View:

Download DOC

Download PDF

Download XLS

Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

SCHEDULE 14A

Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of

the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

Filed by the Registrant   x                        Filed by a Party other than the Registrant   ¨

Check the appropriate box:

Westar Energy, Inc.

(Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter)

(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if other than the Registrant)

Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box):

Table of Contents

April 1, 2016

Dear Fellow Shareholder:

We cordially invite you to the 2016 Annual Meeting of Shareholders of Westar Energy, Inc. The meeting is at 10:00 a.m., Central Daylight Saving Time, on Thursday, May 19, 2016, in the Shawnee Room at the Maner Conference Center located at the southeast corner of 17^th Street and Western Avenue in Topeka, Kansas 66612.

At the meeting, we will elect three members of our board of directors and vote on the other matters set forth in the enclosed notice of the meeting and proxy statement. Upon the completion of the business matters to be conducted at the annual meeting, we will report on our business and our plans for the future.

YOUR VOTE IS IMPORTANT. We urge you to read this proxy statement carefully. Whether or not you plan to attend the annual meeting, please take time to vote as soon as possible using the voting procedures for the Internet or by telephone or by completing and mailing the enclosed proxy card.

If you plan to attend the meeting, please check the appropriate box when voting so we may plan appropriately.

We extend our thanks for your continued investment in Westar Energy, Inc. and look forward to seeing you at the annual meeting.

Sincerely,
CHARLES Q. CHANDLER IV Chairman of the Board		MARK A. RUELLE President and Chief Executive Officer

Table of Contents

HOW TO VOTE

There are four ways you may vote, as explained in the detailed instructions on your proxy card.

If you vote on the Internet or by telephone, you do not need to return your proxy card. Please see the enclosed proxy card for more detailed information on how to vote your shares.

ANNUAL MEETING ADMISSION

Either an admission ticket or proof of ownership of Westar Energy stock must be presented in order to be admitted to the annual meeting. You may also be asked to present valid picture identification. If you are a shareholder of record, your admission ticket is attached to your proxy card. If your shares are held in the name of a bank, broker or other holder of record, you must bring a brokerage statement or other proof evidencing your ownership on March 21, 2016 with you to the annual meeting, or you may request an admission ticket in advance by contacting Continental Stock Transfer and Trust Company at 917-262-2373 or by email at proxy@continentalstock.com. Each shareholder may be accompanied by one guest. If you would like directions to the annual meeting location, please contact Continental Stock Transfer and Trust Company.

REDUCE MAILING COSTS

If you share the same last name with other shareholders living in your household, you can help us reduce printing and mailing costs by electing to receive only one copy of our annual report and proxy statement. Please see “Questions and Answers about the Meeting and Voting” below for more information about “householding.” Additionally, shareholders may help us to reduce printing and mailing costs further by electing to access our proxy materials and annual report via the Internet. If you select this option, you will receive information on how to access these materials along with your proxy card. Please indicate your consent to accessing future proxy materials via the Internet by checking the appropriate box on your proxy card or contacting Continental Stock Transfer and Trust Company at 917-262-2373 or by email at proxy@continentalstock.com.

Table of Contents

WESTAR ENERGY, INC.

818 South Kansas Avenue

Topeka, Kansas 66612

NOTICE OF ANNUAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS

Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials

For the Shareholders Meeting to be Held on May 19, 2016.

The Proxy Statement and our Annual Report to Shareholders for the year ended December 31, 2015 that accompany this Notice are available for viewing via the Internet at www.cstproxy.com/westarenergy/2016

Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

i

Table of Contents

ii

Table of Contents

PROXY STATEMENT

The board of directors of Westar Energy, Inc. (the “Company”) is soliciting proxies for the 2016 Annual Meeting of Shareholders. This proxy statement and the accompanying proxy card contain information about the items you will vote on at the annual meeting. This proxy statement and the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015 are first being mailed or made available on the Internet on or about April 1, 2016.

QUESTIONS AND ANSWERS ABOUT THE MEETING AND VOTING

Who may vote and how many votes do I have?

Shareholders of record at the close of business on March 21, 2016 may vote. As of that date there were outstanding and entitled to vote 141,628,529 shares of our common stock. For each matter presented for vote, you have one vote for each share you own.

How do proxies work?

The board of directors is asking for your proxy. Giving your proxy means you authorize the persons named as proxies to vote your shares at the meeting in the manner you direct. You may vote for all, some or none of our director nominees. If you sign and return the proxy card but do not specify how to vote, the persons named as proxies will vote your shares as follows:

How do I vote?

If you were a shareholder of record on March 21, 2016, there are four ways you may vote, as explained in the detailed instructions on your proxy card. You may:

Please follow the instructions on the proxy card or notice for voting by one of these methods. Please help us save time and postage costs by voting through the Internet or by telephone. If your shares are held by a broker or other nominee, you will receive instructions from the broker or other nominee that you must follow in order to vote your shares. Whether you plan to attend the meeting or not, we encourage you to vote by Internet, telephone or proxy as soon as possible.

Will anyone at the Company know how I vote?

Continental Stock Transfer and Trust Company will count the votes and act as the inspector of election for the annual meeting. Your individual vote will be kept confidential from our directors, officers and employees. If you write opinions or comments on your proxy card, a copy of your proxy card, excluding your voting instructions, will be sent to us so that we can respond, if appropriate, to your comment or question.

1

Table of Contents

What does it mean if I receive more than one proxy card or notice?

You may receive more than one proxy card or notice depending on how you hold your shares and how your shares are registered. If you hold shares through someone else, such as a bank or broker, you may also receive proxy materials from them asking how you want to vote. If you participate in our Direct Stock Purchase Plan or our Employees’ 401(k) Savings Plan (“401(k) Plan”) and the account names are exactly the same on each, you will receive one proxy card or notice for all shares of common stock held in or credited to your accounts as of the record date. If the names on your accounts are different, you will receive more than one proxy card or notice. We encourage you to have all accounts registered in the same name and address whenever possible. You can do this by contacting Continental Stock Transfer and Trust Company at 917-262-2373 or by email at proxy@continentalstock.com.

For shareholders in the 401(k) Plan, the proxy card or notice covers all shares for which the undersigned has the right to give voting instructions to Vanguard Fiduciary Trust Company, trustee of the 401(k) Plan. The proxy card, when properly executed, will be voted as directed. If voting instructions are not received by the proxy tabulator by 11:59 P.M. on May 16, 2016, your shares will not be voted.

If you receive more than one proxy card or notice, we encourage you to complete and return all proxy cards delivered to you to vote all shares registered to you.

Can I change my vote?

You can revoke a proxy before the time for voting at the annual meeting in several ways:

You may also revoke your proxy by voting in person at the annual meeting.

Who can attend the annual meeting?

All shareholders who owned shares at the close of business on March 21, 2016, or their duly appointed proxies, may attend the meeting. Each shareholder may be accompanied by one guest. Registration will begin at 8:45 a.m., and seating will begin at 9:00 a.m. If you attend, you may be asked to present valid picture identification, such as a driver’s license or passport. To avoid delays in gaining admittance to the meeting, registered shareholders should bring the “Admission Ticket” found at the top of the proxy card.

Please note that if you hold your shares in “street name” (through a broker or other nominee), you will need to bring a copy of a brokerage statement reflecting your Westar Energy ownership on March 21, 2016, and check in at the registration table at the meeting.

What constitutes a “quorum” for the meeting?

A quorum is necessary to conduct business at the annual meeting. A quorum requires the presence, in person or by proxy, of the holders of a majority of the outstanding shares entitled to vote at the meeting. When a routine matter is to be voted upon at the meeting, such as the ratification of our independent registered public accounting firm, we count broker “non-votes” and abstentions as present for purposes of determining whether a quorum is present at the meeting.

What is a broker “non-vote”?

If a broker holds your shares in street name and you fail to provide voting instructions to your broker, the broker has the discretion to vote your shares on routine matters, such as ratification of our independent registered public accounting firm, but not on non-routine matters, such as the election of the director nominees or certain

2

Table of Contents

shareholder proposals. Broker “non-votes” on non-routine matters occur when you fail to provide voting instructions to your broker for shares you hold through your broker. As explained below (see, “How many votes are needed?”), broker “non-votes” do not count as votes cast. As a consequence, it is important that you provide voting instructions to your broker for shares you hold through your broker.

How many votes are needed?

Assuming a quorum is present, in an uncontested election, directors are elected by a majority of the votes cast under our majority voting policy. Under our majority voting policy, in an uncontested election, if a director nominee does not receive a majority of the votes cast in the election (that is, the director nominee receives a greater number of “withhold” votes than “for” votes), the director nominee is required to tender his or her resignation for consideration by the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee and our board of directors. Please see “Corporate Governance Matters—Majority Vote Policy” below for further details on our majority voting policy. Abstentions and broker “non-votes” have no effect on the election of directors because they do not count as votes cast.

