Washington, D.C. 20549
Dear Fellow Shareholder:March 2, 2022
We are focused on creating long-term valueTo our stakeholders,
2021 can be summarized as a year of records for Duke Realty Corporation. At year-end, we achieved eight new record highs for various financial, operating and earnings metrics. This is particularly impressive when you and allconsider Duke Realty’s already strong performance over the last three years. I am most proud of our stakeholders.record-breaking Total Shareholder Return (TSR) of 67.8 percent for 2021. Once again, we were ranked in the top 20 percent of all equity REITs in the United States. Our 10-year TSR is 686.7 percent and ranks 7th among all equity REITs and we have repeatedly beat the RMS (composite index of all REITs) and the S&P 500 on a trailing 3-, 5- and 10-year basis.
A great deal of our success and positive outlook for future growth can be attributed to our new development activity. In 2021, we started $1.4 billion of new LEED® certified development projects across the U.S. — a company record. This was an increase of over 75 percent from 2020. We appreciatewere also able to significantly improve our development margins and realize substantial value creation on development deliveries. Our current development pipeline and our development platform overall are expected to be significant contributors to future earnings growth.
One of the trust you placekey drivers to our increased development volume was our leasing activity. We set another all-time high by completing 33.5 million square feet of lease transactions. This record volume was driven by voracious demand for state-of-the-art logistics space and the high-quality projects we own and continue to develop.
Our portfolio occupancy was another highlight for Duke Realty in us2021. Even with our elevated new development volumes, we improved the two key occupancy metrics we track over prior year levels. Our total in-service portfolio and our stabilized in-service portfolio reached record levels of 98.1 percent and 98.7 percent leased, respectively — both 60 basis points increases over 2020.
In 2021, we continued to oversee your interestsimprove the quality of our portfolio in several significant areas. We increased the Net Operating Income (NOI) in our businesscoastal tier 1 markets to 43 percent of our total NOI, up from 37 percent in 2020. This is critical to our future growth, as these markets continue to have the highest rent growth and would likelowest vacancies in the nation.
Additionally, we executed several important transactions to highlight somemanage our growing Amazon portfolio. For more than 15 years, we have had a great partnership with Amazon, leasing and developing many of their projects across the actionscountry. In late 2020, Amazon represented 10 percent of our NOI. As prudent stewards of our portfolio, we tookdeveloped a strategy to reduce our Amazon NOI to a range between four and seven percent of total NOI. In 2021, we sold six projects and contributed seven projects into a newly formed joint venture with CBRE Global Investors. We retained a 20 percent interest in 2019the joint venture and will continue to manage the beginningproperties and maintain our strong and valued relationship with Amazon. These transactions brought our exposure to Amazon down to 5.9 percent of thisour NOI by year-end.
With these record drivers, it’s no surprise that we grew our diluted net income per share to $2.25 and Core Funds From Operations (FFO)* to $1.73 per share. This represents an increase of 181 percent and just under 14 percent, respectively, from 2020. Additionally, we grew our Adjusted Funds From Operations (AFFO)* by 11.6 percent on a share adjusted basis and increased our common dividend to $1.045 per share. This was an 8.9 percent increase in our dividend and was the seventh year to help ensure we create value over the long term.in a row that Duke Realty increased its dividend.
Corporate Responsibility
Atresponsibility is key to our culture and once again we made great strides in environmental stewardship, social responsibility and high corporate governance standards in 2021. During the end of 2019,year, we hired a Vice President of Corporate Responsibility, whose sole responsibility will becontinued our commitment to leadthe environment and sustainability by issuing two more green bonds totaling $950 million to fund our effortsnew LEED certified development projects. Duke Realty was the first industrial logistics REIT in all facets of environmental, social,the U.S. to issue green bonds in 2019. I hope you’ll read Dave Stockert’s letter, which covers our many achievements including carbon neutrality goals, diversity, equity and governance (ESG)inclusion initiatives, and the implementation ofour continued commitment to sustainability.
•LEED®, and its related strategies, policies, communications, and processes. We also committed to integrating innovative, sustainable building design features in alignment with LEED®, including constructing to LEED criteria and achieving certification in all new developments pursuant to a Sustainable Development Policy. LEED® - an acronym for Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design™ -logo, is a registered trademark ofowned by the U.S. Green Building Council®.Council® and is used with permission.
Our balance sheet is the foundation of our company’s ability to perform and grow. Despite all the capital investment in acquisitions and new development, we were able to strengthen our balance sheet. We improved our fixed-charge coverage ratio* to 6.2 times from 5.6 times and we reduced our net debt to EBITDA ratio* to 5.0 times from 5.2 times. The results of our continued solid balance sheet management were recognized early in 2022 when Duke Realty received a rating outlook upgrade from S&P Global from stable to positive.
I would be remiss if I didn’t give credit for all the record achievements to our associates across the country. Working through the second year of a global pandemic, we were able to start 33 new development projects, acquire ten assets, sell 31 assets and complete 275 leases. Simply put, our associates continued to step up and overcome all the obstacles our country is experiencing. We dealt with a pandemic, labor shortages, rising inflation and supply chain issues and none of that kept our teams from achieving a record-setting year.
At this year’s annual meeting, we will say goodbye to board member Mike Szymanczyk. Mike has served on our board for ten years, and I’m grateful for all his advice and counsel over those years. I would like to personally thank Mike for his exemplary service.
2022 is Duke Realty’s golden anniversary. As we head into our 50th year, our outlook for the future has never been brighter. Logistics demand should remain at elevated levels for the foreseeable future. Driven by continued e-commerce growth and consumer spending, combined with record low vacancy rates, the industry should continue to experience significant rent growth. We expect demand and infrastructure spending to allow Duke Realty to continue to create substantial value in our new development activities across the country.
Duke Realty has the depth of experience and leadership talent to maintain our top-tier performance. We’ll continue to invest in our associates, improve the environment and the communities where we live and work. We’ve been around 50 years and are looking forward to what we can accomplish for all of our stakeholders in the next 50 years.
Thank you for your continued investment in and support of Duke Realty Corporation.
Sincerely,
James B. Connor
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
* Core FFO and AFFO are non-GAAP metrics. In addition, the fixed charge coverage ratio and net debt to EBITDA ratio are calculated using non-GAAP financial measures. See Appendix A for more information about non-GAAP financial measures used in November 2019,this proxy statement, including a reconciliation to the most comparable measure calculated in accordance with GAAP.
March 2, 2022
To our stakeholders,
In 2021, Duke Realty continued our focus on environmental stewardship, social responsibility and governance (ESG), further securing our standing as an example to others in our industry. To demonstrate our ongoing commitment to ESG, we wereupdated our vision statement to incorporate sustainability: “Delivering Sustainable Excellence in Logistics Real Estate.”
A LEADER IN ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP
We received top recognition in our sector from GRESB, the gold standard for ESG benchmarking and reporting. GRESB ranked Duke Realty top among peers, earning Sector Leader in the Development Benchmark, and awarded us four Green Stars for our outstanding performance in ESG and sustainable development practices. Duke Realty’s 2021 GRESB submission resulted in a score that is well above GRESB and peer averages and we earned the highest score for management – which speaks to our exemplary company and board leadership.
We took our commitment to limiting our impact on the environment to a new level with carbon neutrality goals announced in 2021. We will target achieving carbon neutrality for our operations by 2025 and achieving carbon neutrality in alignment with the Paris Climate Accords by 2040. Duke Realty will work to meet these carbon neutrality goals by reducing carbon emissions, replacing energy sources with renewable energy and offsetting our energy consumption.
Duke Realty became the first of the industrial REITsReal Estate Investment Trust (REIT) to issue a “green bond”source funds solely for environmentally friendly development in the United States.States with the issuance of a $400 million green bond in 2019. We did it again in January 2021 and yet again in November 2021. In total, we have completed approximately $1.35 billion in green bond offerings, which we will invest entirely in green projects, including remediation efforts. In fact, last year, our infill redevelopment efforts cleaned up 124 acres of environmentally contaminated sites.
In 2021, we earned Best Community Solar Project in Solar Builder’s 2021 Project of the Year awards for our four-building community solar project in New Jersey that generates 11.1 megawatts of clean electricity annually. This is just one installation of several on Duke Realty rooftops across the country that help generate 28.5 megawatts of clean electric power annually.
Duke Realty’s first smart building equipped with technology to better regulate energy and water usage is under development, and in 2021 we launched an initiative that allows our customers to implement smart features for their build-to-suit facilities developed by Duke Realty.
In April 2021, Duke Realty entered the USGBC LEED® v4 Volume Program, allowing the company to achieve certification on a group of projects, rather than individual building assessments, thereby reducing review time and cost. Duke Realty was the first logistics REIT to pledge development of all facilities to LEED certification standards back in 2019. Duke Realty has completed or begun development of $3.7 billion across 72 industrial projects totaling 30.4 million square feet that have achieved or are proudexpected to achieve LEED certified standards. The company’s headquarters even received LEED Silver certification, as well as the Fitwel® Certification 2-Star Rating for health-promoting design and management that supports the physical, mental and social health of our ESG efforts, but recognize that we still have opportunities to do more. We believe our new Vice President of Corporate Responsibility will help us do just that.associates.
Board Refreshment and DiversityFOCUS ON DIVERSITY, EQUITY AND INCLUSION
We have continued our effortscontinue to refreshfoster an equitable environment where associates are valued and diversify our Board. Lastappreciated for their contributions and their diversity. This past year we said farewell to two directors and added one new director, Mr. Warren M. Thompson, foundercelebrated the 20th anniversary of Thompson Hospitality Corporation. Mr. Thompson brings business administration, corporate governance, board, financial, and entrepreneurship expertise to the Board. In January of this year, our Board also appointed Ms. Tamara D. Fischer, President and Chief Executive Officer of National Storage Affiliates Trust, as a new director. Ms. Fischer brings auditing, business administration, capital markets, investor relations, mergers and acquisitions, public company, and risk oversight expertise to the Board. Consistent with our Boardformalized Diversity and Inclusion Policy,Council with a rebrand to Diversity, Equity and based onInclusion Council. Additionally, we hold ourselves accountable for assessing pay equity several times during the self-identified diversity characteristicsyear. This ensures that any disparities created through hiring, promotion,
reorganization, etc., are identified and remedied as quickly as possible. In 2021, we hired a third-party expert to analyze and verify our pay equity initiatives.
Our talent pipeline and mentorship programs have allowed us to identify experienced, high-performing associates for leadership development. In 2021, we continued to increase the number of women and people of color in leadership roles. Most notable was Nancy Shultz being named president of our directors, our Board now includes fourWestern Region. In 2021, 52 percent of top and mid-level new hires companywide were women and twoor people of color. We continue to focus on opportunities to hire and invest in talent that reflects the communities we serve.
Talent ManagementDuke Realty was once again recognized by Brandon Hall, this time with its Gold Award for Best Advance for Leading Under Crisis and we were honored by Globe St. with their Diversity Champion award. In 2021, Duke Realty signed the CREW Network CRE Pledge for Action to Advance Women and DEI. Our commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion will remain a priority.
At the beginning of 2020, our Board’s Executive Compensation Committee changed its name
CULTURE OF GIVING
The credit for Duke Realty’s success goes directly to the Compensation and Human Capital Committee. In addition to reviewing executive compensation, the Compensation and Human Capital Committee now reviews associate turnover and diversity, as well as associate development and engagement programs. Making sure this is the responsibility of a Board committee reinforces how important talent management is to us.
We hope that you will be able to join us at our 2020 Annual Meeting of Shareholders on Wednesday, April 29, 2020. The accompanying proxy materials contain detailed information about the matters on which you are being asked to vote. We urge you to read the materials carefully and vote in accordance with the Board’s recommendations. Your vote is very important to us. On behalf of our associates and their passion for service. They continue to deliver on our Board,mission to be the preferred logistics real estate partner for our stakeholders. And they step up when asked to help the vulnerable in the communities we serve. Throughout the year, our associates volunteered more than 5,000 hours and donated more than $560,000 to local and national organizations. We can’t thank them enough for their hard work and dedication.
Finally, I want to take this opportunity, on behalf of the entire board, to thank Mike Szymanczyk for his service and commitment to Duke Realty and our stakeholders. Mike’s commitment to the board, our corporate governance and our strategy has been invaluable.
Our commitment to sustained growth, attractive returns and corporate responsibility for you, our stakeholders, will continue. We thank you for your support of Duke Realty.support.
Sincerely,
David P. Stockert
Lead Independent Director, Duke Realty Board of Directors
|
| | |
| | |
James B. Connor | | David P. Stockert |
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer | | Lead Director |
TABLE OF CONTENTS
20202022 PROXY SUMMARY
This summary highlights information contained elsewhere in this proxy statement. This summary does not contain all of the information that you should consider, and you should read this entire proxy statement carefully before voting. In this proxy statement, the “company,” “we,” “our” and “us” refer to Duke Realty Corporation and its consolidated subsidiaries, unless the context requires otherwise.
2019Company Overview
We specialize in the ownership, management and development of industrial real estate. Since our founding in 1972, we have set the standard for providing high-quality, productivity-enhancing industrial properties, and today own and manage best-in-class warehouse and distribution facilities in 18 major U.S. logistics markets nationwide. Our expertise also includes sustainable development, property management and leasing services. Our overall strategy is to increase our investment in quality industrial properties primarily through development, on both a speculative and build-to-suit basis, supplemented with acquisitions in the markets we believe have the highest growth potential.
2021 Business Highlights
For more information regarding our 20192021 performance, please review our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019.2021.
Compensation Highlights
Corporate Responsibility Highlights
Corporate Governance Highlights
|
| | | |
| Independence and Compliance | | Stock Guidelines |
þ | 92% of our Board of Directors (Board) is independent: All directors, other than the Chairman, are independent | þ
| No hedging or pledging of our securities
|
þ
| Lead independent director role with significant authority and responsibilities
| þ
| Minimum stock ownership requirements |
þ
| Fully independent Audit, Corporate Governance, Compensation and Human Capital, and Finance Committees | | Other Governance |
þ
| Annual evaluations of Board and its committees | þ
| Proxy access |
þ
| Annual evaluations of individual directors | þ | Shareholders can amend bylaws
|
þ | At least 75% attendance at Board and committee meetings
| þ
| Shareholders can call a special meeting |
þ
| Directors are elected annually
| þ
| No related-party transactions |
þ
| Majority vote standard in uncontested director elections
| þ
| Corporate Responsibility Committee that reports to Board |
| Composition | þ
| No shareholder rights plan |
þ
| 31% of our Board is female | | |
þ
| Mix of director tenure, skills, and background that provides a balance of experience and institutional knowledge with fresh perspectives | | |
þ
| Board Diversity and Inclusion Policy | | |
20202022 Proxy Information
Our Board is soliciting proxies to be voted at the 2022 Annual Meeting of Shareholders. Due to how well the virtual format worked for the 2020 Annual Meeting of Shareholders and the 2021 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, our Board has decided to hold the 2022 Annual Meeting of Shareholders virtually as well. We refer to the 2022 Annual Meeting of Shareholders as the “Virtual Annual Meeting.” Our proxy statement provides shareholders with information needed to vote by proxy or in person atduring the Virtual Annual Meeting. Shareholders do not need to attend the Virtual Annual Meeting to vote. Voting instructions are below.
Virtual Annual Meeting of Shareholders
|
| | | | |
Time and DateDate: | 10 a.m. CT,ET, April 29, 202014, 2022 |
PlaceVirtual-Only Meeting Link: | Peninsula Hotel, 108 East Superior Street (at North Michigan Avenue),
Chicago, Illinois 60611
www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/DRE2022 |
| Attendance instructions: | If you are a shareholder, you will need your 16-digit control number included on the proxy notice, proxy card or the voting instruction form previously distributed to you in order to log in to the meeting. Those without a control number may attend as guests of the Virtual Annual Meeting, but may not vote or ask questions. If you are a guest, you will need to register by entering your name and email address. The Virtual Annual Meeting will start promptly at 10:00 a.m. ET, and online access will begin at 9:45 a.m. ET. We encourage you to access the Virtual Annual Meeting prior to the start time. |
| Voting/Questions: | If you are a shareholder, you may vote during the Virtual Annual Meeting by following the instructions available on www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/DRE2022. You may also continue to use the proxy card included with the proxy materials previously distributed to you to vote, including by using the Internet or telephone options described on the proxy card and as described in more detail below. You may ask questions starting at 9:45 a.m. ET and continuing throughout the Virtual Annual Meeting. We will answer as many as possible after the business portion of the Virtual Annual Meeting. If there are any unanswered questions, we will address them on our corporate website as soon as practical after the Virtual Annual Meeting. Our intent is to ensure that shareholders are afforded the same ability to participate in the Virtual Annual Meeting as at an in-person meeting. Guests will not have the option to vote or ask questions during the virtual event. |
| Technical Support: | You should ensure that you have a strong Internet connection and allow plenty of time to log in and ensure that you can hear streaming audio prior to the start of the Virtual Annual Meeting. Technical support, including related technical support phone numbers, will be available on the virtual-only meeting platform at www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/DRE2022. |
Record DateDate: | February 20, 202018, 2022 |
| Voting Eligibility: | All shareholders of record as of the close of business on the Record Date are entitled to vote atduring the Virtual Annual Meeting. Each share of common stock outstanding on the Record Date is entitled to one vote on each item submitted for consideration. |
QuorumQuorum: | For any business to be conducted, the holders of a majority of the shares of common stock entitled to vote at the Virtual Annual Meeting must be present, either in personvirtually or represented by proxy. For the purpose of determining the presence of a quorum, abstentions and broker non-votes (which occur when shares held by brokers or nominees for beneficial owners are voted on some matters but not on others) generally will be counted as present. As of the Record Date, 368,342,908382,767,712 shares of common stock were issued and outstanding. |
How to Vote
Here are the methods available to shareholders of record for voting on the proposals in this proxy.
|
| | | | | | | |
| | Vote, sign and date your proxy card. Mail it in the enclosed postage-paid envelope. |
| |
| | Vote in person atUse your 16-digit control number to log-in and vote during the Virtual Annual Meeting. For directions to the Annual Meeting, please call 317.808.6005. |
| |
| | Call toll-free 1.800.690.6903 and follow the instructions. You will be prompted for certain information that can be found on your proxy card. |
| |
| | Log on to https://www.proxyvote.comand follow the on-screen instructions. You will be prompted to enter certain information that can be found on your proxy card. |
Note: Please refer to specific instructions provided on the Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials for the Virtual Annual Meeting (Notice) or your printed proxy materials. If you are a beneficial holder who holds shares in “street name,” please refer to the voting instruction form provided by your bank, broker or other nominee.
Proposal One:1: Election of 1311 Directors
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | Board Vote Recommendation | Page Reference (for more detail) |
| | FOR EACH DIRECTOR NOMINEE
| 87 |
| • | We are asking shareholders to elect 1311 directors to serve for a one-year term that will expire at the company’s 20212023 Annual Meeting or until their successors have been elected and qualified. | | | |
•
| Each director nominee is elected annually by the affirmative vote of a majority of shareholders present in personvirtually or represented by proxy and entitled to vote. An abstention will result in a nominee receiving fewer affirmative votes and, therefore, will have the same effect as a vote against the nominee. Brokers are not entitled to vote uninstructed shares on director elections; therefore, broker non-votes are not considered entitled to vote and will not have an impact on the election of directors. | | | |
Proposal Two:2: Advisory Vote to Approve the Compensation of Named Executive Officers
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | Board Vote Recommendation | Page Reference (for more detail) |
| | FOR | 34 |
•
| We are asking shareholders to approve, on an advisory basis, the compensation of the named executive officers (NEOs) as discussed and disclosed in this proxy statement, including the Compensation Discussion and Analysis beginning on page 35 and the tables and narratives that follow under Executive Compensation beginning on page 53.56. | | | |
•
| The proposal to approve, on an advisory basis, the compensation of the company’s named executive officersNEOs will be approved if the votes cast in favor of the proposal exceed the votes cast against the proposal. Abstentions and broker non-votes will not be treated as votes cast and, therefore, will not have an impact on the vote to approve compensation. | | | |
Proposal Three:3: Ratification of Reappointment of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | Board Vote Recommendation | Page Reference (for more detail) |
| | FOR | 6772 |
•
| We are asking shareholders toTo ratify the reappointment of KPMG LLP (KPMG) as the company’s independent registered public accountants for the 2020 fiscal year.year 2022. | | | |
•
| To ratify the selection of KPMG, votes cast in favor of the proposal must exceed votes cast against the proposal. Abstentions will not be treated as votes cast and, therefore, will not have an impact on the ratification of KPMG as our independent registered public accountants. The ratification of the selection of KPMG as the company’s independent registered public accountants for 20202022 is considered a discretionary matter, and brokers will be permitted to vote uninstructed shares as to such matter. | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| PROPOSAL 1 | ELECTION OF 11 DIRECTORS |
Other
The Board currently consists of 12 members. On January 26, 2022, based on the recommendation of the Corporate Governance Committee, the Board approved a decrease in the size of the Board from 12 directors to 11, effective as of the date of the Virtual Annual Meeting, and nominated each of the existing directors, with the exception of Mr. Michael E. Szymanczyk, for re-election to serve for a one-year term that will expire at the 2023 Annual Meeting or when their successors have been elected and qualified.
Each nominee has agreed to be named in this proxy statement and serve if elected. The Board believes that all of the nominees for director will be available for election. However, if a nominee is unavailable for election, the proxy holders may vote for another nominee proposed by the Board. If you arethe Board does not propose another director nominee prior to or at the Virtual Annual Meeting, the Board, by resolution, may reduce the size of the Board and number of directors to be elected at the Virtual Annual Meeting.
The election of each director requires the affirmative vote of a beneficial owner (i.e., you hold your shares through a brokermajority of the shareholders present virtually or other nominee), you may instruct your brokerrepresented by proxy and entitled to vote yourfor the election of directors. An abstention will result in a nominee receiving fewer votes and, therefore, will have the same effect as a vote against the nominee. Brokers are not entitled to vote uninstructed shares by followingin director elections; therefore, broker non-votes are not considered entitled to vote and will not have an impact on the instructionselection of directors.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| ü | OUR BOARD UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDS A VOTE “FOR” THE ELECTION OF ALL OF THE DIRECTOR NOMINEES NAMED IN THIS PROXY STATEMENT. |
BOARD EVALUATIONS AND MEMBERSHIP CRITERIA
The Corporate Governance Committee, whose responsibilities are described in “Board Committees,” annually evaluates the effectiveness of the Board and each Board committee also performs a self-assessment. As part of this evaluation, each director fills out an assessment of the entire Board as well as the committees on which he or she serves. The Corporate Governance Committee then reviews a compilation of the results of the Board self-assessment and each committee reviews the results of its self-assessment. The Board also engages outside counsel to assist with the director self-assessment process, including performing candid one-on-one confidential interviews with directors and presenting their findings to the Board. These individual self-assessment interviews also assist the Corporate Governance Committee in its board refreshment efforts. Since 2016, the Board has added seven new independent directors to the Board.
The Corporate Governance Committee believes that, although the company can benefit from experienced directors, periodic refreshment of the Board is important. The Corporate Governance Committee, therefore, regularly discusses director succession and reviews potential candidates. The Corporate Governance Committee may employ a search firm to identify director candidates. Although there are no specific, minimum qualifications for directors, key factors that the broker provides. If you sign over voting rights but do not provide specific instructions, your brokerCorporate Governance Committee considers when determining whether to appoint new directors or recommend the re-election of current directors include:
In nominating members for election to the Board, the Corporate Governance Committee will vote on your behalf onlyconsider written nominations by shareholders. Our bylaws state that the Corporate Governance Committee must consider these nominees as long as the recommendation is submitted to our Corporate Secretary in a timely manner and the nomination complies with the requirements in our bylaws. Timing requirements are described in “Shareholder Proposals and Nominations for 2023 Annual Meeting.” The Corporate Governance Committee screens all potential candidates in the same manner regardless of the source of recommendation. However, the Corporate Governance Committee may, in its sole discretion, reject any recommendation for any reason. The complete set of requirements for the submission of a shareholder nomination is included in our bylaws. The Board has also adopted a proxy access bylaw, which allows certain eligible shareholders to nominate director candidates and requires us to include such candidates in our proxy materials for an annual meeting of shareholders that involves the election of directors. For more information about the eligibility and other requirements to submit director nominees pursuant to our proxy access bylaw, see “Nominees for Election of Directors-Proxy Access Policy” and “Shareholder Proposals and Nominations for 2023 Annual Meeting.”
Diversity is an important strategic initiative at Duke Realty and has relevance to our associates, vendors, tenants and shareholders. We also are committed to diversity at the Board level. Having a Board composed of men, women and people of color with different perspectives facilitates more balanced, wide-ranging discussion in the boardroom. The Board also is committed to inclusion--ensuring that all directors feel welcomed, valued and able to contribute their opinions. Accordingly, the Board has adopted a Board Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Policy, which is available on the proposals over whichInvestor Relations/Corporate Governance section of our website at www.dukerealty.com. Pursuant to the Board
Diversity, Equity and Inclusion Policy, our Board considers director nominees from diverse backgrounds, and the Corporate Governance Committee periodically reviews the director selection process to ensure that women and people of color are included. Pursuant to this policy, and using the self-identified diversity characteristics of our directors, our Corporate Governance Committee nominated four women and two people of color to the Board this year.
The diversity of tenure, gender and ethnicity of our director nominees is as follows:
The Board believes that it has discretionary authority (Proposal Three). For Proposals Oneis important to have directors with strong leadership experience as well as experience in the real estate industry and Two, your instructions will be countedoperations. A balance of perspectives from other industries also is critical to well-rounded oversight. The chart below highlights the industry experience and qualifications of our nominees to the Board as broker non-votes. Most brokers offer voting by mail, telephone, and on the Internet.more fully described in “Nominees for Election as Directors.”
If you are a shareholder9
returning a properly executed proxy card;
voting in person at the Annual Meeting; or
following the instructions on the Notice to vote online or by telephone.
When you return a properly executed proxy card, we will vote the shares that the proxy card represents in accordance with your directions. If you return the signed proxy card with no direction on a proposal, we will vote your proxy:
•
“FOR” each director nominee in Proposal One;
10
NOMINEES FOR ELECTION AS DIRECTORS
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| John P. Case | | Director Since: 2018 | | Committee: Compensation and Human Capital |
| | | | |
Age: 58
Independent director | | Qualifications: Mr. Case brings auditing, business administration, capital markets, corporate development, corporate governance, governmental and regulatory matters, human capital, international business, investor relations, marketing, mergers and acquisitions, public company and risk oversight expertise to the Board.
Business Experience:
•Partner and Senior Advisor, Ares Management Corporation, an alternative investment management firm (2021-present) •Chairman & Principal of Bunker Hill Group, a private non-registered investment company with primary holdings in the beverage distribution business and related real estate (2019-present) •Chief Executive Officer and Director of Realty Income Corporation, a Standard & Poor’s 500 Index (S&P 500) company that invests primarily in single-tenant retail properties (September 2013-2018) •President of Realty Income Corporation (March 2013-August 2013) •Executive Vice President, Chief Investment Officer of Realty Income Corporation (2010-February 2013) •New York-based real estate investment banker at various banks including Merrill Lynch, UBS and RBC Capital Markets (1991-2010) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| James B. Connor | | Director Since: 2015 | | Committee: N/A |
| | | | |
Age: 63 |
| Qualifications: Mr. Connor brings business administration, capital markets, corporate development, corporate governance, human capital, investor relations, marketing, public company and sustainability expertise to the Board, as well as deep, extensive knowledge of Duke Realty’s business and operations.
Business Experience:
•Positions Held at Duke Realty Corporation •Chairman and Chief Executive Officer (April 26, 2017-present) •Director (2015-present) •President and Chief Executive Officer (2016-April 25, 2017) •Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer (July 31, 2013-2015) •Senior Regional Executive Vice President (January 17, 2011-July 30, 2013) •Executive Vice President of the Midwest Region (December 1, 2003-January 16, 2011) •Senior Vice President (April 1998-November 30, 2003)
•Various Positions Held at Cushman & Wakefield (1981-March 1998)
Other Public Company Board:
•EPR Properties, a publicly traded real estate investment trust (REIT), which focuses on real estate venues that create value by facilitating out of home leisure and recreation experiences where consumers choose to spend their discretionary time and money (2019-present) |
•“FOR” Proposal Two;
•“FOR” Proposal Three; and
•
in accordance
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Tamara D. Fischer | | Director Since: 2020 | | Committee: Audit |
| | | | |
Age: 66
Independent director | | Qualifications: Ms. Fischer brings auditing, business administration, capital markets, investor relations, mergers and acquisitions, public company and risk oversight expertise to the Board.
The Board has determined that Ms. Fischer qualifies as an “audit committee financial expert” as defined under the applicable rules established by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
Business Experience:
•President and Chief Executive Officer of National Storage Affiliates Trust, a publicly traded REIT focused on the ownership, operation and acquisition of self-storage properties (2020-present) •President and Chief Financial Officer of National Storage Affiliates Trust (July 1, 2018-2019) •Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of National Storage Affiliates Trust (2013-June 30, 2018) •Various consulting positions (2011-2012) •Consultant to Vintage Wine Trust, Inc., a REIT created to acquire and own vineyards, wineries and other real estate related to the wine industry (2009-2010) •Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Vintage Wine Trust, Inc. (2004-2008) •Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Chateau Communities, Inc., which was one of the largest REITs in the manufactured home community sector (1993-2003) •Various positions with Coopers & Lybrand (now PricewaterhouseCoopers) (1984-1992)
Other Public Company Board:
•National Storage Affiliates Trust (2020-present) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Norman K. Jenkins | | Director Since: 2017 | | Committee: Corporate Governance |
| | | | |
Age: 59
Independent director | | Qualifications: Mr. Jenkins brings auditing, business administration, capital markets, entrepreneurship, human capital, mergers and acquisitions and public company expertise to the Board.
Business Experience:
•President and Chief Executive Officer of Capstone Development, LLC, a privately-held developer and acquirer of commercial and multi-family real estate (2009-present) •Various roles for Marriott International, Inc. (1992-2008) •Various finance and operating roles for McDonald’s Corporation (1986-1992)
Other Public Company Boards:
•Urban Edge Properties, a publicly traded REIT (2021-present) •AutoNation, Inc., a publicly traded automotive retailer (2020-present) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Kelly T. Killingsworth | | Director Since: 2021 | | Committee: Compensation and Human Capital Committee |
| | | | |
Age: 57
Independent director | | Qualifications: Ms. Killingsworth brings business administration, consulting, corporate development, entrepreneurship, governmental and regulatory matters, human capital, international business, investor relations, marketing and mergers and acquisitions expertise to the Board.
Business Experience:
•Vice President, Logistics of NIKE, Inc. (2020-present) •Various roles in logistics and merchandising for Walmart Inc. (2009-2020) •Independent consultant regarding supply chain matters to Ricoh Systems, which produces electronic products, primarily cameras and office equipment (2009-2009) •Senior Director, Product Management, Supply Chain/Transportation of Manhattan Associates, Inc., which builds technology solutions that solve the world's most complex business problems in supply chain, inventory and omnichannel commerce (2006-2008) •Various logistics roles at The Home Depot, Inc. (2002-2006) •Business Development Senior Manager of Viewlocity, Inc., which provides supply chain management software solutions (2000-2002) •Various management, consulting, and transportation roles at 12 Technologies, Amoco Polymers, Yellow Logistics Services, Dupont, Roadway Package Systems, Inc. and B.I. Transportation (1988-2000) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Melanie R. Sabelhaus | | Director Since: 2012 | | Committee: Compensation and Human Capital, Chairperson |
| | | | |
Age: 73
Independent director | | Qualifications: Ms. Sabelhaus brings consulting, entrepreneurship, human capital, marketing, public company and risk oversight expertise to the Board.
Business Experience:
•Principal at Visionary Philanthropic Consulting, LLC, which provides virtual consulting to philanthropic organizations (2018-present) •Consultant to philanthropy for several nonprofit organizations around the U.S. (2005-present) •Deputy Administrator of the U.S. Small Business Administration, where she was responsible for policy development and program supervision (2002-2005) •Community fundraising and women’s business issues (1998-2018) •Vice President for Global Sales of BridgeStreet Accommodations, Inc., which offered upscale, fully furnished apartments, townhouses and condominiums primarily to business travelers or relocating corporate executives at Fortune 2000 corporations and professional firms (1997-1998) •Chief Executive Officer of Exclusive Interim Properties, a real estate company that specialized in short-term, furnished housing (1986-1996) •Various roles at International Business Machines Corporation (1972-1986) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Peter M. Scott, III | | Director Since: 2011 | | Committees: Audit and Finance, Chairperson of Audit |
| | | | |
Age: 72
Independent director | | Qualifications: Mr. Scott brings business administration, capital markets, consulting, corporate development, corporate governance, governmental and regulatory matters, human capital, investor relations, mergers and acquisitions, public company and risk oversight expertise to the Board.
The Board has determined that Mr. Scott qualifies as an “audit committee financial expert” as defined under the applicable rules established by the SEC.
Business Experience:
•Chief Financial Officer of Progress Energy, Inc. (now Duke Energy Corporation) (2000-2003); (2005-2008) •President and Chief Executive Officer of Progress Energy Service Company LLC, where he had responsibility for all financial and administrative functions of Progress Energy, Inc. (now Duke Energy Corporation) (2004-2008) •Various other management positions with Progress Energy, Inc. (now Duke Energy Corporation) or its subsidiaries, including responsibilities for its telecommunications and competitive energy subsidiaries •President of Scott, Madden & Associates, Inc., a general management consulting firm that served clients in a number of industries, including energy and telecommunications (1983-2000) •Assistant to the Executive Vice President of Carolina Power & Light Company, Inc., a predecessor of Progress Energy, Inc. (now Duke Energy Corporation) (1981-1983) •Principal and partner in Theodore Barry & Associates, Inc., a Los Angeles-based consulting firm (1977-1981)
Past Public Company Board:
•Cleco Corporation (now Corporate Holdings LLC), a public utility holding company (2009-2016) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| David P. Stockert | | Director Since: 2017 | | Committee: Corporate Governance, Chairperson |
| | | | |
Age: 59
Independent director Lead Director since 2019 | | Qualifications: Mr. Stockert brings business administration, capital markets, corporate governance, human capital, investor relations, mergers and acquisitions and public company expertise to the Board.
Business Experience:
•One of three general partners of Sweetwater Opportunity Fund, L.P., a real estate opportunity fund headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia and formed to invest in commercial property in the Southeast and Texas, targeting primarily sub-institutional, opportunistic, situational and relationship-based investments (2019-present) •Chief Executive Officer and President of Post Properties, Inc., a publicly traded REIT that invested in apartments and was later acquired by Mid-America Apartment Communities, Inc. (2002-2016) •President and Chief Operating Officer of Post Properties, Inc. (2001-2002) •Executive Vice President of Duke Realty Corporation (1999-2000) •Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Weeks Corporation, a publicly traded REIT that invested in industrial and suburban office properties (1995 to 1999) •Various investment banking positions (1990-1995)
Other Public Company Board:
•Mid-America Apartment Communities, Inc., a publicly traded REIT that invests in apartments (2016-present) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Chris T. Sultemeier | | Director Since: 2018 | | Committee: Finance |
| | | | |
Age: 59
Independent director | | Qualifications: Mr. Sultemeier brings business administration, human capital, international business, public company and sustainability expertise to the Board.
Business Experience:
•Executive Vice President Logistics of Walmart Stores, Inc. and President/Chief Executive Officer of Wal-mart Transportation LLC (2012-2017) •Various roles in logistics and merchandising for Walmart Stores, Inc. (1989-2016) •U.S. Army Captain (1984-1989)
Other Public Company Board:
•Logistics Innovation Technologies Corp., a blank check company focusing on opportunities in the global logistics industry (2021-present) •Yellow Corporation, a publicly traded holding company with one of the largest, most comprehensive logistics and less-than-truckload networks in North America with local, regional, national and international capabilities (2021-present)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Warren M. Thompson | | Director Since: 2019 | | Committee: Finance |
| | | | |
Age: 62
Independent director | | Qualifications: Mr. Thompson brings business administration, corporate governance and entrepreneurship expertise to the Board.
Business Experience:
•Chairman of the Board and President of Thompson Hospitality, a private retail food and facilities management firm (1992-present) •Various roles at Marriott Corporation (1983-1991)
Other Public Company Boards:
•Performance Food Group Company, a publicly traded food service distribution company (2020-present) •Compass Group North American, a public food service and support services company (1997-present)
Past Public Company Board:
•Federal Realty Investment Trust, a publicly-traded REIT that owns, operates and develops high-quality retail properties (2017-2019)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Lynn C. Thurber | | Director Since: 2008 | | Committee: Audit and Finance, Chairperson of Finance |
| | | | |
Age:75
Independent director | | Qualifications: Ms. Thurber brings auditing, capital markets, corporate governance, human capital, international business, investor relations, mergers and acquisitions, public company, risk oversight and sustainability expertise to the Board.
