SALT LAKE CITY -- Union Pacific Corp. shareholders rejected a proposal last week to force the company to make regular disclosures of political contributions in reports separate from government filings.

The proposal, made by New York City public workers with pension investments in Union Pacific, was defeated by more than 2-to-1 in a shareholder-weighted vote.

Company directors and officers urged the defeat, saying they contribute corporate funds by policy and not by whim, and that they provide enough disclosure to the Federal Elections Commission, which enforces federal campaign finance laws, and state agencies.

The New York City pension funds -- for teachers, police, firefighters and other public employees -- said that FEC filings disclose only the company's federal donations, while state disclosure laws vary. They sought complete disclosure so shareholders can easily evaluate the political use of corporate funds at once.

The New York group offered a figure for Union Pacific's political contributions -- $820,522 during the 2003-04 election cycle -- that couldn't be immediately verified or explained by the Center for Public Integrity in Washington, D.C., which was credited with providing the information.

The center's database editor, Daniel Lathrop, said he didn't know how the New York group added up that figure, but he offered a set of different numbers: Union Pacific's political-action committee gave $1.6 million in voluntary employee donations to candidates for federal office in the 2003-04 election cycle.

Also during the same period, Union Pacific gave $237,000 in corporate donations almost evenly to Republican and Democratic governors' associations, he said.

In another snapshot in time, from 2000-2004, Union Pacific gave $462,000 in corporate donations to 527 groups, which can't give money directly to candidates but can promote their causes.

Shareholders also rejected a proposal that would have required Union Pacific to hire its next board chairman from outside the company. That proposal was made by the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, which has pension interests in Union Pacific.

The Teamsters union, which represents locomotive engineers and others at Union Pacific, also used the meeting to raise a concern about a "glaring lack of security" along rail lines that span Chicago to Los Angeles. The union said rail cars, especially chemical tankers, were vulnerable terrorist targets.

"Since 9-11 we've worked diligently on security," Union Pacific Chairman Dick Davidson said. He offered no elaboration other than to say Union Pacific's efforts had been commended by the Homeland Security Department.

One shareholder proposal, changing the way board directors are elected, was approved.

Offered by the Sheet Metal Workers, it calls for Union Pacific directors to earn the votes of a majority of all shareholders, and not just a majority of the shareholders who voted.

In other action, company officials gave a financial report for 2005, when net income topped $1 billion, up from $604 million in 2004.

"This is the strongest balance sheet we've had in 20 years," said Jim Young, Union Pacific's new chief executive and president.

The company earned $311 million in the first quarter of 2006, a year when Young predicted revenue would grow by 12 percent, as the railroad moves more coal out of Wyoming. Shipments also are up for ethanol from the Midwest, agriculture products, lumber, cement, steel and other materials.

Railroads handle 40 percent of the nation's freight and are three times more energy efficient "than trucks on the highway," Young said.

The sparsely attended shareholders' meeting was held by tradition in Salt Lake City, where Union Pacific was incorporated, even though company headquarters are in Omaha, Neb.