INDEPENDENCE
We have a Compensation Committee that is 100% independent. The Committee engages its own compensation consultant and affirms each year that the consultant has no conflicts of interest and is independent.

NO HEDGING
We have a policy prohibiting all directors and named executive officers (“NEOs”) from engaging in any hedging transactions with respect to equity securities of the Company held by them, which includes the purchase of any financial instrument (including prepaid variable forward contracts, equity swaps, and collars) designed to hedge or offset any decrease in the market value of our equity securities.

COMPENSATION CLAWBACK POLICY
We may seek repayment of cash and equity incentive compensation paid to NEOs in the event of a material misstatement of the Company’s financial results where an

NEO engaged in actual fraud or willful unlawful misconduct that materially contributed to the need to restate the Company’s financial results.

STOCK OWNERSHIP
We have stock ownership guidelines for our directors and executive officers. As of December 31, 2014, each of the directors and executive officers who were employed with us satisfied his or her individual stock ownership requirement. See page 15 for a detailed discussion of stock ownership guidelines.

CHANGE OF CONTROL PAYMENTS
We maintain an executive severance plan with a “double trigger” change in control arrangement that covers our NEOs and certain other members of the Company’s senior management. The executive severance plan does not provide for any gross-up payments for taxes.

We are requesting that the stockholders approve, on an advisory basis, the compensation of the NEOs as disclosed in this Proxy Statement. The Board of Directors recommends a vote FOR Proposal 2 as it believes that the 2014 compensation decisions are consistent with key objectives of Kimco’s executive compensation program: to promote long-term performance through emphasis on the individual performances and achievements of our executive officers, commensurate with our business results and to successfully

execute our strategy to be the premier owner and operator of neighborhood and community shopping centers through investments primarily in the U.S. This proposal was supported by over 99% of the votes cast in 2014 and 2013. Please see the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, Summary Compensation Table and other compensation tables and disclosures beginning on page 22 of this Proxy Statement for a full discussion of our executive compensation.

The following graph shows pay and performance over the five-year period from 2010 to 2014 (as more fully described in the section titled “Compensation Discussion and Analysis”— “Executive Summary” beginning on page 22 of this Proxy Statement). This graph shows the correlation between our net income, FFO as adjusted, Retail EBITDA as adjusted and

FFO as adjusted per diluted share, and the total compensation we paid to our Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) during the last five fiscal years, based on the amounts reported in the summary compensation tables of our proxy statements for these years.

With respect to Proposal 1, you may vote FOR all nominees, WITHHOLD your vote as to all nominees, or vote FOR all nominees except those specific nominees from whom you WITHHOLD your vote. A properly executed proxy marked WITHHOLD with respect to the election of one or more directors will not be voted with respect to the director or directors indicated. The nominees receiving a majority of votes cast will be elected as directors (i.e., the number of votes cast for a director must exceed the number of votes withheld for that director).

With respect to Proposals 2 and 3, you may vote FOR, AGAINST or ABSTAIN. If you ABSTAIN from voting on Proposals 2 or 3, the abstention will have no effect because it will not be a vote cast.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s rules permit us to deliver a single Notice of Internet Availability or set of Meeting materials to one address shared by two or more

of our stockholders. We have delivered only one Proxy Statement and annual report to multiple stockholders who share an address, unless we received contrary instructions from the impacted stockholders prior to the mailing date. We will promptly deliver, upon written or oral request, a separate copy of the Notice of Internet Availability or Meeting materials, as requested, to any stockholder at the shared address to which a single copy of those documents was delivered. If you prefer to receive separate copies of the Proxy Statement or annual report, contact Broadridge Financial Solutions, Inc. at 1-800-542-1061 or in writing at Broadridge, Householding Department, 51 Mercedes Way, Edgewood, NY 11717. If you are currently a stockholder sharing an address with another stockholder and are receiving more than one Proxy Statement and annual report and wish to receive only one copy of future Notices of Internet Availability, proxy statements and annual reports for your household, please contact Broadridge at the above phone number or address.

Nominees for director shall be elected by a majority of the votes cast in person or by proxy at the Meeting. A majority of the votes cast means the affirmative vote of a majority of the total votes cast “for” and “against” such nominee. Withheld votes will be treated as votes against the nominee. For purposes of the election of directors, abstentions and broker non-votes, if any, will not be counted as votes cast and will have no effect on the result of the vote.

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE COMPANY RECOMMENDS THAT YOU VOTE “FOR” EACH OF THE NOMINEES SET FORTH IN THIS PROXY STATEMENT.

TERM OF OFFICE
All directors of the Company serve terms of one year and until the election and qualification of their respective successors.

ATTENDANCE AT BOARD OF DIRECTORS, COMMITTEE MEETINGS AND 2014 ANNUAL MEETING.
The Board of Directors met eight times in person or telephonically in 2014. Attendance at Board and Committee meetings during 2014 averaged over 99% for directors as a group, and no director attended fewer than 95% of the aggregate of the total meetings of the Board and of the Committees on which each director serves. All of the directors were in attendance at the 2014 Annual Meeting of Stockholders held on May 6, 2014. Our director attendance policy is included in our Corporate Governance Guidelines, which are available on the Company’s website located at www.kimcorealty.com and is available in print to any stockholder who requests it.

