Wall Street Climate Semantics Skew Fossil-Fuel Financing Votes

The environmental group that authored a key proposal against fossil-fuel financing said pushback from the banks it targeted helped ensure the resolution failed.

Sierra Club has been pressing Wells Fargo & Co., Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley to stop funding new fossil-fuel supply projects, including coal plants, and endorsed similar proposals for Citigroup Inc. and Bank of America Corp. None of the resolutions received shareholder support of more than 15% during voting last week.

While the banks were asked by Sierra Club and other investors to end the financing of new fossil-fuel developments, the industry presented the idea as a request to immediately cut funding for all oil, gas and coal projects, said Ben Cushing, the Washington-based manager of Sierra Club’s campaign.

“The people conflating those things know better and are smart enough to know the difference,” he said in an interview. “It is hard to see how it isn't a deliberate and willful misrepresentation.”

Just under 13% of Citigroup shareholders voted in favor of the Sierra Club measure, according to a preliminary tally at the company’s annual meeting. At Bank of America and Wells Fargo, the proposals each drew 11% of votes in support.

In trying to explain to shareholders why she thought the resolution should be voted down, Citigroup Chief Executive Officer Jane Fraser said it “isn't feasible for the global economy or for human health or livelihoods to shut down the fossil-fuel economy overnight.”

Wells Fargo told shareholders that passing the resolution “would effectively preclude us from offering general purpose loans to the oil and gas sector,” while Bank of America CEO Brian Moynihan said the bank will continue to monitor client relationships and portfolios to help the transition.

“We work with CEOs and other companies around the world to help that transition take place,” he said. “We’ll continue to do so.”