Table of Contents

        If you received a paper copy of this Proxy Statement.    You can vote by valid proxy received by telephone, electronically via the Internet or by mail. The deadline for voting by telephone or electronically via the Internet is 11:59 p.m., Eastern Daylight Time, on May 28, 2014. If voting by mail, you must:

•

indicate your instructions on the proxy;



•

date and sign the proxy;



•

promptly mail the proxy in the enclosed envelope; and



•

allow sufficient time for the proxy to be received before the date of the annual meeting.

        If your shares are held in "street name" such as in a stock brokerage account, by a bank or other nominee, please follow the instructions you received from your broker or with respect to the voting of your shares.

        If you received an e-mail copy of this Proxy Statement.    Please submit your proxy electronically via the Internet or telephonically using the instructions included on the proxy card. The deadline for voting electronically via the Internet or telephonically is 11:59 p.m., Eastern Daylight Time, on May 28, 2014.

        If you have any questions regarding how to authorize your proxy by telephone or via the Internet, please call MacKenzie Partners, Inc., toll-free at (800) 322-2885 or collect at (212) 929-5500.

Even if you plan to attend the annual meeting, we recommend that you submit a proxy to vote your shares in advance so that your vote will be counted if you later are unable to attend the annual meeting.

How is my vote counted?

        If you authorize your proxy to vote your shares electronically via the Internet or by telephone, or, if you received a proxy card by mail and you properly marked, signed, dated and returned it, the shares that the proxy represents will be voted in the manner specified on the proxy. If no specification is made, your shares will be voted "for" the election of the nominees for the Class II directors named in this proxy statement, "for" advisory approval of the compensation of our named executive officers and "for" ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2014. It is not anticipated that any matters other than those set forth in this proxy statement will be presented at the annual meeting. If other matters are presented, proxies will be voted in accordance with the discretion of the proxy holders. In addition, since no stockholder proposals or nominations were received on a timely basis and not withdrawn, no such matters will be brought to a vote at the annual meeting.

How does the Board recommend that I vote on each of the proposals?

        The Board recommends that you vote:

•

FORProposal 1:  the election of Marc Holliday and John S. Levy as Class II directors to serve on our Board of Directors for a three-year term and until their successors are duly elected and qualified;



•

FORProposal 2:  the approval of an advisory resolution approving the compensation of our named executives officers as disclosed in this proxy statement pursuant to Item 402 of Regulation S-K; and



•

FORProposal 3:  the ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2014.

Table of Contents

What other information should I review before voting?

        Our 2013 annual report, including financial statements for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013, is being made available to you along with this proxy statement. You may obtain, free of charge, copies of our 2013 annual report and our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013, which contains additional information about the Company, on our website athttp://www.slgreen.com or by directing your request in writing to SL Green Realty Corp., 420 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York 10170-1881, Attention: Investor Relations. The 2013 annual report and the Annual Report on Form 10-K, however, are not part of the proxy solicitation materials, and the information found on, or accessible through, our website is not incorporated into, and does not form a part of, this proxy statement or any other report or document we file with or furnish to the SEC.

Who is soliciting my proxy?

        This solicitation of proxies is made by and on behalf of the Board.    We will pay the cost of the solicitation of proxies. We have retained MacKenzie Partners, Inc. at an aggregate estimated cost of $10,000, plus out-of-pocket expenses, to assist in the solicitation of proxies. In addition to the solicitation of proxies by mail, our directors, officers and employees may solicit proxies personally or by telephone.

How do I change how I receive proxy materials in the future?

        For this year's meeting, stockholders will receive paper copies of the proxy materials by mail and will not receive a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials. For future meetings, stockholders may elect to receive links to proxy materials by e-mail or to receive a paper copy of the proxy materials and a paper proxy card by mail, in each case, instead of receiving a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials by mail, as applicable. If you elect to receive proxy materials by e-mail, you will not receive proxy materials in the mail (including, if applicable, a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials). Instead, you will receive an e-mail with links to proxy materials and online voting. If you received a paper copy of the proxy materials in the mail, you can eliminate all such paper mailings (including, if applicable, a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials) in the future by electing to receive an e-mail that will provide Internet links to these documents. Opting to receive all future proxy materials online will save us the cost of producing and mailing such documents to you and help us conserve natural resources. You can change your election by directing your request in writing to SL Green Realty Corp., 420 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York 10170-1881, Attention: Investor Relations, by sending a blank e-mail with the 12-digit control number on your proxy card to sendmaterial@proxyvote.com, via the internet athttp://www.proxyvote.com or by telephone at (800) 579-7639. Your election will remain in effect until you change it.

No person is authorized on our behalf to give any information or to make any representations with respect to the proposals other than the information and the representations contained in this proxy statement, and, if given or made, such information and/or representations must not be relied upon as having been authorized.

Table of Contents

PROPOSAL 1: ELECTIONOUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS

        The Board currently consists of six members and is divided into three classes. Directors in each class serve for a term of three years or until their successors are duly elected and qualify. The term of directors of one class expires at each annual meeting of stockholders.

        At the annual meeting, two directors will be elected to serve until the 2017 annual meeting and until their successors are duly elected and qualify. The Board, upon the recommendation of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, has nominated Marc Holliday and John S. Levy for election to serve as its Class II directors. Messrs. Holliday and Levy currently are serving as Class II directors. Each of Messrs. Holliday and Levy have consented to being named in this proxy statement and to serve as a director if elected. However, if either of Messrs. Holliday or Levy is unable to accept election, proxies voted in favor of such nominee will be voted for the election of such other person as the Board nominates.

        A plurality of all of the votes cast at the annual meeting at which a quorum is present in person or by proxy is required for the election of directors. Pursuant to our Policy on Majority Voting, in an uncontested election, any nominee for director who receives a greater number of votes withheld from his or her election than votes for such election is required, within ten business days, to tender his or her resignation. Our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee is required to make a recommendation to the Board with respect to the resignation. The Board is required to take action with respect to this recommendation and to disclose its decision and, if applicable, the Board's reasons for rejecting the tendered resignation. The policy is described more fully below under the caption "Corporate Governance Matters—Policy on Majority Voting."

        We will treat broker non-votes as shares that are present and entitled to vote for purposes of determining the presence or absence of a quorum. Broker non-votes do not constitute a vote "for" or "withheld" and will not be counted as votes cast. Therefore, broker non-votes will have no effect on this proposal, assuming a quorum is present.

The Board unanimously recommends a vote "FOR" the election of Holliday and Levy.

Information Regarding the Nominees and the Continuing Directors

        The following table and biographical descriptions set forth certain information with respect to the nominees for election as Class II directors at the 2014 annual meeting and the continuing Class I and Class III directors whose terms expire at the annual meetings of stockholders in 2016 and 2015, respectively, based upon information furnished by each director.

Table of Contents

Class II Nominees—Terms Will Expire in 2017

Marc Holliday has served as our Chief Executive Officer since January 2004 and as one of our directors since December 2001. He also serves as a member of our Executive Committee. Mr. Holliday stepped down as our President in April 2007, when Andrew Mathias, our current President, was promoted to that position. Mr. Holliday joined the Company as Chief Investment Officer in July 1998. Mr. Holliday also serves as a director of Gramercy Property Trust Inc. f/k/a Gramercy Capital Corp., or Gramercy, and has served in such capacity since 2004. In 2010, Mr. Holliday notified the Board of Directors of Gramercy that he would not stand for election as a director for a new term. However, Mr. Holliday agreed with the Board of Directors of Gramercy that he would remain as a director for an unspecified period of time following Gramercy's 2010 annual meeting. Mr. Holliday remains a director on that basis. In October 2008, Mr. Holliday stepped down from his positions of President and Chief Executive Officer of Gramercy, positions he had held since August 2004. Prior to joining the Company, Mr. Holliday was Managing Director and Head of Direct Originations for New York-based Capital Trust Inc., a mezzanine finance company, where he was in charge of originating direct principal investments for the firm, consisting of mezzanine debt, preferred equity and first mortgages. From 1991 to 1997, Mr. Holliday served in various management positions, including Senior Vice President, at Capital Trust, Inc.'s predecessor, Victor Capital Group, L.P., a private real estate investment bank specializing in advisory services, investment management and debt and equity placements. Mr. Holliday received a B.S. degree in Business and Finance from Lehigh University in 1988 and an M.S. degree in Real Estate Development from Columbia University in 1990. Mr. Holliday's extensive experience and skills in real estate and finance, as well as his role as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, provide him with valuable knowledge of and expertise in our business and industry. Furthermore, Mr. Holliday's presence on the Board facilitates communication between the Board and the Company's senior management. Mr. Holliday is 47 years old.

John S. Levy has served as one of our directors since 1997. Mr. Levy retired from Lehman Brothers Inc. in 1995. From 1983 until 1995, at Lehman Brothers (or its predecessors), he served as Managing Director and Chief Administrative Officer of the Financial Services Division, Senior Executive Vice President and Co-Director of the International Division and Managing Partner of the Equity Securities Division. Mr. Levy was associated with A.G. Becker Incorporated (or its predecessors) from 1960 until 1983, where he served as Managing Director of the Execution Services Division, Vice President-Manager of Institutional and Retail Sales, Manager of the Institutional Sales Division, Manager of the New York Retail Office and a Registered Representative. Mr. Levy received a B.A. degree from Dartmouth College. Mr. Levy's extensive skills, experience and sophistication in corporate governance, financial, compensation, legal and commercial matters, including his corporate finance expertise developed at Lehman Brothers, allow him to provide valuable insights into the Company's business and finances. Mr. Levy is 78 years old.

Class I Continuing Directors—Terms Will Expire in 2016

Edwin Thomas Burton, III has served as one of our directors since 1997. Mr. Burton is a Professor of Economics at the University of Virginia, and has held teaching positions at York College, Rice University and Cornell University, and has written and lectured extensively in the field of Economics. Mr. Burton also serves as a member of the Board of Trustees of the Virginia Retirement System for state and local employees of the Commonwealth of Virginia, and served as its Chairman from 1997 until March 2001. Mr. Burton also serves as a consultant to numerous companies on investment strategy and investment banking. From 1994 until 1995, Mr. Burton served as Senior Vice President, Managing Director and director of Interstate Johnson Lane, Incorporated, an investment banking firm, where he was in charge of the Corporate Finance and Public Finance Divisions. From 1987 to 1994, Mr. Burton served as President of Rothschild Financial Services, Incorporated (a subsidiary of Rothschild, Inc. of North America), an investment banking company headquartered in New York City

Table of Contents

that is involved in proprietary trading, securities lending and other investment activities. Mr. Burton also served as a consultant to the American Stock Exchange from 1985 until 1986 and a senior vice president with Smith Barney (or its corporate predecessor) from 1976 until 1984. Since 2004, Mr. Burton has served as a member of the Board of Directors of Chase Investors, a privately-held registered investment advisor. Mr. Burton also has served as a member of the Board of Directors of Capstar Hotel Company, a publicly-traded hotel company, Virginia National Bank, a publicly-traded commercial bank, and SNL Securities, a private securities data company. Mr. Burton received a B.A. degree in Economics from Rice University and a Ph.D. degree in Economics from Northwestern University. In addition to his experience in academia as a seasoned professor of economics, Mr. Burton's extensive skills and experience in corporate governance, financial, compensation and legal matters allow him to provide valuable financial expertise and insights into the Company's business. Mr. Burton is 71 years old.

Craig M. Hatkoff has served as a member of our Board of Directors since January 2011. Mr. Hatkoff has been active in commercial real estate and community development for more than two decades. He spent 11 years at Chemical Bank, as Co-Head of the real estate investment banking unit, and was a pioneer in commercial mortgage securitization. Mr. Hatkoff was a Co-Founder and Managing Partner of Victor Capital Group, L.P. until it was later acquired by Capital Trust, Inc., where he served as Vice-Chairman and Chairman of the Executive Committee. He left in 2000 to pursue other entrepreneurial and civic endeavors but served as a Director of Capital Trust, Inc. from 1996 until early 2010. Mr. Hatkoff is a co-founder of Tribeca Enterprises, a diversified company best known for New York City's annual Tribeca Film Festival. Mr. Hatkoff is also presently Chairman of Turtle Pond Publications, LLC, and serves on the boards of a number of non-profit organizations including the Tribeca Film Institute which he co-founded, the Desmond Tutu Peace Foundation, Richard Leakey's Wildlife Direct, the Child Mind Institute, The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, Sesame Workshop, Scholastic's Alliance for Young Artists and Writers and the Borough of Manhattan Community College Foundation. Mr. Hatkoff is the founder of both the Disruptor Foundation and the Owen and Mzee Foundation. Mr. Hatkoff is also on the Board of Directors of Taubman Centers, Inc., where he has served since 2004. From 2002 to 2005, Mr. Hatkoff served as a trustee of the New York City School Construction Authority, the agency responsible for the construction of all public schools in New York City. Mr. Hatkoff's strong background in commercial real estate and real estate finance is well known and respected throughout the New York real estate industry. Mr. Hatkoff's deep understanding of the New York City real estate market matches well with SL Green's core investment and operational focus. Mr. Hatkoff is 60 years old.

Class III Continuing Directors—Terms Will Expire in 2015

John H. Alschuler, Jr. has served as one of our directors since 1997 and serves as our Lead Independent Director. Since 2008, Mr. Alschuler has been the Chairman of HR&A Advisors Inc., an economic development, real-estate and public policy consulting organization. Mr. Alschuler also is an Adjunct Associate Professor at Columbia University, where he teaches real estate development at the Graduate School of Architecture, Planning & Preservation. Mr. Alschuler currently serves on the Board of Directors of Friends of the High Line Inc., a Section 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization. Mr. Alschuler received a B.A. degree from Wesleyan University and an Ed.D. degree from the University of Massachusetts at Amherst. Mr. Alschuler's achievements in academia and business, as well as his extensive knowledge of commercial real estate, New York City's economy, commercial and other markets in New York City and national and international markets for real estate, and his expertise in inter-governmental relations, allow him to assess the real estate market and the Company's business from a knowledgeable and informed perspective, from which he provides valuable insights into the Company's business. Mr. Alschuler is 66 years old.

Table of Contents

Stephen L. Green has served as our Chairman and a member of the Board since 1997 and serves as the Chairman of our Executive Committee. Mr. Green serves as an executive officer, working in conjunction with our Chief Executive Officer, overseeing our long-term strategic direction. Mr. Green formerly served as our Chief Executive Officer. Mr. Green founded our predecessor, S.L. Green Properties, Inc., in 1980. Prior to our initial public offering in 1997, Mr. Green had been involved in the acquisition of over 50 Manhattan office buildings containing in excess of 4.0 million square feet. Mr. Green also served as Chairman of the Board of Gramercy from August 2004 through June 2009. Mr. Green is an at-large member of the Executive Committee of the Board of Governors of the Real Estate Board of New York and previously has served as Chairman of the Real Estate Board of New York's Tax Committee. Mr. Green also served as a member of the Board of Directors of Stemedica Cell Technologies, Inc. from August 2007 through April 2009. Mr. Green currently serves as a member of the Board of Directors of Streetsquash, Inc., a Section 501(c)(3) tax-exempt organization. Mr. Green also served as a member of the board of trustees of the NYU Langone Medical Center. Mr. Green received a B.A. degree from Hartwick College and a J.D. degree from Boston College Law School. In addition to his industry-wide reputation, Mr. Green's extensive skills and experience in real estate, including founding our predecessor, provide him with invaluable knowledge of and expertise in our business and industry. This experience, particularly his experience having led our predecessor and the Company, contributes depth and context to the Board's discussions of the Company's business. Mr. Green is 76 years old.

Biographical Information Regarding Executive Officers Who Are Not Directors

Andrew W. Mathias has served as our President since April 2007. Mr. Mathias is in charge of our equity and structured finance investments and oversees our acquisitions and dispositions and our joint venture program. Mr. Mathias joined the Company in March 1999 as Vice President and was promoted to Director of Investments in 2002, a position he held until his promotion to Chief Investment Officer in January 2004, a position that he held until January 2011. In October 2008, Mr. Mathias stepped down from his position as Chief Investment Officer of Gramercy, a position he had held since August 2004. Prior to joining the Company, Mr. Mathias worked at Capital Trust, Inc. and its predecessor, Victor Capital Group, L.P. Mr. Mathias also worked on the high yield and restructuring desk at Bear Stearns and Co. Mr. Mathias received a B.S. degree in Economics from the Wharton School at the University of Pennsylvania. Mr. Mathias is 40 years old.

James Mead has served as our Chief Financial Officer since November 2010. As Chief Financial Officer, Mr. Mead is responsible for our finance, capital markets, investor relations and administration. Before joining the Company, from November 2004 to March 2010, Mr. Mead was Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Strategic Hotels & Resorts, Inc., a high-end hotel REIT with properties in the U.S., Mexico and Europe, where he directed strategic planning in conjunction with the CEO and board of directors of the company and was responsible for debt and equity financing activities, investor relations, accounting, and domestic and international tax. From April 1993 until October 1999, Mr. Mead was at the California-based apartment REIT Irvine Company Apartment Communities, Inc., where in addition to his responsibilities as Chief Financial Officer he was co-head of the company's property management division. Mr. Mead also worked as head of capital markets for The Irvine Company, a 150 year-old California land development company where he directed the initial public offering of Irvine Company Apartment Communities, Inc., an affiliate of The Irvine Company. Mr. Mead previously worked at JP Morgan in investment banking in New York. A graduate of Tulane University, Mr. Mead holds an MBA from the University of Virginia's Colgate Darden School of Business Administration. Mr. Mead is 54 years old.

Andrew S. Levine has served as our Chief Legal Officer since April 2007 and as our General Counsel, Executive Vice President and Secretary since November 2000. Prior to joining the Company, Mr. Levine was a partner in the REIT and Real Estate Transactions and Business groups at the law

Table of Contents

firm of Pryor, Cashman, Sherman & Flynn, LLP. Prior to joining Pryor, Cashman, Sherman & Flynn, LLP, Mr. Levine was a partner at the law firm of Dreyer & Traub. Mr. Levine received a B.A. degree from the University of Vermont and a J.D. degree from Rutgers School of Law, where Mr. Levine was an Editor of the Law Review. Mr. Levine is 55 years old.

The Board and its Committees

        The Board held four meetings during fiscal year 2013 and all directors attended 75% or more of the board of directors meetings and meetings of the committees on which they served during the periods they served. Three of our directors attended our 2013 annual meeting.

        The Board has four standing committees: an Audit Committee, a Compensation Committee, a Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee and an Executive Committee. The current charters for each of the Audit Committee, Compensation Committee and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee are available on our corporate website atwww.slgreen.com under the "Investors—Corporate Governance" section. Further, we will provide a copy of these charters without charge to each stockholder upon written request. Requests for copies should be addressed to Andrew S. Levine, Secretary, at SL Green Realty Corp., 420 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York 10170-1881. From time to time, the Board also may create additional committees for such purposes as the Board may determine.

        Audit Committee.    Our Audit Committee consists of John H. Alschuler, Jr., Edwin Thomas Burton, III (Chairman) and John S. Levy, each of whom is "independent" within the meaning of the rules of the NYSE and the SEC and each of whom meets the financial literacy standard required by the rules of the NYSE. The Board has determined that Mr. Burton is an "audit committee financial expert" as defined in the rules promulgated by the SEC under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, as amended. Our Audit Committee's primary purpose is to select and appoint our independent registered public accounting firm and to assist the Board in its oversight of the integrity of the Company's financial statements; the Company's compliance with legal and regulatory requirements; the qualifications and independence of the registered public accounting firm employed by the Company for the audit of the Company's financial statements; the performance of the people responsible for the Company's internal audit function; and the performance of the Company's independent registered public accounting firm. Our Audit Committee also prepares the report that the rules of the SEC require be included in this proxy statement and provides an open avenue of communication among the Company's independent registered public accounting firm, its internal auditors, its management and the Board. Our management is responsible for the preparation, presentation and integrity of our financial statements and for the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting. Management is responsible for maintaining appropriate accounting and financial reporting principles and policies and internal controls and procedures that provide for compliance with accounting standards and applicable laws and regulations. Our independent registered public accounting firm is responsible for planning and carrying out a proper audit of our annual financial statements prior to the filing of our Annual Report on Form 10-K, reviewing our quarterly financial statements prior to the filing of each Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and annually auditing the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting and other procedures. Our Audit Committee held nine meetings during fiscal year 2013. Additional information regarding the functions performed by our Audit Committee is set forth in the "Audit Committee Report" included in this annual proxy statement.

        Compensation Committee.    Our Compensation Committee consists of John H. Alschuler, Jr. (Chairman), Edwin Thomas Burton, III and John S. Levy, each of whom is "independent" within the meaning of the rules of the NYSE. Our Compensation Committee's primary purposes are to determine how the Company's Chief Executive Officer should be compensated; to administer the Company's employee benefit plans and executive compensation programs; to determine compensation of our executive officers other than our Chief Executive Officer; and to produce the report on executive

Table of Contents

compensation that is required to be included in this proxy statement. With respect to the compensation of our executive officers, our Compensation Committee solicits recommendations from our Chief Executive Officer regarding total compensation for all executive officers other than the Chief Executive Officer and reviews his recommendations in terms of total compensation and the allocation of such compensation among base salary, annual bonus amounts and other long-term incentive compensation as well as the allocation of such items between cash and equity compensation. Our Compensation Committee has retained Gressle & McGinley LLC as its independent outside compensation consulting firm and has engaged Gressle & McGinley LLC to provide our Compensation Committee with relevant data concerning the marketplace, our peer group and its own independent analysis and recommendations concerning executive compensation. Gressle & McGinley LLC regularly participates in Compensation Committee meetings. See "Executive Compensation—Compensation Discussion and Analysis." Our Compensation Committee held two meetings during fiscal year 2013.

        Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee.    Our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee consists of John H. Alschuler, Jr., Edwin Thomas Burton, III, Craig M. Hatkoff and John S. Levy (Chairman), each of whom is "independent" within the meaning of the rules of the NYSE. Our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee's primary purposes are to identify individuals qualified to fill vacancies or newly-created positions on the Board; to recommend to the Board the persons it should nominate for election as directors at annual meetings of the Company's stockholders; to recommend directors to serve on all committees of the Board; and to develop and recommend to the Board governance principles applicable to the Company. Our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee held one meeting during fiscal year 2013.

        Executive Committee.    Subject to the supervision and oversight of the Board, our Executive Committee, which consists of Stephen L. Green (Chairman), Marc Holliday and John H. Alschuler, Jr., is responsible for, among other things, the approval of our acquisition, disposition and financing of investments; the authorization of the execution of certain contracts and agreements, including those relating to our borrowing of money; and the exercise, in general, of all other powers of the Board, except for such powers that require action by all directors or the independent directors under our articles of incorporation or bylaws or under applicable law. Our Executive Committee did not hold any meetings and did not take any actions by written consent during fiscal year 2013, as all matters within its authority were approved by the Board.

Director Compensation

        Directors of the Company who are also employees receive no additional compensation for their services as directors. The following table sets forth information regarding the compensation paid to our non-employee directors during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013.

Table of Contents

        During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013, each non-employee director received an annual fee of $50,000 and our Lead Independent Director was entitled to receive an additional annual fee of $85,000. With the exception of Mr. Alschuler, who received his annual fees half in stock and half in cash, these annual fees were payable in full in cash, unless a non-employee director elected defer all or part of the annual fee pursuant to our Non-Employee Directors' Deferral Program as described below. Each non-employee director also received $1,500 for each meeting of the Board or a committee of the Board that he attended. The meeting fees were paid in cash unless a non-employee director elected to defer all or part of the meeting fees pursuant to our Non-Employee Directors' Deferral Program. Fees are generally paid quarterly, except for 2013 we postponed all fee payments to be made in phantom stock until July 18, 2013 following stockholder approval of our Third Amended and Restated 2005 Stock Option and Incentive Plan, as amended and restated from time to time, or the 2005 Plan. One of our non-employee directors who resides outside of New York was reimbursed for expenses of attending Board and committee meetings.

        The Chairman of our Audit Committee, the Chairman of our Compensation Committee, and the Chairman of our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee received additional annual fees of $10,000, $7,500 and $5,000, respectively, which were payable in cash unless such Chairman elected to defer all or part of such fee pursuant to our Non-Employee Directors' Deferral Program. In addition, each member of our Audit Committee was entitled to receive a fee of $4,000 per meeting for any special meetings of the Audit Committee held independently of Board meetings. There were no special meetings of the Audit Committee held in 2013. The special meeting fees were paid in cash unless a director elected to defer all or part of the meeting fees pursuant to our Non-Employee Directors' Deferral Program. Each non-employee director also received as additional retainer a grant of options to purchase 8,500 shares of our common stock and a stock grant valued at $100,000 on the grant date. Typically, the options are granted on the first business day of the year. In 2013, the options, and stock retainer, were granted on July 18, 2013 following stockholder approval of the 2005 Plan. The options were fully vested upon grant and had a term of ten years from grant and an exercise price equal to the closing price of our common stock on the NYSE on July 17, 2013. One-third of the shares granted as stock retainer vest on each of January 2, 2014, 2015 and 2016, subject to the non-employee director remaining a member of the Board on the vesting date. A non-employee director may elect to defer all or part of the annual stock grant pursuant to our Non-Employee Directors' Deferral Program. With the exception of Mr. Hatkoff, such grants were deferred for each non-employee director in 2013.

        Under our Non-Employee Directors' Deferral Program, our non-employee directors may elect to defer up to 100% of their annual fee, chairman fees, meeting fees and annual stock grant. At each director's election, fees deferred under the program may be credited in the form of either phantom stock units, account credits that accrue earnings or losses based on the 30-day LIBOR rate at the beginning of each month plus 2% (or based on such other rate or the performance of such investments as may be determined in advance by the Board) or measurement fund credits that track the performance of one or more open-ended mutual funds selected by the director. Subject to limitations contained in the program, on a fixed date each quarter, a director may convert phantom stock units

Table of Contents

into account credits or measurement fund credits or vice versa or change the mutual funds that some or all of the director's measurement fund credits track. All cash fees credited as and conversions of or into phantom stock units or measurement fund credits are based on the fair market value of our common stock or the applicable mutual fund on the date the cash fees otherwise would have been paid or the date of the conversion, as applicable. Unless otherwise elected by a director, a director's phantom stock units, account credits and measurement fund credits are payable on the earlier of the January 1st coincident with or next following the director's termination of service from the Board, or a change in control of the Company, as defined by the program. Phantom stock units are payable in an equal number of shares of our common stock; provided that we may elect to instead settle a director's phantom stock units by paying the director cash in an amount equal to the value of such shares of common stock. Account credits and measurement fund credits are payable in cash. Under the program, each director is entitled to receive dividend equivalents that are paid currently on the director's phantom stock units, unless the director elected to defer payment of such dividend equivalents and have them concurrently reinvested into additional phantom stock units.

        All stock and option grants made to our non-employee directors and settlements under our Non-Employee Directors' Deferral Program that are paid in shares of our common stock are made under the 2005 Plan.

        For the fiscal year ending 2014, we have retained the same director compensation arrangements that were in place for 2013, except that we have eliminated stock option grants to directors going forward and increased the value of the annual stock grant to $300,000 on the grant date, which shares will be fully vested on such grant date.

Table of Contents

PROPOSAL 2: ADVISORY VOTE ON THE COMPENSATION OF OUR NAMED
EXECUTIVE OFFICERS

        In accordance with the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010, our stockholders have the opportunity to vote to approve, on an advisory and non-binding basis, the compensation of our named executive officers. At our 2011 annual stockholder meeting, our stockholders advised on a non-binding basis, by an affirmative vote of a majority of all votes cast, that the Company should hold non-binding advisory votes on executive compensation on an annual basis. On July 14, 2011, the Board determined that it will include future advisory votes on the compensation of our named executive officers in the Company's annual meeting proxy materials every year until the next advisory vote on the frequency of stockholder votes on executive compensation, which will occur no later than the Company's annual meeting of stockholders in 2017. Our executive compensation programs are described in detail in this proxy statement in the section titled "Compensation Discussion and Analysis" and the accompanying tables beginning on page 23. These programs are designed to attract and retain talented individuals who possess the skills and expertise necessary to lead, manage and grow the Company.

        Section 14A(a)(1) of the Exchange Act generally requires each public company to include in its proxy statement a separate resolution subject to a non-binding stockholder vote to approve the compensation of the company's named executive officers, as disclosed in its proxy statement pursuant to Item 402 of Regulation S K, not less frequently than once every three years. This is commonly known as, and is referred to herein as, a "say-on-pay" proposal or resolution.

        Accordingly, pursuant to Section 14A(a)(1) of the Exchange Act, the Company is providing stockholders with the opportunity to approve the following non-binding, advisory resolution:

        "RESOLVED, that the compensation paid to the Company's named executive officers, as disclosed in this proxy statement pursuant to Item 402 of Regulation S-K, including the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, compensation tables and narrative discussion, is hereby APPROVED."

        Our Compensation Committee regularly reviews all elements of the compensation paid to our named executive officers. Our Compensation Committee believes that the Company's present compensation programs, as presented in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis section and the accompanying tables and related narrative disclosure in this proxy statement, promote in the best manner possible our business objectives while aligning the interests of the named executive officers with our stockholders to ensure continued positive financial results, and that our industry-leading results support this conclusion. The Company has continued to deliver positive long-term results to our stockholders and remains among the leaders in the REIT industry as well as the broader public stock market for total return to stockholders ("TRS") over the last decade, with the Company's TRS of approximately 189% for the ten-year period through December 31, 2013 significantly outperforming the MSCI REIT Index and S&P 500 Index return of approximately 124% and 104%, respectively, over the same time period. The compensation programs for our named executives are a key ingredient in motivating our executives to continue to deliver such results.

        The affirmative vote of a majority of all the votes cast at the Annual Meeting at which a quorum is present will be required to approve, on an advisory basis, the compensation of our named executive officers. The results of this advisory vote are not binding on the Compensation Committee, the Company or our Board of Directors. Nevertheless, the Board of Directors values input from our stockholders and will consider carefully the results of this vote when making future decisions concerning executive compensation.

The Board unanimously recommends a vote "FOR" the above resolution regarding the compensation of our named executive officers, as disclosed in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis section and the accompanying compensation tables in this Proxy Statement.

Table of Contents

PROPOSAL 3: RATIFICATION OF APPOINTMENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC
ACCOUNTING FIRM

        The Audit Committee of the Board has appointed the accounting firm of Ernst & Young LLP to serve as our independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2014. Stockholder ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP is not required by law, the New York Stock Exchange or the Company's organizational documents. However, as a matter of good corporate governance, the Board has elected to submit the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP to the stockholders for ratification at the 2014 annual meeting. Even if the appointment is ratified, the Audit Committee, in its discretion, may select a different independent registered public accounting firm at any time if the Audit Committee believes that such a change would be in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders. If our stockholders do not ratify the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP, the Audit Committee will take that fact into consideration, together with such other factors it deems relevant, in determining its next selection of an independent registered public accounting firm. Ernst & Young LLP has served as our independent registered public accounting firm since our formation in June 1997 and is considered by our management to be well-qualified. Ernst & Young LLP has advised us that neither it nor any member thereof has any financial interest, direct or indirect, in the Company or any of our subsidiaries in any capacity.

        A representative of Ernst & Young LLP will be present at the annual meeting, will be given the opportunity to make a statement at the annual meeting if he or she so desires and will be available to respond to appropriate questions.

        A majority of all of the votes cast at the annual meeting at which a quorum is present is required for the ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2014. We will treat abstentions as shares that are present and entitled to vote for purposes of determining the presence or absence of a quorum. Abstentions do not constitute a vote "for" or "against" and will not be counted as "votes cast". Therefore, abstentions will have no effect on this proposal.

Fee Disclosure

Audit Fees

        Fees, including out-of-pocket expenses, for audit services totaled approximately $3,359,018 in fiscal year 2013 and $3,231,689 in fiscal year 2012. Audit fees include fees associated with our annual audits and related reviews of our annual reports on Form 10-K and quarterly reports on Form 10-Q. In addition, audit fees include Sarbanes-Oxley Section 404 planning and testing, fees for public filings in connection with various property acquisitions, joint venture audits, and services relating to public filings in connection with our preferred and common stock and debt offerings and certain other transactions. Our joint venture partners paid their pro rata share of any joint venture audit fees. Audit fees also include fees for accounting research and consultations.

Audit-Related Fees

        Fees for audit-related services totaled approximately $59,225 in both 2013 and 2012. The audit-related services principally include fees for operating expense audits and agreed-upon procedures projects.

Tax Fees

        No fees were incurred for tax services, including tax compliance, tax advice and tax planning in either 2013 or 2012.

Table of Contents

All Other Fees

        Fees for other services not included above totaled approximately $15,150 in 2013. No fees for other services were incurred in 2012.

        Our Audit Committee considers whether the provision by Ernst & Young LLP of any services that would be required to be described under "All Other Fees" would be compatible with maintaining Ernst & Young LLP's independence from both management and the Company.

Pre-Approval Policies and Procedures of our Audit Committee

        Our Audit Committee must pre-approve all audit services and permissible non-audit services provided by our independent registered public accounting firm, except for any de minimis non-audit services. Non-audit services are considered de minimis if: (1) the aggregate amount of all such non-audit services constitutes less than five percent of the total amount of revenues we paid to our independent registered public accounting firm during the fiscal year in which they are provided; (2) we did not recognize such services at the time of the engagement to be non-audit services; and (3) such services are promptly brought to our Audit Committee's or any of its members' attention and approved by our Audit Committee or any of its members who has authority to give such approval prior to the completion of the audit. None of the fees reflected above were incurred as a result of non-audit services provided by our independent registered public accounting firm pursuant to this de minimis exception. All services provided by Ernst & Young LLP in 2013 were pre-approved by our Audit Committee. Our Audit Committee may delegate to one or more of its members who is an independent director the authority to grant pre-approvals.

The Board unanimously recommends a vote "FOR" the ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm.

Table of Contents

AUDIT COMMITTEE REPORT

        The following report of the Audit Committee of the Board regarding the responsibilities and functions of our Audit Committee will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference in any previous or future documents filed by us with the SEC under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, except to the extent that we specifically incorporate this report by reference in any such document.

        Our Audit Committee oversees our financial reporting process on behalf of the Board, in accordance with our Audit Committee Charter. Management has the primary responsibility for the preparation, presentation and integrity of our financial statements, accounting and financial reporting principles, internal controls, and procedures designed to ensure compliance with accounting standards, applicable laws and regulations. In fulfilling its oversight responsibilities, our Audit Committee reviewed and discussed the audited financial statements in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013 with management, including a discussion of the quality, not just the acceptability, of the accounting principles, the reasonableness of significant judgments and the clarity of disclosures in the financial statements.

        Our Audit Committee reviewed and discussed with Ernst & Young LLP, our independent registered public accounting firm, who is responsible for auditing our financial statements and for expressing an opinion on the conformity of those audited financial statements with accounting principles generally accepted in the U.S., their judgments as to the quality, not just the acceptability, of our accounting principles and such other matters as are required to be discussed with the Audit Committee under Auditing Standard No. 16, "Communications with Audit Committees," as adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. Our Audit Committee received from Ernst & Young LLP the written disclosures and the letter required by the applicable requirements of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board regarding communications with the Audit Committee concerning independence, discussed with Ernst & Young LLP their independence from both management and the Company and considered the compatibility of Ernst & Young LLP's provision of non-audit services to the Company with their independence.

        Our Audit Committee discussed with Ernst & Young LLP the overall scope and plans for their audit. Our Audit Committee met with Ernst & Young LLP, with and without management present, to discuss the results of their examinations, their evaluations of our internal controls and the overall quality of our financial reporting, including off-balance sheet investments and our compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.

        In reliance on the reviews and discussions referred to above, but subject to the limitations on the role and responsibilities of our Audit Committee referred in the Report, our Audit Committee recommended to the Board (and the Board has approved) that the audited financial statements be included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013 for filing with the SEC.

        The Board has determined that each member of our Audit Committee is financially literate and has accounting or related financial management expertise, as such qualifications are defined under the rules of the New York Stock Exchange. The Board also has determined that our Audit Committee has at least one "audit committee financial expert," as defined in Item 401(h) of Securities and Exchange Commission Regulation S-K, such expert being Mr. Edwin Thomas Burton, III, and that he is "independent," as that term is used in Item 7(d)(3)(iv) of Schedule 14A under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

        Our Audit Committee held nine meetings during fiscal year 2013 (including sessions with only independent directors attending after certain of these meetings). The members of our Audit Committee are not engaged professionally in the practice of auditing or accounting. Committee members rely,

Table of Contents

without independent investigation or verification, on the information provided to them and on the representations made by management and our independent registered public accounting firm. Accordingly, our Audit Committee's oversight does not provide an independent basis to determine that management has maintained appropriate accounting and financial reporting principles or appropriate internal controls and procedures designed to assure compliance with accounting standards and applicable laws and regulations. Furthermore, our Audit Committee's considerations and discussions referred to above do not assure that the audit of our financial statements has been carried out in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (U.S.), that the financial statements are presented in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the U.S. or that our registered public accounting firm is in fact "independent."

Table of Contents

AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE MATTERS

We are committed to operating our business under strong and accountable corporate governance practices. You are encouraged to visit the "Investors—“Investors—Corporate Governance"Governance” section of our corporate website athttp://www.slgreen.com to view or to obtain copies of our committee charters, Code of Ethics, Governance Principles and director independence standards. The information found on, or accessible through, our website is not incorporated into, and does not form a part of, this proxy statement or any other report or document wedocumentwe file with, or furnish to, the SEC. You also may obtain, free of charge, a copy of the respective charters of our committees, Code of Ethics, Governance Principles and director independence standards by directing your request in writing to SL Green Realty Corp., 420,420 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York 10170-1881,York10170-1881, Attention: Investor Relations. Additional information relating to the corporate governance of the Company also is included in other sections of this proxy statement.

Information Regarding the listing standards of the NYSENominees and the applicable rules promulgated by the SEC. In addition, the Board has adopted director independence standards that assist the Board in making its determinationsContinuing Directors

The following table and biographical descriptions set forth certain information with respect to the independencenominees for election as Class II directors at the2017 annual meeting and the continuing Class I and Class III directors whose terms expire at the annual meetings of directors. The Board has determined affirmatively,stockholders in2019 and2018, respectively, based upon its review of all relevant facts and circumstances and after considering all applicable relationships of which the Board had knowledge, between or among the directors and the Company or our management (some of such relationships are described in the section of this proxy statement entitled "Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions"), that each of the following directors and director nominees has no direct or indirect material relationship with us and is independent under the listing standards of the NYSE, the applicable rules promulgated by the SEC and our director independence standards: Messrs. Edwin T. Burton, III, John H. Alschuler, Jr., John S. Levy and Craig M. Hatkoff. The Board has determined that Messrs. Green and Holliday, our two other directors and, in the case of Mr. Holliday, a director nominee, are not independent because they are also executive officers of the Company.

Code of Ethics

        The Board has adopted a Code of Ethics that applies to our directors, executive officers and employees. The Code of Ethics is designed to assist our directors, executive officers and employees in complying with law and, in resolving moral and ethical issues that may arise and in complying with our policies and procedures. Among the areas addressed by the Code of Ethics are compliance with applicable laws, conflicts of interest, use and protection of the Company's assets, confidentiality, communications with the public, accounting matters, records retention, fair dealing, discrimination, harassment and health and safety.

Table of Contents

Audit Committee Financial Expert

        The Board has determined that Edwin T. Burton, III qualifies as an "audit committee financial expert," as defined in Item 401(h) of SEC Regulation S-K.

Communications with the Board

information furnished byeach director. We have a processproposed to declassify our board. Subject to stockholder approval, we will phase out board classes, and directors whose terms are expiring will be elected for one-year terms. If our proposal to declassify is approved, then our Board of Directors will be fully declassified by which stockholders and/or other parties may communicate with the Board, individual directors (including the independent directors) or independent directors as a group. Any such communications may be sent to the Board or any named individual director (including the independent directors), by U.S. mail or overnight delivery and should be directed to Andrew S. Levine, Secretary, at our2020 annual meeting.

6  SL Green Realty Corp., 420 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York 10170-1881. Mr. Levine forwards all such communications to the intended recipient or recipients. Any such communications may be made anonymously.

Table of Contents

OUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Class II Nominees—Terms Will Expire in 2020

2017 Proxy Statement  Whistleblowing and Whistleblower Protection Policy
7

        Our Audit Committee has established procedures for (1) the receipt, retention and treatmentTable of complaints received by the Company regarding accounting, internal accounting controls or auditing matters, and (2) the confidential and anonymous submission by our employees of concerns regarding questionable accounting or auditing matters. If you wish to contact our Audit Committee to report complaints or concerns relating to the financial reporting of the Company, you may do so in writing to the Chairman of our Audit Committee, c/o Andrew S. Levine, Secretary, Contents

OUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

8  SL Green Realty Corp., 420 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York 10170-1881. Any such communications may be made anonymously.

Table of Contents

Director Attendance at Annual Meetings
OUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Class I Continuing Directors—Terms Will Expire in 2019

2017 Proxy Statement  9

Table of Contents

OUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Class III Continuing Directors—Terms Will Expire in 2018

10  SL Green Realty Corp.

Table of Contents

OUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Board Refreshment

Led by our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, the Board engages in ongoing director succession planning, including a focus on refreshing the Board and enhancing the level of diversity. We encourage each memberbelieve that we have achieved much in this regard; we have added three new independent directors since2011, including two women – Betsy Atkins, who joined our Board in2015, and Lauren Dillard, who joined our Board in2016. Together with the addition of Craig Hatkoff in2011, these additions reduce the average age and tenure of our independent directors by approximately nine years.

Thanks to the efforts of the Board, we believe that, taken as a whole, the Board has the desired mix of expertise, experience, reputation and diversity necessary for us to attend each annual meetingcontinue to deliver superior performance in a highly competitive marketplace, as well as the knowledge, ability and independence to continue to deliver the high standard of stockholders. Onegovernance expected by our investors.

2017 Proxy Statement  11

Table of our directors attended the annual meeting of stockholders held on June 13, 2013.Contents

OUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Identification of Director Candidates

Our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee assists the Board in identifying and reviewing director candidates to determine whether they qualify for membership on the Board and recommends director nominees to the Board to be considered for election at our annual meeting of stockholders. Our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee has adopted a written policy on the criteria and process of identifying and reviewing director candidates.

Each director candidate must have (1) education and experience that provides knowledge of business, financial, governmental or legal matters that are relevant to the Company'sCompany’s business or to its status as a publicly owned company, (2) an unblemished reputation for integrity, (3) a reputation for exercising good business judgment and (4) sufficient available time to be able to fulfill his or her responsibilities as a member of the Board and of any committees to which he or she may be appointed.

In making recommendations to the Board, our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee considers such factors as it deems appropriate. These factors may include judgment, skill, diversity (including diversity of knowledge, skills, professional experience, education, expertise and representation in industries relevant to the Company), ability to bring new perspectives and add to Board discussion and consideration, experience with businesses and other organizations comparable to the Company (including experience managing public companies, marketing experience or experience determining compensation of officers of public companies), the interplay of the candidate'scandidate’s experience with the experience of other Board members, the candidate'scandidate’s industry knowledge and experience, the ability of a nominee to devote sufficient time to the affairs of the Company, any actual or potential

Table of Contents

conflicts of interest and whether the candidate meets the NYSE independence criteria, the extent to which the candidate generally would be a desirable addition to the Board and any committees of the Board, qualifications to serve on appropriate Board committees (including financial acumen), technological literacy, strategic insight, familiarity with desired markets or regions, ability to make independent and analytical judgments, ability to introduce the Company to business or other opportunities, reputation in the corporate governance community, personal rapport with senior officers of the Company, risk management skills and effective communication skills. Such matters are considered in light of the skills, qualifications and diversity of the other members of the Board.

The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee ensures that the potential nominee is not an employee or agent of and does not serve on the board of directors or similar managing body of any of our competitors and determines whether the potential nominee has an interest in any transactions to which we are a party.

Prior to a vote as to whether a potential nominee is recommended to the Board of Directors, each member of the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee is provided reasonable access to such potential nominee. Such access includes a reasonablean opportunity to interview such potential nominee in person or by telephone and to submit questions to such potential candidate. In addition, each potential nominee provides the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee with a written detailed biography and identify on which committees of the Board, if any, the potential nominee would be willing to serve.other requested information.

Our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee may solicitsolicits and considerconsiders suggestions of our directors or management regarding possible nominees. Our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee also may procure the services of outside sources or third parties to assist in the identification of director candidates.

Our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee may consider director candidates recommended by our stockholders. Our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee will apply the same standards in considering candidates submitted by stockholders as it does in evaluating candidates submitted by members of the Board. Any recommendations by stockholders are to follow the procedures outlined under "Stockholder Proposals"“Other Information—Other Matters—Stockholder Proposals and Nominations” in this proxy statement and should provide the reasons supporting a candidate'scandidate’s recommendation, the candidate'scandidate’s qualifications and the candidate'scandidate’s written consent to being considered as a director nominee. No

In connection with the identification and review of director candidates were recommended by our stockholders for election at the 2014 annual meeting.

Executive Sessions of Non-Management Directors

        Our Governance Principles require the non-management directors serving on the Boardand related matters, FTI Consulting, Inc., or FTI Consulting, provides services to meet in an executive session at least annually without the presence of any directors or other persons who are part of our management. In accordanceus that include actively working with such requirement, the independent directors, who currently comprise all of the non-management directors, meet in executive sessions from time to time on such a basis. The executive sessions are regularly chaired by our Lead Independent Director.

Policy on Majority Voting

        The Board has adopted a policy on majority voting in the election of directors. Pursuant to this policy, in an uncontested election of directors, any nominee who receives a greater number of votes withheld from his or her election than votes for his or her election will, within ten business days following the certification of the stockholder vote, tender his or her written resignation to the Chairman of the Board, for consideration by the NominatingLead Independent Director and Corporate Governance Committee. Theour Chief Executive Officer in reviewing governance issues, specific board member roles and responsibilities and committee assignments. FTI Consulting also assists us in the initial search, screening, interviewing and vetting of potential new directors and worked closely with our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee will considerin connection with the resignationrecent additions of Craig Hatkoff in2011, Betsy Atkins in2015 (who was initially recommended for consideration by our Chief Executive Officer and within 60 days followinghas been nominated for re-election at the date of the stockholders' meeting at which the election occurred, will make a recommendation to the Board concerning the acceptance or rejection of the resignation.annual meeting) and Lauren Dillard in2016.

12 SL Green Realty Corp.

---

Table of Contents

OUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Board Structure and Independence

        Under the policy, the Board will take formal action on the recommendation no later than 90 days following the date of the stockholders' meeting. In considering the recommendation, the Board will consider the information, factors and alternatives considered by the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee and such additional factors, information and alternatives as the Board deems relevant. We will publicly disclose, in a Form 8-K filed with the SEC, the Board's decision within four business days after the decision is made. Structure

The Board also will provide, if applicable, the Board's reason or reasonscurrently consists of nine members and is divided into three classes. Directors in each class serve for rejecting the tendered resignation.a term of three years and until their successors are duly elected and qualify. The term of directors of one class expires at each annual meeting of stockholders.