Business Experience:
•Part-time employee of LaSalle Investment Management (described below) for the purpose of serving as the Chairman of the Board of Jones Lang LaSalle Income Property Trust, Inc., a non-listed REIT that owns and manages a diversified portfolio of office, retail, industrial and apartment properties (2018-present) •Non-executive Chairman of LaSalle Investment Management, a wholly owned subsidiary of Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated and a global real estate money management firm that invests in private real estate as well as publicly traded real estate companies on behalf of institutional and individual investors (2007-2017) •Chief Executive Officer of LaSalle Investment Management (2000-2006) •Co-President of LaSalle Investment Management (1995-1999) •Various roles, including Chief Executive Officer, with Alex Brown Kleinwort Benson Realty Advisors, a real estate pension fund adviser that merged with LaSalle Partners (1992-1994) •Various roles with Morgan Stanley (1975-1992)
Other Public Company Boards:
•Acadia Realty Trust, a publicly-traded REIT that primarily invests in retail properties (2016-present) •Jones Lang LaSalle Income Property Trust, Inc. (2011-present)
|
Structure of the proxy holder’s discretion, on any other matter that may properly come beforeBoard and the Annual Meeting, including any adjournments or postponements.Lead Director
Your proxy gives discretionary authority to Mr. James B. Connor, ourThe Board views the selection of the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer (CEO),as one of its most important responsibilities. The Board believes that it should remain free to determine whether these positions should be combined or separated based on circumstances and the composition of the Board at any given time. The Board has determined that a combined Chairman and Chief Executive Officer is in the best interests of the company at this time and has chosen Mr. James B. Connor, who is our Chief Executive Officer, to serve also as the Chairman of the Board.
The Board believes that having the same person serve in both positions demonstrates for our associates, vendors, tenants and other stakeholders that the company is under strong leadership, with one person setting the tone and having primary responsibility for managing our operations. To ensure an appropriate balance of power exists between our unaffiliated directors and the Chief Executive Officer, the Board established the Lead Director position. The independent members of the Board have chosen Mr. David P. Stockert, Chairperson of our Corporate Governance Committee, to serve as Lead Director. As outlined in our corporate governance guidelines, the Lead Director chairs the executive sessions of the independent directors, which are held at least quarterly. The Lead Director also serves as a liaison between the Chief Executive Officer and the independent directors, approves information sent to the Board and approves meeting agendas and schedules to ensure that there is sufficient time for discussion of all agenda items.
We firmly believe that our structure allows for appropriate oversight by the Board in fulfilling its duties to our company and our shareholders.
Board Oversight of Risk Management
The Board is primarily responsible for overseeing the company’s risk management processes. A portion of this responsibility has been delegated by the Board to each of the committees of the Board with respect to the assessment of the company’s risks and risk management in its respective areas of oversight. The focus of each of the
committees with respect to risk management is as follows:
These committees and the full Board focus on the most significant risks facing the company and the company’s general risk management strategy and also ensure that risks undertaken by the company are consistent with the
Board’s appetite for risk. While the Board oversees the company’s risk management, company management is responsible for day-to-day risk management processes. We believe this division of responsibilities is the most effective approach for addressing the risks facing the company and that the leadership structure of the Board supports this approach.
Management works with the Board to assess the company’s risks as follows:
Cyber Security
Cyber security is a growing risk for companies. While the Audit Committee is tasked with overseeing cyber security, it is of particular concern to the full Board, as well. Management reports at least annually to the full Board, as well as quarterly to the Audit Committee, regarding the steps the company is taking to protect the company from cyber attacks or intrusions. Management has created a Cyber Security Committee that meets regularly to discuss the cyber risks facing the company. The Cyber Security Committee focuses on the following strategy areas: legal and compliance; operations and technology; business continuity and crisis management; leadership and governance; human factors; and information risk management.
Independent Directors
Under the company’s articles of incorporation, at least three-fourths of the directors must be persons who are “unaffiliated directors,” which means persons who are not officers or associates of the company or any of its affiliates. Since Mr. John P. Case; Ms. Tamara D. Fischer; Mr. Norman K. Jenkins; Ms. Kelly T. Killingsworth, Ms. Melanie R. Sabelhaus; Mr. Peter M. Scott, III; Mr. David P. Stockert; Mr. Chris T. Sultemeier; Mr. Warren M. Thompson; and Ms. Ann
Lynn C. Dee, our Executive Vice President, General CounselThurber are not currently officers or associates of the company or any of its affiliates, 91% of the director nominees are unaffiliated directors.
In addition, under the enhanced corporate governance listing standards of the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), at least a majority of the company’s directors, and all members of the company’s Audit, Compensation and Human Capital and Corporate Secretary,Governance Committees, must meet the test of “independence” as defined under the listing standards of the NYSE. The NYSE listing standards provide that to qualify as an “independent” director, in addition to satisfying certain bright-line criteria, the Board must affirmatively determine that a director has no material relationship with the company (either directly or as a partner, shareholder or officer of an organization that has a relationship with the company) that would compromise the director’s independence. The Board undertakes a review of director independence at least annually to make affirmative determinations as to the independence of Board members and nominees. During this year’s review, the Board considered, among other things, relationships and transactions during the past three years between each director or any member of his or her immediate family, on the one hand, and the company and its subsidiaries and affiliates, on the other hand. The purpose of the review was to determine whether any relationships or transactions were inconsistent with a director’s independence as defined under the NYSE listing standards. Based on the review, the Board determined that all of the unaffiliated director nominees, as well as Mr. Szymanczyk, are independent under the listing standards of the NYSE.
In addition, members of the Audit Committee must satisfy additional independence requirements established by the SEC and NYSE. Specifically, members of the Audit Committee may not accept, directly or indirectly, any consulting, advisory or other matterscompensatory fee from the company or its subsidiaries other than their directors’ compensation, and they may not be affiliated with the company or its subsidiaries. All members of the Audit Committee satisfy these enhanced independence requirements.
Finally, in determining the independence of any director who will serve on the Compensation and Human Capital Committee, the Board must consider all factors regarding a director’s relationship to the company that mightcould affect that director’s ability to be brought beforeindependent from management in connection with his or her duties, including (1) the Annual Meeting. source of such director’s compensation, including any consulting, advisory or other compensatory fee paid by the company to the director; and (2) whether the director is affiliated with the company, its subsidiaries or affiliates. All members of the Compensation and Human Capital Committee satisfy these enhanced independence requirements.
Majority Voting Policy for Director Elections
The company’s articles of incorporation provide that the election of directors at an annual meeting shall be by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of the shareholders present in person or by proxy and entitled to vote at such meeting. In addition, the company’s corporate governance guidelines provide for a majority voting policy for the election of directors. Pursuant to this policy, in any non-contested election of directors, any nominee for director who does not receive the affirmative vote of at least a majority of the votes entitled to vote thereon present in person or by proxy (an Against Vote) shall promptly tender his or her resignation following certification of the shareholder vote. The Corporate Governance Committee shall consider the resignation offer and recommend to the Board the action to be taken with respect to such offer of resignation. Within 90 days following certification of the shareholder vote, the Board will act on the recommendation of the Corporate Governance Committee.
Any director who tenders his or her resignation under this provision shall not participate in the Corporate Governance Committee recommendation or Board action regarding whether to accept the resignation offer.
If you areeach member of the Corporate Governance Committee receives an Against Vote in the same election, then the independent directors who did not receive an Against Vote shall appoint a record ownercommittee amongst themselves to consider the resignation offers and you sign a proxy card butrecommend to the Board whether to accept them.
If only three or fewer directors do not provide instructions regarding the proposals on the proxy card, your shares will be voted in accordance with the Board’s recommendations, as noted above.
You may revoke your proxy at any time before its exercise by:
| |
(i) | delivering written notice of revocation to Ms. Dee at 8711 River Crossing Blvd., Indianapolis, Indiana 46240; |
| |
(ii) | submitting to the company a duly executed proxy card with a later date; |
| |
(iii) | voting via the Internet or telephone at a later date; or |
| |
(iv) | appearing at the Annual Meeting and voting in person. |
Written revocations will not be effective until received by Ms. Dee at or before the Annual Meeting. Telephone and Internet revocations will not be effective unless,receive an Against Vote in the casesame election, all directors may participate in the decision of whether or not to accept the resignation offers.
Proxy Access Policy
On October 25, 2017, the Board approved the amendment and restatement of the company’s bylaws to implement proxy access. These bylaws state that whenever the Board solicits proxies for the election of directors at an annual meeting of shareholders, who hold their shares through our 401(K) Plan, received onsubject to certain requirements, a shareholder, or before 11:59 p.m., Indianapolis local time, on April 23, 2020, and,a group of up to 20 shareholders, owning three percent or more of the company’s outstanding common stock continuously for at least three years can require the company to include in the case of all other shareholders, received on or before 11:59 p.m., Indianapolis local time, on April 27, 2020. If you are a beneficial owner, you will need to obtain a validits proxy from your broker or other nominee that is the record holder to vote in person at the Annual Meeting.
We are offering shareholders the opportunity to confirm their votes were cast in accordance with their instructions. Vote confirmation is consistent with our commitment to sound corporate governance standards and an important means to increase transparency. Beginning March 14, 2020, andmaterials for such annual meeting director nominations for up to the greater of:
•20% of the number of directors up for election, rounding down to the nearest whole number; or
•two months afterdirectors.
Shareholder requests to include shareholder nominees in the company’s proxy materials for the 2023 Annual Meeting you may confirm your vote beginning 24 hours after your vote isof Shareholders must be received whether it was cast by proxy card, electronically, or telephonically. You may confirm that your instructions were received and cast per your instructions included by logging onto https://www.proxyvote.com using your control number (located on your Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials or proxy card). If you hold shares through a broker or other nominee, the ability to confirm your vote may be affected by the rules ofCorporate Secretary no earlier than October 3, 2022, and no later than November 2, 2022, and must satisfy the broker or other nominee and the confirmation may not confirm whether the broker or other nominee allocated the correct number of shares to you.
Mailing Date/Internet Availability of Proxy Materials
This proxy statement, the enclosed proxy card, and our 2019 Annual Report or a Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials (the Notice) were mailed or e-mailed to shareholders beginning on or about March 11, 2020. The Notice includes instructions on how to access the proxy materials online. Shareholders who received the Notice by mail or e-mail will not be mailed a printed copy of the proxy materials unless they request a copyrequirements specified in the manner described in the Notice. All shareholders will be able to access the proxy materials on the website referred to in the Notice and this proxy statement and will be able to request a printed set of the proxy materials by mail or electronically, in either case, free of charge.
Duke Realty is soliciting proxies to be voted at the Annual Meeting, and has paid the cost of preparing, printing, assembling, and mailing the proxy materials, and also will bear the costs of other materials sent to shareholders in connection with this solicitation. We also may reimburse brokerage houses and other custodians, nominees, and fiduciaries for their expenses incurred in forwarding solicitation materials to the beneficial owners of shares held of record.
In addition to the solicitation of proxies by mail, Duke Realty officers and other associates may solicit proxies by telephone, facsimile, e-mail, or personal interviews without additional compensation. We also expect brokerage houses to forward proxy materials to shareholders at our request. Receipt of more than one proxy card or voting instruction form indicates that a shareholder has multiple accounts at the transfer agent or with stockbrokers. Shareholders should complete and return all proxy cards and voting instruction forms received to ensure that all of their shares are voted.
company’s bylaws.
Shareholders of record who want to receive future proxy statements and annual reports electronically should log on to
https://www.proxyvote.com and follow the instructions to vote using the Internet and, when prompted, indicate that they want to access proxy materials electronically in the future. Shareholders will need to refer to the company number and control number found on the proxy card. Shareholders may cancel electronic enrollment if they later decide to receive proxy statements and annual reports by regular mail.
Information about Communications with Duke Realty Corporation and Our Board
Shareholders may communicate with Duke Realty’s Board on matters that protect or promote legitimate shareholder interests. For instructions on how to deliver such communications, visit the Investor Relations/Corporate Governance section of Duke Realty’s website at www.dukerealty.com.
Shareholders and other interested parties also may contact the Board by writing to:
Board of DirectorsNOMINEES FOR ELECTION AS DIRECTORS
c/o the Corporate Secretary
8711 River Crossing Blvd.
Indianapolis, Indiana 46240 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| John P. Case | | Director Since: 2018 | | Committee: Compensation and Human Capital |
| | | | |
Age: 58
Independent director | | Qualifications: Mr. Case brings auditing, business administration, capital markets, corporate development, corporate governance, governmental and regulatory matters, human capital, international business, investor relations, marketing, mergers and acquisitions, public company and risk oversight expertise to the Board.
Business Experience:
•Partner and Senior Advisor, Ares Management Corporation, an alternative investment management firm (2021-present) •Chairman & Principal of Bunker Hill Group, a private non-registered investment company with primary holdings in the beverage distribution business and related real estate (2019-present) •Chief Executive Officer and Director of Realty Income Corporation, a Standard & Poor’s 500 Index (S&P 500) company that invests primarily in single-tenant retail properties (September 2013-2018) •President of Realty Income Corporation (March 2013-August 2013) •Executive Vice President, Chief Investment Officer of Realty Income Corporation (2010-February 2013) •New York-based real estate investment banker at various banks including Merrill Lynch, UBS and RBC Capital Markets (1991-2010) |
You may e-mail Duke Realty’s Lead Director at leaddirector@dukerealty.com.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| James B. Connor | | Director Since: 2015 | | Committee: N/A |
| | | | |
Age: 63 |
| Qualifications: Mr. Connor brings business administration, capital markets, corporate development, corporate governance, human capital, investor relations, marketing, public company and sustainability expertise to the Board, as well as deep, extensive knowledge of Duke Realty’s business and operations.
Business Experience:
•Positions Held at Duke Realty Corporation •Chairman and Chief Executive Officer (April 26, 2017-present) •Director (2015-present) •President and Chief Executive Officer (2016-April 25, 2017) •Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer (July 31, 2013-2015) •Senior Regional Executive Vice President (January 17, 2011-July 30, 2013) •Executive Vice President of the Midwest Region (December 1, 2003-January 16, 2011) •Senior Vice President (April 1998-November 30, 2003)
•Various Positions Held at Cushman & Wakefield (1981-March 1998)
Other Public Company Board:
•EPR Properties, a publicly traded real estate investment trust (REIT), which focuses on real estate venues that create value by facilitating out of home leisure and recreation experiences where consumers choose to spend their discretionary time and money (2019-present) |
In addition, shareholders and other interested parties may communicate with Duke Realty’s independent, non-management directors and/or the entire Board, as required by the New York Stock Exchange’s (NYSE) listing standards. Written communications to non-management directors should be sent to:
Non-Management Directors
c/o Corporate Secretary
8711 River Crossing Blvd.
Indianapolis, Indiana 46240
Duke Realty’s Corporate Secretary may be contacted by sending correspondence to: 8711 River Crossing Blvd., Indianapolis, Indiana 46240, Attn: Corporate Secretary.
Additional Information | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Tamara D. Fischer | | Director Since: 2020 | | Committee: Audit |
| | | | |
Age: 66
Independent director | | Qualifications: Ms. Fischer brings auditing, business administration, capital markets, investor relations, mergers and acquisitions, public company and risk oversight expertise to the Board.
The Board has determined that Ms. Fischer qualifies as an “audit committee financial expert” as defined under the applicable rules established by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
Business Experience:
•President and Chief Executive Officer of National Storage Affiliates Trust, a publicly traded REIT focused on the ownership, operation and acquisition of self-storage properties (2020-present) •President and Chief Financial Officer of National Storage Affiliates Trust (July 1, 2018-2019) •Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of National Storage Affiliates Trust (2013-June 30, 2018) •Various consulting positions (2011-2012) •Consultant to Vintage Wine Trust, Inc., a REIT created to acquire and own vineyards, wineries and other real estate related to the wine industry (2009-2010) •Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Vintage Wine Trust, Inc. (2004-2008) •Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Chateau Communities, Inc., which was one of the largest REITs in the manufactured home community sector (1993-2003) •Various positions with Coopers & Lybrand (now PricewaterhouseCoopers) (1984-1992)
Other Public Company Board:
•National Storage Affiliates Trust (2020-present) |
Our website
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Norman K. Jenkins | | Director Since: 2017 | | Committee: Corporate Governance |
| | | | |
Age: 59
Independent director | | Qualifications: Mr. Jenkins brings auditing, business administration, capital markets, entrepreneurship, human capital, mergers and acquisitions and public company expertise to the Board.
Business Experience:
•President and Chief Executive Officer of Capstone Development, LLC, a privately-held developer and acquirer of commercial and multi-family real estate (2009-present) •Various roles for Marriott International, Inc. (1992-2008) •Various finance and operating roles for McDonald’s Corporation (1986-1992)
Other Public Company Boards:
•Urban Edge Properties, a publicly traded REIT (2021-present) •AutoNation, Inc., a publicly traded automotive retailer (2020-present) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Kelly T. Killingsworth | | Director Since: 2021 | | Committee: Compensation and Human Capital Committee |
| | | | |
Age: 57
Independent director | | Qualifications: Ms. Killingsworth brings business administration, consulting, corporate development, entrepreneurship, governmental and regulatory matters, human capital, international business, investor relations, marketing and mergers and acquisitions expertise to the Board.
Business Experience:
•Vice President, Logistics of NIKE, Inc. (2020-present) •Various roles in logistics and merchandising for Walmart Inc. (2009-2020) •Independent consultant regarding supply chain matters to Ricoh Systems, which produces electronic products, primarily cameras and office equipment (2009-2009) •Senior Director, Product Management, Supply Chain/Transportation of Manhattan Associates, Inc., which builds technology solutions that solve the world's most complex business problems in supply chain, inventory and omnichannel commerce (2006-2008) •Various logistics roles at The Home Depot, Inc. (2002-2006) •Business Development Senior Manager of Viewlocity, Inc., which provides supply chain management software solutions (2000-2002) •Various management, consulting, and transportation roles at 12 Technologies, Amoco Polymers, Yellow Logistics Services, Dupont, Roadway Package Systems, Inc. and B.I. Transportation (1988-2000) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Melanie R. Sabelhaus | | Director Since: 2012 | | Committee: Compensation and Human Capital, Chairperson |
| | | | |
Age: 73
Independent director | | Qualifications: Ms. Sabelhaus brings consulting, entrepreneurship, human capital, marketing, public company and risk oversight expertise to the Board.
Business Experience:
•Principal at Visionary Philanthropic Consulting, LLC, which provides virtual consulting to philanthropic organizations (2018-present) •Consultant to philanthropy for several nonprofit organizations around the U.S. (2005-present) •Deputy Administrator of the U.S. Small Business Administration, where she was responsible for policy development and program supervision (2002-2005) •Community fundraising and women’s business issues (1998-2018) •Vice President for Global Sales of BridgeStreet Accommodations, Inc., which offered upscale, fully furnished apartments, townhouses and condominiums primarily to business travelers or relocating corporate executives at Fortune 2000 corporations and professional firms (1997-1998) •Chief Executive Officer of Exclusive Interim Properties, a real estate company that specialized in short-term, furnished housing (1986-1996) •Various roles at International Business Machines Corporation (1972-1986) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Peter M. Scott, III | | Director Since: 2011 | | Committees: Audit and Finance, Chairperson of Audit |
| | | | |
Age: 72
Independent director | | Qualifications: Mr. Scott brings business administration, capital markets, consulting, corporate development, corporate governance, governmental and regulatory matters, human capital, investor relations, mergers and acquisitions, public company and risk oversight expertise to the Board.
The Board has determined that Mr. Scott qualifies as an “audit committee financial expert” as defined under the applicable rules established by the SEC.
Business Experience:
•Chief Financial Officer of Progress Energy, Inc. (now Duke Energy Corporation) (2000-2003); (2005-2008) •President and Chief Executive Officer of Progress Energy Service Company LLC, where he had responsibility for all financial and administrative functions of Progress Energy, Inc. (now Duke Energy Corporation) (2004-2008) •Various other management positions with Progress Energy, Inc. (now Duke Energy Corporation) or its subsidiaries, including responsibilities for its telecommunications and competitive energy subsidiaries •President of Scott, Madden & Associates, Inc., a general management consulting firm that served clients in a number of industries, including energy and telecommunications (1983-2000) •Assistant to the Executive Vice President of Carolina Power & Light Company, Inc., a predecessor of Progress Energy, Inc. (now Duke Energy Corporation) (1981-1983) •Principal and partner in Theodore Barry & Associates, Inc., a Los Angeles-based consulting firm (1977-1981)
Past Public Company Board:
•Cleco Corporation (now Corporate Holdings LLC), a public utility holding company (2009-2016) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| David P. Stockert | | Director Since: 2017 | | Committee: Corporate Governance, Chairperson |
| | | | |
Age: 59
Independent director Lead Director since 2019 | | Qualifications: Mr. Stockert brings business administration, capital markets, corporate governance, human capital, investor relations, mergers and acquisitions and public company expertise to the Board.
Business Experience:
•One of three general partners of Sweetwater Opportunity Fund, L.P., a real estate opportunity fund headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia and formed to invest in commercial property in the Southeast and Texas, targeting primarily sub-institutional, opportunistic, situational and relationship-based investments (2019-present) •Chief Executive Officer and President of Post Properties, Inc., a publicly traded REIT that invested in apartments and was later acquired by Mid-America Apartment Communities, Inc. (2002-2016) •President and Chief Operating Officer of Post Properties, Inc. (2001-2002) •Executive Vice President of Duke Realty Corporation (1999-2000) •Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Weeks Corporation, a publicly traded REIT that invested in industrial and suburban office properties (1995 to 1999) •Various investment banking positions (1990-1995)
Other Public Company Board:
•Mid-America Apartment Communities, Inc., a publicly traded REIT that invests in apartments (2016-present) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Chris T. Sultemeier | | Director Since: 2018 | | Committee: Finance |
| | | | |
Age: 59
Independent director | | Qualifications: Mr. Sultemeier brings business administration, human capital, international business, public company and sustainability expertise to the Board.
Business Experience:
•Executive Vice President Logistics of Walmart Stores, Inc. and President/Chief Executive Officer of Wal-mart Transportation LLC (2012-2017) •Various roles in logistics and merchandising for Walmart Stores, Inc. (1989-2016) •U.S. Army Captain (1984-1989)
Other Public Company Board:
•Logistics Innovation Technologies Corp., a blank check company focusing on opportunities in the global logistics industry (2021-present) •Yellow Corporation, a publicly traded holding company with one of the largest, most comprehensive logistics and less-than-truckload networks in North America with local, regional, national and international capabilities (2021-present)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Warren M. Thompson | | Director Since: 2019 | | Committee: Finance |
| | | | |
Age: 62
Independent director | | Qualifications: Mr. Thompson brings business administration, corporate governance and entrepreneurship expertise to the Board.
Business Experience:
•Chairman of the Board and President of Thompson Hospitality, a private retail food and facilities management firm (1992-present) •Various roles at Marriott Corporation (1983-1991)
Other Public Company Boards:
•Performance Food Group Company, a publicly traded food service distribution company (2020-present) •Compass Group North American, a public food service and support services company (1997-present)
Past Public Company Board:
•Federal Realty Investment Trust, a publicly-traded REIT that owns, operates and develops high-quality retail properties (2017-2019)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Lynn C. Thurber | | Director Since: 2008 | | Committee: Audit and Finance, Chairperson of Finance |
| | | | |
Age:75
Independent director | | Qualifications: Ms. Thurber brings auditing, capital markets, corporate governance, human capital, international business, investor relations, mergers and acquisitions, public company, risk oversight and sustainability expertise to the Board.
Business Experience:
•Part-time employee of LaSalle Investment Management (described below) for the purpose of serving as the Chairman of the Board of Jones Lang LaSalle Income Property Trust, Inc., a non-listed REIT that owns and manages a diversified portfolio of office, retail, industrial and apartment properties (2018-present) •Non-executive Chairman of LaSalle Investment Management, a wholly owned subsidiary of Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated and a global real estate money management firm that invests in private real estate as well as publicly traded real estate companies on behalf of institutional and individual investors (2007-2017) •Chief Executive Officer of LaSalle Investment Management (2000-2006) •Co-President of LaSalle Investment Management (1995-1999) •Various roles, including Chief Executive Officer, with Alex Brown Kleinwort Benson Realty Advisors, a real estate pension fund adviser that merged with LaSalle Partners (1992-1994) •Various roles with Morgan Stanley (1975-1992)
Other Public Company Boards:
•Acadia Realty Trust, a publicly-traded REIT that primarily invests in retail properties (2016-present) •Jones Lang LaSalle Income Property Trust, Inc. (2011-present)
|
Structure of the Board and the Lead Director
The Board views the selection of the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer as one of its most important responsibilities. The Board believes that it should remain free to determine whether these positions should be combined or separated based on circumstances and the composition of the Board at any given time. The Board has determined that a combined Chairman and Chief Executive Officer is locatedin the best interests of the company atwww.dukerealty.com. Though information on this time and has chosen Mr. James B. Connor, who is our websiteChief Executive Officer, to serve also as the Chairman of the Board.
The Board believes that having the same person serve in both positions demonstrates for our associates, vendors, tenants and other stakeholders that the company is not partunder strong leadership, with one person setting the tone and having primary responsibility for managing our operations. To ensure an appropriate balance of this proxy statement, you can find company information there, suchpower exists between our unaffiliated directors and the Chief Executive Officer, the Board established the Lead Director position. The independent members of the Board have chosen Mr. David P. Stockert, Chairperson of our Corporate Governance Committee, to serve as Lead Director. As outlined in our Code of Business Ethics, corporate governance guidelines, chartersthe Lead Director chairs the executive sessions of the independent directors, which are held at least quarterly. The Lead Director also serves as a liaison between the Chief Executive Officer and the independent directors, approves information sent to the Board and approves meeting agendas and schedules to ensure that there is sufficient time for discussion of all agenda items.
We firmly believe that our structure allows for appropriate oversight by the Board in fulfilling its duties to our company and our shareholders.
Board Oversight of Risk Management
The Board is primarily responsible for overseeing the company’s risk management processes. A portion of this responsibility has been delegated by the Board to each of the committees of the Board with respect to the assessment of the company’s risks and reportsrisk management in its respective areas of oversight. The focus of each of the
committees with respect to risk management is as follows:
These committees and the full Board focus on the most significant risks facing the company and the company’s general risk management strategy and also ensure that we file and furnishrisks undertaken by the company are consistent with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) . Copies of our Code of Business Ethics, corporate governance guidelines, or charters of Board committees may be obtained by writing to:
17
Duke Realty Corporation
8711 River Crossing Blvd.
Indianapolis, Indiana 46240
Attention: Investor Relations
PROPOSAL ONE: ELECTION OF 13 DIRECTORS TO SERVE
ON THE COMPANY’S BOARD FOR A ONE-YEAR TERMBoard’s appetite for risk. While the Board oversees the company’s risk management, company management is responsible for day-to-day risk management processes. We believe this division of responsibilities is the most effective approach for addressing the risks facing the company and that the leadership structure of the Board supports this approach.
ENDING ON THE DATE OF THE COMPANY’S 2021 ANNUAL MEETING
Management works with the Board to assess the company’s risks as follows:
Cyber Security
Cyber security is a growing risk for companies. While the Audit Committee is tasked with overseeing cyber security, it is of particular concern to the full Board, as well. Management reports at least annually to the full Board, as well as quarterly to the Audit Committee, regarding the steps the company is taking to protect the company from cyber attacks or intrusions. Management has created a Cyber Security Committee that meets regularly to discuss the cyber risks facing the company. The Cyber Security Committee focuses on the following strategy areas: legal and compliance; operations and technology; business continuity and crisis management; leadership and governance; human factors; and information risk management.
Independent Directors
Under the company’s articles of incorporation, at least three-fourths of the directors must be persons who are “unaffiliated directors,” which means persons who are not officers or associates of the company or any of its affiliates. Since Mr. John P. Case; Ms. Tamara D. Fischer; Mr. Norman K. Jenkins; Ms. Kelly T. Killingsworth, Ms. Melanie R. Sabelhaus; Mr. Peter M. Scott, III; Mr. David P. Stockert; Mr. Chris T. Sultemeier; Mr. Warren M. Thompson; and Ms.
Lynn C. Thurber are not currently officers or associates of the company or any of its affiliates, 91% of the director nominees are unaffiliated directors.
In addition, under the enhanced corporate governance listing standards of the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), at least a majority of the company’s directors, and all members of the company’s Audit, Compensation and Human Capital and Corporate Governance Committees, must meet the test of “independence” as defined under the listing standards of the NYSE. The NYSE listing standards provide that to qualify as an “independent” director, in addition to satisfying certain bright-line criteria, the Board must affirmatively determine that a director has no material relationship with the company (either directly or as a partner, shareholder or officer of an organization that has a relationship with the company) that would compromise the director’s independence. The Board currently consistsundertakes a review of 13 members. On January 29, 2020, baseddirector independence at least annually to make affirmative determinations as to the independence of Board members and nominees. During this year’s review, the Board considered, among other things, relationships and transactions during the past three years between each director or any member of his or her immediate family, on the recommendationone hand, and the company and its subsidiaries and affiliates, on the other hand. The purpose of the Corporate Governance Committee,review was to determine whether any relationships or transactions were inconsistent with a director’s independence as defined under the NYSE listing standards. Based on the review, the Board nominated each of the 13 directors for re-election to serve for a one-year term that will expire at the 2021 Annual Meeting or when their successors have been elected and qualified.
Each nominee has agreed to be named in this proxy statement and serve if elected. The Board believesdetermined that all of the unaffiliated director nominees, for director will be available for election. However, if a nominee is unavailable for election,as well as Mr. Szymanczyk, are independent under the proxy holders may vote for another nominee proposedlisting standards of the NYSE.
In addition, members of the Audit Committee must satisfy additional independence requirements established by the Board. IfSEC and NYSE. Specifically, members of the Audit Committee may not accept, directly or indirectly, any consulting, advisory or other compensatory fee from the company or its subsidiaries other than their directors’ compensation, and they may not be affiliated with the company or its subsidiaries. All members of the Audit Committee satisfy these enhanced independence requirements.
Finally, in determining the independence of any director who will serve on the Compensation and Human Capital Committee, the Board does not propose anothermust consider all factors regarding a director’s relationship to the company that could affect that director’s ability to be independent from management in connection with his or her duties, including (1) the source of such director’s compensation, including any consulting, advisory or other compensatory fee paid by the company to the director; and (2) whether the director nominee prior tois affiliated with the company, its subsidiaries or ataffiliates. All members of the Annual Meeting,Compensation and Human Capital Committee satisfy these enhanced independence requirements.
Majority Voting Policy for Director Elections
The company’s articles of incorporation provide that the Board, by resolution, may reduce the numberelection of directors toat an annual meeting shall be elected at the Annual Meeting.
The election of each director requiresby the affirmative vote of at least a majority of the shareholders present in person or represented by proxy and entitled to vote at such meeting. In addition, the company’s corporate governance guidelines provide for a majority voting policy for the election of directors. An abstention will resultPursuant to this policy, in any non-contested election of directors, any nominee for director who does not receive the affirmative vote of at least a nominee receiving fewermajority of the votes and, therefore, will have the same effect as a vote against the nominee. Brokers are not entitled to vote uninstructed sharesthereon present in director elections; therefore, broker non-votes are not considered entitled to vote and will not have an impact onperson or by proxy (an Against Vote) shall promptly tender his or her resignation following certification of the election of directors.
THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDS A VOTE “FOR” THE ELECTION OF ALL OF THE DIRECTOR NOMINEES NAMED IN THIS PROXY STATEMENT.
BOARD EVALUATIONS AND MEMBERSHIP CRITERIA
shareholder vote. The Corporate Governance Committee whose responsibilities are described in “Board Committees,” evaluatesshall consider the effectivenessresignation offer and recommend to the Board the action to be taken with respect to such offer of resignation. Within 90 days following certification of the shareholder vote, the Board and each of its committees annually. As part of this evaluation, each director fills out an assessmentwill act on the recommendation of the entire Board as well as the committees on which he or she serves. The Corporate Governance Committee then reviews a compilation of the results of the various self-assessments. In addition, each year the General Counsel also conducts a candid, in-person self-assessment interview with each Board member, designed to enhanceCommittee.
Any director who tenders his or her participation and role as a director, as well as to assess the competencies and skills each individual director is expected to bring to the Board.
The Corporate Governance Committee believes that though the company can benefit from experienced directors, periodic refreshment of the Board is important. The Corporate Governance Committee, therefore, regularly discusses director succession and reviews potential candidates. The Corporate Governance Committee may employ a search firm to identify director candidates. In 2019, we hired Ferguson Partners Ltd. to review potential director candidates. Key factors thatresignation under this provision shall not participate in the Corporate Governance Committee considers when determiningrecommendation or Board action regarding whether to appoint directors include:accept the resignation offer.
In nominating members for election to the Board,If each member of the Corporate Governance Committee willreceives an Against Vote in the same election, then the independent directors who did not receive an Against Vote shall appoint a committee amongst themselves to consider written nominations by shareholders. Ourthe resignation offers and recommend to the Board whether to accept them.
If only three or fewer directors do not receive an Against Vote in the same election, all directors may participate in the decision of whether or not to accept the resignation offers.
Proxy Access Policy
On October 25, 2017, the Board approved the amendment and restatement of the company’s bylaws to implement proxy access. These bylaws state that whenever the Corporate Governance Committee must consider these nominees as long as the recommendation is submitted to our Corporate Secretary in a timely manner and the nomination complies with the requirements in our bylaws. Timing requirements are described in “Shareholder Proposals and Nominations for 2021 Annual Meeting.” The Corporate Governance Committee screens all potential candidates in the same manner regardless of the source of recommendation. However, the Corporate Governance Committee may, in its sole discretion, reject any recommendation for any reason. The complete set of requirementsBoard solicits proxies for the submissionelection of a shareholder nomination is included in our bylaws. The Board has also adopted a proxy access bylaw, which allows certain eligible shareholders to nominate director candidates and requires us to include such candidates in our proxy materials fordirectors at an annual meeting of shareholders, that involvessubject to certain requirements, a shareholder, or a group of up to 20 shareholders, owning three percent or more of the election of directors. For more information aboutcompany’s outstanding common stock continuously for at least three years can require the eligibility and other requirementscompany to submitinclude in its proxy materials for such annual meeting director nominees pursuantnominations for up to our proxy access bylaw, see “Nominees for Election of Directors-Proxy Access Policy” and “Shareholder Proposals and Nominations for 2021 Annual Meeting.”
the greater of:
Diversity is an important strategic initiative at
•20% of the number of directors up for election, rounding down to the nearest whole number; or
•two directors.
Shareholder requests to include shareholder nominees in the company’s proxy materials for the 2023 Annual Meeting of Shareholders must be received by the Corporate Secretary no earlier than October 3, 2022, and no later than November 2, 2022, and must satisfy the requirements specified in the company’s bylaws.
Information about Communications with Duke Realty Corporation and has relevanceOur Board
Shareholders may communicate with Duke Realty’s Board on matters that protect or promote legitimate shareholder interests. For instructions on how to our associates, suppliers, and shareholders. We also are committed to diversity at the Board level. Having a Board composed of men, women, and people of color with different perspectives facilitates more balanced, wide-ranging discussion in the boardroom. The Board also is committed to inclusion--ensuring that all directors feel welcomed, valued, and able to contribute their opinions. Accordingly, the Board has adopted a Board Diversity and Inclusion Policy, which is available ondeliver such communications, visit the Investor Relations/Corporate Governance section of ourDuke Realty’s website at http://www.dukerealty.com. Pursuant to
Shareholders and other interested parties also may contact the Board Diversity and Inclusion Policy, our Board considers director nominees from diverse backgrounds, and the Corporate Governance Committee periodically reviews the director selection process to ensure that women and people of color are included. Pursuant to this policy, and using the self-identified diversity characteristics of our directors, our Corporate Governance Committee nominated four women and two people of color to the Board this year.by writing to:
The Board believes that it is important to have directors with strong leadership experience as well as experience in the real estate industry and operations. A balance of perspectives from other industries also is critical to well-rounded oversight. The chart below highlights the industry experience and qualifications of our nominees to the Board as more fully described in “Nominees for Election as Directors.”
