June 2008

Update on 2008 shareholder resolutions

Arch Coal: the company challenged the resolution at the SEC and prevailed. The resolution will not be on the proxy for a vote this year. Whether the resolution can be changed enough to withstand another challenge next year is being studied.

Caterpillar: a dialogue was held with the company in late January about its code of business conduct and human rights. The resolution was withdrawn following agreement with the company on holding an ecumenical dialogue on the relationship between the company’s code, human rights and the end-use of company products. A date in July 2008 is being explored for the dialogue. The resolution may be refiled next year, or another dialogue can be held on a topic of our choosing.

ConocoPhillips: the shareholder resolution was filed requesting the company to set a goal for greenhouse gas emissions reductions. The company initially did not respond to a request for dialogue. Following contact with a member of the company’s board of directors, the company’s legal department contacted New Covenant Funds to set up a meeting. This provided valuable information on the company’s programs related to climate change. There was still no indication of setting a reduction target, so the resolution was left on the proxy. At the annual meeting on May 14, the resolution was supported by 29.38 percent of the shareholders, a very strong vote.

Dominion Resources: the resolution was withdrawn following agreement by the company to produce the requested report on climate change policy, impact on the company and strategies for reducing risk.

FirstEnergy: the resolution was withdrawn following agreement by the company that it would produce the requested report on climate change efforts and energy efficiency and, following dialogue, agreement on the subjects to be covered in the report. The first draft of the report is due in November with the final report ready for posting on the company Web site in December.

ITT Industries: the resolution requesting information on foreign military sales was filed. The company challenged the resolution at the SEC. While waiting several weeks for a SEC decision, the company finally contacted the shareholders to accept the request for a dialogue. A dialogue was held on March 4 at the ITT offices. The company would not discuss the substance of the resolution and wanted to focus the discussion on its rewritten ethical principles that will be rolled out later this spring. Shareholders agreed not to withdraw the resolution. Subsequently, the SEC ruled in favor of the shareholders. The resolution received 7.41 percent of the vote at the company’s annual meeting on May 13, 2008.

Mattel: the resolution was withdrawn following agreement by the company that a section on product safety would be included in their next corporate responsibility report.

Motorola: the shareholder resolution requesting a review of the company’s human rights policy was filed. Several religious organizations co-filed the resolution. A dialogue was held in early January where the company told the filers that it was in the process of reviewing its policies, but no information about what the review might produce was shared. Also, the company admitted that the policy would not apply to its business dealings with governments. The filers agreed that the resolution should not be withdrawn. On May 5, the resolution went to a vote at the annual meeting and received 12.94 percent of the vote, a good vote for a human rights resolution.