Board Leadership Structure
Structure; Lead Independent Director

As noted above, ourthe Board currently is comprised of foursix independent and twothree employee directors. Mr. Green has served as Chairman of the Board since 1997since1997 and serves as an executive officer, working in conjunction with Mr. Holliday, our Chief Executive Officer.officer. The Board has appointed Mr. Alschuler, one of the independent directors, as Lead Independent Director. We believe that the number of independent, experienced directors that make up ourthe Board, along with the independent oversight of our Lead Independent Director, benefits the Company and its stockholders.

We recognize that different board leadership structures may be appropriate for companies in different situations, and that no one structure is suitable for all companies. Our current Board leadership structure is optimal for us because it demonstrates to our employees and other stakeholders that the Company is under strong leadership, coordinated closely between a separate Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board. In our judgment, the Company, like many companies, has been well-served by this leadership structure.

To facilitate the role of the independent directors, the Board has determined that it is appropriate for the independent directors to appoint one independent director to serve as Lead Independent Director. In addition to presiding at executive sessions of independent directors, the Lead Independent Director has the responsibility to: (1) consult with the Chief Executive Officer as to an appropriate schedule and agenda for each Board meeting, seeking to ensure that the independent directors can perform their duties effectively and responsibly, (2) ensure the independent directors have adequate resources, especially by way of full, timely and relevant information to support their decision making, (3) advise the Chief Executive Officer as to the quality, quantity and timeliness of the information submitted by the Company'sCompany’s management that is necessary or appropriate for the independent directors to effectively and responsibly perform their duties, (4) recommend to thetothe Board and the Board Committees the retention of advisers and consultants who report directly to the Board, (5) ensure that independent directors have adequate opportunities to meet and discuss issues in sessions of the independent directors without management present and, as appropriate, call meetings of the Independent Directors, (6) serve as Chairman of the sessions of the independent directors, (7) serve as principal liaison between the independent directors and the Chief Executive Officer of the Company and between the independent directors and senior management, (8) communicate to management, as appropriate, the results of private discussions among independent directors, (9) chair the meetings of the Board when the Chairman is not present, (10) with respect to questions and comments directed to the Lead Independent Director or to the independent directors as a group, determine the appropriate means of response, with such consultation with the Chief Executive Officer and other directors as the Lead Independent Director may deem appropriate and (11) perform such other duties as the Board from time to time may delegate. Mr. Alschuler currently is servingserves as the Lead Independent Director.

Throughout the year, ourthe Board discusses corporate governance practices with stockholders and third party advisers to ensure that the Board and its committees follow practices that are optimal for the Company and its stockholders while also delivering superior total return. As part of this process, the Board conducts an annual evaluation in order to determine whether it and its committees are functioningfunction effectively, with independent directors meeting separately with outside counsel. The discussion with stockholders, as well as the evaluations, are the basis for the Board'sBoard’s annual review of

Table of Contents

possible changes to the Company'sCompany’s corporate governance practices. Our Governance Principles provide the flexibility for ourthe Board to modify our leadership structure as the Board focusesdeems appropriate.

Director Independence

Our Governance Principles provide that a majority of our directors serving on current trendsthe Board must be independent as required by the listing standards of the NYSE and the applicable rules promulgated by the SEC. In addition, the Board adopted director independence standards that assist the Board in making its determinations with respect to the independence of directors. The Board determined affirmatively, based upon its review of all relevant facts and circumstances and after considering all applicablerelationships of which the Board had knowledge, between or among the directors and the Company or our management (some of such relationships are described in the section of this proxy statement entitled “Certain Relationships and Related Party Transactions”), that each of the following directors and director nominees has no direct or indirect material relationship with us and is independent under the listing standards of the NYSE, the applicable rules promulgated by the SEC and our director independence

2017 Proxy Statement 13

---

Table of Contents

OUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

standards: Mses. Betsy Atkins and Lauren B. Dillard and Messrs. Edwin T. Burton, III, John H. Alschuler, John S. Levy and Craig M. Hatkoff. The Board has determined that Messrs. Steven L. Green, Marc Holliday andAndrew W. Mathias, our three other directors, are not independent because they are also executive officers of the Company.

Executive Sessions of Non-Management Directors

Our Governance Principles require the non-management directors serving on the Board to meet in an executive session at least annually without the presence of any directors or other persons who are part of our management. In accordance with such requirement, theindependent directors, who currently comprise all of the non-management directors, meet in executive sessions from time to time on such a basis. The executive sessions are regularly chaired by our Lead Independent Director.

Communications with the Board

We have a process by which stockholders and/or other parties may communicate with the Board, individual directors (including the independent directors) or independent directors as a group. Any such communications may be sent to the Board or any named individual director (including the independent directors), by U.S. mail orovernight delivery and should be directed to Andrew S. Levine, Secretary, at SL Green Realty Corp.,420 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York10170-1881. Mr. Levine forwards all such communications to the intended recipient or recipients. Any such communications may be made anonymously.

Director Attendance

The Board held six meetings and all directors attended75% or more of the board of directors meetings and meetings of the committees on which they served during the periods they served during fiscal year2016.

We encourage each member of the Board to attend each annual meeting of stockholders. Four of our directors attended the annual meeting of stockholders held on June2, 2016.

Board Committees

The Board has four standing committees: an Audit Committee, a Compensation Committee, a Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee and an Executive Committee. The current charters for each of the Audit Committee, Compensation Committee and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee are available on our corporate website at www.slgreen.com under the “Investors—Corporate Governance” section. Further, wewill provide a copy of these charters without charge to each stockholder upon written request. Requests for copies should be addressed to Andrew S. Levine, Secretary, at SL Green Realty Corp.,420 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York10170-1881. From time to time, the Board also may create additional committees for such purposes as the Board may determine.

Audit Committee

Our Audit Committee consists of Edwin Thomas Burton, III (Chairman), Lauren B. Dillard and Craig M. Hatkoff, each of whom is “independent” within the meaning of the rules of the NYSE and the SEC and each of whom meets the financial literacy standard required by the rules of the NYSE. Our Audit Committee’s primary purpose is to select and appoint our independent registered public accounting firm and to assist the Board in its oversight of the integrity of the Company’s financial statements; the Company’s compliance with legal and regulatory requirements; the qualifications and independence of the registered public accounting firm employed by the Company for the audit of the Company’s financial statements; the performance of the people responsible for the Company’s internal audit function; and the performance of the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm. Our Audit Committee also prepares the report that the rules ofthe SEC require be included in this proxy statement and provides an open avenue of communication among the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm, its internal auditors, its management and the Board. Our management is responsible for the preparation, presentation and integrity of our financial statements and for the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting. Management is responsible for maintaining appropriate accounting and financial reporting principles and policies and internal controls and procedures that provide for compliance with accounting standards and applicable laws and regulations. Our independent registered public accounting firm is responsible for planning and carrying out a proper audit of our annual financial statements prior to the filing of our Annual Report on Form10-K, reviewing our quarterly financial statements prior to the filing of each Quarterly Report on Form10-Q

14 SL Green Realty Corp.

---

Table of Contents

OUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

and annually auditing the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting and other procedures. Our Audit Committee held12 meetings during fiscal year2016. Additional information regarding the functions performed by our Audit Committee is set forth in the “Audit Committee Report” included in this annual proxy statement.

Audit Committee Financial Expert

The Board determined that Edwin T. Burton, III qualifies as an “audit committee financial expert,” as defined in Item401(h) of SEC Regulation S-K.

Compensation Committee

Our Compensation Committee consists of John H. Alschuler (Chairman), Edwin Thomas Burton, III and John S. Levy, each of whom is “independent” within the meaning of the rules of the NYSE. Our Compensation Committee’s primary purposes are to determine how the Company’s Chief Executive Officer should be compensated; to administer the Company’s employee benefit plans and executive compensation programs; to determine compensation of our executive officers other than our Chief Executive Officer; and to produce the report on executive compensation that is required to be included in this proxy statement. With respect to the compensation of our executive officers, our Compensation Committee solicits recommendations from our Chief Executive Officer regarding total compensation for all executive officers other than the Chief Executive Officer and reviews his recommendations in terms of total compensation and the allocation of such compensation among base salary, annual bonus amounts and other long-term incentive compensation as well as the allocation of such items between cash and equity compensation. Our Compensation Committee retained Gressle & McGinley LLC as its independent outside compensation consulting firm and engaged Gressle & McGinley LLC to provide our Compensation Committee with relevant data concerning the marketplace, our peer group and its own independent analysis and recommendations concerning executive compensation. Gressle & McGinley LLC regularly participates in Compensation Committee meetings. See “Executive Compensation—Compensation Discussion and Analysis.” Our Compensation Committee held two meetings during fiscal year2016.

Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee

Our Nominating and Corporate GovernanceCommittee consists of John H. Alschuler, Betsy Atkins, Craig M. Hatkoff and John S. Levy (Chairman), each of whom is “independent” within the meaning of the rules of the NYSE. Our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee’s primary purposes are to identify individuals qualified to fill vacancies or newly-created positions on the Board; to recommend to the Board the persons it shouldnominate for election as directors at annual meetings of the Company’s stockholders; to recommend directors to serve on all committees of the Board; and to develop and recommend to the Board governance principles applicable to the Company. Our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee held one meeting during fiscal year2016.

Executive Committee

Subject to the supervision and oversight of the Board, our Executive Committee, which consists of Stephen L. Green (Chairman), Marc Holliday and John H. Alschuler, is responsible for, among other things, the approval of our acquisition, disposition and financing of investments; the authorization of the execution of certain contracts and agreements, including those relating to our borrowing of money; and the exercise, in general, of all other powers ofthe Board, except for such powers that require action by all directors or the independent directors under our articles of incorporation or bylaws or under applicable law. Our Executive Committee did not hold any meetings and did not take any actions by written consent during fiscal year2016, as all matters within its authority were approved by the Board.

2017 Proxy Statement 15

---

Table of Contents

OUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Corporate Governance

Stockholder Outreach

The Board and our Lead Independent Director believe that engaging in stockholder outreach is an essential element of strong corporate governance. We strive for a collaborative approach to issues of importance to investors and continually seek to better understand the views of our investors on key topics affecting our business. In2016 and2017, our Lead Independent Director and members ofour senior management team engaged with many of our largest institutional investors, representing ownership of approximately74% of our outstanding common stock. We then shared the feedback received during our outreach process with the Board and its committees to make meaningful changes to our corporate governance arenapractices and launch new initiatives.

Declassified Board

As a result of our stockholder engagement efforts and our commitment to corporate governance, we have proposed to declassify our Board of Directors. With stockholder approval, we will phase out board classes, so that beginning in2018 directors whose terms are expiring will be electedfor one-year terms. By our2020 annual meeting, our Board of Directors will be fully declassified. For more information regarding the declassification of our Board, see “Proposal3: Charter Amendment to Declassify Board of Directors” in this proxy statement.

Proxy Access

As a result of our stockholder engagement efforts and our commitment to corporate governance, in March2016 we adopted a proxy access bylaw, enabling our stockholders to include their own director nominees in our proxy materials along with candidates nominated by the Board, so longas stockholder-nominees meet certain requirements, as set forth in our bylaws. For more information on our proxy access bylaw, see the section entitled “Other Matters—Stockholder Proposals and Nominations.”

Majority Voting Standard and Director Resignation Policy

As a result of our stockholder engagement efforts and our commitment to corporate governance, in March2016 the Board implemented a majority voting standard for director elections. In an uncontested election (as is the case for this annual meeting), our bylaws provide that a majority of all the votes cast with respect to a nominee’s election is required for such nominee to be elected to serve on the Board. This means that the number of votes cast “for” a nominee must exceed the number of votes cast “against” such nominee, with abstentions and broker non-votes not counted as a vote cast either “for” or “against” a nominee. With respect to a contested election, a plurality of all of the votes cast is sufficient for the election of directors. For this purpose, a contested election is deemed to occur at any meeting of stockholders for which the Secretary determines that the number of nominees or proposed nominees exceeds the number of directors to be elected at such meeting as of the seventh day preceding the date the Company performance.files its definitive proxy statement for such meeting with the Securities and Exchange Commission (regardless of whether or not thereafter revised or supplemented).

If a nominee who currently is serving as a director receives a greater number of votes “against” his or her election than votes “for” such election in an uncontested election, Maryland law provides that the director would continueto serve on the Board as a “holdover director.” However, under our Governance Principles, any nominee for election as a director in an uncontested election who receives a greater number of votes “against” his or her election than votes “for” such election must, within ten business days following the certification of the stockholder vote, tender his or her written resignation to the Chairman of the Board for consideration by the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. The Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee will consider the resignation and, within60 days following the date of the stockholders’ meeting at which the election occurred, will make a recommendation to the Board concerning the acceptance or rejection of the resignation.

The Board will then take formal action on the recommendation no later than90 days following the date of the stockholders’ meeting at which the election occurred. In considering the recommendation, the Board will consider the information, factors and alternatives considered by the Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee and such additional factors, information and alternatives as the Board deems relevant. We will publicly disclose, in a Form8-K filed with the SEC, the Board’s decision within four business days after the decision is made. The Board also will provide, if applicable, the Board’s reason or reasons for rejecting the tendered resignation.

16 SL Green Realty Corp.

---

Table of Contents

OUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Sustainability

The Board shares our commitment to environmentally sustainable initiatives and innovation that deliver efficiency, value and health for our business, tenants and community. Structured around the three key areas of efficiency, tenant experience and industry leadership, our sustainability program integrates market-leading initiatives to address energy usage, natural resource consumption, air quality, recycling, transportation and education.

Our commitment toward efficiency is evidenced by portfolio-wide investments. By implementing cutting edge technologies and modernizing obsolete building systems, we continue to optimize building performance, reduce maintenance costs and provide tenants with a Class A experience. We have installed more than35,000 LED bulbs, monitor energy consumption through a real-time energy platform and track our portfolio’s sustainability performance through a web based environmental management system. Currently, we are exploring the deployment of cogeneration, photovoltaic “solar” panels, fuel cells and steam reduction technologies to provide healthier and more reliable forms of energy throughout our portfolio.

Key to our program is active tenant engagement. We partner with tenant sustainability teams in a number of ways, including LEED-CI certifications, Earth Day events, annual community service days, quarterly tenant educational webinars on sustainability topics, Urban Green Council award nominations and participation in the NYC Mayor’s Zero Waste Challenge.

Our industry leadership has been widely recognized. During2015 and2016, we were recognized by the United States Environmental Protection Agency as an ENERGY STAR Partner of the Year for our efforts to strategically manage and improve energy efficiency across our Manhattan and suburban portfolios. In addition to releasing a compliant GRI report for the past3 consecutive years, we have been recognized by Newsweek as one of the greenest companies in the United States and as REIT of the Year – Sustainability by Real Estate & Investment Finance in its2017 award ceremonies. Additionally, we have been included in the MSCI Sustainability Index since2015. Our sustainability strategy, achievements and reports are available on our website at http://www.slgreen.com/sustainability.

Risk Oversight

        OurThe Board is responsible for overseeing the Company'sCompany’s risk management process. The Board focuses on the Company'sCompany’s general risk management strategy and the most significant risks facing the Company, and ensures that appropriate risk mitigation strategies are implemented by management. The Board also is apprised of particular risk management matters in connection with its general oversight and approval of corporate matters. In particular, the Board focuses on overseeing risks relating to the structure and amount of our debt, including overall aggregate principal balance, variable rate versus fixed rate debt, maturity schedules and balance of secured and unsecured debt.

The Board has delegated to the Audit Committee oversight of the Company'sCompany’s risk management process. Among its duties, the Audit Committee reviews with management (a) the Company policies with respect to risk assessment and management of risks that may be material to the Company, (b) the Company'sCompany’s system of disclosure controls and system of internal controls over financial reporting and (c) the Company'sCompany’s compliance with legal and regulatory requirements. The Audit Committee also is responsible for reviewing major legislative and regulatory developments that could have a material impact on the Company's contingentCompany’scontingent liabilities and risks. Our other Board committees also consider and address risk as they perform their respective committee responsibilities. All committees report to the full Board as appropriate, including when a matter rises to the level of a material or enterprise level risk.

In addition, our Compensation Committee considers the risks to the Company'sCompany’s stockholders and to the achievement of our goals that may be inherent in the Company'sCompany’s executive compensation program.

The Company'sCompany’s management is responsible for day-to-day risk management, including the primary monitoring and testing function for company-wide policies and procedures, and management of the day-to-day oversight of the risk management strategy for the ongoing business of the Company. This oversight includes identifying, evaluating, and addressing potential risks that may exist at the enterprise, strategic, financial, operational, and compliance and reporting levels.

We believe the division of risk management responsibilities described above is an effective approach for addressing the risks facing the Company and that ourthe Board leadership structure supports this approach.

Governance Principles

The Board adopted Governance Principles that address significant issues of corporate governance and set forth procedures by which the Board carries out its responsibilities. Among the areas addressed by theGovernance Principles are director qualification standards, director responsibilities, director access to management and independent advisors, director compensation, director orientation and continuing education, management

2017 Proxy Statement 17

---

Table of Contents

OUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

succession, annual performance evaluation of the Board and management responsibilities. Our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee is responsible for,among other things, assessing and periodically reviewing the adequacy of the Governance Principles and will recommend, as appropriate, proposed changes to the Board.

Code of Ethics

The Board adopted a Code of Ethics that applies to our directors, executive officers and employees. The Code of Ethics is designed to assist our directors, executive officers and employees in complying with the law and in resolving moral and ethical issues that may arise and in complying with our policies and procedures. Among the areas addressed by the Code of Ethics are compliance with applicable laws, conflicts of interest, use and protectionof the Company’s assets, confidentiality, communications with the public, accounting matters, records retention, fair dealing, discrimination, harassment and health and safety. We intend to disclose on our corporate website any amendment to, or waiver of, any provisions of this Code applicable to our directors and executive officers that would otherwise be required to be disclosed under the rules of the SEC or the NYSE.

Whistleblowing and Whistleblower Protection Policy

Our Audit Committee established procedures for (1) the receipt, retention and treatment of complaints received by the Company regarding accounting, internal accounting controls or auditing matters, and (2) the confidential and anonymous submission by our employees of concerns regarding questionable accounting or auditing matters. If you wish to contact our Audit Committee to reportcomplaints or concerns relating to the financial reporting of the Company, you may do so in writing to the Chairman of our Audit Committee, c/o Andrew S. Levine, Secretary, SL Green Realty Corp.,420 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York10170-1881. Any such communications may be made anonymously.

Director Compensation

Directors of the Company who are also employees receive no additional compensation for their services as directors. The following table sets forth information regarding the compensation paid to our non-employee directors during the fiscal year ended December31,2016.

Name		Fees Earned or Paid in Cash(1) ($)			Stock Awards(2) ($)			Option Awards(3) ($)		Total ($)
Edwin T. Burton, III		$	90,000		$	300,000		—		$	390,000
John H. Alschuler		$	192,000		$	300,000		—		$	492,000
John S. Levy		$	85,000		$	300,000		—		$	385,000
Craig M. Hatkoff		$	77,000		$	300,000		—		$	377,000
Betsy Atkins		$	77,000		$	300,000		—		$	377,000
Lauren B. Dillard(4)			—			—		—			—

(1)	Mr. Levy deferred all of his2016cash compensation and Mr. Alschuler deferred $67,500of his2016cash compensation pursuant to our Non-Employee Directors’ Deferral Program. Mr. Burton elected to receive all of his2016cash compensation and Mr. Hatkoff elected to receive $25,000of his2016cash compensation in the form of shares of our common stock. Accordingly, our non-employee directors received the following shares of our common stock or phantom stock units with respect to the portion of their2016cash compensation that they elected to defer or receive in stock, as applicable: Mr. Burton received865shares, Mr. Alschuler received648units, Mr. Levy received817units and Mr. Hatkoff received240shares.
(2)	Amounts shown reflect the full grant date fair value on the date of grant of shares of our common stock or phantom stock units granted to the directors in2016, excluding shares of our common stock and phantom stock units credited in lieu of annual fees and meeting fees.
(3)	There were no stock options granted to members of the Board in2016. At December31,2016, the aggregate number of option awards held by our non-employee directors was as follows: Mr. Burton—6,000; Mr. Alschuler—26,500; and Mr. Levy—38,500.
(4)	Ms. Dillard was appointed to the Board effective December31,2016, and did not receive any compensation during the fiscal year ended December31,2016.

18 SL Green Realty Corp.

---

Table of Contents

OUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Only non-employee Directors are compensated for service on the Board. During the fiscal year ended December31,2016, the fees for non-employee Directors were:

Annual cash retainers
Cash retainer		$	50,000
Additional cash retainer if serving as the Lead Independent Director		$	85,000
Additional cash retainer if serving as a chair of the Audit Committee		$	10,000
Additional cash retainer if serving as a chair of the Compensation Committee		$	7,500
Additional cash retainer if serving as a chair of the Corporate Governance Committee		$	5,000
Meeting fees
For each meeting of the Board or a committee of the Board		$	1,500
For each special meeting of the Audit Committee held independently of Board meetings		$	4,000
Stock grant
Valued at the grant date with shares fully vested on such grant date.		$	300,000

The annual fees and meeting fees generally are payable quarterly in cash. Each director may elect to receive some or all of these fees in stock and, as noted below, may elect to defer some or all of these fees.

Under our Non-Employee Directors’ Deferral Program, our non-employee directors were entitled to elect to defer up to 100% of their annual fees, meeting fees and annual stock grant. At each director’s election, cash fees deferred under the program could be credited in the form of either phantom stock units, account credits that accrue earnings or losses based on the 30-day LIBOR rate at the beginning of each month plus 2% (or based on such other rate or the performance of such investments as may be determined in advance by the Board) or measurement fund credits that track the performance of one or more open-ended mutual funds selected by the director. Stock grants deferred under the program are credited in the form of phantom stock units. Subject to limitations contained in the program, on a fixed date each quarter, a director may convert phantom stock units into account credits or measurement fund credits or vice versa or change the mutual funds that some or all of the director’s measurement fund credits track. All cash fees credited as, and conversions of or into, phantom stock units or measurement fund credits are based on the fair market value of our common stock or the applicable mutual fund on the date the cash fees otherwise would have been paid or the date of the conversion, as applicable. Unless otherwise elected by a director, a director’s phantom stock units, account credits and measurement fund credits are payable on the earlier of the January1st coincident with or next following the director’s termination of service from the Board, or a change in control of the Company, as defined by the program. Phantom stock units are payable in an equal number of shares of our common stock; provided that we may elect to instead settle a director’s phantom stock units by paying the director cash in an amount equal to the value of such shares of common stock. Account credits and measurement fund credits are payable in cash. Under the program, each director is entitled to receive dividend equivalents that are paid currently on the director’s phantom stock units, unless the director elected to defer payment of such dividend equivalents and have them concurrently reinvested into additional phantom stock units.

For the fiscal year ending2017, we increased the annual cash retainer for serving as chair of our Audit Committee from $10,000 to $25,000, but otherwise retained the same director compensation arrangements that were in place for2016.

2017 Proxy Statement  19

---

Table of Contents

OUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

Executive Officers

The following sets forth biographical information regarding our executive officers who are not also directors.

Matthew J. DiLiberto
		Matthew J. DiLiberto joined the Company in September2004 and currently serves as the Company’s Chief Financial Officer overseeing the finance, accounting, tax, investor relations and corporate capital markets functions of the organization. Mr. DiLiberto previously served as the Company’s Chief Accounting Officer & Treasurer from2007 to2014. From June2000 to September2004, Mr. DiLiberto was with Roseland, New Jersey-based Chelsea Property Group, now a division of Simon Property Group, a REIT focused on the development and ownership of premium outlet centers, where he was a Controller and Director of Information Management. From August1998 to June2000, Mr. DiLiberto worked at New York-based Vornado Realty Trust, a diversified REIT with ownership interests in office, retail, and other property types, where he worked as a Senior Financial Analyst focusing on accounting and controls as well as the preparation of high level management reports and SEC filings. Prior to joining Vornado Realty Trust, Mr. DiLiberto worked as a Business Assurance Associate at Coopers and Lybrand, LLP (now PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP). Mr. DiLiberto currently serves on the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trust’s Best Financial Practices Council and is a member of the Board of Directors of the FDNY Foundation. Mr. DiLiberto received a B.S. degree in Accounting from The University of Scranton. Mr. DiLiberto is42 years old.

Andrew S. Levine
		Andrew S. Levine has served as our Chief Legal Officer since April2007 and as our General Counsel, Executive Vice President and Secretary since November2000. Prior to joining the Company, Mr. Levine was a partner in the REIT and Real Estate Transactions and Business groups at the law firm of Pryor, Cashman, Sherman & Flynn, LLP. Prior to joining Pryor, Cashman, Sherman & Flynn, LLP, Mr. Levine was a partner at the law firm of Dreyer & Traub. Mr. Levine received a B.A. degree from the University of Vermont and a J.D. degree from Rutgers School of Law, where Mr. Levine was an Editor of the Law Review and he currently serves as a member of the Advisory Board of Rutgers Center for Corporate Law and Governance. Mr. Levine is58 years old.

20  SL Green Realty Corp.

---

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Proposal 2: Advisory Vote on the Compensation of our Named Executive Officers

Section14A(a)(1) of the Exchange Act generally requires each public company to include in its proxy statement a separate resolution subject to a non-binding stockholder vote to approve the compensation of the company’s named executive officers, as disclosed in its proxy statement pursuant to Item402of Regulation S-K, not less frequently than once every three years. This is commonly known as, and is referred to herein as, a “say-on-pay” proposal or resolution.

At our2011annual stockholder meeting, our stockholders advised on a non-binding basis, by an affirmative vote of a majority of all votes cast, that the Company should hold non-binding advisory votes on executive compensation on an annual basis. On July14,2011, the Board determined that it would include future advisory votes on the compensation of our named executive officers in the Company’s annual meeting proxy materials every year until the next advisory vote on the frequency of stockholder votes on executive compensation, which will occur at the Company’s upcoming2017annual meeting of stockholders.

Accordingly, pursuant to Section14A(a)(1) of the Exchange Act, the Company is providing stockholders with the opportunity to approve the following non-binding, advisory resolution:

“RESOLVED, that the compensation paid to the Company’s named executive officers, as disclosed in this proxy statement pursuant to Item402of Regulation S-K, including the Compensation Discussion and Analysis,
compensation tables and narrative discussion, is hereby APPROVED.”

The Board unanimously recommends a vote“FOR”the above resolution regarding the compensation of our named executive officers, as disclosed in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis section and the accompanying compensation tables in this Proxy Statement.

The affirmative vote of a majority of all the votes cast with respect to this proposal will be required to approve this proposal.

OverviewThe results of this advisory vote are not binding on the Compensation Committee, the Company or the Board. Nevertheless, we value input from our stockholders and will consider carefully the results of this vote when making future decisions concerning executive compensation.

Compensation Committee Report

The Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of SL Green Realty Corp. has reviewed and discussed the Compensation Discussion and Analysis required by Item402(b) of Regulation S-K with management and, based on such review and discussions, our Compensation Committee recommended to the Board that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in this annual proxy statement and incorporated by reference in the Company’s Annual Report on Form10-K for the year ended December31,2016.

Submitted by our Compensation Committee
John H. Alschuler (Chairman)
Edwin Thomas Burton, III
John S. Levy

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

This section of our proxy statement discusses the principles underlying our executive compensation policies and decisions and the most important factors relevant to an analysis of these policies and decisions. It provides qualitative and quantitative information regarding the manner and context in which compensation is awarded to, and earned by, our named executive officers and places in perspective the data presented in the tables and narrative that follow.

Throughout this proxy statement, the individuals who served as our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer during our 2013 fiscalour2016fiscal year, as well as the other individuals included in the "Summary“Summary Compensation Table" beginning on page 44,Table” are referred to as the "named“named executive officers,"officers” or our "executives."“executives.”

2017 Proxy Statement  21

---

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Executive Summary

Why You Should Vote for Our2017 Say-On-Pay Proposal

Low G&A Expense

●	We consistently maintain low G&A expense through our prudent management structure, which ensures that shareholder returns are not unduly diluted by the costs of managing our assets. In2016 our G&A expense as a percentage of total assets was the second lowest among our office REIT peers.

Stockholder Engagement;Engagement and Support

●

We have engaged in significant stockholder outreach over the last several years regarding executive compensation and made numerous changes to our executive compensation programs in response to feedback we received. Since our2016 annual meeting, we have conducted stockholder outreach with institutional stockholders owning approximately74% of our outstanding common stock, resulting in the chairman of the Compensation Committee discussing our executive compensation programs with the owners of more than a majority of our outstanding common stock.

●

Our say-on-pay proposal was approved at our2016 annual meeting, as it has been every year since it was first introduced in2011.

Strong Operational Performance

●

As described below, we had strong year-over-year growth in funds from operations, or FFO, per share and cash same-store net operating income. In2016, we signed3.2 million square feet of Manhattan office leases at a mark-to-market of27.6%, and we signed an additional638,000 square feet of suburban office leases at a mark-to-market of6.1%. Also during2016, we executed $3.9 billion of real estate dispositions, generating $1.1 billion of cash, which resulted in liquidity of over $2.0 billion at year-end2016. We also made major progress on our One Vanderbilt project, including breaking ground on the project and securing a $1.5 billion construction loan and over $500 million in joint venture equity.

●

We reduced our ratio of net debt to EBITDA by more than30% during2016 as compared to2015, based on Fitch Ratings’ methodology. We have also achieved full investment grade corporate credit ratings from Moody’s Investors Service, Standard and Poor’s and Fitch Ratings and our corporate credit rating outlook was upgraded to “Positive” by Standard and Poor’s and Fitch Ratings.

Superior Long-Term TRS Performance

●	Although our short-term TRS performance for2016 was disappointing, our TRS has been consistently strong in the19 years since our initial public offering, growing921%, among the best of our office REIT peers.

Pay Linked to Performance

●

In response to our stockholder feedback, we increased the formulaic component of our annual cash bonus program from60% in2014 to100% in2016 for Messrs. Holliday, Green and Mathias, our top three executives.

●

The rigorous application of our pay-for-performance compensation principles resulted in the formulaic annual cash bonus program for our top three executives being earned at only61%, and a reduction of our CEO’s total annual bonus by $250,000—4% below2015 and16% below2014. In addition, to reflect our Executive Chairman’s evolving role and as a result of our2016 TRS, we reduced our Executive Chairman’s total compensation for2016 by50% compared to2015.

Compensation Philosophy

As described below under “Our Executive Compensation Changes

        At our 2013 annual meeting of stockholders, a non-binding, advisory resolution, or "say-on-pay" resolution, approving the compensation paid to our named executive officers, as disclosed in our proxy statement for our 2013 annual meeting, was approved by a majority of the votes cast by our stockholders. Despite the fact that the core philosophy and design of our compensation programs remained materially consistent with prior years, and our TRS was approximately 17% in 2012, the percentage of votes cast in favor of the say-on-pay resolution decreased from more than 95% at our 2012 annual meeting to slightly more than a majority at our 2013 annual meeting. Accordingly, both before and after our 2013 annual meeting, the chairman of our Compensation Committee and Lead Independent Director held a series of meetings, in person or by teleconference, with institutional stockholders that beneficially own more than 55% of our outstanding common stock, including 13 of our largest stockholders. The purpose of these meetings was to explainPhilosophy,” our executive compensation programs and answer questions and receive feedback from these stockholders.

        In our meetings with stockholders, we had interactive discussions regarding all aspects of our executive compensation programs and our overall pay for performance philosophy. In particular, our discussions focused on the appropriate peer group for purposes of our executive compensation, our short-term and long-term objectives and the manner in which our compensation programs incentivize managementare designed to achieve these objectives, the structure of our Outperformance Plans and the manner in which they incentivize management to maximize our long-term TRS, and our use of equity-based compensation, including the alignment between management and our stockholders created by equity-based compensation. We also discussed the competitive landscape of the market in which we compete for investment opportunities and executive talent and our commitment to providingprovide performance-based incentives that create a strong alignment of management and stockholder interests and attractingreward superior performance with superior compensation. We seek to attract and retaining superior executive leadershipretain top talent in a market that is highly competitive for New York City commercial real estate management talent.

        In connection with this outreach effortmarket, and in responsewe expect superior performance from our executives. Due to the feedbackefforts of the executives we received,attract, we madeachieve organizational efficiency (i.e., low relative and absolute G&A expense) as the following changes:

•

Formulaic Annual Cash Bonus Program.  We revised the structureefforts of our annual incentive award program, as described in more detail below,executives allow us to provide that annual cash bonuses to our top three named executive officers will havemaintain a direct linksmaller organization overall, relative to the achievement of specific goals determined in advance.



•

NYC-Peer Group.  Working with our compensation consultants, we have developed a new, New York City focused peer group that better reflects the companies that we compete with for both

Table of Contents

business opportunitiessize and executive talent and provides investors with a more appropriate point of comparison for executive compensation.

•

OPP Disclosure.  We have enhanced the disclosureactivities of the structure of our Outperformance Plans to highlight (i)Company. We believe the rigorresults speak for themselves, as even in a year where REITs underperformed other sectors of the performance goals included in these plans, (ii) the long-term nature of these plans and (iii) the manner in which these plans create a strong alignment of management and stockholder interests.

Formulaic Annual Cash Bonus Program

        Based in part on the feedback we received in connection with our outreach efforts relating to executive compensation, our Compensation Committee decided to revise the structure of our annual incentive award program to provide that a significant portion of the annual cash bonuses to our top three named executive officers will be directly linked to the achievement of specific goals determined in advance. Pursuant to our new annual cash bonus program, we have established specific threshold, target and maximum performance goals pursuant to which each of Messrs. Holliday, Green and Mathias will have the opportunity to earn an annual cash bonus equal to the following percentages of his base salary (with linear interpolation used to determine the percentage earned for performance that falls between threshold, target and/or maximum):

Executive		Threshold			Target			Maximum
Marc Holliday			100	%		200	%		300	%
Stephen Green			100	%		175	%		250	%
Andrew Mathias			100	%		175	%		250	%

        Sixty percent of the annual cash bonuses will be determined in a formulaic manner based on our levels of achieving the following specific criteria, weighted in the manner set forth below:

Performance Criteria		2014 Weighting Levels
Core FFO per share			10.0	%
Annual square footage of Manhattan leases signed			10.0	%
Same-store Manhattan portfolio occupancy			5.0	%
Mark-to-market on signed Manhattan leases			5.0	%
Same-store cash NOI growth			5.0	%
Dividend rate			10.0	%
Relative TRS for 2014			7.5	%
Absolute TRS for 2014			7.5	%

        The remaining 40% will be determined by our Compensation Committee based on specific financial and operational achievements, but will not be determined in a formulaic manner. Examples of these achievements are as follows:

•

Volume of acquisitions, dispositions, joint venture activity, and structured finance originations or secondary market, activity;



•

Capital gains realized on asset sales;



•

Increase in unencumbered asset base;



•

Reduction in debt to EBITDA ratio;



•

Capital market activity including joint ventures, secured financings, equity offerings and corporate financings; and



•

Execution of development and redevelopment projects.

Table of Contents

        For 2014, we have permitted Messrs. Holliday, Green and Mathias to elect to receive LTIP units in lieu of any cash bonus earned under our annual cash bonus program. The number of LTIP units to be issued will be based on the closing price of our common stock on the date on which our Compensation Committee determines the amount of the cash bonus that was earned or another date selected by our Compensation Committee within 15 days thereafter. The LTIP units will be vested upon grant, but will be subject to a no-sell restriction until two years after the date they were granted.

        In addition to our annual cash bonus program, we will also continue to retain an annual equity bonus program for our named executive officers as part of our overall annual incentive award program.

Executive Summary

Company Overview

        SL Green Realty Corp., New York City's largest commercial landlord, is a fully integrated REIT that is focused primarily on acquiring, managing and maximizing the value of Manhattan commercial properties. Our primary business objective is to maximize total return to our stockholders, or TRS, through growth in earnings, primarily measured in funds from operations and asset value appreciation. Our core business is the ownership of high quality office buildings that are strategically located in close proximity to midtown Manhattan's primary commuter stations. The commercial real estate expertise resulting from owning, operating, investing and lending in Manhattan for over 33 years has also enabled us to invest in a collection of premier retail properties, selected multifamily residential assets, and high quality debt and preferred equity investments.

        We are led by a strong, experienced management team skilled in all aspects of property ownership and management including investment, leasing, operations, capital improvements, development, financing, construction and maintenance. Marc Holliday has served as our Chief Executive Officer since January 2004, a period over which our enterprise value grew from $4.6 billion to $18.4 billion through December 31, 2013, an increase of 299%. Mr. Holliday brings extensive experience and expertise in real estate and finance to our Company, which is critical to the successful operation of our business. Under Mr. Holliday's leadership, we have achieved a market leading position in New York City, building upon our growth prior to 2004 under the leadership of our founder and current chairman, Stephen L. Green.

        Critical to our success is the high level, highly skilled and expert management team developed during Mr. Holliday's tenure. We believe that having the best people is the foundation of a successful business. The results achieved by our management team are proof of this and our team is recognized as one of the top real estate management teams in New York City.

Table of Contents

Superior Long-Term TRS Performance

        The effectiveness of our pay for performance compensation program is evidenced by a high degree of alignment of management and stockholder interests that has been fostered over many years and which has contributed to our superior long-term TRS performance. The following graphs show our long-term TRS performance compared to industry indices over periodsremains among the best of up to fifteen years ended December 31, 2013 (based on publicly available data):

Table of Contents

Low Overallour office REIT peers and our G&A Expense

        We are dedicated to running an efficient organization, as illustrated by our general and administrative expense which is well below the average and median of comparable peers within our New York City peer group(1) both as a percentage of total assets and as a percentageis the second lowest among our office REIT peers.

22  SL Green Realty Corp.

---

Table of total revenues:

		G&A Expense as a Percentage of Total Assets
		2010			2011			2012			2013
Average			1.11	%		1.17	%		1.17	%		1.27	%
Median			0.80	%		0.81	%		0.79	%		0.84	%
SL Green Realty Corp			0.59	%		0.52	%		0.50	%		0.50	%

		G&A Expense as a Percentage of Total Revenues
		2010			2011			2012			2013
Average			9.99	%		13.76	%		10.22	%		10.05	%
Median			6.96	%		6.97	%		7.76	%		6.92	%
SL Green Realty Corp			5.57	%		5.43	%		5.13	%		4.97	%

Strong Operating and Financial PerformanceContents

        In 2013,EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

2016 Performance and Executive Compensation

The information below summarizes our strong long-term TRS, our2016 achievements and our2016 CEO and other NEO compensation.

	Normalized FFO Per Share(1)		Growth in Same Store Cash NOI(1)		Operating Success
					Leasing Results ●3.2 million square feet of Manhattan office leases at 27.6% mark-to-market and 638,000 square feet of suburban office leases at 6.1% mark-to-market ●97.1% occupancy for the same store Manhattan office portfolio Disposition Volume ●Executed $3.9 billion of real estate dispositions generating $1.1 billion of cash proceeds Organizational Achievements ●Major progress on One Vanderbilt, including securing a $1.5 billion construction loan and $525 million in JV equity, and breaking ground on the project

	Superior Long-Term TRS Performance		Low G&A Expense(2)
	Despite disappointing TRS for2016 of -2.06%, our longer term TRS performance remains strong, as set forth below: Total Shareholder Return (as of 12/31/2016)		We have consistently maintained low G&A expenses, with G&A expense as a percentage of total assets and revenues among the lowest of our office REIT peers.
			G&A expense as a Percentage of Total Assets(2)	G&A expense as a Percentage of Total Revenues(2)

	2016 CEO Compensation		2016 Other NEO Compensation
	88.5% Variable Performance-Based;75% Equity		86.5% Variable Performance-Based;70.0% Equity
	Chief Executive Officer Pay Mix		Other Named Executive Officers Pay Mix

(1)

Refer to Appendix A to this proxy statement for reconciliations of combined same-store cash net operating income and normalized FFO for the years ended December31,2016,2015,2014,2013and2012and information regarding our use of these financial measures.

(2)

Percentages of total revenues and total assets are presented on a consolidated basis. Companies used for comparison in G&A expense analysis are: Alexandria Real Estate Equities, Inc., Boston Properties, Inc., Brandywine Realty Trust, Douglas Emmett, Inc., Empire State Realty Trust, Inc., Kilroy Realty Corporation, Mack-Cali Realty Corporation, Paramount Group, Inc. and Vornado Realty Trust. Office peer data obtained from Weekly Sector Scorecard, Office, dated February17,2017published by Stifel, Nicolaus & Company, Incorporated.

2017 Proxy Statement  23

---

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Stockholder Engagement; Executive Compensation Changes

Over the last several years, we continuedhave engaged in a formal stockholder outreach program focused on our executive compensation. Throughout each year, we are in contact with our large institutional stockholders, representing the owners of more than a majority of our outstanding common stock, to successfully executediscuss our strategyexecutive compensation programs, our business and our overall performance. Since our 2016 annual meeting, we contacted institutional stockholders owning approximately 74% of generating strong returns through operatingour outstanding common stock. These discussions are led by the chairman of our Compensation Committee, or the Committee, and leasing activity,Lead Independent Director or, in certain instances, members of senior management. We provide these stockholders with information regarding our executive compensation programs, our performance and the manner in which we believe our executive compensation programs contributed to our superior long-term performance. We also engage in discussions with these stockholders where we are able to clarify aspects of our executive compensation programs that they may not fully understand and receive direct feedback regarding specific aspects of our executive compensation programs.

Below are some common themes we discussed during this stockholder outreach and our responses over the last few years:

Area of Stockholder Concern		Our Response
Peer Group		Removed NYC-based asset managers from our peer group and committed, on a going forward basis, to review compensation and performance based on an NYC-based REIT peer group and a national office REIT index.
Annual Cash Bonus Program		For2016, we increased the formulaic component of our annual cash bonus program to100%, an increase of40% since2014, and reduced the number of criteria used in our program.
Contract Awards		In2016, our Chief Executive Officer and President received equity awards granted pursuant to their employment agreements with higher performance hurdles requiring the achievement of either an8% per year increase in FFO per share,8% TRS per year or relative TRS in the top35% of MSCI US REIT Index companies. Provided only performance-based employment agreement equity awards for our Chief Executive Officer’s2016 employment agreement to further align pay for performance.
Outperformance Plans		The SL Green Realty Corp.2014 Outperformance Plan, or our2014 Outperformance Plan, includes performance metrics to incorporate a new relative TRS component for one-third of each award granted. The remainder of each award is subject to the achievement of absolute TRS performance metrics similar to those utilized for prior outperformance plans. There will be no payout under our2014 Outperformance Plan unless total return exceeds $2.5 billion or relative TRS is at or above the50th percentile of index companies. In order for participants to earn the full award under our2014 Outperformance Plan, our TRS during the performance period must equal or exceed50%, which would represent total returns to stockholders in excess of$5 billion, and be in thetop25% of index companies. We would need to achieve TRS of35.5% from February1,2017 through August31,2017 in order for executives to earn the maximum absolute TRS amounts under our2014 Outperformance Plan. In that case, the awards earned by participants in our2014 Outperformance Plan would be less than1.25% of the aggregate total return delivered to our stockholders. Under our2014 Outperformance Plan, we adopted double trigger provisions for acceleration of vesting of equity awards granted to our named executive officers in the event of a change in control of the Company.
Executive Chairman Compensation		Reflecting our Executive Chairman’s evolving role, we meaningfully reduced annual bonuses paid to our Executive Chairman for the second consecutive year. As a result, our Chairman’s2016 compensation was50% less than his2015 compensation. In addition, our Executive Chairman will not participate in any of our future outperformance plans.

24  SL Green Realty Corp.

---

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Compensation Practices

We believe that our executive compensation programs provide appropriate performance-based incentives to attract and retain leadership talent in the highly competitive New York City real estate investment activity, debtmarket, to align management and preferred equity investment activitystockholder interests and financing and capital activity, and continuing to growcontinue to drive our business.long-term track record of superior return to stockholders. The following are notable operational and financial achievements during 2013:

•

funds from operations ("FFO") of $5.16 per diluted share, which greatly exceeded our initial guidance for 2013 of $4.90 to $5.00 per diluted share;



•

the execution of approximately 5.2 million square feet of office leases in Manhattan, representing the highest square footage of leases executed by us in a single year, at a mark-to-market of more than 9.5% higher than the previously fully escalated rents on the same office spaces;



•

same-store cash net operating income growth of approximately $20.4 million, or 3.0%, as compared to the prior year;



•

an increase in the quarterly dividend on our common stock by 52%, from $0.33 per share to $0.50 per share; and



•

strong investment performance, with over $800 million of investments in residential and retail properties and over $400 million of dispositions.

        Refer to pages 62-63key features of our Annual Report on Form 10-K forexecutive compensation programs, which reflect the year ended December 31, 2013 for a reconciliation of FFO to net income attributable tochanges we have adopted following our common stockholders and information regarding our use of FFO. Refer to Appendix A to this proxy statement for a reconciliation of operating income and combined same-store cash net operating income for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 and information regarding our use of these financial measures.

---

(1)

Companies used for comparisonextensive stockholder outreach in G&A expense analysis include: Alexandria Real Estate Equities, Inc., Annaly Capital Management, Inc., Boston Properties, Inc., General Growth Properties, Inc., iStar Financial, NorthStar Realty Finance Corporation, Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc. and Vornado Realty Trust.

recent years:

	WHAT WE DO
	✓		Pay for performance and create alignment with stockholders
	✓		100% formulaic annual cash bonus program for our CEO, Chairman and President
	✓		Include robust hurdles in our 2014 Outperformance Plan based on both absolute and relative TRS, with no payout unless total return exceeds $2.5billion or relative TRS is at or above the50th percentile of index companies
	✓		Subject all future employment agreement equity awards for our CEO to performance-based hurdles
	✓		Pay a majority of total compensation for our CEO and named executive officers in equity
	✓		Follow robust stock ownership guidelines for our directors and named executive officers; in 2016, we increased the stock ownership guidelines for our directors from 3x to5x the annual cash retainer
	✓		Impose a clawback policy with respect to incentive payments
	✓		Require a double trigger for cash severance and accelerated vesting in connection with a change in control

	WHAT WE DON’T DO
	✕		No dividends or distributions paid on unearned equity awards subject to performance-based vesting
	✕		No excise tax gross-up provisions
	✕		Don’t allow repricing of stock options
	✕		No single trigger cash severance or accelerated vesting in connection with a change in control
	✕		Don’t allow directors or officers to hedge our securities

2017 Proxy Statement  25

---

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Our Executive Compensation DecisionsPhilosophy

        In light of the performance factors discussed and keeping with our strong pay-for-performance philosophy, the following actions were taken during or shortly after fiscal year 2013:

•

Total direct annual compensation for 2013 was paid to our named executive officers in amounts that were higher than 2012 levels. For our Chief Executive Officer, total direct annual compensation for 2013 equaled $7,904,000, which represented an approximately 12.1% increase over 2012. Our Compensation Committee determined that increasing total direct annual compensation levels for 2013 over 2012 levels was appropriate based on our significant operational and financial achievements for 2013, as highlighted above, as well as our superior TRS performance.



