OLD NATIONAL BANCORP

 

Notice of
Annual Meeting and
Proxy Statement

 

Annual Meeting of Shareholders
May 19, 2011

Old National Bancorp
One Main Street
Evansville, Indiana 47708

 

 

Notice of Annual Meeting of Shareholders

 

 

To Our Shareholders:

 

The 2011 Annual Meeting of Shareholders of Old National Bancorp (the “Company”) will be held at the Old National Centre, 502 N. New Jersey Street, Indianapolis, Indiana, on Thursday, May 19, 2011, at 9:00 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time for the following purposes:

 

 

Common shareholders of record at the close of business on March 11, 2011 are entitled to notice of, and to vote at, the Annual Meeting.

 

By Order of the Board of Directors

 

Jeffrey L. Knight
Executive Vice President,
Chief Legal Counsel and
Corporate Secretary

 

March 25, 2011

 

 

IMPORTANT

 

Please submit your proxy promptly by mail or by Internet. In order that there may be proper representation at the meeting, you are urged to complete, sign, date and return the proxy card in the envelope provided to you or vote by Internet, whether or not you plan to attend the meeting. No postage is required if mailed in the United States.

 

 

Old National Bancorp
One Main Street
Evansville, Indiana 47708

 

 

Proxy Statement

 

For the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held on

May 19, 2011, at 9:00 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time at the

Old National Centre

502 N. New Jersey Street, Indianapolis, IN 46204

 

Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials

for the Shareholders’ Meeting to be held on May 19, 2011

 

The Proxy Statement and 2010 Annual Report to Shareholders are available at:

www.oldnational.com/proxy

 

General Information about the Annual Meeting of Shareholders and Voting

 

 

This Proxy Statement relates to the Annual Meeting of Shareholders (“Annual Meeting”) of Old National Bancorp (the “Company” or “Old National”) to be held on May 19, 2011, at 9:00 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time. These proxy materials are being furnished by the Company in connection with a solicitation of proxies by the Company’s Board of Directors (the “Board”).

 

 

We are pleased this year to take advantage of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) rule that permits companies to furnish proxy materials to shareholders over the Internet. On or about April 4, 2011, we will begin mailing Notice of Internet Availability of Proxy Materials (“Notice”). The Notice contains instructions on how to vote online, or in the alternative, request a paper copy of the proxy materials and a proxy card. By furnishing the Notice and providing access to our proxy materials by the Internet, we are lowering the costs and reducing the environmental impact of our annual meeting.

 

Who can attend the Annual Meeting?

 

Only shareholders of the Company of record as of March 11, 2011 (the “Record Date”), their authorized representatives and guests of the Company may attend the Annual Meeting. Admission will be by ticket only.

 

Who may vote at the Annual Meeting?

 

These proxy materials are provided to holders of the Company’s common stock who were holders of record on the Record Date. Only the Company’s common shareholders of record on the Record Date are entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting. On the Record Date 94,734,051 shares of the Company’s common stock were outstanding.

 

As of the Record Date, to the knowledge of the Company, no person or firm, other than BlackRock, Inc. and The Vanguard Group, Inc., beneficially owned more than 5% of the common stock of the Company outstanding on that date. As of March 11, 2011, no individual Director, nominee or officer beneficially owned more than 5% of the common stock of the Company outstanding.

Voting and Proxy Procedures

 

Each share of the Company’s common stock outstanding on the Record Date will be entitled to one vote at the Annual Meeting. If you receive the Notice by mail, you will not receive a printed copy of the proxy materials unless you request the materials by following the instructions included in the Notice.

 

If your shares are registered in your name, you may vote your shares by Internet, or by completing, signing, dating and returning the requested proxy card in the postage-paid envelope provided. Simply follow the easy instructions on the proxy card or Notice provided. You may also vote in person at the Meeting. Execution of the proxy card or voting via Internet will not affect your right to attend the Annual Meeting. If your shares are held in “street name” through a broker, bank or other nominee, please follow the instructions provided by your nominee on the voting instruction form or Notice in order to vote your shares by Internet, or by signing, dating and returning the voting instruction form in the enclosed postage-paid envelope. If you desire to vote in person at the Annual Meeting, you must provide a legal proxy from your bank, broker or other nominee.

