This excerpt taken from the KR DEF 14A filed May 15, 2009.
SUPPORTING STATEMENT: In order to provide shareholders a meaningful role in director elections, our Companys director election vote standard should be changed to a majority vote standard. A majority vote standard would require that a nominee receive a majority of the votes cast in order to be elected. The standard is particularly well-suited for the vast majority of director elections in which only board nominated candidates are on the ballot. We believe that a majority vote standard in board elections would establish a challenging vote standard for board nominees and improve the performance of individual directors and entire boards. Our Company presently uses a plurality vote standard in all director elections. Under the plurality vote standard, a nominee for the board can be elected with as little as a single affirmative vote, even if a substantial majority of the votes cast are withheld from the nominee.
In response to strong shareholder support for a majority vote standard in director elections, a strong majority of the nations leading companies, including Intel, General Electric, Motorola, Hewlett-Packard, Morgan Stanley, Wal-Mart, Home Depot, Gannett, Marathon Oil, and Safeway have adopted a majority vote standard in company bylaws or articles of incorporation. Additionally, these companies have adopted director resignation policies in their bylaws or corporate governance policies to address post-election issues related to the status of director nominees that fail to win election. However, our Company has responded only partially to the call for change, simply adopting a post-election director resignation policy that sets procedures for addressing the status of director nominees that receive more withhold votes than for votes. The plurality vote standard remains in place.
We believe that a post-election director resignation policy without a majority vote standard in Company bylaws or articles is an inadequate reform. The critical first step in establishing a meaningful majority vote policy is the adoption of a majority vote standard. With a majority vote standard in place, the Board can then consider action on developing post-election procedures to address the status of directors that fail to win election. A majority vote standard combined with a post-election director resignation policy would establish a meaningful right for shareholders to elect directors, and reserve for the Board an important post-election role in determining the continued status of an unelected director. We feel that this combination of the majority vote standard with a post-election policy represents a true majority vote standard.
This excerpt taken from the KR DEF 14A filed May 15, 2008.
further concluded that McDonald's suppliers that use CAK have experienced improvements in bird handling, stunning efficiency, working conditions, and meat yield and quality.
This excerpt taken from the KR DEF 14A filed May 15, 2007.
SUPPORTING STATEMENT: We believe management has a fiduciary duty to carefully assess and disclose to shareholders all pertinent information on its response to climate change. We believe taking early action to reduce emissions and prepare for standards could provide competitive advantages, while inaction and opposition to climate change mitigation efforts could expose companies to regulatory and litigation risk and reputational damage.
THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS RECOMMENDS A VOT E AGAINST THIS PROPOSAL FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS :
Kroger recognizes the important role it plays as a good steward of the environment. We have numerous green initiatives in place to save energy and preserve our natural resources. In 2007 Kroger will publish on-line an expanded version of The Kroger Co. Public Responsibilities Report that will highlight the companys green initiatives in greater detail.
The proposal recommends a committee of independent directors assess how Kroger is addressing climate change. We believe such a committee report in many ways would be duplicative of the current efforts underway. It would not benefit shareholders and would be a waste of time, resources and money for Kroger and our shareholders.
We have developed our own form of reporting that we believe provides beneficial and cost effective disclosure to our shareholders on the environmental issues that are relevant to our business operations. The expanded report will be published on the Kroger website before the end of 2007.
SHAREHOLDER PROPOSALS 2008 ANNUAL MEETING. Shareholder proposals intended for inclusion in our proxy material relating to Krogers annual meeting in June 2008 should be addressed to the Secretary of Kroger and must be received at our executive offices not later than January 15, 2008. These proposals must comply with the proxy rules established by the SEC. In addition, the proxy solicited by the Board of Directors for the 2008 annual meeting of shareholders will confer discretionary authority to vote on any shareholder proposal presented at the meeting unless we are provided with notice of the proposal before March 31, 2008.
Attached to this Proxy Statement is Krogers 2006 Annual Report which includes a brief description of Krogers business, including the general scope and nature thereof during 2006, together with the audited financial information contained in our 2006 report to the SEC on Form 10-K.