The gender diversity and tenure of our director nominees is as follows:
NOMINEES FOR ELECTION AS DIRECTORS
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | John P. CaseAge 56 |
| Director Since: 2018 |
| Board Committee: Compensation and Human Capital
|
| | | | |
Age: 58
Independent director | | Qualifications: Mr. Case brings auditing, business administration, capital markets, corporate development, corporate governance, governmental and regulatory matters, human capital, international business, investor relations, marketing, mergers and acquisitions, public company and risk oversight expertise to the Board. |
| |
| Since 2019, Mr. Case has served as
Business Experience:
•Partner and Senior Advisor, Ares Management Corporation, an alternative investment management firm (2021-present) •Chairman & Principal of Bunker Hill Group, a private non-registered investment company with primary holdings in the beverage distribution business and related real estate. Mr. Case served as estate (2019-present) •Chief Executive Officer and Director of Realty Income Corporation, from 2013 to 2018. Realty Income Corporation is a Standard & Poor’s 500 Index (S&P 500) company that invests primarily in single-tenant retail properties. Mr. Case joinedproperties (September 2013-2018) •President of Realty Income Corporation in 2010 as (March 2013-August 2013) •Executive Vice President, Chief Investment Officer. He was promoted to President in March 2013 and Chief Executive Officer in September 2013. Prior to joiningof Realty Income Corporation Mr. Case served for 19 years as a (2010-February 2013) •New York-based real estate investment banker. He began his investment banking careerbanker at various banks including Merrill Lynch, where he worked for 14 years, and was named a Managing Director in 2000. Following his tenure at Merrill Lynch, Mr. Case was co-head of Americas Real Estate Investment Banking at UBS and later the co-head of Real Estate Investment Banking for RBC Capital Markets where he also served on the firm’s Global Investment Banking Management Committee. Mr. Case serves as a member of the Board of Trustees of Washington and Lee University. In addition, Mr. Case has been extensively involved in the broader real estate industry, having served on the Executive Board of the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (NAREIT), as a member of The Real Estate Roundtable, and as a member of the International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC).(1991-2010) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
James B. Connor Age 61 |
| Director Since: 2015 |
| Board Committee:N/A
|
| | | | |
Age: 63 |
| Qualifications: Mr. Connor who joined the company in 1998, brings business administration, capital markets, corporate development, corporate governance, human capital, investor relations, marketing, public company and sustainability expertise to the Board.Board, as well as deep, extensive knowledge of Duke Realty’s business and operations. |
| |
| Mr. Connor was named the
Business Experience:
•Positions Held at Duke Realty Corporation •Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Duke Realty Corporation, commencing April(April 26, 2017, and joined the company’s Board in 2015. Prior to being named Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Connor held various senior management positions with the company, including 2017-present) •Director (2015-present) •President and Chief Executive Officer from January 1, 2016 to April(2016-April 25, 2017, 2017) •Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer from 2013 to 2015, (July 31, 2013-2015) •Senior Regional Executive Vice President from 2011 to 2013, (January 17, 2011-July 30, 2013) •Executive Vice President of the Midwest region from 2003 to 2011, and Region (December 1, 2003-January 16, 2011) •Senior Vice President between 1998 and 2003. Prior to joining the company in 1998, Mr. Connor held numerous executive and brokerage positions with(April 1998-November 30, 2003)
•Various Positions Held at Cushman & Wakefield most recently serving as Senior Managing Director for the Midwest area. In 2019, Mr. Connor joined the Board of Trustees of (1981-March 1998)
Other Public Company Board:
•EPR Properties, a publicly traded real estate investment trust (REIT). Mr. Connor also serves, which focuses on the Boardreal estate venues that create value by facilitating out of Trustees of Roosevelt Universityhome leisure and is a member of the Advisory Board of Directors of the Marshall Bennett Institute of Real Estate at Roosevelt University. In addition, Mr. Connor is a member of the Executive Board of Governors of NAREITrecreation experiences where consumers choose to spend their discretionary time and a member of The Real Estate Roundtable. Mr. Connor also serves as a director of the Central Indiana Corporate Partnership.money (2019-present) |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Ngaire E. Cuneo, Age 69
|
| Director Since: 1995
|
| Board Committee: Audit
|
| Qualifications: Ms. Cuneo brings auditing, business administration, consulting, corporate development, and mergers and acquisitions expertise to the Board.
|
| |
| Ms. Cuneo is an Executive Vice President of Silac, LLC, a private insurance company, a position she has held since July 2016. In addition, Ms. Cuneo has been a partner of Red Associates, LLC, a venture capital firm in the financial services sector, since 2002. Ms. Cuneo also served as an Executive Vice President of Forethought Financial Group, an insurance holding company, from 2006 until 2010. From 1992 through 2001, Ms. Cuneo was an Executive Vice President of Conseco, Inc., an owner, operator, and provider of services to companies in the financial services industry. Ms. Cuneo has served on the Board of Directors of Sterling Life Insurance Company, a private insurance company, since July 2016. The Board has determined that Ms. Cuneo qualifies as an “audit committee financial expert” as defined under the applicable rules established by the SEC. |
| | Charles R. Eitel, Age 70
|
| Director Since: 1999
|
| Board Committee: Corporate Governance
|
| Qualifications: Mr. Eitel brings business administration, capital markets, consulting, corporate development, corporate governance, entrepreneurship, human capital, international business, investor relations, marketing, mergers and acquisitions, public company, risk oversight, and sustainability expertise to the Board.
|
| |
| Mr. Eitel is the former Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of WS Packaging Group, Inc., a privately owned producer of printed, packaged goods. Mr. Eitel served in those positions between 2015 and February 2018. Between 2009 and 2014, Mr. Eitel was a partner of Eitel & Armstrong, LLC, which is now North Inlet Partners, a consulting practice that provides hands-on operating and financial guidance to middle market companies. Prior to forming Eitel & Armstrong in 2009, Mr. Eitel served as Vice Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Simmons Bedding Company, an Atlanta-based manufacturer of mattresses, from 2008 to 2009. Mr. Eitel served as Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Simmons Bedding Company from 2000 until his appointment to Vice Chairman in 2008. Since 1999, Mr. Eitel has served on the Board of Directors of American Fidelity Assurance Corporation, a provider of supplemental health insurance benefits and financial services to education employees, auto dealerships, health care providers, and municipal workers across the United States. Since 2019, Mr. Eitel has served on the Board of Directors of Flexsteel Industries, Inc., a public company manufacturer, importer, and marketer of residential and contract upholstered and wooden furniture products in the United States. Mr. Eitel currently chairs the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee of its Board of Directors. |
|
| | | |
| | Tamara D. FischerAge 64 |
| Director Since: 2020 |
| Board Committee: N/AAudit
|
| | | | |
Age: 66
Independent director | | Qualifications: Ms. Fischer brings auditing, business administration, capital markets, investor relations, mergers and acquisitions, public company and risk oversight expertise to the Board. |
| |
|
The Board has determined that Ms. Fischer has served since January 1, 2020,qualifies as a member ofan “audit committee financial expert” as defined under the Board of Trusteesapplicable rules established by the Securities and the Exchange Commission (SEC).
Business Experience:
•President and Chief Executive Officer of National Storage Affiliates Trust, a real estate investment trustpublicly traded REIT focused on the ownership, operation and acquisition of self-storage properties. Ms. Fischer joined the company at its inception in 2013, serving as its Executive Vice properties (2020-present) •President and Chief Financial Officer until she was promoted to President and Chief Financial Officer on Julyof National Storage Affiliates Trust (July 1, 2018. From 2004 to 2008, Ms. Fischer served as the 2018-2019) •Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of National Storage Affiliates Trust (2013-June 30, 2018) •Various consulting positions (2011-2012) •Consultant to Vintage Wine Trust, Inc., a real estate investment trustREIT created to acquire and own vineyards, wineries and other real estate related to the wine industry. She was involved in all aspectsindustry (2009-2010) •Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the company’s capital markets, investor relations, and financial reporting activities. She continued to serve Vintage Wine Trust, Inc. as a consultant through its dissolution in 2010 and served in various other consulting positions until becoming involved with National Storage Affiliates. From 1993 to 2003, Ms. Fischer served as the (2004-2008) •Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Chateau Communities, Inc., which was one of the largest real estate investment trustsREITs in the manufactured home community sector. There, she was responsible for overseeing the company’s initial public offering and several mergers and acquisitions. She was also involved in capital markets activity, investor relations, financial reporting, and administrative responsibilities. Ms. Fischer remained at Chateau Communities, Inc. through its sale to Hometown America LLC in 2003. Prior to her experience at Chateau Communities, Inc., Ms. Fischer spent nine years atsector (1993-2003) •Various positions with Coopers & Lybrand (now PricewaterhouseCoopers), initially as an accountant in the real estate practice and later as an audit manager. (1984-1992)
Other Public Company Board:
•National Storage Affiliates Trust (2020-present) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Norman K. JenkinsAge 57 |
| Director Since:2017 | | Committee: Corporate Governance |
| Board Committee: Compensation and Human Capital
| | | |
Age: 59
Independent director | | Qualifications:Mr. Jenkins brings auditing, business administration, capital markets, entrepreneurship, human capital, mergers and acquisitions and public company expertise to the Board. |
| |
| Mr. Jenkins is
Business Experience:
•President and Chief Executive Officer of Capstone Development, LLC, a privately-held developer and acquirer of institutional-quality lodging assets. Prior to founding Capstone Development, LLC in 2009, Mr. Jenkins served in variouscommercial and multi-family real estate (2009-present) •Various roles for Marriott International, Inc. between 1992 and 2008, including most recently as Senior Vice President, North American Lodging Development. Mr. Jenkins began his career with McDonald’s Corporation holding(1992-2008) •Various finance and operating roles between 1986 and 1992. Mr. Jenkins currently serves on the Boards of The Howard University School of Business and the Developer Roundtable of Washington, DC.for McDonald’s Corporation (1986-1992)
Other Public Company Boards:
•Urban Edge Properties, a publicly traded REIT (2021-present) •AutoNation, Inc., a publicly traded automotive retailer (2020-present) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Kelly T. Killingsworth | | Director Since: 2021 | | Committee: Compensation and Human Capital Committee |
| | | | |
Age: 57
Independent director | | Qualifications: Ms. Killingsworth brings business administration, consulting, corporate development, entrepreneurship, governmental and regulatory matters, human capital, international business, investor relations, marketing and mergers and acquisitions expertise to the Board.
Business Experience:
•Vice President, Logistics of NIKE, Inc. (2020-present) •Various roles in logistics and merchandising for Walmart Inc. (2009-2020) •Independent consultant regarding supply chain matters to Ricoh Systems, which produces electronic products, primarily cameras and office equipment (2009-2009) •Senior Director, Product Management, Supply Chain/Transportation of Manhattan Associates, Inc., which builds technology solutions that solve the world's most complex business problems in supply chain, inventory and omnichannel commerce (2006-2008) •Various logistics roles at The Home Depot, Inc. (2002-2006) •Business Development Senior Manager of Viewlocity, Inc., which provides supply chain management software solutions (2000-2002) •Various management, consulting, and transportation roles at 12 Technologies, Amoco Polymers, Yellow Logistics Services, Dupont, Roadway Package Systems, Inc. and B.I. Transportation (1988-2000) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Melanie R. SabelhausAge 71 |
| Director Since:2012 |
| Board Committee: Compensation and Human Capital, Chairperson
|
| | | | |
Age: 73
Independent director | | Qualifications: Ms. Sabelhaus brings consulting, entrepreneurship, human capital, marketing, public company and marketingrisk oversight expertise to the Board. |
| |
| Ms. Sabelhaus has been a consultant
Business Experience:
•Principal at Visionary Philanthropic Consulting, LLC, which provides virtual consulting to philanthropic organizations (2018-present) •Consultant to philanthropy for several nonprofit organizations around the country since 2005. Ms. Sabelhaus was appointed by President Bush as U.S. (2005-present) •Deputy Administrator of the U.S. Small Business Administration, from 2002 to 2005, where she was responsible for policy development and program supervision. From 1998 until 2018, Ms. Sabelhaus dedicated her time to communitysupervision (2002-2005) •Community fundraising and women’s business issues. In 1986, Ms. Sabelhaus foundedissues (1998-2018) •Vice President for Global Sales of BridgeStreet Accommodations, Inc., which offered upscale, fully furnished apartments, townhouses and condominiums primarily to business travelers or relocating corporate executives at Fortune 2000 corporations and professional firms (1997-1998) •Chief Executive Officer of Exclusive Interim Properties, (EIP), a real estate company that specialized in short-term, furnished housing. Ms. Sabelhaus served as Chief Executive Officer of EIP from 1986 until the company merged with four similar firms in 1997 taking the company public and renaming it BridgeStreet Worldwide. From 1997 until 1998, Ms. Sabelhaus served as Vice President for Global Sales of BridgeStreet Worldwide. From 1972 to 1986, Ms. Sabelhaus workedhousing (1986-1996) •Various roles at International Business Machine (IBM), during which time she aided in the launch of IBM’s consumer retail program. Ms. Sabelhaus co-founded the United Way’s Women United, raising $1.5 billion over 15 years, and the American Red Cross Tiffany Circle, Society of Women Leaders. Ms. Sabelhaus was the Vice Chair of the National American Red Cross for 11 years. Ms. Sabelhaus currently serves as a trustee of Johns Hopkins Health System.Machines Corporation (1972-1986) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Peter M. Scott, IIIAge 70 |
| Director Since:2011 |
| Board Committees: Audit and Finance;Finance, Chairperson of Audit
|
| | | | |
Age: 72
Independent director | | Qualifications: Mr. Scott brings business administration, capital markets, consulting, corporate development, corporate governance, governmental and regulatory matters, human capital, investor relations, mergers and acquisitions, public company and risk oversight expertise to the Board. |
| |
| Mr. Scott was Chief Financial Officer of Progress Energy, Inc. from 2000 to 2003 and from 2005 until his retirement in 2008. From 2004 to 2008, Mr. Scott was also President and Chief Executive Officer of Progress Energy Service Company LLC and had responsibility for all financial and administrative functions of Progress Energy, Inc. Mr. Scott also held various other management positions with Progress Energy, Inc. or its subsidiaries between 2000 and 2008, including responsibilities for its telecommunications and competitive energy subsidiaries. Before joining Progress Energy, Inc. in 2000, Mr. Scott was the President of Scott, Madden & Associates, Inc., a general management consulting firm that he founded in 1983. The firm served clients in a number of industries, including energy and telecommunications. From 1981 until 1983, Mr. Scott served as the Assistant to the Executive Vice President of Carolina Power & Light Company, Inc., a predecessor of Progress Energy, Inc. Prior to that, Mr. Scott was a principal and partner in Theodore Barry & Associates, Inc., a Los Angeles-based consulting firm, between 1977 and 1981. Mr. Scott serves as Chairman of the Board of Governors at Research Triangle International, a not-for-profit organization that provides research and technical services.
The Board has determined that Mr. Scott qualifies as an “audit committee financial expert” as defined under the applicable rules established by the SEC.
Business Experience:
•Chief Financial Officer of Progress Energy, Inc. (now Duke Energy Corporation) (2000-2003); (2005-2008) •President and Chief Executive Officer of Progress Energy Service Company LLC, where he had responsibility for all financial and administrative functions of Progress Energy, Inc. (now Duke Energy Corporation) (2004-2008) •Various other management positions with Progress Energy, Inc. (now Duke Energy Corporation) or its subsidiaries, including responsibilities for its telecommunications and competitive energy subsidiaries •President of Scott, Madden & Associates, Inc., a general management consulting firm that served clients in a number of industries, including energy and telecommunications (1983-2000) •Assistant to the Executive Vice President of Carolina Power & Light Company, Inc., a predecessor of Progress Energy, Inc. (now Duke Energy Corporation) (1981-1983) •Principal and partner in Theodore Barry & Associates, Inc., a Los Angeles-based consulting firm (1977-1981)
Past Public Company Board:
•Cleco Corporation (now Corporate Holdings LLC), a public utility holding company (2009-2016) |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | David P. StockertAge 57 |
| Director Since: 2017 (Lead Director since 2019) |
| Board Committee: Corporate Governance, Chairperson
|
| | | | |
Age: 59
Independent director Lead Director since 2019 | | Qualifications: Mr. Stockert brings business administration, capital markets, corporate governance, human capital, investor relations, mergers and acquisitions and public company expertise to the Board. |
| | |
| In 2019, Mr. Stockert became one
Business Experience:
•One of three general partners of Sweetwater Opportunity Fund, L.P., a real estate opportunity fund headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia. The fund wasGeorgia and formed to invest in commercial property in the Southeast and Texas, targeting primarily sub-institutional, opportunistic, situational and relationship-based investments. From 2002 to 2016, Mr. Stockert served as investments (2019-present) •Chief Executive Officer and President of Post Properties, Inc., a publicly traded REIT that invested in apartments and as was later acquired by Mid-America Apartment Communities, Inc. (2002-2016) •President and Chief Operating Officer from 2001 to 2002. Prior to joiningof Post Properties, Inc., Mr. Stockert served as (2001-2002) •Executive Vice President of Duke Realty Corporation from 1999 to 2000, and as (1999-2000) •Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Weeks Corporation, from 1995a publicly traded REIT that invested in industrial and suburban office properties (1995 to 1999. Prior to joining Weeks Corporation, Mr. Stockert was an1999) •Various investment banker and a certified public accountant. Since 2016, Mr. Stockert has served on the Board of Directors of banking positions (1990-1995)
Other Public Company Board:
•Mid-America Apartment Communities, Inc., a publicly traded REIT that invests in apartments. Mr. Stockert also serves on multiple civic and charitable boards in the Atlanta area.apartments (2016-present) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Chris T. SultemeierAge 57 |
| Director Since: 2018 |
| Board Committee: Finance
|
| | | | |
Age: 59
Independent director | | Qualifications: Mr. Sultemeier brings business administration, human capital, international business, public company and sustainability expertise to the Board. |
| |
| Mr. Sultemeier served as
Business Experience:
•Executive Vice President Logistics of Walmart Stores, Inc. and President/Chief Executive Officer of Wal-mart Transportation LLC between 2012 and 2017. Prior to that, Mr. Sultemeier held various(2012-2017) •Various roles in logistics and merchandising for Walmart Stores, Inc., which he joined in 1989. Mr. Sultemeier served as a (1989-2016) •U.S. Army Captain between 1984 and 1989. Mr. Sultemeier currently serves(1984-1989)
Other Public Company Board:
•Logistics Innovation Technologies Corp., a blank check company focusing on opportunities in the U.S. Congressional Medal of Honor Foundation Board of Directors and teaches at M.I.T. in its Supply Chain/Transportation Master’s Program. |
 | | Michael E. Szymanczyk, •Age 71
|
| Director Since: 2014
|
| Board Committees: Audit and Finance; Chairperson of Finance
|
| Qualifications: Mr. Szymanczyk brings auditing, business administration, capital markets, corporate development, corporate governance, governmental and regulatory matters, human capital, investor relations, marketing, mergers and acquisitions, publicYellow Corporation, a publicly traded holding company and risk oversight expertise to the Board.
|
| |
| Mr. Szymanczyk currently serves as Chief Executive Officer of Endurance Capital LLC, a family-owned real estate investment venture, a position he has held since 2006. Mr. Szymanczyk was the Chairmanwith one of the Boardlargest, most comprehensive logistics and Chief Executive Officer of Altria Group, Inc. from 2008 until 2012. From 2002 through 2008, Mr. Szymanczyk served as Chairman, Presidentless-than-truckload networks in North America with local, regional, national and Chief Executive Officer of Philip Morris USA Inc. Prior to that, he served in various sales and marketing roles at Proctor & Gamble, Inc. and Kraft, Inc. Mr. Szymanczyk also serves on the Finance and Risk Oversight Committee and Compensation, Governance, and Nominating Committee of the Board of Directors of Dominion Resources, Inc., a publicly-traded provider of electricity, natural gas and related services to customers primarily in the eastern and western regions of the U.S. Mr. Szymanczyk has served as a director of Dominion Resources, Inc. since 2012. The Board has determined that Mr. Szymanczyk qualifies as an “audit committee financial expert” as defined under the applicable rules established by the SEC.international capabilities (2021-present)
|
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Warren M. Thompson, Age 60 |
| Director Since: 2019 |
| Board Committee: Finance
|
| | | | |
Age: 62
Independent director | | Qualifications: Mr. Thompson brings business administration, corporate governance and entrepreneurship expertise to the Board. |
| | |
| Mr. Thompson is
Business Experience:
•Chairman of the Board and President of Thompson Hospitality, a private retail food and facilities management firm. Mr. Thompson founded Thompson Hospitality in 1992. Mr. Thompson began his career with thefirm (1992-present) •Various roles at Marriott Corporation in 1983, where he started with the Restaurant Fast Track Management Development Program and served in 15 positions in nine years, ending as Vice President Operations for the Host Division. Mr. Thompson has served on the Board of Directors of (1983-1991)
Other Public Company Boards:
•Performance Food Group Company, a publicly traded food service distribution company (2020-present) •Compass Group North American, a public food service and support services company since 1997.(1997-present)
Past Public Company Board:
•Federal Realty Investment Trust, a publicly-traded REIT that owns, operates and develops high-quality retail properties (2017-2019)
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Lynn C. Thurber Age 73 |
| Director Since: 2008 |
| Board Committee: Corporate GovernanceAudit and Finance, Chairperson of Finance
|
| | | | |
Age:75
Independent director | | Qualifications: Ms. Thurber brings auditing, capital markets, corporate governance, human capital, international business, investor relations, mergers and acquisitions, public company, risk oversight and sustainability expertise to the Board. |
| | |
| Ms. Thurber served
Business Experience:
•Part-time employee of LaSalle Investment Management (described below) for the purpose of serving as the non-executiveChairman of the Board of Jones Lang LaSalle Income Property Trust, Inc., a non-listed REIT that owns and manages a diversified portfolio of office, retail, industrial and apartment properties (2018-present) •Non-executive Chairman of LaSalle Investment Management, a wholly owned subsidiary of Jones Lang LaSalle Inc.Incorporated and a global real estate money management firm that invests in private real estate as well as publicly traded real estate companies on behalf of institutional and individual investors from 2006 until 2017. Prior to becoming Chairman, Ms. Thurber was the (2007-2017) •Chief Executive Officer of LaSalle Investment Management from 2000 to 2006. Since 2011, Ms. Thurber has served as the Chairman(2000-2006) •Co-President of the Board of Directors of LaSalle Investment Management (1995-1999) •Various roles, including Chief Executive Officer, with Alex Brown Kleinwort Benson Realty Advisors, a real estate pension fund adviser that merged with LaSalle Partners (1992-1994) •Various roles with Morgan Stanley (1975-1992)
Other Public Company Boards:
•Acadia Realty Trust, a publicly-traded REIT that primarily invests in retail properties (2016-present) •Jones Lang LaSalle Income Property Trust, Inc., a non-listed REIT that owns and manages a diversified portfolio of office, retail, industrial, and apartment properties. In addition, since 2016, Ms. Thurber has served as a trustee of Acadia Realty Trust, a public REIT that primarily invests in retail properties. Ms. Thurber is a Governing Trustee and former Chairman of Global Board of the Urban Land Institute, a non-profit organization that provides leadership in the responsible use of land and in creating and sustaining thriving communities worldwide. (2011-present)
|
Structure of the Board and the Lead Director
The Board views the selection of the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) as one of its most important responsibilities. The Board believes that it should remain free to determine whether these positions should be combined or separated based on circumstances and the composition of the Board at any given time. The Board has determined that a combined Chairman and CEOChief Executive Officer is in the best interests of the company at this time and has chosen Mr. James B. Connor, who is our CEO,Chief Executive Officer, to serve also as the Chairman of the Board.
The Board believes that having the same person serve in both positions demonstrates for our associates, vendors, tenants and other stakeholders that the company is under strong leadership, with one person setting the tone and having primary responsibility for managing our operations. To ensure an appropriate balance of power exists between our unaffiliated directors and the CEO,Chief Executive Officer, the Board established the Lead Director position. The independent members of the Board have chosen Mr. David P. Stockert, Chairperson of our Corporate Governance Committee, to serve as Lead Director. As outlined in our corporate governance guidelines, the Lead Director chairs the executive sessions of the independent directors, which are held at least quarterly. The Lead Director also serves as a liaison between the CEOChief Executive Officer and the independent directors, approves information sent to the Board and approves meeting agendas and schedules to ensure that there is sufficient time for discussion of all agenda items.
We firmly believe that our structure allows for appropriate oversight by the Board in fulfilling its duties to our company and our shareholders.
Board Oversight of Risk Management
The Board is primarily responsible for overseeing the company’s risk management processes. A portion of this responsibility has been delegated by the Board to each of the committees of the Board with respect to the assessment of the company’s risks and risk management in its respective areas of oversight. The focus of each of the
committees with respect to risk management is as follows:
These committees and the full Board focus on the most significant risks facing the company and the company’s general risk management strategy and also ensure that risks undertaken by the company are consistent with the
Board’s appetite for risk. While the Board oversees the company’s risk management, company management is responsible for day-to-day risk management processes. We believe this division of responsibilities is the most effective approach for addressing the risks facing the company and that the leadership structure of the Board supports this approach.
Management works with the Board to assess the company’s risks as follows:
Cyber Security
Cyber security is a growing risk for companies. While the Audit Committee is tasked with overseeing cyber security, it is of particular concern to the full Board, as well. Management reports at least annually to the full Board, as well as quarterly to the Audit Committee, regarding the steps the company is taking to protect the company from cyber attacks or intrusions. Management has created a Cyber Security Committee that meets regularly to discuss the cyber risks facing the company. The Cyber Security Committee focuses on the following strategy areas: legal and compliance; operations and technology; business continuity and crisis management; leadership and governance; human factors; and information risk management.
Independent Directors
Under the company’s articles of incorporation, at least three-fourths of the directors must be persons who are “unaffiliated directors,” which means persons who are not officers or associates of the company or any of its affiliates. Since Mr. John P. Case; Ms. Ngaire E. Cuneo; Mr. Charles R. Eitel; Ms. Tamara D. Fischer; Mr. Norman K. Jenkins; Ms. Kelly T. Killingsworth, Ms. Melanie R. Sabelhaus; Mr. Peter M. Scott, III; Mr. David P. Stockert; Mr. Chris T. Sultemeier; Mr. Michael E. Szymanczyk; Mr. Warren M. Thompson; and Ms.
Lynn C. Thurber are not currently officers or associates of the company or any of its affiliates, 92%91% of the director nominees are unaffiliated directors.
In addition, under the enhanced corporate governance listing standards of the NYSE,New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), at least a majority of the company’s directors, and all members of the company’s Audit, Compensation and Human Capital and Corporate Governance Committees, must meet the test of “independence” as defined under the listing standards of the NYSE. The NYSE listing standards provide that to qualify as an “independent” director, in addition to satisfying certain bright-line criteria, the Board must affirmatively determine that a director has no material relationship with the company (either directly or as a partner, shareholder or officer of an organization that has a relationship with the company) that would compromise the director’s independence.In January 2020, the The Board undertookundertakes a review of director independence.independence at least annually to make affirmative determinations as to the independence of Board members and nominees. During this year’s review, the Board considered, among other things, relationships and transactions during the past three years between each director or any member of his or her immediate family, on the one hand, and the company and its subsidiaries and affiliates, on the other hand. The purpose of the review was to determine whether any relationships or transactions
were inconsistent with a director’s independence as defined under the NYSE listing standards. Based on the review, the Board determined that all of the unaffiliated director nominees, as well as Mr. Szymanczyk, are independent under the listing standards of the NYSE.
In addition, members of the Audit Committee must satisfy additional independence requirements established by the SEC and NYSE. Specifically, members of the Audit Committee may not accept, directly or indirectly, any consulting, advisory or other compensatory fee from the company or its subsidiaries other than their directors’ compensation, and they may not be affiliated with the company or its subsidiaries. All members of the Audit Committee satisfy these enhanced independence requirements.
Finally, in determining the independence of any director who will serve on the Compensation and Human Capital Committee, the Board must consider all factors regarding a director’s relationship to the company that could affect that director’s ability to be independent from management in connection with his or her duties, including (1) the source of such director’s compensation, including any consulting, advisory or other compensatory fee paid by the company to the director; and (2) whether the director is affiliated with the company, its subsidiaries or affiliates. All members of the Compensation and Human Capital Committee satisfy these enhanced independence requirements.
Majority Voting Policy for Director Elections
The company’s articles of incorporation provide that the election of directors at an annual meeting shall be by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of the shareholders present in person or by proxy and entitled to vote at such meeting. In addition, the company’s corporate governance guidelines provide for a majority voting policy for the election of directors. Pursuant to this policy, in any non-contested election of directors, any nominee for director who does not receive the affirmative vote of at least a majority of the votes entitled to vote thereon present in person or by proxy (an Against Vote) shall promptly tender his or her resignation following certification of the shareholder vote. The Corporate Governance Committee shall consider the resignation offer and recommend to the Board of Directors the action to be taken with respect to such offer of resignation. Within 90 days following certification of the shareholder vote, the Board will act on the recommendation of the Corporate Governance Committee.
Any director who tenders his or her resignation under this provision shall not participate in the Corporate Governance Committee recommendation or Board action regarding whether to accept the resignation offer.
If each member of the Corporate Governance Committee receives an Against Vote in the same election, then the independent directors who did not receive an Against Vote shall appoint a committee amongst themselves to consider the resignation offers and recommend to the Board whether to accept them.
If only three or fewer directors do not receive an Against Vote in the same election, all directors may participate in the decision of whether or not to accept the resignation offers.
Proxy Access Policy
On October 25, 2017, the Board approved the amendment and restatement of the company’s bylaws to implement proxy access. These bylaws state that whenever the Board solicits proxies for the election of directors at an annual meeting of shareholders, subject to certain requirements, a shareholder, or a group of up to 20 shareholders, owning three percent or more of the company’s outstanding common stock continuously for at least three years can require the company to include in its proxy materials for such annual meeting director nominations for up to the greater of:
•20% of the number of directors up for election, rounding down to the nearest whole number; or
•two directors.
Shareholder requests to include shareholder nominees in the company’s proxy materials for the 2021 annual meeting2023 Annual Meeting of shareholdersShareholders must be received by the Corporate Secretary no earlier than October 12, 2020,3, 2022, and no later than November 11, 2020,2, 2022, and must satisfy the requirements specified in the company’s bylaws.
Information about Communications with Duke Realty Corporation and Our Board
Shareholders may communicate with Duke Realty’s Board on matters that protect or promote legitimate shareholder interests. For instructions on how to deliver such communications, visit the Investor Relations/Corporate Governance section of Duke Realty’s website at www.dukerealty.com.
Shareholders and other interested parties also may contact the Board by writing to:
Board of Directors
c/o the Corporate Secretary
8711 River Crossing Blvd.
Indianapolis, Indiana 46240
In addition, shareholders and other interested parties may communicate with Duke Realty’s independent, non-management directors and/or the entire Board, as required by the NYSE listing standards. Written communications to non-management directors should be sent to:
Non-Management Directors
c/o Corporate Secretary
8711 River Crossing Blvd.
Indianapolis, Indiana 46240
You may e-mail Duke Realty’s Lead Director at leaddirector@dukerealty.com.
BOARD COMMITTEES
The Board has four standing committees: the Audit Committee, the Corporate Governance Committee, the Compensation and Human Capital Committee and the Finance Committee. All committee members are independent. In addition, each member of the Audit Committee satisfies the enhanced independence requirements for audit committee members as defined in the NYSE listing standards and SEC rules. Similarly, each member of the Compensation and Human Capital Committee satisfies the enhanced independence standards for compensation committee members as defined in the NYSE listing standards and SEC rules. The Board has adopted written charters for each of these committees. The charters are available on the Investor Relations/Corporate Governance section of our website at www.dukerealty.com. In addition, the Investor Relations/Corporate Governance section of our website contains procedures established by the Audit Committee for submitting complaints or concerns about our accounting, internal accounting controls, or auditing matters. The following table summarizes the primary responsibilities of the committees.
|
| | | | |
| Committee | Primary Responsibilities |
| Audit | • provides assistance to the Board in fulfilling its responsibility to shareholders related to corporate accounting, reporting practices, the quality and integrity of financial reports, cyber security and other operating controls of the company |
| • selects the company’s independent auditors and engagement partner in the best interests of the company and its shareholders |
| • oversees the independent auditors’ activities |
| • supervises and assesses the performance of the company’s internal audit department |
| Corporate Governance | • makes recommendations to the Board regarding corporate governance policies and practices and oversees compliance with such policies and practices |
| • oversees succession planning for senior management and the Board |
| • recommends criteria for membership on the Board |
| • reviews candidates and nominates members for election to the Board |
| • makes recommendations to the Board concerning the members, size and responsibilities of each of the committees |
| • periodically reviews our corporate responsibility practices
|
| • oversees Board self-evaluation process |
| Compensation and Human Capital | • reviews and approves the compensation of the Board, CEO,Chief Executive Officer and other executive officers of the company and its affiliates |
| • oversees the company’s compensation strategies, programs, plans and policies to ensure that the Board, CEO,Chief Executive Officer, other executive officers and key management associates of the company and its affiliates are compensated effectively and in a manner consistent with the stated compensation strategy of the company |
| • oversees the administration of all company benefit plans |
| • reviews and approves the individual elements of compensation for the executive officers and directors of the company |
| • reviews associate turnover and diversity, as well as associate development and engagement programs |
| Finance | • reviews and evaluates the financial policies, plans and structure of the company, its subsidiaries and affiliates |
| • reviews the capital structure, capital raising transactions, investment decisions, financial commitments and relationships with external sources of financing and rating agencies |
| • reviews and authorizes asset acquisitions, asset dispositions and development transactions exceeding threshold amounts established by the Board |
Our website is located at www.dukerealty.com. Although information on our website is not part of this proxy statement, you can find company information there, such as our Code of Business Ethics, corporate governance guidelines, charters of the Board committees and reports that we file and furnish with the SEC. In addition, the Investor Relations/Corporate Governance section of our website contains procedures established by the Audit Committee for submitting complaints or concerns about our accounting, internal accounting controls or auditing matters. Copies of our Code of Business Ethics, corporate governance guidelines or charters of Board committees may be obtained by writing to:
2019
Duke Realty Corporation
8711 River Crossing Blvd.
Indianapolis, Indiana 46240
Attention: Investor Relations
2021 BOARD COMMITTEE MEMBERSHIP AND MEETINGS
The following table provides membership and meeting information for each of the committees of the Board during 2019.(1)2021.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Board | Audit | Compensation and Human Capital | Finance | | Corporate Governance |
| John P. Case | | Member | | | | | | Member | | | | | | | | | |
William Cavanaugh III(2) | | Former Member | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Former Chairperson | |
Alan H. Cohen(2) | | Former Member | | | | | | | | | | Former Member | | | | | |
| James B. Connor | | Chairman | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Ngaire E. Cuneo | | Member | | | Member | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Charles R. Eitel | | Member | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Member | |
| Norman K. Jenkins | | Member | | | | | | Member | | | | | | | | | |
| Melanie R. Sabelhaus | | Member | | | | | | Chairperson | | | | | | | | | |
| Peter M. Scott, III | | Member | | | Chairperson | | | | | | Member | | | | | |
| David P. Stockert | | Lead Director | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Chairperson | |
| Chris T. Sultemeier | | Member | | | | | | | | | | Member | | | | | |
| Michael E. Szymanczyk | | Member | | | Member | | | | | | | Chairperson | | | | |
| Warren M. Thompson | | Member | | | | | | | | | | Member | | | | | |
| Lynn C. Thurber | | Member | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Member | |
| Number of 2019 Meetings | | 6 | | | 4 | | | 5 | | | | 9 | | | | 4 | |
|
| |
(1)
| All directors, with the exception of Messrs. William Cavanaugh III and Alan H. Cohen, have served on the respective committee(s) listed above since May 1, 2019. |
(2)
| Messrs. Cavanaugh and Cohen served as directors until the annual meeting of shareholders held on April 24, 2019, when they did not stand for re-election. |
Independent directors met separately in executive sessions four times in 2019, in addition to the committee meetings noted above.2021. As Lead Director, Mr. Cavanaugh presided over the first of these executive sessions, and Mr. David P. Stockert presided over the last three.each of these executive sessions.
Attendance at Board Meetings and the Annual Meeting
All of our directors attended at least 75% of the meetings of the Board in 20192021 during the term of their tenure, including meetings of the committees of which they were members. The company encourages all of its directors to attend the annual meeting and, in 2019,2021, all directors, with the exception of Mr. Warren M. Thompson, attended the meeting.