 

Shares of the Company’s common stock for which instructions are received will be voted in accordance with the shareholder’s instructions. If you send in your proxy card or use Internet voting, but do not specify how you want to vote your shares, the proxy holders will vote them FOR each of the items being proposed by the Board and in the discretion of the proxy holders as to any other business that may properly come before the Annual Meeting and any adjournment or postponement thereof.

 

Can I change my vote after I return the proxy card or after voting electronically?

 

If you are a shareholder whose shares are registered in your name, you may revoke your proxy at any time before it is voted by one of the following methods:

 

 

(1) following the Internet voting instructions, or

 

 

If you hold your shares in “street name” through a broker, you may revoke your proxy by following instructions provided by your broker. No notice of revocation or later-dated proxy will be effective until received by the Company’s Corporate Secretary at or prior to the Annual Meeting.

 

How do I receive an admission ticket?

 

If you are a registered shareholder (your shares are held in your name) and plan to attend the meeting, your Annual Meeting admission ticket will be included in the Notice being mailed on or about April 4, 2011, or if you receive hard copies of the proxy material, the admission ticket can be detached from the top portion of the proxy card.

 

If your shares are held in “street name” (in the name of a bank, broker or other holder of record) and you plan to attend the meeting, you will need to bring a copy of a brokerage statement reflecting your stock ownership as of the Record Date for admittance to the meeting.

 

No cameras, recording equipment, electronic devices, large bags, briefcases or packages will be permitted in the meeting.

Will the Annual Meeting be webcast?

 

Our Annual Meeting will be webcast on May 19, 2011. You are invited to visit www.oldnational.com at 9:00 a.m. Eastern Daylight Time on May 19, 2011, to access the webcast of the meeting. Registration for the webcast is not required. An archived copy of the webcast will also be available on our website through May 18, 2012.

 

How many votes are needed to have the proposals pass?

 

Election of Directors. A plurality of the votes cast at the meeting is required to elect Directors. This means that the Director nominee with the most votes for a particular slot is elected for that slot. You may vote “for” or “withheld” with respect to the election of Directors. Only votes “for” or “withheld” are counted in determining whether a plurality has been cast in favor of a Director. Abstentions are not counted for purposes of the election of Directors.

 

On July 27, 2006, our Board adopted a corporate governance policy regarding Director elections that is contained in our Corporate Governance Guidelines. The policy provides that in any uncontested election, any nominee for Director who receives a greater number of votes “withheld” for his or her election than votes “for” such election will tender his or her resignation as a Director promptly following the certification of the shareholder vote. The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee, without participation by any Director so tendering his or her resignation, will consider the resignation offer and recommend to the Board whether to accept it. The Board, without participation by any Director so tendering his or her resignation, will act on the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee’s recommendation no later than 90 days following the date of the Annual Meeting at which the election occurred. If the Board decides to accept the Director’s resignation, the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee will recommend to the Board whether to fill the resulting vacancy or to reduce the size of the Board. We will promptly disclose the Board’s decision and the reasons for the decision in a broadly disseminated press release that will also be furnished to the SEC on Form 8-K.

 

Approval of Non-binding Advisory Proposal on Executive Compensation. The affirmative vote of a majority of the shares present in person or by proxy is required to approve the advisory vote on executive compensation. Because your vote is advisory, it will not be binding on the Board or the Company. However, the Board will review the voting results and take them into consideration when making future decisions regarding executive compensation.

 

Approval of a Non-Binding Advisory Proposal Determining the Frequency of Advisory Votes on Executive Compensation. Shareholders will vote on the frequency of the advisory vote on compensation of our Named Executive Officers among three options: every three years, every two years or every one year. Because your vote is advisory, it will not be binding on the Board or the Company. However, the Board will review the voting results and take them into consideration when making future decisions regarding the frequency of the advisory vote on executive compensation.

 

Ratification of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm. The affirmative vote of a majority of the shares present in person or by proxy is required for ratification of the appointment of Crowe Horwath LLP as the independent registered public accounting firm of the Company for fiscal year 2011.

 

What is “householding”?

 

We have adopted a procedure called “householding,” which has been approved by the SEC. Under this procedure, a single copy of the annual report and proxy statement will be sent to any household at which two or more shareholders reside if they appear to be members of the same family, unless one of the shareholders at that address notifies us that they wish to receive individual copies. This procedure reduces our printing costs and fees.

 

Shareholders who participate in householding will continue to receive separate proxy cards.