The outcome of the vote on compensation paid by the Company to its named executive officers (Item 2) will not be binding on the board of directors. The board of directors, in the exercise of its fiduciary duties, will consider the outcome of the advisory vote in determining how to proceed following such vote.

The affirmative vote of the majority of the shares of common stock present in person or represented by proxy and entitled to vote on the item will be deemed to approve, on an advisory basis, the compensation of our named executive officers (Item 2), and will be required to ratify the selection of the independent accounting firm (Item 3) and to approve the shareholder proposal (Item 5). If you hold your shares in your own name and abstain from voting on these matters, your abstention will have the same effect as a negative vote for Items 2, 3 and 5.

The affirmative vote of the majority of the votes cast on the proposal, provided that the total votes cast on the proposal represent over 50% of the voting power of the total outstanding shares of stock, are required to approve the amendment to our Long Term Incentive and Share Award Plan (the “LTISAP”) and to re-approve the performance criteria for awards made under the plan (Item 4). Broker non-votes do not count as votes cast but do count for purposes of calculating voting power of the total outstanding shares of stock. Thus, abstentions have the same effect as a vote “against” the amendment, and abstentions and broker non-votes could impair approval of the proposal.

If you hold your shares through a broker and you do not instruct the broker on how to vote, your broker may exercise its discretionary authority to vote your shares regarding Item 3, but cannot exercise its discretionary authority to vote your shares regarding any other item.

Who pays for the solicitation of proxies?

We pay the cost of soliciting proxies. We retained D.F. King & Co., Inc. to assist with the solicitation for an estimated fee of $9,500, plus reasonable out-of-pocket expenses. We will reimburse brokerage firms and other custodians, nominees and fiduciaries for their reasonable out-of-pocket expenses for sending proxy materials to shareholders. In addition to the use of the mail, proxies may be solicited personally or by telephone or electronic media by our employees.

What is “householding”?

Householding is a procedure that permits us, with your prior permission, to send a single set of our annual report and proxy statement, or a single Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials, to any household at which two or more shareholders reside. Each shareholder will continue to receive a separate proxy card for voting and attendance purposes. Householding reduces the volume of duplicate information you receive, as well as our expenses. Please contact Continental Stock Transfer and Trust Company at 17 Battery Place, 8th Floor, New York NY 10004, or by phone at 917-262-2373 or by email at proxy@continentalstock.com if you would like to participate in householding, or if you participate in householding and wish to receive separate copies of the materials.

3

Table of Contents

Can I elect to access future proxy materials via the Internet?

Shareholders who receive a printed copy of our proxy materials can help us reduce printing and mailing costs by electing to access future proxy materials and annual reports via the Internet. If you have received a printed copy of our proxy materials, please indicate your consent to accessing our proxy materials and annual reports via the Internet by contacting Continental Stock Transfer and Trust Company at 917-262-2373 or by email at proxy@continentalstock.com.

4

Table of Contents

ITEM 1 ON THE PROXY CARD

ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

Directors and Nominees for Election as Directors

Our articles of incorporation provide that the board of directors will have no less than seven nor more than fifteen directors, as determined from time to time by the board of directors. Our board of directors currently consists of nine directors divided into three classes (Class I, Class II and Class III), with the term of office of each class ending in successive years. At each annual meeting of shareholders, the directors constituting one class are elected for a three-year term. The terms of the directors in Class II expire with this meeting.

The board of directors, acting upon the unanimous recommendation of its Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, has unanimously nominated Richard L. Hawley, B. Anthony Isaac and S. Carl Soderstrom, Jr. for election as Class II directors. Each nominee has consented to being named as a nominee and to serve if elected. While it is not expected that any of the nominees will be unable or unwilling to serve, if for any reason one or more are unable or unwilling to do so, the proxies will be voted for substitute nominees selected by our board of directors or the board of directors may reduce the number of directors.

Director Nominees

Set forth below are the names, ages and backgrounds of the three director nominees and the other directors continuing in office, as well as the specific experiences, qualifications, attributes and skills that led our board of directors to conclude that these individuals should serve or continue serving as directors of the Company at this time.

Class II—Term Expiring in 2016

Richard L. Hawley, age 66, has served as our director since October of 2011. Mr. Hawley has over forty years of business experience, including twelve years as a chief financial officer within the electric and gas utility industries and fourteen years as a partner with an international accounting firm. From December of 2003 until December of 2011, Mr. Hawley was executive vice president and chief financial officer of Nicor, Inc. and its regulated natural gas distribution utility subsidiary, Northern Illinois Gas Company, each located in Naperville, Illinois. From 1998 until 2002, Mr. Hawley was vice president and chief financial officer of Puget Energy, Inc. and its regulated electric and natural gas distribution utility subsidiary, Puget Sound Energy, Inc., each located in Bellevue, Washington. Prior to that, Mr. Hawley was an audit partner with Coopers & Lybrand (now PricewaterhouseCoopers), an international accounting firm, from 1984 to 1998 and he also served in various other positions with that firm from 1973 to 1984. His audit experience included a significant emphasis on utility industry clients. From 2003 to 2013, Mr. Hawley was a director, chairman of the audit committee and member of the nominating and corporate governance committee of Fisher Communications, Inc., a media company located in Seattle, Washington. Mr. Hawley’s qualifications to serve as our director include his work experience as a chief financial officer and audit partner, his years of experience within the electric and gas utility industries and his experience as a director of a public company.

B. Anthony Isaac, age 63, has served as our director since December of 2003. Mr. Isaac has thirty-nine years of business experience, thirty-five of which have been spent in leadership positions within the hotel industry. From 2011 until April of 2015, Mr. Isaac was Senior Vice President and Head of Select Service Strategy and Development of Hyatt Hotels Corporation, a global hotel management, franchising, ownership and development company based in Chicago, Illinois with properties worldwide. From 2000 until 2011, Mr. Isaac was president of LodgeWorks, L.P., a hotel management and development company based in Wichita, Kansas, which was acquired by Hyatt Hotels Corporation in 2011. Prior to 2000, Mr. Isaac held management positions with Wyndham International, Summerfield Hotel Corporation, Residence Inn Company and the Marriott Corporation. Mr. Isaac is currently vice chairman of the board and a member of the compensation and finance committees of Via Christi Health System in Wichita, Kansas. Mr. Isaac was formerly chairman of the board and

5

Table of Contents

chairman of the compensation, finance and strategic planning committees of The Via Christi Wichita Regional Health Network, a subsidiary of Via Christi Health System, and a trustee of Wichita Collegiate School, located in Wichita, Kansas. Mr. Isaac’s qualifications to serve as our director include his extensive leadership experience both as the chief executive officer of a privately-held company and as an executive with other large companies in the hotel industry, and his substantial experience with strategic planning and financial matters.

S. Carl Soderstrom, Jr., age 62, has served as our director since July of 2010. Mr. Soderstrom previously served as senior vice president and chief financial officer for ArvinMeritor, an automotive and commercial vehicle components manufacturer based in Troy, Michigan. Mr. Soderstrom brings over twenty-eight years of experience in operations, finance, engineering and product development in the automotive and manufacturing industries to our board of directors. Mr. Soderstrom’s experience includes executive and management positions at Rockwell International, General Electric Company and Emerson Electric. Mr. Soderstrom is a director, chairman of the audit committee and a member of the nominating and corporate governance committee of FreightCar America, Inc., a railcar manufacturing company located in Chicago, Illinois. Mr. Soderstrom is also a director, chairman of the corporate governance committee and member of the audit review committee of Lydall, Inc., a technology and manufacturing company headquartered in Manchester, Connecticut. Mr. Soderstrom’s qualifications to serve as our director include his substantial financial expertise, his operations and engineering knowledge from his experience at other large public companies and his substantial experience serving as a director of other public companies.