DIRECTOR COMPENSATION
The company does not pay additionaldirector compensation to directors who are also employees of the company. Non-employee directors received the following compensation in 2019:2021.
an annual retainer of $100,000, payable in cash unless otherwise elected to be paid in shares of our common stock
an annual supplemental retainer for the directors serving in the roles indicated in the following table:
|
| | | |
Service Description | Annual Amount |
|
Lead Director/Corporate Governance Committee Chairperson(1)
|
| $30,000 |
|
Audit Committee Chairperson |
| $20,000 |
|
Compensation and Human Capital Committee Chairperson |
| $17,500 |
|
Finance Committee Chairperson |
| $17,500 |
|
Director on more than one committee |
| $5,000 |
|
| |
(1)
| The positions of Lead Director and Corporate Governance Committee Chairperson are currently held by one individual, and in 2019, there was only one supplemental retainer for the two positions. |
an annual grant of restricted stock units (RSUs), pursuant to the Duke Realty Corporation 2015 Non-Employee Directors’ Compensation Plan (2015 Directors’ Plan). These RSUs were granted on February 10, 2019, and with the exception of Messrs. Cavanaugh and Cohen, all such RSUs vested in full on the first anniversary of the grant date. The RSUs granted to Messrs. Cavanaugh and Cohen on February 10, 2019, vested upon their retirement from the Board. The number of RSUs awarded was determined by dividing the grant value of $125,000 by the closing stock price on the grant date.
Newly appointed non-employee directors are entitled to a one-time grant of RSUs valued at $50,000. These awards vest in full on the second anniversary of the grant date assuming the recipient remains a director at such time. All retainers are paid on a quarterly basis in arrears, for the previous quarter’s service.
On an annual basis, theThe Compensation and Human Capital Committee of the Board usually conducts a competitive review of our non-employee director compensation program on an annual basis, using the same peer group of similarly-sized REITs that are used for executive compensation comparisons.
Based on these reviews, the Compensation and Human Capital Committee may make changes to thedetermined a benchmarking analysis was unnecessary in 2020 and maintained a consistent non-employee director compensationpay program for the upcoming year. The lastfrom 2020 to 2021. However, a review was conducted in September 2019 and2021 that indicated that our non-employee director compensation levels generally approximate the peer group median with the exception of the annual grant of RSUsrestricted stock units for non-employeeindependent directors and the retainer for the Chairpersons of the Audit Committee, the Finance Committee and the Corporate Governance Committee, which were below the median.Compensation and Human Capital Committee. Effective January 1, 2020,2022, the annual grant of RSUsrestricted stock was increased to $135,000,$145,000, the supplemental retainer for the Chairperson of the Audit Committee was increased to $25,000, and a supplemental retainer of $15,000 for$30,000, the Chairperson of the Corporate Governance CommitteeFinance committee was added. The new supplemental retainer forincreased to $20,000 and the Chairperson of the Corporate GovernanceCompensation and Human Capital Committee is in additionwas increased to the $30,000 supplemental retainer for the Lead Director.$25,000.
Non-employee directors also are reimbursed for reasonable travel expenses incurred in connection with attendance at meetings of the Board, its committees or other company functions in which non-employee directors participate at the request of the Chairman of the Board and CEO.Chief Executive Officer. In addition, we match dollar-for-dollar donations made by eligible associates and directors, up to $1,000 per associate/director per calendar year, to the eligible nonprofit organization of their choice. We do not provide any perquisites, other personal benefits or property to directors for which the aggregate value would exceed $10,000 per director.
Non-employee directors may elect to defer receipt of all or a portion of their director compensation payable in cash, stock or RSUs pursuant to the Directors’ Deferred Compensation Plan. Deferred compensation and earnings will be paid to directors after they cease to be members of the Board. Deferred compensation that otherwise is payable in shares
of common stock is invested in a “deferred stock account” under the Directors’ Deferred Compensation Plan. Deferred compensation that is payable in cash may be invested in either a deferred stock account or an “interest account” under this plan. These deferral accounts are described below.
•Deferred Stock Account. This account allows the director, in effect, to invest his or her deferred compensation in shares of the company’s common stock. Funds in this account are credited as hypothetical shares of the company’s common stock based on the market price at the time the compensation would otherwise have
been paid. Dividends on these hypothetical shares are deemed to be reinvested in additional hypothetical shares based upon the market price of the company’s common stock on the date dividends are paid. Actual shares are issued only when a director ends his or her service on the Board.
•Interest Account. Through December 31, 2019,2021, amounts in this account earned interest at a rate equal to 120% of the long-term applicable federal rate, as published by the Internal Revenue Service.
Stock Ownership Policies
Pursuant to our Director and Executive Stock Ownership Guidelines (Stock Ownership Guidelines), a stock ownership goal for each non-employee director is determined on an individual basis, first in dollars equal to five times the director’s annual retainer, and then by converting that amount to a fixed number of shares. Each director has five years to attain the target number of shares. A copy of these Stock Ownership Guidelines can be found on the Investor Relations/Corporate Governance section of our website at http://www.dukerealty.com.www.dukerealty.com.
Stock Retention Requirements.
Until non-employee directors reach their targeted share ownership, they are required to retain any shares that they owned on the date they became subject to the Stock Ownership Guidelines and at least 75% of “net shares” delivered through our director compensation programs. For this purpose, “net shares” means the number of shares obtained by exercising stock options or through the vesting of awards, less the number of shares the director sells, swaps or trades to pay forthe exercise price of stock options and any exercise costs.applicable tax obligations, including income, FICA or Medicare taxes, as of the date of the transaction. If the director transfers an award to a family member who resides in the same household, the transferee will be subject to the same retention requirements, and the shares will still be counted toward satisfaction of the ownership requirements.
The following table sets forth compensation information for all of our non-employee directors for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2019.2021.
Director Compensation Table for 20192021
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Name | | Fees Earned or Paid in Cash (1) | | Stock Awards
(2)(3) | | All Other Compensation (4) | | Total |
| John P. Case | | $100,000 | | $135,000 | | – | | $235,000 |
| Ngaire E. Cuneo | | $75,000 | | $135,000 | | – | | $210,000 |
| Charles R. Eitel | | $75,000 | | $135,000 | | $1,000 | | $211,000 |
| Tamara D. Fischer | | $100,000 | | $135,000 | | – | | $235,000 |
| Norman K. Jenkins | | $100,000 | | $135,000 | | – | | $235,000 |
| Kelly T. Killingsworth | | $50,000 | | $50,000 | | – | | $100,000 |
| Melanie R. Sabelhaus | | $117,500 | | $135,000 | | $1,000 | | $253,500 |
| Peter M. Scott, III | | $130,000 | | $135,000 | | – | | $265,000 |
| David P. Stockert | | $145,000 | | $135,000 | | $1,000 | | $281,000 |
| Chris T. Sultemeier | | $100,000 | | $135,000 | | – | | $235,000 |
| Michael E. Szymanczyk | | $116,875 | | $135,000 | | – | | $251,875 |
| Warren M. Thompson | | $100,000 | | $135,000 | | – | | $235,000 |
| Lynn C. Thurber | | $111,250 | | $135,000 | | – | | $246,250 |
(1)Because we pay director fees in arrears on a quarterly basis, a portion of the cash fees paid to directors in 2021 was based on the prior year’s annual and supplemental retainer amounts. Messrs. Jenkins and Stockert and Mses. Cuneo and Killingsworth each elected to receive payment of their annual cash retainer in shares of common stock as indicated in the following table. Furthermore, Mr. Jenkins and Mses. Cuneo and Killingsworth elected to defer receipt of their shares for their annual retainer and any supplemental retainer pursuant to the Directors’ Deferred Compensation Plan. The number of shares received in lieu of a cash retainer was determined by dividing the amount of the applicable retainer by the closing stock price on the date the retainer was earned.
|
| | | | | |
| Name | | Fees Earned or Paid in Cash (1) | Stock Awards
(2)(3) | All Other Compensation (4) | Total |
| John P. Case | | $100,000 | $125,000 | – | $225,000 |
William Cavanaugh III(5) | | $97,500 | $125,000 | – | $222,500 |
| Alan H. Cohen | | $75,000 | $125,000 | – | $200,000 |
| Ngaire E. Cuneo | | $100,000 | $125,000 | – | $225,000 |
| Charles R. Eitel | | $100,000 | $125,000 | $1,000 | $226,000 |
| Norman K. Jenkins | | $100,000 | $125,000 | – | $225,000 |
| Melanie R. Sabelhaus | | $116,875 | $125,000 | $1,000 | $242,875 |
| Peter M. Scott, III | | $125,000 | $125,000 | – | $250,000 |
David P. Stockert(5) | | $115,000 | $125,000 | $1,000 | $241,000 |
| Chris T. Sultemeier | | $100,000 | $125,000 | – | $225,000 |
| Michael E. Szymanczyk | | $121,875 | $125,000 | – | $246,875 |
Warren M. Thompson(5) | | $75,000 | $175,000 | - | $250,000 |
| Lynn C. Thurber | | $100,000 | $125,000 | $1,000 | $226,000 |
| |
(1)
| Because we pay director fees in arrears on a quarterly basis, a portion of the cash fees paid to directors in 2019 was based on the prior year’s annual and supplemental retainer amounts. Messrs. Cavanaugh, Jenkins, Stockert, and Szymanczyk and Mses. Cuneo and Thurber each elected to receive payment of their annual cash retainer in shares of common stock as indicated in the following table. Furthermore, Messrs. Cavanaugh, Jenkins, and Szymanczyk and Ms. Cuneo elected to defer receipt of their shares for their annual retainer and any supplemental retainer pursuant to the Directors’ Deferred Compensation Plan. The number of shares was determined by dividing the amount of the applicable retainer by the closing stock price on the date the retainer was earned. |
|
| | | |
| Name | | Total Number of Shares Received in 20192021 for Annual Cash Retainer |
William Cavanaugh III | | 3,333 |
| Ngaire E. Cuneo | | 3,3061,749 |
| Norman K. Jenkins | | 3,3062,261 |
| Kelly T. Killingsworth | | 1,040 |
| David P. Stockert | | 3,765 |
Michael E. Szymanczyk | | 4,026 |
Lynn C. Thurber | | 3,3062,261 |
26
(2)Represents the aggregate grant date fair value of stock awards we granted as computed under Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic 718, Compensation - Stock Compensation (ASC 718). The fair value of the stock awards was equal to the stock price on the date of grant. Compensation in the form of stock awards includes RSUs granted in 2021.
(3)No options were granted to directors in 2021, and there were no outstanding options held by our non-employee directors as of December 31, 2021. The following table sets forth the aggregate number of outstanding stock awards held by our non-employee directors as of December 31, 2021.
| |
(2)
| Represents the aggregate grant date fair value of stock awards we granted as computed under FASB (Financial Accounting Standards Board) ASC (Accounting Standards Codification) Topic 718, Compensation- Stock Compensation, (ASC 718). The fair value of the stock awards was equal to the stock price on the date of grant. Compensation in the form of stock awards includes RSUs granted in 2019.
|
| |
(3)
| No options were granted to directors in 2019, and there were no outstanding options held by our non-employee directors as of December 31, 2019. The following table sets forth the aggregate number of outstanding stock awards held by our non-employee directors as of December 31, 2019: |
|
| | |
| Name | | Number of RSUs |
| John P. Case | | 6,289 |
William Cavanaugh III | | –
|
Alan H. Cohen | | –
3,279 |
| Ngaire E. Cuneo | | 4,285— |
| Charles R. Eitel | | 4,285— |
| Tamara D. Fischer | | 4,721 |
| Norman K. Jenkins | | 4,2853,279 |
| Kelly T. Killingsworth | | 1,122 |
| Melanie R. Sabelhaus | | 4,2853,279 |
| Peter M. Scott, III | | 4,2853,279 |
| David P. Stockert | | 4,2853,279 |
| Chris T. Sultemeier | | 6,2893,279 |
| Michael E. Szymanczyk | | 4,2853,279 |
| Warren M. Thompson | | 6,0033,279 |
| Lynn C. Thurber | | 4,2853,279 |
| |
(4)(4)Represents the amount of matching charitable contributions provided under the Duke Realty Matching Gifts program.
| Represents the amount of matching charitable contributions provided under the Duke Realty Matching Gifts program. |
| |
(5)
| Reflects changes in committee assignments or Chairperson position during 2019. |
AUDIT COMMITTEE REPORT
The Board’s Audit Committee is composed of three directors, each of whom is independent under SEC Rule 10A-3 and the listing standards of the NYSE. The duties and responsibilities of the Audit Committee are set forth in a written Audit Committee Charter which is available on the Investor Relations/Corporate Governance section of the company’s website at http://www.dukerealty.com.www.dukerealty.com. The Board has determined that each of Ms. Cuneo,Fischer, Mr. Scott and Mr. SzymanczykMs. Thurber is an “audit committee financial expert” as defined by the rules of the SEC.
Management is responsible for the company’s internal controls and financial reporting process as well as compliance with laws and regulations and ethical business standards. KPMG LLP, or KPMG, the company’s independent registered public accounting firm, is responsible for auditing the consolidated financial statements and expressing an opinion on the financial statements and the effectiveness of internal controls over financial reporting in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), or the PCAOB. The Audit Committee’s responsibility is to monitor and oversee these processes.
In connection with these responsibilities, the Audit Committee meets separately at most regular committee meetings with management, the Internal Audit Department and KPMG. The Audit Committee met with management and KPMG to review and discuss the company’s 20192021 consolidated financial statements. The Audit Committee also discussed with KPMG the matters required by the applicable requirements of the PCAOB and the SEC, and KPMG also made presentations to the Audit Committee throughout the year on specific topics of interest, including: (i) current developments and best practices for audit committees; (ii) updates on the substantive requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, including management’s responsibility for assessing the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting; (iii) the company’s critical accounting policies;policies and critical accounting matters; (iv) the applicability of several new and proposed accounting releases; and (v) numerous SEC initiatives. The Audit Committee has received the written disclosures and the letter from KPMG in accordance with applicable requirements of the PCAOB regarding the independent accountant’s communications with the Audit Committee concerning independence, and the Audit Committee discussed with KPMG that firm’s independence. The Audit Committee or the Chairperson of the Audit Committee, as provided by the Audit Committee’s Pre-Approval Policy, pre-approved all audit, audit-related and permitted non-audit services provided by KPMG to the company and the related fees for such services and has concluded that such services are compatible with KPMG’s independence.
Based upon the Audit Committee’s discussions with management and KPMG, and the Audit Committee’s review of the representations of management and KPMG, the Audit Committee recommended that the Board include the audited consolidated financial statements in the company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2019, to be filed with the SEC.2021.
Audit Committee
Peter M. Scott, III, Chairperson
Ngaire E. CuneoTamara D. Fischer
Michael E. SzymanczykLynn C. Thurber
The information contained in the Audit Committee Report shall not be deemed to be “soliciting material” or to be “filed” with the SEC, nor shall such information be incorporated by reference into any future filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, except to the extent that we specifically incorporate it by reference in such filing.
FEES PAID TO INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
We incurred the following fees for services rendered by KPMG, our independent registered public accountants, during 20192021 and 2018:2020:
Audit Fees: $1,721,000$1,528,500 for 20192021 and $1,402,000$1,507,000 for 2018,2020, which included fees for services associated with comfort letters and auditor consents totaling $425,000$415,000 and $330,000$450,000 respectively.
Audit-Related Fees: $55,00079,000 for 20192021 and $53,000$86,500 for 2018.2020. These fees primarily relate to associate benefit plan audits.audits and green bond attestations.
Tax Fees: $7,67310,039 for 20192021 and $25,162$65,398 for 2018.2020. These fees are for services on various tax consulting matters and include an additional $15,000 in 2018 approved by the Audit Committee.matters.
All Other Fees: None.
Audit Committee Pre-Approval Policies
The Audit Committee has adopted a policy that requires the pre-approval of all fees paid to KPMG for audit and non-audit services. Under this policy, the committee pre-approved the following services, including the amount of fees payable for such services:
•tax consulting services;
•audit services associated with SEC filings;
•consultations regarding the appropriate accounting or disclosure treatment of specific transactions or events; and
•audits of our associate benefit plans.
Any fees in excess of the pre-approved amounts, or any services not described above, require the pre-approval of the Audit Committee chairperson, with a review by the Audit Committee at its next scheduled meeting. All non-audit services provided by KPMG in 20182020 and 20192021 were approved in accordance with this pre-approval policy.
Audit Committee Review
The Audit Committee has reviewed the services rendered and the fees billed by KPMG for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2019.2021. The Audit Committee has determined that the services rendered and the fees billed last year that were not related directly to the audit of our financial statements were compatible with the maintenance of independence of KPMG as our independent registered public accountants.
REPORT OF THE COMPENSATION AND HUMAN CAPITAL COMMITTEE
Each member of our Compensation and Human Capital Committee is independent, as determined by the Board and based on NYSE listing standards. Members of the Compensation and Human Capital Committee have primary responsibility for setting the compensation of the company’s senior executive officers in a manner that is effective and consistent with the company’s compensation strategy for the company.strategy. As part of that responsibility, we have reviewed and discussed with management the Compensation Discussion and Analysis required by Item 402(b) of Regulation S-K. Based upon such reviews and discussions, we recommended that the Board include the Compensation Discussion and Analysis in this proxy statement.
Compensation and Human Capital Committee
Melanie R. Sabelhaus, Chairperson
John P. Case
Norman K. JenkinsKelly T. Killingsworth
The information contained in the Report of the Compensation and Human Capital Committee shall not be deemed to be “soliciting material” or to be “filed” with the SEC, nor shall such information be incorporated by reference into any future filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, except to the extent that we specifically incorporate it by reference in such filing.
COMPENSATION COMMITTEE INTERLOCKS AND INSIDER PARTICIPATION
As noted above,on the preceding page, the Compensation and Human Capital Committee consists of three independent directors: Ms. Sabelhaus, Mr. Case and Mr. Jenkins.Ms. Killingsworth. No member of the Compensation and Human Capital Committee is or was formerly an officer or an associate of the company. No executive officer of the company serves as a member of the Board or compensation committee of any entity that has one or more executive officers serving as a member of the Board, nor has such interlocking relationship existed in the past.
CORPORATE RESPONSIBILITY
Corporate Responsibility
We are focused on promoting our growth in a sustainable way, one that succeeds by delivering long-term value for our stakeholders. As part of our vision to continually set the standard for maximizing stakeholder value,deliver sustainable excellence in logistics real estate, we have a long standinglong-standing commitment to sustainable practices in environmental, social and corporate governance, or ESG, initiatives. Below,
Environmental
In 2021, we note some ofcompleted an ESG materiality assessment to understand the ESG initiatives that are most relevant and important to our accomplishmentsbusiness and our stakeholders. We will integrate the findings into our overall strategy, operations, budgeting and capital planning processes and set meaningful targets for continued progress in each ESG category. At the end of 2019, we decided to strengthen our commitment by hiring a Vice President of Corporate Responsibility, whose sole responsibility will be to lead our efforts on all facets of ESG strategic initiatives and implementation of related strategies, policies, communications, and processes. We are proud of our ESG efforts, but recognize thatefforts. Below are some additional 2021 accomplishments.
•In November 2021, we still have opportunitiesmade the goal to do more. We believeachieve carbon neutrality for our new Vice President of Corporate Responsibility will help us do just that.
Environmental
operations by 2025 and achieve carbon neutrality in alignment with the Paris Climate Accords by 2040. We have implemented sustainablea comprehensive strategy to meet our goals by reducing carbon emissions, replacing energy sources with renewable energy and customer-oriented practicesoffsetting energy consumption.
•Renewable energy will continue to be a strategic focus for the company, and we plan to encourage our tenants to consider solar installation to help off-set their electricity usage. We have solar installations, tenant-owned and community solar, on several rooftops across the country that help generate 28.5 megawatts of clean electric power annually. Partnering with a solar developer, we delivered the first community solar project in developmentNew Jersey in 2021 as part of New Jersey’s Community Solar Energy Pilot Program. The 11-megawatt project—covering one million square feet of rooftop space across four buildings—will generate enough energy to power 1,800 New Jersey households of which 51% are low- and operations to try to mitigate the impact to the environment and reduce overall corporate risk.moderate-income households.
On December 17, 2019, we adopted a Sustainable Development Policy intended to increase the operational efficiency of our buildings and promote sustainable design principles. •We are committed to integrating innovative, sustainable building design features in alignment with LEED®U.S. Green Building Council’s® (USGBC’s) Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design (or LEED®), of which we have been a member of since 2008, including constructing to LEED criteria and achieving certification in all new developments, where feasible. LEED®- an acronym for LeadershipIn April, we were accepted into USGBC’s volume certification program to help streamline our sustainable development process. As of December 31, 2021, we have invested $2.3 billion in EnergyLEED development since 2019 and Environmental Design™ - is a registered trademarkhave 34 facilities, totaling 16,680,270 square feet of the U.S. Green Building Council®.space, as LEED certified.
•We also follow sustainable building standardspractices for maintenance, renovations,tenant improvements and tenant improvementcapital projects with an objective of providing operating cost savings for tenants as well as supporting tenant and landlord sustainability objectives.
Forour existing buildings, we look for ways to reduce energy, water, and waste consumption, including, for example, retrofitting older high energy consuming light fixtures to newer, more efficient LED lighting. While webuildings. We do not control mosthave access to approximately 95% of the utility usage at our properties, but for the utilities within our control, we partnerhave been partnering with Goby, Inc. in ordera third-party data management provider to help us monitor and manage the utility usage that we do control. usage.
•Our partnership with Goby, Inc. is also instrumental in benchmarking buildings with EnergyStar when required by municipalities or other governmental regulation. In ordercommitment to make this partnership more useful, we have updated our standard lease form to include language requiring tenants to provide us with their utility usage. With the help of the utility management platform and more data from tenants, we expect to establish realistic utility usage benchmarks and then find ways to work with tenants to help make energy, water, and waste efficiency decisions.
In 2019, we completed the GRESB Real Estate Assessment for the second time. GRESB is an industry leader in providing ESG benchmarks for real estate assets. By responding, we are able to assess and improve our ESG performance over time. In 2019, we increased our GRESB survey score from the previous yearstarts at home and we expecttook a thoughtful approach to continue participatingmaking our headquarters a safe place for our associates while promoting community, connectivity and efficiency. We earned Fitwel Certification 2-Star Rating on our Indianapolis headquarters office and received LEED® Silver certification.
•We issued two green bonds in the survey.
We were the first2021. In January, we issued $450 million of the industrial REITs to issue a “green bond” in the United States in November 2019. We plan tosenior unsecured notes and published our allocation report regarding use the netof proceeds from this offering in September. In November, we issued $500 million of senior unsecured notes. We now hold three green bondbonds totaling $1.35 billion. We also added a sustainability metric to finance future or refinance recently completed “Eligible Green Projects.” This may include green buildings, energy efficiency projects, sustainable water and wastewater management systems, renewable energy projects, clean transportation solutions and pollution prevention and control.our line of credit tied to growing the percentage of our LEED developed projects.
Social
We have numerous initiatives that demonstratedevelop and maintain strong relationships with our care and concern for everyone with whom we interact, includingassociates, customers, business partners, investors as well as the communities in which we do business.operate and invest.
| |
• | We are dedicated to fair compensation, fostering a dynamic and balanced work environment, and providing associates with developmental opportunities to perform well and derive satisfaction from their work. A testament to our culture is our average associate tenure of 12.5 years. We also routinely conduct associate engagement surveys and have received numerous awards for being a great place to work. Recently, the Best Companies Group in partnership with local business journals awarded us 1•We are dedicated to fair compensation and our human resources team has embedded processes and checkpoints throughout the year to keep pay equity top-of-mind. In 2021, we hired a third-party expert to analyze and verify our pay equity initiatives to ensure our results are statistically verified by an outside, unbiased consultant. The average percent of female-to-male total compensation by job titles is 100 percent and for associates of color it is 98 percent.st place for the Best Places to |
Work in Chicago, Illinois (medium company category); 2•nd place for the Best Places to Work in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (large company category); and 4th place for the Best Places to Work in Orange County, California (large company category).
Since 2001, we have had aOur diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) program pursuanthas been integrated into our company for 20 years and is dedicated to which we strive to attracteducation, awareness and retain diverse talent, hire diverse vendors,advocacy – within our company, in our communities and in our business and partner withrelationships. In 2021, over 300 associates attended our tenants on diversity initiatives. In 2019, NAREIT, the REIT industry trade group, recognized us as the Corporate Gold winnerannual DEI speaker event. We signed CREW Network’s CRE Pledge for Action to Advance Women and Mr. Connor as the individual winner of its inaugural Dividends Through Diversity and Inclusion Recognition Awards program.
In 2019, we continued our support of the Duke Realty Women’s Network initiative, the goal ofDEI, which is a commitment made by industry CEOs to create a network that supportssupport the investment in, development, and growthadvancement of women atand other individuals in underrepresented groups. Moreover, GlobeSt. recognized our company. The Duke Realty Women’s Network holds semi-annual panel discussionscompany as a Diversity Champion.
•We promote all aspects of health and wellness for allour associates. Nearly 15 years ago, we started a wellness program and in 2021 we renamed it to the well-being program to encompass a wholistic view that includes physical, emotional, nutritional and financial wellness. Our mission is to educate, support and empower associates and organizes various networking events in the local offices.their families to improve and maintain their overall well-being habits through healthy lifestyle choices.
| |
• | In addition, we promote all aspects of wellness for our associates-including physical, emotional,•We support and financial health-through our wellness program, which includes group activities, online resources, and generous incentives. We have also won awards for our wellness program, including Finalist-4th Place in the Healthiest Employer of Indiana awards and the American Heart Association’s Workplace Health Achievement Gold Level Recognition.
|
We encourage our associates to participate in volunteer and community activities and support those who do by providing each associate with two paid community days per year. We hold anheld our annual, company-wide Day of Service in which all associates are encouraged to volunteer2021 and our local markets volunteered throughout the year in their local communities. We also have charitable contribution programs, such as our dollarsDollars for doersDoers program (matching dollars for volunteer hours spent) and our matching gifts program (matching dollars for associateemployee donations to charities).
We have partnered In addition, we partner with various charitable organizations, including the American Red Cross since 2017 to help prevent and alleviate human suffering in the face of emergencies. Each year, Duke Realty associates participate in various engagement opportunities from volunteering in the organization’s “Sound the Alarm” campaign, during which our associates helped local fire departments install smoke alarms, replace batteries in existing smoke alarms, and provide fire prevention and safety education, to assisting in the Missing Maps project, during which associates have helped put people from high risk countries on the map, organized blood drives in their communities, and built military kits to ship overseas. Currently, Duke Realty is2017. We are recognized as an American Red Cross Disaster Responder member and recognized as one of the largest supporters nationwide.member.
Corporate Governance
Our reputation is one of our most important assets. Since our inception, we not only have insisted that our associates, officers,strived to be a top performer operationally, but also to lead in issues important to investors such as disclosure and directors conduct business in accordance with the highest ethical standards. corporate governance.
•We also strive to implement robust corporate governance practices, as they are critical to keeping us accountablerequire annual training and transparent.
We are devoted to ensuring that the Board has a strong oversight function, with a majoritysign-off of independent directors and a Lead Director. We also conduct annual evaluations of our Board and its committees.
31% of our Board and our nominees to the Board are female. Our Compensation and Human Capital Committee is chaired by a woman. We also have a Board Diversity and Inclusion Policy.
The Board oversees our risk management processes, with our Internal Audit Department reporting directly to the Audit Committee. Please see “Board Oversight of Risk Management” for more information regarding the Board’s role in risk management.
We conduct annual Code of Business Ethics training sessions, and associates and directors must sign off on our Code of Business Ethics every year.by associates and our directors. In addition, our construction and property management vendors are asked to understand and comply with our Vendor Code of Conduct.
•All directors, other than the Chairman, are independent representing 91% of our director nominees.
•We have a Corporate Responsibility Committeemix of director tenures, skills and backgrounds that reports toprovides a balance of experience and institutional knowledge with fresh perspectives. 55% of our director nominees are female and people of color.
•50% of our board committees are chaired by women – the Board.Compensation and Human Capital and Finance Committees.
•We proactively adopted best corporate governance policies, such as proxy access and a majority voting standard for uncontested elections of directors.
We have adopted proxy access, shareholders can call special meetings and amend our bylaws, and we do not have a shareholder rights plan.
Through all of our ESG efforts, we demonstrate that operating and developing commercial real estate can be conducted with a conscious regard for the environment and the community, while also benefiting our shareholders, associates, tenants, and communities in which we operate.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| PROPOSAL 2 | ADVISORY VOTE TO APPROVE THE COMPENSATION OF NEOS |
PROPOSAL TWO: ADVISORY VOTE TO APPROVE THE COMPENSATION OF NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS
In accordance with the requirements of Section 14A of the Exchange Act and related SEC rules, we are asking our shareholders to vote to approve, on an advisory (nonbinding) basis, the compensation of our named executive officers, as disclosed in this proxy statement.
As discussed in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis beginning on page 35, we have designed our executive compensation program to attract and retain the highest quality executive officers, directly link pay to our performance and build value for our shareholders. Our program provides total compensation opportunities at levels that are competitive in our industry, ties a significant portion of each executive’s compensation to achieving our key business objectives and closely aligns the interests of our executives with the interests of our shareholders. In sum, our compensation is designed to reward executives when the Companycompany achieves strong financial and operational results, and likewise to provide reduced pay when financial and operating results are not as strong. We believe the compensation of our named executive officers is reflective of and consistent with that intent.
This proposal, commonly known as a “say-on-pay” proposal, gives our shareholders the opportunity to express their views on our named executive officers’ compensation. This vote is not intended to address any specific item of compensation, but rather the overall compensation of our named executive officers described in this proxy statement.
At the annual meetingAnnual Meeting of shareholdersShareholders on April 24, 2019,28, 2021, more than 91%95% of the shares voted were in support of the compensation of our named executive officers, as discussed and disclosed in the 20192021 proxy statement. The Compensation and Human Capital Committee appreciates and values the views of our shareholders. In considering the results of last year’s advisory vote to approve executive compensation, the Compensation and Human Capital Committee concluded that the compensation paid to our named executive officers and our overall pay practices enjoy strong shareholder support. No significant changes were made to our executive compensation program for 20192021 as a result of the advisory vote.
The Board invites you to review carefully the Compensation Discussion and Analysis beginning on page 35 and the tables and other disclosures on compensation under Executive Compensation beginning on page 53,56, and encourages you to cast a vote to approve the company’s executive compensation programs through the following resolution:
“Resolved, that shareholders approve the compensation of the company’s named executive officers as discussed and disclosed in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, the executive compensation tables and any narrative executive compensation disclosure contained in this proxy statement.”
The say-on-pay vote is advisory and, therefore, not binding on the company, the Compensation and Human Capital Committee or the Board. The shareholders’ advisory vote will not overrule any decision made by the Board or the Compensation and Human Capital Committee or create or imply any additional fiduciary duty by our directors. However, if there is a significant vote against the named executive officer compensation as disclosed in this proxy statement, we will consider our shareholders’ concerns, and the Compensation and Human Capital Committee will evaluate whether any actions are needed to address those concerns. Say-on-pay votes currently are held by the company annually, and we expect the next say-on-pay vote after this Virtual Annual Meeting to occur at the 2021 annual meeting2023 Annual Meeting of shareholders.Shareholders.
The proposal to approve, on an advisory basis, the compensation of our named executive officers will be approved if the votes cast in favor exceed the votes cast against the proposal. Abstentions and broker non-votes will not be treated as votes cast and therefore will not affect the outcome.
THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDS A VOTE “FOR” APPROVAL OF PROPOSAL TWO. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| ü | OUR BOARD UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDS A VOTE “FOR” APPROVAL OF PROPOSAL 2. |
COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
Introduction
In the paragraphs that follow, we provide an overview and analysis of our compensation program and policies, the material compensation decisions the Compensation and Human Capital Committee has made under those programs and policies with respect to our top executive officers and the material factors that the Compensation and Human Capital Committee has considered in making those decisions. Following the Compensation Discussion and Analysis (CD&A), under the heading “Executive Compensation,” is a series of tables containing specific data about the compensation earned in 20192021 by the following individuals, whom we refer to as our named executive officers:
our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Mr. James B. Connor; | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | |
James B. Connor Chairman and Chief Executive Officer | Mark A. Denien Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer | Steven W. Schnur Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer | Nicholas C. Anthony Executive Vice President, Chief Investment Officer | Ann C. Dee Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary |
our Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Mr. Mark A. Denien;
our Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer, Mr. Steven W. Schnur.
our Executive Vice President, Chief Investment Officer, Mr. Nicholas C. Anthony; and
our Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary, Ms. Ann C. Dee.
20192021 Performance Highlights
20192021 was another excellentan incredible year given the on-going pandemic and economic challenges related to supply chain issues and inflation among others. Tremendous demand for Duke Realty. We improved in nearly every key operating metric, including same-property net operating income growth,warehouse space drove our occupancy and rent growth to historical highs. We out-performed our beginning of the year expectations in all key earnings and operating metrics and delivered double digit Core Funds From Operations (Core FFO) and Adjusted Funds From Operations (AFFO), on a share adjusted basis, of 13.8% and 11.6%, respectively. We maintained our strong Balance Sheet metrics and liquidity while improving the quality of our portfolio. The efforts of our business teams is evident in the improved operating metrics in our core portfolio and the large amount of significantly pre-leased development starts comparedfor the year. Our portfolio continues to what was an already very impressive 2018, and further strengthened our already sound balance sheet.perform at a high level, exceeding expectations.
At December 31, 2019, we2021:
•We owned or jointly controlled 519548 primarily industrial properties, of which encompassed 155.3 million rentable square feet (including 38 unconsolidated joint venture in-service517 properties with 11.0153 million square feet 21were in service and 31 properties with 9.7 million square feet were under development. The 517 in-service properties were comprised of 477 consolidated properties under development with 8.7140.0 million square feet and one40 unconsolidated joint venture propertyproperties with 12.9 million square feet. The 31 properties under development consisted of 29 consolidated properties with 133,0008.5 million square feet). Ourfeet and two unconsolidated joint venture properties are leased by a diverse base of more than 800 tenants whose businesses include e-commerce, manufacturing, retailing, wholesale trade, and distribution. with 1.2 million square feet.
•We also owned includingdirectly, or through ownership interests in unconsolidated joint ventures (with acreage not adjusted for our percentage ownership interest), 1,380approximately 431 acres of land and controlled an additional 1,000approximately 925 acres through purchase options.
In 2019,2021, we refinedcontinued to refine the geography of our assets to increase our exposure to coastal Tier 1 markets through value-creating development projects and the acquisition of quality, strategically-locatedstrategically located industrial assets with high potential for growth in cash flow. Our exposure to coastal Tier 1 markets now stands at 43% of total stabilized net operating income on a cash basis, compared to 37% one year ago.
In addition to portfolio repositioning, we continued to execute on our35
We also achieved excellent operational and capital strategiesresults in 2019.2021. Highlights include:
•In 2019,2021, earnings per diluted share increased by 10%181.3% from 2018,2020, primarily due to higher gains on sales of properties. Earnings per diluted share from continuing operations increased by 11% from 2018.in 2021 and higher losses on debt extinguishment in 2020. In 2019,2021, we achieved an increase of over 10%11.6% in Adjusted Funds from Operations (AFFO)AFFO, on a share adjusted basis, and over 8%13.8% in Core Funds from Operations (Core FFO).FFO. AFFO and Core FFO are not metrics determined in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) metrics.. See Appendix A for a discussion and reconciliation to the most directly comparable GAAP measures.
•Our average total in-service occupancy for the yearportfolio was 96.0%.97.8% leased on average during 2021. Even with the high occupancy level in our stabilized portfolio, we have ample opportunity to grow earnings through embedded below market leases in our existing portfolio and lease additional space in our unstabilized portfolio.
We recorded a 28.6% increase in GAAP rental rates for 2019, which contributed•For the year ended December 31, 2021, income from continuing operations before income taxes increased 195.8%, due to strongthe timing of property dispositions and debt extinguishment costs, and same-property net operating income, growth.on a cash basis, increased 5.3%, in each case compared to 2020. Our leasing activity across all our markets yielded annualized net effective rental rate growth on second generation leases of 35.3%, which is our highest annual growth ever generated. Same-property net operating income is not a GAAP metric. See Appendix A for a discussion and reconciliation to the most directly comparable GAAP measure.
•We maintained our strong balance sheet, and overall financial position, by utilizing proceeds from property dispositions to repay debt and our high investment-grade credit ratings. We opportunistically raiseraised $950 million of capital in the debt markets when ratesmarkets.
•In February 2022, we redeemed $300 million of our 3.75 percent unsecured notes, which were originally scheduled to mature in December 2024, and pricingwe now have no significant debt maturities until 2026.
•We began $1.4 billion of development starts that were favorable, all while maintaining high investment-grade credit ratings43% pre-leased. These projects should drive future earnings growth and improving the key metrics that drive such ratings.create significant value.
We were the first of the industrial REITs to issue a “green bond” in the United States in November 2019. Please see “Corporate Responsibility—Environmental” for more information on this “green bond” issuance.