•

In 2013, in order to further align the interests of our named executive officers and our stockholders, we provided substantially all of our named executive officers' aggregate bonuses for 2013 in the form of equity awards that include a two-year restriction on transfer.



•

In light of the continued long-term success that we have achieved, during 2013, we entered into a new three-year employment agreement with our Chief Executive Officer to extend his term. We also entered into new long-term employment agreements with each of our President and Chief Legal Officer.

Compensation Practices

        Our compensation programs for our named executive officers also feature the following practices:

•

Robust stock ownership guidelines, requiring our Chief Executive Officer to own equity interests equal to or greater than eight times his base salary and each of our other named executive officers to own equity interests equal to or greater than six times such officer's base salary;



•

Clawback policy with respect to incentive payments;



•

Formal anti-hedging policy;



•

Double trigger provisions for cash severance in connection with a change in control;



•

No excise tax gross-up provisions;



•

No dividends or distributions paid on unearned equity awards subject to performance-based vesting; and



•

Prohibition on repricing of stock options.

Objectives of Our Compensation Program

        Our Compensation Committee has adopted an executive compensation philosophy that rewards the achievement of annual and long-term goals of both the Company and individual executives. Our executive compensation programs are designed to achieve the following objectives:

•

To provide performance-based incentives that create a strong alignment of management and stockholder interests;



•

To attract and retain leadership in a market that is highly competitive for New York City commercial real estate management talent; and



•

To achieve an appropriate balance between risk and reward in our compensation programs that does not create incentives for unnecessary or excessive risk taking.

●	To provide performance-based incentives that create a strong alignment of management and stockholder interests
●	To attract and retain top talent in a market that is highly competitive for New York City commercial real estate management
●	To motivate our executives to achieve, and reward them for achieving, superior performance
●	To achieve an appropriate balance between risk and reward in our compensation programs that does not create incentives for unnecessary or excessive risk taking
●	To foster the dedication required to succeed against our competitors, while maintaining low overall general and administrative expense

Table of Contents

In order to reach these goals, our Compensationthe Committee, in consultation with our Chief Executive Officer and our Compensation Committee'sthe Committee’s independent compensation consultant, has adopted executive compensation practices that follow a pay-for-performance philosophy. Our primary business objective, of maximizing TRS through growth in FFO while seeking appreciation in the value of our investment properties, demands a long-term focus. OurTherefore, on both a current and historical basis, our executive compensation programs therefore, both currently and historically, have beenare based heavily on the achievement of both annual and multi-year performance measures.

        A substantial portionConsideration of 2016 Say-on-Pay Vote

Our say-on-pay proposal was approved at our 2016 annual meeting, as it has been every year since it was first introduced in 2011. The Committee viewed this favorable vote by more than a majority of our stockholders as an indication that our stockholders are generally supportive of the named executive officers' compensation has been provided in the form of equity subject to significant back-ended vesting requirements and/or holding ("no-sell") requirements. These equity incentives were designed in order to (i) ensure that management maintains a long-term focus that serves the best interests of stockholders and (ii) attract, retain and motivate an experienced and talented executive management team in the highly competitive New York City commercial real estate market.

How We Determine Executive Compensation

        Our Compensation Committee determines compensation for our named executive officers and is comprised of three of our independent directors, John H. Alschuler, Jr. (Chairman), Edwin Thomas Burton, III and John S. Levy. Our Compensation Committee exercises independent discretion in respect of executive compensation matters and administers our equity incentive programs, including reviewing and approving equity grants to our executives pursuant to the 2005 Plan. Our Compensation Committee operates under a written charter adopted by the Board, a copy of which is available on our website at http://www.slgreen.com.

        Our Compensation Committee has retained Gressle & McGinley LLC as its independent outside compensation consulting firm and has engaged Gressle & McGinley LLC to provide our Compensation Committee with relevant data concerning the marketplace, our peer group and its own independent analysis and recommendations concerning executive compensation. Gressle & McGinley LLC regularly participates in Compensation Committee meetings. Our Compensation Committee has the authority to replace Gressle & McGinley LLC as its independent outside compensation consultant or hire additional consultants at any time. Gressle & McGinley LLC does not provide any additional services to our Compensation Committee and does not provide any services to the Company other than to our Compensation Committee.

        With respect to the compensation of our named executive officers, our Compensation Committee solicits recommendations from our Chief Executive Officer regarding total compensation for the other named executive officers and reviews his recommendations regarding total compensation, the allocation of this compensation among base salary, annual bonus amounts and other long-term incentive compensation, as well as the portion of overall compensation to be provided in cash or equity. Our Chairman also advises our Compensation Committee on these matters as they pertain to the compensation of our Chief Executive Officer. FTI Consulting, Inc. ("FTI Consulting") is retained by our management as a general business advisor and provides services to the Company in a number of areas, including compensation. FTI Consulting, which has relationships with certain officers of the Company, provides market data to our Chief Executive Officer and Chairman, which they review when considering their compensation recommendations. The recommendations with respect to compensation are formulated by our Chief Executive Officer and Chairman and are communicated to our Compensation Committee by them. Our Compensation Committee is also provided with the market data compiled by FTI Consulting. The other named executive officers do not play a role in determining their own compensation, other than discussing their performance with our Chief Executive Officer.

        Our Compensation Committee, in analyzing the recommendations from the Chief Executive Officer and Chairman, also receives and reviews market and industry materials and data provided by

Table of Contents

the Committee's independent compensation consulting firm, Gressle & McGinley LLC, as well as the compensation analysis and recommendations provided by that firm. Our Compensation Committee has independently retained Gressle & McGinley LLC. Their sole role is as an independent consulting firm to advise our Compensation Committee with respect to the compensation of our named executive officers. The ultimate determination of total compensation and the elements that comprise that total compensation is made solely by our Compensation Committee.

        Our Compensation Committee meets during the year to evaluate executive performance, to monitor market conditions in light of our goals and objectives, to solicit input from our independent compensation consultant on market practices, including peer group pay practices and new developments, and to review our executive compensation practices. As part of these meetings, in formulation of its executive compensation policies and practices for 2013, our Compensation Committee reviewed then-existing policies of certain of our institutional investors, Institutional Shareholder Services ("ISS"), Glass Lewis and other governance groups, as well as feedback provided by such groups in prior year proxy research reports. Our Compensation Committee is currently engaged with stockholders, as discussed above, and annually reviews our executive compensation policies and practices to ensure that such policies are in line with current market practices and stockholders' best interests. Our Compensation Committee makes regular reports to the Board.

        Our named executive officers' compensation and performance for 2013 was evaluated on both an absolute basis and by reference to a "peer group". As mentioned above, the formulation of our peer group was re-evaluated for 2013 in response to stockholder feedback; our 2013 peer group is representative of the New York City real estate marketplace in which we conduct substantially all of our business, which is one of the most competitive in the world from both a business and compensation perspective.

        We maintain the belief that to be successful and competitive in the demanding New York City office real estate market requires having a highly talented management team and a compensation program structured to attract, retain and motivate top executives in one of the most expensive cities in the world. In the case of our Company, anything other than a comparable New York City peer group will not allow for an appropriate comparative analysis of our business performance in its operating market and its compensation program, given the unique characteristics of the New York City market and the prevalence of non-public direct competitors.

2013 Peer Group Determination

        In 2013, our Compensation Committee undertook a detailed comprehensive review of the Company's existing 2012 peer group with the goal of establishing a more tailored peer group. As a guiding principle, our Compensation Committee and the Board unanimously agreed that our compensation peer group should primarily consist of companies in the same business line as SLG (primarily office and finance), and be located and operating within New York City. The newly revised 2013 compensation peer group accomplishes those goals in line with our Compensation Committee's commitment to develop a more accurate compensation peer group of both business and executive comparable peers operating within the unique New York City market.

        Our direct New York City competitors, both in terms of the real estate business and talent, are not limited to other public companies doing business in New York City but rather also consist of top

Table of Contents

performing hedge funds, international investors, large private firms and others that may have equal or greater financial resources, including access to cost efficient capital, including:

	• Alexandria Real Estate Equities, Inc.		• Hines
	• American Capital,  Ltd.		• iStar Financial
	• Angelo, Gordon & Co.		• Jamestown Properties
	• Annaly Capital Management,  Inc.		• KKR & Co. L.P.
	• Apollo Global Management,  LLC		• Morgan Stanley Real Estate Funds
	• Beacon Capital Partners		• NorthStar Realty Finance Corp.
	• Blackstone Group, L.P		• Och-Ziff Capital Management Group
	• Boston Properties,  Inc.		• Paramount Group,  Inc.
	• Brookfield Office Properties,  Inc.		• RXR Realty
	• Cerberus Capital Management,  L.P.		• Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc.
	• Forest City Ratner Companies		• The Related Companies L.P.
	• Fortress Investment Group LLC		• Tishman Speyer
	• General Growth Properties,  Inc.		• Vornado Realty Trust

        Our New York City focused peer companies, as detailed above, are companies with whom we regularly compete for investment opportunities and executive talent. Many of these companies are either private or a hybrid of private and public, resulting in their not disclosing their executive compensation levels. Given the lack of published compensation data for private companies, these companies have not been included in our selected compensation peer group. However, based on our understanding of the New York City market and on input from our compensation consultants (who are active within the New York City real estate and compensation market), we believe that the compensation levels of these additional New York City peer group companies are also in line with those of our New York City focused peer group.

        Our selected compensation peer group for 2013 consists of the following twelve companies for which we were able to compare publicly available data:

	• Alexandria Real Estate Equities, Inc.		• Fortress Investment Group LLC
	• American Capital,  Ltd.		• General Growth Properties,  Inc.
	• Annaly Capital Management,  Inc.		• iStar Financial
	• Apollo Global Management,  LLC		• NorthStar Realty Finance Corp.
	• Blackstone Group, L.P		• Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc.
	• Boston Properties,  Inc.		• Vornado Realty Trust

        In analyzing our Chief Executive Officer's total compensation for 2013, our Compensation Committee reviewed an analysis of total compensation for 2012 paid to the chief executive officer or comparable real estate principal for each company in our selected compensation peer group, which was prepared by our compensation consultants based on publicly available information. Several of these companies are private equity firms where a substantial portion of executives' total compensation is paid in the form of distributions. Our Compensation Committee considered total compensation information from these peer companies that included the amount of distributions received by these executives, where such amounts could be obtained from publicly available information. Our Compensation Committee did not target a particular percentile for our Chief Executive Officer's total compensation for 2013, but did use this analysis to confirm that our Chief Executive Officer's total compensation for 2013 was within an appropriate range of the total compensation received by the chief executive officers or comparable real estate principals of these peers, considering relative size and performance. With respect to size, we ranked at or slightly below the median of these peers with respect to common equity market capitalization, total assets and total revenue.

Table of Contents

Analysis of Risk Associated with Our Executive Compensation Plans

        In setting compensation, we also consider the risks to our stockholders and to achievement of our goals that may be inherent in the compensation program. We concluded that it is not reasonably likely that our compensation policies and practices will have a material adverse effect on us.

        Although a significant portion of our executive's compensation is performance-based and "at-risk," we believe our executive compensation plans are appropriately structured and do not pose a material risk to the Company. We considered the following elementsstructure of our executive compensation plansprograms. Nevertheless, we continued to engage in stockholder outreach and policies when evaluating whether such plans and policies encourage our executives to take unreasonable risks:

•

We evaluate performance based uponimplemented the achievement of a variety of business objectives and goals including, by way of example, strength of our balance sheet, FFO growth, occupancy and leasing rates, TRS performance (both on an absolute and relative basis) and completion of successful debt and equity offerings, that we believe correlate to long-term creation of stockholder value and that are affected by management decisions;



•

We have adopted a balanced approach to equity compensation that incorporates the use of various stock-based compensation vehicles, including time-based full value equity awards and performance-based equity awards. By utilizing a balanced equity compensation mix comprised of several different types of stock-based compensation vehicles, including time-based full value equity awards that retain value even in a depressed market, we lessen the likelihood that executives will take unreasonable risks to keep their stock awards "in-the-money," as may be the case with equity compensation programs that rely solely on leveraged market-based equity compensation vehicles such as stock options;



•

We provide a significant portion of long-term incentive compensation in the form of Long-Term Incentive Awards, such as awards that may be earned under our 2011 Outperformance Plan. The amounts that ultimately may be earned under this program are tied to how we perform over a three-year period, which focuses management on sustaining our long-term performance;



•

We structure payouts under our performance-based awards based on achieving a minimum level of performance, so that some compensation is awarded at levels below full target achievement rather than an "all-or-nothing" approach;



•

We consider non-financial and other qualitative performance factors in determining actual compensation payouts;



•

We provide a significant portion of each executive's annual compensation in the form of stock-based compensation, which results in our executives having built sizable holdings of equity in the Company (which executives are required to maintain sizable holdings of equity in the Company under the terms of our stock ownership guidelines implemented in 2011), which aligns an appropriate portion of their personal wealth to our long-term performance; and



•

We have adopted a policy for recoupment of incentive payments made to our executives, including our named executive officers, if payment was based on having met or exceeded performance expectations during a period of fraudulent activity for which the executive is responsible.

        In conclusion, our executive compensation program is structured so that (i) we avoid the type of disproportionately large short-term incentives that could encourage executives to take risks that may not be in our long-term interests, (ii) we provide incentives to manage the Company for long-term performance, (iii) we have adopted a policy for recoupment of incentive payments under certain circumstances and (iv) a significant amount of the wealth of our executives is tied to our long-term

Table of Contents

success. We believe this combination of factors encourages our executives to manage the Company in a prudent manner.

What Our Compensation Program is Designed to Reward

        Our executive compensation program rewards the achievement of both annual and long-term goals of both the Company and the individual executive. Our Compensation Committee evaluates performance on an absolute basis against financial and other operating measures, as well as on a relative basis by comparing our performance against other New York City office competitors and against REITs and the real estate industry generally.

        A substantial portion of the compensation granted by our Compensation Committee to our Chief Executive Officer and other named executive officers is performance-based and paid in the form of equity grants in lieu of cash. Most equity awards are subject to long-term vesting and/or restrictions against sale for periods of time after being awarded to named executive officers. For example, with respect to our Chief Executive Officer pay in 2013, calculated consistent with the Summary Compensation Table:

•

Approximately 82% of total compensation was paid in equity



•

Approximately 85% of the discretionary bonus was paid in equity with 2-year no-sell requirements attached



•

Approximately 87% of total compensation was performance-based tied to operational and/or stock price achievement



•

Approximately 79% of total compensation had time-based vesting and/or no-sell requirements to address retention

        As notedadditional changes described above our Compensation Committee has designed our executive compensation program to achieve the following objectives: (i) to provide performance-based incentives to align management and stockholder interests, (ii) to attract and retain leadership talent in the New York City real estate market that is highly competitive and is comprised of other publicly-traded REITs, private real estate operating companies, opportunity funds and sovereign wealth funds, among others, and (iii) to ensure that our executive compensation programs do not encourage unnecessary or excessive risk taking. Our compensation program rewards the achievement of annual, long-term and strategic goals of both the Company and the individual executive. Our Compensation Committee evaluates performance on an absolute basis against financial and other measures, as well as on a relative basis by comparing our performance against other office REITs and against the REIT and real estate industry generally. Comparative performance is an important metric since market conditions may affect the ability to meet specific performance criteria. Historically, our Compensation Committee has structured our compensation program so that half or more of the total compensation provided to our named executive officers has been provided in the form of equity incentive compensation based on our performance. Our equity awards have taken the form of incentive awards under our 2011 Outperformance Plan, our 2010 Notional Unit Plan, 2006 Outperformance Plan, 2005 Outperformance Plan and 2003 Outperformance Plan, which we refer to, collectively, as our Outperformance Plans, multi-year equity awards in connection with new or extended employment agreements, a portion of which may only be earned based on the attainment of select performance hurdles over a multi-year period, and equity bonuses awarded in respect of prior year performance. The remainder of total compensation is primarily paid in cash. To address our retention objective, a substantial portion of long-term performance-based awards have time-based vesting requirements with significant back-end vesting after the award has been earned.

Table of Contentsfeedback we received.

Elements of Our Executive Compensation ProgramPrograms

Our named executive officers'officers’ compensation currently has three primary components:

•

annual base salary;



•

annual incentive awards,components, which are discussed in more detail below:

●	annual base salary and deferred compensation
●	annual incentive awards, which include cash and equity bonuses
●	long-term equity incentive awards, which include stock options and full-value equity awards

Variable pay constitutes the vast majority of our executives’ compensation, which allows the Committee to reward superior performance and equity bonuses; and



•

penalize poor performance, while the substantial long-term equity incentives, which include stock options, restricted stock, restricted stock units and LTIP units, which may be granted pursuant to an employment agreement or our Outperformance Plans.

        The overall levels of compensation as well as the allocation between these elements are determined by our Compensation Committee based upon an analysis of our performance during the year. Historically, our compensation has been divided among base salary, cash and equity bonuses, multi-year equity awards in connection with new or extended employment agreements, and multi-year awards under our Outperformance Plans. Multi-year equity awards under our Outperformance Plans and in connection with new or extended employment agreements are designed to align management's focus and stockholder interest and to provide incentives for each executive to successfully implement our long-term strategic goals. Our named executive officers have historically received a substantial portion of their compensation in the form of equity of the Company.

        In addition to the aforementioned elementsincentive portions of our compensation program that currently are applicableprograms serve to each of our named executive officers, Messrs. Holliday, Green and Mathias receive an annual contributions of deferred notional stock units that are subject to vesting based on continued employment during the year and are only paid upon termination of employment or a change in control. By tying the value of the deferred notional units to the future value of the Company, the deferred compensation program further aids in establishing alignment of management and stockholder interests and ensuring the executives remain focused on long-term stockholder value creation. See "Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change-in-Control" beginning on page     for additional details.

Why We Chose Each Element and How Each Element Fits into Our Overall Compensation Objectives

        We view the various components of compensation as related but distinct. Our Compensation Committee designs total executive compensation packages that it believes will best create retention incentives, link compensation to performance and align the interests of our named executive officers andwith our stockholders. Each of our named executive officers has an employment agreement with us, which is described under "Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change of Control."

Annual Base Salary.Salary and Deferred Compensation    Our Compensation Committee has determined that we should provide our named executive officers' annual base salaries to compensate them for services rendered during the fiscal year.

Base salaries are established at levels intended to reflect the scope of each executive'sexecutive’s duties and responsibilities and further take into account the competitive market compensation paid by other companies for similar positions. WeHowever, they do not serve our objective of paying for performance, and therefore are intentionally structure an executive's annual base salarystructured to be a relatively low percentage of total compensation.

The following sets forth the annual base salaries for our named executive officers for 2015 and 2016, which reflect amounts agreed to in each executive’s employment agreement:

Executive		2015 Base Salary			2016 Base Salary			% Change
Marc Holliday		$	1,050,000		$	1,350,000		28.6%
Stephen L. Green		$	750,000		$	750,000		—
Andrew Mathias		$	800,000		$	800,000		—
Matthew J. DiLiberto		$	400,000		$	400,000		—
Andrew S. Levine		$	500,000		$	550,000		10.0%

26  SL Green Realty Corp.

---

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

In 2013,addition to base salary, each of Messrs. Holliday, Green and LevineMathias also received a contribution of deferred notional stock units that are subject to vesting based on continued employment during a one-year period following the contribution and are only paid upon termination of employment or a change in control. The amount of deferred compensation that each of Messrs. Holliday, Green and Mathias received for 2016 was equal to the minimum amount that we had previously agreed to provide under the executive’s employment agreement and associated deferred compensation agreement that was in effect for 2016. This deferred compensation is viewed similarly to annual base salary, increases in conjunction with negotiations forthat fixed amounts are granted each year regardless of performance. However, because the value of this deferred compensation is tied to the value of our common stock and these executives will not receive this deferred compensation until the termination of their respective employment agreements.

Executive		2012 Base Salary			2013 Base Salary			% Change
Marc Holliday		$	1,000,000		$	1,050,000			5.00	%
Stephen Green		$	750,000		$	750,000			0.00	%
Andrew Mathias		$	750,000		$	750,000			0.00	%
James Mead		$	500,000		$	500,000			0.00	%
Andrew Levine		$	450,000		$	475,000			5.56	%

Tableor a change in control, this deferred compensation program further establishes alignment of Contentsmanagement and stockholder interests and helps ensure that the executives remain focused on long-term stockholder value creation. The following table sets forth the deferred compensation grants made to our executives in 2016:

Executive		Deferred Compensation Amount			Notional Stock Units(1)
Marc Holliday		$	750,000		8,265
Stephen L. Green		$	150,000		1,333
Andrew Mathias		$	500,000		4,443

(1)	Deferred compensation contributions were converted into notional stock units based on the market price of our common stock on the date of the contribution.

Annual Incentive Awards.Awards    Annual

We pay annual incentive awards are provided in the form of annual cash bonuses and equity awards designedbonuses to focus aand reward our named executive officerofficers on achieving key corporate financial objectives to motivate certain desired individual behaviors and to reward substantial achievement of theseoperational objectives and individual goals. Our Compensation Committee did not set specific fixed targets that entitle the executive officers to formulaic bonuses in 2013. As described above, basedBased in part on the feedback we received in connection with our outreach efforts relating to executive compensation, our Compensationthe Committee decided to revise the structure of our annual incentive award program for our Chief Executive Officer, Executive Chairman and President. For 2016, we increased the formulaic component of our annual cash bonus program to provide that a significant portion100% of the target opportunity (from 75% in 2015 and 60% in 2014) and we reduced the number of performance criteria. Otherwise, we maintained the same overall structure of our annual incentive award program. Also, in 2016, the entire amount of the annual cash bonuses paid to our top three named executive officers will be directly linkedwas determined pursuant to this annual cash bonus program, which is described in more detail below.

Annual Cash Bonus Program (Top Three Named Executive Officers)

As noted above, the achievement ofannual cash bonuses paid to our top three named executive officers for 2016 were determined pursuant to our annual cash bonus program. Under this program, the Committee established specific goals determined in advance. Although our Compensation Committee made this decision after the structurethreshold, target and maximum cash bonus amounts that each of our annual incentive award programtop three named executive officers could earn for 2013 had already been2016 and established our Compensation Committee did analyze the annual incentive awards forspecific performance criteria that were to be used in a formulaic manner to determine 100% of each of these executives’ cash bonuses. For 2016, each of Messrs. Holliday, Green and Mathias were eligible to earn the following percentages of his base salary (with linear interpolation used to determine the percentage earned for 2013performance that falls between threshold, target and/ or maximum):

Executive		Threshold		Target		Maximum
Marc Holliday		100%		200%		300%
Stephen L. Green		100%		175%		250%
Andrew Mathias		100%		175%		250%

2017Proxy Statement  27

---

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

One hundred percent of each executive’s annual cash bonus was determined in a formulaic manner based on the metricslevel of our achievement of a number of performance criteria as compared to the level established in advance by the Committee. The following set forth the specific performance criteria selected for 2016, the relative weighting of each, the threshold, target and maximum performance levels established by the Committee in advance for each, and our actual 2016 results for each:

Performance criteria		2016 Weighting Levels		Threshold			Target			Maximum			2016Actual Performance
FFO per share		25.0%		$	6.75		$	6.85		$	6.95		$	7.08(2)
Same-store cash NOI growth		25.0%			3.0%			4.0%			5.0%			6.0%
Dividend growth		20.0%			5.0%			9.0%			13.0%			7.6%
Relative TRS for2016(1)		15.0%			40th			60th			80th			16th
Absolute TRS for2016		15.0%			5.0%			7.0%			9.0%			-2.06%

(1)	Relative TRS for 2016 was based on the percentile of our TRS relative to the TRS of the constituents of the SNL US REIT Office Index.
(2)	Represents normalized FFO per share of $7.08, which adjusts actual FFO per share of $8.29 to exclude $1.21 per share attributable to the write-off of accounting related balances and the 2017 portion of the lease termination fee related to the sale of 388-390 Greenwich Street to Citigroup, Inc.

The following table reflects the 2016 cash bonuses awarded to Messrs. Holliday, Green and Mathias pursuant to our annual cash bonus program, presented based on the maximum percentages of each executive’s base salary that can be earned:

Executive		Max Cash Bonus (%)		Actual Cash Bonus (%)(1)		Total ($)
Marc Holliday		300.00%		183.19%		$	2,473,125
Stephen L. Green		250.00%		154.90%		$	1,161,718
Andrew Mathias		250.00%		154.90%		$	1,239,166

(1)	Consistent with the timing of prior years’ annual cash bonus determinations, payouts and determinations under the annual cash bonus program were made in December 2016 based on a combination of actual results through that point in time and estimates of full year results.

As a result of the rigor of the performance targets established by the Committee for our annual cash bonus program, the amounts paid to Messrs. Holliday, Green and Mathias were significantly reduced for 2016 as compared to 2015, as set forth in the table below:

Executive		2015 Annual Cash Bonus			2016 Annual Cash Bonus			% Change(1)
Marc Holliday		$	2,795,625		$	2,473,125		-11.5%
Stephen L. Green		$	1,671,093		$	1,161,718		-30.5%
Andrew Mathias		$	1,782,500		$	1,239,166		-30.5%

(1)	The decrease in annual cash bonus amount paid to Mr. Holliday was partially offset by the increase in total bonus opportunity resulting from the corresponding increase in Mr. Holliday’s 2016 base salary.

Annual Equity Bonuses (Top Three Named Executive Officers)

We also maintain an equity bonus program for our top three named executive officers, which provides annual bonuses that are being utilized fordetermined by the formulaic componentCommittee, in its discretion, based on the short-term and long-term performance of annual cash bonuses for 2014our Company and take such analysis into account in determining the amountexecutive, the Committee’s view of theappropriate annual incentive awards for 2013. For a discussionin light of 2013 annual incentive awards, see "Measuring 2013 Performance."

        Long-Term Equity Incentives.    Long-term equity incentives have been provided to our named executive officers through the grant of stock options, restricted stock, restricted stock units and/or LTIP units pursuant to our Outperformance Plansexecutive’s historical compensation, skill, experience and in connection with new or extended employment agreements orposition, competitive market factors and such other factors as are determined appropriate by the provisions of such agreements, and the majority ofCommittee. In making these awards have included performance-based vesting hurdles that must be met in order for recipients to earn them. All of2016, the equity awards granted pursuant to our Outperformance Plans have been subject to performance-based vesting hurdles based on TRS or stock price appreciation over a multi-year period, subject to potential acceleration in some circumstances. In addition, a majority of the total equity awards that we granted to Messrs. Holliday, Mathias, Mead and Levine (or are required to grant in order to avoid causing Good Reason to exist) in connection with new or extended employment agreements that we entered into during 2013 were or will be subject to the achievement of performance-based vesting hurdles. In addition to the performance-based vesting hurdles, generally, all of these equity awards have additional time-based vesting provisions, generally three to five years in the aggregate with principally back-end vesting for awards under our Outperformance Plans, based on continued employment that act as a retention device and provide a strong incentive to the executives to increase stockholder value during the vesting period. The awards also contain forfeiture provisions, which result in immediate cancellation of the award if the executive voluntarily leaves or is terminated with cause. The grant of equity awards links a named executive officer's compensation and net worth directly to the performance of our stock price as well as the achievement of other performance-based vesting hurdles in some cases, which encourages our named executive officers to make decisions with an ownership mentality.

        One of the main components of our long-term incentives is our Outperformance Plans. The structure of our Outperformance Plans can provide value to our executives based on the amount of stockholder value created by the Company over a multi-year period above specified hurdles as measured by TRS. These plans are directly aligned with long-term stockholder interests as they allow our executives to share in the value that they createabove a specific defined return to our stockholders. Historically, we have provided a meaningful percentage of our executives' total compensation in the form of Outperformance Plans because they provide significant stockholder benefits, including (i) requiring us to provide stockholders with a predefined minimum return (consisting of share price appreciation and dividends)before executives are entitled to any compensation, meaning that merely achieving the minimum hurdle does not earn our executives any award, and (ii) being payable in long-term vesting equity as the plans typically measure performance over a three-year period and contain additional years of time-based vesting beyond the performance period. We anticipate continuing to utilize these types of plans as a significant component of our compensation program in the future.

Table of Contents

        Equity awards under our 2011 Outperformance Plan were designed to compensate our named executive officers upon the attainment of certain goals with respect to TRS and to provide an incentive for executives to remain with the Company and focus on long-term stockholder value creation. Under our 2011 Outperformance Plan, the executives have the opportunity to earn LTIP units in our operating partnership, or LTIP units, contingent upon the extent to which, if at all, our TRS exceeds a threshold of 25% over a three-year performance period; provided that a portion of such awards are eligible to be earned after the first and second years of the performance period contingent upon the achievement of the maximum level of performance for 45 consecutive days.

        As illustrated below, our 2011 Outperformance Plan is structured so that no awards will be earned under our 2011 Outperformance Plan unless the aggregate total return to our stockholders during the three-year performance period exceeds $1.75 billion and maximum awards will only be earned if the aggregate total return equals or exceeds $2.6 billion.

        Upon the achievement of the designated performance thresholds, awards earned under our 2011 Outperformance Plan are further subject to time-based vesting requirements following the achievement of the performance thresholds. This creates, in the aggregate, up to a four-year retention period with respect to our executives who are participants in our 2011 Outperformance Plan. Even if the performance thresholds are achieved and awards are earned under our 2011 Outperformance Plan, until full vesting, the named executive officers continue to bear the same share price and total return risk as our stockholders. To date, no awards have been earned under our 2011 Outperformance Plan. Our 2011 Outperformance Plan was designed to be complementary to our 2010 Notional Unit Plan, as the baseline stock price for measuring performance under our 2011 Outperformance Plan exceeds the stock price at which maximum stock price appreciation would be achieved under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan. See "SL Green Realty Corp. 2011 Outperformance Plan" on page 48 for additional details concerning our 2011 Outperformance Plan.

        Dividends on performance-based awards accrue and are only paid to the executives if and when the performance metrics are met.

Pay-for-Performance

        As evidenced by examining our executive compensation programs over the past several years, the executive compensation philosophy adopted by our Compensation Committee demonstrates a

Table of Contents

pay-for-performance culture that ensures the alignment of management and stockholder interests. As a significant portion of the total compensation opportunities provided to our named executive officers are directly tied to stock price appreciation and TRS performance, we must achieve sustained long-term performance in order for such compensation opportunities to be realized.

        As further discussed below, we continued to demonstrate superior fundamental operating performance in 2013 and continued long-term multi-year TRS performance in the upper echelon of office REITs and the broader REIT industry. As a result, compensation determined by our Compensation Committee for 2013 resulted in total direct annual compensation levels for our named executive officers generally higher than 2012 levels, with equity compensation awards comprising a majority of total compensation for 2013.

Measuring 2013 Performance

        In 2013, we continued to demonstrate superior market performance at levels that outperformed the industry and also achieved outstanding operating performance; as a result, 2013 annual incentive award levels reflected this superior performance. Annual incentive awards generally demonstrated increases over 2012 amounts which had reflected strong performance in 2012. In 2013, domestic macroeconomic conditions continued the uptrend that began in prior years off of recessionary levels, with GDP marking another full year of growth and unemployment beginning to incrementally decline, albeit at a slower pace than many economists had anticipated. The business and operating environment nonetheless remained challenging during 2013, with events such as the continuing European sovereign debt crisis leading to uncertainty and periods of dislocations in the markets, and the U.S. and international financial services industry, which holds a significant presence and role in the New York City economy, confronting a myriad of headwinds that led to a series of layoffs across the sector. Notwithstanding the economic environment, we attained significant market and operational achievements in 2013. The following sets forth our actual results for 2013 compared to our initial FFO per share guidance for 2013 and the other specific company goals and objectives for 2013 that were initially presented at our investor day conference in December 2012:

2013 Goals and Objectives		2013 Results
FFO per share (initial guidance of $4.90-$5.00 per share)		$5.16 per share
1,800,000 square feet of Manhattan leases signed		5,186,894 sq. ft. signed
96.0% same-store Manhattan portfolio occupancy		96.6%
3-8% mark-to-market on signed Manhattan office leases		>9.5%
4% same-store cash NOI growth		3%
$750 million of acquisitions of office properties		$114 million
$400 million of dispositions		$457 million
$500 million of investments in residential and retail properties		$801 million
Sign retail anchors for 180 Broadway and 747 Madison		Signed retail anchors
$250 million increase in unencumbered asset base		$265 million
Dispose of at least one suburban asset		Sold four suburban assets
Dividend increase		52% increase
TRS in top 20% of office REIT peer group(2)		Highest TRS in peer group
Sign anchor tenant for 280 Park Avenue		Signed anchor tenant
Refinance $900 million mortgage on 1515 Broadway		Completed refinancing
Apply for special permit for One Vanderbilt		Rezoning delayed to 2014
Commence redevelopment projects (635/641 6th Avenue, 10 E 53rd Street and 180 Maiden)		Commenced redevelopment
Obtain Fitch upgrade to BB+ outlook: positive		Obtained upgrade

---

(2)

Includes Alexandria Real Estate Equities, Inc., Boston Properties, Inc., Digital Realty Trust, Inc., Douglas Emmet, Inc., Duke Realty Corporation, Kilroy Realty Corporation, Liberty Property Trust, Mack-Cali Realty Corporation and Vornado Realty Trust.

Table of Contents

        In making 2013 year-end annual incentive award decisions, our Compensation Committee sought to find a balance between (i) acknowledging the significant operational achievements attained during the year, as highlighted above, (ii) ensuring that annual incentive award and total compensation amounts were in line with the prevailing market and adequate to address recruitment and retention needs in the competitive New York City commercial real estate markets where we actively compete for business opportunities and executive talent with other publicly-traded REITs, private real estate operating companies, opportunity funds and sovereign wealth funds, among others, (iii) continuing to ensure our compensation programs create shoulder-to-shoulder alignment of management and stockholder interests by appropriately rewarding our named executive officers for the attainment of performance achievements that drive long-term value creation and (iv) rewarding our continued superior

28  SL Green Realty Corp.

---

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

long-term TRS performance as balanced against our disappointing short-term and long-term TRS performance. In addition, the Committee based its decisions on our Compensation Committee analyzedperformance as compared to specific company goals and objectives for 2016 that were presented at the annual incentive awards for Messrs. Holliday, Green and Mathias for 2013 based on the metrics that2015 investor day conference, which are being utilized for the formulaic component of annual cash bonuses for 2014 and took such analysis into account in determining the amount of the annual incentive awards for 2013. repeated below:

2016Goals and Objectives		2016 Results
2,600,000square feet of Manhattan leases signed(1)		3.2million sq. ft. signed
97% or greater same-store Manhattan portfolio leased occupancy		97.1%
13-16% mark-to-market on signed Manhattan office leases		27.6%
6.0% same-store cash NOI growth		6.0%
Increase growth portfolio NOI by $28million		$28.7million
$1billion of office property acquisitions		None
$750million of office property dispositions		$3billion
$500million of retail/residential property acquisitions		$29million
$100million of retail/residential property dispositions		$138million
$150million increase of debt and preferred equity balance		$180million
$200million of debt and preferred equity income		$234million
$400million of Federal Home Loan Bank borrowings		$251million
Create more than $500million of incremental retail value		$1.2billion
Sign200,000square feet of leases at One Vanderbilt		2018Action
Obtain $1billion of construction financing for One Vanderbilt		$1.5billion construction loan obtained
Dispose of more than $100million of suburban assets		$82million
Achieve7.6x or better net debt to EBITDA (per Fitch)		Achieved
Dividend increase of12.5% or more		7.6% increase
TRS greater than10%		TRS of -2.1%
TRS in excess of MSCI US REIT Index by250basis points		-1,066basis points

(1)	Goal increased by management from 2,000,000 square feet to 2,600,000 square feet in July 2016.

The differences in compensation awarded to our named executive officers are generally a function of the executive'sexecutive’s position and authority, as well as the competitive landscape for executives in similar positionspositions. The table below sets forth the annual equity bonus awards that were granted to each of Messrs. Holliday, Green and Mathias for 2015 and 2016, as approved by the Committee:

Executive		2015 Equity Bonus			2016 Equity Bonus(1)			% Change
Marc Holliday		$	4,204,375		$	4,276,875		1.7%
Stephen L. Green		$	2,228,907		$	788,282		-64.6%
Andrew Mathias		$	3,217,500		$	3,560,834		10.7%
Total		$	9,650,782		$	8,625,991		-10.6%

(1)	Excludes the value of 11,340 LTIP units granted to Mr. Mathias in June 2016, which were granted in recognition of performance since the beginning of 2014 as opposed to solely relating to 2016.

The amounts of the equity bonus awards for our executives in 2016 as compared to 2015 were primarily determined based on our strong operational achievements and, on an individual basis, the changing roles of each of our Chief Executive Officer, Executive Chairman and President, as balanced against our disappointing short-term TRS performance in 2016. In particular, reflecting our Executive Chairman’s evolving role, we significantly reduced the equity bonus award paid to our Executive Chairman. As a result, the overall equity bonus awards for our top three executives were reduced by approximately 10.6%, in the New York City commercial real estate industry. For 2013,aggregate, while the individual equity bonus awards reflect each executive’s contributions to our Compensation Committee approved the following aggregate annual incentive awards for the named executive officers:

Executive		2013 Cash Bonus			2013 Equity Bonus(1)			2013 Total Bonus
Marc Holliday		$	100,000		$	6,304,000		$	6,404,000
Stephen Green			—		$	4,000,000		$	4,000,000
Andrew Mathias			—		$	4,560,000		$	4,560,000
James Mead		$	800,000		$	250,000		$	1,050,000
Andrew Levine			—		$	1,467,749	(2)	$	1,467,749

---

(1)

Except as otherwise noted,strong business achievements in 2016. The 2016 equity bonuses reflect the dollar amounts usedpaid to determine the numbereach of shares of common stock or LTIP units granted, as reduced by the accounting discount attributable to the terms of such awards.

(2)

Equity bonus amount for Mr. Levine includes (i) $75,000, representing an additional allocation under our 2011 Outperformance Plan pursuant to which up to $75,000 may be earned and (ii) stock options with a grant date value of $592,749, the value of which is solely based upon future share price appreciation from the date of grant.

Comparison of 2012-2013 Annual Incentive Awards

        The following table illustrates the percentage changes in 2013 annual incentive awards as compared with awards for 2012:

		2013 Bonus (Cash & Equity)(1)(2)			2012 Bonus (Cash & Equity)(1)(3)			% Change
Marc Holliday		$	6,404,000		$	5,600,000			14.36	%
Stephen Green		$	4,000,000		$	4,160,000			-3.85	%
Andrew Mathias		$	4,560,000		$	4,260,000			7.04	%
James Mead		$	1,050,000		$	950,000			10.53	%
Andrew Levine		$	1,467,749		$	932,500			57.40	%

---

(1)

Except as otherwise noted, equity bonuses reflect the dollar amounts used to determine the number of shares of common stock or LTIP units granted, as reduced by the accounting discount attributable to the terms of such awards.

(2)

Equity bonus amount for Mr. Levine includes (i) $75,000, representing an additional allocation under our 2011 Outperformance Plan pursuant to which up to $75,000 may be earned and (ii) stock options with a grant date value of $592,749, the value of which is solely based upon future share price appreciation from the date of grant.

(3)

Equity bonus amounts for Mr. Levine and Mr. Mead include additional allocations of awards earned under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan of $100,000, respectively.

        As illustrated above, 2013 annual incentive award levels for ourtop three named executive officers listed above were higher than 2012 levelspaid in the aggregate. In 2013, we continued to demonstrate superior long-term market performance at levels that outperformed the industry and superior operating performance and,

Table of Contents

as a result, 2013 annual incentive award levels generally demonstrated increases over 2012 amounts. Additionally, in 2013, in order to further align the interests of our named equity officers and our stockholders, we provided substantially all of our named executive officers' aggregate annual incentive awards for 2013 in the form of equity awards. For 2013, we provided substantially all of the annual incentive awards for Messrs. Holliday, Green, Mathias and Levine and approximately 25% of the annual incentive award for Mr. Mead in the form of equity awards. For 2013, we provided all of the equity bonuses for our named executive officersearly 2017 in the form of LTIP units that may not be transferredvested upon grant, but remain subject to a no-sell restriction until two years after their grant date. Our named executive officers received the date theyfollowing number of LTIP units for these equity bonuses: Mr. Holliday—40,329; Mr. Green—7,433; and Mr. Mathias—33,577.

During 2016, we also separately granted Mr. Mathias an equity bonus consisting of 11,340 LTIP units that were vested upon grant, but were subject to a no-sell restriction until two years after their grant. These LTIP units were granted (exclusiveas equity bonus in 2016, but were in recognition of performance since the beginning of 2014 as opposed to solely relating to 2016.

2017 Proxy Statement  29

---

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Bonuses to Other Executives

Consistent with our historical practice, annual bonuses for Messrs. DiLiberto and Levine were determined by the Committee in its discretion in substantially the same manner as the equity bonuses for our top three named executive officers. The table below sets forth the annual bonus awards that were granted to Messrs. DiLiberto and Levine for 2015 and 2016, as approved by the Committee, to the extent paid in cash or LTIP units:

Executive		2015 Bonus			2016 Bonus			% Change
Matthew J. DiLiberto		$	1,400,000		$	1,700,000		21.4%
Andrew S. Levine		$	1,100,000		$	1,350,000		22.7%

Similar to the annual equity bonus awards that were granted to our top three named executive officers, these annual bonuses for Messrs. DiLiberto and Levine reflected our significant operational achievements for 2016, our continued superior long-term TRS performance and their evolving roles at our company, as balanced against our disappointing short-term TRS performance for 2016. These 2016 bonuses were paid to Messrs. DiLiberto and Levine in early 2017 in the form of cash and LTIP units that vested upon grant, but remain subject to no-sell restriction until two years after their grant date. Mr. Mead, whoDiLiberto received common shares with no additional two-year vest,$1,400,000 in cash and 2,829 LTIP units and Mr. Levine received 12,730 LTIP units.

In addition to these bonuses paid to Messrs. DiLiberto and Levine for 2016, the Committee also determined to make bonus awards to each executive in the form of 30,000 Class O LTIP units, which are economically similar to stock options, and additional allocation inwill only have value if our 2011 Outperformance Plan grantedrecent operational achievements translate into future returns for our stockholders. This decision reflects our commitment to Mr. Levine). As a resultour pay-for-performance compensation philosophy, and further aligns the interests of these restrictions, theseexecutive officers with those of our stockholders.

Long-Term Equity Incentive Awards

Long-term equity awards will provide continuing alignment ofincentives have been provided to our named executive officers with our stockholders asthrough the ultimate value they may realize will continue to be linked to the future valuegrant of our common stock. Equity bonus amounts for Mr. Levine include an additional allocation of future potential awards to be earned under our 2011 Outperformance Plan of $75,000 and stock options, with a grant date value of $592,749, the value of which is solely based upon future share price appreciation from the date of grant.

Comparison of 2011-2013 Total Direct Annual Compensation

        In orderrestricted stock, restricted stock units and/or LTIP units pursuant to provide our stockholders with an analysis of compensation directly attributable to a calendar year, we are including below, consistent with prior years, a Total Direct Annual Compensation Table. The Total Direct Annual Compensation Table enables a more meaningful year-over-year compensation comparison than the Summary Compensation Table presented beginning on page 44. The Total Direct Annual Compensation Table consists of (i) the actual salary paid for the year, (ii) the annual cash bonus awarded for the year irrespective of when such amounts were ultimately paid, (iii) the annual equity bonus awarded for the year irrespective of when such awards ultimately were granted, paid and/or vestedoutperformance plans and (iv) deferred compensation contributions made for the year. This table illustrates one of the analyses undertaken by our Compensation Committee in determining each element of our named executive officers' compensation for the particular year in light of such executive's performance during the year, and it further demonstrates the correlation between the executive's pay and overall company performance.

        The principal differences between the Total Direct Annual Compensation Table and the Summary Compensation Table, as presented beginning on page 44, are that, except as specifically noted below, (i) annual equity bonus is shown in the year to which such bonus relates based on the dollar amount on which equity bonuses were determined as reduced by the accounting discount attributable to the terms of such awards rather than showing the accounting grant date fair value in the year in which such grants were made as reflected in the Summary Compensation Table, and (ii) awards granted under long-term performance programs attributable to multi-year periods for which the ultimate value is unknown at the time of grant are excluded, rather than reflected at full grant-date accounting value as reflected in the Summary Compensation Table. Accordingly, the Summary Compensation Table, as presented beginning on page 44, includes the full grant date value of the portion of each executive's allocation in our 2011 Outperformance Plan awarded during the 2011-2013 period. The grant date value of each executive's allocation in our 2011 Outperformance Plan and 2010 Notional Unit Plan has been excluded from the Total Direct Annual Compensation Table, since our 2011 Outperformance Plan and 2010 Notional Unit Plan, other than those made as annual equity bonuses, represent long-term compensation programs that provide participants the opportunity to earn equity awards only if designated TRS or stock price appreciation thresholds are achieved over multi-year periods, such potential awards are not attributed to a singular year and the ultimate value of the Plans is not known at the time of grant.

        Additionally, we have paid signing bonuses or made equity awards in connection with new or extended employment agreements or the provisionsagreements. The majority of such agreements. Our Compensation Committee evaluates such awards in its process of determining annual compensation levels for the named executive

Table of Contents

officers. However, since these awards included performance-based vesting hurdles that must be met in order for recipients to earn them. The grant of equity awards links a named executive officer’s compensation and net worth directly to the performance of our stock price as well as the achievement of other performance-based vesting hurdles in some cases, which we believe encourages our named executive officers to make decisions with an ownership mentality and provides alignment of interest with our stockholders. The Committee has made long-term equity incentive awards a central part of our executive compensation program due to these features.

Outperformance Plans

A main component of our long-term equity incentive award program is our outperformance plans. Our outperformance plans provide equity awards to our named executive officers and other employees that are granted for retention purposessubject to performance-based hurdles based on TRS or stock price appreciation over a multi-year period, and are not attributedeligible for potential acceleration in specific, limited circumstances. In addition to service or performance for a particular year, theythe performance-based vesting hurdles, all of these equity awards have been excluded from the below table, rather than reflected at full grant-date valueadditional time-based vesting provisions of four to five years in the year they were issuedaggregate with principally back-end vesting, based on continued employment, which act as a retention device and provide a strong incentive to the executives to increase stockholder value during the vesting period.

Our outperformance plans are designed to provide strong and direct alignment of our executive’s interests with long-term stockholder interests. As a result, historically, we provided a meaningful percentage of our executives’ total compensation in the Summary Compensation Table. For a detailed descriptionform of equity awards under our outperformance plans. We anticipate continuing to utilize these types of plans as a significant component of our executive compensation program.