Continuing Directors

Class III—Term Expiring in 2017

Mollie H. Carter, age 53, has served as our director since June of 2003. Ms. Carter has twenty-nine years of business experience, including twenty years as a chief executive of a Kansas based financial institution. Ms. Carter has been president and chief executive officer of Sunflower Bank, N.A. since 2005, and of its holding company, Sunflower Financial, Inc. (formerly Sunflower Banks, Inc.), since 1996. Ms. Carter is also a director of Sunflower Financial, Inc. and chairman of the board of Sunflower Bank, N.A. These entities are family owned financial institutions with headquarters in Salina, Kansas. Ms. Carter is also president of Star A, Inc., and has held officer positions with Star A., Inc. since 1997. Star A, Inc. is a family owned company with Kansas agricultural and other investment interests. Prior to holding these positions, Ms. Carter served ten years as a senior investment officer for John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance Company. In addition, Ms. Carter has served as a director of Archer-Daniels-Midland Company since 1996 and is a member of the compensation and nominating and corporate governance committees, and she previously served as a director of Premium Standard Farms, Inc., a large processor of pork products. Ms. Carter is also a member of the Kansas Governor’s Council of Economic Advisors, a director of the Kansas Health Foundation and she previously served as a director of Foley Equipment Company, a private company. Ms. Carter’s qualifications to serve as our director include her substantial leadership experience as a chief executive officer, her financial expertise and her significant experience serving as a director of a large public company.

Jerry B. Farley, age 69, has served as our director since October of 2004. Mr. Farley has forty-four years of experience in the administration of the academic, business and fiscal operations of universities. Since 1997, Mr. Farley has been president of Washburn University located in Topeka, Kansas. Prior to that position, Mr. Farley worked in executive positions for the University of Oklahoma and Oklahoma State University. Mr. Farley has also been a Certified Public Accountant since 1972 and, although he has not practiced public accounting, his business responsibilities have included all aspects of financial management and reporting at three large public universities. Mr. Farley is a director and member of the audit and trust committees of CoreFirst Bank and Trust in Topeka, Kansas, and a director and member of the audit and governance committees of Guggenheim Investors, formerly The Security Group of Mutual Funds, also located in Topeka, Kansas. Mr. Farley also serves as a director for various non-profit and charitable organizations. Mr. Farley’s qualifications to serve as our director include his substantial leadership experience as the president of a public university, his extensive knowledge of the administration, financial and operational management of large organizations and his significant experience serving as a director of institutions in the financial industry.

6

Table of Contents

Mark A. Ruelle, age 54, has served as our director and president since May of 2011 and as our chief executive officer since August of 2011. Mr. Ruelle brings twenty-nine years of business leadership experience to the board of directors. From 2003 to 2011, Mr. Ruelle was our executive vice president and chief financial officer. In that role, he had responsibility for large construction projects, information technology and human resources in addition to accounting, finance and investor relations. Between 1997 and 2002, Mr. Ruelle served in various executive positions at Sierra Pacific Resources, Inc., the owner of the largest electric utilities in Nevada. While there, Mr. Ruelle served four years as senior vice president and chief financial officer and one year as president of its Nevada Power Company unit. From 1986 to 1997, Mr. Ruelle worked for us in various executive positions. Mr. Ruelle was also a director and member of the audit, compensation and nominating and corporate governance committees of US BioEnergy Corporation from 2006 to 2008. Mr. Ruelle currently serves as a director, chairman of the nominating and governance committee and member of the audit committee of Houston Wire & Cable Company, a distributor of electrical wire and cable products and services based in Houston, Texas. Mr. Ruelle also serves as vice chairman of the Electricity Information Sharing and Analysis Center, an information exchange for the electricity sector that was formed in collaboration with the Department of Energy and the Electricity Sector Coordinating Council, as a member of the Department of Homeland Security Advisory Council, as a director the Edison Electric Institute, an association of shareholder owned electric companies, as a board member of GO Topeka Economic Partnership, a local civic organization, as a trustee for the Stormont-Vail Foundation, a non-profit organization and was formerly an advisory board member for a privately-held sports apparel concern located in Kansas. Mr. Ruelle’s qualifications to serve as our director include his leadership experience, his financial expertise and his extensive utility industry experience.

Class I—Term Expiring in 2018

Charles Q. Chandler IV, age 62, has served as our director since December of 1999 and chairman of our board of directors since December of 2002. Mr. Chandler has thirty-nine years of leadership experience with large, regional financial institutions. Mr. Chandler has been chief executive officer of INTRUST Bank, N.A. since 1996 (as well as president from 1996 to 2013) and president and chief executive officer of INTRUST Financial Corporation since 1990 and 2009, respectively. Mr. Chandler is also chairman of the board of both INTRUST Bank, N.A. and INTRUST Financial Corporation. Both companies are large regional financial institutions headquartered in Wichita, Kansas. Prior to this time period, Mr. Chandler spent thirteen years in other officer positions within those institutions. Mr. Chandler is also a director of Fidelity State Bank and Trust Company in Topeka, Kansas, First Bank of Newton in Newton, Kansas, HCA Wesley Medical Center in Wichita, Kansas, as well as several non-profit organizations. Mr. Chandler also served previously as a director of the First National Bank of Pratt, Kansas and New Horizons Foundation. Mr. Chandler’s qualifications to serve as our chairman of the board include his extensive leadership experience as a chief executive officer, his financial expertise and his knowledge of the business community in Wichita, Kansas, the largest city we serve.

R. A. Edwards III, age 70, has served as our director since October of 2001. Mr. Edwards has forty-one years of leadership experience with locally-based financial institutions. Mr. Edwards is chairman of the board of First National Bank of Hutchinson and was its president and chief executive officer from 1981 to 2010. Mr. Edwards is also a director and president of First Kansas Bancshares of Hutchinson, the parent corporation of First National Bank of Hutchinson. Mr. Edwards served as vice president of First Kansas Bancshares from 1986 to 2011. Both companies are financial institutions located in Hutchinson, Kansas. Mr. Edwards spent six years in executive positions and thirty-eight years as a director, including nine years as chairman of the board, with Douglas County Bank, a financial institution located in Lawrence, Kansas. Mr. Edwards also serves as chairman of the board and a member of the governance committee of Data Center, Inc., a bank technology company located in Hutchinson, Kansas, a director and member of the audit committee of Kansas Natural Gas, a private company located in Hays, Kansas, a director of Mitchelhill Seed Company, a private company located in Missouri, and a director or trustee of several non-profit organizations and foundations. Mr. Edwards’ qualifications to serve as our director include his substantial leadership experience as a chief executive officer and his financial expertise.

7

Table of Contents

Sandra A.J. Lawrence, age 58, has served as our director since October of 2004. Ms. Lawrence brings thirty-seven years of varied business experience to her position as our director. Since December of 2005, Ms. Lawrence has been executive vice president and chief financial officer of Children’s Mercy Hospital located in Kansas City, Missouri. From December of 2004 until March of 2005, Ms. Lawrence was senior vice president and treasurer, and from March of 2005 until December of 2005, she was senior vice president and chief financial officer, of MRI Global (formerly Midwest Research Institute), an independent, non-profit, contract research organization located in Kansas City, Missouri. Prior to that Ms. Lawrence spent twenty-six years in professional or management positions in the architecture, real estate, financial services, packaging, and medical research industries. Ms. Lawrence is a director of Turn the Page KC, a past director (and past Chairman of the Board) of the Greater Kansas City Community Foundation, a former director (and former Chairman of the Board) of the Kansas BioScience Authority, an organization dedicated to the advancement of Kansas’ leadership in bioscience, a director and chair of the audit committee and member of the investment committee of the Hall Family Foundation, a private charitable organization, and a director and member of the investment committee of the Nelson-Atkins Museum, located in Kansas City, Missouri. Ms. Lawrence was an appointee to the Mayor’s Google Task Force in Kansas City, Missouri and she also served on The Kansas City Market Board of US Bank and as a director of Children’s Mercy Hospital, J.E. Dunn Construction Group, Inc., and numerous other private, non-profit and civic organizations. Ms. Lawrence’s qualifications to serve as our director include her substantial financial expertise and her extensive service as a director with public and private organizations.

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDS THAT YOU VOTE IN FAVOR OF EACH OF THE ABOVE NOMINEES.

Board of Directors’ Responsibilities

The board of directors’ primary responsibility is to seek to maximize long-term shareholder value. The board of directors selects senior management, monitors management’s and the Company’s performance and provides advice and counsel to management. Among other things, at least annually, the board of directors reviews our business strategy and approves our budget. In fulfilling the board of directors’ responsibilities, directors have full access to management, internal and external auditors and outside advisers.

Corporate Governance Matters

General.    The board of directors and management are committed to maintaining strong corporate governance practices that allocate rights and responsibilities among the board of directors, management and our shareholders in a manner that benefits the long-term interests of our shareholders. Accordingly, our corporate governance practices are designed not just to satisfy regulatory and stock exchange requirements, but also to provide for effective oversight and management of the Company.

The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee engages in a regular process of reviewing our corporate governance practices, including comparing our practices with those recommended by various corporate governance authorities, the expectations of our shareholders and the practices of other leading public companies. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee also regularly reviews our corporate governance practices in light of proposed and adopted laws and regulations, including the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”), the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the “Sarbanes-Oxley Act”), the rules of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) and the rules and listing standards of the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”).