COMMUNICATIONS WITH DIRECTORS
The Audit Committee and the non-management directors welcome anyone who has a concern about the Company’s conduct or policies, or any employee who has a concern about the Company’s accounting, internal accounting controls or auditing matters, to communicate that concern directly to the Board of Directors, the Lead Independent Director, the non-management directors or the Audit Committee. Such communications may be confidential or anonymous, and may be submitted in writing to the Board of Directors, the Lead Independent Director or the non-management directors by sending a letter by mail addressed to the Board of Directors, the Lead Independent Director or the non-management directors c/o Secretary of the Company, Kimco Realty Corporation, 3333 New Hyde Park Road, New Hyde Park, NY, 11042-0020. The Board of Directors has designated Richard G. Dooley as its Lead Independent Director to review these communications and present them to the entire Board of Directors or forward them to the appropriate directors. In addition, the Company maintains an Ethics Helpline, as further discussed in the Company’s Code of Conduct, which allows employees and contractors to submit concerns anonymously via phone or the Internet.

Our Board of Directors has adopted a formal set of categorical independence standards for directors. These categorical standards specify the criteria by which the independence of our directors will be determined, including guidelines for directors and their immediate families with respect to past employment or affiliation with the Company or its independent registered public accounting firm. These categorical standards meet, and in some areas exceed, the listing standards of the NYSE. The Board of Directors’ categorical standards are available along with our Corporate Governance Guidelines on the Company’s website located at www.kimcorealty.com and is available in print to any stockholder who requests it.

In accordance with these categorical standards and the NYSE listing standards, the Board of Directors undertook its annual review of the independence of its directors on February 4, 2015. During this review, the Board of Directors considered transactions and relationships between each director or members of his or her immediate family and the Company. The Board of Directors also considered whether there were any transactions or relationships between directors or members of their immediate family (or any entity of which a director or an immediate family member is an executive officer, general partner or significant equity holder). The

purpose of this review was to determine whether any such relationships or transactions existed that were inconsistent with a determination that the director is independent.

As a result of this review, the Board of Directors affirmatively determined that the following nominees for director are independent of the Company and its management under the standards set forth in the categorical standards and the NYSE listing standards:

In making these determinations, the Board of Directors considered the relationships and transactions described under the caption “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions” beginning on page 44.

In addition, none of the directors’ family members serves as an executive officer, as defined by Rule 3b-7 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (“executive officer”) of the Company.

BOARD LEADERSHIP STRUCTURE
The Board of Directors has separated the roles of the Executive Chairman of the Board of Directors and the CEO in recognition of the differences between the two roles. The CEO is responsible for setting the strategic direction for the Company and the day-to-day leadership and performance of the Company, while the Executive Chairman of the Board of Directors provides guidance to the CEO, establishes the agenda for Board of Directors meetings in consultation with the CEO and presides over meetings of the full Board of Directors. Because Mr. Cooper, the Executive Chairman, is an employee of the Company and is therefore not “independent,” the Board of Directors has appointed the Chairman of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, Richard G. Dooley, as Lead Independent Director to preside at all executive sessions of “non-management” directors, as defined under the NYSE Listed Company Manual.

STOCK OWNERSHIP GUIDELINES
The Board of Directors adopted revised stock ownership guidelines in July 2012 for nonemployee directors and executive officers that require each non-employee director and executive officer to own shares of our Common Stock. Under the guidelines, all current non-employee directors must own shares of our Common Stock with a value equal to five times the annual Board of Directors retainer. Executive officers must own shares of our Common Stock with a value equal to a certain multiple of his or her base salary. Our Executive Chairman must own shares of our Common Stock with a value equal to five times base salary, our CEO must own shares of our Common Stock with a value equal to five times base salary, our Chief Operating Officer must own shares of our Common Stock with a value equal to three times base salary, and our Chief Financial Officer must own shares of our Common Stock with a value equal to

two times base salary. Equity interests that count towards the satisfaction of the ownership guidelines include shares owned outright, shares jointly owned, restricted shares and shares held in a 401(k) retirement plan. Directors and executive officers have five years from the date they become a member of the Board of Directors or an executive officer to attain these ownership levels or until December 31, 2014 to meet the ownership levels, whichever is later. All of our directors and executive officers are currently in compliance with the stock ownership requirements.

DIRECTOR CONTINUING EDUCATION
The Company maintains a formal program of continuing education for directors. In 2014, directors participated in customized Company-sponsored sessions on business-related topics, corporate governance matters, SEC rule changes, and other current topics such as cyber security, including issues applicable to particular committees of the Board of Directors. These sessions included detailed presentations on these matters and discussions on each of the covered topics.

CLAWBACK POLICY
The Company may seek repayment of cash and equity incentive compensation paid to NEOs in the event of a material misstatement of the Company’s financial results where an NEO engaged in actual fraud or willful unlawful misconduct that materially contributed to the need to restate. Where the Executive Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors determines that these circumstances exist, the Committee may direct the Company to recover the after-tax portion of the difference between the compensation actually paid or awarded and the compensation calculated using the restated financial statements, based upon the Committee’s view of all relevant facts and circumstances and the best interests of the Company.

RISK OVERSIGHT
Our Board of Directors oversees an enterprisewide approach to risk management, designed to support the achievement of organizational objectives, including strategic objectives, to improve long-term organizational performance and enhance stockholder value. A fundamental part of risk management is not only understanding the risks a company faces and what steps management is taking to manage those risks, but also understanding what level of risk is appropriate for the Company. Management is responsible for establishing our business strategy, identifying and assessing the related risks and establishing appropriate risk management practices. Our Board of Directors reviews our business strategy and management’s assessment of the related risk, and discusses with management the appropriate level of risk for the Company.

Our Board of Directors administers its risk oversight function with respect to our operating risk as a whole, and meets with management at least quarterly to receive updates with respect to our operations, business strategies and the monitoring of related risks. The Board of Directors also delegates oversight to the Audit, Executive Compensation and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committees to oversee selected elements of risk:

Our Board of Directors and Committees’ risk oversight responsibilities are discussed further in “Committees of the Board of Directors” on the next page.