Householding will not affect dividend check mailings in any way.

 

If a single copy of the annual report and proxy statement was delivered to an address that you share with another shareholder, we will promptly deliver a separate copy to you upon your written or oral request to the Company’s Shareholder Services Department at 812-464-1296 or 1-800-677-1749, at P.O. Box 929, Evansville, Indiana 47706-0929, or via email to shareholderservices@oldnational.com.

 

Shareholders sharing an address who are receiving multiple copies of the annual report and proxy statement may request a single copy by contacting our Shareholder Services Department using the contact information set forth above.

 

A number of brokerage firms have instituted householding. If you hold your shares in “street name,” please contact your bank, broker, or other holder of record to request information about householding.

 

How are abstentions and broker non-votes treated?

 

Abstentions and, unless a broker’s authority to vote on a particular matter is limited, broker non-votes are counted in determining the votes present at the meeting. A broker has limited authority to vote on the election of directors but is not limited as to the proposal relating to the ratification of auditors. With respect to the election of Directors, abstentions, broker non-votes and instructions on the enclosed form of proxy to “withhold authority” to vote “for” one or more of the nominees will result in the nominee receiving fewer votes, but will not affect the outcome of the election. With respect to the ratification of auditors, abstentions and broker non-votes have the same effect as a vote against the proposal.

 

How do I designate my proxy?

 

If you wish to give your proxy to someone other than the proxies identified on the proxy card, you may do so by crossing out all the names of the proxy members appearing on the proxy card and inserting the name of another person. The signed card must be presented at the Annual Meeting by the person you have designated on the proxy card.

 

Who will pay for the costs involved in the solicitation of proxies?

 

The Company will pay all costs of preparing, assembling, printing and distributing the proxy materials. The Company retained Georgeson, Inc., a proxy soliciting firm, to assist in the solicitation of proxies, for an estimated fee of $8,250 plus reimbursement of certain out-of-pocket expenses. Georgeson, Inc. may solicit proxies by personal interview, telephone, telefax, mail and electronic mail. In addition to solicitations by mail, Directors and Officers of the Company and its subsidiaries may solicit proxies personally, by telephone, telefax, electronic mail or in person, but such persons will not be specially compensated for their services.

 

We will, upon request, reimburse brokerage firms and others for their reasonable expenses incurred for forwarding solicitation material to beneficial owners of stock.

 

Other Matters Related to the Meeting

 

Only matters brought before the Annual Meeting in accordance with the Company’s By-Laws will be considered. Aside from the items listed above in the Notice of Annual Meeting, the Company does not know of any other matters that will be presented at the Annual Meeting. However, if any other matters properly come before the Annual Meeting or any adjournment, the proxy holders will vote them in accordance with their best judgment.

 

Should any nominee for Director become unable or unwilling to accept nomination or election, the persons acting under the proxy intend to vote for the election of another person recommended by the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee and nominated by the Board. The Company has no reason to believe that any of the nominees will be unable or unwilling to serve if elected to office.

 

 

The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee is primarily responsible for corporate governance matters affecting the Company and its subsidiaries. The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee operates under a written charter which conforms to the requirements of the SEC and the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”).

 

The Board, which is elected by the shareholders, selects the Executive Leadership Group (“ELG”), which is the executive management team charged with the conduct of the Company’s business. Having selected the ELG, the Board acts as an advisor and counselor to management and ultimately monitors its performance. The Board has the responsibility for overseeing the affairs of the Company and, thus, an obligation to keep informed about the Company’s business. This involvement enables the Board to provide guidance to management in formulating and developing plans and to exercise its decision-making authority on appropriate matters of importance to the Company. Acting as a full Board and through the Board’s seven standing committees, the Board oversees and approves the Company’s strategic plan. The Board regularly reviews the Company’s progress against its strategic plan and exercises oversight and decision-making authority regarding strategic areas of importance to the Company.

 

The Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines provide for a non-executive Chairman (currently Larry E. Dunigan), who acts as chair of meetings of the Board; leads executive sessions of the Board; consults and meets with any or all outside Directors as required and represents such Directors in discussions with management of the Company on corporate governance issues and other matters; ensures that the Board, committees of the Board, individual Directors and management of the Company understand and discharge their duties and obligations under the Company’s system of corporate governance; mentors and counsels new members of the Board to assist them in becoming active and effective Directors; leads the Board in the annual evaluation of the Chief Executive Officer’s (“CEO”) performance; acts in an advisory capacity to the president and CEO in all matters concerning the interests of the Board and relationships between management and the Board; and performs such other duties and responsibilities as may be delegated to the non-executive Chairman by the Board from time to time.