Corporate Governance Guidelines and Independence.    The board of directors has adopted Corporate Governance Guidelines, which provide a framework for our corporate governance initiatives and cover topics including, but not limited to, board and committee composition, director compensation and director qualifications. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee is responsible for overseeing and reviewing the Corporate Governance Guidelines and reporting and recommending to the board of directors any changes to the Corporate Governance Guidelines. Our Corporate Governance Guidelines are available from our Corporate Secretary and on our Internet website at www.westarenergy.com.

8

Table of Contents

Our Corporate Governance Guidelines require that a majority of the board of directors must meet the independence standards established by the NYSE. The board of directors has determined that each member of the board of directors, except Mr. Ruelle, is independent.

In making that determination, the board of directors applied the independence standards established by the NYSE and, if applicable, the following categorical standards. These categorical standards are included in our Corporate Governance Guidelines and are based on the independence standards established by the NYSE. In addition, the board of directors considered any other relevant facts and circumstances.

Any director who meets the following criteria is presumed to be independent (except for purposes of service on certain of the committees of the board of directors, as described below) absent an affirmative determination to the contrary by the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee:

Certain Relationships with Directors.    In determining that each of the members of our board of directors other than Mr. Ruelle is independent, the board considered and determined that the relationships described below are not material and do not cause the directors to fail to satisfy the standards for independence established by the NYSE. Mr. Chandler holds positions as a director and officer of INTRUST Bank, which has issued letters of credit related to the workers compensation program for the Wolf Creek nuclear power plant in which we have a 47% ownership interest.

Board Leadership.    As set forth in our Corporate Governance Guidelines, the board of directors believes it is important to retain its flexibility to allocate the responsibilities of the offices of the chairman of the board and chief executive officer in any way that is in the best interests of the Company. These roles are currently separate as has been the case since 2003. The board of directors believes that separation provides, at present, the best balance of these important responsibilities with the chairman of the board directing board operations and leading the board in its oversight of management, and the chief executive officer focusing on developing and implementing the strategy approved by the board and managing the Company’s day-to-day business.

Board’s Role in Risk Oversight.    Our board of directors recognizes that it has ultimate responsibility for oversight of the Company’s enterprise risk management practices. This responsibility has not been delegated to one of our standing board committees. Rather, each board committee helps oversee risk in areas over which it has responsibility. Management is responsible for developing and implementing appropriate risk management practices on a day-to-day basis. The full board of directors receives an annual report from management of key risks. Management provides in-depth reports on risks the board of directors indicates it wishes to receive additional information about, as well as other periodic updates on various risks for the Company and the electric utility industry.

9

Table of Contents

Policies and Procedures for Approval of Related Person Transactions.     In February 2007, our board of directors formally adopted a policy with respect to related person transactions to document procedures where such transactions are reviewed, approved or ratified. The policy applies to any transaction in which the Company is a participant and any related person has a direct or indirect material interest and the amount involved exceeds $120,000. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee is responsible for reviewing, approving and ratifying any related person transaction. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee intends to approve only those related person transactions that are in, or are not inconsistent with, the best interests of the Company and its shareholders. There were no related person transactions in 2015. The policy is available, without charge, from our Corporate Secretary and made available on our Internet website at www.westarenergy.com.

Communications with Directors.    You may contact our board of directors, a committee of our board of directors, or an individual director by writing to them at Westar Energy, Inc., 818 S. Kansas Avenue, Topeka, Kansas 66612, Attention: Corporate Secretary. All communications will be compiled by the Corporate Secretary and submitted to the board of directors, the chairman of the appropriate committee of the board of directors or an individual director, as applicable. Communications that are unrelated to the duties and responsibilities of the board of directors will not be distributed to the directors, but will be available to any director upon request. The Corporate Secretary will take additional action or respond to letters in accordance with instructions from the relevant director.

Majority Voting Policy.    In October 2006, our board of directors adopted a majority voting policy, included in our Corporate Governance Guidelines, requiring director nominees to receive a majority of the votes cast (that is, the nominees receive more “for” votes than “withhold” votes) with respect to such director in an uncontested election. If an incumbent director in an uncontested election does not receive a majority of the votes cast, he or she must tender a resignation promptly following certification of the stockholder vote. Our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee will act on an expedited basis to determine whether to accept the director’s resignation and will submit its recommendation for prompt consideration by the board of directors. The board of directors will act on the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee’s recommendation and publicly disclose its decision and the rationale behind the decision within 90 days following certification of the stockholder vote. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee in making its recommendation, and the board of directors in making its decision, may each consider any factors or other information that it considers appropriate and relevant.

Any director who tenders his or her resignation pursuant to this policy will not participate in the consideration of it by either the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee or the board of directors. If an incumbent director’s resignation is not accepted, he or she will continue to serve until the next annual meeting and until his or her successor is duly elected, or his or her earlier resignation or removal. Pursuant to the policy, the board of directors will nominate for directors only individuals who agree to comply with the policy.

Code of Ethics.    We have adopted a code of ethics that applies to all of our directors, officers and employees, including our chief executive officer, chief financial officer and controller. Our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics is available, without charge, from our Corporate Secretary and made available on our Internet website at www.westarenergy.com. We intend to post on our Internet website any amendments to, or waivers from, our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics that apply to our chief executive officer, chief financial officer or controller within five business days of the date of the amendment or waiver.

Board Meetings and Committees of the Board of Directors

Board Meetings.    Our board of directors held six meetings including one held in conjunction with an annual strategic planning meeting during 2015. Each director attended at least 75% of the total number of board and committee meetings held while he or she served as a director or member of a standing committee in 2015. All of the directors who served on the board at the time of the 2015 Annual Meeting of Shareholders attended the meeting. All nominees and continuing directors are encouraged to attend the annual meetings of shareholders.

10

Table of Contents

Executive Sessions.    Executive sessions, or meetings of our non-employee directors without management present, are held at regularly scheduled meetings of the board of directors. Each of these sessions is presided over by Mr. Chandler. Our standing committees also meet periodically in executive sessions presided over by the chairman of the committee.

We have four standing committees of the board of directors: the Audit Committee, the Compensation Committee, the Finance Committee and the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. The charter for each committee is available, without charge, from our Corporate Secretary and is available on our Internet website at www.westarenergy.com. The chairman of each committee is recommended by the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee and approved by the board of directors.

BOARD OF DIRECTORS COMMITTEE ASSIGNMENTS

Audit Committee.    The committee oversees the integrity of our financial statements and the performance of our internal audit and compliance function, reviews our policies and practices with respect to risk assessment and risk management, including discussing with management our major financial risk exposures and the steps that have been taken to monitor and control such exposures, and serves as our “qualified legal compliance committee” and in that role reviews any report made directly, or otherwise made known, to the committee by an attorney representing our company or our subsidiaries of a material violation of federal or state law. The committee has the sole responsibility for the retention, compensation and oversight of the firm of independent registered public accountants that audits our financial statements and for approving non-audit services performed by our independent registered public accountants. The committee reviews with the independent registered public accountants the scope and results of their audits, as well as our accounting procedures, internal controls and accounting and financial reporting policies and practices, and makes reports and recommendations to the board of directors as it deems appropriate. The committee also determines whether management has established a system to promote the accuracy and completeness of our financial statements and other publicly disclosed information. No member of the committee serves on the audit committee of more than three public companies. The authority and responsibilities of the committee are more fully set forth in the Audit Committee Charter.

The chairman of the committee is Mr. Hawley. The other members of the committee are Mr. Edwards, Mr. Farley and Mr. Soderstrom. Mr. Morrissey was chairman of the committee until his retirement on May 21, 2015. The board of directors has determined that each of the members of the committee meets the experience and independence requirements of the rules of the NYSE. The board of directors has determined that one member of

11

Table of Contents

the committee possesses the qualifications of an audit committee financial expert as determined under Regulation S-K Item 407(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and has designated Mr. Hawley as that expert.

Compensation Committee.    The committee performs the following functions with respect to compensation for our executive officers, including our named executive officers, as directed by the committee’s charter:

The charter vests the committee with sole authority to retain and terminate compensation consultants to assist the committee in evaluating and determining executive compensation and fulfilling its other responsibilities. This includes authority to approve all such consultants’ fees and other retention terms. The charter permits the committee to delegate, to one or more of our officers, the authority to make grants of restricted share units to officers who do not have policy making responsibilities. The charter also permits the committee to delegate its authority generally to subcommittees or to the chairman when the committee deems appropriate and in the best interests of the Company.