To guarantee that our long-term equity incentive awards reward only exceptional returns, our outperformance plans incorporate challenging performance hurdles. During prior periods where stockholders did not realize superior returns, such as during 2008 and cash compensation2009, our outperformance plans did not provide payouts. Due to the variable, at-risk nature of our outperformance plans, our executives must truly drive our overall performance and TRS to earn awards. This feature is illustrated by the table below showing our

30  SL Green Realty Corp.

---

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

strong TRS during the performance periods of our two previous outperformance plans and the awards issuedearned by our executives pursuant to those plans, as compared to our performance through December 31, 2016 relative to the robust performance hurdles contained in connection with newour 2014 Outperformance Plan:

		2010 Notional Unit Long-Term Compensation Plan		2011Outperformance Plan		2014Outperformance Plan
Performance Period		Dec. 2009 – Nov. 2012		Sept. 2011 – Aug. 2014		Sept. 2014 – Aug. 2017
Initial Stock Price		$42.37		$73.38		$109.36
Maximum Plan Award		$75.0 million		$85.0 million		610,000 LTIP units
Cumulative Absolute		25% - 50%		25% - 38%		25% - 50%
Hurdle Range
Absolute Hurdle Achieved?		YES – 85% TRS		YES – 54% TRS		NOT YET – 4.5% TRS for the
		($76.42 + $1.80		($109.36 + $3.92		28 months ended 12/31/16
		dividends)		dividends)		($107.55 + $6.56 dividends)
Cumulative Relative Hurdle Range		N/A		N/A		50th percentile – 75th percentile
Relative Hurdle Achieved?		N/A		N/A		NOT YET – 24th percentile for
						the 28 months ended 12/31/16

2014 Outperformance Plan

In August 2014, the Committee approved the general terms of our 2014 Outperformance Plan. Under our 2014 Outperformance Plan, participants may earn awards based on our TRS on an absolute basis as well as on a relative basis compared to the constituents of the MSCI US REIT Index, or materially amended executive employment agreements that are currently in effect, please see the "Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change-in-Control" section belowIndex Companies, over a three-year performance period beginning on page 50.September 1, 2014 and continuing through August 31, 2017. Awards earned based on absolute TRS will be determined independently of awards earned based on relative TRS.

In order for participants to earn the full award under our 2014 Outperformance Plan, our TRS during the performance period must equal or exceed50%, which would represent total returns to stockholders in excess of$5billion, and be in thetop25% of Index Companies.

Name		Year			Salary			Cash Bonus			Equity Bonus(1)(2)(3)			Annual Deferred Compensation Contributions			Total Direct Annual Compensation(4)
Marc Holliday			2013		$	1,050,000		$	100,000		$	6,304,000		$	450,000		$	7,904,000
			2012		$	1,000,000		$	2,000,000		$	3,600,000		$	450,000		$	7,050,000
			2011		$	1,000,000		$	2,000,000		$	3,280,000		$	450,000		$	6,730,000
Stephen Green			2013		$	750,000			—		$	4,000,000		$	150,000		$	4,900,000
			2012		$	750,000		$	2,000,000		$	2,160,000		$	150,000		$	5,060,000
			2011		$	750,000		$	1,500,000		$	2,320,000		$	150,000		$	4,720,000
Andrew Mathias			2013		$	750,000			—		$	4,560,000		$	350,000		$	5,660,000
			2012		$	750,000		$	2,500,000		$	1,760,000		$	350,000		$	5,360,000
			2011		$	750,000		$	1,750,000		$	2,120,000		$	350,000		$	4,970,000
James Mead			2013		$	500,000		$	800,000		$	250,000		$	—		$	1,550,000
			2012		$	500,000		$	750,000		$	200,000		$	—		$	1,450,000
			2011		$	500,000		$	650,000		$	104,768		$	—		$	1,254,768
Andrew Levine			2013		$	475,000			—		$	1,467,749		$	—		$	1,942,749
			2012		$	450,000		$	462,500		$	470,000		$	—		$	1,382,500
			2011		$	450,000		$	850,000		$	157,152		$	—		$	1,457,152

---

(1)

Except as otherwise noted, equity bonuses reflect the dollar amounts usedOur 2014 Outperformance Plan was designed to determine the number of shares of common stock or LTIP units granted, as reduced by the accounting discount attributablebe complementary to the terms of such awards.

(2)

Equity bonus amountSL Green Realty Corp. 2011 Long-Term Outperformance Plan, or our 2011 Outperformance Plan, as the baseline stock price for Mr. Levine for 2013 includes (i) $75,000, representing an additional allocationmeasuring performance under our 2014 Outperformance Plan exceeds the stock price at which maximum stock price appreciation would be achieved under our 2011 Outperformance Plan.

Awards that are earned under our 2014 Outperformance Plan pursuantwill also be subject to which up to $75,000vesting based on continued employment through August 31, 2018, with 50% of the awards earned vesting on August 31, 2017 and the remaining 50% vesting on August 31, 2018. The maximum number of LTIP units that may be earned and (ii) stock options with a grant date value of $592,749, the value of which is solely based upon future share price appreciation from the date of grant.

(3)

Equity bonus amounts for Mr. Levine and Mr. Mead include additional allocations of awards earned under our 2010 Notional Unit2014 Outperformance Plan will be 610,000 LTIP units.

Under the 2014 Outperformance Plan, two-thirds of $100,000, respectively.

(4)

Does not include the valueLTIP units may be earned based on our absolute TRS and one-third of certain perquisites, including matching contributionsthe LTIP units may be earned based on our relative TRS compared to Index Companies. The table below reflects the minimum and maximum thresholds for both the absolute TRS and relative TRS components:

Absolute TRS		Percentage of Absolute TRS LTIP Units Earned (two-thirds of total)			Relative TRS		Percentage of Relative TRS LTIP Units Earned (one-third of total)
Less than 25%		0%			Below 50th percentile		0%
25%		37.5%			50th percentile		37.5%
50% or higher		100%			75th percentile or greater		100%

The number of LTIP units that are earned if performance is above the minimum thresholds, but below the maximum hurdles, will be determined based on linear interpolation between the percentages earned at the minimum and maximum thresholds.

In the event our performance reaches the maximum absolute TRS or relative TRS hurdle before the end of the three-year performance period, a pro-rata portion of the maximum award may be earned. For each component, if our performance reaches the maximum threshold duringthe second half of the performance period, participants will earn one-third of the maximum award. If our performance reaches the maximum threshold during the third year of the performance period for a component, participants will earn up to two-thirds of the maximum award that may be earned for that component. Except in the event of a change in control, no awards may be earned during the first half of the performance period and, with respect to amounts deferredthe last one-third of the maximum award, no awards may be earned prior to the end of the performance period.

2017 Proxy Statement  31

---

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Awards may be earned upon a change in control as follows, but any such awards remain subject to vesting based on continued employment, as set forth above, with acceleration only occurring for a named executive officer in the event of a termination of the executive’s employment by us without cause or by the executive for good reason. In the event of a change in control during the first year of the performance period, participants will earn, for each component, the greater of (i) a prorated award based on the attainment of prorated performance hurdles or (ii) a non-prorated award based on attainment of the full, non-prorated performance hurdles, in each case, using the change in control as the end of the performance period. In the event a change in control occurs after the first year of the performance period, awards will be earned for each component based upon the attainment of prorated performance hurdles using the change in control as the end of the performance period.

The awards made to our named executive officers under our 401(k) plan2014 Outperformance Plan also provide that if that executive’s employment is terminated by us without cause or automobile benefitsby the executive officer for good reason, then the executive officer is treated under our 2014 Outperformance Plan as if he had remained employed by us for 12 months after the date of his termination. If the executive officer’s employment terminates due to death or disability, then such termination will be treated in the same manner, for that award recipient, as if a change in control occurred on the date of such termination; provided that any LTIP units earned in connection with death or disability will vest in full as of the date on which they are earned.

Distributions are not payable unless and until awards are earned. If awards are earned under our 2014 Outperformance Plan, each participant will then be entitled to Messrs. Green and Holliday.

Employment Agreementsthe distributions that would have been paid had the number of earned LTIP units been earned at the beginning of the performance period. Those distributions will be paid in cash or additional LTIP units as determined by the Committee. Thereafter, distributions will be paid currently with respect to all earned LTIP units, whether vested or unvested.

        WeThe following awards under our 2014 Outperformance Plan have been made pursuant to which our named executive officers have the opportunity to earn the following LTIP units:

Executive		Award Opportunity (# of LTIP Units)(1)
		Threshold		Maximum		Hypothetical Earning Based on Annualized Results through 12/31/2016(2)
Marc Holliday		43,208		115,222		0
Stephen L. Green		14,045		37,455		0
Andrew Mathias		30,500		81,333		0
Matthew J. DiLiberto		6,621		17,657		0
Andrew S. Levine		7,725		20,600		0

Robust hurdles demonstrate strong pay for performance alignment. We would need to achieve TRS of10.5% and35.5% from February 1, 2017 through August 31, 2017 in order for executives to earn the threshold and maximum absolute TRS amounts, respectively, under our 2014 Outperformance Plan.

(1)

Based on awards granted to date, for Messrs. Holliday, Green, Mathias and Levine, approximately 83.3% of the LTIP units may be earned based on our absolute TRS performance and approximately 16.7% of the LTIP units may be earned based on our relative TRS performance. For Mr. DiLiberto, approximately 66.7% of the LTIP units may be earned based on our absolute TRS performance and approximately 33.3% may be earned based on our relative TRS performance.

(2)

Represents LTIP units that would have been earned based on our performance from the start of the performance period through December31,2016.

Pursuant to our employment agreements with allMessrs. Holliday and Mathias, we agreed to allocate at least 22.67% and 16.00%, respectively, of the total awards under our 2014 Outperformance Plan to these executives. To date, we have allocated 18.9% and 13.3% to Messrs. Holliday and Mathias, respectively, of the total awards under our 2014 Outperformance Plan to which they are entitled, representing the full allocation of LTIP units that each may earn based on our absolute TRS performance and one-half of the allocation of LTIP units that each may earn based on our relative TRS performance.

Employment Agreement Awards

The second main component of our long-term equity incentive award program is equity awards granted for retention purposes or in connection with new or extended employment agreements. We typically enter into employment agreements with each of our named executive officers, other than Mr. Green, that set forth, among other things, each executive's base salary, annual deferred compensation contributions, if applicable, and non-competition and non-solicitation obligations and our severance obligations in connection with a terminationhave terms of the executive's employment during the term. We entered into new employment agreements with Messrs. Holliday, Mathias, Mead and Levine in 2013, which superseded their previous employment agreements.three or four years. In connection with these newagreements, we typically grant one or more types of equity awards to our named executive officers that have vesting periods aligned with the terms of these agreements. Vesting of these awards has been based on continued employment and, for a majority of these awards, the achievement of performance hurdles.

In connection with our employment agreements with our named executive officers, we granted equity awards to Messrs. Mathias, MeadDiLiberto and Levine on the effective date of each such agreement. In addition, under our employment agreements with Messrs. Holliday and Mathias we agreedprovided for the granting of the stock options and LTIP units noted in the table below, which, collectively for each of Mr. Holliday and Mr. Mathias, are scheduled to vest over the three-year term of the agreement. These long-term equity incentive

32  SL Green Realty Corp.

---

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

awards were not granted at the time these agreements were entered into. Instead, these agreements provided that Good Reason will exist, whichthe executives would allow the executivebe entitled to terminate histheir employment with us and receive severance payments and benefits if we dodid not make specified equity awardthese grants to the executive prior to fixed dates during the term of employment.on or before their scheduled vesting dates. These provisions were included instead of making long-term grants at the time the agreement was entered into, in part, in order to avoid the distortion in measuring annual compensation that otherwise might have occurred if these grants were all made in the year in which we entered into the agreements. TheseRegardless of the ultimate grant dates, for purposes of evaluating our executive compensation, we believe these awards should be viewed collectively as long-term equity awards are primarily performance-

Table of Contents

based, and we believe will serve to better align each executive's interests with those of our stockholdersvesting over the fullthree-year terms of these agreements (as opposed to three separate awards subject to short-term vesting), which is consistent with how the Committee viewed, and approved of, these awards.

The table below indicates the terms of the agreements. Prioremployments agreements with Messrs. Holliday, Mathias, DiLiberto and Levine that were in effect as of January 1, 2016 and summarizes the terms and grant dates of the long-term equity incentive awards made, or to enteringbe made, to our named executive officers pursuant to these employment agreements.

Messrs. Holliday and Mathias had amended their employment agreements in 2014 such that 100% of the future LTIP unit awards granted under these employment agreements were subject to performance-based vesting hurdles, with restructured hurdles that are more difficult to achieve than those originally established, as set forth in the table below.

			MARC HOLLIDAY (JANUARY 18, 2013 – JANUARY 17, 2016)
			Equity Award		# of Shares/ Units		Grant Date		Description(1)
			Stock options		200,000		2013		One-third vesting on1/17/14, 1/17/15 and 1/17/16; 50% expires 5 years after grant;50% expires 10 years after grant
Three- Year vesting			Performance-based and time-based LTIP units		87,870		2014		Vesting1/17/14; 60% subject to performance-based vesting contingent upon achievement of either7% increase in FFO, 7% TRS or TRS in the top40% of the MSCI US REIT Index, for the prior year (or on a cumulative basis from2013); two-year post-vesting no-sale
			Performance-based LTIP units		87,870		2015		Vesting1/17/15 and 1/17/16, respectively; vesting contingent upon achievement of either8% increase in FFO, 8% TRS or TRS in the top35% of the MSCI US REIT Index, for the prior year (or on a cumulative basis from2013); two-year post-vesting no-sale
			Performance-based LTIP units		87,870		2016
			ANDREW MATHIAS (JANUARY1,2014– DECEMBER31,2016)(2)
			Equity Award		# of Shares/ Units		Grant Date		Description(1)
			Stock options		130,000		2013		One-third vesting on12/31/14, 12/31/15 and 12/31/16; 50% expires 5years after grant; 50% expires 10 years after grant
Three- Year vesting			Performance-based and time-based LTIP units		58,666		2014		Vesting 12/31/14; 60% subject to performance-based vesting contingent upon achievement of either7% increase in FFO, 7% TRS or TRS in the top40% of the MSCI US REIT Index, for the prior year (or on a cumulative basis from2014); two-year post-vesting no-sale
			Performance-based LTIP units		58,667		2015		Vesting12/31/15 and 12/31/16, respectively; vesting contingent upon achievement of either8% increase in FFO, 8% TRS or TRS in the top35% of the MSCI US REIT Index, for the prior year (or on a cumulative basis from2014); two-year post-vesting no-sale
			Performance-based LTIP units		58,667		2016
			MATTHEW J. DILIBERTO (JANUARY1,2015– JANUARY1,2018)
			Equity Award		# of Shares/ Units		Grant Date		Description(1)
			Time-based LTIP units		13,000		2014		6,000 LTIP units vesting 1/1/16 and 3,500 LTIP units vesting on each of1/1/17 and 1/1/18
			Performance-based LTIP units		7,000		2014		One-half vesting on each of1/1/17 and 1/1/18; vesting contingent upon achievement of either8% increase in FFO, 8% TRS or TRS in the top35% of the MSCI US REIT Index, for the prior year (or on a cumulative basis from2015)

2017 Proxy Statement  33

---

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

	ANDREW S. LEVINE (JANUARY 1, 2016 – JANUARY 1, 2019)
	Equity Award		# of Shares/ Units		Grant Date		Description(1)
	Time-based LTIP units		18,000		2016		One-third vesting on 1/1/17, 1/1/18 and 1/1/19
	Performance-based LTIP units		18,000		2016		One-third vesting on 1/1/17, 1/1/18 and 1/1/19 contingent on achievement of performance hurdle; from 50-100% vesting based on achievement of either annual FFO growth or TRS of 5-8% per year or TRS in the top 35-50% of the MSCI US REIT Index, respectively, for the prior year (or on a cumulative basis from 2016 through such year or a subsequent quarter during the term); no vesting unless the 50% threshold performance criteria described above is met

	(1)	Performance-based LTIP units not earned in one year will vest on a subsequent vesting date occurring during the term of employment if the performance hurdle is met based on cumulative performance through a subsequent calendar quarter (for awards granted to Messrs. Holliday, Mathias and Levine) or year (for awards granted to Mr. DiLiberto) occurring prior to such vesting date.
	(2)	Excludes additional allocations of awards under our outperformance plans that were made to Mr. Mathias in connection with his employment agreement.

In 2016, we entered into thea new employment agreement with Mr. Holliday we alsofollowing the expiration of his prior employment agreements. The structure of Mr. Holliday’s new employment agreement was similar to his prior employment agreement in that the long-term equity incentive awards to be made a cash retention payment to Mr. Holliday of $1,000,000were not granted at the time this agreement was entered into and, grantedinstead, these agreements provided that Mr. Holliday optionswould be entitled to purchase 200,000 sharesterminate his employment with us and receive severance payments and benefits if we did not make these grants on or before their scheduled vesting dates. However, unlike Mr. Holliday’s prior agreement, he is no longer entitled to receive ungranted performance-based LTIP units upon a termination for good reason or without cause, except where such termination also occurs in connection with a change in control. The table below indicates the terms of these employment agreements and summarizes the terms and grant dates of the long-term equity incentive awards made, or to be made, to Mr. Holliday pursuant to this employment agreement.

MARC HOLLIDAY (JANUARY 18, 2016 – JANUARY 17, 2019)
Equity Award		# of Shares/Units		Grant Date		Description(1)
Stock options / Class O LTIP units		105,000		2016		Vesting one-year after grant date, which grant is to occur on or before 7/1/16; 50% expires 5 years after grant; 50% expires 10 years after grant
Stock options / Class O LTIP units		105,000		2017		Vesting one-year after grant date, which grant is to occur one year after the 2016 grant; 50% expires 5 years after grant; 50% expires 10 years after grant
Performance-based LTIP units		76,980		2017		Vesting 1/17/17, 1/17/18 and 1/17/19, respectively, contingent on achievement of performance hurdle; from 50-100% vesting based on achievement of either annual FFO growth or TRS of 5-8% per year or TRS in the top 35-50% of the MSCI US REIT Index, respectively, for the prior year (or on a cumulative basis from 2016 through such year or a subsequent quarter during the term); no vesting unless the 50% threshold performance criteria described above is met; two-year post-vesting no-sale
Performance-based LTIP units		61,584		2018
Performance-based LTIP units		61,584		2019

(1)	Performance-based LTIP units not earned in one year will vest on a subsequent vesting date occurring during the term of employment if the performance hurdle is met based on cumulative performance through a subsequent calendar quarter occurring prior to such vesting date.

Also in 2016, we entered into an amendment to our common stockemployment agreement with Mr. Mathias in connection with the automaticone-year renewal of the term of his prior employment agreement and as part of the process pursuant to which we entered intoits terms. In satisfaction of our obligations under the new employment agreement withamendment, we granted 54,545 LTIP units to Mr. Holliday. One-third of the total shares subject to the options vested or will vestMathias on each of January 17, 2014, 2015 and 2016, respectively, subject, in each case, to continued employment. One-half of the options10, 2017, which LTIP units are scheduled to expire after five years withvest on December 31, 2017, subject to continued employment through such date. Once vested, the remainder expiring after ten years. PriorLTIP units will be subject to enteringa two-year post-vesting no-sale restriction. Had we not made such grant to Mr. Mathias on or before January 31, 2017, and had Mr. Mathias subsequently opted to terminate his employment on or before February 28, 2017, then certain non-competition provisions of the employment agreement would have ceased to apply as of the effective date of termination.

We also entered into thea new employment agreement with Mr. Levine, we similarlyeffective January 1, 2016, which is summarized above.

34  SL Green Realty Corp.

---

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Other Compensation Policies and Information

How We Determine Executive Compensation

The Committee determines compensation for our named executive officers and is comprised of three of our independent directors, John H. Alschuler (Chairman), Edwin Thomas Burton, III and John S. Levy.

Independent Compensation Consultant/Compensation Process

The Committee retained Gressle & McGinley LLC as its independent outside compensation consulting firm and engaged Gressle & McGinley LLC to provide the Committee with relevant data concerning the marketplace, our peer group and its own independent analysis and recommendations concerning executive compensation. Gressle & McGinley LLC regularly participates in Compensation Committee meetings. Gressle & McGinley LLC does not provide any additional services to the Committee and does not provide any services to the Company other than to the Committee. Its sole role is as an independent consulting firm to advise the Committee with respect to the compensation of our named executive officers. The ultimate determination of total compensation and the elements that comprise that total compensation is made solely by the Committee.

With respect to our named executive officers, the Committee solicits recommendations from our Chief Executive Officer regarding total compensation, the allocation of this compensation among base salary, annual bonus amounts and other long-term incentive compensation, as well as the portion of overall compensation to be provided in cash or equity. Our Chairman also advises the Committee on these matters as they pertain to the compensation of our Chief Executive Officer. FTI Consulting, Inc., or FTI Consulting, is retained by our management as a cash retention paymentgeneral business advisor and provides services to Mr. Levinethe Company in a number of $100,000areas, including compensation. FTI Consulting, which has relationships with certain officers of the Company, provides market data to our Chief Executive Officer and Chairman, which they review when considering their compensation recommendations. The recommendations with respect to compensation are formulated by our Chief Executive Officer and Chairman and are communicated to the Committee by them. The Committee is also provided with the market data compiled by FTI Consulting and its recommendations with respect to the compensation of our named executive officers. The other named executive officers do not play a role in determining their own compensation, other than discussing their performance with our Chief Executive Officer.

All final determinations of compensation for our named executive officers are made solely by the Committee.

The Committee meets during the year to evaluate executive performance, to monitor market conditions in light of our goals and objectives, to solicit input from our independent compensation consultant on market practices, including peer group pay practices and new developments, and to review our executive compensation practices. As part of these meetings, in formulation of its executive compensation policies and practices for 2016, the Committee reviewed then-existing policies of certain of our institutional investors, Institutional Shareholder Services, Inc., or ISS, Glass Lewis & Co LLC and other governance groups, as well as feedback provided by such groups in prior year proxy research reports. The Committee is currently engaged with stockholders, as discussed above, and annually reviews our executive compensation policies and practices to ensure that such policies are in line with current market practices and stockholders’ best interests. The Committee makes regular reports to the Board.

Peer Group Benchmarking

In 2016, as in prior years, the Committee reviewed various peer compensation information in connection with its compensation decisions, primarily focused on the automatic renewalchief executive officer’s compensation. The Committee did not use this peer information to target a particular percentile for our Chief Executive Officer’s total compensation for 2016, but rather used this information to confirm that our Chief Executive Officer’s total compensation for 2016 was within an appropriate range of the termtotal compensation received by the chief executive officers of his prior employment agreementthese peers, considering relative size and as partperformance. With respect to size, we ranked above the median of these peers with respect to common equity market capitalization and total revenue. The Committee reviewed 2015 total compensation information for the chief executive officers of a New York City traditional REIT peer group.

The Committee utilized a New York City-based peer group given the unique characteristics of the process pursuant toNew York City real estate marketplace in which we entered intoconduct substantially all of our business, which is one of the newmost competitive in the world from both a business and compensation perspective. The following companies were included in the New York City traditional REIT peer group that the Committee reviewed:

NYC Traditional REIT Peer Group
●	Alexandria Real Estate Equities, Inc.
●	Boston Properties, Inc.
●	Brookfield Asset Management, Inc.
●	General Growth Properties, Inc.
●	iStar Financial
●	Kennedy-Wilson Holdings, Inc.
●	Ladder Capital Corp.
●	NorthStar Asset Management Group Inc.
●	Paramount Group, Inc.
●	Vornado Realty Trust

Our direct New York City competitors, both in terms of real estate business and talent, are not limited to other public REITs doing business in New York City. Rather, the Committee also views our competitors as consisting of top performing hedge funds, international investors, large private firms and others that may have equal or greater financial resources, including access to cost-efficient capital. The Committee believes that the top real estate principals

2017 Proxy Statement 35

---

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

of these non-REIT companies typically receive substantially higher compensation than chief executive officers of public REITs.

However, based on feedback from our stockholders, we removed all New York City-based asset managers from our peer group beginning in 2015 and now review compensation based on our New York City traditional REIT peer group and a national office REIT index. For 2016, we added Kennedy-Wilson Holdings, Inc. and Paramount Group, Inc. to our New York City traditional REIT peer group.

Analysis of Risk Associated with Our Executive Compensation Plans

In setting compensation, we also consider the risks to our stockholders and to achievement of our goals that may be inherent in the executive compensation program. We concluded that it is not reasonably likely that our compensation policies and practices will have a material adverse effect on us.

Although a significant portion of our executive’s compensation is performance-based and “at-risk,” we believe our executive compensation programs are appropriately structured and do not pose a material risk to the Company. We considered the following elements of our executive compensation plans and policies when evaluating whether such plans and policies encourage our executives to take unreasonable risks:

●	We evaluate performance based upon the achievement of a variety of business objectives and goals including, by way of example, FFO growth, occupancy and leasing rates, TRS performance (both on an absolute and relative basis), real estate investment activity, the strength of our credit profile, and capital markets executions that we believe correlate to long-term creation of stockholder value and that are affected by management decisions;
●	We adopted a balanced approach to equity compensation that incorporates the use of various equity-based compensation vehicles. By utilizing a balanced equity compensation mix comprised of several different types of equity-based compensation vehicles, including full value equity awards that retain value even in a depressed market, we lessen the likelihood that executives will take unreasonable risks to keep their equity awards “in-the-money,” as may be the case with equity compensation programs that rely solely on leveraged market-based equity compensation vehicles such as stock options;
●	We provide a significant portion of incentive compensation in the form of Long-Term Incentive Awards, such as awards that may be earned under our2014 Outperformance Plan. The amounts that ultimately may be earned under this program are tied to how we perform over a three-year period, which focuses management on sustaining our long-term performance;
●	We structure payouts under our performance-based awards based on achieving a minimum level of performance, so that some compensation is awarded at levels below full target achievement rather than an “all-or-nothing” approach;
●	We consider non-financial and other qualitative performance factors in determining actual compensation payouts;
●	We provide a significant portion of each executive’s annual compensation in the form of equity-based compensation, which results in our executives having built sizable holdings of equity in the Company. We note that executives are required to maintain sizable holdings of equity in the Company under the terms of our stock ownership guidelines, which aligns an appropriate portion of their personal wealth to our long-term performance; and
●	We adopted a policy for recoupment of incentive payments made to our executives, including our named executive officers, if payment was based on having met or exceeded performance expectations during a period of fraudulent activity for which the executive is responsible.

In conclusion, our executive compensation program is structured so that (i) we avoid the type of disproportionately large short-term incentives that could encourage executives to take risks that may not be in our long-term interests, (ii) we provide incentives to manage the Company for long-term performance, (iii) we have adopted a policy for recoupment of incentive payments under certain circumstances and (iv) a significant amount of the wealth of our executives is tied to our long-term success. We believe this combination of factors encourages our executives to manage the Company in a prudent manner.

Perquisites and Other Personal Benefits

We do not provide significant perquisites or personal benefits to our named executive officers, except that we reimburse our Chairman for costs associated with an automobile he leases for personal use and provide leased automobiles for our Chief Executive Officer and President. Additionally, we provide our Chairman with a full-time driver and our Chief Executive Officer receives certain insurance benefits. The costs of these benefits constitute only a small percentage of the applicable executive’s compensation.

Employment Agreements

As noted above, we have employment agreementagreements with Mr. Levine.

all of our named executive officers. All of the employment agreements with our named executive officers provide for, among other things, provide for severance payments and benefits and acceleration of equity awards in connection with certain qualified terminations. In return, each of our named executive officers has agreed to non-compete,

36  SL Green Realty Corp.

---

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

non-solicitation, non-interference and confidentiality provisions. For each of our executives, we believe that, because the severance level is negotiated up front, it makes it easier for us to terminate these executives without the need for protracted negotiations over severance. We also believe that providing pre-negotiated severance benefits for all of our executives in the event they are terminated without cause or terminate their employment for good reason following a change in control helps to further align the interests of our executives and our stockholders in the event of a potentially attractive proposed change in control transaction following which one or more of our executives may be expected to be terminated. See "Executive“Executive Compensation—Executive Compensation Tables—Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change-in-Control"Change in Control” for a summary of the employment agreements with our named executive officers.

Employee Benefits

        We have a 401(k) Savings/Retirement Plan, or our 401(k) Plan, to cover eligible employees of ours and of any designated affiliate. Our 401(k) Plan permits eligible employees to defer up to 15% of their annual compensation, subject to certain limitations imposed by the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the "IRC"). The employees' elective deferrals are immediately vested and non-forfeitable upon contribution to the 401(k) Plan. We do not provide our named executive officers with a supplemental pension or any other retirement benefits that are in addition to the 401(k) benefits provided generally to our employees.

Perquisites and Other Personal Benefits

        We do not provide significant perquisites or personal benefits to our named executive officers, except that we reimburse our Chief Executive Officer and our Chairman for costs associated with automobiles they lease for personal use. Additionally, we provide our Chairman with a full-time driver, our President with reimbursement for certain car service usage and our Chief Executive Officer receives certain insurance benefits. The costs of these benefits constitute only a small percentage of the applicable executive's compensation.

Clawback Policy

The Board has adopted a clawback policy under which any incentive payments made to a named executive officer on the basis of having met or exceeded performance targets during a period of fraudulent activity for which such executive is found personally responsible may be recouped by the Company.

Table of Contents

Anti-hedging Policy

The Board has adopted a policy prohibiting all of our executive officers and directors from engaging in hedging transactions with respect to our securities. Pursuant to this policy, our executive officers and directors may not engage in hedging transactions with respect to our securities (including, without limitation, partnership interests in our operating partnership) through puts, calls, covered calls, synthetic purchases, collars, other derivative securities of the Company or otherwise at any time. Prior to the adoption of this policy, none of our executive officers or directors were engaging in any hedging transactions with respect to our securities, and this policy was adopted to formally reflect the practices that our executive officers and directors had already been observing.

Executive and Director Stock Ownership Guidelines

        In December 2011, in connection with our Compensation Committee's monitoring and review of evolving "best practices," including an assessment of the feedback provided by proxy advisory firms ISS and Glass Lewis in their 2011 proxy research reports, and in furtherance of our Compensation Committee's ongoing efforts to foster an ownership culture among our senior leadership team, we adopted stock ownership guidelines for our named executive officers and independent directors. Pursuant to the guidelines, our Chief Executive Officer is required to hold equity interests in the Company or its operating partnership having a market value equal to or greater than a multiple of eight times such officer's annual base salary, our other named executive officers are required to hold equity interests having a market value equal to or greater than a multiple of six times each such officer's base salary, and our independent directors are required to hold a number of shares of Company stock having a market value equal to or greater than three times their annual retainer. Named executive officers and directors have three years from the date of adoption of the guidelines to attain compliance with the stock ownership requirements, or in the case of a new named executive officer or independent director, three years from the commencement of their employment or election to the Board.

Other Matters

Tax Treatment.Treatment    Our Compensation. The Committee reviews and considers the tax efficiency of executive compensation as part of its decision-making process. Section 162(m) of the IRC generally limits the deductibility of compensation over $1 million to a corporation'scorporation’s named executive officers. We are a real estate investment trust and therefore generally doesdo not pay income taxes. In addition, our named executive officers provide most of their services to our operating partnership. We have received a private letter ruling from the Internal Revenue Service to the effect that the deduction limitation of Section 162(m) does not apply with respect to compensation to our named executive officers for services rendered to our operating partnership. As a result, the amounts and form of compensation that we provide to our named executive officers is not materially impacted by Section 162(m) of the IRC.

LTIP units.units and Class O LTIP units. Under our 2010 Notional Unit2014 Outperformance Plan, as well our 2011 and 2005 Outperformance Plans, in lieu of issuing shares of restricted stock, we issued a separate class of units of limited partnership interest in our operating partnership, which we refer to as LTIP units. We also used LTIP units for the equity bonuses that we granted to our named executive officers for 20132016 and as equity awards granted in connection with new or extended employment agreements or the provisions of such agreements. LTIP units are similar to common units in our operating partnership, which generally are economically equivalent to shares of our common stock, except that the LTIP units are structured as "profits interests"“profits interests” for U.S. federal income tax purposes under current federal income tax law. As profits interests, LTIP units generally only have value, other than with respect to the right to receive distributions, if the value of the assets of our operating partnership increases between the issuance of LTIP units and the date of a book-up event for partnership tax purposes. If the value of the assets of our operating partnership increases sufficiently, the LTIP units can achieve full parity with common units in our operating partnership. If such parity is achieved, LTIP units may be converted, subject to

Table of Contents

the satisfaction of applicable vesting conditions, on a one-for-one basis into common units, which in turn are redeemable by the holder for cash or, at our election, on a one-for-one basis into shares of our common stock. LTIP units are not entitled to distributions prior to being earned based on achievement against the performance-based hurdles contained in these plans. Once earned, these LTIP units, whether vested or unvested, entitle the holder to receive distributions per unit from our operating partnership that are equivalent to the dividends paid per share on our common stock.

In addition to the LTIP units described above that we issued in lieu of shares of restricted stock, we also have issued another class of units of limited partnership interest in our operating partnership that are intended to be similar to stock options from an economic perspective, which we refer to as Class O LTIP units. Class O LTIP units are also intended to qualify as “profits interests” for U.S. federal income tax purposes. During 2016, we used Class O LTIP units as equity awards granted in connection with new or extended employment agreements or the provisions of such agreements, and we also used Class O LTIP units for annual bonuses that we granted to certain of our named executive officers in 2017 for 2016 performance.

2017 Proxy Statement 37

---

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Like stock options, Class O LTIP units operate in a manner that generally permits holders to realize the benefit of any increase in the per share value of our common stock above the value at the time the Class O LTIP units are granted. At the time of the grant of Class O LTIP units, the operating partnership establishes a conversion threshold, the vesting terms and the mandatory conversion date, if any, for the Class O LTIP units. The conversion threshold corresponds to the exercise price of a stock option while the mandatory conversion date corresponds to the expiration date of a stock option. Similar to the exercise price for stock options, the conversion threshold will equal the per unit value of the common units of our operating partnership on the grant date. Class O LTIP units will receive 10% distributions relating to periods between grant and vesting upon vesting, and will receive 10% distributions from vesting to their conversion as opposed to holders of non-qualified stock options who will not receive any distributions relating to periods between grant and exercise.

Once Class O LTIP units have vested, they may be converted into common units of our operating partnership by the holder at any time prior to their mandatory conversion date in a manner that is similar to a net exercise of stock options. Upon exercise of this conversion right, the Class O LTIP units will convert into a number of common units of the operating partnership that have an aggregate value equal to the aggregate spread of the Class O LTIP units that are converted. The “spread” for each Class O LTIP unit will equal the excess, if any, of the value of our operating partnership’s assets per common unit on the conversion date above the per unit value at the time the Class O LTIP unit was granted (i.e., the conversion threshold). Any Class O LTIP units that have not been voluntarily converted prior to the mandatory conversion date established at the time the Class O LTIP units were granted will automatically convert into common units on such mandatory conversion date, or be forfeited if the value of our operating partnership’s assets per common unit is less than the conversion threshold for the Class O LTIP units.

LTIP units and Class O LTIP units are intended to offer executives substantially the same long-term incentive as shares of restricted stock and stock options, respectively, with more favorable U.S. federal income tax treatment available for "profits interests"“profits interests” under current federal income tax law. More specifically, one key disadvantage of restricted stock is that executives are generally taxed on the full market value of a grant at the time of vesting, even if they choose to hold the stock. Similarly, holders of non-qualified stock options are taxed upon exercise. Conversely, under current federal income tax law, an executive would generally not be subject to tax at the time of issuance or vesting of an LTIP unit or Class O LTIP unit or conversion into common units but only when he or she chooses to liquidate the common units into which his or her LTIP units.units or Class O LTIP units convert. Therefore, an executive who wishes to hold his or her equity awards for the long term can generally do so in a more tax-efficient manner with LTIP units or Class O LTIP units. In light of the trade-offs between increased tax efficiency, and incremental economic risk relating to the structure of the LTIP units as profits interests due to their only having value upon a book-up event as described above as compared to restricted stock, we chosehave chosen to use LTIP units and Class O LTIP units for grants to our 2011 Outperformance Plan and our 2010 Notional Unit Plan.executives. We believe that the use of LTIP units in these plansand Class O LTIP units has (i) enhanced our equity-based compensation package overall, (ii) advanced the goal of promoting long-term equity ownership by executives, (iii) not adversely impacted dilution as compared to restricted stock, and (iv) further aligned the interests of our executives with the interests of our stockholders. We also believe that these benefits outweigh the loss of the U.S. federal income tax business-expense deduction from the issuanceutilization of LTIP units or Class O LTIP units, as compared to restricted stock.stock or stock options.

        Funds from Operations (FFO).38    We compute FFO in accordance with standards established by the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts, or NAREIT, which may not be comparable to FFO reported by other REITs that do not compute FFO in accordance with the NAREIT definition, or that interpret the NAREIT definition differently than we do. The revised White Paper on FFO approved by the Board of Governors of NAREIT in April 2002, as subsequently amended, defines FFO as net income (loss) (computed in accordance with GAAP), excluding gains (or losses) from debt restructuring and sales of properties and real estate related impairment charges, plus real estate related depreciation and amortization and after adjustments for unconsolidated partnerships and joint ventures. We present FFO because we consider it an important supplemental measure of our operating performance and believe that it is frequently used by securities analysts, investors and other interested parties in the evaluation of REITs. We also use FFO as one of several criteria to determine performance-based bonuses for members of our senior management. FFO is intended to exclude GAAP historical cost depreciation and amortization of real estate and related assets, which assumes that the value of real estate assets diminishes ratably over time. Historically, real estate values have risen or fallen with market conditions. Because FFO excludes depreciation and amortization unique to real estate, gains and losses from property dispositions and extraordinary items, it provides a performance measure that, when compared year over year, reflects the impact to operations from trends in occupancy rates, rental rates, operating costs and interest costs, providing perspective not immediately apparent from net income. FFO does not represent cash generated from operating activities in accordance with GAAP and should not be considered as an alternative to net income (determined in accordance with GAAP), as an indication of our financial performance or to cash flow from operating activities (determined in accordance with GAAP) as a measure of our liquidity, nor is it indicative of funds available to fund our cash needs, including our ability to make cash distributions.

        No Material Adverse Effect.    Based on our analysis of the foregoing, we have concluded that our compensation policies and procedures are not reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on the Company.

Table of Contents

Compensation Committee Report

        The Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of  SL Green Realty Corp. has reviewed and discussed the Compensation Discussion and Analysis required by Item 402(b)

---

Table of Regulation S-K with management and, based on such review and discussions, our Compensation Committee recommended to the Board that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in this annual proxy statement and incorporated by reference in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013.Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

		Submitted by ourExecutive Compensation Committee John H. Alschuler, Jr. (Chairman) Edwin Thomas Burton, III John S. Levy Tables

Summary Compensation Table

The following table sets forth information regarding the compensation paid to the individuals who served as our Chief Executive Officer ourand Chief Financial Officer during our 2016 fiscal year and each of our three most highly compensated executive officers, other than our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, whose total compensation exceeded $100,000 during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013,2016, or collectively, the "named“named executive officers."”

Name And Principal Position		Year			Salary ($)			Bonus ($)			Stock Awards(1) ($)			Option Awards ($)			All Other Compensation(2) ($)			Total ($)
Marc Holliday			2013		$	1,050,000		$	1,100,000		$	6,632,200		$	3,849,590		$	38,938		$	12,670,728
Chief Executive Officer			2012		$	1,000,000		$	2,000,000		$	7,241,604			—		$	39,051		$	10,280,655
			2011		$	1,000,000		$	2,000,000		$	5,582,539			—		$	36,614		$	8,619,153
Stephen L. Green			2013		$	750,000			—		$	4,543,356			—		$	148,389		$	5,441,745
Chairman of the Board			2012		$	750,000		$	2,000,000		$	4,054,936			—		$	147,810		$	6,952,746
			2011		$	750,000		$	1,500,000		$	4,391,911			—		$	170,932		$	6,812,843
Andrew Mathias			2013		$	750,000			—		$	5,370,869		$	3,136,874		$	28,863		$	9,286,606
President			2012		$	750,000		$	2,500,000		$	4,940,748			—		$	20,912		$	8,211,660
			2011		$	750,000		$	1,750,000		$	14,900,101			—		$	7,350		$	17,407,451
James Mead			2013		$	500,000		$	800,000		$	1,142,587			—		$	7,650		$	2,450,237
Chief Financial Officer			2012		$	500,000		$	750,000		$	585,938			—		$	79,500		$	1,915,438
			2011		$	500,000		$	650,000		$	306,059			—		$	150,580		$	1,606,639
Andrew S. Levine			2013		$	475,000		$	100,000		$	3,264,228		$	592,749		$	7,650		$	4,439,627
Chief Legal Officer and General Counsel			2012		$	450,000		$	462,500		$	877,113			—		$	7,500		$	1,797,113
			2011		$	450,000		$	850,000		$	3,405,195			—		$	7,350		$	4,712,545

---

(1)

Amounts shown do not reflect compensation actually received by the named executive officer. Instead, the amounts shown are the full grant date fair value of stock awards issued to the executives in 2013, 2012 and 2011, respectively. In accordance with SEC disclosure requirements, the amounts for 2013, 2012 and 2011 include the full grant date fair value of the executives' allocation in our 2011 Outperformance Plan and 2010 Notional Unit Plan granted during such years. The grant date fair value of such awards is computed in accordance with ASC 718, "Compensation-Stock Compensation" by the use of Monte Carlo simulation models that consider the probable outcomes of the market-based performance conditions governing such awards. For the awards granted under our 2011 Outperformance Plan during 2012, the Monte Carlo simulation model used an assumed stock price volatility level of 47% on the Company's common stock and a risk-free interest rate of 0.30%. For the awards granted under our 2011 Outperformance Plan during 2011, the Monte Carlo simulation model used an assumed stock price volatility level of 50% on the Company's common stock and a risk-free interest rate of 0.33%. For the awards granted under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan during 2011, the Monte Carlo simulation model used an assumed stock price volatility level of 64% on the Company's common stock, a risk-free interest rate of 1.20% and total dividends over the respective three-year measurement periods of $3.46. The actual value of such awards (i) with respect to our 2011 Outperformance Plan, will be contingent upon the attainment of stockholder return targets over a three-year measurement period ending August 31, 2014, and, (ii) with respect to our 2010 Notional Unit Plan, was

Name And Principal Position		Year		Salary ($)			Bonus ($)			Stock Awards(1) ($)			Option Awards(2)($)			Non-Equity Incentive Plan Compensation ($)			All Other Compensation(3)($)			Total ($)
Marc Holliday		2016		$	1,350,000			—		$	11,285,597		$	2,173,500		$	2,473,125		$	44,149		$	17,326,371
Chief Executive		2015		$	1,050,000		$	787,500		$	19,159,050			—		$	2,008,125		$	43,074		$	23,047,749
Officer		2014		$	1,050,000			—		$	14,160,346			—		$	1,102,500		$	41,215		$	16,354,061
Stephen L. Green		2016		$	750,000			—		$	1,933,688			—		$	1,161,718		$	179,800		$	4,025,206
Chairman of the		2015		$	750,000		$	468,750		$	3,962,493			—		$	1,202,343		$	170,490		$	6,554,076
Board		2014		$	750,000			—		$	4,468,371			—			—		$	173,992		$	5,392,363
Andrew Mathias		2016		$	800,000			—		$	9,120,896			—		$	1,239,166		$	38,823		$	11,198,885
President		2015		$	800,000		$	500,000		$	13,436,852			—		$	1,282,500		$	26,790		$	16,046,132
		2014		$	800,000			—		$	10,188,264			—			—		$	7,800		$	10,996,064
Matthew J.		2016		$	400,000		$	1,400,000			—			—			—		$	7,950		$	1,807,950
DiLiberto		2015		$	400,000		$	1,400,000			—			—			—		$	7,950		$	1,807,950
Chief Financial
Officer
Andrew S. Levine		2016		$	550,000			—		$	3,709,007			—			—		$	7,950		$	4,266,957
Chief Legal Officer		2015		$	500,000			—		$	873,342			—			—		$	7,950		$	1,381,292
and General		2014		$	490,000			—		$	2,033,308			—			—		$	7,800		$	2,531,108
Counsel

(1)

Amounts shown do not reflect compensation actually received by the named executive officer. Instead, the amounts shown are the full grant date fair value of stock awards issued to the executives in 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively. In accordance with SEC disclosure requirements, the amounts for 2015 and 2014 include the full grant date fair value of the executives' allocations in our 2014 Outperformance Plan and our 2011 Outperformance Plan granted during such years. The grant date fair value of such awards is computed in accordance with ASC 718, “Compensation-Stock Compensation,” or ASC 718, by the use of Monte Carlo simulation models that consider the probable outcomes of the market-based performance conditions governing such awards. For the awards granted under our 2014 Outperformance Plan during 2015, the Monte Carlo simulation model used an assumed stock price volatility level of 21.0% on our common stock and a risk-free interest rate of 0.88%. For the awards granted under our 2011 Outperformance Plan during 2014, the Monte Carlo simulation model used an assumed stock price volatility level of 19.0% on our common stock and a risk-free interest rate of 0.08%. The actual value of awards with respect to (i) our 2014 Outperformance Plan will be contingent upon our attainment of absolute and relative stockholder return metrics over a three-year measurement period ending August 31, 2017 and (ii) our 2011 Outperformance Plan was contingent upon the attainment of stockholder return targets over a three-year measurement period that ended August 31, 2014.

(2)

Amounts shown do not reflect compensation actually received by the named executive officer. Instead, the amounts shown are the full grant date fair value of Class O LTIP units as computed in accordance with ASC 718 by the use of the Black-Scholes option pricing model. For Class O LTIP units granted during 2016 with a mandatory conversion date that is 5 years after the date of grant, the Black-Scholes simulation model assumed volatility of 23%, an annual dividend yield of 2.3%, a risk free interest rate of 0.89% and an expected term of 3 years. For Class O LTIP units granted during 2016 with a mandatory conversion date that is 10 years after the date of grant, the Black-Scholes simulation model assumed volatility of 35%, an annual dividend yield of 2.3%, a risk free interest rate of 1.26% and an expected term of 5.5 years.

2017 Proxy Statement 39

---

Table of Contents

contingent upon the attainment of stock price appreciation targets over the three-year measurement period ending November 30, 2012. Assuming that maximum performance is achieved under our 2011 Outperformance Plan, the value at the grant date of the awards made under our 2011 Outperformance Plan during 2012 and 2011 would each have been as follows: Mr. Holliday—$9,633,333; Mr. Green—$4,250,000; Mr. Mathias—$6,800,000; Mr. Mead—$1,075,000; and Mr. Levine—$1,750,000, respectively. The assumptions used to calculate the grant date value of stock awards for 2013, 2012 and 2011, other than the awards under our 2011 Outperformance Plan and 2010 Notional Unit Plan, are set forth under Note 2 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2013, which was filed with the SEC on February 25, 2014, on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012, which was filed with the SEC on February 27, 2013, and on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011, which was filed with the SEC on February 28, 2012, respectively.

(2)

The table and footnotes below shows the components of this column for 2013, which include certain perquisites such as Company 401(k) matching contributions.