AUDIT COMMITTEE.
The Audit Committee currently consists of Mr. Coviello who is Chair of the Audit Committee, and Messrs. Dooley, Grills and Lourenso, all of whom are independent directors. Five meetings of the Audit Committee were held in person or telephonically during 2014. Messrs. Coviello, Dooley, Grills and Lourenso are each an “audit committee financial expert,” as determined by the Board of Directors in accordance with Item 407(d)(5) of Regulation S-K, and Messrs. Coviello, Dooley, Grills and Lourenso are “independent” from the Company as defined by the current listing standards of the NYSE.

The Audit Committee assists the Board of Directors in fulfilling its oversight responsibilities as related to the Company’s risk management processes. The Board of Directors and Audit Committee oversee (i) the integrity of the Company’s financial statements and financial reporting process and the Company’s systems of internal accounting and financial controls; (ii) the performance of the internal audit function; (iii) the annual independent integrated audit of the Company’s consolidated financial statements and internal control over financial reporting, the engagement of the independent registered public accounting firm and the evaluation of the independent registered public accounting firm’s qualifications, independence and performance; (iv) policy standards and guidelines for risk assessment and risk management; (v) the Company’s compliance with legal and regulatory requirements, including

the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures; and (vi) the fulfillment of the other responsibilities set out in the Audit Committee Charter, as adopted by the Board of Directors. The Audit Committee receives regular reports from management regarding the Company’s assessment of risks. In addition, the Audit Committee reports regularly to the Board of Directors. The Board of Directors and Audit Committee focus on the Company’s general risk management strategy, and also ensure that risks undertaken by the Company are consistent with the business strategies approved by the Board of Directors. While the Board of Directors oversees the Company’s risk management, management is responsible for the day-to-day risk management processes and reports directly to both the Board of Directors and Audit Committee on a regular basis and more frequently as appropriate. The Board of Directors believes this division of responsibilities is an effective approach for addressing the risks facing the Company.

The Audit Committee works with management to adopt and reviews annually a code of ethics designed to support the highest standards of business ethics. The Audit Committee operates under a written charter, as amended, adopted by the Board of Directors. A copy of the Audit Committee Charter, as amended, and the Company’s Code of Business Conduct and Ethics (“Code of Ethics”) is available on the Company’s website located at www.kimcorealty.com and is available in print to any stockholder who requests it.

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION COMMITTEE
The Executive Compensation Committee currently consists of Mr. Grills, who is Chair of the Executive Compensation Committee, and Messrs. Coviello, Dooley, Lourenso and Saltzman and Ms. Nicholas, all of whom are independent directors. The Board of Directors has established an Executive Compensation Committee to: (i) evaluate (in consultation with management or the Board of Directors) and recommend to the Board of Directors for approval the compensation plans, policies and programs of the Company, especially those regarding executive compensation; and (ii) determine and recommend to the Board of Directors for approval the compensation of the Chief Executive Officer and all other executive officers of the Company.

More specifically, the Executive Compensation Committee annually reviews and approves corporate goals and objectives relevant to the total direct compensation of the CEO including changes in base salary, bonus payments and equity awards. For other NEOs, the Executive Compensation Committee reviews their performance against these goals and objectives and, based on its evaluation, approves their total direct compensation. The details of the processes and procedures involved are described in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis beginning on page 22.

Five meetings of the Executive Compensation Committee were held in person or telephonically during 2014. The Executive Compensation Committee operates under a written charter adopted by the Board of Directors. A copy of the Executive Compensation Committee Charter is on the Company’s website located at www.kimcorealty.com and is available in print to any stockholder who requests it.

The Board of Directors and Executive Compensation Committee, in consultation with the Executive Compensation Committee’s independent compensation consultant, Pay Governance LLC (“Pay Governance”) and management, have reviewed the design and operation of the Company’s incentive compensation arrangements, including the performance objectives and target levels used in connection with incentive awards, and evaluated the relationship between the Company’s risk management policies and practices and these arrangements. As a result of this review, management has determined, and the Board of Directors has affirmed management’s determination, that the Company’s compensation policies and practices are not reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on the Company because they do not encourage the Company’s employees to take excessive or unnecessary risks. The Executive Compensation Committee believes that the combination of the Company’s (i) balanced approach to compensation, (ii) reliance on a variety of performance measures and (iii) use of both quantitative and qualitative assessments of performance reflected in the Company’s compensation program is consistent with

the Company’s objectives and risk profile. Accordingly, the performance objectives in the Company’s annual incentive compensation plan are balanced with those contained in the Company’s long-term incentive compensation plan to ensure that both are aligned and consistent with the Company’s long-term business plan. The Company’s mix of equity-based awards has been allocated to ensure an appropriate combination of incentive and retention objectives, and the Company has established stock ownership guidelines to ensure that the interests of the Company’s executive officers are aligned with the interests of the Company’s stockholders.