The committee’s charter requires approval of the committee’s recommendation about compensation for the chief executive officer by the full board of directors. To obtain approval, Ms. Carter reports on the committee’s recommendations, as well as other matters the committee is addressing, at meetings of the board of directors. She generally reports when the board meets in executive session with only the non-employee directors present. Mr. Chandler excuses Mr. Ruelle when the board is discussing his compensation and at other times that Mr. Chandler considers appropriate so that board members are able to openly discuss officer compensation. A representative of our outside legal counsel for corporate governance matters attends some of these executive sessions. In connection with Ms. Carter’s reports, the board of directors generally receives, or is provided access to, the same market information for compensation of executive officers that is received by the committee.

Ms. Carter is the chairman of the committee. The other members of the committee are Mr. Hawley, Mr. Isaac and Ms. Lawrence. Mr. Morrissey was a member of the committee until his retirement on May 21, 2015. The board of directors has determined that each of the members of the committee meets the independence requirements of the rules of the NYSE, and each member of the committee is a “non-employee director” for

12

Table of Contents

purposes of the Exchange Act and an “outside director” for purposes of Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code. Because of their diverse skills and experiences, we believe the committee members are well-qualified to serve on the committee. Ms. Carter serves on the compensation/succession committee of Archer-Daniels-Midland Company. Ms. Carter, Mr. Hawley, Mr. Isaac and Ms. Lawrence have extensive experience with executive compensation matters as a result of their past and current employment as senior executives of substantial businesses. More detailed information regarding the committee’s processes and procedures is provided under “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” below.

Finance Committee.    The committee assists us in effectively managing our financial affairs, including the establishment of appropriate capital and operating budgets, financial forecasts and dividend policies. The committee also assists in evaluating financial and other business transactions. The authority and responsibilities of the committee are more fully set forth in the Finance Committee Charter.

The chairman of the committee is Mr. Isaac. The other members of the committee are Ms. Carter and Mr. Soderstrom.

Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee.    The committee identifies, reviews and recommends nominees for election to our board of directors, recommends directors for appointment to committees, recommends procedures through which director independence may be determined, oversees the evaluation of director performance and compensation, develops and recommends corporate governance guidelines to the board of directors and oversees compliance with our Corporate Governance Guidelines and our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics. The authority and responsibilities of the committee are more fully set forth in the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee Charter.

The committee considers many attributes in evaluating prospective candidates or current directors for nomination or re-nomination to the board of directors including, among others, experience as a chief executive officer, utility or regulated industries experience, financial or accounting skills or oversight experience, legislative or regulatory experience, other public company experience and involvement in community affairs. The committee periodically assesses the current composition of the board of directors and whether the background, knowledge, experience and diversity of the current members are sufficient to effectively oversee our affairs. To assist in this assessment, the committee maintains an inventory of the competencies and qualifications of each director. In light of this assessment the committee considers the personal characteristics and background of prospective candidates or current directors, including, among other factors, their character, reputation for personal integrity and adherence to the highest ethical standards, business acumen and judgment and senior leadership experience with a record of increasing levels of responsibility in business or industry. The prior performance of current directors is considered when evaluating them for re-election.

Although the committee does not have a formal policy with respect to director diversity, the committee recognizes that a board with a diverse set of skills, experiences, specialized knowledge and perspectives will enhance the quality of the board’s deliberations and decisions and best serve the interests of our shareholders, customers, employees and other constituencies. In evaluating the board’s diversity, the committee may consider the board’s diversity in its broadest sense, reflecting, but not limited to, age, geography, gender and ethnicity.

The committee may employ an executive search firm from time to time to assist in the identification and recruitment of new directors.

The committee will consider a candidate for director suggested by a shareholder by applying the criteria described above and the independence standards attached as Annex A to our Corporate Governance Guidelines. If nominated, we will identify the candidate and the shareholder (or group of shareholders) recommending the candidate in our next proxy statement. If a shareholder wishes the committee to consider an individual as a candidate for election to the board of directors, the shareholder must submit a proper and timely request as specified in the “Submitting Director Recommendations to the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee” section of this proxy statement.

13

Table of Contents

The chairman of the committee is Ms. Lawrence. The other members of the committee are Mr. Chandler, Mr. Edwards and Mr. Farley. The board of directors has determined that each member of the committee is independent, based on our independence standards and those of the NYSE applicable to determining independence for members of an audit committee.

Non-Employee Director Stock Ownership

In 2015, non-employee directors were encouraged to own a minimum number of shares of our common stock equal to five times the $60,000 annual cash retainer earned by non-employee directors, divided by the closing price of our common stock on the last trading day of the prior year ($41.24). For 2015, the minimum number of shares was 7,275 shares. For 2016, the minimum number of shares is 8,253 shares, based on five times the $70,000 annual cash retainer and the closing price of our common stock on December 31, 2015 ($42.41). The minimum number of shares for the chairman of the board is the same as the number of shares for the other non-employee directors irrespective of the larger stock award made to the chairman of the board. Non-employee directors may accumulate the number of shares necessary to meet the minimum stock ownership level during the first five years after becoming a director. All of our non-employee directors own the minimum number of shares.

We also expect all directors to comply with all federal, state and local laws regarding trading in our securities and disclosing material, non-public information. We have procedures in place to assist directors in complying with these laws.

Board of Directors’ Self-Evaluation

The board of directors conducts a self-evaluation of its performance annually. The evaluation includes a review of the board’s composition, responsibilities, structure, processes and effectiveness. Each committee of the board of directors conducts a similar self-evaluation with respect to such committee.

Director Orientation and Education

Each individual, upon joining the board of directors, is provided with an orientation regarding the role and responsibilities of the board of directors and our business. As part of this orientation, new directors meet with members of our senior management.

The board of directors is also committed to the ongoing education of its members. From time to time, our officers and other managers present and discuss information with the board of directors regarding their respective areas. Moreover, our directors are encouraged to attend no less frequently than every other year, at least one director education program. We reimburse the directors for fees and expenses associated with attending educational programs.

14

Table of Contents

AUDIT COMMITTEE REPORT

The Audit Committee of the board of directors (the “Committee”) is composed entirely of directors who are independent under the NYSE listing standards. In addition, each member has the accounting or related financial management experience required under the NYSE listing standards. Our board of directors has determined that at least one member of the Committee possesses the qualifications of an audit committee financial expert as determined under Regulation S-K Item 407(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and has designated Mr. Hawley as that expert. The Committee operates under a written charter that was last amended on December 10, 2013. A copy of the Committee’s charter is available from the Company’s Corporate Secretary and made available on the Company’s Internet website at www.westarenergy.com. As required by the charter, the Committee reviews and reassesses the charter annually and recommends any changes to the Company’s Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee for approval.

During 2015, at each of its regularly scheduled meetings, the Committee met in separate private sessions with the senior members of the Company’s financial management team, the Company’s chief audit executive and the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm. An executive session with only the members of the Committee in attendance was also held at each of these meetings. The Committee’s agenda is established by the Committee’s chairman and the Company’s chief audit executive.

Under the Committee’s charter, the Committee has the responsibility to, among other tasks, monitor and provide oversight of management’s preparation of the Company’s financial statements and management’s performance in establishing and maintaining an appropriate system of internal controls related to the financial reporting process. The Committee also has the responsibility to review the qualifications, independence and performance of the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm. The independent registered public accounting firm is responsible for auditing the Company’s consolidated financial statements and expressing an opinion as to whether they are presented fairly, in all material respects, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. The independent registered public accounting firm is also responsible for expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. This opinion is based on an audit conducted by the independent registered public accounting firm in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (“PCAOB”). During 2015, the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm was Deloitte & Touche LLP.

In performing its functions, the Committee acts only in an oversight capacity and relies necessarily on the work and assurances provided to it by management and on opinions made to it by the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm in its report. Accordingly, the oversight provided by the Committee should not be considered as providing an independent basis for determining that management has established and maintained appropriate internal controls related to the financial reporting process, that the financial statements have been prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, or that the audit of the Company’s financial statements and effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting by the independent registered public accounting firm has been carried out in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB.

In fulfilling its responsibilities for the year ended December 31, 2015, the Committee has met with the Company’s management, the Company’s chief audit executive and the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm to review the audited financial statements that are included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015, including a discussion of the reasonableness of significant accounting judgments and estimates, the overall quality and adequacy of the Company’s internal controls over financial reporting, and the organizational structure and responsibilities of the Company’s internal audit function.