Our operational and strategic success has translated into strong returns to our shareholders. Our total shareholder return was 46.4%67.8%, 173.3% and 107.7%190.7% over the past one, three and five fiscal years, respectively. This is particularly favorable when compared to total shareholder returns of 26.2%43.1%, 66.4% and 40.5%66.8% for the MSCI US REIT Index over the same time periods. We increased our quarterly dividend from $0.215$0.255 per share for the first three quarters of 20192021 to $0.235$0.28 per share for the fourth quarter of 2019,2021, representing a 9.3% increase.an 8.9% increase in dividends paid year-over-year. We expect to continue to distribute an amount at least equal to our taxable earnings, to meet the requirements to maintain our REIT status, and additional amounts as determined by our Board. Distributions are declared at the discretion of our Board and are subject to actual cash available for distribution, our financial condition, capital requirements, and such other factors as our Board deems relevant.
Fiscal 20192021 Pay and Performance Alignment |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Fiscal Year 2019 Performance Measures and Results |
| Fiscal Year 2019 Award Payouts/Vesting |
| Annual Incentive Awards | | | |
| Corporate Goals (all named executive officers) | |
| Annual cash incentive awards for all executives had the following corporate goals: AFFO/share, Core FFO/share, and average total in-service lease up occupancy. | The table below summarizes the overall bonus payouts which were based on the corporate, division (as applicable) and individual goals and weightings for each named executive officer. |
| | | Threshold (50%) |
| Target (100%) |
| Stretch (150%) |
| Superior (200%) |
| Actual |
| AFFO/Share |
| $1.23 |
|
| $1.27 |
|
| $1.29 |
|
| $1.32 |
| $1.30 | NEO | % of Target Earned | Annual Incentive Payout |
| Core FFO/Share | $1.34 |
| $1.40 |
| $1.43 |
| $1.47 |
| $1.44 | Connor | 153.80% | $2,164,800 |
| Average Total In-Service Lease Up Occupancy | 94.00% |
| 95.50% |
| 96.20% |
| 97.00% |
| 96.00% | Denien | 153.80% | $1,076,250 |
| | Schnur | 153.70% | $969,360 |
| Division Goals (Mr. Anthony) | Anthony | 155.40% | $922,810 |
| The award for Mr. Anthony also included the following goals related to our Capital Transactions and Joint Venture Division. | Dee | 153.70% | $804,480 |
| (Dollar figures are in millions) | Threshold (50%) |
| Target (100%) |
| Stretch (150%) |
| Superior (200%) |
| Actual | | | |
Acquisitions Volume(1) | $133.3 |
| $200.0 |
| $233.3 |
| $300.0 |
| $215.7 | | | |
Acquisitions Yield(2) | 4.00% |
| 4.25% |
| 4.40% |
| 4.60% |
| 4.66% | | | |
Dispositions Volume(1) | $326.2 |
| $434.9 |
| $489.3 |
| $598.0 |
| $498.5 | | | |
Dispositions Yield(3) | 6.25% |
| 6.00% |
| 5.60% |
| 5.40% |
| 5.64% | | | |
(1) Based on ownership share. | | | |
(2) Stabilized capitalization rate | | | |
(3) In-place capitalization rate | | | |
| | | | |
| Individual Goals (all named executive officers) | | | |
| Awards for all executives included subjective, non-formulaic individual performance goals. | |
| 2019-2021 Performance Share Plan Awards (PSP awards) | | | |
| PSP awards vest after three years, if and to the extent performance goals are met, and have two performance components: average annual growth in AFFO/Share and relative total shareholder return, based on a peer group of selected REITs and certain indices. Named executive officers have the opportunity to elect to receive Long-Term Incentive Plan, or LTIP, units with the same vesting schedule in lieu of PSP awards. | The performance goals and resulting payout for the PSP awards relating to fiscal years 2017-2019 are described on pages 49-50.
|
| | Threshold (50%) |
| Target (100%) |
| Superior (200%) |
| | |
| Average Annual Growth in AFFO/Share | 0.00% |
| 3.00% |
| 5.00% or above | |
| | Threshold (50%) |
| Target (100%) |
| Superior (200%) |
| Outperformance (250%) |
| Annualized Relative TSR (Total Shareholder Return) Percentile Rank | 25 |
| 50 |
| 75 |
| ≥75 & ≥15.00% Absolute TSR |
Restricted Stock Units (RSUs) RSUs granted in 2019 vest in equal amounts on the first three anniversaries of the grant date, provided that the named executive officer remains employed on each such vesting date. Named executive officers have the opportunity to elect to receive LTIP Units with the same vesting schedule in lieu of RSUs. |
A substantial portion of the compensation of our named executive officers is linked to performance. For example, the Compensation and Human Capital Committee established the following weightings for the 2021 annual bonus opportunities. Mr. Anthony’s annual bonus opportunities include division goals for acquisitions, dispositions and joint ventures.
The charts below show the fiscal year 2021 results for the company goal portion of the annual bonus.
See “—Annual Cash Incentives” for a more detailed description.
Our Executive Compensation Practices
The Compensation and Human Capital Committee is mindful of evolving practices in executive compensation and corporate governance. The following table highlights our current executive compensation practices – both the practices we believe drive performance and mitigate risk and the practices we have not implemented or have eliminated because we do not believe they would serve our shareholders’ long-term interests.
|
| |
| Executive Compensation Practices We Have Implemented: |
þ Provide balanced pay opportunities consisting of (1) cash and equity, (2) annual and long-term incentives and (3) fixed and variable pay |
þ Align pay and performance |
þ Use diverse performance measures |
þ Have appropriate caps on performance-based bonus payouts |
þ Provide perquisites that are limited and have sound business rationale |
þ Include “double-trigger” change in control provisions in equity awards |
þ Apply share ownership and retention guidelines for senior executive officers and directors |
þ Utilize an independent compensation adviser |
þ MitigateSeek to mitigate undue risk in compensation programs |
þ Maintain a clawback policy |
þ Maintain an anti-hedging/pledging policy |
|
| Executive Compensation Practices We Have Not Implemented: |
ý No “liberal” change in control definition that would be activated on shareholder approval of a transaction |
ý No tax gross-ups on perquisites (except for certain relocation costs that are available to all associates) |
ý No tax gross-up protection for change in control excise taxes |
ý No repricing of options or SARs (directly or indirectly) without prior shareholder approval |
ý No employment contracts, except for severance agreements with certain officers |
Consideration of Most Recent Say-on-Pay Vote
The Compensation and Human Capital Committee recognizes that executive pay practices and views of sound governance principles continue to evolve. Consequently, the Compensation and Human Capital Committee intends to continue paying close attention to the advice and counsel of its independent compensation adviser and invites our shareholders to communicate any concerns or opinions on executive pay directly to the Compensation and Human Capital Committee or the Board. Please refer to “Information about Communications with Duke Realty Corporation and Our Board” on page 620 for information about communicating with the Board.
At the annual meetingAnnual Meeting of shareholdersShareholders on April 24, 2019,28, 2021, more than 91%95% of the shares voted were in support of the compensation of our named executive officers, as discussed and disclosed in the 20192021 proxy statement. This represents the sixth year that more than 90% of the shares voted were in support of our say-on-pay proposal.
Based on the advisory vote to approve the compensation of our named executive officers in 2021, the Compensation and Human Capital Committee concluded that the compensation paid to our named executive officers and the company’s overall pay practices enjoy strong shareholder support. No significant changes were made to our executive compensation program for 20192021 as a result of the advisory vote.
At the annual meetingAnnual Meeting of shareholdersShareholders on April 26, 2017, our shareholders expressed a preference that advisory votes on executive compensation occur every year. Consistent with this preference, the Board has implemented an advisory vote to approve executive compensation every year until the next required vote on the frequency of shareholder votes on the compensation of executives, which is expected to occur at the 2023 annual meeting.Annual Meeting.
Overview of Executive Compensation Philosophy and Objectives
We have designed our executive compensation program, under the direction of the Compensation and Human Capital Committee, to attract and retain the highest quality executive officers, directly link pay to our performance and build value for our shareholders. In order to do this effectively, our program is designed to:
•provide total compensation opportunities with a combination of compensation elements that are competitive;
•tie a significant portion of each executive’s compensation to achieving our key business objectives; and
•align shareholder interests and executive rewards by tying a significant portion of each executive’s compensation opportunity to pay for performance standards designed to increase long-term shareholder value.
Determining Individual Compensation Levels and Pay Mix
When setting compensation, the Compensation and Human Capital Committee seeks to achieve optimal balance between:
•fixed and variable pay;
•short-term and long-term incentives; and
•cash and equity.
We believe that a significant percentage of our executives’ compensation should be at risk and subject to performance. In addition, we attempt to balance the short- and long-term focus of our executives and to align their interests with our shareholders by providing a meaningful portion of their compensation in the form of equity-based awards.
Our executive compensation program includes the following elements:
|
| | |
Compensation Element | | Overview/Objectives |
Base Salary | • | Fixed portion of an executive’s annual compensation that is intended to recognize fundamental market value for the individual’s skills and experience based on the responsibilities of his or her position. |
Annual Cash Incentive | • | Annual cash incentives vary based on performance against pre-defined goals and are intended to reward short-term performance, including company, individual, and in some cases, division performance. |
Long-term Incentive Awards (restricted stock units and PSP awards) | • | Stock-based incentives vary based on stock price and, in the case of PSP awards, on the achievement of predefined goals. They are intended to reward performance over a multi-yearperiod, link executives’ interests to those of shareholders, and encourage retention through a multi-year vesting schedule.
|
The following charts show the allocations of the fiscal year 20192021 target total direct compensation for our CEOChief Executive Officer and the fiscal year 20192021 average target total direct compensation for our other named executive officers, respectively. Base salary is the only fixed element of compensation, with the remainder being at risk. Base salaries and annual bonuses are paid in cash, while 100% of the long-term incentive opportunities (RSUs and PSP awards) are paid in stock, or partnership units, at the executive’s election.
Fiscal 20192021 Targeted Total Direct Compensation
How We Make Compensation Decisions
The Compensation and Human Capital Committee has primary responsibility for determining our compensation strategy and setting the compensation of our senior executive officers. Information about the Compensation and Human Capital Committee can be found on page 21 of this proxy statement, under the caption “Board Committees.” To assist in evaluating the compensation practices at the company, the Compensation and Human Capital Committee engaged Frederic W. Cook & Co., Inc. (FW Cook),Ferguson Partners Consulting as its independent executive compensation adviser in 2019. FW CookApril 2021. Ferguson Partners Consulting reports directly to the Compensation and Human Capital Committee and only provides no other servicesthe company with executive and non-employee director compensation consulting services. While all work conducted by Ferguson Partners Consulting with respect to the company.company’s compensation programs was performed on behalf of the Compensation and Human Capital Committee in 2021, the company also engaged Ferguson Partners Ltd., an affiliate of Ferguson Partners Consulting, for director search services in 2021. The Compensation and Human Capital Committee took into account such director search services when evaluating the independence of Ferguson Partners Consulting as discussed in more detail in the “Compensation Guidelines and Policies” section. The following table outlines the roles and responsibilities of the various parties in determining executive compensation.
| | | | | | | | |
| | |
| Roles and Responsibilities |
| The Compensation and Human Capital Committee | • | Determines our compensation strategy. |
| • | Oversees design, implementation and administration of our equity programs. |
| • | Approves incentive programs and sets performance goals for executive officers. |
| • | Reviews the performance of the CEO.Chief Executive Officer. |
| • | Determines appropriate levels of compensation for our executive officers, including the CEO,Chief Executive Officer, by assessing their individual performance as well as the financial and operational results of the company against annual objectives. |
FW CookFerguson Partners Consulting
(Independent Compensation Adviser) | • | Provides advice, research and analytical services on a variety of subjects, including compensation philosophy, trends and best practices, peer group selection, target competitive positioning, pay mix and incentive program design. |
CEOChief Executive Officer | • | Develops an assessment of individual performance for each of his direct reports. |
| • | Provides recommendations to the Compensation and Human Capital Committee regarding individual compensation levels for such executives. |
| • | Provides recommendations to the Compensation and Human Capital Committee regarding metrics and goal levels for incentive plans for company, division and individual performance for himself and each of his direct reports. |
| Other Members of Management | • | Our Senior Vice President, Human Resources provides data and information relating to our compensation programs to the Compensation and Human Capital Committee and FW CookFerguson Partners Consulting to help facilitate the Compensation and Human Capital Committee’s review of competitive compensation practices. |
| • | Our Chief Financial Officer provides the Compensation and Human Capital Committee with reports on financial performance as it relates to key business drivers and performance measures included in incentive program designs. |
Assessing the Competitive Marketplace
The Compensation and Human Capital Committee usually reviews peer compensation data annually to ensure that our executive officer compensation is competitive in the marketplace. In 2018,2020, the Compensation and Human Capital Committee determined that, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, peer benchmarking would not be useful for setting executive pay in 2021 because it would reflect pay during 2019 before the onset of the pandemic. Thus, the last benchmarking review before pay was set in 2021 was in 2019 when management engaged FPL Associates (FPL),Ferguson Partners Consulting, to provide market data from our peer group. The peer group, developed in consultation with FWFrederic W. Cook & Co., Inc. (FW Cook), which was the independent compensation adviser to the Compensation and Human Capital Committee in 2019, consisted of 15 public REITs that were similar to the company in terms of total capitalization (market value of common stock, preferred stock, operating partnership units and balance sheet long-term debt). Total capitalization
This peer group was used to assess competitive levels of compensation for our executive officers to help inform the Compensation and Human Capital Committee’s decisions on 20192020 target total direct compensation opportunities. Since the Compensation and Human Capital Committee did not do any peer benchmarking of executive pay in 2020, the same benchmark data was used for 2021 as was used for 2020. The companies included in the peer group were:
|
| | | | | | | |
• Alexandria Real Estate Equities, Inc. | •Federal Realty Investment Trust Extra Storage Space, Inc. | •Liberty Property Trust |
• Apartment Investment and Management Company | • Healthpeak Properties, Inc.Federal Realty Investment Trust | • The Macerich Company |
•Camden Property Trust | •Host Hotels & Resorts, Healthpeak Properties, Inc. | • Mid-America Apartment Communities, Inc. |
• CyrusOne Inc. | • Host Hotels & Resorts, Inc. | • Regency Centers Corporation |
| • Douglas Emmett, Inc. | •Kilroy Realty Corporation | •Regency Centers Corporation
|
•Extra Storage Space, Inc.
| •Kimco Realty Corporation
| •UDR, Inc. |
How the Compensation and Human Capital Committee Uses Peer Group Data
The Compensation and Human Capital Committee’s objective is to provide a range of compensation opportunities with a combination of elements that are competitive relative to similarly-situated executives at other companies and internally. To assess external competitiveness, the Compensation and Human Capital Committee usually reviews the median compensation levels from the compensation peer group companies for each component of pay, including base salary, target annual incentive bonus, target total cash compensation (which includes both base salary and target annual incentive bonus), target long-term incentives and target total direct compensation (which includes base salary, target annual incentive bonus and the target value of long-term incentives) for each executive officer position. In setting individual executive target total direct compensation opportunities, for 2019, the Compensation and Human Capital Committee examinedgenerally examines each component on both a stand-alone basis and as a total. Decisions wereare based on the Compensation and Human Capital Committee’s business judgment, informed by the comparative data, professional advice and other considerations, including each executive’s experience level and job performance; his or her duties and responsibilities at the company compared to the duties and responsibilities of executive officers in similar positions at compensation peer group companies; the company’s performance; internal pay equity; and other circumstances unique to the company.
Analysis of 20192021 Compensation Decisions
Base Salaries
Base salaries paid to our executive officers are the fixed portion of annual compensation and are intended to recognize the fundamental skills and experience of our executive officers. The Compensation and Human Capital Committee considers the executive’s performance, role and responsibilities; internal equity considerations; and external competitive compensation data when determining the base salary for each executive officer. Base salaries for each of the named executive officers were increased at the beginning of 20192021 to recognize performance and bring salaries more in line with competitive benchmarks as follows:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Name | | 2020 | | 2021 |
| James B. Connor | | $930,000 | | $960,000 |
| Mark A. Denien | | $600,000 | | $620,000 |
| Steven W. Schnur | | $500,000 | | $520,000 |
| Nicholas C. Anthony | | $490,000 | | $505,000 |
| Ann C. Dee | | $495,000 | | $510,000 |
|
| | | |
| Name | | 2018 | 2019 |
| James B. Connor | | $850,000 | $880,000 |
| Mark A. Denien | | $540,000 | $560,000 |
| Steven W. Schnur | | $440,000 | $460,000 |
| Nicholas C. Anthony | | $460,000 | $475,000 |
| Ann C. Dee | | $440,000 | $455,000 |
Mr. Schnur was later promoted on September 2, 2019 to Executive Vice President, Chief Operating Officer with a new base salary of $485,000.
Annual Cash Incentives
We pay annual incentive bonuses to reward executives for achieving or surpassing annual performance goals that are directly related to our key financial and operational objectives for the year and for execution of specific company strategies. At the beginning of each year, the Compensation and Human Capital Committee establishes performance targets for the annual incentive program. These performance targets are developed using economic and industry factors, including the interest rate environment, general market conditions, overall company leverage, annual capital-recycling goals, the capital market environment specific platform issues, and other considerations.
Each named executive officer has a target annual bonus potential, expressed as a percentage of base salary, based on his or her role and responsibilities, internal equity considerations and external competitive compensation data. Annual bonuses are paid in cash in February for the prior year’s performance, and are based on the Compensation and Human Capital Committee’s assessment of our overall performance against goals and each executive’s individual (and, if applicable, division) performance against goals approved by the Compensation and Human Capital Committee.
The following table shows the target annual cash incentive for 20192021 for each of our named executive officers and the actual award earned, expressed as a percentage of base salary:the target:
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| Name | | Target Annual Bonus
(as a % of Salary) | Actual Annual Bonus
(as a % of Target) |
| James B. Connor | | 185 | % | 195 | % |
| Mark A. Denien | | 135 | % | 192 | % |
| Steven W. Schnur | | 135 | % | 192 | % |
| Nicholas C. Anthony | | 135 | % | 163 | % |
| Ann C. Dee | | 125 | % | 186 | % |
|
| | | |
| Name | | Target Annual Bonus (as a % of Salary) | Actual Annual Bonus (as a % of Salary) |
| James B. Connor | | 160% | 246% |
| Mark A. Denien | | 125% | 192% |
| Steven W. Schnur | | 130% | 200% |
| Nicholas C. Anthony | | 125% | 194% |
| Ann C. Dee | | 115% | 177% |
For 2019,2021, 75% of the annual bonus opportunities for Messrs. Connor, Denien and Schnur and Ms. Dee and 35% of the annual bonus opportunity for Mr. Anthony were based on overall company performance, as measured by three operational strategy goals: one that measured the company’s annual AFFOCore FFO per share,share; one that measured the company’s annual Core FFOAFFO per share,share; and one that measured the average total in-service lease up occupancy of our real estate portfolio, each as described in more detail below. We selected these measures because they directly impact and are indicative of our success in achieving our primary financial and operational objectives for 2019:2021: namely, increasing profitability by maximizing cash from operations.
AFFO and Core FFO are calculated by first computing FFO in accordance with standards established by NAREIT. NAREIT defines FFO as net income or loss in accordance with GAAP, excluding gains or losses on sales of real estate assets (including real estate assets incidental to our business) and related taxes, gains or losses from change in control, impairment charges related to real estate assets (including real estate assets incidental to our business); plus real estate related depreciation and amortization, and after similar adjustments for unconsolidated joint ventures and partially owned consolidated entities. Then, to determine Core FFO, FFO computed in accordance with NAREIT is adjusted for certain items that are generally non-cash in nature and that can create significant earnings volatility and do not directly relate to our core business operations. The adjustments include tax expense or benefit related to (i) changes in deferred tax asset valuation allowances, (ii) changes in tax exposure accruals that were established as the result of the previous adoption of new accounting principles, or (iii) taxable income (loss) related to other items excluded from FFO or Core FFO (collectively referred to as “other income tax items”); gains (losses) on debt transactions; gains or losses from involuntary conversion from weather events or natural disasters; promote income; severance and other charges related to major overhead restructuring activities; and the expense impact of costs attributable to successful leasing activities. Although our calculation of Core FFO differs from NAREIT’s definition of FFO and may not be comparable to that of other REITs and real estate companies, we believe it provides a meaningful supplemental | | |
| Company Goal #1: Core FFO/Share |
| | |
Why is Core FFO/share important?
Core FFO provides an indication of the health of our core business—our properties. It is also a major focus of analysts and our investors to evaluate earnings. We compute Core FFO by first computing FFO, which is a supplemental measure of operating performance, in accordance with standards established by the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (NAREIT). We then adjust FFO for certain recurring and nonrecurring items that can have both positive and negative short-term effects on our results of operations. The effects of these items are inconsistent and not relevant to our long-term outlook. Because we adjust for such items, we believe Core FFO gives a more realistic picture of the operating performance of our portfolio. For purposes of the annual bonus, we look at this metric on a per share basis, because that is how we look at it internally for budget purposes.
|
| | |
What was our target and why did we choose it?
Our Core FFO/share target for 2021 for purposes of our annual bonus was $1.64, with a range of $1.58 to $1.71. This target would equate to a 7.9% increase over 2020 results. In establishing the target for Core FFO/share, our Compensation and Human Capital Committee considered:
•the generally favorable economic environment for logistics real estate; •the positive impact of placing a significant amount of development projects in service in 2020 and 2021; •the positive impact of rent growth on leases signed in 2020 and expected to be signed in 2021; •the positive impact of debt re-financings at lower interest rates; and •the potential negative impact of the pandemic on our tenants’ ability to operate and pay rent.
|
measure of our operating performance. AFFO is Core FFO less recurring building improvements and total second generation capital expenditures (the leasing of vacant space that had previously been under lease by the company is referred to as second generation lease activity) related to leases commencing during the reporting period, and adjusted for certain non-cash items, including straight line rental income and expenses; non-cash components of interest expense, including interest rate hedge amortization; stock compensation expense; and after similar adjustments for unconsolidated partnerships and joint ventures. | | |
What were the actual results?
Our Core FFO/share for 2021 was $1.73. This equates to a 13.8% increase over 2020 results. |
| | |
| Company Goal #2: AFFO/Share |
Average Total In-Service Occupancy (Lease-Up Basis) is the average square footage of our in-service real estate portfolio represented by executed leases without regard to whether the leases have commenced, divided by the total average square footage of our in-service real estate portfolio, excluding the impact of any acquisitions during the year. | | |
Why is AFFO/share important?
AFFO provides an indication of our free cash flow and is also a major focus of analysts and investors. AFFO is Core FFO less recurring building improvements and total second generation capital expenditures and also adjusted for certain non-cash items. AFFO thus provides a performance measure that, when compared year to year, captures trends in portfolio operating results and serves as a good indicator of our ability to pay and grow dividends. We also look at this metric on a per share basis, because that is how we look at it internally for budget purposes. |
| | |
What was our target and why did we choose it?
Our AFFO/share target for 2021 for purposes of our annual bonus was $1.48, with a range of $1.44 to $1.54. This target would equate to a 7.2% increase over 2020 results. In establishing the target for AFFO/share, our Compensation and Human Capital Committee considered the same factors it considered when setting the target for Core FFO/share. The targeted increase in AFFO/share for 2021 is higher than the actual increase in AFFO/share in the prior year. |
| | |
What were the actual results?
Our AFFO/share for 2021 was $1.54. This equates to an 11.6% increase over 2020 results. |
| | |
| Company Goal #3: Average Total In-Service Lease Up Occupancy |
| | |
Why is average total in-service lease-up occupancy important?
Our ability to maintain high occupancy rates is among the principal drivers of maintaining and increasing rental revenue. It is also the primary driver of Core FFO and AFFO results. Average total in-service occupancy (lease-up basis) is the average square footage of our in-service real estate portfolio represented by executed leases without regard to whether the leases have commenced, divided by the total average square footage of our in-service real estate portfolio, excluding the impact of any acquisitions during the year. We believe that average total in-service lease-up occupancy is a good indicator of management’s performance, as it proves management’s ability to renew and re-lease our expiring space and to lease up speculative development projects that have been placed in service. We exclude acquisitions from the metric because we cannot predict how they will impact occupancy. Using this occupancy metric is a better indicator of rental revenue than using total portfolio occupancy, because development buildings that have yet to be completed do not generate rental revenue. In addition, average total in-service occupancy better reflects management’s performance than stabilized in-service portfolio occupancy, because, unlike stabilized in-service portfolio occupancy, it does take speculative developments into account. |
| | |
What was our target and why did we choose it?
Our target for average total in-service occupancy (lease-up basis) for 2021 for purposes of the annual bonus was 96.5%, with a range of 95.1% to 97.9%. This target was lower than the actual results for 2020 of 97.0%. In establishing the target, our Compensation and Human Capital Committee considered:
•the negative impact of placing a significant amount of speculative developments in service; •the acquisition of a vacant, 500,000 square foot building in December 2020; and •the negative impact of both tenant defaults in the fourth quarter of 2020 and anticipated tenant defaults in the first quarter of 2021. |
| | |
What were the actual results?
Our average total in-service occupancy (lease-up basis) for 2021 was 97.8%. |
40% of the annual bonus opportunity for Mr. Anthony in 20192021 was based on his division’s performance goals, for his division, which are described on page 45.below.
25% of the annual incentive bonus opportunity for each of our named executive officers in 20192021 was directly tied to individual performance.
For purposes of the annual bonus program, individual performance in 20192021 was evaluated in a subjective and non-formulaic manner, based on certain individual goals:goals, as described below:
As the company’s Chairman and CEO, Mr. Connor’s individual goals for 2019 were based upon implementing the company’s 2019-2021 strategic plan, maintaining the company’s BBB+ credit metrics, further developing succession and leadership plans, recruiting a new Board member, joining the board of a charity or university, and developing a strategy to further the company’s corporate responsibility initiatives. | | | | | |
| Name | Goals |
| James B. Connor | As the company’s Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Connor’s individual goals for 2021 were based upon communicating the updated 2019-2021 strategic plan to employees, investors and analysts, maintaining the company���s BBB+ credit metrics, continuing a strong focus on succession planning for executives including Chief Executive Officer successors, continuing to refresh the Board by recruiting a new Board member and maintaining Board diversity, developing a Carbon Neutrality Plan and improving diversity at the senior level of the company. |
| Mark A. Denien | As the company’s Chief Financial Officer, Mr. Denien’s individual goals for 2021 focused on maintaining the company’s BBB+ credit metrics, continued development of business acumen and the other professional development opportunities, enhancing investor and analyst communications and developing expanded roles for key team members and increasing his group’s overall diversity. |
| Steven W. Schnur | As the company’s Chief Operating Officer, Mr. Schnur’s goals for 2021 included increasing external visibility with clients, investors and major brokerage house leaders, advancing the corporate responsibility initiative internally and externally, developing a succession plan for the East Region of the company’s real estate operations, selecting a product and developing a plan to replace the company’s current customer relationship management system and increasing mid to high level diversity within the Real Estate Operations team. |
| Nicholas C. Anthony | As the company’s Executive Vice President, Chief Investment Officer, Mr. Anthony’s goals for 2021 included developing a plan to increase Coastal Tier 1 market exposure, reinforcing the acquisitions team in the Northeast, taking an active role in investor and analyst relations and developing a plan to increase diversity within his group. |
| Ann C. Dee | As the company’s General Counsel, Ms. Dee’s individual goals for 2021 included assisting with company diversity and inclusion efforts, providing legal support to execute the company’s strategy to reduce Amazon exposure and continuing the development of a succession strategy for the legal department. |
As the company’s Chief Financial Officer, Mr. Denien’s individual goals for 2019 focused on maintaining the company’s BBB+ credit metrics, successful completion of the transition of the company’s real estate accounting software to YARDI Systems, Inc., continuing personal development opportunities, and enhancing investor and analyst communications.
As the company’s Chief Operating Officer, Mr. Schnur’s goals for 2019 included developing the West Coast leadership team and growing Duke Realty’s investment in the West Coast, creating development and succession plans for leadership roles within real estate operations, driving efficiency in operations by achieving lower general and administrative expenses as a percent of total revenue and gross assets goals, and taking an active role in investor and analyst relations.
As the Executive Vice President, Chief Investment Officer, Mr. Anthony’s goals for 2019 included implementing the acquisition and disposition components of the 2019-2021 strategic plan, implementing a development plan for the new Capital Transactions Manager, taking an active role in investor and analyst relations, and finalizing the company’s headquarters project.
As the company’s General Counsel, Ms. Dee’s individual goals for 2019 included assisting with the implementation of the company’s corporate responsibility goals, developing a succession strategy for the legal department, and successfully transitioning the human resources department after the retirement of the Chief Human Resources Officer.
The following table shows the adjusted performance goals and weightings of the 20192021 annual incentive bonus opportunities for the named executive officers.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Weighting for
James B. Connor,
Mark A. Denien, Steven W. Schnur, and Ann C. Dee | Weighting for
Nicholas C. Anthony | |
2021 Annual Incentive Targets | |
| | | | Threshold | | Target | | Stretch | | Superior | | Actual | |
| Core FFO/Share | 25.00 | % | 11.66 | % | | $ | 1.58 | | | $ | 1.64 | | | $ | 1.67 | | | $ | 1.71 | | | $ | 1.73 | | |
| AFFO/Share | 25.00 | % | 11.66 | % | | $ | 1.44 | | | $ | 1.48 | | | $ | 1.51 | | | $ | 1.54 | | | $ | 1.54 | | |
| Average Total In-Service Lease Up Occupancy | 25.00 | % | 11.66 | % | | 95.10 | % | | 96.50 | % | | 97.20 | % | | 97.90 | % | | 97.80 | % | |
| Division Goals | 0.00 | % | 40.00 | % | | For Mr. Anthony: Assessment of achievement against a mix of financial and operational goals applicable to our Capital Transaction and Joint Ventures Division including: acquisitions volume ($450.0 million target, $536.66 million actual), acquisitions yield (4.36% target, 4.14% actual), dispositions volume ($800.0 million target, $857.29 million actual), dispositions yield (5.63% target, 4.99% actual), joint venture volume ($259.0 million target, $299.12 million actual) and joint venture yield (4.36% target, 3.77% actual). | |
| Individual Goals | 25.00 | % | 25.00 | % | | Subjective assessment of achievement of individual goals for 2021 as discussed above. | |
| Total | 100.00 | % | 100.00 | % | | | |
|
| | | | | | | |
| | Weighting for
James B. Connor, Mark A. Denien, Steven W. Schnur, and Ann C. Dee | Weighting for Nicholas C. Anthony |
2019 Annual Incentive Targets |
| | | | Threshold | Target | Stretch | Superior | Actual |
| AFFO/Share | 25.00% | 11.66% | $1.23 | $1.27 | $1.29 | $1.32 | $1.30 |
| Core FFO/Share | 25.00% | 11.66% | $1.34 | $1.40 | $1.43 | $1.47 | $1.44 |
Average Total In-Service Lease Up Occupancy(1) | 25.00% | 11.66% | 94.00% | 95.50% | 96.20% | 97.00% | 96.00% |
| Division Goals | 0.00% | 40.00% | For Mr. Anthony: Assessment of achievement against a mix of financial and operational goals applicable to our Capital Transaction and Joint Ventures Division including: acquisitions volume ($200.0 million target, $215.7 million actual), acquisitions yield (4.25% target, 4.66% actual), dispositions volume ($434.9 million target, $498.5 million actual), and dispositions yield (6.00% target, 5.64% actual). |
| Individual Goals | 25.00% | 25.00% | Subjective assessment of achievement of individual goals for 2019 as discussed above. |
| Total | 100.00% | 100.00% | |
| |
(1)
| In setting goals for occupancy for 2019, the Compensation and Human Capital Committee considered the Company’s speculative development projects expected to be completed in late 2018 and 2019, which would add significant additional vacant space to the portfolio. Even with aggressive leasing of this additional vacant space, our planned occupancy levels for 2019 were slightly lower than for 2018. Therefore, the Compensation and Human Capital Committee established threshold (94.00%), target (95.50%), and stretch (96.20%) goals for 2019 average total in-service occupancy that were slightly lower than the Company’s threshold (94.70%), target (96.00%), and stretch (96.50%) goals for 2018 average total in-service occupancy. The superior goal for average total in-service occupancy remained the same (97.00%) for 2019. |
Performance for the corporate goals is measured against four different levels established by the Compensation and Human Capital Committee - threshold, target, stretch and superior. Achieving the target level of performance results in a payout at 100% of target for the relevant measure. Threshold performance results in a payout at 50% of target, and stretch and superior performance result in payouts at 150% and 200% of target, respectively. Performance below the threshold goal results in no payout for the relevant measure. Payout amounts between performance levels are determined using interpolation. The Committee reviews the performance against the division goals relating to our Capital Transactions and Joint Ventures Division, which were used for Mr. Anthony, and the individual goals for named executive officers, and determines the payout for these elements in a partially formulaic and partially non-formulaic manner.
Financial component target levels set for our executive compensation program are used for that limited purpose and should not be understood to be statements of management’s expectations of our future results or other guidance. Investors should not apply these targets in any other context.
Long-Term Incentive Awards
The objectives of the company’s long-term incentive compensation program are to:
•reward achievement over a multi-year period;
•align the interests of the executives with those of our shareholders by focusing executives on the shareholder return performance of the company; and
•provide a retention mechanism through multi-year vesting.
The Compensation and Human Capital Committee oversees grants of long-term incentives on an annual basis and at other times that may be warranted. A target long-term incentive award value is established for each executive as a percentage of base salary. The Compensation and Human Capital Committee determines the target grant
amounts using factors similar to those used in setting annual incentive targets, including the executive’s level of responsibility within the company, and internal equity contributions and external equity considerations.competitive compensation data.
The following table shows the target long-term incentive award values for 20192021 for each of our named executive officers, expressed as a percentage of base salary:salary.
|
| | | | | | | |
| Name | | Target Long-Term Incentive Award Value
(as a % of Salary)
|
| James B. Connor | | 440%525 | % |
| Mark A. Denien | | 240%250 | % |
| Steven W. Schnur | | 195%250 | % |
| Nicholas C. Anthony | | 240%250 | % |
| Ann C. Dee | | 195%205 | % |
As shown in the following graphic, the long-term equity awards made to our named executive officers in February 20192021 consisted of a combination of one-third RSUs and two-thirds PSP awards.
The following table describes the design features and purpose of the RSUs and PSP awards.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Award | | Design Features | | Purpose |
| RSUs | • | Vest over a defined period of time, subject to the executive’s continued employment
| • | Retention of key talent
|
| | | • | Align the interests of management with those of shareholders |
| PSP awards | •
| Earned based on continued employment and the achievement of financial performance targets established by the Compensation and Human Capital Committee
| • | Focus and incentivize our executives on long-term financial performance
|
| • | Represent the right to earn actual shares of the company’s common stock at the end of a three-year performance period established for each PSP award
| • | Retention of key talent |
| | | • | Align the interests of management with those of shareholders |
In 2019,2021, executive officers were permitted to elect to receive LTIP units in lieu of RSUs or PSP awards. The LTIP units are designed to qualify as profits interests in our operating partnership, Duke Realty Limited Partnership, for federal income tax purposes. To the extent the value of the LTIP units increases after the grant date, the LTIP units will become regular common units of ownership in our operating partnership upon vesting. Pursuant to the limited partnership agreement of our operating partnership, common units of ownership in the operating partnership may be redeemed for shares in the company on a 1:1 basis.
RSUs
The RSUs granted in 20192021 vest ratably over a three-year period, subject to the holder’s continued employment with the company. During the vesting period, RSUs accumulate dividend equivalents, which are deemed to be reinvested in additional vested RSUs based upon the closing price of the company’s common stock on the dividend payment date. When the original RSUs vest, the original RSUs and the RSUs acquired through corresponding dividend equivalents are converted to shares of the company’s common stock and paid to participants.
LTIP units elected in lieu of RSUs have the same time-based vesting provisions as the RSUs. However, instead of accumulating dividend equivalents, holders of time-based vesting LTIP units receive cash distributions from the operating partnership on each dividend payment date.
Performance Share Plan Awards
PSP Performance share plan awards (PSP awards) granted under the 2010 Performance Share Plan (PSP), represent the right to earn actual shares of the company’s common stock at the end of a performance period established for each PSP award. Executives may also elect to receive LTIP units in lieu of performance shares. The actual number of performance shares or LTIP units earned with respect to an award is based upon the target number of performance shares, multiplied by a “payout percentage” ranging from 0 to 225% and determined by the level of performance against pre-established performance goals. Performance shares earn dividend equivalents only if they vest. LTIP units awarded in lieu of PSP awards receive cash distributions equal to 10 percent of the regular partnership distributions during the vesting period, so the LTIP units continue to qualify as “profits interests” for tax purposes. The LTIP units accrue additional dividend equivalent LTIP units up to 90 percent of the regular partnership distributions. As with performance shares, full dividend equivalents are earned on LTIP units only if those LTIP units vest.