Name		Year			All Other Compensation ($)
Marc Holliday			2013		$	38,938	(a)
Stephen L. Green			2013		$	148,389	(b)
Andrew Mathias			2013		$	7,650	(c)
James Mead			2013		$	7,650	(d)
Andrew S. Levine			2013		$	7,650	(e)

---

a)

Represents (i) the Company's matching contributions with respect to amounts earned by the named executive officer under our 401(k) plan ($7,650), (ii) leased car payments ($20,776) and (iii) life insurance premiums ($10,775). The Company's 401(k) matching contributions are credited in the year subsequent to which employees make their contributions.

b)

Represents leased car ($16,144) and full-time driver payments ($132,245). Mr. Green is the only officer in the Company provided with a full-time driver, which allows him to use his time efficiently for business purposes during his travel time, and it is the Company's policy to not provide such perquisite to any officer other than Mr. Green.

c)

Represents the Company's matching contributions with respect to amounts earned by the named executive officer under our 401(k) plan ($7,650). The Company's 401(k) matching contributions are credited in the year subsequent to which employees make their contributions.

d)

Represents the Company's matching contributions with respect to amounts earned by the named executive officer under our 401(k) plan ($7,650). The Company's 401(k) matching contributions are credited in the year subsequent to which employees make their contributions.

e)

Represents the Company's matching contributions with respect to amounts earned by the named executive officer under our 401(k) plan ($7,650). The Company's 401(k) matching contributions are credited in the year subsequent to which employees make their contributions.

Table of ContentsEXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

(3)	The table and footnotes below show the components of this column for2016, which include certain perquisites such as Company401(k) matching contributions.

	Name		Year		All Other Compensation ($)
	Marc Holliday		2016		$	44,149(a)
	Stephen L. Green		2016		$	179,800(b)
	Andrew Mathias		2016		$	38,823(c)
	Matthew J. DiLiberto		2016		$	7,950(d)
	Andrew S. Levine		2016		$	7,950(d)

	(a)	Represents (i) the Company’s matching contributions with respect to amounts earned by the named executive officer under our401(k) plan ($7,950), (ii) leased car payments ($22,987) and (iii) life insurance premiums ($13,212). The Company’s401(k) matching contributions are credited in the year subsequent to which employees make their contributions.
	(b)	Represents leased car ($36,273) and full-time driver payments ($143,527). Mr. Green is the only officer in the Company provided with a full-time driver and it is the Company’s policy to not provide such perquisite to any officer other than Mr. Green.
	(c)	Represents the Company’s matching contributions with respect to amounts earned by the named executive officer under our401(k) plan ($7,950) and leased car payments ($30,873). The Company’s401(k) matching contributions are credited in the year subsequent to which employees make their contributions.
	(d)	Represents the Company’s matching contributions with respect to amounts earned by the named executive officer under our401(k) plan ($7,950). The Company’s401(k) matching contributions are credited in the year subsequent to which employees make their contributions.

20132016 Grants of Plan-Based Awards

The following table sets forth certain information with respect to each grant of an award made to a named executive officer in the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013.December31,2016.

								Estimated Future Payouts Under Equity Incentive Plan Awards (#)									All Other Stock Awards; Number of Shares of Stock or Units (#)			All Other Options Awards; Number of Securities Underlying Options (#)			Exercise or Base Price of Option Awards ($/Sh)			Grant Date Fair Value of Stock and Option Awards ($)
Name		Grant Date			Approval Date			Threshold ($/#)			Target ($/#)			Maximum ($/#)
Marc Holliday			01/02/2013			01/02/2013			—			—			—						100,000	(1)	$	76.65		$	1,797,530
			01/02/2013			01/02/2013			—			—			—						100,000	(1)	$	76.65		$	2,052,060
			01/18/2013			12/09/2009			—			—			—			5,696	(2)							$	456,990
			06/27/2013			01/11/2013			—			—			—			59,312	(3)							$	4,254,805
			12/17/2013			12/17/2013			—			—			—			26,622	(4)							$	1,920,405
Stephen L. Green			01/01/2013			12/09/2009			—			—			—			1,958	(5)							$	150,081
			06/27/2013			01/11/2013			—			—			—			35,587	(3)							$	2,552,869
			12/17/2013			12/17/2013			—			—			—			25,513	(4)							$	1,840,406
Andrew Mathias			01/01/2013			08/30/2010			—			—			—			4,569	(5)							$	350,213
			06/27/2013			01/11/2013			—			—			—			28,997	(3)							$	2,080,129
			11/08/2013			11/08/2013			—			—			—			7,393	(6)							$	539,985
			11/08/2013			11/08/2013			—			—			—						65,000	(7)	$	91.43		$	1,419,957
			11/08/2013			11/08/2013			—			—			—						65,000	(7)	$	91.43		$	1,716,917
			12/17/2013			12/17/2013			—			—			—			33,278	(4)							$	2,400,542
James Mead			01/11/2013			01/11/2013			—			—			—			1,977	(8)							$	156,420
			10/28/2013			10/28/2013			—			—			—			7,500	(9)							$	736,126
			12/17/2013			12/17/2013			—			—			—			2,773								$	250,041
Andrew S. Levine			06/27/2013			01/11/2013			—			—			—			6,096	(3)							$	437,303
			06/27/2013			06/27/2013			—			—			—			21,000	(10)							$	1,491,168
			06/27/2013			06/27/2013			—			21,000	(11)		21,000	(11)										$	1,335,757
			12/12/2013			12/11/2013			—			—			—						12,500	(12)	$	90.15		$	270,643
			12/12/2013			12/11/2013			—			—			—						12,500	(12)	$	90.15		$	322,106

---

(1)

This grant of stock options was awarded in connection with the extension of the term of Mr. Holliday's employment. This grant reflects an award of 100,000 stock options that expire 5 years after the date of grant and an award of 100,000 stock options that expire 10 years after the date of grant, each of which vests pro-rata over a three-year period on January 17, 2014, 2015 and 2016, respectively.

(2)

This grant of notional stock units vested on January 17, 2014. Each stock unit represents the contingent right to receive the value of one share of common stock in accordance with the terms of a deferred compensation agreement.

(3)

As previously disclosed in our proxy statement for the 2013 annual meeting of stockholders, this grant represents LTIP units issued as equity bonus for 2012 following the approval of the 2005 Plan at our 2013 annual meeting of stockholders. This grant of LTIP units vested immediately upon grant, but remains subject to a two-year restriction on transfer from the date of grant.

(4)

This grant of LTIP units vested immediately upon grant, but remains subject to a two-year restriction on transfer from the date of grant.

(5)

This grant of notional stock units vested on December 31, 2013. Each stock unit represents the contingent right to receive the value of one share of common stock in accordance with the terms of a deferred compensation agreement.

(6)

This grant of LTIP units was awarded in connection with Mr. Mathias' employment agreement, which vested 50% on the date of grant, 25% on December 31, 2013 and will vest 25% on January 1, 2015. Once vested, restricted stock units remain subject to a two-year restriction on transfer from the date of grant.

(7)

This grant of stock options was awarded in connection with Mr. Mathias' employment agreement. This grant reflects an award of 65,000 stock options that expire 5 years after the date of grant and an award of 65,000 stock options that expire 10 years after the date of grant, each of which vests pro-rata over a three-year period on December 31, 2014, 2015 and 2016, respectively.

(8)

This grant of restricted stock units vested immediately upon grant.

(9)

This grant of restricted stock was awarded in connection with Mr. Mead's employment agreement and will vest in four equal quarterly installments at the end of each fiscal quarter during 2014.

						Estimated Possible Payouts Under Non-Equity Incentive Plan Awards									Estimated Future Payouts Under Equity Incentive Plan Awards						All Other Stock Awards: Number of Shares of Stock or Units (#)		All Other Option Awards: Number of Securities Underlying Options (#)		Exercise or Base Price of Option Awards ($/Sh)			Grant Date Closing Market Price ($/Sh)			Grant Date Fair Value of Stock and Option Awards ($)
Name		Grant Date		Approval Date		Threshold ($)			Target ($)			Maximum ($)			Threshold (#)		Target (#)		Maximum (#)
Marc Holliday		01/12/2016		01/12/2016			—			—			—		—		—		—		40,153(1)		—			—					$	3,363,537
		01/12/2016		01/12/2016			—			—			—		—		—		—		87,870(2)		—			—					$	7,238,379
		02/10/2016		02/10/2016			—			—			—		—		—		—		8,265(3)		—			—					$	683,681
		06/17/2016		06/17/2016			—			—			—		—		—		—		—		52,500(4)		$	99.86		$	100.32		$	717,675
		06/17/2016		06/17/2016			—			—			—		—		—		—		—		52,500(4)		$	99.86		$	100.32		$	1,455,825
		N/A		N/A		$	1,350,000(9)		$	2,700,000(9)		$	4,050,000(9)		—		—		—		—		—			—						—
Stephen L. Green		01/01/2016		12/09/2009			—			—			—		—		—		—		1,333(5)		—			—					$	150,602
		01/12/2016		01/12/2016			—			—			—		—		—		—		21,286(1)		—			—					$	1,783,086
		N/A		N/A		$	750,000(9)		$	1,312,500(9)		$	1,875,000(9)		—		—		—		—		—			—						—
Andrew Mathias		01/01/2016		11/08/2013			—			—			—		—		—		—		4,443(5)		—			—					$	501,970
		01/12/2016		01/12/2016			—			—			—		—		—		—		30,728(1)		—			—					$	2,574,023
		01/12/2016		01/12/2016			—			—			—		—		58,667(6)		58,667(6)		—		—			—					$	5,134,800
		06/17/2016		06/17/2016			—			—			—		—		—		—		11,340(1)		—			—					$	910,103
		N/A		N/A		$	800,000(9)		$	1,400,000(9)		$	2,000,000(9)		—		—		—		—		—			—						—
Matthew J. DiLiberto		—		—			—			—			—		—		—		—		—		—			—						—
Andrew S. Levine		01/12/2016		01/12/2016			—			—			—		—		—		—		10,505(1)		—			—					$	879,983
		02/10/2016		02/10/2016			—			—			—		9,000(7)		13,500(7)		18,000(7)		—		—			—					$	1,340,064
		02/10/2016		02/10/2016			—			—			—		—		—		—		18,000(8)		—								$	1,488,960

(1)

This grant of LTIP units vested immediately upon grant, but remains subject to a two-year restriction on transfer from the date of grant.

(2)

This grant of LTIP units was awarded in connection with Mr. Holliday’s employment agreement and was to be subject to vesting based on the achievement of any of the following financial performance goals during2015(or on a cumulative basis beginning with2013through the end of2015) and continued employment through January17th of the year following the year as of which the financial performance goals are achieved: (i)8% or greater increase in FFO on a per-share basis, (ii)8% or greater TRS or (iii) TRS or percentage increase in FFO per share in the top35% of a peer group of companies determined each year by our Compensation Committee. This grant is presented in the “All Other Stock Awards: Number of Shares of Stock or Units” column instead of the “Estimated Future

40  SL Green Realty Corp.

---

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

(10)

This grant of LTIP units was awarded in connection with Mr. Levine's employment agreement. This grant of LTIP units vests pro-rata over a three-year period on January 1, 2014, 2015 and 2016, respectively. Once vested, LTIP units remain subject to a two-year restriction on transfer from the date of grant.

(11)

This grant of LTIP units was awarded in connection with Mr. Levine's employment agreement. This grant of LTIP units vests pro-rata over a three-year period on January 1, 2014, 2015 and 2016, respectively, subject to the achievement of certain performance criteria. Once vested, LTIP units remain subject to a two-year restriction on transfer from the date of grant. See "—Potential Payments Upon Termination or a Change in Control" for a description of the performance goals. The "Maximum ($/#)" column represents the maximum number of LTIP units that could be earned. The "Target ($/#)" column represents the number of LTIP units that would be earned if the performance goals are achieved. The LTIP units only provide for a single level of performance each year. Accordingly, the "Threshold($/#)" subcolumn is not applicable.

(12)

This grant reflects an award of 12,500 stock options that expire 5 years after the date of grant and an award of 12,500 stock options that expire 10 years after the date of grant, each of which vests pro-rata over a three-year period on January 1, 2015, 2016 and 2017, respectively.

	Payouts Under Equity Incentive Plan Award” column, because the grant occurred after performance-based vesting was achieved. Once vested, these LTIP units remain subject to a restriction on transfer until the earlier of two years after vesting, termination of employment or a change in control.
(3)	This grant of notional stock units was subject to vesting based on continued employment through January17,2017. Each stock unit represents the contingent right to receive the value of one share of our common stock in accordance with the terms of a deferred compensation agreement.
(4)	These grants of Class O LTIP units were awarded in connection with the extension of Mr. Holliday’s employment. These grants reflect an award of52,500Class O LTIP units with a mandatory conversion date that is5years after the date of grant and an award of52,500Class O LTIP units that expire10years after the date of grant, each of which vests on June17,2017. These grants are presented in the “All Other Option Awards: Number of Securities Underlying Options” column, because Class O LTIP units are economically similar to stock options. The conversion threshold for the Class O LTIP units, which is equivalent to the exercise price for a stock option, was determined by reference to the fair market value under our Fourth Amended and Restated2005Stock Option and Incentive Plan of one share of our common stock, meaning, in this instance, the closing stock price of one share of our common stock on the NYSE on June16,2016, the last preceding trading date prior to the grant date. See “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—Other Compensation Policies and Information—Other Matters—LTIP units and Class O LTIP units” for a description of Class O LTIP units.
(5)	This grant of notional stock units was subject to vesting based on continued employment through December31,2016. Each stock unit represents the contingent right to receive the value of one share of our common stock in accordance with the terms of a deferred compensation agreement.
(6)	This grant of LTIP units was awarded in connection with Mr. Mathias’s employment agreement and was subject to vesting based on the achievement of any of the following financial performance goals during2016(or on a cumulative basis beginning with2014through the end of2016) and continued employment through the end of the year as of which the financial performance goals are achieved: (i)8% or greater increase in FFO on a per-share basis, (ii)8% or greater TRS or (iii) TRS or percentage increase in FFO per share in the top35% of a peer group of companies determined each year by our Compensation Committee. Once vested, these LTIP units remain subject to a restriction on transfer until the earlier of two years after vesting, termination of employment or a change in control. The “Maximum (#)” column represents the maximum number of LTIP units that could be earned. The “Target (#)” column represents the number of LTIP units that would be earned if the performance goals are achieved. The LTIP units only provide for a single level of performance. Accordingly, the “Threshold(#)” subcolumn is not applicable.
(7)	This grant of LTIP units was awarded in connection with Mr. Levine’s employment agreement. This grant of LTIP units vests pro-rata over a three-year period on January1,2017,2018and2019, subject to the achievement of financial performance goals and continued employment through each vesting date. In each case, from50-100% of the LTIP units eligible to vest on each vesting date will vest based on the achievement of either (i) annual FFO growth or TRS of5-8% per year or (ii) TRS in the top35-50% of the MSCI US REITIndex, respectively, for the prior year (or on a cumulative basis from2016through such year or a subsequent quarter during the term). None of the LTIP units will vest unless the50% minimum performance vesting threshold is met.
(8)	This grant of LTIP units was awarded in connection with Mr. Levine's employment agreement. This grant of LTIP units vests pro-rata over a three-year period on January1,2017,2018and2019, respectively, subject to continued employment through each vesting date. Once vested, LTIP units remain subject to a two-year restriction on transfer from the date of grant.
(9)	Represents cash payouts that were possible pursuant to the formulaic component of our annual cash bonus program for2016. See “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—Annual Incentive Awards—Annual Cash Bonus Program (Top Three Named Executive Officers)” for a description of these awards.

Grants of all equity awards were made pursuant to the 2005Fourth Amended and Restated2005 Stock Option and Incentive Plan. Shares of restricted stock, restricted stock units and LTIP units that are only subject to time-based vesting based on continued employment through a specified date (and have not been forfeited) generally entitle executives to receive cash dividends, dividend equivalents or distributions whether or not then vested. Shares of restricted stock, restricted stock units and LTIP units that are subject to performance-based vesting hurdles accrue cash dividends, dividend equivalents or distributions prior to the achievement of these hurdles, and such accrued amounts are only paid to the executives if and when the performance hurdles are met.

See "Potential“Potential Payments Upon Termination or a Change in Control"Control” below, for a discussion regarding potential acceleration of the equity awards and a description of the material terms of each named executive officer'sofficer’s employment agreement.

2017 Proxy Statement  41

---

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Outstanding Equity Awards at Fiscal Year-End 2013
2016

The following table sets forth certain information with respect to all outstanding equity awards held by each named executive officer at the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013.December31,2016.

		Option Awards												Stock Awards
Name		Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#) Exercisable			Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#) Unexerciseable			Option Exercise Price ($)			Option Expiration Date			Number of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not Vested (#)			Market Value of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not Vested (#)(1)			Equity Incentive Plan Awards: Number of Unearned Shares, Units or Other Rights That Have Not Vested (#)			Equity Incentive Plan Awards: Market or Payout Value of Unearned Shares or Units or Other Rights that Have Not Vested ($)(1)
Marc Holliday			—			100,000	(9)	$	76.65			01/02/2018			67,756	(2)(6)	$	6,259,299			193,072	(7)	$	17,836,003
			—			100,000	(9)	$	76.65			01/02/2023			—			—			—			—
Stephen L. Green			—			—			—			—			32,850	(6)	$	3,034,683			85,179	(7)	$	7,868,825
			—			—			—			—			—			—			—			—
Andrew Mathias			—			65,000	(10)	$	91.43			11/08/2018			56,599	(3)(6)	$	5,228,616			136,286	(7)	$	12,590,119
			—			65,000	(10)	$	91.43			11/08/2023			—			—			—			—
James Mead			—			—			—			—			11,468	(4)(6)	$	1,059,414			21,545	(7)	$	1,990,350
			—			—			—			—			—			—			—			—
Andrew S. Levine			—			12,500	(11)	$	90.15			12/12/2018			33,372	(5)(6)	$	3,082,905			35,074	(7)	$	3,240,104
			—			12,500	(11)	$	90.15			12/12/2023			—			—			21,000	(8)	$	1,939,980

---

(1)

Based on a price of $92.38 per share/unit, which was the closing price on the New York Stock Exchange of one share of our common stock on December 31, 2013. Assumes that the value of LTIP units on a per unit basis is equal to the per share value of our common stock.

		Option Awards									Stock Awards
Name		Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#) Exercisable		Number of Securities Underlying Unexercised Options (#) Unexercisable		Option Exercise Price ($)			Option Expiration Date		Number of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not Vested(#)(1)		Market Value of Shares or Units of Stock That Have Not Vested(2)			Equity Incentive Plan Awards: Number of Unearned Shares, Units or Other Rights That Have Not Vested (#)		Equity Incentive Plan Awards: Market or Payout Value of Unearned Shares or Units or Other Rights that Have Not Vested(2)
Marc Holliday		100,000				$	76.65		01/02/2018		13,253		$	1,425,360		—			—
		100,000				$	76.65		01/02/2023		—			—		25,925(3)		$	2,788,234
				52,500(4)		$	99.86		06/17/2021
				52,500(4)		$	99.86		06/17/2026
Stephen L. Green		—		—			—		—		2,201		$	236,718		8,427(3)		$	906,324
Andrew Mathias		65,000		—		$	91.43		11/08/2018		3,781		$	406,647		—			—
		65,000		—		$	91.43		11/08/2023		—			—		18,300(3)		$	1,968,165
Matthew J. DiLiberto		20,000(5)		10,000(5)		$	90.15		12/12/2018		11,148		$	1,198,967		—			—
		—		—			—		—		—			—		10,121(3)		$	1,088,514
Andrew S. Levine		8,333(6)		4,167(6)		$	90.15		12/12/2018		24,926		$	2,680,791		—			—
		8,333(6)		4,167(6)		$	90.15		12/12/2023		—			—		16,635(3)		$	1,789,094

(1)	For each of our named executive officers, includes the following:

(2)

Includes 5,696 notional stock units, each of which represents the contingent right to receive the value of one share of common stock in accordance with the terms of a deferred compensation agreement. These notional stock units vested on 01/17/2014. Vested notional stock units are settled in cash no later than 30 days following the earliest of (i) Mr. Holliday's death, (ii) the date of Mr. Holliday's separation from service with us, and (iii) the effective date of a Change-in-Control (as defined in the deferred compensation agreement).

	Executive		Notional Stock Units(a)		LTIP Units(b)		Performance- Based Employment Agreement LTIP Units(c)		Time-Based Employment Agreement LTIP Units(d)
	Marc Holliday		8,265		4,988		—		—
	Stephen L. Green		—		2,201		—		—
	Andrew Mathias		—		3,781		—		—
	Matthew J. DiLiberto		—		648		3,500		7,000
	Andrew S. Levine		—		926		6,000		18,000

	(a)	Represents notional stock units, each of which represents the contingent right to receive the value of one share of our common stock in accordance with the terms of a deferred compensation agreement. These notional stock units vested on01/17/2017. Vested notional stock units are settled in cash no later than30days following the earliest of (i) Mr. Holliday’s death, (ii) the date of Mr. Holliday’s separation from service with us, and (iii) the effective date of a change in control (as defined in the deferred compensation agreement).
	(b)	Represents LTIP units that vest on6/30/2017based on2016performance, subject to continued employment through such date.
	(c)	Represents LTIP units that vested on01/01/2017based on2016performance.
	(d)	For Mr. DiLiberto, represents LTIP units, of which one-half is scheduled to vest on01/01/2017and one-half is scheduled to vest on01/01/2018, subject to continued employment through such dates. For Mr. Levine, represents6,000LTIP units that vested on01/01/2017, with the remaining12,000LTIP units scheduled to vest one-half on01/01/2018and one-half on01/01/2019, subject to continued employment through such dates.

42  SL Green Realty Corp.

---

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

(3)

Includes LTIP units granted on 11/08/2013, of which 1,849 are scheduled to vest on 01/01/2015 subject to continued employment through such date.

(4)

Includes 7,500 shares of restricted stock granted on 10/28/2013, which will vest in four equal quarterly installments at the end of each fiscal quarter during 2014, subject to continued employment through such dates.

(5)

Includes 21,000 LTIP units granted on 06/27/2013, of which one-third vested on 01/01/2014 and one-third is scheduled to vest on each of 01/01/2015 and 01/

(2)	Based on a price of $107.55per share/unit, which was the closing price on the NYSE of one share of our common stock on December31,2016. Assumes that the value of LTIP units on a per unit basis is equal to the per share value of our common stock.
(3)	Includes the following LTIP units, which represents the number of LTIP units that will be earned under the2014Outperformance Plan if we achieve both25% or greater absolute TRS and relative TRS in the50th percentile or higher during the three-year performance period under the2014Outperformance Plan: Mr. Holliday—25,925LTIP units; Mr. Green—8,427LTIP units; Mr. Mathias—18,300LTIP units; Mr. DiLiberto—6,621LTIP units; and Mr. Levine—4,635LTIP units. If our absolute and relative performance for the three-year performance period applicable to these awards continues to be the same as we experienced from the beginning of the performance period through December31,2016, our named executive officers will not earn any LTIP units under these awards. As a result, in accordance with SEC rules, the table reflects the number of LTIP units that would be earned if the “threshold” performance goal was achieved. For Mr. DiLiberto, also includes3,500LTIP units that are scheduled to vest on01/01/2018, based on the attainment of specified performance goals during the vesting period and subject to continued employment through such date. For Mr. Levine, also includes12,000LTIP units that are scheduled to vest one-half on01/01/2018and one-half on01/01/2019, based on the attainment of specified performance goals during the vesting period and subject to continued employment through such dates.
(4)	Reflects an award of52,500Class O LTIP units with a mandatory conversion date that is five years after the date of grant and an award of52,500Class O LTIP units with a mandatory conversion date that is10years after the date of grant, each of which is scheduled to vest on06/17/2017, subject to continued employment through such date. Class O LTIP units are economically similar to stock options. See “Compensation Discussion and Analysis—Other Compensation Policies and Information—Other Matters—LTIP units and Class O LTIP units” for a description of Class O LTIP units.
(5)	Reflects an award of30,000stock options that expires five years after the date of grant, of which one-third vested on01/01/2015, one-third vested on01/01/2016and one-third vested on01/01/2017.
(6)	Reflects an award of12,500stock options that expires five years after the date of grant and an award of12,500stock options that expires10years after the date of grant, of which one one-third of each vested on01/01/2015, one-third of each vested on01/01/2016and one-third of each vested on01/01/2017.

2016 respectively, subject to continued employment through such dates.

(6)

Includes the following LTIP unit awards with respect to which the performance-based vesting conditions had been met under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan, but which remained subject to vesting requirements based on continued employment, which is scheduled to vest on 01/01/2015 subject to continued employment through such date: Mr. Holliday—62,060 LTIP units, Mr. Green—32,850 LTIP units, Mr. Mathias—54,750 LTIP units, Mr. Mead—3,968 LTIP units, and Mr. Levine—12,372 LTIP units.

(7)

Includes the following LTIP Units, which represents the number of LTIP Units that will be earned under our 2011 Outperformance Plan if we achieve the same per year percentage stock price appreciation during the three-year performance period under our 2011 Outperformance Plan as we did from plan inception through year-end 2013: Mr. Holliday—193,072 LTIP Units, Mr. Green—85,179 LTIP Units, Mr. Mathias—136,286 LTIP Units, Mr. Mead—21,545 LTIP Units, and Mr. Levine—35,074 LTIP Units.

If the performance based vesting is met under our 2011 Outperformance Plan, the awards will remain subject to vesting requirements based on continued employment, with 50% scheduled to vest on 08/31/14 and 50% scheduled to vest on 08/31/15 subject to continued employment through such dates.

(8)

Includes 21,000 LTIP units granted on 06/27/2013, of which one-third vested on 01/01/2014 and one-third is scheduled to vest on each of 01/01/2015 and 01/01/2016, respectively, based on the attainment of specified performance goals during the vesting period and subject to continued employment through such dates.

(9)

Reflects an award of 100,000 stock options that expire 5 years after the date of grant and an award of 100,000 stock options that expire 10 years after the date of grant, each of which vests pro-rata over a three-year period on January 17, 2014, 2015 and 2016, respectively.

(10)

Reflects an award of 65,000 stock options that expire 5 years after the date of grant and an award of 65,000 stock options that expire 10 years after the date of grant, each of which vests pro-rata over a three-year period on December 31, 2014, 2015 and 2016, respectively.

(11)

Reflects an award of 12,500 stock options that expire 5 years after the date of grant and an award of 12,500 stock options that expire 10 years after the date of grant, each of which vests pro-rata over a three-year period on January 1, 2015, 2016 and 2017, respectively.

2013 Option Exercises and Stock Vested

None of our named executive officers exercised any stock options during2016. The following table sets forth certain information with respect to the exercise of stock options, stock appreciation rights, or SARs, and similar instruments, and the vesting of stock, including restricted stock, restricted stock units, LTIP units and similar instruments for each named executive officer during the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013.December31,2016.

Name		Number of Shares Acquired on Exercise (#)			Value Realized on Exercise ($)			Number of Shares Acquired on Vesting (#)			Value Realized on Vesting(1) ($)
Marc Holliday			—			—			254,408		$	21,701,748
Stephen L. Green			—			—			95,908		$	8,602,174
Andrew Mathias			—			—			177,138		$	16,060,506
James Mead			—			—			14,241		$	1,300,686
Andrew S. Levine			—			—			18,468		$	1,656,664

---

(1)

		Stock Awards
Name		Number of Shares Acquired on Vesting (#)		Value Realized on Vesting(1)($)
Marc Holliday		137,801		$	13,944,593
Stephen L. Green		24,820		$	2,569,524
Andrew Mathias		108,957		$	11,491,522
Matthew J. DiLiberto		6,646		$	746,660
Andrew S. Levine		25,430		$	2,761,905

(1)	Amounts reflect the market value of the stock on the vesting date.

2017 Proxy Statement  43

---

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

2016 Nonqualified Deferred Compensation

The following table sets forth certain information regarding non-tax qualified compensation deferred during the year ended December31,2016. All of the information below relates to notional stock units that we have granted to certain of our named executive officers pursuant to employment agreements we have entered into with them. Pursuant to these employment agreements, we have agreed to grant notional stock units with a specified value to certain of our named executive officers each year, which are subject to vesting based on continued employment for the dayfollowing year. Once vested, these notional stock units represent a contingent right to receive the value ofone share of our common stock. Under the terms of the deferred compensation agreements, each participant is also entitled to dividend equivalent rights, to be paid in cash on a current basis, equal to the amount per share of any cash dividend we declare, multiplied by the total number of notional units held by such participant as of the record date for such dividend. Vested notional stock vested.

units are settled in cash no later than30 days following the earliest of (i) the executive’s death, (ii) the date of the executive’s separation from service with us and (iii) the effective date of a change in control.

Executive		Executive Contributions in Last FY ($)(1)(2)			Registrant Contributions in Last FY ($)		Aggregate Earnings in Last FY ($)(2)(3)			Aggregate Withdrawals/ Distributions ($)(4)			Aggregate Balance at Last FYE ($)(2)(5)
Marc Holliday		$	479,771		—		$	-18,809		$	128,735		$	4,140,783
Stephen L. Green		$	143,364		—		$	-27,562		$	39,303		$	1,467,735
Andrew Mathias		$	477,845		—		$	-46,553		$	79,825		$	2,980,963
Matthew J. DiLiberto			—		—			—			—			—
Andrew S. Levine			—		—			—			—			—

(1)	Represents values as of the vesting dates for notional units that vested during2016, which are reported in the2016Option Exercises and Stock Vested table.
(2)	Awards of notional units constitute “Stock Awards” for purposes of the Summary Compensation Table, and, as a result, the full grant date fair value of these awards computed in accordance with ASC718, as of the grant date of such awards, are included in the “Stock Awards” column of the Summary Compensation Table for the year in which they were granted. The right to receive dividend equivalents was factored into the determination of the grant date fair value, which means that the value of the dividend equivalents included in “Aggregate Earnings in Last FY” was effectively already included in the Summary Compensation Table.
(3)	The amounts in this column represent the increase or decrease in value of vested notional units from December31,2015through December31,2016, as calculated based on the closing stock price on the NYSE of one share of our common stock on December31,2015, or, for notional units that vested during2016, the closing stock price on the NYSE of one share of our common stock on such vesting date, compared to the closing stock price on the NYSE of one share of our common stock on December31,2016, plus the aggregate value of dividend equivalent rights paid with respect to all vested and unvested notional units held by each executive during2016.
(4)	Represents the aggregate value of dividend equivalent rights paid with respect to all vested and unvested notional units held by each executive during2016.
(5)	Based on a per share price of $107.55, which was the closing stock price on the NYSE of one share of our common stock on December31,2016.

44   SL Green Realty Corp. 2010 Notional Unit Plan

---

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

        In December 2009,Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change in Control

We have contractual arrangements with our Compensation Committee approvednamed executive officers that provide for payments, acceleration of vesting or other benefits to our named executive officers upon a termination of employment in certain circumstances or upon a change in control. These include our employment agreements with our named executive officers and the general terms of our2014 Outperformance Plan, our performance-based equity awards and our stock options. The following are certain key aspects of these contractual arrangements:

●	No IRC Section280G tax gross-up provisions
●	No single trigger change in control payments
●	No single trigger change in control vesting acceleration
●	Reasonable cash severance multiples (1x without change in control;2x-3x with change in control)

The discussion below describes these contractual arrangements in greater detail.

Employment Agreements

We have employment agreements with all of our named executive officers. All of the employment agreements with our named executive officers provide for, among other things, severance payments and benefits and acceleration of equity awards in connection with the termination of employment in certain circumstances. In return, each of our named executive officers has agreed to non-compete, non-solicitation, non-interference and confidentiality provisions. The table below summarizes the material terms of our employment agreements with our named executive officers.

		Marc Holliday		Stephen L. Green		Andrew Mathias		Matthew J. DiLiberto		Andrew S. Levine
Term(1)		1/18/16-1/17/19		1/1/15-1/1/16		1/1/16-12/31/17		1/1/15-1/1/18		1/1/16-1/1/19
Annual Salary		$1.35M		$750K		$800K		$400K		$550K
Annual Deferred Compensation(2)		$750K		$150K		$550K		None		None
Guaranteed Bonus		None(3)		None		None		None		None
OPP Allocation		22.67% (2014) and24% (future)		None		16% (2014/future)		None		None
Other Benefits		$10M of life insurance		$5M of life insurance		None		None		None
Equity Awards		See “—Compensation Discussion and Analysis—Long-Term Equity Incentive Awards—Employment Agreement Awards” for a summary of the terms relating to equity awards.

2017 Proxy Statement  45

---

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Marc Holliday

Stephen L. Green

Andrew Mathias

Matthew J. DiLiberto

Andrew S. Levine

Severance Benefits

If the executive’s employment is terminated by us without Cause or by the executive for Good Reason during the term, the executive will be entitled to the following payments or benefits subject (except if such termination is in connection with a Change-in-Control) to the effectiveness of a mutual release:

Termination without Change-in-Control

Termination with Change-in-Control(4)

●1x average annual base salary, deferred compensation, if any, and bonus(5) ●Pro-rata bonus for partial year(6) ●Acceleration of all unvested equity awards (other than OPP awards) and deferred compensation, if any ●Grant of certain employment agreement equity awards not previously granted(7) ●Option exercise period extended to second January 1st following termination ●12 months of benefit continuation/payments

●2x-3x average annual base salary, deferred compensation, if any, and bonus(5) ●Pro-rata bonus for partial year(6) ●Acceleration of all unvested equity awards (other than OPP awards) and deferred compensation, if any ●Grant of employment agreement awards not previously granted(7) ●Option exercise period extended to second January 1st following termination ●24 months of benefit continuation/payments ●Section 280G modified cut-back(8)

Death/Disability

If the executive’s employment is terminated by us upon death or disability during the term, the executive will be entitled to the following payments or benefits subject (in the case of disability) to the effectiveness of a mutual release:

Death

Disability

●Pro-rata bonus for partial year(6) ●Partial acceleration of unvested equity awards (other than OPP awards) and deferred compensation, if any(9) ●Grant of certain employment agreement equity awards not previously granted(7) ●Payments/benefits to Messrs. Holliday and Green are reduced by life insurance benefit

●1x average annual base salary, deferred compensation, if any, and bonus(5) ●Pro-rata bonus for partial year(6) ●Partial acceleration of unvested equity awards (other than OPP awards) and deferred compensation, if any(9) ●Grant of certain employment agreement equity awards not previously granted(7) ●36 months of benefit continuation/ payments

Post-Change-in-Control Salary

For periods following a Change-in-Control, in lieu of the base salary, annual bonus, deferred compensation and OPP awards described above, each executive, while employed, will be entitled to receive salary payable in cash at a per annum rate equal to the sum of his annual base salary in effect prior to the Change-in-Control plus his annual bonus and the value of his deferred compensation contributions and his equity awards (other than those granted under outperformance plans) that vested during the most recent fiscal year prior to the Change-in-Control.

Restrictive Covenants

For Messrs. Holliday, Green and Mathias, noncompetition with us for18 months following termination (12 months if employment is terminated upon or after the scheduled expiration of the term of employment or6 months if employment is terminated in connection with or within18 months after a Change-in-Control). Non-solicitation, non-disparagement, non-interference and litigation cooperation covenants also apply.

For Messrs. DiLiberto and Levine, noncompetition with us for12 months after termination unless employment is terminated upon non-renewal of the agreement or without Cause or for Good Reason in connection with or within18 months after a Change-in-Control. Non-solicitation, non-disparagement, non-interference and litigation cooperation covenants also apply.

(1)

The terms automatically renew for one year (for Messrs. Green and Mathias) and six months (for Messrs. DiLiberto and Levine) unless either party provide advance written notice of non-renewal. Mr. Holliday’s employment agreement does not provide for automatic renewal of the term. In the event of a Change-in-Control within18months of the end of the term of Mr. Holliday’s agreement, Mr. Holliday may elect to extend the term until18months after the Change-in-Control.

46  SL Green Realty Corp. 2010 Notional Unit Long-Term Compensation Plan,

---

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

(2)	Annual deferred compensation contributions are made in the form of notional stock units at the beginning of the term and on each anniversary of such date during the term, subject to vesting based on continued employment for one year from the grant date, and are payable no later than30days following the earliest of (i) the executive’s death, (ii) the date of the executive’s separation from service with us and (iii) the effective date of a Change-in-Control based on the value of such stock units at that time.
(3)	Mr. Holliday is eligible to participate in an annual formulaic cash bonus program pursuant to which he will be able to earn up to three times his base salary based on the achievement of specific goals established in advance by the Committee.
(4)	Severance benefits in the event of a termination by us without Cause or by the executive for Good Reason in connection with or within18months after a Change-in-Control.
(5)	Calculated based on the sum of the named executive officer’s (i) average annual base salary in effect during the preceding24months, plus (ii) average annual cash bonuses (including any portion of the annual cash bonus paid in the form of equity awards, but excluding any annual or other equity awards made other than as payment of a cash bonus) paid for the two most recently completed fiscal years, plus (iii) average annual deferred compensation contribution, if any, during the preceding24months, calculated based on the cash value of the annual deferred compensation contributions as of the dates of such contributions. In connection with a Change-in-Control, Messrs. Holliday and Green are entitled to three times, Mr. Mathias is entitled to two and one-half times and Messrs. DiLiberto and Levine are entitled to two times the foregoing sum. Average deferred compensation is only applicable to Messrs. Holliday, Mathias and Green.
(6)	Pro-rata bonus is for the year in which employment is terminated (and a bonus for the prior year if such bonus had not yet been determined) based on average annual cash bonus calculated in the manner described in footnote (5) above.
(7)	Only applicable to Mr. Holliday. Mr. Holliday will be entitled to receive the stock options or Class O LTIP units provided for in his employment agreement, but will not be entitled to receive any other employment agreement equity awards that had not yet been granted unless his termination is in connection with or within18months after a Change-in-Control; provided that Mr. Holliday will not be subject to the non-competition provisions in his employment agreement if such other employment agreement equity awards are not granted.
(8)	In the event that any payment or benefit constitutes an excess “parachute payment” under Section280G of the IRC subject to an excise tax, the executive will not be entitled to a tax gross-up payment; however, the executive’s payments and benefits would be reduced to the extent necessary to avoid such excise taxes, but only if such a reduction of pay or benefits would result in a greater after-tax benefit to the executive.
(9)	Full acceleration of vesting of any unvested equity awards granted in lieu of cash bonuses and deferred compensation and24months (Messrs. Holliday and Green),18months (Mr. Mathias) or12months (Messrs. DiLiberto and Levine) of additional vesting of other outstanding equity awards (other than OPP awards).

The terms Cause, Good Reason and Change-in-Control, as used above, are specifically defined in each executive’s employment agreement. The summary above is qualified in its entirety by reference to the copies of the employment agreements and the deferred compensation agreements with our 2010 Notional Unit Plan. Our 2010 Notional Unit Plan is a long-term incentive compensation plan pursuant tonamed executive officers, which award recipients could earn, inhave been previously filed by us with the aggregate, from approximately $15 million up to approximately $75 million of LTIP unitsSEC, as referenced in our operating partnership based on our stock price appreciation over three years beginning on December 1, 2009. If our aggregate stock price appreciation during this period was less than 25%, then award recipients would not have earned any LTIP units under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan. For stock price appreciation between 25%Form10-K for the year ended December31,2016, and 50% during this period, award recipients would have earned LTIP

Table of Contentsare incorporated herein by reference.

units with a value ranging from approximately $15 million to approximately $75 million based on a sliding scale. If our aggregate stock price appreciation during this period equaled or exceeded 50%, then award recipients were entitled to earn the maximum awardOutperformance Plan Awards

The impact of $75 million under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan. Pursuant to our 2010 Notional Unit Plan, the stock price appreciation percentages noted above were adjusted as a result of the increase in our quarterly dividend rate above $0.10 per share, such that the aggregate total return to stockholders that was needed to earn LTIP units remained the same.

        Our 2010 Notional Unit Plan provided that, if, prior to the end of the three-year performance period, we achieved the maximum stock price appreciation of 50% for 45 consecutive days, then a portion of the total awards could be earned early as described in this paragraph. If this 45 consecutive day maximum performance period was completed at any point during the second year of the performance period, then approximately $25 million of LTIP units were to be earned. If this 45 consecutive day maximum performance period was completed at any point during the third year of the performance period, then approximately $25 million (or if the maximum performance was not also achieved at any point during the second year, then approximately $50 million) of LTIP units were to be earned. Other than in connection with a change in control or termination of the Company, no acceleration could occur prior to the commencement of the second year or with respect to the final $25 million of LTIP units. As a resultemployment of our named executive officers on the awards granted under our2014 Outperformance Plan are described above under “—Compensation Discussion and Analysis—Our Executive Compensation Programs—Long-Term Equity Incentive Awards—Outperformance Plans—2014 Outperformance Plan.”

Performance-Based Equity Awards

Upon a change in control, the performance-based vesting criteria for the performance-based LTIP unit awards that we granted to our named executive officers pursuant to their employment agreements or that we granted in2014 in recognition of our strong stock price performance during the three-year performance period our Compensation Committee determined that maximum performance had been achieved at or shortly after the beginning of each of the second and third years of the performance period and for the full performance period and, accordingly, 366,815 LTIP units, 385,583 LTIP units and 327,416 LTIP units were earned under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan in December 2010, 2011 and 2012, respectively. Substantially in accordance with the original terms of the program, 50% of these LTIP units vested on December 17, 2012 (accelerated from the original January 1, 2013 vesting date), 25% of these LTIP units vested on December 11, 2013 (accelerated from the original January 1, 2014 vesting date) and the remainder is scheduled to vest ratably on January 1, 2015 based on continued employment. In accordance with the terms of our 2010 Notional Unit Plan, distributions were not paid on any LTIP units until they were earned, at which time we paid all distributions that would have been paid on the earned LTIP units since the beginning of the performance period.

        The awards made to our named executive officers under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan also provide that if that named executive officer's employment is terminated by us without cause or by the executive officer for good reason, then the executive officer is treated under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan as if he had remained employed by us for 12 months after the date of his termination.

SL Green Realty Corp. 2011 Outperformance Plan

        In August 2011, our Compensation Committee approved the general terms of the SL Green Realty Corp. 2011 Long-Term Outperformance Plan, or the "2011 Outperformance Plan". Participants in our 2011 Outperformance Plan may earn, in the aggregate, up to $85 million of LTIP units in our operating partnership based on our total return to stockholders for the three-year period beginning September 1, 2011. Under our 2011 Outperformance Plan, participants will be entitled to share in a "performance pool" comprised of LTIP units with a value equal to 10% of the amount, if any, by which our total return to stockholders during the three-year period exceeds a cumulative total return to stockholders of 25%, subject to the maximum of $85 million of LTIP units; provided that if maximum performance has been achieved, approximately one-third of each award may be earned at any time after the beginning of the second year and an additional approximately one-third of each award may be earned at any time after the beginning of the third year. LTIP units earned under our 2011our2011 Outperformance Plan will be subject to continued vesting requirements, with 50% of any awards earned vestingdetermined based on August 31, 2014 and the remaining 50% vesting on August 31, 2015, subject to continued employment with usperformance through such dates. Participants will not be entitled to distributions with respect to LTIP units granted under

Table of Contents

our 2011 Outperformance Plan unless and until they are earned. If LTIP units are earned, each participant will also be entitled to the distributions that would have been paid had the number of earned LTIP units been issued at the beginning of the performance period, with such distributions being paid partly in cash and partly in the form of additional LTIP units. Thereafter, distributions will be paid currently with respect to all earned LTIP units, whether vested or unvested.

        In the event of a change in control of our company on or after September 1, 2012 but before August 31, 2014, the performance pool will be calculated assuming the performance period ended on August 31, 2014 and the total return continued at the same annualized rate from the date of the change in control (except for the portion of the performance-based LTIP unit awards that were to August 31, 2014be granted as was achieved from September 1, 2011time-based LTIP unit awards to Messrs. Holliday and Mathias prior to the dateamendments to their then current employmentagreements in2014, for which the performance-based vesting criteria will be deemed to have been met in the event of a change in control). Regardless of the change in control; provided that the performance pool may not exceed 200% of what it would have been if it was calculated using the total return from September 1, 2011 to the datesatisfaction of the change in control and a pro rated benchmark. In either case, the performance pool will be formed as described above if the adjusted benchmark target is achieved and all earnedperformance-based vesting criteria, these awards will be fully vested uponremain subject to vesting based on continued employment through the changeoriginally established vesting dates. In the event of a termination by us without Cause or by an executive for Good Reason (as defined in control. Ifeach executive’s employment agreement) in connection with or within18 months after a change in control, occurs afterall of the performance period has ended, all unvested awards issued under our 2011 Outperformance Planperformance-based LTIP units will become fully vestedvest. Otherwise, the vesting of these performance-based LTIP units upon the change in control. Additionally, under our 2011 Outperformance Plan, an award recipient'sa termination due to death or disabilityof employment will be treated in the same manner for that award recipient, as if a change in control had occurred onother equity awards under our executive’s employment agreements.

Stock Options and Class O LTIP units

Under the dategeneral terms of such termination.

        The awards madethe2005 Plan, the vesting of stock options and Class O LTIP units granted thereunder, including those granted to our named executive officers, underwill fully accelerate in the event of a termination of the recipient’s employment upon death or disability. Vested stock options and Class O LTIP units generally may be exercised or converted until the earlier of (i) their stated expiration date or mandatory conversion date or (ii) subject to extension of the exercise period or conversion period pursuant to our 2011 Outperformance Plan also provide that if that named executive officer'sofficers’ employment is terminatedagreements, a specified period of time after termination of employment (i.e., upon termination in the event of termination for cause, one year after termination in the event of termination due to death or disability and three months after termination in all other cases).

2017 Proxy Statement 47

---

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

Hypothetical Illustration of Payments upon Termination or Change in Control

The following tables show the potential payments and estimated value of the benefits that our named executive officers would have been entitled to receive upon a termination of their employment by us without cause or by the executive officerthem for good reason thenor upon the executive officer is treated under our 2011 Outperformance Plandeath or disability as if he had remained employed by us for 12 months afterof December31,2016 based on the dateemployment agreements and other contractual arrangements in effect as of his termination.

        As of December 31, 2013, we have granted approximately all of the awards available under our 2011 Outperformance Plan. A total of 39 employees of the Company received awards pursuant to our 2011 Outperformance Plan, with 42% going to employees other than ourthat date. Our named executive officers.

Retirement Benefits

        The Company doesofficers would not provide supplemental pensionhave been entitled to any payments or other retirement benefits other than our tax-qualified 401(k) Plan. See "Summary Compensation Table." In addition, the Company does not have a nonqualified deferred compensation plan that provides for deferral of compensation on a basis that is not tax-qualified for our named executive officers.