The Committee and members of the Company’s management discussed with the independent registered public accounting firm matters required to be discussed by the auditor with the Committee and others charged with governance responsibilities under PCAOB Auditing Standard No. 16, Communications with Audit Committees, as amended, and other regulations. The Committee received and discussed with the independent registered public accounting firm its annual written report on the auditor’s independence from the Company and

15

Table of Contents

its management, which is required by applicable requirements of the PCAOB, regarding the firm’s communications with the Committee concerning independence. The Committee considered whether the non-audit services provided by the independent registered public accounting firm to the Company during 2015 were compatible with the auditor’s independence.

The Committee has appointed Deloitte & Touche LLP to act as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm and to examine the Company’s financial statements, and those of its subsidiaries, for the year ending December 31, 2016 and the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2016. The Committee’s selection of Deloitte & Touche LLP took into account the Committee’s review of Deloitte & Touche LLP’s qualifications as the independent registered public accounting firm for the Company. In addition, the review included matters required to be considered under the Securities and Exchange Commission’s rules on auditor independence, including the nature and extent of non-audit services. In the Committee’s business judgment, the nature and extent of non-audit services performed by Deloitte & Touche LLP during 2015 did not impair the firm’s independence.

In reliance on the reviews and discussions detailed in this report and the report of the independent registered public accounting firm, the Committee has recommended to the board of directors, and the board of directors has approved, that the audited financial statements be included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015 and that such report be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

The Audit Committee

Richard L. Hawley, Chairman

R.A. Edwards III

Jerry B. Farley

S. Carl Soderstrom

16

Table of Contents

BENEFICIAL OWNERSHIP OF VOTING SECURITIES

Certain Beneficial Owners of Common Stock

The following table sets forth certain information regarding beneficial ownership of our common stock on February 16, 2016 by each person who is known by us to own beneficially more than 5% of the outstanding shares of common stock.

17

Table of Contents

Security Ownership of Management

The following information relating to the ownership of shares of our common stock is furnished with respect to each of our current directors and named executive officers individually, and with respect to our current directors and executive officers as a group, as of February 16, 2016.

18

Table of Contents

COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

Introduction

This section provides a discussion and analysis of our philosophy and objectives for compensation of our named executive officers, the process we utilize when annually reviewing executive compensation and the elements of our executive compensation program. This discussion is generally applicable to all of our officers. Compensation data for each of our named executive officers appear in the Summary Compensation Table and the other tables appearing immediately after this section.

Executive Summary

Philosophy.    Our executive compensation philosophy is to provide a total compensation opportunity for our officers, as a group, approximating the market median for officers of peer utilities, to reward company and individual officer performance and to strongly align the interests of our officers with those of our shareholders.

Our executive compensation program consists of the following primary elements:

Though customary in our industry and among our peers, we do not pay our officers annual cash incentives. Rather, our compensation program focuses our officers on long-term performance.

Features.    The Compensation Committee (the “Committee”), which administers our executive compensation program, believes the following features of our executive compensation program are especially important in supporting the program’s philosophy and objectives:

19

Table of Contents

Total Shareholder Return Performance.    For compensation purposes, we calculated total shareholder return of approximately 8% in 2015 and approximately 61% for the three-year performance period ended in 2015. On a relative basis, this total shareholder return for the three-year performance period placed us at the 81^st percentile of the total shareholder return of our peer group. As a result, performance-based restricted share units with performance tied to relative total shareholder return for this period paid out at 178.13% of the target level, as shown in the table below. Please see “Executive Officer Compensation Program Structure—Long-Term Incentive Compensation” for information on these calculations, and our 2015 Annual Report on Form 10-K for a more detailed description of our financial results.

Compensation Actions Taken During 2015.    In 2015, the Committee, as part of its annual executive compensation review processes:

Consideration of Results of the 2015 Shareholder Advisory Vote.    In May 2015, we provided our shareholders with an advisory vote on the 2014 named executive officer compensation as disclosed in our 2015 annual meeting proxy statement (a “say-on-pay” vote). Approximately 96% of the votes cast, excluding abstentions and broker non-votes, were in favor of the 2014 compensation of our named executive officers. The Committee regarded this result as evidence of strong shareholder support of our executive compensation philosophy and considered the advisory vote as a factor in its decision to continue our current executive compensation program.

Based on the preference indicated by our shareholders in May 2011, our Board of Directors adopted a policy to hold the “say-on-pay” vote each year at the annual meeting of the shareholders.

Executive Compensation Objectives

In furtherance of our philosophy described above, the principal objectives of our executive compensation program are to:

20

Table of Contents

Overall, our intent is to provide a total compensation opportunity for our officers as a group that approximates the market median compensation opportunity at peer utilities, while also providing the Committee the flexibility to recognize relative individual performance. Because of its emphasis on stock-based compensation and the creation of long-term shareholder value, the Committee believes this compensation program is especially suited to our mission and business as a regulated electric utility where we believe a long-term perspective should guide most of our decisions and plans.

Executive Compensation Process

Compensation Program Review.    To ensure that our compensation policies and practices are consistent with our compensation philosophies and objectives, each year the Committee assesses and analyzes our executive compensation program, including each named executive officer’s compensation. As part of this process, the Committee obtains market information about compensation at other utilities and energy companies and obtains independent analysis and recommendations on competitive market practices from Meridian Compensation Partners, LLC (“Meridian”), an independent compensation consultant engaged by and reporting to the Committee.

When making officer compensation decisions, we determine an aggregate pool of base salaries and target total compensation for the named executive officers and all of our other officers, but excluding the chief executive officer, after referencing the median level of target annual total compensation in the market data for the comparable positions held by our officers. (See below under “Benchmarking” for a more detailed discussion regarding the market data used and related methodology.) The aggregate pool of restricted share units comprising the long-term incentive is calculated based on the aggregate difference between target total compensation and base salary.

For the chief executive officer’s compensation, the Committee develops a range of compensation for the full board of directors to consider in light of the full board’s evaluation of the chief executive officer’s performance. Differences among officers in base salary and target annual total compensation reflect differences in median compensation levels for similar positions at comparably sized utilities, each officer’s experience, the scope of his or her responsibilities and the Committee’s or the chief executive officer’s subjective evaluation of an officer’s relative contribution, performance and consideration in our succession plans. Base salary and target annual total compensation may also take into account situations where we have assigned an officer to take on a cross-developmental assignment. The aggregate compensation pool is allocated among the officers other than our chief executive officer based primarily on the recommendations of our chief executive officer, but subject to review and approval by the Committee.

We have a history of developing and promoting executives from within the company when possible. As a result, compensation levels for our officers often begin significantly below the market medians for their respective positions. Depending upon their performance, these officers may receive proportionately larger increases to move their salaries and target total compensation close to the market medians.

Benchmarking.    To provide competitive total compensation, the Committee considers national market information about base salaries and other compensation from two sources described below. The Committee believes it is appropriate to look at national market data because we compete for executive talent on a national basis.

21

Table of Contents

In 2015, the Committee relied principally on market information provided by Towers Watson derived from Towers Watson’s 2014 Energy Services Executive Compensation Database. We refer to this database as the “Towers Watson Database.” The database is an annual compilation of compensation for executive officer positions at a broad group of energy and utility companies nationwide prepared by Towers Watson. The companies included in the Towers Watson Database are listed in Appendix A to this proxy statement. After discussing each of our officer positions with management and Meridian, including the duties and responsibilities associated with each position, Towers Watson obtained data from its database for positions that in its judgment most closely corresponded to the positions held by our officers. Towers Watson then aggregated the data for the identified positions and adjusted it using recognized statistical methods to account for the different total revenues of the companies in its database as compared to our revenues. Meridian reviewed this market data to ensure that Towers Watson’s methodology was consistent with our executive compensation philosophy. The reports provided to the Committee showed market information for base salary and target annual total compensation for each benchmark position at the market median.

As an additional point of reference, the Committee also reviewed data derived by Meridian from the 2014 proxy statements for companies in the same peer group used to measure total shareholder return for performance-based restricted share units. The proxy data was used to compare the compensation levels of our named executive officers against the compensation of corresponding named executive officers of companies in the peer group. This comparison allowed the Committee to evaluate the reasonableness of the survey data and of our compensation program. The Committee may make compensation adjustments based on this comparison.

The companies included in the peer group for purposes of 2015 compensation decisions are listed below.

The Committee periodically reviews the peer group and may remove or add a company for various reasons, such as merger and acquisition activity. In February 2015, Cleco Corporation, UNS Energy Corporation and Wisconsin Energy Corporation were removed from the peer group due to pending strategic transactions and ALLETE, Inc., CMS Energy Corporation and UIL Holdings Corporation were added to the peer group. These changes were used for 2015 performance-based restricted share units and, subject to further changes, would be used in future compensation decisions.

22

Table of Contents

Executive Officer Compensation Program Structure

Components.    Our 2015 officer compensation program contained the following principal elements.

