Important TIAA update//Restarting the campaign!

Social Choice for Social Change: Campaign for a New TIAA-CREF

Dear Campaign Supporters:

You may have noticed that our updates have been far less frequent these past months. And, most updates have focused more on the work of the larger TC (TIAA-CREF) coalition of which we are a part than on our positive investing efforts. The reason, as you know, is that a year ago we moved into a stage of cooperation with TC which they initiated.

As a result of our dialogue with TC representatives, we made some progress over the last year—but not as much as we would have liked, and TC reneged on some commitments that were made. In an effort to turn up the heat once again, we recently sent the CEO the letter below (slightly edited a little here). Unfortunately, the deadline for their response passed, and so our Steering Committee has decided to restart the campaign in earnest.

In the near future, we will resume our aggressive media strategy of informing reporters about TC’s hypocrisy on this and related matters. We also will be slowly gearing up other activities, such as leafletting at TC-related events and demonstrating at various venues (including residences of TC officers or trustees, if need be). Though we regret the need for such actions, we feel we have been jilted. Nevertheless, we will continue to be forthright in our dealings with TC and the media.

We will also be calling upon you, again, for participation. Restarting the campaign is unpleasant in a number of ways: it means more work for us (as in the past), and it means confrontation. But we must “keep our eyes on the prize”: our proposal would (a) create low-income housing; (b) push TC to vote proxies in a way that can positively influence corporations; and (c) direct investment toward socially responsible business ventures that would benefit individuals and society.

We have influenced TC before on several matters: twenty years ago we pushed them to create the Social Choice Account. We can make a change again, with your continued commitment and participation at whatever level is feasible for you. We will be in touch asking you to take specific actions. We’re in it for the long haul.

Best wishes,

Neil

Neil Wollman, Co-Chair

MC Box 135

Manchester College

North Manchester, IN 46962

nwollman@bentley.edu

260-982-5346

April 1, 2005

Herbert Allison

CEO and Chairman

TIAA-CREF

Dear Mr. Allison:

Because we are in a critical stage of discussions between TIAA-CREF and the Social Choice for Social Change (SCSC) campaign, I am writing you directly on behalf of our group rather than using the usual channel of communication. In a March 18 telephone conversation, Mr. Bert Scott described a few steps taken by TIAA-CREF regarding socially responsible investing. However, Mr. Scott’s status report did not address our concerns raised over the last few years and in our communications of February 14 and February 5 (see both messages below). On good faith, we essentially ended our lobbying efforts a year ago after TIAA-CREF promised to seriously address our concerns. However, we have continued to hear only promises and have seen few concrete results. For example, Mr. Scott told us to be patient and we would not be disappointed. He has also noted on more than one occasion that if what we want is “doable,” TIAA-CREF will find a way to make it happen. As noted below, what we seek is quite doable. Also, at the June 2004 annual meeting, you stated that TIAA-CREF would look for ways to incorporate community investment into the Social Choice Account (SCA). We have met our part of the “bargain” by refraining from more assertive tactics, but we have very little to show for it.

As noted in the correspondence below, our preference remains for a TIAA-CREF-sponsored resolution on the 2005 ballot that includes three components for the SCA: shareholder advocacy voting (and quiet diplomacy with portfolio companies); community investing (as commonly defined by the SRI industry); and social venture capital/private equity. It is not clear to us why this is no longer possible—why “the window of opportunity has closed” and we needed to wait for the 2006 ballot, as asserted by Mr. Scott in the March 18 conversation. It was months ago that we mutually acknowledged the need for such a resolution if community investing was to be incorporated into the SCA, and we offered to help with the necessary research. Mr. Scott has stated that TIAA-CREF is in “conceptual” agreement with this approach, and Mr. Evans said he would support a proxy resolution that would be mutually agreed upon by TIAA-CREF management and the SCSC campaign. We have pointed out that what we desire has been done by other SRI mutual funds and, thus, is both reasonable and feasible. However, a conference call in January between representatives of our group and TIAA-CREF vice presidents revealed that necessary background research had not been done that would allow for introducing such a resolution.

Given that the annual meeting is scheduled for July 19, there must be at least two months time left to draft a resolution, even considering the time needed for ballot preparation and distribution. We can provide sufficient background research for a proposal, with details of investment logistics to be handled later. We are also aware that approval of at least two shareholder introduced resolutions for 2005 is still under discussion. This suggests that in fact there is time for TIAA-CREF to introduce an additional resolution.

If you remain firm in your contention that a resolution is not possible for this year’s annual meeting, we see but one other option to avoid going public again with our concerns about SRI and TIAA-CREF’s failure to follow through on its stated commitments. Though it is decidedly not our preference, we would settle for a statement, in writing, from you on behalf of TIAA-CREF, that a TIAA-CREF sponsored resolution will be on the ballot for 2006 that includes community investing, shareholder advocacy voting and dialogue with companies, and social venture capital/private equity. (The second message below lays out our specific interests along those lines; we realize that some particular concerns about social venture capital/private equity must still be addressed.) This would give TIAA-CREF an entire year to work with us to prepare the resolution. We would additionally expect TIAA-CREF to start moving quickly, presumably after the new SCA manager is hired, to insure that background research is completed, the resolution is drafted, and planning for implementation begins. As plans progress, we will mutually address how best to handle specifics of the resolution in order to meet everyone's concerns. (Of course, we would also appreciate a good-faith effort to heighten TIAA-CREF’s social responsibility in other ways, such as incorporating standard SRI-field community investment into the TIAA Traditional Account and further integrating TIAA-CREF into the SRI community.)

If we do not hear a positive response from you within the next two weeks, we will interpret this as a lack of commitment on your part, and we will actively resume our campaign sometime in April. For by the 2006 annual meeting, over two years and three annual meetings will have transpired since we halted the campaign. If we do not see results by then, we must conclude that we were wrong to trust TIAA-CREF’s statements and cease our campaign in the first place. Note that I am speaking here on behalf of SCSC, not for the entire “Make TIAA-CREF Ethical” coalition we are a part of; though it is possible that we will seek to bring them and their participation on board if we must restart the campaign.

Sincerely,

Neil Wollman, Ph.D.

Co-Chair, Social Choice for Social Change

Senior Fellow, Peace Studies Institute

Professor of Psychology

Manchester College

CC. Bertram Scott, Scott Evans, Joann Mahoney