Potential Payments Upon Termination or Change-in-Control

        Each of our named executive officers is a party to an employment and non-competition agreement between us and such executive officer. This section describes the material terms of each named executive officer's employment and non-competition agreement and provides the amount of compensation that would be paid to each named executive officer by us under these agreements and our other executive compensation programsthose already accrued in the event of a termination of such executive'stheir employment with us or a Change-in-Control without termination of employment. The amount of compensation payable to each named executive officer upon (i) a Change-in-Control without termination of the named executive officer, (ii) termination of the named executive officer by us for Causecause or by the executivethem without Good Reason, (iii) termination of the named executive officer by usgood reason (including upon retirement) or a change in control without Cause or by the executive with Good Reason, (iv) termination of the named executive officer in connection with a Change-in-Control, (v) termination of the named executive officer in the event of the disability of the executive and (vi) termination of the named executive officer in the event of the death of the executive, each referred to as a Triggering Event, is described below.termination. The types of events constituting Cause, Good Reason,cause, good reason, disability and a Change-in-Controlchange in control may differ in some immaterial respects among the different arrangements providing for benefits to the named executive officers; however, for consistency in presentation, our executive compensation arrangementsthe payments and estimated value of benefits have been grouped together based on these concepts without regard for any such differences.

Marc Holliday

Payment/Benefit		Termination without Cause or for Good Reason			Termination w/Change in Control			Disability			Death(1)
Pro-Rata Bonus		$	7,500,000		$	7,500,000		$	7,500,000		$	7,500,000
Cash Severance		$	9,375,000		$	28,125,000		$	9,375,000			—
Stock Option / Class O LTIP Unit Vesting(2)		$	807,450		$	807,450		$	807,450		$	807,450
LTIP Unit/Stock Unit Vesting(3)		$	1,425,360		$	1,425,360		$	1,425,360		$	1,425,360
2014OPP(4)			—			—			—			—
Benefits Continuation(5)		$	44,014		$	88,027		$	132,041			—
Stephen L. Green
Payment/Benefit		Termination without Cause or for Good Reason			Termination w/Change in Control			Disability			Death(1)
Pro-Rata Bonus		$	4,200,000		$	4,200,000		$	4,200,000		$	4,200,000
Cash Severance		$	5,100,000		$	15,300,000		$	5,100,000			—
Stock Option / Class O LTIP Unit Vesting(2)			—			—			—			—
LTIP Unit/Stock Unit Vesting(3)		$	236,718		$	236,718		$	236,718		$	236,718
2014OPP(4)			—			—			—			—
Benefits Continuation(5)		$	30,941		$	61,882		$	92,822			—
Andrew Mathias
Payment/Benefit		Termination without Cause or for Good Reason			Termination w/Change in Control			Disability			Death(1)
Pro-Rata Bonus		$	5,300,000		$	5,300,000		$	5,300,000		$	5,300,000
Cash Severance		$	6,625,000		$	16,562,000		$	6,625,000			—
Stock Option / Class O LTIP Unit Vesting(2)			—			—			—			—
LTIP Unit/Stock Unit Vesting(3)		$	406,647		$	406,647		$	406,647		$	406,647
2014OPP(4)			—			—			—			—
Benefits Continuation(5)		$	44,014			88,027			132,041			—
Matthew J. DiLiberto
Payment/Benefit		Termination without Cause or for Good Reason			Termination w/Change in Control			Disability			Death(1)
Pro-Rata Bonus		$	1,400,000		$	1,400,000		$	1,400,000		$	1,400,000
Cash Severance		$	1,800,000		$	3,600,000		$	1,800,000			—
Stock Option / Class O LTIP Unit Vesting(2)		$	174,000		$	174,000		$	174,000		$	174,000
LTIP Unit/Stock Unit Vesting(3)		$	1,575,392		$	1,575,392		$	822,542		$	822,542
2014OPP(4)			—			—			—			—
Benefits Continuation(5)		$	41,554		$	83,107		$	124,661			—

48 SL Green Realty Corp.

---

Table of Contents

EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

        The amounts shown below assume that such Change-in-Control or such termination was effective as of December 31, 2013 and are estimates of the amounts that would be paid out to the named executive officers upon such Change-in-Control or termination of employment. In the cases of Messrs. Mathias and Mead, such amounts were calculated based on the terms of their new employment and non-competition agreements, which became effective on January 1, 2014. The value of the acceleration of vesting of shares of restricted stock and the LTIP units is based on the value of unvested awards set forth in the "Outstanding Equity Awards" table above.Andrew S. Levine

Payment/Benefit		Termination without Cause or for Good Reason			Termination w/Change in Control			Disability			Death(1)
Pro-Rata Bonus		$	1,150,000		$	1,150,000		$	1,150,000		$	1,150,000
Cash Severance		$	1,675,000		$	3,350,000		$	1,675,000			—
Stock Option / Class O LTIP Unit Vesting(2)		$	145,000		$	145,000		$	145,000		$	145,000
LTIP Unit/Stock Unit Vesting(3)		$	3,971,391		$	3,971,391		$	1,390,191		$	1,390,191
2014OPP(4)			—			—			—			—
Benefits Continuation(5)		$	44,014		$	88,027		$	132,041			—

(1)	As we maintained life insurance policies for the benefit of the beneficiaries of Messrs. Holliday and Green in the amount of $10million and $5million, respectively, as of December31,2016, the amount of the payments and benefits to be received by Messrs. Holliday and Green in the event of a termination upon death will be reduced by these amounts in accordance with their employment agreements.
(2)	Represents the value of the stock options or Class O LTIP units that would vest. Assumes that the per share value of the stock options or Class O LTIP units that vest equals (i) $107.55per share, which was the closing price on the NYSE of one share of our common stock on December31,2016, less (ii) the exercise price per share of such stock options or the conversion threshold of such Class O LTIP units.
(3)	Represents the value of the LTIP units and notional stock units, if any, that would vest (other than pursuant to our2014 Outperformance Plan) based on a price of $107.55 per unit, which was the closing price on the NYSE of one share of our common stock on December 31, 2016. Assumes that the value of LTIP units on a per unit basis is equal to the per share value of our common stock.
(4)	Represents the value of the LTIP units that would vest and the distributions that would be payable pursuant to awards granted under our2014Outperformance Plan based on a price of $107.55per unit, which was the closing price on the NYSE of one share of our common stock on December31,2016. Assumes that the value of LTIP units on a per unit basis is equal to the per share value of our common stock. Based on our TRS performance from the beginning of the performance period through December31,2016, all outstanding awards under our2014Outperformance Plan would have been forfeited in the event of a change in control or termination due to death or disability as of December31,2016. No amounts are included in the event of a termination without cause or for good reason, because the executive only would have been entitled to vesting to the extent that the awards were earned based on the achievement of the performance-based vesting criteria within12months after December31,2016.
(5)	Benefits continuation amounts are based on the actual expense for financial reporting purposes for the year ended December31,2016for covering an employee under each our group health plans for the entire year, assuming that the employee elected family coverage under each of these plans, less the minimum contribution required by employees participating in these plans.

        Health and welfare benefits are valued based on the estimated amount of future premiums that would be paid on behalf of the named executive officer under our existing plans, based on the premiums in effect as of December 31, 2013. The actual amounts to be paid out can only be determined at the time of such Change-in-Control or such named executive officer's separation from the Company. The amounts described belowabove do not include payments and benefits to the extent they have been earned prior to the termination of employment or Change-in-Controlchange in control or are provided on a non-discriminatory basis to salaried employees upon termination of employment. These include: accrued salary and vacation pay; earned and accrued, but unpaid, bonuses; distribution of plan balances under our 401(k)our401(k) plan; life insurance proceeds in the event of death; and disability insurance payouts in the event of disability. All of the cash severance payments described below are to be made as lump sum payments at the time of termination; provided that, to the extent necessary to avoid the imposition of an additional tax under Section 409ASection409A of the IRC, the payments are to be delayed until six months aftermonthsafter termination, during which time the payments will accrue interest at the rate of 5%of5% per annum.

        We have designed our retention policy, in part, through significant back-end vesting requirements to the executives' equity-based awards. Certain of these termination and Change-in-Control provisions result in significant payments in the event of certain termination events. We have designed our equity-based awards to encourage retention and continued performance. As a result the executive would suffer a material economic forfeiture should an executive leave our employment without Good Reason.

        Stephen L. Green.    Stephen L. Green's amended and restated employment and non-competition agreement had an initial term commencing on December 24, 2010 and ending on December 31, 2011, subject to automatic renewal for successive one-year periods unless either party delivers six months' prior written notice of non-renewal under the agreement. As neither party provided written notice of non-renewal prior to June 30, 2013, the term was automatically extended through December 31, 2014. The agreement provides for an annual salary of no less than $750,000 from January 1, 2011 through the end of the employment period, and such discretionary annual bonuses as we, in our sole discretion, may deem appropriate to reward Mr. Green for job performance. In addition to annual salary and bonuses, the agreement provides for annual contributions of notional stock units with a value equal to $150,000, on January 1st of each year during the employment period, into a deferred compensation account maintained on Mr. Green's behalf, with vesting of each annual contribution occurring on December 31st of that year subject to continued employment. Under the agreement, we are also obligated to maintain a life insurance policy for the benefit of Mr. Green's beneficiariesprovisions in the face amount of $5 million, or if not available at reasonable rates, to self-insure Mr. Green up to the maximum cash severance payable under the agreement. The benefit payable under this policy to Mr. Green's beneficiaries will offset certain other benefits that would otherwise be provided to his estate under this agreement, as more fully described below.

        If Mr. Green'snamed executive officers’ employment is terminated for any reason, under the agreement he will be subject to the following continuing obligations after termination: (i) noncompetition with us for 18 months (12 months if employment is terminated upon or after the scheduled expiration of the term of employment or 6 months if employment is terminated in connection with or within 18 months after a Change-in-Control); (ii) nonsolicitation of our employees for 30 months (unless employment is terminated by us without Cause or Mr. Green with Good Reason in connection with or within

Table of Contents

18 months after a Change-in-Control, in which case the nonsolicitation provision will not extend beyond termination of employment); and (iii) nondisparagement of us and non-interference with our business for one year. In connection with a Triggering Event occurring as of December 31, 2013, Mr. Green would have been entitled to the following payments and benefits:

•

Change-in-Control without termination.  Under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan, the time-based vesting of the remaining unvested awards would have been accelerated. The accelerated time-based vesting under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan would have resulted in Mr. Green receiving a total value of $3,034,683. With respect to Mr. Green's allocation under our 2011 Outperformance Plan, based on total return levels from plan inception through year-end 2013, an award would have been earned in connection with a December 31, 2013 Change-in-Control under our 2011 Outperformance Plan in the amount of $8,741,391. Mr. Green would not have received any additional benefits or payments in the event of a Change-in-Control under his employment agreement or otherwise. Under the employment agreement,agreements, in the event that any payment or benefit constitutesto be paid or provided to an excess "parachute payment"executive set forth above would have been subject to the excise tax under Section 280GSections280G of the IRC, subject to an excise tax, Mr. Green will not be entitled to a tax gross-up payment; however, Mr. Green'sthe payments and benefits to such executive would behave been reduced to the extent necessary to avoid the imposition of such excise taxes,tax, but only if such a reduction of pay or benefits would result in a greater after-tax benefit to Mr. Green. In orderthe executive. The amounts set forth in the table above have not been adjusted to avoid creating an opportunity for a successor to induce Mr. Green to terminate his employment without Good Reason following a Change-in-Control, Mr. Green will be entitled to receive cash compensation following a Change-in-Control at a per annum rate equal to the sum of his base salary in effect prior to the Change-in-Control plus his annual bonus and the value of his deferred compensation contributions and his equity awards (other than those granted under outperformance plans) that vested during the most recent fiscal year prior to the Change-in-Control, and the failure to pay such compensation after a Change-in-Control will constitute Good Reason.



•

Termination with Cause or without Good Reason.  Mr. Green would have received no payments or benefits.



•

Termination without Cause or for Good Reason.  Under Mr. Green's employment agreement, Mr. Green would have received a cash severance payment of $10,000,000, which is equal to the sum of (i) his average annual base salary in effect during the preceding 24 months, or his Average Annual Base Salary, plus (ii) a bonus equal to the average bonuses (including any equity awarded as bonus) paid to him for the two most recently completed fiscal years, or his Average Annual Cash Bonus, plus (iii) his average annual deferred compensation contribution during the preceding 24 months, calculated based on the cash value of the annual deferred compensation contributions as of the dates of such contributions, or his Average Deferred Compensation, plus (iv) a pro rata bonus for the year in which Mr. Green's employment was terminated (and the prior year if such bonus had not yet been determined) based on Mr. Green's Average Annual Cash Bonus. Under Mr. Green's employment agreement, Mr. Green also would have received his medical and welfare benefits for 12 months, the cost of which to us is projected to aggregate approximately $24,421. Under Mr. Green's employment agreement, all of his outstanding equity awards, other than those made under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and our 2011 Outperformance Plan, and all of his outstanding unvested deferred compensation contributions would have fully vested upon termination. As Mr. Green did not havereflect any such unvested equity awards or deferred compensation contributions, this acceleration of vesting would not have resulted in any additional value being received. Under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and our 2011 Outperformance Plan, Mr. Green also would have 12 months of additional vesting for his awards under those plans. Mr. Green would have received a total value of $4,370,694 from this 12 months of additional vesting. Mr. Green only would have been entitled to receive the severance payments, accelerated vesting and other benefits provided for in

Table of Contents

his employment agreement, as described above, if he executed a general release of claims with us.

•

Termination in connection with a Change-in-Control.  Under Mr. Green's employment agreement, if Mr. Green had been terminated by us without Cause or by Mr. Green for Good Reason in connection with or within 18 months after a Change-in-Control, Mr. Green would have received a cash severance payment of $20,900,000, which is equal to the sum of (i) three times the sum of his Average Annual Base Salary, Average Annual Cash Bonus and Average Deferred Compensation, plus (ii) a pro rata bonus for the year in which his employment was terminated (and a bonus for the prior year if such bonus had not yet been determined) based on his Average Annual Cash Bonus. Under Mr. Green's employment agreement, Mr. Green also would have received his medical and welfare benefits for 24 months, the cost of which to us is projected to aggregate approximately $48,843. Mr. Green's equity awards and outstanding unvested deferred compensation contributions would have fully vested in the same manner as described in the preceding paragraph, except with respect to Mr. Green's awards under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and our 2011 Outperformance Plan. Under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan, the time-based vesting of the awards would have been accelerated. With respect to Mr. Green's allocation under our 2011 Outperformance Plan, based on total return levels from plan inception through year-end 2013, an award would have been earned in connection with a December 31, 2013 termination in connection with a Change-in-Control under our 2011 Outperformance Plan. The combination of the accelerated vesting under Mr. Green's employment agreement and 2010 Notional Unit Plan and the earning of an award under our 2011 Outperformance Plan results in total value of $11,776,074. Under Mr. Green's employment agreement, in the eventreduction that any payment or benefit constitutes an excess "parachute payment" under Section 280G of the IRC subject to an excise tax, Mr. Green will notmight be entitled to a tax gross-up payment; however, Mr. Green's payments and benefits would be reduced to the extent necessary to avoid such excise taxes, but only if such a reduction of pay or benefits would result in a greater after-tax benefit to Mr. Green.



•

Termination upon disability.  Under Mr. Green's employment agreement, Mr. Green would have received a cash severance payment of $10,000,000, which is equal to the sum of (i) the sum of his Average Annual Base Salary, Average Annual Cash Bonus and Average Deferred Compensation, plus (ii) a pro rata bonus for the year in which his employment was terminated (and a bonus for the prior year if such bonus had not yet been determined) based on his Average Annual Cash Bonus. Under Mr. Green's employment agreement, Mr. Green also would have continued to receive his medical and welfare benefits for 36 months, the cost of which to us is projected to aggregate approximately $73,264. Mr. Green also would have received 24 months of additional vesting for his outstanding equity awards, other than awards made under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and our 2011 Outperformance Plan, and full vesting for his stock options, equity awards granted in lieu of cash bonuses and any unvested deferred compensation contributions. Under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan, the time-based vesting of the award would have been accelerated. With respect to Mr. Green's allocation under our 2011 Outperformance Plan, based on total return levels from plan inception through year-end 2013, an award would have been earned in connection with a December 31, 2013 termination upon a disability under our 2011 Outperformance Plan. The combination of the accelerated vesting under Mr. Green's employment agreement and 2010 Notional Unit Plan and the earning of an award under our 2011 Outperformance Plan results in total value of $11,776,074. Mr. Green only would have been entitled to receive the severance payments, accelerated vesting and other benefits provided for in his employment agreement, as described above, if he had executed a general release of claims with us.

Table of Contents

•

Termination upon death.  Under Mr. Green's employment agreement, Mr. Green's estate would have received (i) a cash severance payment equal to his pro rata bonus for the year in which his employment was terminated (and the prior year if such bonus had not yet been determined) based on his Average Annual Cash Bonus, (ii) 24 months of additional vesting for his outstanding equity awards, other than awards made under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and our 2011 Outperformance Plan, and (iii) full vesting for his equity awards granted in lieu of cash bonuses and his outstanding unvested deferred compensation contributions. Under the general terms of our equity plans, all of the stock options granted to Mr. Green would have fully vested. Under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan, the time-based vesting of the award would have been accelerated. With respect to Mr. Green's allocation under our 2011 Outperformance Plan, based on total return levels from plan inception through year-end 2013, an award would have been earned in connection with a December 31, 2013 termination upon death under our 2011 Outperformance Plan. However, notwithstanding the foregoing, Mr. Green's estate only would have been entitled to receive the pro rata bonus, vesting credit, payments and other benefits described above to the extent that the aggregate value of such pro rata bonus, vesting credit, payments and other benefits exceeds the amount payable to Mr. Green's beneficiaries under the life insurance policy, or self-insurance, maintained by us. As we maintained a life insurance policy for the benefit of Mr. Green's beneficiaries in the face amount of $5 million as of December 31, 2013, the aggregate value that Mr. Green's estate would have received with respect to the pro rata bonus, vesting credit, payments and other benefits described above would have been $6,776,074, which equals the amount by which their value exceeded $5 million.

        Marc Holliday.    Marc Holliday's amended and restated employment and non-competition agreement has an initial term commencing on January 18, 2013 and ending on January 17, 2016; provided that, if a Change-in-Control occurs within 18 months prior to the scheduled expiration of the term, Mr. Holliday may elect to extend the term until the date that is 18 months after such Change-in-Control. The agreement provides for an annual salary of no less than $1,050,000 from January 18, 2013 through the end of the employment period, and such annual bonuses as we, in our sole discretion, may deem appropriate to reward Mr. Holliday for job performance. In addition to annual salary and bonuses, the agreement provides for annual contributions of notional stock units with a value equal to $550,000 for 2014 and $600,000 for 2015, to be made on January 18th of each respective year, into a deferred compensation account maintained on Mr. Holliday's behalf, with vesting of each annual contribution occurring on January 17th of the following year subject to continued employment. Under the agreement, Mr. Holliday will also be entitled to a percentage award allocation in any outperformance plan implemented during the employment period that is no less than his current percentage allocation in our 2011 Outperformance Plan. The agreement also provides that Good Reason will exist if we do not grant 87,870 LTIP units to Mr. Holliday on or before January 17th of each of 2014, 2015 and 2016, of which 60% will be subject to performance-based vesting, based on the goals described below, and 40% will be subject to time-based vesting based on continued employment through January 17th of such year. The vesting of the performance-based LTIP units to be granted each year is to be based on the achievement of any of the following financial performance goals during the prior year (or on a cumulative basis beginning with 2013 through the end of such year or, if later, 2014 or 2015) and continued employment through January 17th of the year following the year as of which the financial performance goals are achieved: (i) 7% or greater increase in funds from operations on a per-share basis, (ii) 7% or greater total return to stockholders or (iii) total return to stockholders or percentage increase in funds from operations in the top 40% of a peer group of companies determined each year by our Compensation Committee. All of the performance-based and time-based LTIP units will include a restriction on transfer until the earlier of two years after vesting, termination of Mr. Holliday's employment or a Change-in-Control. Under the agreement, we are also obligated to maintain a life insurance policy for the benefit of Mr. Holliday's beneficiaries in the face amount of $10 million, or if not available at reasonable rates, to self-insure Mr. Holliday up to the maximum cash

Table of Contentsapplicable.

severance payable under the agreement. The benefit payable under this policy to Mr. Holliday's beneficiaries will offset certain other benefits that would otherwise be provided to his estate under this agreement, as more fully described below.

        If Mr. Holliday's employment is terminated for any reason, under the agreement he will be subject to the following continuing obligations after termination: (i) noncompetition with us for 18 months (12 months if employment is terminated upon or after the scheduled expiration of the term of employment or 6 months if employment is terminated in connection with or within 18 months after a Change-in-Control); (ii) nonsolicitation of our employees for 30 months (unless employment is terminated by us without Cause or Mr. Holliday with Good Reason in connection with or within 18 months after a Change-in-Control, in which case the nonsolicitation provision will not extend beyond termination of employment); and (iii) nondisparagement of us and non-interference with our business for one year. In connection with a Triggering Event occurring as of December 31, 2013, Mr. Holliday would have been entitled to the following payments and benefits:

•

Change-in-Control without termination.  Under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan, the time-based vesting of the award would have been accelerated. The accelerated time-based vesting under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan would have resulted in Mr. Holliday receiving a total value of $5,733,103. With respect to Mr. Holliday's allocation under our 2011 Outperformance Plan, based on total return levels from plan inception through year-end 2013, an award would have been earned in connection with a December 31, 2013 Change-in-Control under our 2011 Outperformance Plan in the amount of $19,813,819. Mr. Holliday would not have received any additional benefits or payments in the event of a Change-in-Control under his employment agreement or otherwise. Under the employment agreement, in the event that any payment or benefit constitutes an excess "parachute payment" under Section 280G of the IRC subject to an excise tax, Mr. Holliday will not be entitled to a tax gross-up payment; however, Mr. Holliday's payments and benefits would be reduced to the extent necessary to avoid such excise taxes, but only if such a reduction of pay or benefits would result in a greater after-tax benefit to Mr. Holliday. In order to avoid creating an opportunity for a successor to induce Mr. Holliday to terminate his employment without Good Reason following a Change-in-Control, Mr. Holliday will be entitled to receive cash compensation following a Change-in-Control at a per annum rate equal to the sum of his base salary in effect prior to the Change-in-Control plus his annual bonus and the value of his deferred compensation contributions and his equity awards (other than those granted under outperformance plans) that vested during the most recent fiscal year prior to the Change-in-Control, and the failure to pay such compensation after a Change-in-Control will constitute Good Reason.



•

Termination with Cause or without Good Reason.  Mr. Holliday would have received no payments or benefits.



•

Termination without Cause or for Good Reason.  Under Mr. Holliday's employment agreement, Mr. Holliday would have received a cash severance payment of $14,075,000, which is equal to the sum of (i) his average annual base salary in effect during the preceding 24 months, or his Average Annual Base Salary, plus (ii) a bonus equal to the average bonuses (including any equity awarded as bonus) paid to him for the two most recently completed fiscal years, or his Average Annual Cash Bonus, plus (iii) his average annual deferred compensation contribution during the preceding 24 months, calculated based on the cash value of the annual deferred compensation contributions as of the dates of such contributions, or his Average Deferred Compensation, plus (iv) a pro rata bonus for the year in which Mr. Holliday's employment was terminated (and the prior year if such bonus had not yet been determined) based on Mr. Holliday's Average Annual Cash Bonus. Under Mr. Holliday's employment agreement, Mr. Holliday also would have received payments for his medical and welfare benefits for 12 months, which is projected to aggregate approximately $23,133. Under Mr. Holliday's

Table of Contents

employment agreement, all of his outstanding equity awards, other than those made under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and our 2011 Outperformance Plan, and all of his outstanding unvested deferred compensation contributions would have fully vested upon termination. In addition, any of the annual time-based and performance-based equity awards to be granted on or before each January 17 during the term to avoid creating Good Reason, described above, that had not yet been granted would have been granted and been fully vested. These grants and the accelerated vesting results in total value of $27,948,292. Under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and our 2011 Outperformance Plan, Mr. Holliday also would have 12 months of additional vesting for his awards under those plans. Mr. Holliday would have received a total value of $9,906,910 from this 12 months of additional vesting. Mr. Holliday only would have been entitled to receive the severance payments, accelerated vesting and other benefits provided for in his employment agreement, as described above, if he executed a general release of claims with us.

•

Termination in connection with a Change-in-Control.  Under Mr. Holliday's employment agreement, if Mr. Holliday had been terminated by us without Cause or by Mr. Holliday for Good Reason in connection with or within 18 months after a Change-in-Control, Mr. Holliday would have received a cash severance payment of $29,625,000, which is equal to the sum of (i) three times the sum of his Average Annual Base Salary, Average Annual Cash Bonus and Average Deferred Compensation, plus (ii) a pro rata bonus for the year in which his employment was terminated (and a bonus for the prior year if such bonus had not yet been determined) based on his Average Annual Cash Bonus. Under Mr. Holliday's employment agreement, Mr. Holliday also would have received medical and welfare benefit continuation payments for 24 months, which is projected to aggregate approximately $46,266. Mr. Holliday's equity awards and outstanding unvested deferred compensation contributions would have been granted and/or fully vested in the same manner as described in the preceding paragraph, except with respect to Mr. Holliday's awards under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and our 2011 Outperformance Plan. Under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan, the time-based vesting of the award under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan would have been accelerated. With respect to Mr. Holliday's allocation under our 2011 Outperformance Plan, based on total return levels from plan inception through year-end 2013, an award would have been earned in connection with a December 31, 2013 termination in connection with a Change-in-Control under our 2011 Outperformance Plan. The combination of the grants and accelerated vesting under Mr. Holliday's employment agreement and our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and the earning of an award under our 2011 Outperformance Plan results in total value of $53,495,214. Under Mr. Holliday's employment agreement, in the event that any payment or benefit constitutes an excess "parachute payment" under Section 280G of the IRC subject to an excise tax, Mr. Holliday will not be entitled to a tax gross-up payment; however, Mr. Holliday's payments and benefits would be reduced to the extent necessary to avoid such excise taxes, but only if such a reduction of pay or benefits would result in a greater after-tax benefit to Mr. Holliday.



•

Termination upon disability.  Under Mr. Holliday's employment agreement, Mr. Holliday would have received a cash severance payment of $14,075,000, which is equal to the sum of (i) the sum of his Average Annual Base Salary, Average Annual Cash Bonus and Average Deferred Compensation, plus (ii) a pro rata bonus for the year in which his employment was terminated (and a bonus for the prior year if such bonus had not yet been determined) based on his Average Annual Cash Bonus. Under Mr. Holliday's employment agreement, Mr. Holliday also would have received medical and welfare benefit continuation payments for 36 months, which is projected to aggregate approximately $69,398. In addition, any of the annual time-based and performance-based equity awards to be granted on or before each January 17 during the term to avoid creating Good Reason, described above, that had not yet been granted would have been granted. Mr. Holliday also would have received 24 months of additional vesting for his outstanding equity awards (including those granted in connection with such termination), other

Table of Contents

than awards made under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and our 2011 Outperformance Plan, and full vesting for his stock options, equity awards granted in lieu of cash bonuses and any unvested deferred compensation contributions. Under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan, the time-based vesting of the award under would have been accelerated. With respect to Mr. Holliday's allocation under our 2011 Outperformance Plan, based on total return levels from plan inception through year-end 2013, an award would have been earned in connection with a December 31, 2013 termination upon a disability under our 2011 Outperformance Plan. The combination of the grants and accelerated vesting under Mr. Holliday's employment agreement and our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and earning of an award under our 2011 Outperformance Plan results in total value of $53,117,103. Mr. Holliday only would have been entitled to receive the severance payments, accelerated vesting and other benefits provided for in his employment agreement, as described above, if he had executed a general release of claims with us.

•

Termination upon death.  Under Mr. Holliday's employment agreement, Mr. Holliday's estate would have received (i) a cash severance payment equal to his pro rata bonus for the year in which his employment was terminated (and the prior year if such bonus had not yet been determined) based on his Average Annual Cash Bonus, (ii) 24 months of additional vesting for his outstanding equity awards, other than awards made under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and our 2011 Outperformance Plan, and (iii) full vesting for his equity awards granted in lieu of cash bonuses and his outstanding unvested deferred compensation contributions. In addition, any of the annual time-based and performance-based equity awards to be granted on or before each January 17 during the term to avoid creating Good Reason, described above, that had not yet been granted would have been granted and received 24 months of additional vesting. Under the general terms of our equity plans, all of the stock options granted to Mr. Holliday would have fully vested. Under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan, the time-based vesting of the award would have been accelerated. With respect to Mr. Holliday's allocation under our 2011 Outperformance Plan, based on total return levels from plan inception through year-end 2013, an award would have been earned in connection with a December 31, 2013 termination upon death under our 2011 Outperformance Plan. However, notwithstanding the foregoing, Mr. Holliday's estate only would have been entitled to receive the pro rata bonus, vesting credit, payments and other benefits described above to the extent that the aggregate value of such pro rata bonus, vesting credit, payments and other benefits exceeds the amount payable to Mr. Holliday's beneficiaries under the life insurance policy, or self-insurance, maintained by us. As we maintained a life insurance policy for the benefit of Mr. Holliday's beneficiaries in the face amount of $10 million as of December 31, 2013, the aggregate value that Mr. Holliday's estate would have received with respect to the pro rata bonus, vesting credit, payments and other benefits described above would have been $43,117,103, which equals the amount by which their value exceeded $10 million.

        Andrew Mathias.    Andrew Mathias' amended and restated employment and non-competition agreement has a term commencing on January 1, 2014 and ending on December 31, 2016, which will automatically renew for successive one-year periods unless either party delivers written notice of non-renewal by September 15 of a given year. The agreement provides for an annual salary of no less than $800,000 during the employment period, and such annual bonuses as we, in our sole discretion, may deem appropriate to reward Mr. Mathias for his job performance. In addition to annual salary and bonuses, the agreement provides for annual contributions of notional stock units with a value equal to $400,000 for 2014, $450,000 for 2015 and $500,000 for 2016 to be made on January 1st of each year during the employment period, into a deferred compensation account maintained on Mr. Mathias' behalf, with vesting of each annual contribution occurring on December 31st of that year subject to continued employment. The agreement also provides that Mr. Mathias will be entitled to a percentage award allocation in any outperformance plan implemented during the employment period that is no less than his initial percentage allocation in our 2011 Outperformance Plan Under the agreement,

Table of Contents

Mr. Mathias was also entitled to receive a one-time grant of 7,393 LTIP units, which were vested 50% upon grant, 25% on December 31, 2013 and the remaining 25% of which will vest on January 1, 2015, subject to continued employment. Mr. Mathias also received a one-time grant of options to purchase 130,000 shares of the Company's common stock. One-third of the total shares subject to the options will vest on December 31 of 2014, 2015 and 2016, respectively, subject, in each case, to continued employment. One-half of the options are scheduled to expire after five years with the remainder expiring after ten years. The agreement also provides that Good Reason will exist if we do not grant 58,667 (or, for 2014, 58,666) LTIP units to Mr. Mathias on or before December 31st of each year during the term, of which 60% will be subject to performance-based vesting, based on the goals described below, and 40% will be subject to time-based vesting based on continued employment through December 31 of such year. The vesting each year for the performance-based LTIP units to be granted each year is to be based on the achievement of any of the following financial performance goals during the prior year (or on a cumulative basis beginning with 2014 through the end of any of such year or, if later, 2015 or 2016) and continued employment through the end of the year as of which the financial performance goals are achieved: (i) 7% or greater increase in funds from operations on a per-share basis, (ii) 7% or greater total return to stockholders or (iii) total return to stockholders or percentage increase in funds from operations in the top 40% of a peer group of companies determined each year by our Compensation Committee. The agreement also provided that Good Reason would exist if we had not granted Mr. Mathias an additional allocation under our 2011 Outperformance Plan pursuant to which Mr. Mathias may earn up to approximately $1,000,000 of LTIP units.

        If Mr. Mathias' employment is terminated for any reason, under the agreement he will be subject to the following continuing obligations after termination: (i) noncompetition with us for 18 months (12 months if employment is terminated upon or after the scheduled expiration of the term of employment or 6 months if employment is terminated in connection with or within 18 months after a Change-in-Control); (ii) nonsolicitation of our employees for 30 months (unless employment is terminated by us without Cause or Mr. Mathias with Good Reason in connection with or within 18 months after a Change-in-Control, in which case the nonsolicitation provision will not extend beyond termination of employment); and (iii) nondisparagement of us and non-interference with our business for one year. In connection with a Triggering Event occurring as of December 31, 2013, Mr. Mathias would have been entitled to the following payments and benefits:

•

Change-in-Control without termination.  Under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan, the time-based vesting of the award would have been accelerated. The accelerated time-based vesting under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan would have resulted in Mr. Mathias receiving a total value of $5,057,805. With respect to Mr. Mathias' allocation under our 2011 Outperformance Plan, based on total return levels from plan inception through year-end 2013, an award would have been earned in connection with a December 31, 2013 Change-in-Control under our 2011 Outperformance Plan in the amount of $13,986,195. Mr. Mathias would not have received any additional benefits or payments in the event of a Change-in-Control under his employment agreement or otherwise. Under the employment agreement, in the event that any payment or benefit constitutes an excess "parachute payment" under Section 280G of the IRC subject to an excise tax, Mr. Mathias will not be entitled to a tax gross-up payment; however, Mr. Mathias' payments and benefits would be reduced to the extent necessary to avoid such excise taxes, but only if such a reduction of pay or benefits would result in a greater after-tax benefit to Mr. Mathias. Under the agreement, to avoid creating an opportunity for a successor to the Company to induce Mr. Mathias to terminate his employment without Good Reason following a Change-in-Control, Mr. Mathias would also be entitled to receive cash compensation following a Change-in-Control at a per annum rate equal to the sum of his base salary in effect prior to the Change-in-Control plus his annual bonus and the value of his deferred compensation contributions and his equity awards (other than those granted under outperformance plans) that vested during the most recent fiscal year prior to the Change-in-Control, and the failure to pay such compensation after a Change-in-Control will constitute Good Reason.

Table of Contents

•

Termination with Cause or without Good Reason.  Mr. Mathias would have received no payments or benefits.



•

Termination without Cause or for Good Reason.  Under Mr. Mathias' employment agreement, Mr. Mathias would have received a cash severance payment of $10,200,000, which is equal to the sum of (i) his average annual base salary in effect during the preceding 24 months, or his Average Annual Base Salary, plus (ii) a bonus equal to the average bonuses (including any equity awarded as bonus) paid to him for the two most recently completed fiscal years, or his Average Annual Cash Bonus, plus (iii) his average annual deferred compensation contribution during the preceding 24 months, calculated based on the cash value of the annual deferred compensation contributions as of the dates of such contributions, or his Average Deferred Compensation, plus (iv) a pro rata bonus for the year in which Mr. Mathias' employment was terminated (and the prior year if such bonus had not yet been determined) based on Mr. Mathias' Average Annual Cash Bonus. Under Mr. Mathias' employment agreement, Mr. Mathias also would have received payments for his medical and welfare benefits for 12 months, which is projected to aggregate approximately $23,941. In addition, any of the equity awards to be granted during the term to avoid creating Good Reason, described above, that had not yet been granted would have been granted. Under Mr. Mathias' employment agreement, all of his outstanding equity awards (including those granted in connection with such termination), other than those made under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and our 2011 Outperformance Plan, and all of his outstanding unvested deferred compensation contributions would have fully vested upon termination. These grants and the accelerated vesting results in total value of $16,553,191. Under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and our 2011 Outperformance Plan, Mr. Mathias also would have 12 months of additional vesting for his awards under those plans. Mr. Mathias also would have been entitled to receive the additional grant under our 2011 Outperformance Plan required to be made to avoid creating Good Reason, described above. Mr. Mathias would have received a total value of $7,507,312 from this grant and 12 months of additional vesting. Mr. Mathias only would have been entitled to receive the severance payments, accelerated vesting and other benefits provided for in his employment agreement, as described above, if he executed a general release of claims with us.



•

Termination in connection with a Change-in-Control.  Under Mr. Mathias' employment agreement, if Mr. Mathias had been terminated by us without Cause or by Mr. Mathias for Good Reason in connection with or within 18 months after a Change-in-Control, Mr. Mathias would have received a cash severance payment of $18,675,000, which is equal to the sum of (i) 2.5 times the sum of his Average Annual Base Salary, Average Annual Cash Bonus and Average Deferred Compensation, plus (ii) a pro rata bonus for the year in which his employment was terminated (and a bonus for the prior year if such bonus had not yet been determined) based on his Average Annual Cash Bonus. Under Mr. Mathias' employment agreement, Mr. Mathias also would have received medical and welfare benefit continuation payments for 24 months, which is projected to aggregate approximately $47,882. Mr. Mathias' equity awards and outstanding unvested deferred compensation contributions would have been granted and/or fully vested in the same manner as described in the preceding paragraph, except with respect to Mr. Mathias' awards under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and our 2011 Outperformance Plan. Under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan, the time-based vesting of the award would have been accelerated. With respect to Mr. Mathias' allocation under our 2011 Outperformance Plan, based on total return levels from plan inception through year-end 2013, an award would have been earned in connection with a December 31, 2013 termination in connection with a Change-in-Control under our 2011 Outperformance Plan. The combination of the grants and accelerated vesting under Mr. Mathias' employment agreement and our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and the earning of an award under our 2011 Outperformance Plan results in total value of $35,597,191. Under Mr. Mathias' employment agreement, in the event that any payment or benefit constitutes an excess "parachute payment" under Section 280G of the IRC subject to an excise tax,

Table of Contents

Mr. Mathias will not be entitled to a tax gross-up payment; however, Mr. Mathias' payments and benefits would be reduced to the extent necessary to avoid such excise taxes, but only if such a reduction of pay or benefits would result in a greater after-tax benefit to Mr. Mathias.

•

Termination upon disability.  Under Mr. Mathias' employment agreement, Mr. Mathias would have received a cash severance payment of $10,200,000, which is equal to the sum of (i) the sum of his Average Annual Base Salary, Average Annual Cash Bonus and Average Deferred Compensation, plus (ii) a pro rata bonus for the year in which his employment was terminated (and a bonus for the prior year if such bonus had not yet been determined) based on his Average Annual Cash Bonus. Under Mr. Mathias' employment agreement, Mr. Mathias also would have continued to receive medical and welfare benefit continuation payments for 36 months, which is projected to aggregate approximately $71,824. In addition, any of the equity awards to be granted during the term to avoid creating Good Reason, described above, that had not yet been granted would have been granted. Mr. Mathias also would have received 18 months of additional vesting for his outstanding equity awards (including those granted in connection with such termination), other than awards made under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and our 2011 Outperformance Plan, and full vesting for his stock options, equity awards granted in lieu of cash bonuses and any unvested deferred compensation contributions. Under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan, the time-based vesting of the award would have been accelerated. With respect to Mr. Mathias' allocation under our 2011 Outperformance Plan, based on total return levels from plan inception through year-end 2013, an award would have been earned in connection with a December 31, 2013 termination upon a disability under our 2011 Outperformance Plan. The combination of the grants and accelerated vesting under Mr. Mathias' employment agreement and our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and the earning of an award under our 2011 Outperformance Plan results in total value of $27,471,908. Mr. Mathias only would have been entitled to receive the severance payments, accelerated vesting and other benefits provided for in his employment agreement, as described above, if he had executed a general release of claims with us.



•

Termination upon death.  Under Mr. Mathias' employment agreement, Mr. Mathias' estate would have received (i) a cash severance payment equal to his pro rata bonus for the year in which his employment was terminated (and the prior year if such bonus had not yet been determined) based on his Average Annual Cash Bonus, (ii) 18 months of additional vesting for his outstanding equity awards (including those granted in connection with such termination), other than awards made under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and our 2011 Outperformance Plan, and (iii) full vesting for his equity awards granted in lieu of cash bonuses and his outstanding unvested deferred compensation contributions. In addition, any of the equity awards to be granted during the term to avoid creating Good Reason, described above, that had not yet been granted would have been granted. Under the general terms of our equity plans, all of the stock options granted to Mr. Mathias would have fully vested. Under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan, the time-based vesting would have been accelerated. With respect to Mr. Mathias' allocation under our 2011 Outperformance Plan, based on total return levels from plan inception through year-end 2013, an award would have been earned in connection with a December 31, 2013 termination upon death under our 2011 Outperformance Plan. The aggregate value that Mr. Mathias' estate would have received with respect to the pro rata bonus, vesting credit, payments and other benefits described above would have been $27,471,908.

        James Mead.    James Mead's employment and non-competition agreement has a term beginning on January 1, 2014 and ending on January 1, 2015. The agreement provides for an annual salary of at least $525,000, and such discretionary annual bonuses as we, in our sole discretion, may deem appropriate to reward Mr. Mead for his job performance; provided, however, that we agreed that Mr. Mead's bonus for 2013 shall be at least equal to his annual bonus for 2012. Pursuant to his employment agreement, on October 28, 2013, we granted Mr. Mead 7,500 shares of restricted stock

Table of Contents

subject to time-based vesting in four equal quarterly installments at the end of each fiscal quarter during 2014, subject to continued employment through such dates. On or after March 31, 2014, either party may terminate Mr. Mead's employment upon at least 90 days' prior written notice. In the event of such a termination or a termination upon the expiration of the term, Mr. Mead will receive a cash severance payment of $550,000 and will remain eligible to receive his discretionary bonus for 2014, which will be prorated based on the portion of the year that Mr. Mead was employed by the Company. In the event that such termination is by the Company on any date other than the end of a calendar quarter, Mr. Mead will receive accelerated vesting of the portion of the 7,500 shares of restricted stock awarded in connection with his employment agreement that would have vested had Mr. Mead remained employed by the Company through the end of the calendar quarter in which the termination occurred. All other equity awards between the Company and Mr. Mead, including awards pursuant to the Company's 2010 Notional Long-Term Compensation Plan and 2011 Long-Term Outperformance Plan, shall be governed by their terms as in effect from time to time. Mr. Mead is also eligible for the health and welfare benefits provided by us to our senior executive officers. Pursuant to the agreement, if Mr. Mead is terminated for any reason, he will be subject to the following obligations: (i) non-solicitation of our employees for 24 months; (ii) non-disparagement of the Company; and (iii) perpetual nondisclosure of confidential information. In connection with a Triggering Event occurring as of December 31, 2013, Mr. Mead would have been entitled to the following payments and benefits:

•

Change-in-Control without termination.  Under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan, the time-based vesting of the award would have been accelerated. The accelerated time-based vesting under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan would have resulted in Mr. Mead receiving a total value of $366,564. With respect to Mr. Mead's allocation under our 2011 Outperformance Plan, based on total return levels from plan inception through year-end 2013, an award would have been earned in connection with a December 31, 2013 Change-in-Control under our 2011 Outperformance Plan in the amount of $2,211,058. Mr. Mead would not have received any additional benefits or payments in the event of a Change-in-Control under his employment agreement or otherwise. Under the employment agreement, in the event that any payment or benefit constitutes an excess "parachute payment" under Section 280G of the IRC subject to an excise tax, Mr. Mead will not be entitled to a tax gross-up payment; however, Mr. Mead's payments and benefits would be reduced to the extent necessary to avoid such excise taxes, but only if such a reduction of pay or benefits would result in a greater after-tax benefit to Mr. Mead.



•

Termination with Cause or without Good Reason.  Mr. Mead would have received no payments or benefits.



•

Termination without Cause or with Good Reason.  Under Mr. Mead's employment agreement, Mr. Mead would have received a cash severance payment of $550,000. In addition, Mr. Mead would receive accelerated vesting of the portion of the restricted stock awarded in connection with his employment agreement that would have vested had Mr. Mead remained employed by the Company through the end of the calendar quarter in which the termination occurred. Because these shares would not begin vesting until the end of the first quarter of 2014, Mr. Mead would have received no value from this accelerated vesting in connection with a termination on December 31, 2013. Under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and our 2011 Outperformance Plan, Mr. Mead also would have 12 months of additional vesting for his awards under those plans. Mr. Mead would have received a total value of $1,105,529 from this 12 months of additional vesting. Mr. Mead only would be entitled to the severance payments described above upon his execution of a mutual release agreement that released us from all claims he may have against us.



•

Termination in connection with a Change-in-Control.  Under Mr. Mead's employment agreement, if Mr. Mead had been terminated by us without Cause or by Mr. Mead for Good Reason in connection with a Change-in-Control, Mr. Mead would have received a cash severance payment

Table of Contents

of $550,000. In addition, Mr. Mead would receive accelerated vesting of the portion of the restricted stock awarded in connection with his employment agreement that would have vested had Mr. Mead remained employed by the Company through the end of the calendar quarter in which the termination occurred. Because these shares would not begin vesting until the end of the first quarter of 2014, Mr. Mead would have received no value from this accelerated vesting in connection with a termination on December 31, 2013. Under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan, the time-based vesting of the award would have been accelerated. With respect to Mr. Mead's allocation under our 2011 Outperformance Plan, based on total return levels from plan inception through year-end 2013, an award would have been earned in connection with a December 31, 2013 termination in connection with a Change-in-Control under our 2011 Outperformance Plan. The combination of the accelerated vesting under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and the earning of an award under our 2011 Outperformance Plan results in total value of $2,577,622. Under the employment agreement, in the event that any payment or benefit constitutes an excess "parachute payment" under Section 280G of the IRC subject to an excise tax, Mr. Mead will not be entitled to a tax gross-up payment; however, Mr. Mead's payments and benefits would be reduced to the extent necessary to avoid such excise taxes, but only if such a reduction of pay or benefits would result in a greater after-tax benefit to Mr. Mead.

•

Termination upon disability.  Under Mr. Mead's employment agreement, Mr. Mead would have received a cash severance payment of $550,000. In addition, Mr. Mead would receive accelerated vesting of the portion of the restricted stock awarded in connection with his employment agreement that would have vested had Mr. Mead remained employed by the Company through the end of the calendar quarter in which the termination occurred. Because these shares would not begin vesting until the end of the first quarter of 2014, Mr. Mead would have received no value from this accelerated vesting in connection with a termination on December 31, 2013. Under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan, the time-based vesting of the award would have been accelerated. With respect to Mr. Mead's allocation under our 2011 Outperformance Plan, based on total return levels from plan inception through year-end 2013, an award would have been earned in connection with a December 31, 2013 termination upon a disability under our 2011 Outperformance Plan. The combination of the accelerated vesting under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and the earning of an award under our 2011 Outperformance Plan results in total value of $2,577,622. Mr. Mead only would have been entitled to the severance payments provided for in his employment agreement, as described above, upon Mr. Mead's execution of a mutual release agreement that released us from all claims he may have against us.



•

Termination upon death.  Under Mr. Mead's employment agreement, Mr. Mead's estate would have received a cash severance payment of $550,000. In addition, Mr. Mead would receive accelerated vesting of the portion of the restricted stock awarded in connection with his employment agreement that would have vested had Mr. Mead remained employed by the Company through the end of the calendar quarter in which the termination occurred. Because these shares would not begin vesting until the end of the first quarter of 2014, Mr. Mead would have received no value from this accelerated vesting in connection with a termination on December 31, 2013. Under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan, the time-based vesting of the award would have been accelerated. With respect to Mr. Mead's allocation under our 2011 Outperformance Plan, based on total return levels from plan inception through year-end 2013, an award would have been earned in connection with a December 31, 2013 termination upon death under our 2011 Outperformance Plan. The combination of the accelerated vesting under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and the earning of an award under our 2011 Outperformance Plan results in total value of $2,577,622.

