Company: MYI
Filing Date: 2025-09-02
Form Type: N-14 8C/A
Source: 0001193125-25-193985
Chunk: 436

Company: BLACKROCK MUNIYIELD QUALITY FUND III, INC.
Filing Date: 2025-09-02
Form: N-14 8C/A
Chunk 436
---
 expected to serve, in line with market norms where those exist. In such markets, we find it helpful when companies disclose their approach to director tenure particularly around the contributions of directors who have
served for longer periods than provided for in local practices. In our experience, long-serving directors could become less independent given their relationship with management and involvement in past board decisions.

Succession planning for board roles helps achieve the appropriate cadence of turnover that balances renewal through the regular introduction of directors with fresh
perspectives and expertise with continuity through the retention of directors with long-term knowledge of the board and company.

In markets where there is not
specific director tenure guidance, we may vote against the election of the chair of the committee responsible for board composition if there is not a clearly disclosed approach to director tenure and board renewal. We may vote against the election
of directors who have served for longer duration than typical in markets with specific guidance, where the case for their continued service is not evident.

Capacity

Common impediments to independence may include but are not limited to: current or recent employment at the
company or a subsidiary; being, or representing, a shareholder with a substantial shareholding in the company; interlocking directorships; lengthy tenure, and having any other interest, business, or other relationship which could, or could
reasonably be perceived to, materially interfere with a director’s ability to act in the best interests of the company and shareholders.

B-9

To be effective and engaged, directors must commit appropriate time and energy to the role. A board should assess the ability of its members to maintain an appropriate focus on board matters and the company taking into consideration competing responsibilities. We recognize that board leadership roles vary across markets in responsibilities and required time commitment but note that they are generally more intensive than a standard directorship. We will take local norms and practices into consideration when making our voting determinations across markets. We may vote against the election of directors who do not seem to have sufficient capacity to effectively fulfil their duties to the board and company. Director elections In support of director accountability to shareholders, directors should stand for election on a regular basis, ideally annually. A classified board structure may be justified by a company when it needs consistency and stability during a time of transition, or on the basis of its business model, e.g., a non-operatingcompany such as closed-endfunds. Shareholders should have the opportunity to evaluate nominated directors individually rather than in bundled slates. We look to companies to provide sufficient information on each director standing for election