Tegna Inc. | Director elections at Tegna Inc.

AGM date
Previous AGM date
Resolution details
Company ticker
Submitted by
Resolution ask
Strengthen board oversight of issue
ESG theme
  • Governance
ESG sub-theme
  • Shareholder rights
Type of vote
Director vote
Filer type
Company sector
Consumer Discretionary
Company HQ country
United States
Resolved clause
PRI will update the information provided to include which directors are up for (re-)election and which committee they sit on once the company proxy statement is published.

Whereas clause
The directors up for election at the 2023 AGM are as following:

1) Howard D. Elias
•  Executive Committee (Chair)
•  Leadership Development and Compensation Committee

2) Gina L. Bianchini
• Nominating and Governance Committee
•  Public Policy and Regulation Committee

3) Stuart J. Epstein
• Audit Committee

4) Karen H. Grimes
•  Audit Committee
•  Nominating and Governance Committee

5) David T. Lougee
•  Nominating and Governance Committee

6) Scott K. McCune
•  Audit Committee
•  Executive Committee
•  Leadership Development and Compensation Committee (Chair)

7) Henry W. McGee
•  Executive Committee
•  Nominating and Governance Committee (Chair)
•  Public Policy and Regulation Committee

8) Neal Shapiro
•  Nominating and Governance Committee
•  Public Policy and Regulation Committee

9) Melinda C. Witmer
•  Executive Committee
•  Leadership Development and Compensation Committee
•  Public Policy and Regulation Committee (Chair)
Supporting statement
Last year, shareholders voted 56% in favour of a proposal titled 'Provide Right to Call Special Meeting at 10% Ownership'. PRI research finds that as of 01 March 2023 there is no evidence that the company has been responsive to shareholder views on this matter.

The 2022 proxy season had one of the highest records for majority-supported environmental, social, and governance (ESG) shareholder proposals in recent years, according to PWC. But as the 2023 proxy season commences, companies are acting on – and implementing – less than two out of every five of those shareholder proposals, according to their proponents. In approximately a quarter of cases, the investor proponent believes the proposal will not be addressed at all.

Access the research here: www.unpri.org/active-ownership-20/are-corporate-boards-responding-to-successful-shareholder-esg-proposals/11160.article

DISCLAIMER: By including a shareholder resolution or management proposal in this database, neither the PRI nor the sponsor of the resolution or proposal is seeking authority to act as proxy for any shareholder; shareholders should vote their proxies in accordance with their own policies and requirements.

Any voting recommendations set forth in the descriptions of the resolutions and management proposals included in this database are made by the sponsors of those resolutions and proposals, and do not represent the views of the PRI.

Information on the shareholder resolutions, management proposals and votes in this database have been obtained from sources that are believed to be reliable, but the PRI does not represent that it is accurate, complete, or up-to-date, including information relating to resolutions and management proposals, other signatories’ vote pre-declarations (including voting rationales), or the current status of a resolution or proposal. You should consult companies’ proxy statements for complete information on all matters to be voted on at a meeting.