        Andrew S. Levine.    Andrew Levine's amended and restated employment and non-competition agreement has a term commencing on January 1, 2013 and ending on January 1, 2016, which will automatically renew for successive six-month periods unless either party delivers three months' prior

Table of Contents

written notice of non-renewal under the agreement. The agreement provides for an annual salary of no less than 475,000 from the beginning of the employment period through December 31, 2013, $490,000 from January 1, 2014 through December 31, 2014 and $500,000 from January 1, 2015 through the end of the employment period. In addition, Mr. Levine is entitled to such annual bonuses as we, in our sole discretion, may deem appropriate to reward Mr. Levine for job performance. In connection with the agreement, we also granted Mr. Levine (i) 21,000 LTIP units subject to time-based vesting and (ii) 21,000 LTIP units subject to performance-based vesting. Both the LTIP units subject to time-based vesting and performance-based vesting will vest in three equal, annual installments on January 1, 2014, January 1, 2015 and January 1, 2016, subject to continued employment through such dates and also, in the case of the LTIP units subject to performance-based vesting, the achievement of any of the following performance hurdles during the fiscal year prior to such vesting date (or on a cumulative basis from the beginning of 2013 through the end of such fiscal year): (i) 7% or greater increase in funds from operations on a per-share basis, (ii) 7% or greater total return to stockholders or (iii) total return to stockholders or percentage increase in funds from operations in the top 40% of a peer group of companies determined each year by our Compensation Committee.

        If Mr. Levine's employment is terminated for any reason, under the agreement he will be subject to the following continuing obligations after termination: (i) noncompetition with us for 12 months unless employment is terminated upon non-renewal of the agreement or by us without Cause or Mr. Levine for Good Reason within 18 months after a Change-in-Control; (ii) nonsolicitation of our employees for 24 months (unless employment is terminated by us without Cause or Mr. Levine with Good Reason in connection with or within 18 months after a Change-in-Control, in which case the nonsolicitation provision will not extend beyond termination of employment); and (iii) nondisparagement of us and non-interference with our business for one year. In connection with a Triggering Event occurring as of December 31, 2013, Mr. Levine would have been entitled to the following payments and benefits:

•

Change-in-Control without termination.  Under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan, the time-based vesting of the award would have been accelerated. The accelerated time-based vesting under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan would have resulted in Mr. Levine receiving a total value of $1,142,925. With respect to Mr. Levine's allocation under our 2011 Outperformance Plan, based on total return levels from plan inception through year-end 2013, an award would have been earned in connection with a December 31, 2013 Change-in-Control under our 2011 Outperformance Plan in the amount of $3,599,394. Mr. Levine would not have received any additional benefits or payments in the event of a Change-in-Control under his employment agreement or otherwise. Under the employment agreement, in the event that any payment or benefit constitutes an excess "parachute payment" under Section 280G of the IRC subject to an excise tax, Mr. Levine will not be entitled to a tax gross-up payment; however, Mr. Levine's payments and benefits would be reduced to the extent necessary to avoid such excise taxes, but only if such a reduction of pay or benefits would result in a greater after-tax benefit to Mr. Levine. In order to avoid creating an opportunity for a successor to induce Mr. Levine to terminate his employment without Good Reason following a Change-in-Control, Mr. Levine will be entitled to receive cash compensation following a Change-in-Control at a per annum rate equal to the sum of his base salary in effect prior to the Change-in-Control plus his annual bonus and the value of his equity awards (other than those granted under outperformance plans) that vested during the most recent fiscal year prior to the Change-in-Control, and the failure to pay such compensation after a Change-in-Control will constitute Good Reason.



•

Termination with Cause or without Good Reason.  Mr. Levine would have received no payments or benefits.



•

Termination without Cause or with Good Reason.  Under Mr. Levine's employment agreement, Mr. Levine would have received a cash severance payment of $2,533,940, which is equal to the sum of (i) his average annual base salary in effect during the preceding 24 months, or his

Table of Contents

Average Annual Base Salary, plus (ii) a bonus equal to the average bonuses (including any equity awarded as bonus) paid to him for the two most recently completed fiscal years, or his Average Annual Cash Bonus. Under Mr. Levine's employment agreement, Mr. Levine also would have received medical and welfare benefit continuation payments for 12 months, which is projected to aggregate approximately $23,941. Under Mr. Levine's employment agreement, all of his outstanding equity awards, other than those made under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and our 2011 Outperformance Plan, would have fully vested at termination. The accelerated vesting results in total value of $3,935,710. Under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and our 2011 Outperformance Plan, Mr. Levine also would have 12 months of additional vesting for his awards under those plans. Mr. Levine would have received a total value of $1,799,697 from this 12 months of additional vesting. Mr. Levine only would be entitled to the severance payments, continuation of benefits and the acceleration of vesting of equity awards described above upon his execution of a mutual release agreement that released us from all claims he may have against us.

•

Termination in connection with a Change-in-Control.  Under Mr. Levine's employment agreement, if Mr. Levine had been terminated by us without Cause or by Mr. Levine for Good Reason in connection with or within 18 months after a Change-in-Control, Mr. Levine would have received a cash severance payment of $4,032,160, which is equal to the sum of (i) two times his Average Annual Base Salary, plus (ii) two times his Average Annual Cash Bonus, plus (iii) a pro rata bonus for the year in which Mr. Levine's employment was terminated (and a bonus for the prior year if such bonus had not yet been determined) based on Mr. Levine's Average Annual Cash Bonus. Under Mr. Levine's employment agreement, Mr. Levine also would have received medical and welfare benefit continuation payments for 24 months, which is projected to aggregate approximately $47,882. Under Mr. Levine's employment agreement, all of his outstanding equity awards, other than those made under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and our 2011 Outperformance Plan, would have fully vested at termination. Under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan, the time-based vesting of the award would have been accelerated. With respect to Mr. Levine's allocation under our 2011 Outperformance Plan, based on total return levels from plan inception through year-end 2013, an award would have been earned in connection with a December 31, 2013 termination in connection with a Change-in-Control under our 2011 Outperformance Plan. The combination of the accelerated vesting under Mr. Levine's employment agreement and our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and the earning of an award under our 2011 Outperformance Plan results in total value of $8,678,029. Under the employment agreement, in the event that any payment or benefit constitutes an excess "parachute payment" under Section 280G of the IRC subject to an excise tax, Mr. Levine will not be entitled to a tax gross-up payment; however, Mr. Levine's payments and benefits would be reduced to the extent necessary to avoid such excise taxes, but only if such a reduction of pay or benefits would result in a greater after-tax benefit to Mr. Levine.



•

Termination upon disability.  Under Mr. Levine's employment agreement, Mr. Levine would have received a cash severance payment of $2,533,940, which is equal to the sum of (i) his Average Annual Base Salary, plus (ii) his Average Annual Cash Bonus, plus (iii) a pro rata bonus for the year in which his employment was terminated (and a bonus for the prior year if such bonus had not yet been determined) based on his Average Annual Cash Bonus. Under Mr. Levine's employment agreement, Mr. Levine also would have continued to receive medical and welfare benefit continuation payments for 36 months, which is projected to aggregate approximately $71,824. Mr. Levine also would have received 12 months of additional vesting for his outstanding equity awards, other than those made under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and our 2011 Outperformance Plan, and full vesting for his stock options and his equity awards granted in lieu of cash bonuses. Under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan, the time-based vesting of the award would have been accelerated. With respect to Mr. Levine's allocation under our 2011 Outperformance Plan, based on total return levels from plan inception through year-end 2013, an award would

Table of Contents

have been earned in connection with a December 31, 2013 termination upon a disability under our 2011 Outperformance Plan. The combination of the accelerated vesting under Mr. Levine's employment agreement and our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and the earning of an award under our 2011 Outperformance Plan results in total value of $7,384,709. Mr. Levine only would have been entitled to the severance payments and the acceleration of vesting of equity awards provided for in his employment agreement, as described above, upon Mr. Levine's execution of a mutual release agreement that released us from all claims he may have against us.

•

Termination upon death.  Under Mr. Levine's employment agreement, Mr. Levine's estate would have received a cash severance payment which is equal to his pro rata bonus for the year in which his employment was terminated (and a bonus for the prior year if such bonus had not yet been determined) based on his Average Annual Cash Bonus. Mr. Levine's estate also would have received 12 months of additional vesting for his outstanding equity awards, other than those made under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and our 2011 Outperformance Plan, and full vesting for his stock options and his equity awards granted in lieu of cash bonuses. Under our 2010 Notional Unit Plan, the time-based vesting of the award would have been accelerated. With respect to Mr. Levine's allocation under our 2011 Outperformance Plan, based on total return levels from plan inception through year-end 2013, an award would have been earned in connection with a December 31, 2013 termination upon death under our 2011 Outperformance Plan. The combination of the accelerated vesting under Mr. Levine's employment agreement and our 2010 Notional Unit Plan and the earning of an award under our 2011 Outperformance Plan results in total value of $7,384,709.

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

Our Compensation Committee is comprised of John H. Alschuler, Jr., Edwin Thomas Burton, III and John S. Levy. There are no Compensation Committee interlocks and none of our employees is a member of our Compensation Committee.

2017 Proxy Statement 49

---

Table of Contents

CHARTER AMENDMENT

Proposal 3: Charter Amendment to Declassify Board of Directors

Background of the Proposal

As a result of our stockholder engagement efforts and our commitment to corporate governance, after careful consideration, our Board of Directors has proposed to amend our Articles of Restatement (the “Charter”) to phase out board classes, such that directors whose termsare expiring will be elected for one-year terms starting at the Company’s2018annual meeting of stockholders. By our2020annual meeting, our Board of Directors will be fully declassified.

Proposed Amendment to Charter

Our Charter currently divides our Board of Directors into three classes. Directors in each class serve for a term of three years and until their successors are duly elected and qualify. The term of directors of one class expires at each annual meeting of stockholders.

In order to phase out the present three-year staggered terms of our directors and instead provide for the annual election of directors, Section 1 of Article IV of our Charter will need to be amended. Amendments to our Charter must be declared advisable by resolution duly adopted by our Board of Directors, and approved by our stockholders at an annual or special meeting by the affirmative vote of not less than two-thirds of all of the votes entitled to be cast on the matter, and once approved by the stockholders, such amendment will become effective upon filing with, and acceptance for record by, the State Department of Assessments and Taxation of Maryland (the “SDAT”) of articles of amendment setting forth the amendment. By resolutions adopted as of April 20, 2017, the Board of Directors declared advisable the amendment to our Charter set forth onAppendix B attached hereto which provides that, beginning with the 2018 annual meeting of stockholders, our directors will be elected for a term ending at the next annual meeting of stockholders following their election and until their successors are duly elected and qualify, and directed that this amendment to our Charter be submitted for consideration by our stockholders at the 2017 annual meeting of stockholders. This amendment is not intended to, and will not, abrogate, shorten or otherwise affect the term of any director elected prior to the 2018 annual meeting of stockholders, including those directors who currently are candidates for election as set forth in Proposal 1.

Effective Date

If the amendment to our Charter is approved by the stockholders of the Company by the requisite vote at the annual meeting, then following the annual meeting, articles of amendment setting forth such amendment will be filed with, and will become effective upon acceptance by, the SDAT. Once the amendment to our Charter becomes effective, the directors whose terms of office expire at annual meetings of stockholders subsequent to the annual meeting, and any successors to such directors, will be elected to hold office until the next annual meeting of stockholders following their election instead of the third-succeeding annual meeting, and until their successors are duly elected and qualify.

Vote Required

The affirmative vote of at least two-thirds of all of the votes entitled to be cast by the stockholders on this proposal at the annual meeting is required for approval of the amendment of our Charter to effect the declassification of our Board of Directors. Abstentions and broker non-votes (as described under “Questions and Answers about the Annual Meeting — What vote is required to approve each proposal?”), if any, will have the same effect as votes against the proposal.

The Board unanimously recommends a vote“FOR”the amendment of our Charter to effect the declassification of our Board of Directors.

50 SL Green Realty Corp.

---

Table of Contents

AUDIT COMMITTEE MATTERS

Proposal 4: Ratification of Appointment of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The Audit Committee of the Board has appointed the accounting firm of Ernst & Young LLP to serve as our independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December31, 2017. Stockholder ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP is not required by law, the NYSE or the Company’s organizational documents. However, as a matter of good corporate governance, the Board has elected to submit the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP to the stockholders for ratification at the2017 annual meeting. Even if the appointment is ratified, the Audit Committee, in its discretion, may select a different independent registered public accounting firm at any time if the Audit Committee believes that such a change would be in the best interests of the Company and its stockholders. If our stockholders do not ratify the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP, the Audit Committee will take that fact into consideration, together with such other factors it deems relevant, in determining its next selection of an independentregistered public accounting firm. Ernst & Young LLP has served as our independent registered public accounting firm since our formation in June1997 and is considered by our management to be well-qualified. Ernst & Young LLP has advised us that neither it nor any member thereof has any financial interest, direct or indirect, in the Company or any of our subsidiaries in any capacity.

A representative of Ernst & Young LLP will be present at the annual meeting, will be given the opportunity to make a statement at the annual meeting if he or she so desires and will be available to respond to appropriate questions.

A majority of all of the votes cast with respect to this proposal is required for the ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December31,2017. Abstentions do not constitute a vote “for” or “against” and will not be counted as “votes cast”. Therefore, abstentions will have no effect on this proposal.

The Board unanimously recommends a vote“FOR”the ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm.

Audit Committee Report

The following report of the Audit Committee of the Board will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference in any previous or future documents filed by us with the SEC under the Securities Act of1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of1934, as amended, except to the extent that we specifically incorporate this report by reference in any such document.

Our Audit Committee oversees our financial reporting process on behalf of the Board, in accordance with our Audit Committee Charter. Management has the primary responsibility for the preparation, presentation and integrity of our financial statements, accounting and financial reporting principles, internal controls, and procedures designed to ensure compliance with accounting standards, applicable laws and regulations. In fulfilling its oversight responsibilities, our Audit Committee reviewed and discussed the audited financial statements in the Annual Report on Form10-K for the year ended December31,2016 filed by the Company with management.

Our Audit Committee reviewed and discussed with Ernst & Young LLP, our independent registered public accounting firm, the matters required to be discussed with the Audit Committee under Auditing Standard No.1301, “Communications with Audit Committees,” as adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board. Our Audit Committee received from Ernst & Young LLP the written disclosures and the letter required by the applicable requirements of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board regarding communications with the Audit Committee concerning independence, and has discussed with Ernst & Young LLP their independence.

Based on the review and discussions referred to above, our Audit Committee recommended to the Board that the audited financial statements be included in the Annual Report on Form10-K for the year ended December31,2016 filed by the Company.

The members of our Audit Committee are not engaged professionally in the practice of auditing or accounting. Committee members rely, without independent

2017 Proxy Statement 51

---

SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT
Table of Contents

AUDIT COMMITTEE MATTERS

investigation or verification, on the information provided to them and on the representations made by management and our independent registered public accounting firm. Accordingly, our Audit Committee’s oversight does not provide an independent basis to determine that management has maintained appropriate accounting and financial reporting principles or appropriate internal controls and procedures designed to assure compliance with accounting standards and applicable laws and regulations. Furthermore, our Audit Committee’s considerations and discussions referred to above do not assure that the audit of our financial statements has been carried out in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, that the financial statements are presented in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the U.S. or that our registered public accounting firm is in fact “independent.”

Submitted by our Audit Committee
Edwin Thomas Burton, III (Chairman)
Lauren B. Dillard
Craig M. Hatkoff

Fee Disclosure

Audit Fees

Fees, including out-of-pocket expenses, for audit services totaled approximately $3,398,000 in fiscal year2016 and $4,031,963 in fiscal year2015. Audit fees include fees associated with our annual audits and related reviews of our annual reports on Form10-K and quarterly reports on Form10-Q. In addition, audit fees include Sarbanes-Oxley Section404 planning and testing, fees for public filingsin connection with various property acquisitions, joint venture audits, and services relating to public filings in connection with our preferred and common stock and debt offerings and certain other transactions. Our joint venture partners paid their pro rata share of any joint venture audit fees. Audit fees also include fees for accounting research and consultations.

Audit-Related Fees

Fees for audit-related services totaled approximately $68,000 in2016 and $54,255 in2015. The audit-related services principally include fees for operating expense audits and agreed-upon procedures projects.

Tax Fees

No fees were incurred for tax services, including tax compliance, tax advice and tax planning in either2016 or2015.

All Other Fees

There were no fees for other services not included above in either2016 or2015.

Our Audit Committee considers whether the provision by Ernst & Young LLP of any services that would be required to be described under “All Other Fees” would be compatible with maintaining Ernst & Young LLP’s independence from both management and the Company.

Pre-Approval Policies and Procedures of our Audit Committee

Our Audit Committee must pre-approve all audit services and permissible non-audit services provided by our independent registered public accounting firm, except for any de minimis non-audit services. Non-audit services are considered de minimis if: (1) the aggregate amount of all such non-audit services constitutes less than five percent of the total amount of revenues we paid to our independent registered public accounting firm during the fiscal year in which they are provided; (2) we did not recognize such services at the time of the engagement to be non-audit services; and (3) such services are promptly brought to ourAudit Committee’s or any of its members’ attention and approved by our Audit Committee or any of its members who has authority to give such approval prior to the completion of the audit. None of the fees reflected above were incurred as a result of non-audit services provided by our independent registered public accounting firm pursuant to this de minimis exception. All services provided by Ernst & Young LLP in2016 were pre-approved by our Audit Committee. Our Audit Committee may delegate to one or more of its members who is an independent director the authority to grant pre-approvals.

52 SL Green Realty Corp.

---

Table of Contents

SAY-ON-FREQUENCY PROPOSAL

Proposal 5: Advisory Vote on the Frequency of Stockholder Advisory Votes on the Compensation of Our Named Executive Officers

Section14A(a)(2) of the Exchange Act enables stockholders to vote on the frequency of future stockholder advisory votes on the compensation of our named executive officers, such as Proposal2 included in this proxy statement. Under Section14A(a)(2), generally, each public company must submit this proposal to its stockholders not less than every six years and this proposal was last submitted to our stockholders at our2011 annual meeting of stockholders. By voting on this Proposal5, stockholders may recommend whether future advisory votes on executive compensation should be conducted every “one year,” “two years” or “three years.” In addition, stockholders may choose to abstain from voting on this proposal.

The Compensation Committee and the Board believe that a vote on the compensation of our named executive officers every year is in the best interests of the Company. This recommendation received the majority of thevotes cast at the Company’s2011 annual meeting of stockholders and the administrative process of submitting a non-binding, advisory say-on-pay resolution to stockholders on an annual basis is not expected to impose any substantial additional costs on the Company.

Although this advisory vote on the frequency of future “say on pay” votes is non-binding, the Board and the Compensation Committee will take into account the outcome of the vote when considering the frequency of future advisory votes on executive compensation.

In order for any of the three alternative frequencies to be approved, it must receive a majority of the votes cast on this proposal. In the event that no option receives a majority of the votes cast, we will consider the option that receives the most votes to be the option selected by the stockholders. Abstentions and broker non-votes, if any, will have no effect on the outcome of this matter.

The Board unanimously recommends a vote for“ONE YEAR”as the frequency for future non-binding advisory votes on the compensation of our named executive officers.

2017 Proxy Statement 53

---

Table of Contents

STOCKHOLDER PROPOSAL

Proposal 6: Stockholder Proposal Regarding Setting Target Amounts for CEO Compensation

Overview

The Company has been notified that a stockholder of the Company intends to present a proposal for consideration at the annual meeting. The stockholder making this proposal has presented the proposal and supporting statement set forth below, and we are presenting the proposal and the supporting statement as they were submitted to us. While we take issue with certain of the statements contained in the proposal and the supporting statement, we have limited our response to the most important points and have not attempted to address all the statements with which we disagree.

Stockholder Proposal Regarding Setting Target Amounts For CEO Compensation

The Trowel Trades S&P 500 Index Fund, which is located at c/o Comerica Bank & Trust, N.A., Trustee, Post Office Box 75000, Detroit, Michigan 48275 and which is a beneficial owner of1,854 shares of SL Green common stock, has submitted the following resolution and supporting statement:

Resolved: Shareholders of SL Green Realty Corp. (the "Company") request that the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors take into consideration the pay grades and/or salary ranges of all classifications of Company employees when setting target amounts for CEO compensation. The Compensation Committee should describe in the Company's proxy statements for annual shareholder meetings how it complies with this requested policy. Compliance with this policy is excused if it will result in the violation of any existing contractual obligation or the terms of any existing compensation plan. Supporting Statement: Like at many companies, our Company's Compensation Committee uses peer group benchmarks of what other companies pay their CEOs to set its target CEO compensation. These target pay amounts are then subject to performance adjustments. To ensure that our Company's CEO compensation is reasonable relative to our Company's overall employee pay philosophy and structure, we believe that the Compensation Committee should also consider the pay grades and/or salary ranges of Company employees when setting CEO compensation target amounts. This proposal does not require the Compensation Committee to use other employee pay data in a specific way to set CEO compensation targets. Under this proposal, the Compensation Committee will have discretion to determine how other employee pay should impact CEO compensation targets. The Compensation Committee also will retain authority to use peer group benchmarks and/or any other metric to set CEO compensation target amounts. Over time, using peer group benchmarks to set CEO compensation can lead to pay inflation. Although many companies target CEO compensation at the median of their peer group, certain companies have targeted their CEO’s pay above median. In addition, peer groups can be cherry-picked to include larger or more successful companies where CEO compensation is higher. (Charles Elson and Craig Ferrere, “Executive Superstars, Peer Groups and Overcompensation,” Journal of Corporation Law, Spring2013). High pay disparities between CEOs and other senior executives may undermine collaboration and teamwork. According to Institutional Shareholder Services, an excessive pay disparity between the CEO and the next highest-paid named executive officer is a problematic pay practice that may result in a recommendation to its clients that they vote against advisory votes on executive compensation. (Institutional Shareholder Services, United States Proxy Voting Manual, February23,2016, p.147).

54  SL Green Realty Corp.

---

Table of Contents

STOCKHOLDER PROPOSAL

In our view, the pay of non-executive employees should also be considered. High CEO compensation can impact the morale and productivity of employees who are not senior executives. According to a Glassdoor study of employee opinions, “Higher CEO compensation is statistically linked to lower CEO approval ratings on average.” (Glassdoor, What Makes a Great CEO?, August2016, available at https://www.glassdoor.com/research/studies/ what-makes-a-great-ceo/). For those reasons, we urge you to vote in favor of this proposal.

The Board of Directors’ Statement In Opposition

For the reasons described below, our Board of Directors unanimously recommends a voteAGAINST this proposal.

Our Board of Directors believes that its executive compensation programs are conceived, designed and implemented in a manner that provides performance-based incentives that create strong alignment of management and stockholder interests and reward superior performance with superior compensation. As described in greater detail under “Our Executive Compensation Programs,” our Compensation Committee (referred to in this statement as the “Committee”), which is comprised of three of our independent directors, determines compensation for our named executive officers, including our Chief Executive Officer.

The Committee retains an independent outside compensation consulting firm to provide relevant data concerning the marketplace, our peer group and its own independent analysis and recommendations concerning executive compensation. In its deliberations, the Committee considers our short-term and long-term performance, including the achievement of the financial and operational goals that we establish and communicate to investors, as well as the Committee’s view of the appropriate overall annual incentive award for each of our named executive officers in light of their historical compensation, skill, experience, position and competitive market factors. The Committee also reviews various peer compensation information to confirm that our Chief Executive Officer’s total compensation is within an appropriate range of the total compensation received by the chief executive officers of these peers, considering relative size and performance. The Committee also considers the risks to our stockholders and to achievement of our goals that may be inherent in the executive compensation program and considers non-financial and other qualitative performance factors in determining actual compensation payouts. In addition, the Committee annually reviews our executive compensation policies and practices to ensure that such policies are in line with current market practices and stockholders’ best interests.

Over the last several years, we also have engaged in a formal stockholder outreach program focused on our executive compensation. Throughout each year, we are in contact with our large institutional stockholders, representing the owners of more than a majority of our outstanding common stock, to discuss our executive compensation programs, our business and our overall performance. These discussions are led by the chairman of the Committee and Lead Independent Director or, in certain instances, members of senior management. As a matter of course, we provide all stockholders and the market generally with information regarding our executive compensation programs, our performance and the manner in which we believe our executive compensation programs contributed to our superior long-term performance. Discussions as part of our stockholder outreach program enable us to clarify aspects of our executive compensation programs that our stockholders may not fully understand and to receive direct feedback regarding specific aspects of our executive compensation programs.

Based on all of these factors, considerations and discussions and given the breadth of the inputs and information available to and taken into account by the Committee, we believe that mandating that certain information be utilized by the Committee in the performance of its duties is unnecessary and not in the best interests of stockholders. Accordingly, our Board of Directors recommends a voteAGAINST the proposal.

Vote Required

A majority of votes cast with respect to the proposal is required for approval. Abstentions and broker non-votes (as described under “Questions and Answers about the Annual Meeting — What vote is require to approve each proposal?”) will not be treated as votes cast and will have no effect on the result of the vote. The stockholder proposal will be voted on at the annual meeting only if properly presented by or on behalf of the proponent.

Board Recommendation

The Board of Directors unanimously recommends a vote AGAINST the stockholder proposal regarding setting target amounts for CEO compensation.

2017 Proxy Statement  55

---

Table of Contents

STOCK OWNERSHIP INFORMATION

Executive and Director Stock Ownership Guidelines

In furtherance of the Committee’s ongoing efforts to foster an ownership culture among our senior leadership team, we adopted stock ownership guidelines for our named executive officers and non-employee directors. We have subsequently revised these guidelines to increase the amount of equity in the Company or its operating partnership that our named executive officers are required to own in order to satisfy the guidelines, as set forth below:

Named Executive Officers and Non-Employee Directors		Multiple of Base Salary or Annual Cash Retainer
Chief Executive Officer		8x
Other Named Executive Officers		6x
Non-Employee Directors		5x

New named executive officers and non-employee directors have three years from the commencement of their employment or election to the Board to attain compliance with the stock ownership requirements.

Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management

The following table sets forth the beneficial ownership of our common stock, $0.01 par value per share as of March 31, 2014,March31,2017, unless otherwise noted, for (i) each person known to us to be the beneficial owner of more than 5%than5% of the Company'sour outstanding common stock, (ii) each of our directors, (iii) each of our named executive officers who is not a director and (iv) our directors and executive officers as a group. All information in the following table is based on Schedules 13D, 13GSchedules13D,13G and/or any amendments thereto, filed withfiledwith the SEC, and on information supplied to us by our directors and officers. Except as otherwise described in the notes below, the following beneficial owners have sole voting power and sole investment power with respect to all shares set forth opposite their respective names.

        As None of March 31, 2014, there were 95,318,446 shares outstanding.

Name**		Amount And Nature of Beneficial Ownership of Common Stock			Percent of Total
The Vanguard Group(1)			11,593,977			12.16	%
Cohen & Steers, Inc.(2)			11,356,072			11.91	%
BlackRock, Inc.(3)			8,123,020			8.52	%
FMR LLC(4)			7,305,583			7.66	%
John H. Alschuler, Jr.(5)			50,697			*
Edwin Thomas Burton, III(6)			56,081			*
Stephen L. Green(7)			916,393			*
Craig M. Hatkoff(8)			22,095			*
Marc Holliday(9)			300,710			*
Andrew S. Levine			39,756			*
John S. Levy(10)			90,980			*
Andrew Mathias(11)			455,832			*
James Mead			26,097			*
All Directors and Executive Officers as a Group (9 Persons)			1,958,640			2.05	%

---

*

Less than 1%.

**

Unless otherwise indicated, the business address is 420 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York 10170-1881.

(1)

Based on information provided on a Schedule 13G/A filed with the SEC on February 11, 2014, as of December 31, 2013, The Vanguard Group ("Vanguard") may be deemed to beneficiallyour executive officers own an aggregate of 11,593,977any shares of our commonpreferred stock in its capacityexcept as an investment advisor, which includes 53,351set forth below.

As of March31,2017, there were101,831,845 shares of our common stock held by Vanguard Fiduciary Trust Company as a result of its serving as investment manager of collective trust accounts and 255,266 shares of common stock held by Vanguard Investments Australia, Ltd. as a result of its serving as investment manager of Australian investment offerings. The business address of Vanguard is 100 Vanguard Blvd., Malvern, PA 19355. According to information received from Vanguard, the number of shares reported as beneficially owned by Vanguard in such Schedule 13G/A includes 6,218,441 shares, representing 6.52% of our outstanding common stock, that Vanguard Specialized Funds—Vanguard REIT Index Fund separately reported as beneficially owned in a Schedule 13G/A filed on February 4, 2014 with the SEC.

(2)

Based on information provided on a Schedule 13G/A filed with the SEC on February 14, 2014, as of December 31, 2013, Cohen & Steers, Inc., Cohen & Steers Capital Management, Inc. and Cohen & Steers UK Ltd., collectively, may be deemed to beneficially own an aggregate of 11,356,072 shares of our common stock. The business address for Cohen & Steers, Inc. and Cohen & Steers Capital Management, Inc. is 280 Park Avenue, 10th Floor, New York, NY 10017. The business address for Cohen & Steers UK Ltd. is 21 Sackville Street, 4th Floor, London, United Kingdom W1S 3DN.

(3)

Based on information provided on a Schedule 13G/A filed with the SEC on January 30, 2014, as of December 31, 2013, BlackRock, Inc., BlackRock (Luxembourg) S.A., BlackRock (Netherlands) B.V., BlackRock Advisors (UK) Limited, BlackRock Advisors, LLC, BlackRock Asset Management Canada Limited, BlackRock Asset Management Deutschland AG, BlackRock Asset Management Ireland Limited, BlackRock Financial Management, Inc., BlackRock Fund Advisors, BlackRock Fund Management Ireland Limited, BlackRock Fund Managers Ltd, BlackRock Institutional Trust Company,

outstanding.

Name**		Amount and Nature of Beneficial Ownership of Common Stock		Percent of Total
The Vanguard Group(1)		17,429,748		17.12%
Cohen & Steers, Inc.(2)		10,434,841		10.25%
BlackRock, Inc.(3)		9,117,294		8.95%
State Street Corporation(4)		5,845,935		5.74%
John H. Alschuler(5)		30,463		*
Betsy S. Atkins(6)		5,242		*
Edwin Thomas Burton, III(7)		34,469		*
Matthew J. DiLiberto(8)		49,053		*
Lauren B. Dillard(9)		2,879		*
Stephen L. Green(10)		912,274		*
Craig M. Hatkoff		1,544		*
Marc Holliday(11)		853,924		*
Andrew S. Levine(12)		92,106		*
John S. Levy(13)		73,980		*
Andrew Mathias(14)		988,780		*
All Directors and Executive Officers as a Group (11Persons)		3,044,714		2.99%

*	Less than1%.
**	Unless otherwise indicated, the business address is420 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York10170-1881.
(1)	Based on information provided on a Schedule13G/A filed with the SEC on February13,2017, as of December31,2016, The Vanguard Group (“Vanguard”) may be deemed to beneficially own an aggregate of17,429,326shares of our common stock in its capacity as an investment advisor, which includes129,194,613shares of our common stock held by Vanguard Fiduciary Trust Company as a

56  SL Green Realty Corp.

---

Table of Contents

STOCK OWNERSHIP INFORMATION

N.A.

	result of its serving as investment manager of collective trust accounts and312,463 shares of our common stock held by Vanguard Investments Australia, Ltd. as a result of its serving as investment manager of Australian investment offerings. The business address of Vanguard is100 Vanguard Blvd., Malvern, PA19355. According to information received from Vanguard, the number of shares reported as beneficially owned by Vanguard in such Schedule13G/A includes7,611,627 shares, representing7.51% of our outstanding common stock, that Vanguard Specialized Funds—Vanguard REIT Index Fund separately reported as beneficially owned in a Schedule13G/A filed on February14,2017 with the SEC.
(2)	Based on information provided on a Schedule13G/A filed with the SEC on February14,2017, as of December31,2016, Cohen & Steers, Inc., Cohen & Steers Capital Management, Inc. and Cohen & Steers UK Ltd., BlackRock International Limited, BlackRock Investment Management (Australia) Limited, BlackRock Investment Management (UK) Ltd, BlackRock Investment Management, LLC, BlackRock Japan Co Ltd and BlackRock Life Limited, or, collectively, BlackRock, may be deemed to beneficially own an aggregate of10,434,841shares of our common stock. The business address for Cohen & Steers, Inc. and Cohen & Steers Capital Management, Inc. is280Park Avenue,10th Floor, New York, NY10017. The business address for Cohen & Steers UK Ltd. is50Pall Mall,4th Floor, London, United Kingdom SW1Y5JH.
(3)	Based on information provided on a Schedule13G/A filed with the SEC on January27,2017, as of December31,2016, BlackRock, Inc. may be deemed to beneficially own an aggregate of9,117,294shares of our common stock. The business address for BlackRock is55East52nd Street, New York, NY10022.
(4)	Based on information provided on a Schedule13G filed with the SEC on February8,2017, as of December31,2016, State Street
	Corporation may be deemed to beneficially own an aggregate of5,845,935shares of our common stock. The business address for State Street is One Lincoln Street, Boston, MA02111.
(5)	Includes20,500shares of our common stock subject to options exercisable within60days of March31,2017and9,963phantom units.
(6)	Includes1,753phantom units.
(7)	Includes34,372phantom units.
(8)	Includes47,823LTIP units convertible into limited partnership units in SL Green Operating Partnership, L.P. (“OP Units”) within60days of March31,2017. The total excludes LTIP units that remain subject to performance-based vesting conditions,4,148LTIP units that remain subject to time-based vesting conditions,30,000Class O LTIP units that remain subject to time-based vesting conditions and4,121vested LTIP units that are not convertible into OP Units within60days of March31,2017.
(9)	Includes2,879phantom units.
(10)	Includes794,633OP Units and117,641vested LTIP units convertible into OP Units within60days of March31,2017held by the Stephen L. Green Revocable Trust. The total excludes LTIP units that remain subject to performance-based vesting conditions, 2,201 LTIP units that remain subject to time-based vesting conditions and 33,119 vested LTIP units that are not convertible into OP Units within 60 days of March 31, 2017 held by the Stephen L. Green Revocable Trust.
(11)	Includes200,000shares of our common stock subject to options exercisable within60days of March31,2017and633,124LTIP units convertible into OP Units within60days of March31,2017. The total excludes LTIP units that remain subject to performance-based vesting conditions,4,988LTIP units that remain subject to time-based vesting conditions,105,000Class O LTIP units that remain subject to time-based vesting conditions and255,306vested LTIP units that are not convertible into OP Units within60days of March31,2017. Mr. Holliday also beneficially owns88,900shares of our Series I preferred stock, which represents less than1% of our standing Series I preferred stock. This percentage is based on9,200,000shares of Series I preferred stock outstanding as of March31,2017.
(12)	Includes12,500shares of our common stock subject to options exercisable within60days of March31,2017and64,121LTIP units convertible into OP Units within60days of March31,2017. The total excludes LTIP units that remain subject to performance-based vesting conditions,12,926LTIP units that remain subject to time-based vesting conditions,30,000Class O LTIP units that remain subject to time-based vesting conditions and37,084vested LTIP units that are not convertible into OP Units within60days of March31,2017. Mr. Levine also beneficially owns5,000shares of our Series I preferred stock, which represents less than1% of our standing Series I preferred stock. This percentage is based on9,200,000shares of Series I preferred stock outstanding as of March31,2017.
(13)	Includes26,500shares of our common stock subject to options exercisable within60days of March31,2017and47,480phantom units.
(14)	Includes130,000shares of our common stock subject to options exercisable within60days of March31,2017and568,916LTIP units convertible into OP Units within60days of March31,2017. The total excludes LTIP units that remain subject to performance-based vesting conditions,58,326LTIP units that remain subject to time-based vesting conditions and141,870vested LTIP units that are not convertible into OP Units within60days of March31,2017.

2017 Proxy Statement  57

---




Table of 8,123,020 shares of our common stock. The business address for BlackRock is 40 East 52nd Street, New York, NY 10022.Contents

(4)

Based on information provided on a Schedule 13G/A filed with the SEC on February 14, 2014, as of December 31, 2013, FMR LLC, Edward C. Johnson 3d, Fidelity Management & Research Company, Fidelity SelectCo, LLC, Pyramis Global Advisors, LLC and Pyramis Global Advisors Trust Company, or, collectively, Fidelity, may be deemed to beneficially own an aggregate of 7,305,583 shares of our common stock. The business address for Fidelity is 245 Summer Street, Boston, MA 02210.

(5)

Includes 38,500 shares of our common stock subject to options exercisable within 60 days of March 31, 2014 and 12,197 phantom units.

(6)

Includes 20,500 shares of our common stock subject to options exercisable within 60 days of March 31, 2014 and 32,091 phantom units.

(7)

Includes 822,240 limited partnership units in SL Green Operating Partnership, L.P. held directly or indirectly through certain partnerships and other similar entities.

(8)

Includes 20,500 shares of our common stock subject to options exercisable within 60 days of March 31, 2014.

(9)

Includes 66,666 shares of our common stock subject to options exercisable within 60 days of March 31, 2014.

(10)

Includes 56,500 shares of our common stock subject to options exercisable within 60 days of March 31, 2014 and 34,480 phantom units.

(11)

Includes 66,666 limited partnership units in SL Green Operating Partnership, L.P. held directly or indirectly through certain partnerships and other similar entities.

STOCK OWNERSHIP INFORMATION

Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

Section16(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,of1934, as amended, requires our executive officers and directors and persons who own more than 10%than10% of a registered class of our equity securities to file reports of ownership and changes in ownership with the SEC and the NYSE. Officers, directors and persons who own more than 10%than10% of a registered class of our equity securities are required by SEC regulation to furnish us with copies of all Section 16(a)Section16(a) forms that they file. To our knowledge, based solely on review of the copies of such reports and any amendments thereto furnished to us during or with respect to our most recent fiscal year, all Section 16(a)Section16(a) filing requirements applicable to our executive officers, directors and persons who own more than 10%than10% of a registered class of our equity securities were satisfied, with the exception of Messrs. Green,Mr. Mathias and Mead, who each inadvertently failed to timely file a Form 4Form4 relating to the conversionan award of LTIP units into shareson June17,2016. The Form4 relating to this award of the Company's common stock during fiscal year 2012.LTIP units was subsequently filed on June29,2016.

58  LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
SL Green Realty Corp.

---

        We are not involved in any legal proceeding in which any of our directors or executive officers is adverse to the Company or in any material pending legal proceeding.

Table of Contents

CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS

Policies and Procedures With Respect to Related Party Transactions

All related party transactions (generally, transactions involving amounts exceeding $120,000 in which directors and executive officers or their immediate family members, or stockholders owning 5%owning5% of more of our outstanding common stock have an interest) are subject to approval or ratification in accordance with the procedures described below.

Our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee reviews the material facts of all related party transactions and either approves or disapproves the entry into such related party transaction. If advance approval of a related party transaction is not feasible, then the related party transaction will be considered and, if our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee determines it to be appropriate, ratified, at the next regularly scheduled meeting of our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. In determining whether to approve or ratify a related party transaction, our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee takes into account, among other factors it deems appropriate, whether the related party transaction is on terms no less favorable than terms generallytermsgenerally available to an unaffiliated third-party under the same or similar circumstances and the extent of the related party'sparty’s interest in the transaction.

No director may participate in any discussion or approval of a related party transaction for which he or she is a related party, except that the director must provide all material information concerning the related party transaction to our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee.

If a related party transaction will be ongoing, our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee may establish guidelines for our management to follow in its ongoing dealings with the related party. Thereafter, our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee, on at least an annual basis, reviews and assesses ongoing relationships with such related party to see that our management is in compliance with our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee'sCommittee’s guidelines and that such related party transaction remains appropriate.

Related party transactions are disclosed in our SEC filings.

One Vanderbilt Investment

In December2016, we entered into agreements with entities owned and controlled by Messrs. Holliday and Mathias, pursuant to which they agreed to make an investment in our One Vanderbilt project at appraised fair market value for the interests acquired. We entered into these agreements in order to further strengthen the alignment of the interests of Messrs. Holliday and Mathias with those of our company in the successful completion and stabilization of this long-term project.

Pursuant to these agreements, the entities owned and controlled by Messrs. Holliday and Mathias agreed to purchase interests in the One Vanderbilt project that will entitle them to receive approximately1.50% –1.80% and1.00% –1.20%, respectively, of the profit generated from this project in excess of capital contributions. Fifty percent of these interests were purchased on December31,2016 and the remaining fifty percent will be purchased on December31,2017. The entities owned and controlled by Messrs. Holliday and Mathias will pay $1,440,000 and $960,000, respectively, which equals the fair market value of the interests acquired as of the date the investment agreements were entered into as determined by an independent third party appraisal that we obtained.

The entities owned and controlled by Messrs. Holliday and Mathias cannot monetize their interests until after the stabilization of the project, estimated to occur in 2023. Thereafter, such entities may require us to repurchase 50% of the interests within three years after stabilization and 100% following such period. In addition, the agreement calls for us to repurchase these interests in the event of a sale of One Vanderbilt or a transactional change of control of our company. We also have the right to repurchase these interests on the seven-year anniversary of the stabilization of the project or upon the occurrence of certain separation events relating to each of Messrs. Holliday’s and Mathias’s continued service with us prior to the stabilization of the project. The price paid upon an exercise of the various rights described above will equal the liquidation value of the interests at the time, with the value of One Vanderbilt being based on its sale price, if applicable, or fair market value as determined by an independent third party appraiser. Messrs. Holliday and Mathias generally have the right to elect whether to receive any amounts paid upon the repurchase of these interests in cash or common units of our operating partnership. In addition, upon the exercise of the rights described above, we may elect to pay the purchase price in shares of our common stock in lieu of paying in cash, subject to a cap on the maximum number of common units and shares of our common stock that we will be required to pay in these circumstances. We have agreed to provide resale registration rights to the entities owned and controlled by Messrs. Holliday and Mathias for any shares of our common stock that are issued.

2017 Proxy Statement  59

---

Table of Contents

CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS

In accordance with our policies and procedures with respect to related party transactions described above, this investment was reviewed in detail and approved by our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee. In addition, this investment was also reviewed by the Chairman of the Board, our Lead Independent Director and the Chairman of our Audit Committee as well as the other members of the Board and was approved by the Board as well as our Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee.

Cleaning/Security/Messenger and Restoration Services

Through Alliance Building Services, or Alliance, First Quality Maintenance, L.P., or First Quality, provides cleaning, extermination and related services, Classic Security LLC provides security services, Bright Star Couriers LLC provides messenger services, and Onyx Restoration Works provides restoration services with respect to certain properties owned by us. Alliance is partially owned by Gary Green, a son of Stephen L. Green, the chairman of our board of directors.the Board. In addition, First Quality has the non-exclusive opportunity to provide cleaning and related services to individual tenants at our properties on a basis separately negotiated with any tenant seeking such additional services. The Service CorporationA subsidiary through which we realize income from management, leasing and construction contracts with third parties and joint venture properties has entered into an arrangement with Alliance whereby it will receive a profit participation above a certain threshold for services provided by Alliance to certain tenants at certain buildings above the base services specified in their lease agreements. Income earned from profit participation was approximately $3.5 million, $4.0$3.8 million and $2.7$3.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011,December31,2016,2015 and2014, respectively. We also recorded expenses of approximately $19.5$23.4 million, $17.9$21.3 million and $16.1$21.5 million for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011,December31,2016,2015 and2014, respectively, for these services (excluding services provided directly to tenants).

Management Fees

S.L. Green Management Corp., a consolidated entity, receives property management fees from an entity in which Stephen L. Green owns an interest. We received management fees from such entity of

Table of Contents

approximately $441,100, $384,900$701,751, $480,600 and $420,300$444,300 for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011,December31,2016,2015 and2014, respectively.

Leases

        Nancy Peck and Company leases 1,003 square feet of space at 420 Lexington Avenue under a lease that ends in August 2015. Nancy Peck and Company is owned by Nancy Peck, the wife of Stephen L. Green. The rent due pursuant to the lease is $35,516 per annum for year one increasing to $40,000 in year seven.

Marketing Services

A-List Marketing, LLC, or A-List, provided marketing services to us. Deena Wolff, a sister of Marc Holliday, our CEO,Chief Executive Officer, is the founder of A-List. We recorded approximately $293,600, $155,500$281,851, $286,900 and $140,300$221,100 for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011,December31,2016,2015 and2014, respectively.

OtherOther

Amounts due from related parties at December 31, 2013 and 2012December31,2016 and2015 consisted of the following (in thousands):

			2016			2015
Due from joint ventures		$	1,240		$	1,334
Other			14,616			9,316
Related party receivables		$	15,856		$	10,650

60  SL Green Realty Corp.

---

		2013			2012
Due from joint ventures		$	2,376		$	511
Other			6,154			7,020
​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​
Related party receivables		$	8,530		$	7,531
​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​
​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​
Due to joint ventures		$	—		$	(8,401	)
​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​
​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​

Table of Contents

OTHER INFORMATION

These proxy materials are being made available in connection with the solicitation of proxies by the Board of Directors, or the Board, of SL Green Realty Corp., a Maryland corporation, for use at our 2017 annual meeting of stockholders to be held on Thursday, June 1, 2017 at 10:00 a.m., local time, at the Grand Hyatt New York, 109 East 42nd Street, New York, New York, 10017, or at any postponement or adjournment of the annual meeting.

Questions and Answers about the Annual Meeting

Who is entitled to vote at the annual meeting?

Holders of record of our common stock, $0.01 par value per share, at the close of business on March 31, 2017, the record date for the annual meeting, are entitled to receive notice of the annual meeting and to vote at the annual meeting. If you are a holder of record of our common stock as of the record date, you may vote the shares that you held on the record date even if you sell such shares after the record date. Each outstanding share as of the record date entitles its holder to cast one vote for each matter to be voted upon and, with respect to the election of directors, one vote for each director to be elected. Stockholders do not have the right to cumulate voting for the election of directors.

What is the purpose of the annual meeting?

At the annual meeting, you will be asked to vote on the following proposals:

●	Proposal1: the election of the three Class II director nominees named in this proxy statement to serve on the Board for a three-year term and until their successors are duly elected and qualify
●	Proposal 2: the approval of an advisory resolution approving the compensation of our named executive officers as disclosed in this proxy statement pursuant to Item 402 of Regulation S-K
●	Proposal3: the amendment of our Articles of Restatement to effect the declassification of our Board of Directors
●	Proposal4: the ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2017
●	Proposal5: whether an advisory vote on executive compensation should be held every one, two or three years
●	Proposal6: a stockholder proposal regarding setting target amounts for CEO compensation

You also may be asked to consider and act upon any other matters that may properly be brought before the annual meeting and at any adjournments or postponements thereof.