Consistent with our compensation philosophy and objectives, a significant portion of our officers’ annual total compensation is at risk or in the form of long-term incentives that align the interests of our officers with those of our shareholders. The following charts indicate the allocation of 2015 target annual total compensation approved in February 2015 between base salary and restricted share units for Mr. Ruelle and our other named executive officers.

23

Table of Contents

Base Salary.    Base salary provides our officers competitive fixed cash compensation. While the aggregate amount of the base salaries for all of the officers (named executive officers and all other officers) is targeted at approximately the market median, base salaries for individual officers are set above or below the market median for the reasons discussed above.

The Committee reviews base salaries annually. In February 2015, the Committee considered an adjustment to the compensation of Mr. Ruelle. Mr. Ruelle made no recommendation regarding his own compensation, nor was he present in any discussions or presentations regarding his compensation. The Towers Watson market information provided to the Committee showed that Mr. Ruelle’s 2014 base salary was below the market median base salary. The Committee decided to increase Mr. Ruelle’s base salary from $775,000 to $820,000. The market information that Towers Watson provided to the Committee indicated that, after this adjustment, Mr. Ruelle’s new base salary would approximate the market median base salary.

In February 2015, the Committee also approved increases in base salaries for our other named executive officers. The approved increases, which were based in part on the Towers Watson market information and the recommendation of Mr. Ruelle, raised the aggregate amount of the base salaries for these officers to a level that was slightly below the market median and reflected the Committee’s objective of providing a competitive executive compensation program in light of prevailing business and economic conditions.

Taking into account these adjustments, the following table shows prior base salaries and the new base salaries for the named executive officers as approved by the Committee in February 2015.

Annual Cash Incentive.    Though unusual for the utility industry, our executive compensation program does not include an annual cash incentive component in order to focus our executives on long-term performance. The Committee believes the overall compensation program is appropriately performance-based without an annual cash incentive because of the potential for appreciation in the price of our common stock received when restricted share units vest, and the potential for above or below target payouts of performance-based restricted share units. The Committee has considered this issue from time to time and may revisit this issue again in the future. Because our executive compensation program does not include an annual cash incentive, total cash compensation for our officers is typically significantly less than the relevant market median of total cash compensation.

Long-Term Incentive Compensation.

Overview.    The Committee approves long-term incentive compensation for our officers and other key employees who are in positions to make positive contributions to our long-term performance and to create shareholder value through the development and execution of our business strategies. For 2015, 50% of the named executive officers’ long-term incentive is in the form of time-based restricted share units and the other 50% is in the form of performance-based restricted share units. Because we do not provide an annual cash incentive, restricted share units make up a larger percentage of the target annual total compensation of our officers than does the long-term incentive compensation component of the target annual total compensation for officers of our peer group.

The Committee believes restricted share units accomplish our executive compensation program objectives because they:

24

Table of Contents

Our time-based restricted share units are designed to provide total compensation below the target market median if our common stock price significantly decreases after approval, but above the target market median if our common stock price significantly increases. The Committee believes this design also provides an incentive to our officers to continue their employment with us for the duration of the vesting period, thus providing us with continuity and stability of management.

Performance-based restricted share units compensate an officer based on relative total shareholder return, which is a measure of our stock price appreciation and dividend payments relative to those of a peer group. The Committee settled on relative total shareholder return as an appropriate performance measure because this measure focuses our officers on creating long-term shareholder value when developing and implementing strategic plans. The Committee believes that the risk and reward inherent in performance-based restricted share units provides an appropriate incentive for officers to manage the Company in the long-term interests of shareholders without encouraging inappropriate risk taking. See “Other Matters—Risk Assessment” below.

Process for Determining Long-Term Incentives.    Annually, the Committee reviews base salaries and target annual total compensation of our officers. The dollar amount of long-term incentive compensation is target annual total compensation less base salary. To determine the number of restricted share units, we use the average closing price of our common stock for the twenty trading days preceding the first day of the performance period, which customarily has been the first day of the year. Decisions related to the approval of long-term incentives are made independently of announcements of material information or stock price as of any particular date.

Restricted Share Unit Terms.    Each restricted share unit represents the right upon vesting to receive one share of our common stock. Prior to vesting, each time-based restricted share unit gives the holder the right to receive a cash payment equal to each dividend paid on one share of our common stock and which is paid at the same time as our common stock dividend. This right to receive a cash payment is referred to as a dividend equivalent. Dividend equivalents change when we change the dividend paid on our common stock. In the case of performance-based restricted share units, dividend equivalents are paid following vesting, but only to the extent vesting actually occurs.

Time-based restricted share units vest in three years, subject to the officer’s continued employment through the vesting date. Performance-based restricted share units vest in three years, subject to satisfaction of performance measures tied to our total shareholder return relative to the total shareholder return for a peer group over the three-year performance period. Total shareholder return is equal to the difference between the value of a share of common stock at the beginning and end of the three-year performance period using the average closing price of our common stock for the twenty trading days preceding such days, plus dividends paid as if reinvested in stock. For this measure, our total shareholder return is compared to total shareholder return of a peer group for the same three-year period. See “Benchmarking” above for a list of the companies included in our peer group for purposes of 2015 compensation. In February 2015, the Committee authorized a change to the form of award agreement to remove a company from the peer group for outstanding cycles when the company announces that it is being acquired. Previously, companies were removed from the peer group only after the transaction had closed. The Committee made this change to neutralize peer company stock price distortions that occur during the time between the announcement and closing of a transaction, which, in the electric utility industry, can often span more than one year.

25

Table of Contents

The relative total shareholder return targets, and the corresponding payouts expressed as a percentage of the target number of performance-based restricted share units, are as follows:

Interpolation is used to determine payouts if relative total shareholder return falls between the percentiles shown above.

Vesting of all restricted share units is subject to the officer’s employment with us continuing uninterrupted through the vesting date, except that a prorated portion of the restricted share units will vest on the scheduled vesting date if the officer’s employment terminates as a result of death, disability or retirement. Retirement means termination of an officer’s employment after reaching age 60 and ten years of service. Additionally, in the event of a change in control, all restricted share units will vest as of the date of the change in control. See “Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change In Control” below.

2015 Approvals.    In February 2015 the Committee approved long-term incentives for officers, including the named executive officers, as reflected in the following table:

Pension and Other Benefits

Other Benefit Programs and Perquisites.    Our officers have the opportunity to participate in employee benefit programs available to all of our non-union employees, including the employees’ 401(k) Plan, medical, dental and life insurance programs, a defined benefit pension plan and assistance with moving expenses in some instances. Additionally, as explained below, our officers are eligible to participate in retirement and 401(k) benefit restoration plans that replace benefits lost because of limitations on benefits imposed by the Internal Revenue Code. Officers, including the named executive officers, do not receive any “perquisites” or special benefits such as car allowances, discretionary allowances, personal expense reimbursements, personal use of aircraft or personal club memberships.

From time to time, in various circumstances, such as when an officer retires below age 60 or retires after age 60 but without ten years of service, the Committee considers one time payments or other arrangements, including the accelerated vesting of restricted share units, that it considers appropriate. No such payments or arrangements were made in 2015.

Pension and Retirement Plans.    Our officers, including the named executive officers, participate in the same defined benefit pension plan that we make available to all of our employees.

26

Table of Contents

Our named executive officers also participate in a retirement benefit restoration plan adopted in 2010. We adopted this plan because of limitations on benefits imposed by the Internal Revenue Code, and in order to increase the competitiveness of the retirement benefits provided by our executive compensation in comparison to the benefits provided to executive officers of most other utilities including all of the companies in our peer group. As a result of having this plan, the retirement benefits for named executive officers are calculated on the same basis as benefits for other covered employees.

Officers who participate in our retirement plan as cash balance members also participate in a 401(k) benefit restoration plan that became effective on January 1, 2015. The plan was adopted after a review of the competitiveness of retirement and other benefits, such as a deferred compensation program, provided by our executive compensation program in comparison to the benefits provided to executive officers of other utilities, including companies in our peer group. The review included the impact on retirement benefits for our officers from not having an annual cash incentive in our executive compensation program. As a result of having this plan, we credit matching contributions to an account established for officers who participate in our retirement plan as a cash balance member in an amount determined irrespective of limitations on contributions to the 401(k) Plan imposed by the Internal Revenue Code.

In an earlier period of employment with the Company, Mr. Ruelle accrued vested benefits for his prior period of employment under an executive salary continuation plan. He is not accruing additional benefits under this plan in connection with his current employment, and none of the other named executive officers are accruing benefits under this plan. Please see “Pension Benefits” below for a more detailed discussion of the benefits provided to Mr. Ruelle under this plan. The Committee has not taken into account these benefits related to a prior period of employment in setting current compensation for Mr. Ruelle, although the Committee did consider these benefits in its evaluation of the adoption of the retirement benefit restoration plan discussed above.