Grant of Performance Share Plan Awards in 20192021
The PSP awards have two financial performance components, each weighted one-half of the 20192021 PSP award, that are measured over a three-year period beginning January 1, 2019,2021, as shown in more detail below. Shares and LTIP units granted under the PSP are issued under the Duke Realty Corporation 2015 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the
2015 Incentive Plan). To the extent performance goals are achieved, the 20192021 PSP awards will pay out after the end of the 2019-20212021-2023 performance period.
The first financial component measures the company’s average annual growth in AFFO per share. The following table shows the AFFO per-share growth goals and corresponding payout percentages of target shares for the 20192021 PSP awards. The payout for AFFO performance between the Threshold and Target levels and the Target and Superior levels will be linearly interpolated.
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| 2021-2023 Average Annual Growth in AFFO per share |
| Performance Level | | Targets | Payout Percentage |
| Superior | | 5.0% or above | 200.0 | % |
| Target | | 3.0 | % | 100.0 | % |
| Threshold | | 0.0 | % | 50.0 | % |
| Below Threshold | | Less than 0.0% | 0.0 | % |
|
| | | |
| 2019-2021 Average Annual Growth in AFFO per share |
| Performance Level | | Targets | Payout Percentage |
| Superior | | 5.0% or above | 200.0% |
| Target | | 3.0% | 100.0% |
| Threshold | | 0.0% | 50.0% |
| Below Threshold | | Less than 0.0% | 0.0% |
The second financial component measures our annualized total shareholder return (changes in stock price, inclusive of reinvested dividends) relative to a peer group. The following table shows the payout percentage for the 20192021 PSP awards at various levels of relative and absolute total shareholder return. The TSR payout percentage will be linearly interpolated between the Threshold and Target performance levels and the Target and Superior performance levels.
|
| | | | | | | | | | |
2019-20212021-2023 Relative Total Shareholder Return |
| Performance Level | | Targets | Payout Percentage |
| Outperformance | | ≥ 75th Percentile and ≥ 15.0% Absolute TSR | 250.0%250.0 | % |
| Superior | | 75th Percentile | 200.0%200.0 | % |
| Target | | 50th Percentile | 100.0%100.0 | % |
| Threshold | | 25th Percentile | 50.0%50.0 | % |
| Below Threshold | | < 25th Percentile | 0.0%0.0 | % |
For purposes of relative total shareholder returnTSR comparisons, the company selected REITs against which we most directly competed for business and/or capital, as well as twoone REIT indicesindex that werewas a relevant performance benchmarksbenchmark at the time the PSP awards were granted.
|
| | | | |
| • EastGroup Properties, Inc. | • NAREIT FTSE Industrials IndexPlymouth Industrial REIT, Inc. |
| • First Industrial Realty Trust, Inc. | • Prologis, Inc. |
• Liberty PropertyIndustrial Logistics Properties Trust(1) | • Rexford Industrial Realty, Inc. |
| • Monmouth Real Estate Investment Corporation | • STAG Industrial, Inc. |
| • MSCI US REIT Index | • Terreno Realty Corporation |
| |
(1)
| On October 27, 2019, Prologis, Inc. and Liberty Property Trust announced that the two companies had entered into a definitive merger agreement by which Prologis, Inc. would acquire Liberty Property Trust, subject to the approval of the shareholders of Liberty Property Trust. Because the definitive merger agreement was announced |
prior to the end of the performance period, Liberty Property Trust’s total shareholder return will be excluded from the calculation.
For both the AFFO payout percentage and the TSR payout percentage, the payout will be zero percent if the threshold performance level is not attained.
Payout of Performance Share Plan Awards Granted in 2016, 2017,
In 2018, 2019, Messrs. Connor, Denien, Schnur,2020 and Anthony, and Ms. Dee earned a payout of the performance shares granted under the PSP in 2017 (2017 PSP) awards. The 2017 PSP awards had two financial performance components, each weighted one-half of the 2017 PSP award, that were measured over a three-year period beginning January 1, 2017, as described in more detail below. For 2017, Messrs. Connor, Denien, and Schnur, and Ms. Dee each elected to receive LTIP units in lieu of PSP awards.
The first financial component measured was the company’s average annual growth in AFFO and the second component measured the company’s annualized total shareholder return (changes in stock price, inclusive of reinvested dividends) relative to a peer group.
The following table shows the AFFO metric goals and corresponding payout percentages for the 2017 PSP awards with payout for performance between levels linearly interpolated.
|
| | | |
2017-2019 Average Annual Growth in AFFO per share(1) |
| Performance Level | | Targets | Payout Percentage |
| Superior | | 3.9% or above | 200.0% |
| Target | | 1.8% | 100.0% |
| Threshold | | -1.3% | 50.0% |
| Below Threshold | | Less than -1.3% | 0.0% |
| |
(1)
| Reflects goals as adjusted in July 2017 for our medical office portfolio disposition, which was announced in 2017. Original goals for superior, target, and threshold goals were 5%, 3%, 0%, and less than 0%, respectively. |
The following table shows the payout percentage for the 2017 PSP awards at various levels of relative total shareholder return (changes in stock prices, inclusive of reinstated dividends). The TSR payout percentage would be linearly interpolated between Threshold and Target performance levels and the Target and Superior performance levels.
|
| | | |
2017-2019 Relative Total Shareholder Return |
Performance Level | | Targets | Payout Percentage |
Outperformance | | ≥ 75th Percentile and ≥ 15.0% Absolute TSR
| 250.0% |
Superior | | ≥ 75th Percentile
| 200.0% |
Target | | ≥ 50th Percentile
| 100.0% |
Threshold | | ≥ 25th Percentile
| 50.0% |
| | < 25th Percentile | 0.0%
|
Total shareholder return for the 2017-2019 performance period was measured versus the following REITs against which the company most directly competed for business and/or capital, as well as two REIT indexes and one broad market index that were relevant performance benchmarks at the start of the performance period:
|
| |
• DCT Industrial Trust, Inc.(1)
| • NAREIT FTSE Industrials Index |
• EastGroup Properties, Inc. | • Prologis, Inc. |
• First Industrial Realty Trust, Inc. | • S&P MidCap 400 Index |
• Liberty Property Trust(2)
| • STAG Industrial, Inc. |
• MSCI US REIT Index | • Terreno Realty Corporation |
2021
(1) On August 22, 2018, Prologis, Inc. acquired DCT Industrial Trust, Inc. Thus, its total shareholder return for the 2017-2019 performance period was excluded from the final computation.
(2) On October 27, 2019, Prologis, Inc. and Liberty Property Trust announced that the two companies had entered into a definitive merger agreement by which Prologis, Inc. would acquire Liberty Property Trust, subject to the approval of the shareholders of Liberty Property Trust. Because the definitive merger agreement was announced prior to the end of the performance period, Liberty Property Trust’s total shareholder return was excluded from the calculation.
For purposes of the 2017 PSP awards, our average annual growth in AFFO per share was 7.07%, resulting in a payout percentage of 200% and our relative total shareholder return ranking was in the 25th percentile, resulting in a payout percentage of 50%. The combined payout percentage was 125% of target, an average of the payout percentages for the two components. In addition, with the exception of LTIP units, dividend equivalents accrued on the performance shares earned were paid out in shares of stock. Unpaid operating partnership distributions were paid out in additional LTIP units. Please see “Executive Compensation—Option Exercises and Stock Vested in 2019” for the number of shares of stock and LTIP units and values received by our named executive officers in connection with the payout of the 2017 PSP awards.
Other Compensation and Benefits
Our executive officers participate in benefit plans generally available to all other associates. We also provide certain benefits to our executive officers that are not available to all other associates, such as physical examinations that are outside the normal health care plan, supplemental life insurance, financial advisory services and automobile and cell phone allowances. We added a supplemental life insurance policy for certain officers beginning January 1, 2019. For additional information on benefits made available during fiscal 2019, please see the Summary Compensation Table under the section entitled “Executive Compensation.”
Compensation Guidelines and Policies
To help manage compensation-related risk, we have adopted guidelines to ensure the independence of compensation advisers, a compensation recoupment policy and stock ownership and retention guidelines, all of which are described in more detail below.
Compensation Committee Advisers Independence Guidelines
The Compensation and Human Capital Committee has adopted guidelines regarding the engagement of independent executive compensation advisers. These guidelines, which can be found on the Investor Relations/Corporate Governance section of our website at www.dukerealty.com,, are designed to safeguard the independence of the Compensation and Human Capital Committee’s advisers from the company and management. The Compensation and Human Capital Committee’s adviser, FW Cook,Ferguson Partners Consulting, reports directly to the Chairperson of the Compensation and Human Capital Committee, and all work conducted by FW Cook with respect to the company’s compensation programs is on behalf of the Compensation and Human Capital Committee. FW Cook provides no services to the company other than executive and non-employee director compensation consulting services, and has no other direct or indirect business relationship with the company or any of its affiliates.In addition, in its consulting agreement with the Compensation and Human Capital Committee, FW Cook agreesFerguson Partners Consulting also agreed to advise the Chairperson of the Compensation and Human Capital Committee if any potential conflicts of interest arise that could cause FW Cook’sFerguson Partners Consulting’s independence to be questioned and to undertake no
projects for management except as approved in advance by the Chairperson of the Compensation and Human Capital Committee. No such conflicts of interest, including due to the director search services provided by Ferguson Partners Ltd., arose in 2019.2021.
Compensation Recoupment Policy
We have adopted a compensation recoupment policy under which executive officers and the principal accounting officer could be required to return to the company certain compensation (such as a bonus or other variable compensation) if it was earned based on materially inaccurate financial statements that required a restatement or if a metric used in computing the executive officer or principal accounting officer’s short-term or long-term compensation has been materially incorrectly calculated, and the Compensation and Human Capital Committee determines that the officer has received an excess incentive due to a restatement or correction of the incorrect calculation. In that case, the Compensation and Human Capital Committee may take action, subject to approval by the Board and applicable law, to recover the difference between the amount actually paid to the executive officer and the amount that would have been paid based on correct financial results. If the Compensation and Human Capital Committee determines that any associate’s intentional or knowingly fraudulent or illegal conduct caused damage to the company, the Compensation and Human Capital Committee also may take appropriate action to cancel or reduce any outstanding equity compensation awards, incentive compensation awards or other benefits to which the associate is actually or contingently entitled, in an amount up to the damage to the company. The company’s Recoupment Policy is incorporated into the Code of Business Ethics thatcan be found on the Investor Relations/Corporate Governance section of the company’s website at www.dukerealty.com.www.dukerealty.com.
Hedging/Pledging Policy
Under our Securities Trading Policy Statement, associates and directors are prohibited from taking out loans, such as margin loans, for which repayment is secured by a pledge of shares of the company’s stock or other securities issued by the company.In addition, transactions in puts, calls or other derivative securities, or hedging transactions of any kind, whether or not on an exchange or in any other organized market, are generally prohibited.prohibited.
Stock Ownership and Retention Guidelines
The company’s senior executive officers are required to hold shares of common stock with a value equal to specified multiples of base salary, as shown below. This program assists in focusing executives on long-term success and shareholder value by requiring executives to hold company stock over the long term.
|
| | | | |
| Position | Base Salary Multiple | Time to Attain Ownership Requirement |
| Chief Executive Officer | 6x | 5 years |
| Executive Vice Presidents and Chief Operating Officer | 4x | 5 years |
The stock ownership goal for each person subject to the company’s Stock Ownership Guidelines is determined on an individual basis, first in dollars equal to a multiple of the executive’s base salary, and then by converting that amount to a fixed number of shares. Until the senior executive officers reach their ownership guidelines, they are required to retain shares that are owned on the date they became subject to the Stock Ownership Guidelines and at least 75% of “net shares” delivered through the company’s executive compensation plans. For this purpose, “net shares” means the number of shares, including limited partnership units in our operating partnership, obtained by
exercising stock options or through vesting of awards, less the number of shares the executive sells, surrenders or trades to coverpay the exercise costsprice of stock options and any applicable tax obligations, including income, FICA or to pay withholding taxes.Medicare taxes, as of the date of the transaction. If the executive transfers an award to a family member who resides in the same household, the transferee will be subject to the same retention requirements and the shares will still be counted toward satisfaction of the ownership requirements. A copy of the Stock Ownership Guidelines can be found on the Investor Relations/Corporate Governance section of our website at http://www.dukerealty.com.www.dukerealty.com.
Equity Grant Policies
Our annual equity grants, including equity grants to named executive officers, are awarded effective as of February 10 of each year, with the grant value of an RSU and the target value of a PSP award, as applicable, equal to the fair market value of our stock as of the grant date. Having a pre-determinedpredetermined grant date minimizes any concern that grant
dates could be selectively chosen based upon market price at any given time. The Compensation and Human Capital Committee periodically approves equity grants to newly hired associates or to associates receiving promotions. These interim grants generally occur on the February 10, May 10, August 10 or November 10 immediately following the date of hire or promotion, with the grant value of an RSU equal to the fair market value of our stock as of the grant date. The Compensation and Human Capital Committee is authorized to award special equity grants on other dates from time to time when the company experiences exceptional performance results. The company does not plan to time, and has not timed, its release of material non-public information for the purpose of affecting the value of executive compensation.
Employment and Severance Agreements
As a matter of business philosophy, we do not enter into employment agreements with our executive officers. However, we do from time to time enter into letter agreements regarding executive severance with certain key officers, including each of the named executive officers. We enter into these agreements as a means of protecting the business interests of the company by conditioning the right of a terminated officer to receive the severance benefits on his or her compliance with a number of post-termination restrictive covenants. We believe that having these covenants in place provides a tangible benefit to our shareholders.
The letter agreements provide that an officer is entitled to receive certain separation payments and benefits upon the termination of his or her employment under various conditions. The level of severance pay depends upon the circumstances of the officer’s termination of employment. For example, if the officer were terminated by the company without cause or the officer resigns for good reason, then he or she would be entitled to a severance payment equal to two times (2X) (or, if such termination occurs within one year following a change in control of the company, three times (3X)) the sum of (a) his or her base salary then in effect and (b) the average annual incentive bonus paid or payable with respect to services performed in the three prior calendar years, payable over a 24-month period. If the company terminates the officer’s employment due to his or her disability, then the officer would be entitled to a severance payment equal to the sum of (a) his or her base salary then in effect and (b) the average annual incentive bonus paid or payable with respect to services performed in the three prior calendar years, payable over a 12-month period. If the officer terminates his or her employment voluntarily without good reason, then the severance payment would equal one times (1X) his or her base salary then in effect, payable over a 12-month period.
In addition, if an officer’s employment terminates for any reason other than cause or death, and at the time of the termination the officer is at least 55 years old and has at least 10ten years of service with the company or an affiliate, then he or she also will receive a healthcare stipend and a financial advisory stipend during the severance period. The healthcare stipend is equal to the difference between (a) the cost the officer would have to pay to continue participation in the company’s health plans under COBRAthe Consolidated Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act (COBRA) for a period of 36 months and (b) the active associate rate for such coverage and the healthcare stipend will be reduced by 50% for months during such period in which the officer would be age 65 or over. The financial advisory stipend is equal to the cost the company would have to pay to provide the officer the financial advisory services it provides generally to executive officers for a period of 36 months, calculated using the annual cost for such services in the year in which the termination date occurs. No severance or stipends would be payable if an officer is terminated for cause or death.
Regardless of the reason for termination of an officer’s employment, his or her right to the severance payments and stipends would stop if he or she violates any of the post-employment restrictive covenants in the amended letter agreements, which include non-competition, non-solicitation and non-disclosure obligations. The non-compete and non-solicitation covenants generally last for two years following termination of employment or one year if the termination is by the company for cause or by the officer without good reason. The letter agreements do not include tax gross-up provisions. Please see “Executive Compensation—Other Potential Post Employment Payments” for a table showing the amounts that would be payable to each of our named executive officers under the letter agreements under various termination scenarios using the applicable base salary and cash incentive bonus as if the termination occurred on December 31, 2019.
2021.
EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
The total direct compensation of each of our named executive officers consists of annual base salary and annual cash and long-term equity incentive awards as specifically addressed in the CD&A. Our objective is to provide compensation opportunities that are competitive in total as well as in the mix of elements. The compensation program is designed to provide the proper balance of fixed versus variable and cash versus equity compensation.
With the exception of stock awards, the following table sets forth the compensation earned by or paid to each of our named executive officers during the fiscal years ended December 31, 2019;2021; December 31, 2018;2020; and December 31, 2017.2019. In the case of stock awards, this table reflects the aggregate grant date fair value of stock awards granted by the company during these years.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Summary Compensation Table |
Name and
Principal Position |
Year |
Salary |
Stock Awards
(1) | Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation
(2) | All Other
Compensation
(3) | Total |
James B. Connor
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer |
| 2021 | $957,692 | $5,040,000 | $3,458,760 | $37,472 | $9,493,924 |
| 2020 | $926,154 | $4,340,000 | $2,537,740 | $37,607 | $7,841,501 |
| 2019 | $877,692 | $3,613,867 | $2,164,800 | $37,545 | $6,693,904 |
Mark A. Denien
Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
| 2021 | $618,462 | $1,550,000 | $1,609,140 | $35,575 | $3,813,177 |
| 2020 | $596,923 | $1,400,000 | $1,131,000 | $34,160 | $3,162,083 |
| 2019 | $558,462 | $1,254,400 | $1,076,250 | $33,176 | $2,922,288 |
Steven W. Schnur
Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer |
| 2021 | $518,462 | $1,300,000 | $1,349,600 | $34,371 | $3,202,433 |
| 2020 | $498,846 | $1,120,000 | $942,500 | $34,597 | $2,595,943 |
| 2019 | $466,154 | $837,200 | $969,360 | $65,465 | $2,338,179 |
Nicholas C. Anthony
Executive Vice President, Chief Investment Officer |
| 2021 | $503,846 | $1,262,500 | $1,110,060 | $36,174 | $2,912,580 |
| 2020 | $488,846 | $1,097,600 | $919,770 | $34,786 | $2,541,002 |
| 2019 | $473,846 | $1,064,000 | $922,810 | $33,499 | $2,494,155 |
Ann C. Dee
Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary |
| 2021 | $508,846 | $1,045,500 | $1,185,750 | $36,144 | $2,776,240 |
| 2020 | $491,923 | $924,000 | $824,180 | $34,761 | $2,274,864 |
| 2019 | $453,846 | $828,100 | $804,480 | $33,656 | $2,120,082 |
|
| | | | | | |
Summary Compensation Table |
Name and Principal Position | Year | Salary | Stock Awards
(1) | Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation (2) | All Other Compensation
(3) | Total |
James B. Connor Chairman and Chief Executive Officer |
| | 2019 | $877,692 | $3,613,867 | $2,164,800 | $37,545 | $6,693,904 |
| | 2018 | $846,154 | $3,794,333 | $2,199,380 | $33,746 | $6,873,613 |
| | 2017 | $788,462 | $3,306,667 | $2,072,000 | $33,184 | $6,200,313 |
Mark A. Denien Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
| | 2019 | $558,462 | $1,254,400 | $1,076,250 | $33,176 | $2,922,288 |
| | 2018 | $536,923 | $1,317,400 | $1,117,800 | $32,046 | $3,004,169 |
| | 2017 | $496,923 | $1,136,667 | $1,063,750 | $31,301 | $2,728,641 |
Steven W. Schnur Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer |
| | 2019 | $466,154 | $837,200 | $969,360 | $65,465 | $2,338,179 |
| | 2018 | $437,692 | $822,200 | $816,750 | $121,662 | $2,198,304 |
Nicholas C. Anthony Executive Vice President, Chief Investment Officer |
| | 2019 | $473,846 | $1,064,000 | $922,810 | $33,499 | $2,494,155 |
| | 2018 | $457,692 | $1,026,567 | $897,260 | $32,203 | $2,413,722 |
| | 2017 | $426,923 | $910,883 | $851,800 | $31,241 | $2,220,847 |
Ann C. Dee Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary |
| | 2019 | $453,846 | $828,100 | $804,480 | $33,656 | $2,120,082 |
| | 2018 | $438,846 | $867,767 | $810,700 | $32,358 | $2,149,671 |
| | 2017 | $422,308 | $746,583 | $864,880 | $29,994 | $2,063,765 |
(1)This column reflects the aggregate grant date fair value in the applicable year for (a) RSUs granted under the 2015 Incentive Plan and (b) performance shares granted under the PSP, as computed under FASB ASC Topic 718. It also includes the grant date fair value for any LTIP units granted in lieu of RSUs and/or PSP awards, as elected by the executive officer. In 2021, Messrs. Connor, Denien and Schnur elected to receive LTIP units in lieu of both RSUs and PSP awards. The grant value for all such awards is equal to the fair market value of our stock as of the grant dates. Pursuant to SEC rules, the amounts shown in the Summary Compensation Table for awards subject to financial performance conditions are based on the probable outcome as of the date of grant and exclude the impact of estimated forfeitures. The following table sets forth the grant date target values of the 2021 PSP grant, in addition to values assuming achievement of the highest level of performance, for each named executive officer.
| |
(1)
| This column reflects the aggregate grant date fair value in the applicable year for (a) RSUs granted under the 2015 Incentive Plan and (b) performance shares granted under the PSP, as computed under FASB ASC Topic 718. It also includes the grant date fair value for any LTIP units granted in lieu of RSUs and/or PSP awards, as elected by the executive officer. In 2019, Messrs. Connor and Denien elected to receive LTIP units in lieu of both RSUs and PSP awards. Mr. Schnur elected to receive LTIP units in lieu of PSP awards. The grant value for all such awards is equal to the fair market value of our stock as of the grant dates. Pursuant to SEC rules, the amounts shown in the Summary Compensation Table for awards subject to financial performance conditions are based on the probable outcome as of the date of grant and exclude the impact of estimated forfeitures. The following table sets forth the grant date target values of the 2019 PSP grant, in addition to values assuming achievement of the highest level of performance, for each named executive officer. |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| 2021 PSP Awards |
| Name | | | Grant Date
Target Value
($)(a) | | Value as of Grant Date, Assuming Highest Level of Performance
($) |
| James B. Connor | | | $3,360,000 | (b) | | $7,560,000 |
| Mark A. Denien | | | $1,033,333 | (b) | | $2,325,000 |
| Steven W. Schnur | | | $866,667 | (b) | | $1,950,000 |
| Nicholas C. Anthony | | | $841,667 | | | $1,893,750 |
| Ann C. Dee | | | $697,000 | | | $1,568,250 |
(a)Represents the grant date target value of PSP awards. The grant date fair value reported in the Summary Compensation Table is based on the probable outcome at the time of grant, which was at target. The total value reported in the Summary Compensation Table also includes the grant date value of all RSU awards.
(b)Represents the grant date value at target of LTIP units awarded in lieu of PSP awards upon election by the executive officer. See the discussion of LTIP units awarded in lieu of PSP awards under the section entitled “Performance Share Plan Awards” included in the discussion of long-term incentive awards in the CD&A.
(2)Represents the aggregate annual cash incentive bonus that is based upon the company’s attainment of certain corporate performance goals as compared to predetermined targets established at the beginning of each calendar year as well as an individual, and in certain cases, a division performance component.
(3)All other compensation for 2021 includes the value of company matching and profit sharing contributions of $11,845 for each Executive Officer to the company’s 401(k) plan and profit sharing plan, and the value of term life insurance premium payments made by the company. In addition, all other compensation includes the following perquisites for each of the named executive officers: (i) an automobile allowance and cell phone allowance; (ii) payments for personal financial planning services; and (iii) payments for executive medical examinations.
|
| | | | |
| 2019 PSP Awards |
| Name | | | Grant Date Target Value ($)(a) | Value as of Grant Date, Assuming Highest Level of Performance ($) |
| James B. Connor | | | $2,581,333(b) | $5,807,999 |
| Mark A. Denien | | | $896,000(b) | $2,016,000 |
| Steven W. Schnur | | | $598,000(b) | $1,345,500 |
| Nicholas C. Anthony | | | $760,000 | $1,710,000 |
| Ann C. Dee | | | $591,500 | $1,330,875 |
| |
(a)
| Represents the grant date target value of PSP awards. The grant date fair value reported in the Summary Compensation Table is based on the probable outcome at the time of grant, which was below target. The total value reported in the Summary Compensation Table also includes the grant date value of all RSU awards. |
| |
(b)
| Represents the grant date value at target of LTIP units awarded in lieu of PSP awards upon election by the executive officer. See the discussion of LTIP units awarded in lieu of PSP awards under the section entitled “Performance Share Awards” included in the discussion of long-term incentive awards in the CD&A. |
| |
(2)
| Represents the aggregate annual cash incentive bonus that is based upon the company’s attainment of certain corporate performance goals as compared to predetermined targets established at the beginning of each calendar year as well as an individual, and in certain cases, a division performance component. |
| |
(3)
| All other compensation for 2019 includes the value of company matching and profit sharing contributions to the company’s 401(k) plan and profit sharing plan, and the value of term life insurance premium payments made by the company. In addition, all other compensation includes the following perquisites for each of the named executive officers: (i) an automobile allowance and cell phone allowance; (ii) payments for personal financial planning services; and (iii) payments for executive medical examinations. With regard to Mr. Schnur, all other compensation also includes $31,788 for tax gross-ups related to moving and relocation expenses. |
Grants of Plan-Based Awards in 20192021
The following table summarizes grants made to the named executive officers in 20192021 under the company’s plans:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Name | Grant Date | Compensation Committee Approval Date | | Estimated Possible Payouts Under Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards
(1) | | Estimated Future Payouts Under Equity Incentive Plan Awards
(2) | | All Other Stock Awards: Number of Shares of Stock or Units
(#)(3) | Grant Date Fair Value of Stock and Option Awards |
| Threshold | Target | Maximum | | Threshold
(#) | Target
(#) | Maximum
(#) | |
| James B. Connor | | | | $1,110,000 | $1,776,000 | $3,552,000 | | | | | | | |
| 2/10/21 | 1/27/21 | | | | | | 39,934 | 79,867 | 179,701 | | | $3,360,000 |
| 2/10/21 | 1/27/21 | | | | | | | | | | 39,934 | $1,680,000 |
| Mark A. Denien | | | | $523,125 | $837,000 | $1,674,000 | | | | | | | |
| 2/10/21 | 1/27/21 | | | | | | 12,282 | 24,563 | 55,267 | | | $1,033,333 |
| 2/10/21 | 1/27/21 | | | | | | | | | | 12,282 | $516,667 |
Steven W. Schnur
| | | | $438,750 | $702,000 | $1,404,000 | | | | | | | |
| 2/10/21 | 1/27/21 | | | | | | 10,301 | 20,601 | 46,352 | | | $866,667 |
| 2/10/21 | 1/27/21 | | | | | | | | | | 10,301 | $433,333 |
| Nicholas C. Anthony | | | | $426,094 | $681,750 | $1,363,500 | | | | | | | |
| 2/10/21 | 1/27/21 | | | | | | 10,004 | 20,007 | 45,016 | | | $841,667 |
| 2/10/21 | 1/27/21 | | | | | | | | | | 10,004 | $420,833 |
| Ann C. Dee | | | | $398,438 | $637,500 | $1,275,000 | | | | | | | |
| 2/10/21 | 1/27/21 | | | | | | 8,284 | 16,568 | 37,278 | | | $697,000 |
| 2/10/21 | 1/27/21 | | | | | | | | | | 8,284 | $348,500 |
(1)Represents the 2021 annual cash incentive bonus opportunities for each executive. See the description of the annual cash incentive award in the CD&A.
(2)Represents the number of shares that could be earned under performance shares granted during 2021 under the PSP or the number of limited partnership units in our operating partnership that could be earned under LTIP units granted in lieu of PSP awards. All of the PSP awards and LTIP units granted in lieu of PSP awards have a three-year performance measurement period. The value is computed in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718. See pertinent details regarding the payout of awards under the PSP in the section entitled “Performance Share Plan Awards” included in the discussion of long-term incentive awards in the CD&A.
(3)Represents the number of RSUs granted during 2021 under the 2015 Incentive Plan or the number of LTIP units granted in lieu of RSUs. See the description of the RSUs and LTIP units in the section entitled “RSUs” included in the discussion of long-term incentive awards in the CD&A.
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Name | Grant Date | Compensation Committee Approval Date | | Estimated Possible Payouts Under Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards (1) | | Estimated Future Payouts Under Equity Incentive Plan Awards (2) | | All Other Stock Awards: Number of Shares of Stock or Units (#)(3) | Grant Date Fair Value of Stock and Option Awards |
| | Threshold | Target | Maximum | | Threshold (#) | Target (#) | Maximum (#) | |
| James B. Connor | | | | $880,000 | $1,408,000 | $2,816,000 | | | | | | | |
| 2/10/19 | 1/30/19 | | | | | | 43,051 | 86,102 | 193,730 | | | $2,323,200 |
| 2/10/19 | 1/30/19 | | | | | | | | | | 43,051 | $1,290,667 |
| Mark A. Denien | | | | $437,500 | $700,000 | $1,400,000 | | | | | | | |
| 2/10/19 | 1/30/19 | | | | | | 14,944 | 29,887 | 67,246 | | | $806,400 |
| 2/10/19 | 1/30/19 | | | | | | | | | | 14,943 | $448,000 |
Steven W. Schnur
| | | | $394,063 | $630,500 | $1,261,000 | | | | | | | |
| 2/10/19 | 1/30/19 | | | | | | 9,974 | 19,947 | 44,881 | | | $538,200 |
| 2/10/19 | 1/30/19 | | | | | | | | | | 9,973 | $299,000 |
| Nicholas C. Anthony | | | | $371,094 | $593,750 | $1,187,500 | | | | | | | |
| 2/10/19 | 1/30/19 | | | | | | 12,675 | 25,350 | 57,038 | | | $684,000 |
| 2/10/19 | 1/30/19 | | | | | | | | | | 12,675 | $380,000 |
| Ann C. Dee | | | | $327,031 | $523,250 | $1,046,500 | | | | | | | |
| 2/10/19 | 1/30/19 | | | | | | 9,685 | 19,730 | 44,393 | | | $532,350 |
| 2/10/19 | 1/30/19 | | | | | | | | | | 9,865 | $295,750 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Outstanding Equity Awards at 2021 Fiscal Year End |
|
| The following table contains information concerning outstanding equity awards held by each of the named executive officers as of December 31, 2021: |
| | | Stock Awards |
| Name | Grant Date | | Number of Shares or Units of Stock Granted That Have Not Vested
(#)(1) | Market Value of Shares or Units of Stock Granted That Have Not Vested
(1) | Equity Incentive Plan Awards: Number of Unearned Shares, Units, or Other Rights That Have Not Vested
(#)(2) | Equity Incentive Plan Awards: Market or Payout Value of Unearned Shares, Units, or Other Rights That Have Not Vested
(2) |
| James B. Connor | 2/10/19 | | 14,350 | $941,934 | – | – |
| 2/10/20 | | 27,711 | $1,818,950 | 195,301 | $12,819,558 |
| 2/10/21 | | 39,934 | $2,621,268 | 183,238 | $12,027,742 |
| Mark A. Denien | 2/10/19 | | 4,981 | $326,953 | – | – |
| 2/10/20 | | 8,939 | $586,756 | 63,000 | $4,135,320 |
| 2/10/21 | | 12,282 | $806,190 | 56,355 | $3,699,142 |
| Steven W. Schnur | 2/10/19 | | 3,554 | $233,281 | – | – |
| 2/10/20 | | 7,151 | $469,392 | 50,401 | $3,308,322 |
| 2/10/21 | | 10,301 | $676,158 | 47,265 | $3,102,475 |
| Nicholas C. Anthony | 2/10/19 | | 4,517 | $296,514 | – | – |
| 2/10/20 | | 7,355 | $482,753 | 49,625 | $3,257,385 |
| 2/10/21 | | 10,221 | $670,938 | 46,000 | $3,019,440 |
| Ann C. Dee | 2/10/19 | | 3,515 | $230,755 | – | – |
| 2/10/20 | | 6,192 | $406,426 | 41,777 | $2,742,242 |
| 2/10/21 | | 8,464 | $555,583 | 38,093 | $2,500,425 |
(1)
| |
(1)
| Represents the 2019 annual cash incentive bonus opportunities for each executive. See the description of the annual cash incentive award in the CD&A. |
| |
(2)
| Represents the number of shares that could be earned under performance shares granted during 2019 under the PSP, or the number of limited partnership units in our operating partnership that could be earned under LTIP units granted in lieu of PSP awards. All of the PSP awards and LTIP units granted in lieu of PSP awards have a three-year performance measurement period. The value is computed in accordance with FASB ASC Topic 718. See pertinent details regarding the payout of awards under the PSP in the section entitled “Performance Share Awards” included in the discussion of long-term incentive awards in the CD&A.
|
| |
(3)
| Represents the number of RSUs granted during 2019 under the 2015 Incentive Plan, or the number of LTIP units granted in lieu of RSUs. See the description of the RSUs and LTIP units in the section entitled “RSUs” included in the discussion of long-term incentive awards in the CD&A. |
|
| | | | | | |
| Outstanding Equity Awards at 2019 Fiscal Year End |
| |
| The following table contains information concerning outstanding equity awards held by each of the named executive officers as of December 31, 2019: |
| | | | Stock Awards |
| Name | Grant Date | | Number of Shares or Units of Stock Granted That Have Not Vested (#)(1) | Market Value of Shares or Units of Stock Granted That Have Not Vested (1) | Equity Incentive Plan Awards: Number of Unearned Shares, Units, or Other Rights That Have Not Vested (#)(2) | Equity Incentive Plan Awards: Market or Payout Value of Unearned Shares, Units, or Other Rights That Have Not Vested (2) |
| James B. Connor | 2/10/17 | | 14,076 | $488,015 | – | – |
| | 2/10/18 | | 32,015 | $1,109,960 | 227,508 | $7,887,702 |
| | 2/10/18 | | 7,548 | $261,689 | – | – |
| | 2/10/19 | | 43,051 | $1,492,578 | 198,595 | $6,885,289 |
| Mark A. Denien | 2/10/17 | | 4,838 | $167,733 | – | – |
| | 2/10/18 | | 11,115 | $385,357 | 78,989 | $2,738,549 |
| | 2/10/18 | | 2,621 | $90,870 | – | – |
| | 2/10/19 | | 14,943 | $518,074 | 68,935 | $2,389,976 |
| Steven W. Schnur | 2/10/17 | | 2,381 | $82,553 | – | – |
| | 2/10/18 | | 7,345 | $254,642 | 49,299 | $1,709,196 |
| | 2/10/18 | | 1,732 | $60,054 | – | – |
| | 2/10/19 | | 10,251 | $355,391 | 46,008 | $1,595,097 |
| Nicholas C. Anthony | 2/10/17 | | 4,306 | $149,280 | – | – |
| | 2/10/18 | | 9,171 | $317,964 | 61,905 | $2,146,246 |
| | 2/10/18 | | 2,160 | $74,884 | – | – |
| | 2/10/19 | | 13,028 | $451,678 | 58,629 | $2,032,667 |
| Ann C. Dee | 2/10/17 | | 3,529 | $122,365 | – | – |
| | 2/10/18 | | 7,322 | $253,854 | 52,037 | $1,804,123 |
| | 2/10/18 | | 1,724 | $59,771 | – | – |
| | 2/10/19 | | 10,140 | $351,543 | 45,631 | $1,582,027 |
|
| |
| Officer | Represents |
| James B. Connor | The awards dated February 10, 2017,2019, through February 10, 2019,2021, represent the number of LTIP units granted in lieu of RSUs pursuant to the executive’s election, including the special grant of RSUs.election. |
| Mark A. Denien | The awards dated February 10, 2017,2019, through February 10, 2019,2021, represent the number of LTIP units granted in lieu of RSUs pursuant to the executive’s election, including the special grant of RSUs.election. |
| Steven W. Schnur | The amount represents the number and market value of outstanding RSUs granted pursuant to the 2015 Incentive Plan for 2017, 2018, and 2019, including the special grant of RSUs. The totals include accumulated dividend equivalent RSUs. |
Nicholas C. Anthony | The amount represents the number and market value of outstanding RSUs granted pursuant to the 2015 Incentive Plan for 2017, 2018, and 2019, including the special grant of RSUs. The totals include accumulated dividend equivalent RSUs.
|
Ann C. Dee | The amount represents the number and market value of outstanding RSUs granted pursuant to the 2015 Incentive Plan for 2017 and 2019. The totals include accumulated dividend equivalent RSUs.RSUs.
