking, understands that genocide is occurring in Gaza. How then does a super-majority of council manage to simply look away and allow itself to invalidate the legitimate feelings of psychological pain, moral injury and general distress that people are experiencing? The evidence is overwhelming — we know it’s not about Israel defending itself when tens of thousands and quite likely hundreds of thousands of Palestinians, most of them women and children, are being murdered at an industrial scale. If elected, I will immediately demand a fresh look at divestment from companies that profit from the suffering in Gaza.

Nicole Speer

Many in our community have ties to Israel or Gaza. The antisemitic attack and murder of a Jewish community member on June 1 added to the fear and pain so many are experiencing. The ongoing suffering of civilians in Gaza and the continued plight of the hostages reverberates.

A prior Council determined we could take positions on international issues if the matter significantly impacts Boulder and Council has had sufficient time and information to study. That’s a high bar, and for good reason.

I’ve advocated building a principled framework for engaging in international issues, or ending the practice altogether. Any engagement must be based on clear criteria and a predictable, transparent process that avoids bias. 

U.S. arms transfers, foreign policy, and corporate supply chains have catastrophic impacts beyond the war in Gaza (e.g., Sudan, Xinjiang, the Democratic Republic of Congo). We cannot have a double standard where Israel is the only country singled out.

Regarding disruptions, it’s important everyone has access to their local government. I’ve advocated clearer open comment rules, unbiased implementation of those rules, protections for speech and safety, and open comment time limits. It has taken time to arrive at a workable solution but we’re seeing results.

Mark Wallach

It is already enshrined in Council’s rules that we do not opine on foreign affairs, and I agree with that. It is simply not our job to become embroiled in contentious foreign affairs issues, and if we begin to do so, there is no limit to where that practice would end (the imprisonment of 1,000,000 Uyghers in labor camps in China; the death of hundreds of thousands in Syria, the destruction and mass killing in Sudan, Russia’s war against Ukraine, etc.). The thought that the rest of the world is just waiting for guidance of the Boulder City Council on these matters is hubristic and foolish.

Everyone is entitled to their beliefs on the war in Gaza and Israel’s policies, and I have no problem with individuals speaking to that subject at Open Comment, as is their constitutional right. But disruptions of the meeting, chanting, shouting and cursing have no place there. And I believe it is appropriate not to accommodate hate speech, cursing and shouting. Everyone is entitled to express their opinion, even strongly; they are not entitled to disrupt our meetings and prevent the business of Boulder from being conducted, which is our job and our obligation.