In reaching its conclusion that the Company’s compensation policies and practices do not encourage excessive and unnecessary risk taking, the Executive Compensation Committee considered several factors including salaries, bonuses and equity awards. The Company’s benefits and retirement plans are not linked to performance. There is an annual performance-based bonus program for employees that provides a discretionary award based on their respective level in the Company, individual performance and overall Company performance. While the Company’s bonus program for its leasing personnel is tied to personal production for new lease deals and renewals, management is comfortable that this bonus opportunity fairly incentivizes leasing personnel without being excessive. In addition, executive bonuses and equity awards are based on certain performance measures (established by the Executive Compensation Committee and management) including, but not limited to, funds from operations, results from operations, contributions from real estate investment programs, other financial considerations, individual performance and enterprise-wide performance. The Company’s long-term equity awards consist primarily of performance shares and restricted stock. These awards are intended to further link recipients’ interests with stockholder interests. The Company’s Executive Severance Plan with its NEOs and certain members of management provides severance protections. Since there are no performance-based aspects of these severance arrangements, and the Company generally retains the ability to terminate an executive “for cause” without triggering severance, the Executive Compensation Committee does not believe these agreements encourage excessive risktaking. The Executive Compensation Committee believes that it is not overly reliant on any single measure of performance and assesses actual results against each performance measure as well as taking into account overall performance compared to targets. In addition to the quantitative performance measures, the Executive Compensation Committee also assesses the broader business environment and relative performance of the Company to evaluate individual performance. Finally, the Executive Compensation Committee considers changes in the business, industry and capital markets environment in determining compensation policies and practices.

NOMINATING AND CORPORATE
GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE.
The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee currently consists of Mr. Dooley, who is Chair of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, and Messrs. Coviello, Grills, Lourenso and Saltzman and Ms. Nicholas, all of whom are independent directors. The functions of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee include recommending candidates for annual election to the Board of Directors and filling vacancies on the Board of Directors that may arise from time-to-time and senior management succession. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee is not limited to any specific process in identifying candidates and will consider candidates suggested by other members of the Board of Directors, as well as candidates recommended by stockholders. Such recommendations should include the name and address and other pertinent information about the candidate as is required to be included in the Company’s Proxy Statement. Recommendations should be submitted to the Secretary of the Company. In addition, the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee is authorized to retain search firms and other consultants to assist it in identifying candidates and fulfilling other duties.

As described in the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines, consideration is given to assuring that the Board of Directors, as a whole, considers diversity in its broadest sense, including persons diverse in geography, gender and ethnicity as well as representing diverse experiences, skills and backgrounds. We believe a diverse group can best perpetuate the success of the business and represent stockholder interests through the exercise of sound judgment. The Board of Directors and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee take into account many factors in recommending candidates for a director position. These factors include, but are not limited to, the ability to make independent analytical inquiries; general understanding of marketing, finance, accounting and other elements relevant to the success of a publicly-traded company in today’s business environment; understanding of the Company’s business on a technical level; other board service and educational and professional background. In addition, each candidate nominee must possess fundamental qualities of intelligence, honesty, good judgment, high ethics and standards of integrity, fairness and responsibility. The Board of Directors and the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee evaluate each individual candidate by considering all appropriate factors as a whole. The Company’s approach favors active deliberation rather than using rigid formulas to assign relative weights to these factors. Following the end of each fiscal year, the Nominating and Corporate Governance

Committee establishes the criteria for and conducts an annual assessment of the performance of the Board of Directors with respect to these factors. Consideration of other corporate governance principles or modifications of such principles may also be discussed at that time.

The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee is also responsible for ensuring that the Company adheres to good corporate governance principles and for developing and implementing the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines that apply to all of its directors and management. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee is also charged with the task of ensuring the Company’s compliance with all NYSE listing requirements. Four meetings of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee were held in person or telephonically during 2014. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee operates under a written charter adopted by the Board of Directors. Copies of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee charter and the Corporate Governance Guidelines, are available on the Company’s website located at www.kimcorealty.com and are available in print to any stockholder who requests it.

The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee is responsible for reviewing the leadership structure of the Board of Directors. As part of this review, the Committee evaluates (i) whether to have a Lead Independent Director, (ii) the responsibilities of the positions of Chairman of the Board of Directors and Lead Independent Director, and (iii) the qualifications for those positions, including whether the position of Chairman of the Board of Directors should be held by the CEO, an independent director, or a non-independent director other than the CEO. The Committee makes its recommendation to the full Board of Directors, which is responsible for approving the leadership structure of the Board of Directors. The Board of Directors has named Richard G. Dooley as its Lead Independent Director. In this capacity, Mr. Dooley is designated to chair executive sessions of the Company’s Non-Management Directors and to act as a liaison between management and other independent directors.

MEETINGS OF NON-MANAGEMENT DIRECTORS.
The Non-Management Directors meet in executive session at each in-person Board of Directors meeting, and more frequently if necessary. Non-Management Directors are all those Directors who are not employees of the Company. The Non-Management Directors consist of Messrs. Coviello, Dooley, Grills, Lourenso and Saltzman and Ms. Nicholas.

The executive officers of the Company serve in their respective capacities for approximately one-year terms and are subject to election by the Board of Directors, generally at the time of the annual meeting of the Board of Directors following the 2015 Annual Meeting of Stockholders.

Please see Proposal 1 - Election of Directors - Information Regarding Nominees starting on page 10 for information regarding Milton Cooper and David B. Henry.

CONOR C. FLYNN was appointed President of the Company in August 2014, Chief Investment Officer in May 2014 and Chief Operating Officer in May 2013. Mr. Flynn directs the strategic and day-to-day activities of the Company’s shopping center business. Prior to his current role, Mr. Flynn was President of the Western Region of the Company responsible for directing personnel that handled leasing, property management, construction, asset management and value creation. Mr. Flynn joined the Company in June 2003 as an Asset Manager. Mr. Flynn received a B.A. degree from Yale University and a Master’s degree in Real Estate Development from Columbia University. Mr. Flynn is a licensed real estate

broker in California, and a member of Urban Land Institute (ULI), NAREIT and ICSC.