The awards dated February 10, 2018,2020, and February 10, 2021, represent the number of LTIP units granted in lieu of RSUs pursuant to the executive’s election, includingelection. |
| Nicholas C. Anthony | The amount represents the special grantnumber of outstanding RSUs granted February 10, 2019, through February 10, 2021, pursuant to the 2015 Incentive Plan. The totals include accumulated dividend equivalent RSUs. |
| Ann C. Dee | The amount represents the number of outstanding RSUs granted February 10, 2019, through February 10, 2021, pursuant to the 2015 Incentive. The totals include accumulated dividend equivalent RSUs. |
With the exception of the special grant of RSUs in 2018, RSUs and LTIP units granted beginning on February 10, 2015, and after vest in three equal installments beginning on the first anniversary of the grant date, subject to the holder’s continued employment and in the case of the LTIP units, subject to certain other vesting requirements. The special grant dated February 10, 2018, vests in two equal installments. See pertinent details regarding LTIP units granted in lieu of RSUs, including cash distributions and certain other vesting requirements, included in the discussion of long-term incentive awards in the CD&A. The dividend equivalent RSUs vest as they accrue but are paid out when the host award vests or, if the host award fails to vest and is forfeited, are paid out as
soon as practical after such forfeiture, including any delay necessary to comply with Section 409A of the Code. In all cases, the market value indicated is based upon the closing price of the company’s common stock on December 31, 2019,2021, of $34.67$65.64 per share.
(2)
|
| | | | |
| Officer | Represents |
| James B. Connor | The amount represents the number of common units in our operating partnership, plus LTIP units earned in place of unpaid cash distributions, that would be earned at the maximum payout level for the LTIP units granted in lieu of PSP awards in 20182020 and 2019.2021. |
| Mark A. Denien | The amount represents the number of common units in our operating partnership, plus LTIP units earned in place of unpaid cash distributions, that would be earned at the maximum payout level for the LTIP units granted in lieu of PSP awards in 20182020 and 2019.2021. |
| Steven W. Schnur | The amount represents the number of common units in our operating partnership, plus LTIP units earned in place of unpaid cash distributions, that would be earned at the maximum payout level for the LTIP units granted in lieu of PSP awards in 20182020 and 2019.2021. |
| Nicholas C. Anthony | The amount represents the number of shares that would be earned at the maximum payout level, including dividend equivalent shares, for the awards granted pursuant to the PSP in 20182020 and 2019.2021. |
| Ann C. Dee | The amount represents the number of common units in our operating partnership, plus LTIP units earned in place of unpaid cash distributions, that would be earned at the maximum payout level, for the LTIP units granted in lieu of PSP awards in 2018. For 2019, the amount represents the number of shares that would be earned at the maximum payout level, including dividend equivalent shares, for the awards granted pursuant to the PSP.PSP in 2020 and 2021. |
All such amounts are represented at a market value based upon the closing price of the company’s common stock on December 31, 2019,2021, of $34.67$65.64 per share. The PSP awards have a three-year performance measurement period. Further details regarding awards granted under the PSP, including LTIP units, are found under the section entitled “Performance Share Plan Awards” included in the discussion of long-term incentive awards in the CD&A.
Option Exercises and Stock Vested in 20192021
The following table shows the number of shares acquired and the value realized upon vesting in 20192021 of (i) RSUs, including the value of dividend equivalents earned and vested in 20192021 on all outstanding RSUs; (ii) LTIP units received in lieu of RSUs; (iii) performance shares granted in 20172019 under the PSP, including the value of dividend equivalents earned and vested in 20192021 with respect thereto; (iv) LTIP units received in lieu of performance shares granted in 20172019 under the PSP, including the value of dividend equivalents earned on unpaid cash distributions and LTIP units earned above target payout; and/or (v) dividend equivalents earned in 20192021 on performance units previously vested under the 2000 Performance Share Plan (2000 PSP). The aggregate value of shares acquired is based upon the fair market value of the company’s common stock on the vesting date.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Stock Awards |
| Name | | Number of Shares Acquired on Vesting
(#)(1) | | Value Realized on Vesting
(1) |
| James B. Connor | | 252,765 | | $15,543,732 | (2) |
| Mark A. Denien | | 87,286 | | $5,375,616 | |
| Steven W. Schnur | | 58,682 | | $3,606,233 | |
| Nicholas C. Anthony | | 74,034 | | $4,567,263 | |
| Ann C. Dee | | 58,154 | | $3,577,260 | |
(1) Includes the following number of shares or LTIP units acquired and value realized on vesting for the 2019 PSP award:
| | | | | | | | | | | |
| Name | | Number of Shares/LTIP Units Acquired on Vesting (#)(a) | Value Realized on Vesting |
| James B. Connor | | 208,223 | $13,667,732 |
| Mark A. Denien | | 72,277 | $4,744,230 |
| Steven W. Schnur | | 48,239 | $3,166,383 |
| Nicholas C. Anthony | | 61,503 | $4,037,057 |
| Ann C. Dee | | 47,868 | $3,142,057 |
(a) Messrs. Connor, Denien and Schnur elected to receive LTIP units in lieu of PSP awards in 2019. The number represents the LTIP units earned upon vesting, including additional LTIP units earned in place of unpaid cash distributions.
(2)Includes $15,959 for Mr. Connor attributable to the value of dividend equivalents earned in 2021 on performance units previously vested under the 2000 PSP for which receipt has been deferred. Dividend equivalent units earned under the 2000 PSP also are included in the “Aggregate Earnings in the Last FY” column of the Nonqualified Deferred Compensation table. For a description of these dividend equivalents, see the description of the 2000 PSP under the heading, “Nonqualified Deferred Compensation for 2021.”
|
| | | |
| | | Stock Awards |
| Name | | Number of Shares Acquired on Vesting (#)(1) | Value Realized on Vesting (1) |
| James B. Connor | | 183,036 | $6,038,659(2) |
| Mark A. Denien | | 65,137 | $2,142,031 |
| Steven W. Schnur | | 30,029 | $985,296 |
| Nicholas C. Anthony | | 51,007 | $1,683,671 |
| Ann C. Dee | | 42,442 | $1,397,416 |
| |
(1)
| Includes the following number of shares or LTIP units acquired and value realized on vesting for the 2017 PSP award: |
|
| | | |
| Name | | Number of Shares/LTIP Units Acquired on Vesting (#)(a) | Value Realized on Vesting |
| James B. Connor | | 117,368 | $4,069,140 |
| Mark A. Denien | | 40,345 | $1,398,767 |
| Steven W. Schnur | | 17,880 | $619,908 |
| Nicholas C. Anthony | | 32,614 | $1,130,734 |
| Ann C. Dee | | 26,499 | $918,736 |
| |
(a)
| Messrs. Connor, Denien, and Schnur, and Ms. Dee elected to receive LTIP units in lieu of PSP awards in 2017. The number represents the LTIP units earned upon vesting, including additional LTIP units earned in place of unpaid cash distributions. |
| |
(2)
| Includes $12,754 for Mr. Connor attributable to the value of dividend equivalents earned in 2019 on performance units previously vested under the 2000 PSP for which receipt has been deferred. Dividend equivalent units earned under the 2000 PSP also are included in the “Aggregate Earnings in the Last FY” column of the Nonqualified Deferred Compensation table. For a description of these dividend equivalents, see the description of the 2000 PSP under the heading, “Nonqualified Deferred Compensation for 2019.” |
Nonqualified Deferred Compensation for 20192021
Our named executive officers’ nonqualified deferred compensation in 20192021 consists of participation in one or both of the following plans: (1) the Executives’ Deferred Compensation Plan (DC Plan), and (2) the 2000 PSP. The DC Plan continues in effect as the company’s primary nonqualified deferred compensation plan. Certain of our named executive officers have undistributed awards under the 2000 PSP, although no further awards will be made under such plan. The 2000 PSP constitutes a deferred compensation plan in the technical sense that outstanding vested awards may be paid out in a future year.
Executives’ Deferred Compensation Plan
The company does not make contributions to the DC Plan and does not guarantee any return on participant account balances. Executives are permitted to elect to defer up to 50% of base salary, 100% of annual cash incentive bonus and 100% of RSU and PSP awards. The company has established an irrevocable rabbi trust to hold assets separate from other general corporate assets for the purpose of paying future participant obligations. The assets of the trust remain available to the general creditors of the company. Participants are 100% vested in their deferrals and related earnings. Participants who retire on or after reaching age 50 will receive their DC Plan account balance, based upon their election, either in full or by partial lump-sum payment and/or by annual installments of two to 15 years. A participant who becomes disabled or terminates employment other than by retirement death, or disability will receive the undistributed portion of the account balance in a lump-sum payment. In the event of a participant’s death, the participant’s designated beneficiary will receive the undistributed portion of the account balance in a lump-sum payment. A participant may also elect to receive some or all of a particular year’s deferral and related earnings prior to retirement or termination of employment in the form of a lump-sum payment or in up to five annual installments. Subject to approval by the DC Plan administrator, in the event of an unforeseen financial emergency beyond the participant’s control, a participant may request a withdrawal from his or her account up to the amount necessary to satisfy the emergency (provided the participant does not have the financial resources to otherwise meet the hardship).
2000 Performance Share Plan
Awards under the 2000 PSP were made in 2000 and 2004 in the form of performance units, all of which are now fully vested. The payment for vested awards is made in shares of common stock. However, vested awards are not paid until retirement or termination of employment and thus are considered deferred compensation. Dividends are paid on the awards in cash or additional performance units, as previously elected by the participant.
The following table sets forth certain information as of December 31, 2019,2021, regarding deferred compensation plans available to each of our named executive officers.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Name | Name of Plan | Executive Contributions in Last FY (1) | Registrant Contributions in Last FY | Aggregate Earnings in Last FY (2) | Aggregate Withdrawals/ Distributions | Aggregate Balance
at Last FYE
(3) |
| James B. Connor | DC Plan | – | – | – | – | – |
| 2000 PSP | – | – | $410,119 | – | $1,015,075 |
| Mark. A. Denien | DC Plan | – | – | – | – | – |
| 2000 PSP | – | – | – | – | – |
| Steven W. Schnur | DC Plan | – | – | $387,697 | – | $1,866,067 |
| 2000 PSP | – | – | – | – | – |
| Nicholas C. Anthony | DC Plan | – | – | $823,701 | – | $2,673,691 |
| 2000 PSP | – | – | – | – | – |
| Ann C. Dee | DC Plan | – | – | $659,805 | – | $2,159,433 |
| 2000 PSP | – | – | – | – | – |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Name | Name of Plan | Executive Contributions in Last FY (1) | Registrant Contributions in Last FY | Aggregate Earnings
in Last FY
(2) | Aggregate Withdrawals/ Distributions | Aggregate Balance at Last FYE (3) |
| James B. Connor | DC Plan | – | – | – | – | – |
| 2000 PSP | – | – | $139,570 | – | $510,884 |
| Mark. A. Denien | DC Plan | – | – | – | – | – |
| 2000 PSP | – | – | – | – | – |
| Steven W. Schnur | DC Plan | – | – | $331,354 | – | $1,257,206 |
| 2000 PSP | – | – | – | – | – |
| Nicholas C. Anthony | DC Plan | – | – | $394,573 | – | $1,587,562 |
| 2000 PSP | – | – | – | – | – |
| Ann C. Dee | DC Plan | $15,000 | – | $300,052 | – | $1,240,978 |
| 2000 PSP | – | – | – | – | – |
(2)Earnings represent notional returns on (a) participant-selected investments in the DC Plan and (b) dividend reinvestments in the 2000 PSP. Aggregate earnings are not includable in the Summary Compensation Table because those earnings were not preferential or above market.
(3)The aggregate balance at December 31, 2021, includes the following amounts of associate contributions representing compensation earned and deferred in prior years that was reported in the Summary Compensation Table for the year in which earned or would have been so reported if the officer had been a named executive officer in such year. Amounts in the following table include contributions to the DC Plan and the value of vested awards and dividend equivalents under the 2000 PSP.
| |
(1)
| Executive contributions represent deferral of base salary in 2019, which amounts are also disclosed in the fiscal 2019 “Salary” column of the Summary Compensation Table. Messrs. Connor, Denien, Schnur, and Anthony did not defer any of their salary, incentive bonus, or vesting RSU and PSP Awards in 2019.
|
| |
(2)
| Earnings represent notional returns on (a) participant-selected investments in the DC Plan and (b) dividend reinvestments in the 2000 PSP. Aggregate earnings are not includable in the Summary Compensation Table because those earnings were not preferential or above market. |
| |
(3)
| The aggregate balance at December 31, 2019, includes the following amounts of associate contributions representing compensation earned and deferred in prior years that was reported in the Summary Compensation Table for the year in which earned or would have been so reported if the officer had been a named executive officer in such year. Amounts in the following table include contributions to the DC Plan and the value of vested awards and dividend equivalents under the 2000 PSP. |
|
| | |
| Name | | Total |
| James B. Connor | | $208,511 |
| Mark A. Denien | | – |
| Steven W. Schnur | | $496,261 |
| Nicholas C. Anthony | | $500,492 |
| Ann C. Dee | | $675,335690,335 |
Other Potential Post-Employment Payments
The company and each of our named executive officers have entered into letter agreements that provide for separation payments upon the termination of the officer’s employment under various conditions. The level of severance pay under the letter agreements depends upon the circumstances of the officer’s termination of employment. We enter into these agreements as a means of protecting the business interests of the company by conditioning the right of a terminated officer to receive the severance benefits on his or her compliance with a number of post-termination restrictive covenants. Please see “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—Employment and Severance Agreements,”Agreements” for a description of the letter agreements.
The following table shows the amounts that would be payable to each of our named executive officers under the letter agreements under various termination scenarios using the applicable base salary and cash incentive bonus as if the termination occurred on December 31, 2019.2021. The severance agreements do not include tax gross-up provisions, and all payments made to the executives would be net of applicable withholdings.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Named Executive Officer | Executive Leaves Voluntarily with No Change in Control | Termination by Company without Cause and with No Change in Control | Termination due to Disability | Termination by Company without Cause or by Officer for “Good Reason” following Change in Control |
| James B. Connor | $1,060,986 | $6,622,266 | $3,361,626 | $9,882,906 |
| Mark A. Denien | $620,000 | $3,456,700 | $1,728,350 | $5,185,050 |
| Steven W. Schnur | $520,000 | $2,859,073 | $1,429,537 | $4,288,610 |
| Nicholas C. Anthony | $626,884 | $2,958,444 | $1,540,164 | $4,376,724 |
| Ann C. Dee | $610,986 | $2,747,226 | $1,424,106 | $4,070,346 |
|
| | | | |
| Named Executive Officer | Executive Leaves Voluntarily with No Change in Control | Termination by Company without Cause and with No Change in Control | Termination due to Disability | Termination by Company without Cause or by Officer for “Good Reason” following Change in Control |
| James B. Connor | $970,066 | $5,456,366 | $2,773,216 | $8,139,516 |
| Mark A. Denien | $560,000 | $3,087,960 | $1,543,980 | $4,631,940 |
| Steven W. Schnur | $485,000 | $2,374,013 | $1,187,007 | $3,561,020 |
| Nicholas C. Anthony | $475,000 | $2,525,211 | $1,262,606 | $3,787,820 |
| Ann C. Dee | $545,066 | $2,465,886 | $1,277,976 | $3,653,796 |
Change in Control Provisions Under Other Agreements
The company’s long-term compensation plans, including the 2015 Incentive Plan, generally provide that a change in control occurs upon the occurrence of any of the following: (1) when the incumbent members of the Board cease to constitute a majority of the Board; (2) except in the case of certain issuances or redemptions of stock or the acquisition of stock by any associate benefit plan sponsored by the company, when any person acquires a 25% or more ownership interest in the outstanding common stock or combined voting power of the then outstanding securities of the company; (3) the consummation of a reorganization, merger, consolidation, statutory share exchange or other corporate transaction, unless (a) the beneficial owners of the company’s stock immediately prior to the transaction continue to own 50% or more of the outstanding common stock and combined voting power of the then outstanding securities of the company,company; (b) no person acquires a 25% or more ownership interest in the then outstanding common stock or combined voting
power of the then outstanding securities of the company,company; and (c) at least a majority of the members of the board of directors of the surviving corporation were incumbent directors at the time of approval of the corporate transaction; (4) the approval by the shareholders of the company of a complete liquidation or dissolution; or (5) when the company’s ownership interest in the operating partnership is reduced below 50%.
All outstanding awards granted under the 2015 Incentive Plan provide for “double trigger” change in control vesting, such that the effect of a change in control depends upon whether the award is assumed by the acquiring company. If awards are not assumed by the acquiring company, service-based awards vest in full upon the change in control and performance-based awards vest at the “target” level if the change in control occurs prior to the second anniversary of the beginning of the performance period. Such awards vest at the “actual” level if the change in control occurs on or after the second anniversary of the beginning of the performance period and prior to the end of the performance period, based on performance through the date of the change in control. If the awards are assumed by the acquiring company, similar accelerated vesting of awards is contingent on the grantee’s involuntary termination without cause or for good reason within one year following the change in control.
The following table shows the total additional value of the awards that would be payable to each of the named executive officers under the accelerated vesting provisions of these plans upon the occurrence of a change in control as of December 31, 2019, and2021, assuming that the acquiring company does not assume the awards. Unless indicated otherwise below, award values were determined at $34.67$65.64 per share, the closing price of the company’s stock on December 31, 2019.2021.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Named Executive Officer | | RSUs
(1) | PSP Award
(2) | Total |
| James B. Connor | | $5,382,152 | $11,043,241 | $16,425,393 |
| Mark A. Denien | | $1,719,899 | $3,481,972 | $5,201,871 |
| Steven W. Schnur | | $1,363,737 | $2,849,229 | $4,212,966 |
| Nicholas C. Anthony | | $1,393,997 | $2,789,710 | $4,183,707 |
| Ann C. Dee | | $1,146,862 | $2,330,085 | $3,476,947 |
(1)Represents the value of the unvested awards at December 31, 2021.
(2)Represents awards granted in 2020 and 2021 under the PSP. The value of the awards granted in 2020 would be fixed at the target level in the event of a change in control prior to January 1, 2022, and the value of the awards granted in 2021 would be fixed at the target level in the event of a change in control prior to January 1, 2023. The above table assumes a change in control occurring on December 31, 2021, with the result that both the 2020 and 2021 awards would pay out at the target level.
|
| | | | |
| Named Executive Officer | | RSUs (1) | PSP Award (2) | Total |
| James B. Connor | | $3,352,242 | $6,565,780 | $9,918,022 |
| Mark A. Denien | | $1,162,034 | $2,279,338 | $3,441,372 |
| Steven W. Schnur | | $717,322 | $1,468,571 | $2,185,893 |
| Nicholas C. Anthony | | $944,896 | $1,857,296 | $2,802,192 |
| Ann C. Dee | | $765,826 | $1,504,962 | $2,270,788 |
| |
(1)
| Represents the value of the unvested awards at December 31, 2019. |
| |
(2)
| Represents awards granted in 2018 and 2019 under the PSP. The value of the awards granted in 2018 would be fixed at the target level in the event of a change in control prior to January 1, 2020, and the value of the awards granted in 2019 would be fixed at the target level in the event of a change in control prior to January 1, 2021. The above table assumes a change of control occurring on December 31, 2019, with the result that both the 2018 and 2019 awards would pay out at the target level. |
Retirement Provisions Under Other Agreements
Awards granted to named executive officers pursuant to the 2015 Incentive Plan will continue to vest upon the executive’s termination of employment, other than for cause, on or after reaching age 55, and provided that the sum of the executive’s age and years of service to the company totals at least 65 years (which is defined as “retirement” for purposes of the 2015 Incentive Plan). Such awards are subject to the restrictive covenants in each executive’s letter agreement regarding severance payments, previously described under the section “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—Employment and Severance Agreements.” As of December 31, 2019, Mr.2021, Messrs. Connor and Anthony and Ms. Dee were eligible for retirement under these provisions. The values represented above in the table under “—Change in Control Provisions Under Other Agreements” also reflect the total value of the unvested awards that would remain eligible for continued vesting for Mr.Messrs. Connor and Anthony and Ms. Dee under the provisions of these plans upon the occurrence of a retirement as of December 31, 2019,2021, and assuming continuing compliance with the restrictive covenants.
Risk Assessment of Overall Compensation Program
The Compensation and Human Capital Committee has reviewed with management the design and operation of our incentive compensation arrangements for all associates, including executive officers, to determine whether these programs might encourage inappropriate risk-taking that would be reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on the company. Specifically, management compiled an inventory of all incentive compensation arrangements applicable to the company’s associates at all levels, which were then summarized for the Compensation and Human Capital Committee’s independent compensation adviser. The adviser analyzed these arrangements in the context of potential high-risk design provisions and concluded that the program is well-designedwell designed overall not to encourage behaviors that would create a material risk for the company. The adviser noted in particular the following program provisions that support this conclusion: (1) appropriate pay philosophy, peer group and market positioning to support business objectives; (2) an effective balance in cash and equity, short and longer-term performance focus, corporate, business unit and individual performance focus and financial and non-financial performance measurement as well as the discretion of the Compensation and Human Capital Committee; (3) a balanced weighting of performance measures; (4) fixed maximum levels for performance-based awards; and (5) meaningful risk mitigation features including stock ownership guidelines, the compensation recoupment policy and independent Compensation and Human Capital Committee oversight. Based on the independent review and findings of the adviser, the Compensation
and Human Capital Committee concluded that the company’s compensation plans, programs and policies, considered as a whole, including applicable risk-mitigation features, are not reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on the company.
CEO Pay Ratio
The 20192021 compensation disclosure ratio of the median annual total compensation of all company associates to the annual total compensation of the company’s CEOChief Executive Officer is as follows:
|
| | | | | | | |
| Category | | 20192021 Total Compensation
and Ratio
|
| Annual total compensation of Mr. Connor (A) | | $6,693,9049,493,924 |
| Median associate total compensation (excluding Mr. Connor) (B) | | $122,714148,012 |
| Ratio of A to B | | 55:64:1 |
The company identified the median associate by examining the following compensation elements for all individuals, excluding Mr. Connor: base salary as of December 31, 2019; 20182021; 2020 bonus paid in 2019;2021; grant date value of 20192021 long-term grants; leasing commissions paid in 2019;2021; and overtime paid in 2019.2021. The company determined the median associate, based on its workforce as of December 31, 2019,2021, and included all part-time, temporary and full-time associates. After identifying the median associate, the company calculated 20192021 total compensation for such associate using the same methodology used for our named executive officers as set forth in the Summary Compensation Table.
Equity Compensation Plan Information
The following table provides information, as of December 31, 2019,2021, about our common stock that may be issued, whether upon the exercise of options, warrants and rights, or otherwise, under our existing equity compensation plans.
62 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| Plan Category | Number of Securities to be Issued Upon Exercise of Outstanding Options, Warrants and Rights
(a) | Weighted-Average Exercise Price of Outstanding Options, Warrants and Rights
(b) | Number of Securities Remaining Available for Future Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans (Excluding Securities Reflected in Column (a))
(c) |
| Equity compensation plans approved by shareholders | 4,274,346 | (1) | – | (2) | 5,245,856 | (3) |
Equity compensation plans not approved by shareholders(4) | – | | – | | – | |
| Total | 4,274,346 | (1) | – | (2) | 5,245,856 | (3) |
|
| | | |
| Plan Category | Number of Securities to be Issued Upon Exercise of Outstanding Options, Warrants, and Rights (a) | Weighted-Average Exercise Price of Outstanding Options, Warrants, and Rights (b) | Number of Securities Remaining Available for Future Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans (Excluding Securities Reflected in Column (a)) (c) |
| Equity compensation plans approved by shareholders | 3,358,056 (1) | –(2) | 6,362,131 (3) |
Equity compensation plans not approved by shareholders(4) | – | – | – |
| Total | 3,358,056 (1) | – | 6,362,131 (3) |
The number of options and full value awards granted and outstanding as of December 31, 2019,2021, as indicated above, are from all plans.
| |
(1)
| Represents shares of our common stock issuable pursuant to the conversion of RSUs and performance shares, or LTIP units elected in lieu of such awards. |
| |
(2)
| No options remain outstanding under our equity plans. Our outstanding awards do not have an exercise price. |
| |
(3)
| Represents the number of remaining shares available for grant under the company’s 2015 Incentive Plan. |
| |
(4)
| All of the company’s equity plans have been approved by its shareholders. |
(1) Represents shares of our common stock issuable pursuant to the conversion of RSUs and performance shares, or LTIP units elected in lieu of such awards.
(2) No options remain outstanding under our equity plans. Our outstanding awards do not have an exercise price.
(3) Represents the number of remaining shares available for grant under the company’s 2015 Incentive Plan.
(4) All of the company’s equity plans have been approved by its shareholders.
OWNERSHIP OF COMPANY SHARES
The following table sets forth the beneficial ownership of shares of common stock of the company and common units of ownership in our operating partnership as of February 20, 2020,18, 2022, for:
• each of our named executive officers;
•each of our directors;
•our current directors and executive officers as a group; and
•each person or group known to us to be holding more than 5% of such common stock.
|
| | | | | | | | |
Beneficial Owner | | Shares and Partnership Units Beneficially Owned (1)(12) | | Shares Issuable Upon Exercise of Stock Options (2) | | Total | |
Percent of
Class |
James B. Connor(3) | | 461,553 | | – | | 461,553 | | * |
Mark A. Denien(4) | | 171,640 | | – | | 171,640 | | * |
Steven W. Schnur(5) | | 48,700 | | – | | 48,700 | | * |
Nicholas C. Anthony(6) | | 99,465 | | – | | 99,465 | | * |
Ann C. Dee(7) | | 112,597 | | – | | 112,597 | | * |
| John P. Case | | 11,364 | | – | | 11,364 | | * |
| Ngaire E. Cuneo | | 36,740 | | – | | 36,740 | | * |
| Charles R. Eitel | | – | | – | | – | | * |
| Tamara D. Fischer | | – | | – | | – | | * |
| Norman K. Jenkins | | – | | – | | – | | * |
| Melanie R. Sabelhaus | | 31,126 | | – | | 31,126 | | * |
| Peter M. Scott, III | | 20,381 | | – | | 20,381 | | * |
| David P. Stockert | | 29,573 | | – | | 29,573 | | * |
| Chris T. Sultemeier | | 11,432 | | – | | 11,432 | | * |
| Michael E. Szymanczyk | | 37,081 | | – | | 37,081 | | * |
| Warren M. Thompson | | 4,332 | | – | | 4,332 | | * |
| Lynn C. Thurber | | 115,558 | | – | | 115,558 | | * |
| All directors and executive officers as a group (17 persons) | | 1,210,579 | | – | | 1,210,579 | | * |
The Vanguard Group, Inc.(8) | | 60,917,401 | | – | | 60,917,401 | | 16.54% |
BlackRock, Inc.(9) | | 36,686,488 | | – | | 36,686,488 | | 9.96% |
State Street Corp.(10) | | 24,178,587 | | – | | 24,178,587 | | 6.56% |
Cohen & Steers, Inc.(11) | | 25,850,229 | | – | | 25,850,229 | | 7.02% |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Beneficial Owner | Shares and Partnership Units Beneficially Owned
(1)(12) | Shares Issuable Upon Exercise of Stock Options
(2) | Total |
Percent of
Class |
James B. Connor(3) | 771,630 | – | 771,630 | * |
Mark A. Denien(4) | 234,894 | – | 234,894 | * |
Steven W. Schnur(5) | 96,506 | – | 96,506 | * |
Nicholas C. Anthony(6) | 120,431 | – | 120,431 | * |
Ann C. Dee(7) | 166,425 | – | 166,425 | * |
| John P. Case | 18,361 | – | 18,361 | * |
| Tamara D. Fischer | – | – | – | * |
| Norman K. Jenkins | – | – | – | * |
| Kelly T. Killingsworth | 17 | – | 17 | * |
| Melanie R. Sabelhaus | 38,176 | – | 38,176 | * |
| Peter M. Scott, III | 6,680 | – | 6,680 | * |
| David P. Stockert | 41,516 | – | 41,516 | * |
| Chris T. Sultemeier | 19,031 | – | 19,031 | * |
| Michael E. Szymanczyk | 44,078 | – | 44,078 | * |
| Warren M. Thompson | 13,046 | – | 13,046 | * |
| Lynn C. Thurber | 113,438 | – | 113,438 | * |
| All directors and executive officers as a group (16 persons) | 1,684,229 | – | 1,684,229 | * |
The Vanguard Group, Inc.(8) | 60,864,846 | – | 60,864,846 | 15.90 | % |
Cohen & Steers, Inc.(9) | 52,430,557 | – | 52,430,557 | 13.70 | % |
BlackRock, Inc.(10) | 38,729,322 | – | 38,729,322 | 10.12 | % |
State Street Corp.(11) | 23,967,128 | – | 23,967,128 | 6.26 | % |
* Less than one percent (1%)
(1)The number of shares and units in this column represents the number of shares of common stock and/or partnership units the person “beneficially owns,” as determined by the rules of the SEC. Unless otherwise indicated, each person listed in the table possesses sole voting and investment power with respect to the common shares reported in this column to be owned by such person.
(2)As of ContentsFebruary 18, 2022, there are no outstanding stock options owned by any of our named executive officers or directors.
(3)Includes 8,653 shares owned by family members and 608,555 partnership units.
(4)Includes 225,254 partnership units.
(5)Includes 87,592 partnership units.
(6)Includes 75,568 partnership units.
(7)Includes 1,454 shares owned by family members and 96,733 partnership units.
(8)The address of The Vanguard Group, Inc. is 100 Vanguard Blvd., Malvern, PA 19355. This information is based solely on a Schedule 13G/A filed by The Vanguard Group with the SEC on February 9, 2022. The Vanguard Group has the sole power to vote 0 shares and dispose of 58,965,787 shares and shared power to vote 969,690 shares and dispose of 1,899,059 shares.
(9)This information was obtained from a Schedule 13G/A filed with the SEC jointly by Cohen & Steers, Inc., Cohen & Steers Capital Management, Inc., Cohen & Steers UK Limited, Cohen & Steers Asia Limited, and Cohen & Steers Ireland Limited on February 14, 2022. The address of Cohen & Steers, Inc. and Cohen & Steers Capital Management, Inc. is 280 Park Avenue, 10th Floor, New York, NY 10017. The address of Cohen & Steers UK Limited is 50 Pall Mall, 7th Floor, London, United Kingdom SW1Y 5JH. The address of Cohen & Steers Asia Limited is 1201-02 Champion Tower, Three Garden Road, Central, Hong Kong. The address of Cohen & Steers Ireland Limited is 77 Sir John Rogerson’s Quay, Block C, Grand Canal Docklands, Dublin 2, D02 VK60. Total shares beneficially owned include 36,098,807 with sole voting power and 52,430,557 with sole dispositive power.
(10)The address of BlackRock, Inc. is 55 East 52nd Street, New York, NY 10055. This information was obtained from a Schedule 13G/A filed with the SEC on January 27, 2022. Total shares beneficially owned include 33,107,732 with sole voting power and 38,729,322 with sole dispositive power. According to the Schedule 13G/A, the shares were acquired by the following subsidiaries: BlackRock Life Limited; BlackRock International Limited; Aperio Group, LLC; BlackRock Advisors, LLC; BlackRock (Netherlands) B.V.; BlackRock Institutional Trust Company, National Association; BlackRock Asset Management Ireland Limited; BlackRock Financial Management, Inc.; BlackRock Japan Co., Ltd.; BlackRock Asset Management Schweiz AG; BlackRock Investment Management, LLC; FutureAdvisor, Inc.; BlackRock Investment Management (UK) Limited; BlackRock Asset Management Canada Limited; BlackRock (Luxembourg) S.A.; BlackRock Investment Management (Australia) Limited; BlackRock Advisors (UK) Limited; BlackRock Fund Advisors; BlackRock Asset Management North Asia Limited; BlackRock (Singapore) Limited; and BlackRock Fund Managers Ltd.
(11)The address of State Street Corporation is State Street Financial Center, One Lincoln Street, Boston, MA 02111. This information was obtained from a Schedule 13G/A filed with the SEC on February 11, 2022. Total shares beneficially owned include 19,401,867 with shared voting power and 23,937,429 with shared dispositive power. According to the Schedule 13G/A, the shares were acquired by the following subsidiaries: SSGA Funds Management, Inc; State Street Global Advisors Limited; State Street Global Advisors LTD; State Street Global Advisors, Australia, Limited; State Street Global Advisors (Japan) Co., LTD; State Street Global Advisors Asia Limited; State Street Global Advisors Singapore Limited; State Street Global Advisors Europe Limited; State Street Global Advisors Trust Company.
(12)While not included in the table above, shares deferred into our Directors’ Deferred Compensation Plan by members of the Board are considered to be shares owned for purposes of each director’s target ownership requirement pursuant to the company’s Stock Ownership Policies, which are described on page 25. Shares owned by individual directors as of the record date in the Directors’ Deferred Compensation Plan are as follows:
| |
(1)
| The number of shares and units in this column represents the number of shares of common stock and/or partnership units the person “beneficially owns,” as determined by the rules of the SEC. Unless otherwise indicated, each person listed in the table possesses sole voting and investment power with respect to the common shares reported in this column to be owned by such person. |
| |
(2)
| As of February 20, 2020, there are no outstanding stock options owned by any of our named executive officers or directors. |
| |
(3)
| Includes 8,653 shares owned by family members and 276,502 partnership units. |
| |
(4)
| Includes 157,269 partnership units. |
| |
(5)
| Includes 27,626 partnership units.
|
| |
(6)
| Includes 67,262 partnership units. |
| |
(7)
| Includes 1,386 shares owned by family members and 57,028 partnership units. |
| |
(8)
| The address of The Vanguard Group, Inc. is 100 Vanguard Blvd., Malvern, PA 19355. This information is based solely on a Schedule 13G filed by The Vanguard Group with the SEC on February 11, 2020. The Vanguard Group has the sole power to vote 914,347 shares and dispose of 59,943,962 shares, including shared power to vote 468,012 shares and dispose of 973,439 shares. |
| |
(9)
| The address of BlackRock, Inc. is 55 East 52nd Street, New York, NY 10055. This information was obtained from a Schedule 13G filed with the SEC on February 5, 2020. Total shares beneficially owned include 32,603,959 with sole voting power and 36,686,488 with sole dispositive power.
|
| |
(10)
| The address of State Street Corporation is One Lincoln Street, Boston, MA 02111. This information was obtained from a Schedule 13G filed with the SEC on February 14, 2020. Total shares beneficially owned include 20,130,634 with shared voting power and 24,145,390 with shared dispositive power.
|
| |
(11)
| The address of Cohen & Steers, Inc. is 280 Park Avenue, 10th Floor, New York, NY 10017. This information was obtained from a Schedule 13G filed with the SEC on February 14, 2020. Total shares beneficially owned include 14,478,702 with sole voting power and 25,850,229 with sole dispositive power.
|
| |
(12)
| While not included in the table above, shares deferred into our Directors’ Deferred Compensation Plan by members of the Board are considered to be shares owned for purposes of each director’s target ownership requirement pursuant to the company’s Stock Ownership Policies, which are described on page 24. Shares owned by individual directors as of the record date in the Directors’ Deferred Compensation Plan are as follows: |
|
| | |
| Name | | Number of Deferred Shares |
Ngaire E. CuneoTamara D. Fischer | | 198,398 |
Charles R. Eitel | | 47,1748,521 |
| Norman K. Jenkins | | 18,34531,294 |
| Kelly T. Killingsworth | | 1,429 |
| Peter M. Scott, III | | 36,93845,843 |
| Michael E. Szymanczyk | | 17,85618,739 |
CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS
Our Code of Business Ethics requires that all associates, officers and directors avoid conflicts of interest that interfere with the performance of their duties or are not in the best interests of the company. The Audit Committee reviews all material proposed transactions between the company and related parties as specified under Item 404 of Regulation S-K promulgated by the SEC and examines each such transaction for potential conflicts of interest and other improprieties. The Audit Committee has not adopted any specific written procedures for conducting such reviews and considers each transaction in light of the specific facts and circumstances presented. We currently do not have any such transactions to report.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| PROPOSAL 3 | RATIFICATION OF INDEPENDENT AUDITOR |
PROPOSAL THREE: RATIFICATION OF REAPPOINTMENT OF
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
The Audit Committee has selected KPMG as our independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2020,2022, and has further directed that the selection of the independent registered public accounting firm be submitted for ratification by the shareholders at the Virtual Annual Meeting.
Representatives of KPMG will be present at the Virtual Annual Meeting, have the opportunity to make a statement if they so desire and be available to respond to appropriate questions.
