Why? The story explains it fairly clearly.
The language is reflective of a law passed in the last legislative session that prohibits all state agencies from contracting with or investing in companies that boycott Israel. The law, which is similiar to laws in at least a dozen other states, took effect Sept. 1.
In other words, if you boycott Israel the state will boycott your company. I would suggest what happened here was that this town's attorney inserted a standard clause in there without really checking to see if the law applies to individuals as opposed to businesses.
This kind of thing should not exist in the free markets or for the individual. There is no reasonable situation for US citizens to support Israel in order to get disaster relief funds. With a free market I should be able to do what I want with the business as long as I am not breaking any laws or abusing my staff. This puts that into law.
But if this was put in and without any checking to see if it can be applied, means that these people have no idea how to govern and this is something else. Almost snuck in there hoping people would not notice, or they would be desperate enough to sign off on it.
If I chose to boycott Israel , that's my choice as the owner of the business. This is a government clause which forces you to support Israel in order to get your funds to rebuild your home in Texas because it was destroyed in a natural disaster. Imagine if the nation was Russia, or Saudi Arabia, or any other nation for that matter.
This goes against the first amendment. As businesses are treated as individuals and as real people. That's just how it is in the US. Maybe there really is no 'free market' in the US anymore.