GLENN G. COHEN was appointed Chief Financial Officer of the Company in June 2010, and continues as Treasurer, a position he has held since 1997. Mr. Cohen directs the Company’s financial and capital strategy and oversees the day-to-day accounting, financial reporting and planning, tax, treasury and capital market activities. In addition, Mr. Cohen is responsible for the information technology activities of the Company. Prior to joining the Company in 1995 as Director of Accounting and Taxation, Mr. Cohen served as Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer for U.S. Balloon Manufacturing Company, Chief Financial Officer for EMCO Sales and Service, L.P. and spent six years at the public accounting firm Coopers & Lybrand, LLP (predecessor to PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP), where he served as a manager in the audit group. Mr. Cohen received a Bachelor of Science degree in accounting from the State University of New York at Albany in 1985. He is a Certified Public Accountant and a member of NAREIT and ICSC.

Our Board of Directors has an Executive Compensation Committee (the “Committee”) that administers and monitors what and how we pay our NEOs and other executives. The Committee held five meetings in person or by phone during 2014. The Committee is comprised of Joe Grills (Chairman), Philip E. Coviello, Richard G. Dooley, Frank Lourenso, Colombe M. Nicholas and Richard B. Saltzman. We encourage feedback from our stockholders regarding our executive compensation program. In 2014, over 99% of the votes cast (i.e., excluding abstentions and broker non-votes) in our Say-on-Pay advisory vote approved the proposal.

Our senior management team worked in 2014 to strategically position Kimco for long-term performance by focusing their efforts on strengthening our portfolio, maintaining our capital and liquidity positions, and operating competitively. Our compensation decisions in 2014 emphasized rewarding corporate / financial performance and individual performances and achievements of our NEOs, commensurate with our business results, to successfully execute our strategy to be the premier owner and operator of neighborhood and community shopping centers through investments primarily in the U.S.

Kimco Realty Corporation is one of the nation’s largest owners and operators of neighborhood and community shopping centers, measured in GLA. As of December 31, 2014, the Company had interests in 754 shopping center properties aggregating 109.5 million square feet of GLA and 533 other

property interests, primarily through the Company’s preferred equity investments and other real estate investments, totaling 11.7 million square feet of GLA, for a grand total of 1,287 properties aggregating 121.2 million square feet of GLA, located in 41 states, Puerto Rico, Canada, Mexico and Chile.

At our 2014 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, we provided our stockholders with the opportunity to cast an advisory vote on executive compensation, and in future years we expect such advisory vote will occur annually. Over 99% of the votes cast (i.e., excluding abstentions and broker non-votes) on this Say-on-Pay vote were voted in favor of the proposal. We have considered the results of the 2014 vote and believe the support of our stockholders for the proposal indicates that our stockholders are supportive of our approach to

executive compensation, including the ratio of performance based compensation to all other compensation, the ratio of performance-based equity compensation to time-based equity compensation, and the integrity of our peer group. Thus we did not make changes to our executive compensation arrangements in response to the vote. In the future, we will continue to consider the outcome of our Say-on-Pay votes when making compensation decisions regarding our NEOs.

Our executive compensation program provides pay-for performance compensation that we believe is aligned with the interests of our stockholders and is designed to continue to attract, retain and appropriately motivate our key employees who drive long-term value creation. The following graph shows the correlation between our net income, FFO as adjusted, Retail EBITDA as adjusted, and FFO as adjusted per diluted share, and the total compensation we paid to our CEO during the last five fiscal years, based on the amounts reported in the summary compensation tables of our proxy statements

for these years. FFO as adjusted, Retail EBITDA as adjusted, and leverage, calculated from debt to total assets, defined as consolidated debt plus JV pro rata share of debt divided by the total gross consolidated assets and JV share of pro rata gross assets, are the metrics used in our annual incentive program, ensuring that pay and performance, as measured in our executive compensation program, are aligned. See Annex A starting on page 52 for reconciliations of net income to FFO as adjusted, and to Retail EBITDA as adjusted.

In determining our NEOs’ base salaries, the Committee considered each NEO’s scope of responsibilities, individual qualifications and experience, future potential, past performance and the practices of our peer group, without applying a quantitative formula. We did not seek a specific target within our peer group. Base salary increases, if any, are effective January 1 and are based upon the performance of each NEO as assessed and approved by the Board of Directors and Committee. No formulaic base salary increases

are provided to the NEOs, and other forms of compensation are generally used to reward overall Company performance or exceptional performance of a particular NEO.

Under our executive compensation program, each NEO is eligible to receive an annual cash bonus based on the Company’s corporate / financial performance compared to targets and such NEO’s individual performance against specific quantitative and qualitative goals as further discussed starting on page 30. For each NEO’s annual bonus opportunity for 2014, 60% was based on the Company’s corporate / financial performance for the performance year compared to targets as measured by the Company’s (1) FFO as adjusted per diluted share for the performance year compared to

Target FFO, (2) retail EBITDA as adjusted compared to Target EBITDA and (3) leverage compared to Target Leverage, and 40% was based on individual NEO performance against specific quantitative and qualitative goals as discussed starting on page 30 and as evaluated by the Committee. The table on the next page shows the percent of the Total Annual Target Bonus each NEO would receive based on achievement of threshold, target and maximum levels for corporate / financial performance and individual performance.

The table on page 28 shows the target bonus and the bonus actually earned in 2014 for each NEO. In establishing the target bonuses, we considered the responsibilities of each NEO, Mr. Henry’s recommendations, and the peer group practices discussed in “Comparison to Competitive Market.” The Committee awarded 2014 bonuses based on the following analysis of our corporate / financial performance and each NEO’s individual performance:

CORPORATE / FINANCIAL PERFORMANCE.