What constitutes a quorum?

The presence, in person or by proxy, of holders of a majority of the total number of outstanding shares entitled to vote at the annual meeting is necessary to constitute a quorum for the transaction of any business at the annual meeting. As of the record date, there were 101,831,845 shares outstanding and entitled to vote at the annual meeting.

Each share of our common stock outstanding on the record date is entitled to one vote on each matter properly submitted at the annual meeting and, with respect to the election of directors, one vote for each director to be elected. Abstentions and “broker non-votes” (i.e., shares represented at the meeting held by brokers, as to which instructions have not been received from the beneficial owners or persons entitled to vote such shares and with respect to which, on a particular matter, the broker does not have discretionary voting power to vote such shares) will be counted for purposes of determining whether a quorum is present for the transaction of business at the annual meeting.

What vote is required to approve each proposal?

For Proposal 1, a majority of all the votes cast with respect to a nominee’s election is required for such nominee to be elected to serve on the Board. This means that the number of votes cast “for” a nominee must exceed the number of votes cast “against” such nominee. Abstentions and broker non-votes are not counted as a vote cast either “for” or “against” a nominee, and therefore, will have no effect on the election of directors. For more information on the operation of our majority voting standard in director elections, see the section entitled “Our Board of Directors and Corporate Governance—Corporate Governance—Majority Voting Standard and Director Resignation Policy.”

2017 Proxy Statement  61

---

Table of Contents

OTHER INFORMATION

A majority of all of the votes cast with respect to the proposal is required for approval of each of Proposals 2, 4 and 6. For Proposal 3, the Articles of Restatement will be amended only if approved by the affirmative vote of two-thirds of all the votes entitled to be cast on the matter. For Proposal 5, in order for any of the three alternative frequencies to be approved, it must receive a majority of the votes cast. In the event that no option receives a majority of the votes cast, we will consider the option that receives the most votes to be the option selected by the stockholders.

In respect of Proposals 2, 4, 5 and 6, abstentions and broker non-votes are not counted as votes cast, and therefore will have no effect on the votes for these proposals. In respect of Proposal 3, abstentions and broker non-votes, if any, will have the same effect as votes against the proposal.

Can I change my vote after I submit my proxy card?

If you cast a vote by proxy, you may revoke it at any time before it is voted by:

●	filing a written notice revoking the proxy with our Secretary at our address
●	properly signing and forwarding to us a proxy with a later date
●	appearing in person and voting by ballot at the annual meeting

If you attend the annual meeting, you may vote in person whether or not you previously have given a proxy, but your presence (without further action) at the annual meeting will not constitute revocation of a previously given proxy. Unless you have received a legal proxy to vote the shares, if you hold your shares through a bank, broker or other nominee, that is, in “street name,” only that bank, broker or other nominee can revoke your proxy on your behalf.

You may revoke a proxy for shares held by a bank, broker or other nominee by submitting new voting instructions to the bank, broker or other nominee or, if you have obtained a legal proxy from the bank, broker or other nominee giving you the right to vote the shares at the annual meeting, by attending the annual meeting and voting in person.

How do I vote?

OTHER MATTERS
Voting in Person at the Annual Meeting. If you hold your shares in your own name as a holder of record with our transfer agent, Computershare, and attend the annual meeting, you may vote in person at the annual meeting. If your shares are held by a bank, broker or other nominee, that is, in “street name,” and you wish to vote in person at the annual meeting, you will need to obtain a “legal proxy” from the bank, broker or other nominee that holds your shares of record.

Voting by Proxy. You should submit your proxy or voting instructions as soon as possible. You can vote by valid proxy received by telephone, electronically via the Internet or by mail. The deadline for voting by telephone or electronically via the Internet is 11:59 p.m., Eastern Daylight Time, on May 31, 2017. If voting by mail, you must:

●	indicate your instructions on the proxy
●	date and sign the proxy
●	promptly mail the proxy in the enclosed envelope
●	allow sufficient time for the proxy to be received before the date of the annual meeting

If your shares are held in “street name” such as in a stock brokerage account, by a bank or other nominee, please follow the instructions you received from your broker or with respect to the voting of your shares.

If you have any questions regarding how to authorize your proxy by telephone or via the Internet, please call MacKenzie Partners, Inc., toll-free at (800) 322-2885 or collect at (212) 929-5500.

Even if you plan to attend the annual meeting, we recommend that you submit a proxy to vote your shares in advance so that your vote will be counted if you later are unable to attend the annual meeting.

How is my vote counted?

If you authorize your proxy to vote your shares electronically via the Internet or by telephone, or, if you received a proxy card by mail and you properly marked, signed, dated and returned it, the shares that the proxy represents will be voted in the manner specified on the proxy. If no specification is made, your shares will be voted “for” the election of the nominees for the Class I directors named in this proxy statement, “for” advisory approval of the compensation of our named executive officers, “for” the approval of the amendment of our Articles of Restatement to effect the declassification of our Board of Directors, “for” ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2017, “for” a frequency of every one year for future advisory votes on the compensation of our named executive officers and against the stockholder proposal regarding setting target amounts for CEO compensation. It is not anticipated that any matters other than those set forth in this proxy statement will be presented at the annual meeting. If other matters are presented, proxies will be voted in accordance with the discretion of the proxy holders.

62  SL Green Realty Corp.

---

Table of Contents

OTHER INFORMATION

How does the Board recommend that I vote on each of the proposals?

The Board recommends that you vote:

●	FORProposal1: the election of Betsy Atkins, Marc Holliday, and John S. Levy as Class II directors to serve on the Board for a three-year term and until their successors are duly elected and qualify
●	FORProposal2: the approval of an advisory resolution approving the compensation of our named executive officers as disclosed in this proxy statement pursuant to Item 402 of Regulation S-K
●	FORProposal3: the amendment of our Articles of Restatement to effect the declassification of our Board of Directors
●	FORProposal4: the ratification of the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2017
●	FOR “ONE YEAR” in respect ofProposal5: the recommendation, on an advisory basis of whether an advisory vote on executive compensation should be held every one, two or three years
●	AGAINST Proposal6: a stockholder proposal regarding setting target amounts for CEO compensation

What other information should I review before voting?

Our 2016 annual report, including financial statements for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016, is being made available to you along with this proxy statement. You may obtain, free of charge, copies of our 2016 annual report and our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016, which contains additional information about the Company, on our website at http://www.slgreen.com or by directing your request in writing to SL Green Realty Corp., 420 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York 10170-1881, Attention: Investor Relations. The 2016 annual report and the Annual Report on Form 10-K, however, are not part of the proxy solicitation materials, and the information found on, or accessible through, our website is not incorporated into, and does not form a part of, this proxy statement or any other report or document we file with or furnish to the SEC.

How do I change how I receive proxy materials in the future?

For this year’s meeting, stockholders will receive paper copies of the proxy materials by mail and will not receive a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials. For future meetings, stockholders may elect to receive links to proxy materials by e-mail or to receive a paper copy of the proxy materials and a paper proxy card by mail, in each case, instead of receiving a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials by mail, as applicable. If you elect to receive proxy materials by e-mail, you will not receive proxy materials in the mail (including, if applicable, a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials). Instead, you will receive an e-mail with links to proxy materials and online voting. If you received a paper copy of the proxy materials in the mail, you can eliminate all such paper mailings (including, if applicable, a Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials) in the future by electing to receive an e-mail that will provide Internet links to these documents.

Opting to receive all future proxy materials online will save us the cost of producing and mailing such documents to you and help us conserve natural resources. You can change your election by directing your request in writing to SL Green Realty Corp., 420 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York 10170-1881, Attention: Investor Relations, by sending a blank e-mail with the 16-digit control number on your proxy card to sendmaterial@proxyvote.com, via the internet at http://www.proxyvote.com or by telephone at (800) 579-7639. Your election will remain in effect until you change it.

No person is authorized on our behalf to give any information or to make any representations with respect to the proposals other than the information and the representations contained in this proxy statement, and, if given or made, such information and/or representations must not be relied upon as having been authorized.

Other Matters

Solicitation of Proxies

We will pay the cost of solicitation of proxies. Our directors, officers and employees may solicit proxies personally, by telephone, via the Internet or by mail without additional compensation for such activities. We also will request persons, firms and corporations holding shares in their names or in the names of their nominees, which are beneficially owned by others, to send a Proxy Statement to and obtain proxies from such beneficial owners. We will reimburse such holders for their reasonable expenses. In addition, we intend to utilize the proxy solicitation services of MacKenzie Partners, Inc. at an aggregate estimated cost of $10,000 plus out-of-pocket expenses.

2017 Proxy Statement  63

---

Table of Contents

OTHER INFORMATION

Stockholder Proposals
and Nominations

        Stockholders who,Proposals for Inclusion in accordance withour 2018 Proxy Materials

SEC rules permit stockholders to submit proposals to be included in our proxy materials if the stockholder and the proposal satisfy the requirements specified in Rule 14a-8 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, wishAct. For a stockholder proposal to present proposalsbe considered for inclusion in the proxy materials to be distributed by us in connection with our 2015 annual meeting must submit their proposals to our Corporate Secretary on or before December 26, 2014.

        Apart from the SEC's Rule 14a-8 that addresses the inclusion of stockholder proposals in our proxy materials underfor the 2018 annual meeting, the proposal must be delivered to our bylaws, certain procedures areSecretary at the address provided thatbelow by January 1, 2018.

Director Nominations for Inclusion in our 2018 Proxy Materials (Proxy Access)

Our proxy access bylaw permits a stockholder must follow(or a group of up to 20 stockholders) owning 3% or more of our outstanding common stock continuously for at least three years to nominate personsand include in the Company’s proxy materials director candidates constituting up to the greater of two individuals or 20% of the Board, if the nominating stockholder(s) and the nominee(s) satisfy the requirements specified in our bylaws. For the 2018 annual meeting, notice of a proxy access nomination must be delivered to our Secretary at the address provided below no later than January 1, 2018 and no earlier than December 2, 2017.

Other Proposals or Nominations to be brought before our 2018 Annual Meeting

Our bylaws permit a stockholder to propose items of business and/or nominate director candidates that are not intended to be included in our proxy materials if the stockholder complies with the procedures set forth in our bylaws. For the 2018 annual meeting, notice of such proposals or nominations must be delivered to our Secretary at the address provided below no later than March 3, 2018 and no earlier than February 1, 2018.

If the Company moves the 2018 annual meeting to a date that is more than 25 days before or after the date which is the one year anniversary of this year’s annual meeting date (i.e., June 1, 2018), the Company must receive such notice no later than the close of business on the 10th day following the earlier of the day on which the Company makes a public announcement of the meeting date or they day on which notice of the meeting date is first distributed to stockholders.

Address for Submission of Notices and Additional Information

All stockholder nominations of individuals for election as directors or to introduce an itemproposals of business at an annual meeting of stockholders. These procedures provide that nominations for director nominees and/or an itemother items of business to be introducedconsidered by stockholders at anthe 2018 annual meeting of stockholders(whether or not intended for inclusion in our proxy materials) must be timely submitted in writing to Andrew S. Levine, Secretary, at SL Green Realty Corp., 420 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York 10170-1881. To be considered timely, we must receive10170-1881, Attention: Andrew S. Levine, Secretary.

In addition, both the proxy access and the advance notice provisions of our bylaws require a stockholder’s notice of your intention to introduce a nomination or proposed item of business at our annual meeting:

•

not less than 90 days nor more than 180 days prior to the first anniversary of the preceding year's annual meeting; or



•

not earlier than the 180th day prior to such annual meeting and not later than the close of business on the later of the 90th day prior to such annual meeting or the 20th day following the earlier of the day on which public announcement of the date of such meeting is first made or notice of the meeting is mailed to stockholders, in the event that the date of the annual meeting is advanced by more than seven calendar days or delayed by more than 60 days from such anniversary date.

        Assuming that our 2015 annual meeting is not advanced by more than seven calendar days or delayed by more than 60 days from the anniversary date of the 2014 annual meeting, we must receive notice of your intention to introduce a nomination or other item of business at the 2015 annual meeting after November 30, 2014 and no later than February 28, 2015.

to include certain information. Director nominees must also meet certain eligibility requirements. Any notice of a nomination must contain all information relating to such person (the "Proposed Nominee") and relating to the stockholder giving the notice that is required by our bylaws, including information required to be disclosed in solicitations of proxies for election of directors, or is otherwise required, in each case pursuant to Regulation 14A under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, including such person's written consent to being named in the proxy statement as a nominee and to serving as a director if elected.

        Any notice ofconsidering introducing a nomination or of a proposedother item of business must contain, as to the stockholder giving the notice, any Proposed Nominee and any person acting in concert with such stockholder, any beneficial owner of Company Securities (as defined below) with such stockholder, any beneficial owner of Company Securities owned of record or beneficially by such stockholder (other than a stockholder that is a depositary) and any person that, directly or indirectly through one or more intermediaries,

Table of Contentsshould carefully review our bylaws.

controls, is controlled by or is under common control with such stockholder or Stockholder Associated Person (a "Stockholder Associated Person"), the information required by our bylaws, including (i) the name and address of such stockholder, as they appear on SL Green's books, and the current name, business address and residence address of any such Stockholder Associated Person or Proposed Nominee, (ii) as of the date of the notice, the number of shares, if any, of each class of stock or other security of the Company or any affiliate thereof (the "Company Securities") which are owned beneficially and/or of record by such stockholder, Proposed Nominee or Stockholder Associated Person, the date on which each such Company Security was acquired and the investment intent of such acquisition, and (iii) as of the date of the notice, whether and the extent to which, such stockholder, Proposed Nominee or Stockholder Associated Person is subject to, or during the past six months has, directly or indirectly (through brokers, nominees or otherwise), engaged in any hedging, derivative or other transaction or series of transactions or entered into any other agreement, arrangement or understanding (including any short interest, any borrowing or lending of securities or any proxy or voting agreement), the effect or intent of which is (x) for any such stockholder, Proposed Nominee or Stockholder Associated Person, to mitigate loss to or manage risk or benefit from changes in the price of Company Securities or (y) to increase or decrease, disproportionately to the economic interest, the voting power of any such stockholder, Proposed Nominee or Stockholder Associated Person in the Company or any affiliate thereof.

        Any notice of a proposed item of business must include a brief description of the business desired to be brought before the meeting, the reasons for conducting such business at the meeting and any material interest in such business of such stockholder and of the beneficial owner, if any, on whose behalf the proposal is made.

Householding of Proxy Materials

The SEC has adopted rules that permit companies and intermediaries (such as banks and brokers) to satisfy the delivery requirements for proxy materials with respect to two or more stockholders sharing the same address by delivering a single proxy statement, annual report or Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials, as applicable, addressed to those stockholders. This process, which is commonly referred to as "householding,"“householding,” potentially means extra convenience for stockholders and cost savings for companies.

This year, a number of brokers with account holders who are our stockholders will be "householding"“householding” our proxy materials. A single Proxy Statementproxy statement will be delivered to multiple stockholders sharing an address unless contrary instructions have been received from the affected stockholders. Once you have received notice from your broker that such broker will be "householding"“householding” communications, including the proxy materials, to your address, "householding"“householding” will continue until you are notified otherwise or until you revoke your consent.

Stockholders who currently receive only one copy of the proxy materials at their address and would like to receive additional copies and/or stockholders who no longer wish to participate in "householding"“householding” and would prefer to receive separate proxy materials in the future should direct their request either to their broker or to the Company in writing to SL Green Realty Corp., 420 Lexington Avenue, New York, New York 10170-1881, Attention: Investor Relations or by telephone at (212) 594-2700.

Stockholders who currently receive multiple copies of the proxy materials at their address and would like to request "householding"“householding” of their future communications should direct their request either to their broker or to the Company at the address of telephone number above.

Table of Contents

Other Matters

        The Board does not know of any matters other than those described in this proxy statement that will be presented for action at the annual meeting. If other matters are presented, proxies will be voted in accordance with the discretionBy Order of the proxy holders.Board of Directors

Andrew S. Levine
Secretary

		By Order of our Board of Directors
		Andrew S. Levine Secretary

New York, New York
April 30, 2014May     , 2017

64  SL Green Realty Corp.

---

Table of Contents

APPENDIX A:
INFORMATION REGARDING CERTAIN
FINANCIAL MEASURES

Below are reconciliations of net income attributable to our stockholders to Normalized FFO per share and FFO per share for the years ended December 31, 2016, 2015, 2014, 2013 and 2012 (amounts in thousands, except per share data).

		Year Ended December31,
		2016				2015				2014			2013				2012
FFO Reconciliation:
Net income attributable to SL Green common stockholders		$	234,946			$	269,132			$	503,104		$	101,330			$	155,984
Add:
Depreciation and amortization			821,041				560,887				371,610			324,461				325,737
Discontinued operations depreciation adjustments			—				—				5,581			16,443				6,373
Joint venture depreciation and noncontrolling interest adjustments			69,853				34,226				33,487			51,266				35,593
Net income attributable to noncontrolling interests			17,780				26,408				25,057			13,652				11,188
Less:
Gain on sale of real estate and discontinued operations, net			238,116				190,096				163,059			14,900				6,627
Equity in net gain on sale of interest in unconsolidated joint venture/ real estate			44,009				15,844				123,253			3,601				31,264
Purchase price fair value adjustment			—				40,078				67,446			(2,305	)			—
Depreciable real estate reserve			(10,387	)			(19,226	)			—			(2,150	)			5,789
Depreciation on non-rental real estate assets			2,027				2,036				2,045			1,509				940
Funds From Operations attributable to SL Green common stockholders and noncontrolling interests		$	869,855			$	661,825			$	583,036		$	491,597			$	490,255
FFO attributable to the write-off of accounting related balances and the 2017 portion of the lease termination fee related to the sale of 388-390 Greenwich Street to Citigroup, Inc. in 2016			126,905															—
FFO attributable to the additional cash income from the recapitalization of 717 Fifth Avenue in 2012			—															67,797
Normalized Funds From Operations attributable to SL Green common stockholders and noncontrolling interests		$	742,950														$	422,458
Diluted weighted average shares and units outstanding			104,880				103,735				99,696			95,266				92,873
Normalized FFO / FFO per share		$	7.08			$	6.38			$	5.85		$	5.16			$	4.55

2017 Proxy Statement  A-1

---

Table of Contents

APPENDIX A: INFORMATION REGARDING CERTAIN FINANCIAL MEASURES

Below is a reconciliationare reconciliations of income from continuing operations before equity in net income of unconsolidated joint ventures, noncontrolling interests and discontinued operations to operating income and combined same-store cash net operating income for the years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, the years ended December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012 and the years ended December 31, 2012 and 2011 (amounts in thousands, except per share data).

Reconciliation of 2016 and 2015

		Consolidated Properties								Unconsolidated Joint Ventures								Combined
		Year Ended December31,								Year Ended December31,								Twelve Months Ended December31,
		2016				2015				2016				2015				2016				2015
Operating income and Same-store NOI Reconciliation:
Income (loss) from continuing operations before equity in net income from unconsolidated joint ventures, equity in net gain on sale of interest in unconsolidated joint venture/real estate, gain on sale of real estate, depreciable real estate reserve, loss on sale of marketable securities and loss on early extinguishment of debt		$	(4,618	)		$	77,261			$	32,032			$	4,257
Equity in net income from unconsolidated joint ventures			11,874				13,028				—				—
Depreciation and amortization			821,041				560,887				199,011				149,023
Interest expense, net of interest income			321,199				323,870				197,741				199,126
Amortization of deferred financing costs			24,564				27,348				24,829				13,394
Loss on early extinguishment of debt			—				(49	)			(1,606	)			(1,089	)
Operating income		$	1,174,060			$	1,002,345			$	452,007			$	364,711
Marketing, general and administrative expense			99,759				94,873				—				—
Net operating income from discontinued operations			—				427				—				—
Transaction related costs, net			7,528				11,430				5,566				615
Non-building revenue			(217,945	)			(195,944	)			(31,914	)			(25,690	)
Equity in net income from unconsolidated joint ventures			(11,874	)			(13,028	)			—				—
Loss on early extinguishment of debt			—				49				1,606				1,089
NOI from partner's share of unconsolidated joint ventures			—				—				(254,456	)			(214,299	)
Net operating income (NOI)			1,051,528				900,152				172,809				126,426			$	1,224,337			$	1,026,578
NOI from discontinued operations			—				—				—				—				—				—
NOI from other properties/affiliates			(381,013	)			(231,392	)			(84,317	)			(44,402	)			(465,330	)			(275,794	)
Same-Store NOI		$	670,515			$	668,760			$	88,492			$	82,024			$	759,007			$	750,784
Ground lease straight-line adjustment			1,749				1,887				—				—				1,749				1,887
Straight-line and free rent			(27,442	)			(48,468	)			(7,697	)			(5,879	)			(35,139	)			(54,347	)
Rental income - FAS 141			(4,050	)			(17,100	)			(1,557	)			(1,867	)			(5,607	)			(18,967	)
Same-store cash NOI		$	640,772			$	605,079			$	79,238			$	74,278			$	720,010			$	679,357

A-2  SL Green Realty Corp.

---

		Consolidated Properties						SL Green's share of Unconsolidated Joint Ventures						Combined
		Year Ended December 31,						Year Ended December 31,						Year Ended December 31,
		2013			2012			2013			2012			2013			2012
Income from continuing operations before equity in net income from unconsolidated joint ventures, equity in net gain on sale of interest in unconsolidated joint venture/real estate, gain (loss) on sale of investment in marketable securities, purchase price fair value adjustment and loss (gain) on early extinguishment of debt		$	142,024		$	79,021		$	—		$	—
Equity in net income from unconsolidated joint ventures			9,921			76,418			9,921			76,418
Depreciation and amortization			337,692			325,737			84,403			69,108
Interest expense, net of interest income			330,215			329,897			79,896			86,268
Amortization of deferred financing costs			16,695			19,450			9,637			3,859
Gain (loss) on early extinguishment of debt			(18,518	)		(6,978	)		—			10,711
​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​
Operating income		$	818,029		$	823,545		$	183,857		$	246,364
​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​
​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​
Marketing, general & administrative expense			86,192			82,840			—			—
Net operating income from discontinued operations			7,548			11,849			—			—
Loan loss and other investment reserves, net of recoveries			—			564			—			—
Transaction related costs, net of recoveries			3,987			5,625			356			960
Non-building revenue			(201,416	)		(134,391	)		(18,451	)		(83,242	)
Equity in net income from unconsolidated joint ventures			(9,921	)		(76,418	)		—			—
Loss (gain) on early extinguishment of debt			18,518			6,978			—			(10,711	)
​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​
Net operating income (NOI)			722,937			720,592			165,762			153,371		$	888,699		$	873,963
NOI from discontinued operations			(7,548	)		(11,849	)		—			—			(7,548	)		(11,849	)
NOI from other properties/affiliates			(59,448	)		(54,403	)		(64,861	)		(56,296	)		(124,309	)		(110,699	)
Same-Store NOI		$	655,941		$	654,340		$	100,901		$	97,075		$	756,842		$	751,415
​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​
Ground lease straight-line adjustment			5,645			2,702			—			—			5,645			2,702
Straight-line and free rent			(47,963	)		(56,249	)		(3,186	)		(2,842	)		(51,149	)		(59,091	)
Rental income—FAS 141			(5,154	)		(10,317	)		(2,525	)		(1,411	)		(7,679	)		(11,728	)
​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​
Same-store cash NOI		$	608,469		$	590,476		$	95,190		$	92,822		$	703,659		$	683,298
​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​
​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​	​

Table of Contents

APPENDIX A: INFORMATION REGARDING CERTAIN FINANCIAL MEASURES

Reconciliation of 2015 and 2014

		Consolidated Properties								Unconsolidated Joint Ventures								Combined
		Twelve Months Ended December31,								Twelve Months Ended December31,								Twelve Months Ended December31,
		2015				2014				2015				2014				2015				2014
Operating income and Same-store NOI Reconciliation:
Income from continuing operations before equity in net income from unconsolidated joint ventures, equity in net gain on sale of interest in unconsolidated joint venture/ real estate, purchase price fair value adjustment, gain on sale of real estate, depreciable real estate reserves and loss on early extinguishment of debt		$	77,261			$	174,963			$	—			$	—
Equity in net income from unconsolidated joint ventures			13,028				26,537				13,028				26,537
Depreciation and amortization			560,887				371,610				62,766				60,692
Interest expense, net of interest income			323,870				317,400				70,018				61,556
Amortization of deferred financing costs			27,348				22,377				5,770				6,008
Loss on early extinguishment of debt			(49	)			(32,365	)			—				—
Operating income		$	1,002,345			$	880,522			$	151,582			$	154,793
Marketing, general and administrative expense			94,873				92,488				—				—
Net operating income from discontinued operations			488				37,790				—				—
Transaction related costs, net			11,430				8,707				37				372
Non-building revenue			(195,944	)			(217,857	)			(25,690	)			(17,467	)
Equity in net income from unconsolidated joint ventures			(13,028	)			(26,537	)			—				—
Loss on early extinguishment of debt			49				32,365				497				3,382
Net operating income (NOI)			900,213				807,478				126,426				141,080			$	1,026,639			$	948,558
NOI from discontinued operations			(488	)			(37,790	)			—				—				(488	)			(37,790	)
NOI from other properties/affiliates			(210,584	)			(114,361	)			(44,943	)			(62,229	)			(255,527	)			(176,590	)
Same-Store NOI		$	689,141			$	655,327			$	81,483			$	78,851			$	770,624			$	734,178
Ground lease straight-line adjustment			1,595				1,602				—				—				1,595				1,602
Straight-line and free rent			(57,615	)			(46,210	)			(5,829	)			(7,471	)			(63,444	)			(53,681	)
Rental income - FAS 141			(12,296	)			(16,377	)			(1,512	)			(1,607	)			(13,808	)			(17,984	)
Same-store cash NOI		$	620,825			$	594,342			$	74,142			$	69,773			$	694,967			$	664,115

2017 Proxy Statement  A-3

---

Table of Contents

APPENDIX A: INFORMATION REGARDING CERTAIN FINANCIAL MEASURES

Reconciliation of 2014 and 2013

		Consolidated Properties								Unconsolidated Joint Ventures								Combined
		Twelve Months Ended December 31,								Twelve Months Ended December 31,								Twelve Months Ended December 31,
		2014				2013				2014				2013				2014				2013
Operating income and Same-store NOI Reconciliation:
Income from continuing operations before equity in net income from unconsolidated joint ventures, equity in net gain on sale of interest in unconsolidated joint venture/real estate, gain (loss) on sale of investment in marketable securities, purchase price fair value adjustment and loss on early extinguishment of debt		$	174,963			$	118,062			$	—			$	—
Equity in net income from unconsolidated joint ventures			26,537				9,921				26,537				9,921
Depreciation and amortization			371,610				324,461				60,691				84,403
Interest expense, net of interest income			317,400				310,894				61,556				79,896
Amortization of deferred financing costs			22,377				15,855				6,008				9,637
Loss on early extinguishment of debt			(32,365	)			(18,518	)			—				—
Operating income		$	880,522			$	760,675			$	154,792			$	183,857
Marketing, general & administrative expense			92,488				86,192				—				—
Net operating income from discontinued operations			37,790				64,906				—				—
Loan loss and other investment reserves, net of recoveries			—				—				—				—
Transaction related costs, net of recoveries			8,707				3,985				372				356
Non-building revenue			(217,856	)			(201,416	)			(17,467	)			(18,451	)
Equity in income from unconsolidated joint ventures			(26,537	)			(9,921	)			—				—
Loss on early extinguishment of debt			32,365				18,518				3,382				—
Net operating income (NOI)			807,479				722,939				141,079				165,762			$	948,558			$	888,701
NOI from discontinued operations			(37,790	)			(64,906	)			—				—				(37,790	)			(64,906	)
NOI from other properties/affiliates			(111,992	)			(22,437	)			(54,941	)			(87,906	)			(166,933	)			(110,343	)
Same-Store NOI		$	657,697			$	635,596			$	86,138			$	77,856			$	743,835			$	713,452
Ground lease straight-line adjustment			1,602				1,143				—				—				1,602				1,143
Straight-line and free rent			(47,886	)			(40,357	)			(8,404	)			(9,645	)			(56,290	)			(50,002	)
Rental income - FAS141			(21,578	)			(18,956	)			(1,990	)			(2,257	)			(23,568	)			(21,213	)
Same-store cash NOI		$	589,835			$	577,426			$	75,744			$	65,954			$	665,579			$	643,380

A-4  SL Green Realty Corp.

---

Table of Contents

APPENDIX A: INFORMATION REGARDING CERTAIN FINANCIAL MEASURES

Reconciliation of 2013 and 2012

		Consolidated Properties								Unconsolidated Joint Ventures								Combined
		Twelve Months Ended December 31,								Twelve Months Ended December 31,								Twelve Months Ended December 31,
		2013				2012				2013				2012				2013				2012
Operating income and Same-store NOI Reconciliation:
Income from continuing operations before equity in net income from unconsolidated joint ventures, equity in net gain on sale of interest in unconsolidated joint venture/real estate, gain (loss) on sale of investment in marketable securities, purchase price fair value adjustment and loss (gain) on early extinguishment of debt		$	142,024			$	79,021			$	—			$	—
Equity in net income from unconsolidated joint ventures			9,921				76,418				9,921				76,418
Depreciation and amortization			337,692				325,737				84,403				69,108
Interest expense, net of interest income			330,215				329,897				79,896				86,268
Amortization of deferred financing costs			16,695				19,450				9,637				3,859
(Loss) gain on early extinguishment of debt			(18,518	)			(6,978	)			—				10,711
Operating income		$	818,029			$	823,545			$	183,857			$	246,364
Marketing, general & administrative expense			86,192				82,840				—				—
Net operating income from discontinued operations			7,548				11,849				—				—
Loan loss and other investment reserves, net of recoveries			—				564				—				—
Transaction related costs, net			3,987				5,625				356				960
Non-building revenue			(201,416	)			(134,391	)			(18,451	)			(83,242	)
Equity in net income from unconsolidated joint ventures			(9,921	)			(76,418	)			—				—
Loss (gain) on early extinguishment of debt			18,518				6,978				—				(10,711	)
Net operating income (NOI)			722,937				720,592				165,762				153,371			$	888,699			$	873,963
NOI from discontinued operations			(7,548	)			(11,849	)			—				—				(7,548	)			(11,849	)
NOI from other properties/affiliates			(59,448	)			(54,403	)			(64,861	)			(56,296	)			(124,309	)			(110,699	)
Same-Store NOI		$	655,941			$	654,340			$	100,901			$	97,075			$	756,842			$	751,415
Ground lease straight-line adjustment			5,645				2,702				—				—				5,645				2,702
Straight-line and free rent			(47,963	)			(56,249	)			(3,186	)			(2,842	)			(51,149	)			(59,091	)
Rental income - FAS141			(5,154	)			(10,317	)			(2,525	)			(1,411	)			(7,679	)			(11,728	)
Same-store cash NOI		$	608,469			$	590,476			$	95,190			$	92,822			$	703,659			$	683,298

2017 Proxy Statement  A-5

---

Table of Contents

APPENDIX A: INFORMATION REGARDING CERTAIN FINANCIAL MEASURES

Reconciliation of 2012 and 2011

		Consolidated Properties								Unconsolidated Joint Ventures								Combined
		Twelve Months Ended December 31,								Twelve Months Ended December 31,								Twelve Months Ended December 31,
		2012				2011				2012				2011				2012				2011
Operating income and Same-store NOI Reconciliation:
Income from continuing operations before equity in net income of unconsolidated joint ventures, noncontrolling interests and discontinued operations		$	82,524			$	122,580			$	—			$	—
Equity in net income (loss) from joint ventures			76,418				1,583				76,418				1,583
Depreciation and amortization			332,028				277,345				69,116				58,598
Interest expense, net of interest income			330,569				285,917				86,268				88,546
Amortization of deferred financing costs			19,450				14,118				3,859				4,996
Gain (loss) on early extinguishment of debt			(6,978	)			904				—				—
Operating income		$	834,011			$	702,447			$	235,661			$	153,723
Marketing, general & administrative expense			82,840				80,103				—				—
Net operating income from discontinued operations			1,385				10,878				—				—
Loan loss and other investment reserves, net of recoveries			564				6,722				—				—
Transaction related costs			5,625				5,561				960				1,173
Non-building revenue			(134,392	)			(135,987	)			(93,144	)			(12,346	)
Equity in net income from joint ventures			(76,418	)			(1,583	)			—				—
(Gain) loss on early extinguishment of debt			6,978				(904	)			(10,711	)			—
Net operating income (NOI)			720,593				667,237				132,766				142,550			$	853,359			$	809,787
Net operating income from discontinued operations			(1,385	)			(10,878	)			—				—				(1,385	)			(10,878	)
NOI from other properties/affiliates			(69,006	)			(1,514	)			(23,150	)			(36,641	)			(92,156	)			(38,155	)
Same-Store NOI		$	650,202			$	654,845			$	109,616			$	105,909			$	759,818			$	760,754
Ground lease straight-line adjustment			2,702				440				—				(9	)			2,702				431
Straight-line and free rent			(54,686	)			(79,496	)			(4,217	)			(6,219	)			(58,903	)			(85,715	)
Rental income - FAS141			(17,365	)			(21,201	)			(2,030	)			(1,172	)			(19,395	)			(22,373	)
Same-store cash NOI		$	580,853			$	554,588			$	103,369			$	98,509			$	684,222			$	653,097

A-6  SL Green Realty Corp.

---

Table of Contents

APPENDIX A: INFORMATION REGARDING CERTAIN FINANCIAL MEASURES

Notes:

Funds from Operations and Normalized Funds from Operations

Funds from Operations, or FFO, is a widely recognized measure of REIT performance. We compute FFO in accordance with standards established by the National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts, or NAREIT, which may not be comparable to FFO reported by other REITs that do not compute FFO in accordance with the NAREIT definition, or that interpret the NAREIT definition differently than we do. The revised White Paper on FFO approved by the Board of Governors of NAREIT in April2002, and as subsequently amended, defines FFO as net income (loss) (computed in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, or GAAP), excluding gains (or losses) from sales of properties and real estate related impairment charges, plus real estate related depreciation and amortization and after adjustments for unconsolidated partnerships and joint ventures. We present FFO because we consider it an important supplemental measure of our operating performance and believe that it is frequently used by securities analysts, investors and other interested parties in the evaluation of REITs, particularly those that own and operate commercial office properties.

We also use FFO as one of several criteria to determine performance-based bonuses for members of our senior management. FFO is intended to exclude GAAP historicalcost depreciation and amortization of real estate and related assets, which assumes that the value of real estate assets diminishes ratably over time. Historically, however, real estate values have risen or fallen with market conditions. Because FFO excludes depreciation and amortization unique to real estate, gains and losses from property dispositions and extraordinary items, it provides a performance measure that, when compared year over year, reflects the impact to operations from trends in occupancy rates, rental rates, operating costs, interest costs, providing perspective not immediately apparent from net income. FFO does not represent cash generated from operating activities in accordance with GAAP and should not be considered as an alternative to net income (determined in accordance with GAAP), as an indication of our financial performance or to cash flow from operating activities (determined in accordance with GAAP) as a measure of our liquidity, nor is it indicative of funds available to fund our cash needs, including our ability to make cash distributions.

For certain periods, we also present Normalized FFO, defined as FFO excluding the impact of two discrete transactions (set forth in the table above) that increased FFO in2016 and2012, which we present to enhance the comparability of our FFO across periods.

Combined Same-Store Cash Net Operating Income

The Company presents operating income, net operating income, same-store net operating income and same-store cash net operating income because the Company believes that these measures provide investors with useful information regarding the operating performance of properties that are comparable for the periods presented. For properties owned since January 1, 2011 and still owned in the same manner atduring both the end ofapplicable year and the current quarter,year immediately preceding such applicable year, excluding development properties prior to being stabilized for both the applicable year and the preceding year, the Company determines same-store net operating income by subtracting same-store property operating expenses and ground rent from same-store recurring rental and tenant reimbursement revenues. Same-store cash net operating income is derived by deducting same-store straight line, and free rent, and lease intangibles (FAS 141 Adjustments) from, and adding same-store tenantsame-storetenant credit loss allowance to, same-store net operating income. The Company'sCompany’s share of unconsolidated joint venture net operating income, same-store net operating income and same-store cash net operating income is calculated in the same manner as noted above, but includes just the Company'sCompany’s pro-rata share of the total amounts. Combined net operating income, same-store net operating income and same-store cash net operating income are calculated by combining the Company'sCompany’s consolidated amount with the Company'sCompany’s share of unconsolidated joint venture amounts for each measure. None of these measures is an alternative to net income (determined in accordance with GAAP) and same-store performance should not be considered an alternative to GAAP net income performance.

2017 Proxy Statement  A-7

---

Table of Contents

APPENDIX B:
CHARTER AMENDMENT

SL GREEN REALTY CORP.

ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT

SL GREEN REALTY CORP., a Maryland corporation (the “Corporation”), hereby certifies to the State Department of Assessments and Taxation of Maryland (the “Department”) that:

FIRST: The Corporation desires to, and does hereby, amend the charter of the Corporation as currently in effect, consisting of Articles of Restatement filed with the Department on July11,2014 (the “Charter”), pursuant to Sections2-601 et seq. of the Maryland General Corporation Law (the “MGCL”).

SECOND: The Charter of the Corporation is hereby amended by deleting therefrom in its entirety the existing Section1 of Article IV, and inserting in lieu thereof the following new Section1 of Article IV:

Section1.Number of Directors. The business and affairs of the Corporation shall be managed under the direction of the Board of Directors of the Corporation (the “Board of Directors”). The number of directors of the Corporation shall be nine (9), which number may be increased or decreased pursuant to the Bylaws of the Corporation but shall never be less than the minimum number required by the Maryland General Corporation Law. The names of the nine (9) current directors who shall serve until the expiration of the respective terms for which they were elected, and until their successors are duly elected and qualified, and the year in which the current term of each such director shall expire are:

Name		Year of Expiration
John H. Alschuler		2018
Stephen L. Green		2018
Lauren B. Dillard		2018
Edwin Thomas Burton III		2019
Craig M. Hatkoff		2019
Andrew W. Mathias		2019
Marc Holliday		2020
John S. Levy		2020
Betsy Atkins		2020

Each director shall serve for the term of office for which he or she is elected, and until his or her successor is duly elected and qualifies. At each annual meeting of stockholders commencing with the annual meeting of stockholders held in2018, the successors to the directors whose term expires at such annual meeting of stockholders shall be elected to hold office until the next annual meeting of stockholders and until their successors are duly elected and qualified.

THIRD: The foregoing amendment to the Charter as set forth in these Articles of Amendment has been duly advised by the Board of Directors of the Corporation and approved by the stockholders of the Corporation as required by law.

FOURTH: These Articles of Amendment shall be effective upon filing with the Department.

FIFTH: The undersigned Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation acknowledges these Articles of Amendment to be the corporate act of the Corporation and, as to all matters or facts required to be verified under oath, the undersigned Chief Executive Officer acknowledges that to the best of his knowledge, information and belief, these matters and facts are true in all material respects and that this statement is made under the penalties for perjury.

2017 Proxy Statement  B-1

---

Table of Contents

SL GREEN REALTY CORP.
420 LEXINGTON AVE.
NEW YORK, NY 10170

AUTHORIZE YOUR PROXY BY INTERNET -www.proxyvote.com
Use the Internet to transmit your voting instructions and for electronic delivery of information up until 11:59 P.M. Eastern Time the day before the cut-off date or meeting date. Have your proxy card in hand when you access the web site and follow the instructions to obtain your records and to create an electronic voting instruction form.

AUTHORIZE YOUR PROXY BY PHONE - 1-800-690-6903
Use any touch-tone telephone to transmit your voting instructions up until 11:59 P.M. Eastern Time the day before the cut-off date or meeting date. Have your proxy card in hand when you call and then follow the instructions.

AUTHORIZE YOUR PROXY BY MAIL
Mark, sign and date your proxy card and return it in the postage-paid envelope we have provided or return it to Vote Processing, c/o Broadridge, 51 Mercedes Way, Edgewood, NY 11717.

TO VOTE, MARK BLOCKS BELOW IN BLUE OR BLACK INK AS FOLLOWS:
E24792-P88412	KEEP THIS PORTION FOR YOUR RECORDS
	DETACH AND RETURN THIS PORTION ONLY
THIS PROXY CARD IS VALID ONLY WHEN SIGNED AND DATED. Date Signature (Joint Owners) Date Signature [PLEASE SIGN WITHIN BOX] AUTHORIZE YOUR PROXY BY INTERNET - www.proxyvote.com Use the Internet to transmit your voting instructions and for electronic delivery of information up until 11:59 P.M. Eastern Time the day before the cut-off date or meeting date. Have your proxy card in hand when you access the web site and follow the instructions to obtain your records and to create an electronic voting instruction form. AUTHORIZE YOUR PROXY BY PHONE - 1-800-690-6903 Use any touch-tone telephone to transmit your voting instructions up until 11:59 P.M. Eastern Time the day before the cut-off date or meeting date. Have your proxy card in hand when you call and then follow the instructions. AUTHORIZE YOUR PROXY BY MAIL Mark, sign and date your proxy card and return it in the postage-paid envelope we have provided or return it to Vote Processing, c/o Broadridge, 51 Mercedes Way, Edgewood, NY 11717.

SL GREEN REALTY CORP. 420 LEXINGTON AVE. NEW YORK, NY 10170 M72836-P50656 To withhold authority to vote for any individual nominee, mark “For All Except” and write the number of the nominee on the line below. SL GREEN REALTY CORP. For All Except Withhold All For All
	The Board of Directors recommends you vote FOR the following: ! ! !
	1.		Election of Directors
			Nominees: 01)				For		Against		Abstain
			1a.		Betsy Atkins		☐		☐		☐
			1b.		Marc Holliday 02)		☐		☐		☐
			1c.		John S. Levy		☐		☐		☐
	The Board of Directors recommends you vote FOR the following proposals: For Abstain Against ! ! !
	2.		To approve, on a non-binding advisory basis, our executive compensation. ! ! !				☐		☐		☐
	3.		To approve the amendment of our Articles of Restatement to effect the declassification of our Board of Directors.				☐		☐		☐
	4.		To ratify the appointment of Ernst & Young LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2014. 4. 2017.				☐		☐		☐

The Board of Directors recommends you vote 1 YEAR on the following proposal:				1 Year		2 Years		3 Years		Abstain
5.		To recommend, by a non-binding advisory vote, whether an advisory vote on our executive compensation should be held every one, two or three years.		☐		☐		☐		☐
The Board of Directors recommends you vote AGAINST the following proposal:						For		Against		Abstain
6.		To consider and act upon a stockholder proposal regarding setting target amounts of CEO compensation.				☐		☐		☐
7.		To consider and act upon any other matters that may properly be brought before the Annual Meeting and at any adjournments or postponements thereof.

The undersigned hereby acknowledge(s) receipt of the Notice of the Annual Meeting of Stockholders, the terms of which are incorporated herein by reference, and revoke(s) any proxy or proxies heretofore given with respect to the Annual Meeting. This proxy may be revoked at any time prior to the time voting is declared closed by giving the corporate secretary of SL Green Realty Corp. written notice of revocation or by a subsequently dated proxy, or by casting a ballot at the Annual Meeting. This solicitation of proxies is made by and on behalf of the Board. The validity of this proxy is governed by the Maryland General Corporation Law and applicable federal securities laws. This proxy does not revoke any prior powers of attorney except for prior proxies given in connection with the Annual Meeting. Please sign exactly as your name(s) appear(s) hereon. When signing as attorney, executor, administrator, or other fiduciary, please give full title as such. Joint owners should each sign personally. All holders must sign. If a corporation or partnership, please sign in full corporate or partnership name by authorized officer.

Signature [PLEASE SIGN WITHIN BOX]		Date		Signature (Joint Owners)		Date

---

Table of Contents

Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials for the Annual Meeting:
The Notice and Proxy Statement and Annual Report are available at www.proxyvote.com.

E24793-P88412

SL GREEN REALTY CORP.
THIS PROXY IS SOLICITED ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

The undersigned stockholder(s) hereby appoint(s) Stephen L. Green and Andrew S. Levine, or either of them, as proxies, each with the power to appoint his substitute and hereby authorize(s) them to represent and to vote as designated on the reverse side of this ballot all of the shares of Common Stock of SL GREEN REALTY CORP. that the stockholder(s) is/are entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held at The Grand Hyatt New York, 109 East 42nd Street, New York, New York at 10:00 A.M., local time on Thursday, June 1, 2017 and any adjournment or postponement thereof.

THIS PROXY, WHEN PROPERLY EXECUTED, WILL BE VOTED AS DIRECTED BY THE STOCKHOLDER(S) AND IN THE DISCRETION OF THE PROXYHOLDER ON ANY OTHER MATTER PROPERLY BROUGHT BEFORE THE MEETING OR ANY ADJOURNMENT OR POSTPONEMENT THEREOF. IF NO SUCH DIRECTIONS ARE MADE, THIS PROXY WILL BE VOTED FOR THE ELECTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS' NOMINEES LISTED ON THE REVERSE SIDE HEREOF, FOR PROPOSALS 2, 3 AND 4, 1 YEAR ON PROPOSAL 5 AND AGAINST PROPOSAL 6.

PLEASE MARK, SIGN AND DATE AND RETURN THIS PROXY CARD PROMPTLY USING THE ENCLOSED REPLY ENVELOPE.

Continued and to be signed on reverse side

Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials for the Annual Meeting: The Notice and Proxy Statement and Annual Report are available at www.proxyvote.com. M72837-P50656 SL GREEN REALTY CORP. THIS PROXY IS SOLICITED ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS The undersigned stockholder(s) hereby appoint(s) Stephen L. Green and Andrew S. Levine, or either of them, as proxies, each with the power to appoint his substitute and hereby authorize(s) them to represent and to vote as designated on the reverse side of this ballot all of the shares of Common Stock of SL GREEN REALTY CORP that the stockholder(s) is/are entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held at The Grand Hyatt New York Hotel, Park Avenue at Grand Central Terminal, 109 East 42nd Street, New York, New York at 11:00 A.M., local time on Thursday, May 29, 2014 and any adjournment or postponement thereof. THIS PROXY, WHEN PROPERLY EXECUTED, WILL BE VOTED AS DIRECTED BY THE STOCKHOLDER(S) AND IN THE DISCRETION OF THE PROXYHOLDER ON ANY OTHER MATTER PROPERLY BROUGHT BEFORE THE MEETING OR ANY ADJOURNMENT OR POSTPONEMENT THEREOF. IF NO SUCH DIRECTIONS ARE MADE, THIS PROXY WILL BE VOTED FOR THE ELECTION OF THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS' NOMINEES LISTED ON THE REVERSE SIDE HEREOF AND FOR PROPOSALS 2 AND 3. PLEASE MARK, SIGN AND DATE AND RETURN THIS PROXY CARD PROMPTLY USING THE ENCLOSED REPLY ENVELOPE. Continued and to be signed on reverse side

---