Insult to Injury

Want to know just how stupid they think we are? Read this (click on the page for a better view):

and this page, the crux: 

Objection to Proxy access proposal

Objection to Proxy Access Proposal

You can and should read the actual proposal

here

and decide for yourself if the board figures you for a standard half-brained idiot, or for a complete moron.

Whose best interest?  I don’t know, maybe it’s just me or maybe it’s just another bad decision.  Could they seriously believe any of this?

9 comments on “Insult to Injury

  1. The bank contends that the directors need to vet prospective board members. Look at the sorry lot of directors that has resulted in the financial mess of the bank. Actually, under the proposal, directors could still vet prospective board members, and advise shareholders of their recommendations.

    And anyway, the directors were hand-picked by Tony Sorcic.

  2. A NOTE TO THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS:

    The board says they don’t want to give up their responsibility of “fully investigating” the business and personal attributes of the prospective board members–the nominees.

    My argument to the board would be that they have had that responsibility and haven’t done a very good job of it. Maybe it’s time for the board to try something new and collaborate with the shareholders on nominating candidates. The shareholders ARE shareholders because they are successful, intelligent people in their communities.

    Has the board managed the bank well and is the bank an asset to the community? They brag about their involvement in the community, when in fact the bank has become an absolute embarassment to this community. All the volunteerism and monetary donations are meaningless. The truth is, lives have been ruined and the community is being torn apart.

    So, BOARD MEMBERS, I believe we all have the same goal, so let us collaborate and not work against one another. Time is being wasted. We should all be working together to save this institution which, at one time, was well respected in the community.

  3. Please, someone, clarify things for me.
    ———————————————–
    In Chapter 1, GENERAL CORPORATION LAW of Delaware, page 8:
    220. Inspection of books and records.
    (b) Any stockholder, in person or by attorney or other agent, shall, upon written demand under oath stating the purpose thereof, have the right during the usual hours for business to inspect for any proper purpose, and to make copies and extracts from:
    (1) The corporation’s stock ledger, a list of its stockholders, and its other books and records
    —————————————————
    Why is this so difficult? What’s the big deal about a stockholder looking at the list? It’s a bigger deal for the bank to REFUSE to show the list to a stockholder, isn’t it?

    • Good question. These guys are playing the game. You and I are not. From a gamesmanship standpoint, they think they have won a round. All we have to do is encourage shareholders to not send in their proxy votes.

  4. I wonder if this board or their attorneys have read SEC Rule 14a-11. It has already been finalized and is on the books. Some of the arguments that the attorneys have sighted are covered in the comments and rebutted by the SEC.

    It is 451 pages of heavy reading and government legalize. If you want to read the whole reg. in it’s entirety this is the link. http://www.sec.gov/rules/final/2010/33-9136.pdf

    • Bob,
      Here is a link that gives the basics of the court decision, last September, to vacate 14a-11. I believe it no longer applies. Note that the SEC rules, which are linked to this site still reference 14a-11 in several paragraphs. However, if you go to the electronic version of the SEC Code of Federal regulations, you will see that 14a-11 is not listed in the directory, nor is there any such paragraph in the body of the rules. Go figure.

Comments are closed.