In 2014, the Company’s Target FFO was $1.38 on a diluted per share basis, Target EBITDA was $956 million and Target Leverage was 45%. After the Committee considered the Company’s actual 2014 FFO as adjusted, retail EBITDA as adjusted and leverage, the Committee’s payout for the corporate financial incentive was based on an achievement of 101.4%, 102.1% and 102.7% of Target FFO, Target EBITDA and Target Leverage, respectively which resulted in a payout for the corporate financial incentive of 65.4% of each NEO’s 2014 total target bonus.*

*The corporate financial incentive is calculated as follows: If the Company achieves its target level of 100% of each of the financial measures based upon the percentage weighting of 60% FFO as adjusted, 20% retail EBITDA as adjusted, and 20% leverage, then the base corporate financial incentive paid is 60% of the NEO’s total target bonus. In 2014, the company achieved 101.4%, 102.1%, and 102.7% of the three measurements respectively, exceeding the 60%

target by 541 basis points. Interpolating linearly between target and maximum performance levels resulted in a payout of 109.02% of the target incentive. Calculation: (65.41% / 60%) = 109.02%.

INDIVIDUAL PERFORMANCE.

The Committee’s evaluation of each NEO’s individual performance against, among other factors, specific quantitative and qualitative goals is detailed below in “Analysis of Each NEO’s Compensation” as further discussed starting on page 30. In general, in determining each NEO’s achievement compared to target, the Committee considered each NEO’s scope of responsibilities, individual qualifications and experience, performance in 2014 and the practices of our peer group, without applying a quantitative formula. In 2014, the Committee also considered the NEOs’ efforts to successfully refocus the Company on its core assets and business amidst continuing economic challenges and uncertainties. The Committee agreed to award each NEO individual performance bonuses of approximately 115% to 150% of each NEO’s 2014 individual performance target bonus.

CALCULATION OF TOTAL 2014 BONUS.

The bonuses actually received by each NEO are determined by adding the corporate / financial performance bonus and the individual performance bonus together. Thus, each NEO earned a total 2014 bonus of approximately 111% to 126% of the 2014 target bonus.

The Company maintains a long-term incentive plan pursuant to which the Company makes annual equity-based compensation awards to the NEOs. The target number of performance shares underlying the long-term incentive equity awards were established in February 2014 for the calendar year 2014. In establishing the equity awards, we considered the qualitative factors discussed in “Analysis of Each NEO’s Compensation,” Mr. Henry’s recommendations, and peer group practices discussed in “Comparison to Competitive Market.” We also used our business judgment to determine appropriate equity compensation to recognize the potential of our executive officers for our business and retain our executive officers for the long term.

Approximately 20% of the value of the equity awards is awarded in the form of time-vesting restricted stock eligible to vest in 25% increments on each of the first, second, third and fourth anniversaries of the grant date. Mr. Flynn was awarded 100,000 shares of restricted stock at the time he was appointed President of the Company which vest in 20% increments on each of the first, second, third, fourth and fifth anniversaries of the grant date. For 2014, the time-vesting awards were granted under the Company’s 2010 Equity Participation Plan, as such plan may be amended from time to time (the “2010 Equity Participation Plan”). The actual time-vesting awards granted are set out in the “Grants of Plan-Based Awards for 2014” table on page 37.

Approximately 80% of the value of the equity awards is awarded in the form of performance shares. Beginning in 2014, the Company began transitioning its performance share awards to a three-year performance period. The performance

shares granted in 2014 permit the NEOs to earn vested shares of the Company’s Common Stock based on the Company’s total stockholder return compared to peers listed in the NAREIT Retail Index over one-year, two-year and three-year performance periods, each of which commences with the year of grant, and also include the right to receive, if and when the underlying shares are earned, the equivalent value (paid in shares without interest) of dividends declared on the earned shares following issuance of the performance shares and before issuance of any earned stock. The 2014 performance shares provide a target number of shares that may be earned in each performance period if the Company’s total shareholder return for the period equals the 50th percentile of its peers listed in the NAREIT Retail Index. One third of the total target number of shares subject to each NEO’s 2014 performance share award is allocated to each performance period. The number of performance shares actually earned for a performance period may range between a threshold of 50% of the target number of shares if the Company’s total shareholder return for the period is at least in the 25th percentile of its peers listed in the NAREIT Retail Index and a maximum of 150% of the target number of shares for the period if the Company’s total shareholder return for the period equals or exceeds the 75th percentile of its peers listed in the NAREIT Retail Index. Linear interpolation is used to determine the shares earned for a performance period where the Company’s total shareholder return falls between the threshold, target and maximum percentile levels. If the Company’s total stockholder return for a performance is less than the threshold level, no performance shares are earned or issued for the period.

The Committee considers each of the NEO’s quantitative and qualitative performance factors as a whole in determining each NEO’s salary and the individual performance component of each NEO’s annual bonus. Individual members of the Committee may give different weights to different factors. We also consider our CEO’s evaluation of our individual executives’ performance and his recommended set of compensation actions for all NEOs. The Committee uses its business judgment to determine appropriate compensation in order to recognize the contributions and potential of our executives.

MILTON COOPER

Mr. Cooper serves as the Company’s Executive Chairman of the Board of Directors and in 2014 earned total compensation as set forth in the “Summary Compensation Table” below.

For Mr. Cooper, the following individual performance factors were considered in determining his compensation:

DAVID B. HENRY

Mr. Henry serves as the Company’s CEO and Vice Chairman of the Board of Directors and in 2014 earned total compensation as set forth in the “Summary Compensation Table” below.

For Mr. Henry, the following individual performance factors were considered in determining his compensation:

CONOR C. FLYNN

Mr. Flynn serves as the Company’s President, Chief Operating Officer and Chief Investment Officer and in 2014 earned total compensation as set forth in the “Summary Compensation Table” below.