To ratify the selection of KPMG, the votes cast in favor of the proposal must exceed the votes cast against the proposal. Abstentions will not be treated as votes cast and therefore will not affect the outcome. The ratification of the selection of KPMG as our independent registered public accountants for 20202022 will be deemed to be a discretionary matter, and brokers will be permitted to vote uninstructed shares as to such matter; therefore, no broker non-votes are expected.
THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDS A VOTE “FOR” THE RATIFICATION OF KPMG AS THE COMPANY’S INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2020. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| ü | OUR BOARD UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDS A VOTE “FOR” PROPOSAL 3. |
INFORMATION ABOUT VOTING AND PROXY MATERIALS
How to Vote Your Shares
If you are a beneficial owner (i.e., you hold your shares through a broker or other nominee), you may instruct your broker to vote your shares by following the instructions that the broker provides. If you sign over voting rights but do not provide specific instructions, your broker will vote on your behalf only on the proposals over which it has discretionary authority (Proposal Three). For Proposals One and Two, your instructions will be counted as broker non-votes. Most brokers offer voting by mail, telephone and on the Internet.
If you are a shareholder of record, you may vote by:
•returning a properly executed proxy card;
•using the 16-digit control number (which is included on your proxy card or Notice) to log in and vote during the Virtual Annual Meeting; or
•following the instructions on the Notice to vote online or by telephone.
When you return a properly executed proxy card, we will vote the shares that the proxy card represents in accordance with your directions. If you return the signed proxy card with no direction on a proposal, we will vote your proxy:
•“FOR” each director nominee in Proposal One;
•“FOR” Proposal Two;
•“FOR” Proposal Three; and
•in accordance with the proxy holder’s discretion, on any other matter that may properly come before the Virtual Annual Meeting, including any adjournments or postponements.
Your proxy gives discretionary authority to Mr. James B. Connor, our Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, and Ms. Ann C. Dee, our Executive Vice President, General Counsel and Corporate Secretary, on any other matters that might be brought before the Virtual Annual Meeting. If you are a record owner and you sign a proxy card but do not provide instructions regarding the proposals on the proxy card, your shares will be voted in accordance with the Board’s recommendations, as noted above.
You may revoke your proxy at any time before its exercise by:
(i)delivering written notice of revocation to Ms. Dee at 8711 River Crossing Blvd., Indianapolis, Indiana 46240;
(ii)submitting to the company a duly executed proxy card with a later date;
(iii)voting via the Internet or telephone at a later date; or
(iv)using the 16-digit control number (which is included on your proxy card, Notice or voting instruction form) to log in and vote during the Virtual Annual Meeting.
Written revocations will not be effective until received by Ms. Dee at or before the Virtual Annual Meeting. Telephone and Internet revocations will not be effective unless, in the case of shareholders who hold their shares through our 401(K) Plan, received on or before 11:59 p.m. ET on April 8, 2022, and, in the case of all other shareholders, received on or before 11:59 p.m. ET on April 12, 2022.
We are offering shareholders the opportunity to confirm their votes were cast in accordance with their instructions. Vote confirmation is consistent with our commitment to sound corporate governance standards and an important means to increase transparency. Beginning March 30, 2022, and for up to two months after the Virtual Annual Meeting, you may confirm your vote beginning 24 hours after your vote is received, whether it was cast by proxy card, electronically or telephonically. You may confirm that your instructions were received and cast per your instructions by
logging onto www.proxyvote.com using your control number (located on your proxy card, Notice or voting instruction form). If you hold shares through a broker or other nominee, the ability to confirm your vote may be affected by the rules of the broker or other nominee, and the confirmation may not confirm whether the broker or other nominee allocated the correct number of shares to you.
SHAREHOLDER PROPOSALS AND NOMINATIONS FOR 2021 ANNUAL MEETING
Shareholder Proposals and Nominations for inclusion in the Company’sMailing Date/Internet Availability of Proxy Materials
SEC rules establishThis proxy statement, the eligibility requirementsenclosed proxy card and procedures that mustthe Notice were mailed or e-mailed to shareholders beginning on or about March 2, 2022. The Notice includes instructions on how to access the proxy materials online. Shareholders who received the Notice by mail or e-mail will not be followed formailed a shareholder’s proposal to be includedprinted copy of the proxy materials unless they request a copy in the company’s proxy materials. Under those rules, any shareholder wishing to have a proposal considered for inclusionmanner described in the company’sNotice. All shareholders will be able to access the proxy materials foron the 2021 annual meeting must submit his or her proposalwebsite referred to in the company in writing on or before November 11, 2020, which is 120 calendar days prior to the anniversary of the dateNotice and this proxy statement was releasedand will be able to shareholders. However, if the daterequest a printed set of the 2021 annual meeting of shareholders is more than 30 calendar days earlier or later than the anniversary date of the 2020 annual meeting of shareholders, then the deadline is a reasonable time before we begin to print and send our proxy materials. Proposals must comply with all applicable SEC rules.
If a shareholder wishes to nominate a director for inclusion in the company’s proxy material for the 2021 annual meeting of shareholders pursuant to the company’s proxy access bylaw provision, the company’s bylaws require that the shareholder give advance written notice to the company’s Corporate Secretary no earlier than 150 days and no later than 120 days before the one year anniversary of the date when the proxy materials for the previous year’s annual meetingby mail or electronically, in either case, free of shareholders were releasedcharge.
Duke Realty is soliciting proxies to shareholders, which for the 2021 annual meeting would be no earlier than October 12, 2020, and no later than November 11, 2020. However, if the date of the 2021 annual meeting of shareholders is more than 30 calendar days earlier or later than the date contemplatedvoted at the timeVirtual Annual Meeting, has paid the cost of the 2020 annual meeting of shareholders, the notice must be received by the company’s Corporate Secretary not fewer than the later of (i) 150 calendar days prior to the date of the contemplated annual meeting or (ii) the date which is 10 calendar days after the date of the first public announcement or other notification to the shareholders of the date of the contemplated annual meeting.
Shareholder Proposalspreparing, printing, assembling and Nominations not for inclusion inmailing the Company’s Proxy Materials
If a shareholder wishes to present a proposal, including a proposal to nominate a director nominee, at the 2021 annual meeting, even if the proposal or nomination is not intended to be included in the 2021 proxy materials and also will bear the company’s bylaws require that the shareholder give advance written notice to the company’s Corporate Secretary at least 120 days before the one year anniversarycosts of the date when the proxy statement was releasedother materials sent to shareholders in connection with this solicitation. We also may reimburse brokerage houses and other custodians, nominees and fiduciaries for their expenses incurred in forwarding solicitation materials to the previous year’sbeneficial owners of shares held of record.
In addition to the solicitation of proxies by mail, Duke Realty officers and other associates may solicit proxies by telephone, facsimile, e-mail or personal interviews without additional compensation. We also expect brokerage houses to forward proxy materials to shareholders at our request. Receipt of more than one proxy card or voting instruction form indicates that a shareholder has multiple accounts at the transfer agent or with stockbrokers. Shareholders should complete and return all proxy cards and voting instruction forms received to ensure that all of their shares are voted.
Shareholders of record who want to receive future proxy statements and annual meeting,reports electronically should log on to www.proxyvote.com and follow the instructions to vote using the Internet and, when prompted, indicate that they want to access proxy materials electronically in the future. Shareholders will need to refer to the company number and control number found on the proxy card. Shareholders may cancel electronic enrollment if they later decide to receive proxy statements and annual reports by regular mail.
Householding of Proxy Material
The SEC has adopted rules that permit companies and intermediaries such as brokers to satisfy delivery requirements for proxy statements with respect to two or more shareholders sharing the same address by delivering to that address a single proxy statement to those shareholders. This process, which is commonly referred to as “householding,” potentially provides extra convenience for shareholders and cost savings for companies. Some brokers household proxy materials, delivering a single proxy statement to multiple shareholders sharing an address unless contrary instructions have been received from the 2021 annual meetingaffected shareholders. Once you have received notice from your broker or us that they or we will be householding materials to your address, householding will continue until you are notified otherwise or until you revoke your consent. If, at any time, you no longer wish to participate in householding and would be November 11, 2020. However,prefer to receive a separate proxy statement, or if the dateyou are receiving multiple copies of the 2021 annual meeting of shareholders is more than 30 calendar days earlierproxy statement and wish to receive only one copy, please notify your broker if your shares are held in a brokerage account or later than the date contemplated at the time of the 2020 annual meeting of shareholders, the notice must be receivednotify us if you hold registered shares. You can notify us by the company’ssending a written request to Duke Realty Corporation, c/o Corporate Secretary, not fewer than the later of (i) 150 calendar days prior to the date of the contemplated annual meeting8711 River Crossing Blvd., Indianapolis, Indiana 46240 or (ii) the date which is 10 calendar days after the date of the first public announcement or other notification to the shareholders of the date of the contemplated annual meeting.by calling our Investor Relations Department at (317) 808-6005.
If a shareholder is permitted to present a proposal at the 2021 annual meeting, but the proposal was not included in the 2021 proxy materials, the company believes that its proxy holder would have the discretionary authority granted by the proxy card (and as permitted under SEC rules) to vote on the proposal if the proposal was received after January 25, 2021, which is 45 calendar days prior to the one-year anniversary of the mailing of this proxy statement.
ANNUAL REPORT
A copy of our 20192021 Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021, is available on the Internet as described in the Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials. Additionally, a copy of our 20192021 Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2019, may be obtained, free of charge, by any shareholder by writing to Duke
Realty Corporation, 8711 River Crossing Blvd., Indianapolis, Indiana 46240, Attention: Investor Relations. Our Annual Report on Form 10-K is also available and may be accessed free of charge through the Investor Relations section of our Internet website at http://investor.dukerealty.cominvestor.dukerealty.com.
.
OTHER MATTERS
The Board knows of no other matters to be brought before this Virtual Annual Meeting. However, if other matters should properly come before the Virtual Annual Meeting, it is the intention of each person named in the proxy to vote such proxy in accordance with his or her judgment.
HOUSEHOLDING OF PROXY MATERIAL75
The SHAREHOLDER PROPOSALS AND NOMINATIONS FOR 2023 ANNUAL MEETING
Shareholder Proposals and Nominations for inclusion in the Company’s Proxy Materials
SEC has adopted rules establish the eligibility requirements and procedures that permit companies and intermediaries such as brokersmust be followed for a shareholder’s proposal to satisfy delivery requirementsbe included in the company’s proxy materials. Under those rules, any shareholder wishing to have a proposal considered for inclusion in the company’s proxy statements with respectmaterials for the 2023 Annual Meeting must submit his or her proposal to twothe company in writing on or more shareholders sharingbefore November 2, 2022, which is 120 calendar days prior to the same address by delivering to that address a singleanniversary of the date this proxy statement was released to those shareholders. This process,However, if the date of the 2023 Annual Meeting of Shareholders is more than 30 calendar days earlier or later than the anniversary date of the Virtual Annual Meeting, then the deadline is a reasonable time before we begin to print and send our proxy materials. Proposals must comply with all applicable SEC rules.
If a shareholder wishes to nominate a director for inclusion in the company’s proxy materials for the 2023 Annual Meeting of Shareholders pursuant to the company’s proxy access bylaw provision, the company’s bylaws require that the shareholder give advance written notice to the company’s Corporate Secretary no earlier than 150 days and no later than 120 days before the one year anniversary of the date when the proxy materials for the previous year’s annual meeting of shareholders were released to shareholders, which for the 2023 Annual Meeting would be no earlier than October 3, 2022, and no later than November 2, 2022. However, if the date of the 2023 Annual Meeting of shareholders is more than 30 calendar days earlier or later than the date contemplated at the time of the Virtual Annual Meeting, the notice must be received by the company’s Corporate Secretary not fewer than the later of (i) 150 calendar days prior to the date of the contemplated annual meeting or (ii) the date which is commonly referred10 calendar days after the date of the first public announcement or other notification to as “householding,” potentially provides extra conveniencethe shareholders of the date of the contemplated annual meeting.
Shareholder Proposals and Nominations not for shareholders and cost savings for companies. Some brokers householdinclusion in the Company’s Proxy Materials
If a shareholder wishes to present a proposal, including a proposal to nominate a director nominee, at the 2023 Annual Meeting, even if the proposal or nomination is not intended to be included in the 2023 proxy materials, delivering a single proxy statementthe company’s bylaws require that the shareholder give advance written notice to multiple shareholders sharing an address unless contrary instructions have been received from the affected shareholders. Once you have received notice from your broker or us that they or we will be householding materials to your address, householding will continue until you are notified otherwise or until you revoke your consent. If,company’s Corporate Secretary at any time, you no longer wish to participate in householding and would prefer to receive a separate proxy statement, or if you are receiving multiple copiesleast 120 days before the one year anniversary of the date when the proxy statement and wishwas released to receive only one copy, please notify your brokershareholders in connection with the previous year’s annual meeting, which, for the 2023 Annual Meeting, would be November 2, 2022. However, if your shares are held in a brokerage account,the date of the 2023 Annual Meeting of Shareholders is more than 30 calendar days earlier or notify us if you hold registered shares. You can notify uslater than the date contemplated at the time of the Virtual Annual Meeting, the notice must be received by sending a written request to Duke Realty Corporation, c/othe company’s Corporate Secretary 8711 River Crossing Blvd., Indianapolis, Indiana 46240not fewer than the later of (i) 150 calendar days prior to the date of the contemplated annual meeting or by calling our Investor Relations Department at (317) 808-6005.
(ii) the date which is 10 calendar days after the date of the first public announcement or other notification to the shareholders of the date of the contemplated annual meeting.
IT IS IMPORTANT THAT PROXIES BE RETURNED PROMPTLY.
Whether or
If a shareholder is permitted to present a proposal at the 2023 Annual Meeting, but the proposal was not you plan to attendincluded in the meeting, you are urged2023 proxy materials, the company believes that its proxy holder would have the discretionary authority granted by the proxy card (and as permitted under SEC rules) to vote your proxy.on the proposal if the proposal was received after January 16, 2023, which is 45 calendar days prior to the one-year anniversary of the mailing of this proxy statement.
APPENDIX A: DEFINITIONS AND RECONCILIATIONS OF GAAP AND NON-GAAP FINANCIAL MEASURES
Please refer to our annual and quarterly financial statements filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Forms 10-K and 10-Q and other public reports for further information about us and our business.
FFO: FFO is a non-GAAP performance measure computed in accordance with standards established by the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts (“NAREIT”) Funds from Operations White Paper - 2018 Restatement.(NAREIT). It is calculated as net income attributable to common shareholders computed in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP")(GAAP), excluding depreciation and amortization related to real estate, gains andor losses on sales of real estate assets (including real estate assets incidental to our business) and related taxes,, gains andor losses from change in control, impairment charges related to real estate assets (including real estate assets incidental to our business) and similar adjustments for unconsolidated joint ventures and partially owned consolidated entities.entities, all net of related taxes. We believe FFO to be most directly comparable to net income attributable to common shareholders as defined by GAAP. FFO does not represent a measure of liquidity, nor is it indicative of funds available for our cash needs, including our ability to make cash distributions to shareholders.
Core FFO: Core FFO is computed as FFO adjusted for certain items that are generally non-cash in nature and that can create significant earnings volatility and do not directly relate to our core business operations. The adjustments include tax expenses or benefits related to (i) changes in deferred tax asset valuation allowances, (ii) changes in tax exposure accruals that were established as the result of the previous adoption of new accounting principles, or (iii) taxable income (loss) related to other items excluded from FFO or Core FFO (collectively referred to as “other income tax items”), gains or losses on debt transactions, gains or losses from involuntary conversion from weather events or natural disasters, promote income, severance and other charges related to major overhead restructuring activities, and the expense impact of non-incremental costs attributable to successful leasing activities.leases. Although our calculation of Core FFO differs from NAREIT’s definition of FFO and may not be comparable to that of other REITs and real estate companies, we believe it provides a meaningful supplemental measure of our operating performance.
AFFO: AFFO is defined by the Companycompany as the Core FFO (as defined above), less recurring building improvements and total second generation capital expenditures (the leasing of vacant space that had previously been under lease by the Companycompany is referred to as second generation lease activity) related to leases commencing during the reporting period and adjusted for certain non-cash items including straight line rental income and expense, non-cash components of interest expense, including interest rate hedge amortization, stock compensation expense and after similar adjustments for unconsolidated partnerships and joint ventures.
Property Level Net Operating Income - Cash Basis (PNOI): PNOI is a non-GAAP performance measure, which is comprised of rental revenues from continuing operations (computed in accordance with GAAP) less rental expenses and real estate taxes from continuing operations, along with adjustments to exclude the straight line rental income and expense, amortization of above and below market rents, amortization of lease concessions and lease termination fees, as well as an adjustment to add back intercompany rent. PNOI, as we calculate it, may not be directly comparable to similarly titled, but differently calculated, measures for other REITs. We believe that PNOI to be most directly comparable to income from continuing operations defined by GAAP and that PNOI is another useful supplemental performance measure, as it is an input in many REIT valuation models and it provides a means by which to evaluate the performance of the properties within our Rental Operations segments.
Same-Property Net Operating Income (SPNOI - Cash): We evaluate the performance of our properties, including our share of properties we jointly control, on a "same-property" basis, using PNOI with certain minor adjustments. The same-property pool of properties is defined once a year at the beginning of the current calendar year, and includes buildings that were in the stabilized portfolio throughout both the current and prior calendar years in both periods. The same-property pool is adjusted for dispositions subsequent to its initial establishment. SPNOI also excludes termination fees. SPNOI is a non-GAAP supplemental performance measure that we believe is useful because it improves comparability between periods by eliminating the effects of changes in the composition of our portfolio.
EBITDA: EBITDA is defined by the company as net income (computed in accordance with GAAP), before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization.
Core EBITDA: Core EBITDA is defined by the company as EBITDA, adjusted for the same reasons as Core FFO, to exclude gains or losses on debt transactions, gains or losses from involuntary conversion from weather events or natural disasters, the expense impact of costs attributable to successful leasing activities and promote income and severance charges related to major overhead restructuring activities. Core EBITDA also excludes gains and losses on sales of real estate assets (including real estate assets incidental to our business), gains and losses from change of
control, impairment charges related to real estate assets (including real estate assets incidental to our business) and includes the applicable share of Core EBITDA related to unconsolidated joint ventures and partially owned consolidated entities.
Fixed Charges: Fixed Charges are defined as the sum of interest expense (computed in accordance with GAAP) and capitalized interest expense, adjusted for such amounts related to unconsolidated joint ventures and partially owned consolidated entities.
Fixed Charge Coverage ratio: Fixed Charge Coverage ratio is defined as Core EBITDA divided by Fixed Charges.
While we believe our modified FFOnon-GAAP measures are important supplemental measures, neither NAREIT’s nor our measures of FFOthey should not be used alone because they exclude significant economic components of net earningsthe comparable measures computed under GAAP, and are, therefore, limited as an analytical tool.tools. These FFO measures are used by management as supplemental financial measures of operating performance, and we believe that it is important that shareholders, potential investors and financial analysts understand the measures management uses. We do not use our FFOnon-GAAP measures as, nor should they be considered to be, alternatives to net earningsincome, net income attributable to common shareholders or income from continuing operations before income taxes computed under GAAP, as indicators of our operating performance, as alternatives to cash from operating activities computed under GAAP, or as indicators of our ability to fund our cash needs. We reconcile our modified FFO, EBITDA and SPNOI measures to our net earningscomparable measures computed under GAAP as follows:
Duke Realty Corporation and Subsidiaries
Non-GAAP Reconciliations - FFO, Core FFO, and AFFO
Twelve Months Ended December 31,
(Unaudited and in thousands, except per share amounts)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| 2021 | | 2020 |
| Amount | Wtd. Avg. Shares | Per Share | | Amount | Wtd. Avg. Shares | Per Share |
| Net income attributable to common shareholders | $ | 852,895 | | | | | $ | 299,915 | | | |
| Less dividends on participating securities | (1,356) | | | | | (1,447) | | | |
| Net income per common share-basic | 851,539 | | 377,673 | | $ | 2.25 | | | 298,468 | | 370,057 | | $ | 0.81 | |
| Add back: | | | | | | | |
| Noncontrolling interest in earnings of unitholders | 8,354 | | 3,708 | | | | 2,663 | | 3,303 | | |
| Other potentially dilutive securities | 1,356 | | 2,095 | | | | — | | 796 | | |
| Net income attributable to common shareholders-diluted | $ | 861,249 | | 383,476 | | $ | 2.25 | | | $ | 301,131 | | 374,156 | | $ | 0.80 | |
| Reconciliation to FFO | | | | | | | |
| Net income attributable to common shareholders | $ | 852,895 | | 377,673 | | | | $ | 299,915 | | 370,057 | | |
| Adjustments: | | | | | | | |
| Depreciation and amortization | 362,148 | | | | | 353,013 | | | |
| Depreciation, amortization and other - unconsolidated joint ventures | 9,383 | | | | | 9,265 | | | |
| Gains on sales of properties | (585,685) | | | | | (127,811) | | | |
| Gains on land sales | (12,917) | | | | | (10,458) | | | |
| Income tax expense triggered by sales of real estate assets | 18,549 | | | | | (5,112) | | | |
| Impairment Charges | — | | | | | 5,626 | | | |
| Gains on sales of real estate assets - unconsolidated joint ventures | (20,106) | | | | | (822) | | | |
| Noncontrolling interest share of adjustments | 2,222 | | | | | (1,979) | | | |
| NAREIT FFO attributable to common shareholders - basic | 626,489 | | 377,673 | | $ | 1.66 | | | 521,637 | | 370,057 | | $ | 1.41 | |
| Noncontrolling interest in income of unitholders | 8,354 | | 3,708 | | | | 2,663 | | 3,303 | | |
| Noncontrolling interest share of adjustments | (2,222) | | | | | 1,979 | | | |
| Other potentially dilutive securities | | 2,095 | | | | | 2,236 | | |
| NAREIT FFO attributable to common shareholders - diluted | $ | 632,621 | | 383,476 | | $ | 1.65 | | | $ | 526,279 | | 375,596 | | $ | 1.40 | |
| Gains on involuntary conversion | (3,222) | | | | | (4,312) | | | |
| Loss on debt extinguishment - including share of unconsolidated joint venture | 17,964 | | | | | 32,900 | | | |
| Non-incremental costs related to successful leases | 13,302 | | | | | 12,292 | | | |
| Overhead restructuring charges | 3,463 | | | | | 4,524 | | | |
| Core FFO attributable to common shareholders - diluted | $ | 664,128 | | 383,476 | | $ | 1.73 | | | $ | 571,683 | | 375,596 | | $ | 1.52 | |
| AFFO | | | | | | | |
| Core FFO - diluted | $ | 664,128 | | 383,476 | | $ | 1.73 | | | $ | 571,683 | | 375,596 | | $ | 1.52 | |
| Adjustments: | | | | | | | |
| Straight-line rental income and expense | (32,846) | | | | | (26,102) | | | |
| Amortization of above/below market rents and concessions | (12,475) | | | | | (9,093) | | | |
| Stock based compensation expense | 25,122 | | | | | 23,049 | | | |
| Non-cash interest expense | 9,834 | | | | | 9,238 | | | |
| Second generation concessions | (2,913) | | | | | (743) | | | |
| Second generation tenant improvements | (21,725) | | | | | (18,188) | | | |
| Second generation leasing costs | (29,479) | | | | | (29,017) | | | |
| Building improvements | (10,597) | | | | | (3,926) | | | |
| AFFO - diluted | $ | 589,049 | | 383,476 | | | | $ | 516,901 | | 375,596 | | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | 2019 | | 2018 |
| | Amount | Wtd. Avg. Shares | Per Share | | Amount | Wtd. Avg. Shares | Per Share |
| Net income attributable to common shareholders | $ | 428,972 |
| | | | $ | 383,729 |
| | |
| Less dividends on participating securities | (1,487 | ) | | | | (1,675 | ) | | |
| Net income per common share-basic | 427,485 |
| 362,234 |
| $ | 1.18 |
| | 382,054 |
| 357,569 |
| $ | 1.07 |
|
| Add back: | | | | | | | |
| Noncontrolling interest in earnings of unitholders | 3,678 |
| 3,118 |
| | | 3,528 |
| 3,290 |
| |
| Other potentially dilutive securities | 1,487 |
| 1,987 |
| | | 1,675 |
| 2,438 |
| |
| Net income attributable to common shareholders-diluted | $ | 432,650 |
| 367,339 |
| $ | 1.18 |
| | $ | 387,257 |
| 363,297 |
| $ | 1.07 |
|
| Reconciliation to FFO | | | | | | | |
| Net income attributable to common shareholders | $ | 428,972 |
| 362,234 |
| | | $ | 383,729 |
| 357,569 |
| |
| Adjustments: | | | | | | | |
| Depreciation and amortization | 327,223 |
| | | | 312,217 |
| | |
| Depreciation, amortization and other - unconsolidated joint ventures | 10,083 |
| | | | 9,146 |
| | |
| Gains on sales of properties | (235,098 | ) | | | | (208,780 | ) | | |
| Gains on land sales | (7,445 | ) | | | | (10,334 | ) | | |
| Income tax expense triggered by sales of real estate assets | 8,686 |
| | | | 8,828 |
| | |
| Gains on sales of real estate assets - unconsolidated joint ventures | (21,239 | ) | | | | (12,094 | ) | | |
| Impairment charges - unconsolidated joint venture | — |
| | | | 2,214 |
| | |
| Noncontrolling interest share of adjustments | (702 | ) | | | | (923 | ) | | |
| NAREIT FFO attributable to common shareholders - basic | 510,480 |
| 362,234 |
| $ | 1.41 |
| | 484,003 |
| 357,569 |
| $ | 1.35 |
|
| Noncontrolling interest in income of unitholders | 3,678 |
| 3,118 |
| | | 3,528 |
| 3,290 |
| |
| Noncontrolling interest share of adjustments | 702 |
| | | | 923 |
| | |
| Other potentially dilutive securities | | 1,987 |
| | | | 2,438 |
| |
| NAREIT FFO attributable to common shareholders - diluted | $ | 514,860 |
| 367,339 |
| $ | 1.40 |
| | $ | 488,454 |
| 363,297 |
| $ | 1.34 |
|
| Gains on involuntary conversion - including share of unconsolidated joint venture | (3,559 | ) | | | | (3,897 | ) | | |
| Loss on debt extinguishment | 6,320 |
| | | | 388 |
| | |
| Non-incremental costs related to successful leases | 12,402 |
| | | | — |
| | |
| Core FFO attributable to common shareholders - diluted | $ | 530,023 |
| 367,339 |
| | | $ | 484,945 |
| 363,297 |
| |
| AFFO | | | | | | | |
| Core FFO - diluted | $ | 530,023 |
| 367,339 |
| | | $ | 484,945 |
| 363,297 |
| |
| Adjustments: | | | | | | | |
| Straight-line rental income and expense | (20,724 | ) | | | | (26,037 | ) | | |
| Amortization of above/below market rents and concessions | (7,566 | ) | | | | (2,332 | ) | | |
| Stock based compensation expense | 19,801 |
| | | | 20,198 |
| | |
| Non-cash interest expense | 5,904 |
| | | | 5,788 |
| | |
| Second generation concessions | (999 | ) | | | | (164 | ) | | |
| Second generation tenant improvements | (15,183 | ) | | | | (18,436 | ) | | |
| Second generation leasing costs | (22,178 | ) | | | | (25,935 | ) | | |
| Building improvements | (12,685 | ) | | | | (9,947 | ) | | |
| AFFO - diluted | $ | 476,393 |
| 367,339 |
| | | $ | 428,080 |
| 363,297 |
| |
Duke Realty Corporation and Subsidiaries
Reconciliation ofNon-GAAP Reconciliations - Same Property Net Operating Income to FFO as Defined by NAREIT
Twelve Months Ended December 31,
(Unaudited and in thousands, except per share amounts)thousands)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | Percent |
| | 2021 | | 2020 | Change |
| Income from continuing operations before income taxes | | $ | 880,167 | | | $ | 297,537 | | |
| Share of same property NOI from unconsolidated joint ventures | | 22,505 | | | 21,880 | | |
| Non segment items (*) | | (88,940) | | | 410,541 | | |
| Earnings from service operations | | (12,142) | | | (6,028) | | |
| Properties not included and other adjustments | | (162,580) | | | (116,818) | | |
| Same property NOI - Cash Basis | | $ | 639,010 | | | $ | 607,112 | | 5.3% |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | | | | |
| | 2021 | | 2020 | |
| (*) Non-Segment Items: | | | | | |
| Equity in earnings of unconsolidated companies | | $ | 32,804 | | | $ | 11,944 | | |
| Interest expense | | (84,843) | | | (93,442) | | |
| Depreciation expense | | (362,148) | | | (353,013) | | |
| Gain on sale of properties | | 585,685 | | | 127,700 | | |
| Impairment charges on non-depreciable properties | | — | | | (5,626) | | |
| Interest and other income | | 4,451 | | | 1,721 | | |
| General and administrative expenses | | (69,554) | | | (62,404) | | |
| Gain on land sales | | 12,917 | | | 10,458 | | |
| Other operating expenses | | (3,607) | | | (8,209) | | |
| Non-incremental costs related to successful leases | | (13,302) | | | (12,292) | | |
| Loss on debt extinguishment | | (17,901) | | | (32,900) | | |
| Gain on involuntary conversion | | 3,222 | | | 4,312 | | |
| Other non-segment revenues and expenses, net | | 1,216 | | | 1,210 | | |
| | $ | 88,940 | | | $ | (410,541) | | |
|
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | 2019 | | 2018 | | 2017 | | 2016 | | 2015 |
| Net income attributable to common shareholders - continuing operations | $ | 432,199 |
| | $ | 383,368 |
| | $ | 290,592 |
| | $ | 298,421 |
| | $ | 188,248 |
|
| Less: noncontrolling interest in earnings - consolidated joint ventures | 6 |
| | (11 | ) | | 114 |
| | (46 | ) | | (147 | ) |
| Diluted net income attributable to common shareholders - continuing operations | $ | 432,205 |
| | $ | 383,357 |
| | $ | 290,706 |
| | $ | 298,375 |
| | $ | 188,101 |
|
| Weighted average common shares and potentially dilutive securities | 367,339 |
| | 363,297 |
| | 362,011 |
| | 357,076 |
| | 352,197 |
|
| Diluted net income per common share - continuing operations | $ | 1.18 |
| | $ | 1.06 |
| | $ | 0.80 |
| | $ | 0.84 |
| | $ | 0.53 |
|
| 3 year growth | 48 | % | | | | | | | | |
| 5 year growth | 123 | % | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
| Reconciliation to FFO | | | | | | | | | |
| Net income attributable to common shareholders | $ | 428,972 |
| | $ | 383,729 |
| | $ | 1,634,431 |
| | $ | 312,143 |
| | $ | 615,310 |
|
| Adjustments: | | | | | | | | | |
| Depreciation and amortization | 327,223 |
| | 312,217 |
| | 299,472 |
| | 317,818 |
| | 320,846 |
|
| Joint venture share of adjustments | (11,156 | ) | | (734 | ) | | (44,223 | ) | | (49,736 | ) | | 13,336 |
|
| Gains on real estate asset sales, net of taxes and impairments | (233,857 | ) | | (210,286 | ) | | (1,453,702 | ) | | (162,818 | ) | | (645,358 | ) |
| Noncontrolling interest share of adjustments | (702 | ) | | (923 | ) | | 11,023 |
| | (1,037 | ) | | 3,197 |
|
| NAREIT FFO attributable to common shareholders - basic | $ | 510,480 |
| | $ | 484,003 |
| | $ | 447,001 |
| | $ | 416,370 |
| | $ | 307,331 |
|
| Noncontrolling interest in income of unitholders | 3,678 |
| | 3,528 |
| | 15,176 |
| | 3,089 |
| | 6,404 |
|
| Noncontrolling interest share of adjustments | 702 |
| | 923 |
| | (11,023 | ) | | 1,037 |
| | (3,197 | ) |
| NAREIT FFO attributable to common shareholders - diluted | $ | 514,860 |
| | $ | 488,454 |
| | $ | 451,154 |
| | $ | 420,496 |
| | $ | 310,538 |
|
| Weighted average common shares and potentially dilutive securities | 367,339 |
| | 363,297 |
| | 362,011 |
| | 357,076 |
| | 352,197 |
|
| NAREIT FFO per share attributable to common shareholders - diluted | $ | 1.40 |
| | $ | 1.34 |
| | $ | 1.25 |
| | $ | 1.18 |
| | $ | 0.88 |
|
| 3 year growth | 12 | % | | | | | | | | |
| 5 year growth | 59 | % | | | | | | | | |
Duke Realty Corporation and Subsidiaries
Twelve Months Ended December 31,
(Unaudited and in thousands)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | 2021 | | 2020 | | 2019 |
| Ratio of Net Income/Interest Expense | | | | | | |
| Net income | | $ | 861,618 | | | $ | 302,760 | | | $ | 432,644 | |
| Add interest expense | | 84,843 | | | 93,442 | | | 89,756 | |
| | $ | 946,461 | | | $ | 396,202 | | | $ | 522,400 | |
| Interest expense | | $ | 84,843 | | | $ | 93,442 | | | $ | 89,756 | |
| Ratio of Net Income/Interest Expense | | 11.2 | | 4.2 | | 5.8 |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
| | 2021 | | 2020 | | 2019 |
| Non-GAAP Reconciliation - EBITDA and Core EBITDA | | | | | | |
| Net income | | $ | 861,618 | | | $ | 302,760 | | | $ | 432,644 | |
| Add depreciation and amortization - continuing operations | | 362,148 | | | 353,013 | | | 327,223 | |
| Add non-real estate asset related depreciation | | 2,347 | | | 2,793 | | | 2,217 | |
| Add interest expense | | 84,843 | | | 93,442 | | | 89,756 | |
| Add income tax (benefit) expense - continuing operations | | 18,549 | | | (5,112) | | | 8,686 | |
| Add finance lease related interest expense | | 267 | | | — | | | — | |
| EBITDA | | $ | 1,329,772 | | | $ | 746,896 | | | $ | 860,526 | |
| Gains on sale of properties | | (585,685) | | | (127,811) | | | (235,098) | |
| Gains on land sales | | (12,917) | | | (10,458) | | | (7,445) | |
| Impairment charges | | — | | | 5,626 | | | — | |
| Equity in earnings of unconsolidated joint ventures | | (32,804) | | | (11,944) | | | (31,406) | |
| Company's share of unconsolidated joint venture EBITDA | | 24,249 | | | 22,115 | | | 22,078 | |
| Gain on involuntary conversion | | (3,222) | | | (4,312) | | | (2,259) | |
| Non-incremental costs related to successful leases | | 13,302 | | | 12,292 | | | 12,402 | |
| Loss on debt extinguishment | | 17,901 | | | 32,900 | | | 6,320 | |
| Overhead restructuring charges | | 3,463 | | | 4,524 | | | — | |
| Noncontrolling interest share of consolidated joint venture EBITDA | | 240 | | | 115 | | | (92) | |
| Core EBITDA | | $ | 754,299 | | | $ | 669,943 | | | $ | 625,026 | |
| Components of Fixed Charges | | | | | | |
| Interest expense - continuing operations | | $ | 84,843 | | | $ | 93,442 | | | $ | 89,756 | |
| Interest expense - finance lease | | 267 | | | — | | — | |
| Company's share of unconsolidated joint venture interest expense | | 1,628 | | | 1,852 | | | 3,066 | |
| Less noncontrolling interest share of consolidated joint venture interest expense | | (320) | | | (297) | | | (29) | |
| Capitalized interest | | 34,953 | | | 24,327 | | | 26,525 | |
| Company's share of unconsolidated joint venture capitalized interest | | — | | | 80 | | | 366 | |
| Total Fixed Charges | | $ | 121,371 | | | $ | 119,404 | | | $ | 119,684 | |
| | | | | | |
| Fixed Charge Coverage Ratio | | 6.2 | | | 5.6 | | | 5.2 | |
Duke Realty Corporation and Subsidiaries
Non-GAAP Reconciliations - Net Debt to EBITDA
December 31,
(Unaudited and in thousands)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | 2021 | | 2020 | | |
| | | | | | |
| Total Debt, excluding discounts, premiums and deferred financing costs | | $ | 3,734,722 | | | $ | 3,418,157 | | | |
| Finance lease liabilities | | 39,194 | | | 19,430 | | | |
| Share of unconsolidated joint venture debt | | 80,998 | | | 77,769 | | | |
| Less noncontrolling share of consolidated debt | | (9,019) | | | (9,387) | | | |
| Less cash | | (69,752) | | | (6,309) | | | |
| Net Debt | | $ | 3,776,143 | | | $ | 3,499,660 | | | |
| | | | | | |
| Core EBITDA | | $ | 754,299 | | | $ | 669,943 | | | |
| | | | | | |
| Net debt to EBITDA | | 5.0 | | | 5.2 | | | |