Change in Control Agreements.    The possibility of a change in control can create uncertainty and generate questions among management that may result in the departure or distraction of management personnel to the detriment of the Company and its shareholders. Accordingly, the Committee and the board of directors have taken steps to both minimize the risk that our officers will depart prior to a change in control, and to reinforce and encourage the continued attention and dedication of officers to their assigned duties without distraction in circumstances arising from the possibility of a change in control. The board of directors believes it important, in the event we or our shareholders receive a proposal for transfer of control, that our officers be able to continue their management responsibilities without being influenced by the uncertainties of their personal situations. The board of directors authorized change in control agreements for all of our officers.

The board of directors believes that the payments that could be made under the change in control agreements are reasonable because of the amounts involved and, among other things:

Please see “Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control” below for a more detailed description of the terms of the change in control agreements and the amount of the benefits payable to each of our named executive officers in the event of the termination of his employment for various reasons following a change in control.

27

Table of Contents

Deferred Compensation.    We do not currently have a deferred compensation plan for cash compensation paid to any of our officers. However, we have a plan that authorizes the Committee, at its discretion, to permit officers to defer the receipt of shares of common stock that would otherwise be issued upon the vesting of restricted share units, when we would not otherwise be able to take a related tax deduction.

Executive Compensation Administration

Compensation Committee.    The Committee assists our board of directors in administering our executive compensation program. The responsibilities assigned to the Committee by its charter are summarized earlier in this proxy statement under the heading “Board Meetings and Committees of the Board of Directors-Compensation Committee.” The Committee meets frequently, both in conjunction with regularly scheduled meetings of the board of directors and in special meetings.

Compensation Consultant.    In order to fulfill its duties, the Committee seeks independent advice from a compensation consultant. The Committee has full, independent authority to retain its compensation consultant. The Committee generally looks to the consultant for market information rather than recommendations about the amount of compensation for individual officers. The Committee sometimes discusses a project directly with the consultant, and sometimes provides directions to members of management who then work with the consultant and report back to the Committee. In keeping with the Committee’s practice of continuing oversight of our executive compensation program, the compensation consultant is retained throughout the year and typically attends the Committee’s regular and special meetings in person or telephonically. The Committee also annually reviews the performance of the compensation consultant.

During 2015, the Committee was assisted by Meridian, its compensation consultant. Prior to its engagement by the Committee in 2010, Meridian had not provided services to the Committee or the Company. In connection with its assignments in 2015, Meridian provided information to the Committee about market compensation practices in the utility industry and made recommendations related to the executive compensation program. Meridian also worked with management to develop market information for the Committee’s review in connection with the Committee’s consideration in February 2015 of adjustments to officer compensation. During 2015, Meridian provided no services to us other than those described above. The Committee considered the independence of Meridian using NYSE independence rules and found Meridian to be independent.

Management also worked with Towers Watson to develop market information for the Committee’s review in connection with the Committee’s annual consideration of adjustments to officer compensation. In 2015, management also retained Towers Watson on the Company’s behalf to provide actuarial services for our benefit plans. The Towers Watson data was reviewed by Meridian as the Committee’s independent consultant to ensure that Towers Watson’s methodology was consistent with our executive compensation philosophy.

Participation of Executive Officers.    Our officers and members of senior management are involved in various aspects of the Committee’s evaluation and determination of officer compensation. Our chief executive officer makes recommendations to the Committee for the compensation of officers other than himself. Some officers, including our chief executive officer, attend portions of Committee discussions about compensation for officers generally and individual compensation for officers other than themselves. As noted above, management may work with compensation consultants to provide information requested by consultants for their reports to the Committee.

Our officers do not work with the board of directors or the Committee in establishing measures or targets that affect their own compensation, although officers did participate in discussions about the performance measures for our performance-based restricted share units. Our officers do not participate in discussions of the Committee or the full board of directors about their own compensation. Further, our officers do not meet with the Committee’s compensation consultants on an individual basis regarding their own compensation.

In the view of the Committee, the involvement by management does not hinder the ability of the Committee to make independent decisions about officer compensation.

28

Table of Contents

Tally Sheets.    The Committee annually reviews a tally sheet for each officer, including each named executive officer, to ensure that the Committee is fully informed about the total compensation and benefits of each officer, including the potential compensation in various scenarios should an officer’s employment be terminated. The tally sheets also help to ensure the Committee is considering all benefits and previously granted restricted share units when making compensation decisions. Each tally sheet is prepared by management with the assistance of our human resources staff and the Committee’s independent compensation consultant and includes a summary of an officer’s compensation including current salary, unvested restricted share units, pension and other benefits.

Other Matters

Risk Assessment.    The Committee believes the design of the executive compensation program does not encourage excessive or unnecessary risk-taking, based on, among other factors, the following:

Stock Ownership Requirements.    Each officer is required to own an amount of our common stock having a value equal to a multiple of the officer’s base salary. The multiple ranges from one to five times base salary, depending upon the position of the officer, with a higher requirement for more senior officers. The Committee believes these requirements further align the interests of officers with the interests of our shareholders by ensuring our officers have a significant long-term stake in the Company and are subject to the risks of equity ownership. At the same time, the Committee believes these requirements balance the personal needs of officers to be able to diversify personal assets and investments. We determine whether the requirements have been met using our closing stock price on the last trading day of the immediately preceding calendar year. We expect officers to achieve the applicable ownership requirement, which includes unvested time-based restricted share units but excludes unvested performance-based restricted share units, within five years of their appointment to an officer position.

Each of the named executive officers has met the current requirements, which are set forth below.

Tax Deductibility of Compensation.    Under Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code, we may not deduct certain forms of compensation in excess of $1 million paid to any named executive officer other than the chief financial officer. Certain performance-based compensation is specifically exempt from the deduction limit. The Committee considers deductibility of compensation for federal income tax purposes in structuring our executive compensation program; however, to maintain flexibility in compensating executive officers in a manner designed to promote our various goals, the Committee may, but does not necessarily, design compensation programs based upon tax consequences. For example, our time-based restricted share units, as currently designed, are not eligible for the performance-based exemption from the Section 162(m) deduction limit. Our performance-based restricted share unit awards are generally intended to be exempt from the deduction limit.

29

Table of Contents

COMPENSATION COMMITTEE REPORT

The Compensation Committee has reviewed and discussed with the Company’s management the Compensation Discussion and Analysis included in this proxy statement. Based on that review and discussion, the Compensation Committee has recommended to the board of directors that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in this proxy statement.

The Compensation Committee

Mollie H. Carter, Chairman

Richard L. Hawley

B. Anthony Isaac

Sandra A.J. Lawrence

30

Table of Contents

COMPENSATION OF EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

The following tables, narrative and footnotes discuss the compensation for 2013, 2014 and 2015 of our named executive officers.

SUMMARY COMPENSATION TABLE

Amounts relate to annual long-term incentives approved for all the named executive officers. See “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—Long-Term Incentive Compensation” for additional information about these long-term incentives and their terms, including vesting conditions that must be met for any compensation to be received and, for performance-based restricted share units, their performance measures, the target payout level and the payout range, which is between zero and 200% of the target level. These amounts do not reflect actual compensation realized by the named executive officers and are not a guarantee of the amount that the named executive officers will receive from the long-term incentives. The actual compensation will be based on our common stock price at vesting and the performance level achieved for the applicable performance period.

31

Table of Contents

The grant date fair value for the time-based restricted share units is determined by multiplying the number of restricted share units granted by the closing stock price on the grant date of the underlying common stock. The grant date fair value for the performance-based restricted share units in 2015 is based on an accounting value of 101.5% of the target value for the annual long-term awards. Assuming achievement of the performance goals at the maximum level and the receipt of the maximum number of performance-based restricted share units, the aggregate grant date fair value of the restricted share unit awards in 2015 would be: Mr. Ruelle, $3,368,664; Mr. Greenwood $1,064,008; Mr. Somma, $1,041,407; Mr. Irick $694,073; and Mr. Akin, $443,089.

32

Table of Contents

GRANTS OF PLAN-BASED AWARDS

Annual long-term incentives were approved for each of the named executive officers in 2015 consisting of time-based restricted share units and performance-based restricted share units. See “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—Long-Term Incentive Compensation” for information about the terms of these restricted share units. The following table sets forth information about the grants.

OUTSTANDING EQUITY AWARDS AT FISCAL YEAR-END

The following table sets forth information as of December 31, 2015, with regard to unvested restricted share units held by the named executive officers.