For Mr. Flynn, the following individual performance factors were considered in determining his compensation:

GLENN G. COHEN

Mr. Cohen serves as the Company’s Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer and in 2014 earned total compensation as set forth in the “Summary Compensation Table” below.

For Mr. Cohen, the following individual performance factors were considered in determining his compensation:

We review competitive compensation data from a select group of peer companies and broader survey sources. However, we do not set our NEO pay as a direct function of market pay levels. Instead, we use market data to help confirm that our pay practices are reasonable. Using this data and NAREIT comparison data supplied by the Company, Pay Governance conducted survey data analysis and provided comment and analysis regarding our peer group. At the

Committee’s request, Pay Governance prepared an annual report summarizing the Company’s peer group, market data and peer group methodology as well as Pay Governance’s findings and recommendations. This report was discussed with the Committee in early 2014. As a primary reference, Pay Governance gathered proxy pay data for the following REITs with market capitalizations comparable to ours and with whom we compete for executive talent.

The Committee considered the Pay Governance information as an input in its decision making process for determining our NEOs’ compensation. Pay Governance reported directly to the Committee and provided no other services besides executive compensation services to the Company.

The Committee considered whether Pay Governance’s work providing information that the Committee uses when determining compensation for the Company’s NEOs and other executive officers raises any conflicts of interest and determined that no conflicts of interest exist.

LONG-TERM INCENTIVES – EQUITY AWARDS
Our NEOs are eligible to retire at the earlier of age 65 or 20 years of service to the Company and their equity awards (excluding retention awards) would vest immediately upon retirement. Messrs. Cooper and Henry are currently eligible to retire from the Company. We do not maintain special pension plans for our NEOs because we believe this accelerated vesting offsets the lack of such plans. The Committee may accelerate equity vesting upon an employee’s termination at its discretion.

If an NEO holding restricted stock is terminated prior to vesting for reasons other than death, disability, retirement, without cause or change of control, the employee would forfeit the unvested stock. Prior to vesting, recipients of this restricted stock may vote the shares and also receive dividends.

EXECUTIVE SEVERANCE PLAN – “DOUBLE-TRIGGER” CHANGE IN CONTROL SEVERANCE ARRANGEMENT On March 15, 2010, the Executive Compensation Committee adopted the Kimco Realty Corporation Executive Severance Plan, as amended from time to time (the “Severance Plan”) pursuant to which our NEOs and certain other members of the Company’s senior management, are eligible for severance payments if the covered executive’s employment is terminated by the Company without “Cause” or, following a change in control, by the executive for “Good Reason” (each as defined in the Severance Plan), subject to the terms and conditions described in the Severance Plan. Upon a covered termination of employment, a participant will receive two times the sum of (a) the participant’s annual base salary and (b) the amount of the participant’s annual bonus received in the prior year, payable in equal installments over the two years following the termination or in a lump sum if the termination

occurs within two years following a change in control. The participant will also receive eighteen months of continued participation in the Company’s health insurance plans or successor plans (running concurrently with the COBRA period) and accelerated vesting of all unvested stock options, restricted stock awards and performance awards. In certain circumstances, if a participant would otherwise have incurred excise taxes under Section 4999 of the Internal Revenue Code (“Parachute Payment Taxes”), his or her payments will be reduced to the “safe harbor amount,” such that no such excise taxes would be due. The Severance Plan does not provide for any gross-up payments for Parachute Payment Taxes incurred by any participant.

Mr. Henry agreed, effective as of March 14, 2013, that the bonus component of his severance pursuant to the Executive Severance Plan shall be based on the average actual bonus he received in the three years immediately prior to the year in which the termination occurs. Mr. Cooper does not participate in the Company’s Severance Plan.

RETIREMENT PLANS
We maintain a 401(k) retirement plan (the “401(k) Plan”) in which substantially all employees, including our NEOs, are eligible to participate. The 401(k) Plan permits participants to defer up to a maximum of 100% of their eligible base salary compensation, up to the federal limit. The Company currently makes matching contributions on a dollar-for-dollar basis to all employees contributing to their 401(k) accounts and who have completed one year of employment with the Company, of up to 5% of the employee’s base salary compensation (and subject to a maximum of $8,500 for highly compensated employees). Participants in the 401(k) Plan are not subject to federal and state income tax on salary deferral contributions or Company contributions or on the earnings thereon until such amounts are withdrawn from the 401(k) Plan. Salary reduction contributions are treated as wages subject to FICA and Medicare tax. Withdrawals from the 401(k) Plan may only be made upon termination of employment, or in connection with certain provisions of the 401(k) Plan that permit hardship withdrawals, allow in-service distributions and loans, or require minimum distributions. The 401(k) Plan also includes a Roth 401(k) feature which enables participants to defer some or all of their 401(k) contributions on an after-tax rather than pre-tax basis, allowing for tax-free (federal and most state) distributions on both participant contributions and related earnings at retirement. Generally, participation in the Roth 401(k) allows for tax free distributions if the Roth account has been in place for 5 years and the participant has attained age 59 ½. We do not maintain any other retirement plans for our NEOs or employees. The Company does not provide any pension benefits or any nonqualified deferred compensation to its NEOs or employees.

TAX AND ACCOUNTING CONSIDERATIONS
The recognition or deferral of period expense in our financial statements did not factor into the allocation of compensation among base salary, bonus and equity awards. Cash salary and bonus are charged as an expense in the period in which the amounts are earned by the NEO. The value of equity awards are amortized ratably into expense over the vesting period, except for the value of equity awards granted to our NEOs eligible for retirement, which were expensed immediately in the periodic financial statements as of the grant date in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board Accounting Standards Codification (“FASB ASC”) 718, which requires immediately expensing of equity awards of employees eligible for retirement.

Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code generally places a $1 million annual limit on the amount of compensation paid to each of the Company’s NEOs who were officers on the last day of the relevant taxable year other than its Chief Financial Officer that may be deducted by the Company for federal income tax purposes unless such compensation constitutes “qualified performance-based compensation” which is based on the achievement of pre-established performance goals set by a committee of the Board of Directors pursuant to an incentive plan that has been approved by the Company’s stockholders. The 2010 Equity Participation Plan provides that certain awards made thereunder may, in the discretion of the plan administrator, be structured in a manner intended to qualify for the “qualified performance-based compensation” exception to the $1 million annual deductibility limit of Section 162(m).

Other provisions of the Internal Revenue Code can also affect compensation decisions. Section 409A of the Internal Revenue Code, which governs the form and timing of payment of deferred compensation, imposes sanctions, including a 20% penalty and an interest penalty, on the recipient of deferred compensation that does not comply with Section 409A. The Committee takes into account the implications of Section 409A in determining the form and timing of compensation awarded to our executives and strives to structure any nonqualified deferred compensation plans or arrangements to be exempt from or to comply with the requirements of Section 409A.

Section 280G of the Internal Revenue Code disallows a company’s tax deduction for payments received by certain individuals in connection with a change in control to the extent that the payments exceed an amount approximately three times their average annual compensation, and Section 4999 of the Internal Revenue Code imposes a 20% excise tax on those payments. The Committee takes into account the implications of Section 280G in determining potential payments to be made to our executives in connection with

a change in control. Nevertheless, to the extent that certain payments upon a change in control are classified as excess parachute payments, such payments may not be deductible pursuant to Section 280G.

PERQUISITES
We do not believe we treat our NEOs materially differently from our other senior employees with respect to perquisites. We provided the following perquisites to our NEOs in 2014:

The Executive Compensation Committee (the “Committee”) of Kimco Realty Corporation, a Maryland Corporation (the “Company”), has reviewed and discussed with the Company’s management the Compensation Discussion and Analysis that is required by Securities and Exchange Commission Rules to be included in the Proxy Statement.

Based on that review and those discussions, the Committee has recommended to the Company’s Board of Directors that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in the Proxy Statement.

The foregoing report shall not be deemed incorporated by reference by any general statement incorporating by reference the Proxy Statement into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), or the Securities

Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), except that the Company specifically incorporates this information by reference, and shall not otherwise be deemed filed under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act.

During 2014, members of the Board of Directors and Committees thereof who were not also employees of the Company (“Non-management Directors”) were entitled to receive an annual retainer of $50,000. Also, during 2014, the Non-management Directors were entitled to receive a total of $10,000 each as members of the Executive Compensation Committee and $6,000 each as members of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. The Non-management Directors who are members of the Audit Committee also are entitled to receive an annual fee of $20,000. The chairmen of the Audit, Executive Compensation and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committees were entitled to receive an additional annual fee of $45,000,

$35,000 and $16,000, respectively. During 2014, the Lead Independent Director received an additional annual fee of $10,000. In accordance with the Company’s 2010 Equity Participation Plan, the Non-management Directors may be granted awards of deferred stock (“Deferred Stock”) or restricted stock in lieu of directors’ fees. Unless otherwise provided by the Board of Directors, a grantee of Deferred Stock shall have no rights as a Company stockholder with respect to such Deferred Stock until such time as the Common Stock underlying the award has been issued. Employees of the Company who are also directors are not paid any directors’ fees.

As of December 31, 2014, Messrs. Coviello, Dooley, Grills, Lourenso, Saltzman and Ms. Nicholas held options to acquire 37,000 shares, 107,000 shares, 107,000 shares, 107,000 shares, 107,000 shares and 14,667 shares, respectively. As of

December 31, 2014, Messrs. Coviello, Dooley, Grills, Lourenso, Saltzman and Ms. Nicholas held shares of restricted stock in the amounts of 15,125 shares, 15,125 shares, 15,125 shares, 15,125 shares, 15,125 shares and 14,667 shares, respectively.

The Company reviews all relationships and transactions in which the Company and our directors and executive officers or their immediate family members are participants to determine whether such persons have a direct or indirect material interest. Our current written policies and procedures for review, approval or ratification of relationships or transactions with related persons are set forth in our:

Our Code of Ethics applies to all of our directors and employees. Review and approval of potential conflicts of interest involving our directors, executive officers or other principal officers may only be conducted by our Board of Directors. A copy of the Company’s Code of Ethics is available through the Investors/Governance/Governance Documents section of the Company’s website located at www.kimcorealty.com and is available in print to any stockholder who requests it.

Our Corporate Governance Guidelines provide that the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee will review annually the relationships that each director has with the Company (either directly or as a partner, stockholder or officer of an organization that has a relationship with the Company), in the course of making independence determinations under the Company’s categorical independence standards for directors and the NYSE listing standards. Directors are expected to avoid any action, position or interest that conflicts with the interests of the Company or gives the appearance of a conflict. If an actual or potential conflict of interest develops, the director should immediately report the matter to the Chairman of the Board of Directors. Any significant conflict must be resolved or the director should resign. If a director has a personal interest in a matter before the Board of Directors, the director will disclose the interest to the Board of Directors, excuse himself or herself from discussion on the matter and not vote on the matter. The Corporate Governance Guidelines further provide that the Board of Directors is responsible for reviewing and, where appropriate, approving major changes in and determinations