 

The Board elected Mr. Dunigan as non-executive Chairman in 2004 at the same time the Board hired Robert Jones to serve as President and Chief Executive Officer. The Board believes that separating the Chairman role from the Chief Executive Officer role allows the Chief Executive Officer to focus on the management and leadership of the business, while permitting the non-executive Chairman to focus on board and governance issues. The Board annually reviews the effectiveness of the arrangement and believes this structure is in the best interest of shareholders and serves the Company well.

 

Executive sessions, or meetings of outside Directors without management present, are held at regular intervals for both the Board and the Committees. Mr. Dunigan, as the non-executive Chairman of the Company, serves as the presiding Director of the executive session meetings of the non-management Directors of the Board. The Board meets in executive session a minimum of four times each year.

 

The Board met eight times during 2010. Each Director attended 85% or more of Board meetings and meetings of Committees on which they served in 2010. Directors as a group attended an average of 97.8% of the Board meetings and meetings of Committees on which they served in 2010.

 

The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee has responsibility for recruiting and nominating new Directors, assessing the independence of non-management Directors, leading the Board in its annual

performance evaluation, reviewing and assessing the adequacy of the Corporate Governance Guidelines and retaining outside advisors as needed to assist and advise the Board with respect to legal and other accounting matters. The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee is also responsible for reviewing with the full Board, on an annual basis, the requisite skills and characteristics of Board members as well as the composition of the Board as a whole.

 

The Company has not established a formal policy regarding Director attendance at its Annual Meeting, but it encourages all Directors to attend these meetings and reimburses expenses associated with attendance. The non-executive Chairman presides at the Annual Meeting. All the Directors attended the Annual Meeting in 2010.

 

The Board has adopted a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics that sets forth important Company policies and procedures in conducting our business in a legal, ethical and responsible manner. These standards are applicable to all of our Directors and employees, including the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Controller. In addition, the Board has adopted the Code of Ethics for CEO and Senior Financial Officers that supplements the Code of Business Conduct and Ethics by providing more specific requirements and guidance on certain topics. The Code of Ethics for CEO and Senior Financial Officers applies to the Company’s Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Controller. The Code of Business Conduct and Ethics and the Code of Ethics for CEO and Senior Financial Officers are available on our website at www.oldnational.com. We will post any material amendments to, or waivers from, our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics and Code of Ethics for Senior Financial Officers on our website within two days following the date of such amendment or waiver.

 

Employees are required to report any conduct they believe in good faith to be an actual or apparent violation of our Codes of Conduct. In addition, as required under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the Audit Committee has established confidential procedures to receive, retain and treat complaints received regarding accounting, internal accounting controls, or auditing matters and the confidential, anonymous submission by Company employees of concerns regarding questionable accounting or auditing matters.

 

In 2008, the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee amended the Code of Business Conduct and Ethics. The new Code of Business Conduct and Ethics addresses, among other things, the following topics: working with integrity; honesty and fair dealing; compliance with laws, rules and regulations (including federal securities laws); conflicts of interest; corporate opportunities; protection and proper use of Company assets; protecting confidential information; and the reporting of any illegal or unethical behavior. In addition, a table of contents and an introductory message from the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company supporting the Code and its principles were added to the new Code of Conduct.

 

As discussed in more detail in the Report of the Audit Committee later in this proxy statement, the Company received an ethics certification from Ethisphere in 2009. This ethics certification is exclusively granted to organizations that can demonstrably prove the existence of a superior employee and leadership culture that promotes ethical, responsible and sustainable business practices.

 

The Board has adopted the Corporate Governance Guidelines that, along with the Company’s corporate charter, By-Laws and charters of the various committees of the Board, provide the foundation for the Company’s governance. Among other things, our Corporate Governance Guidelines set forth the: (i) minimum qualifications for Directors; (ii) independence standards for Directors; (iii) responsibilities of Directors; (iv) majority vote standard election of Directors; (v) committees of the Board; (vi) access of Directors to the officers and employees of the Company; (vii) Directors’ compensation; (viii) procedures for Director orientation and development; (ix) procedures for an annual review of the CEO and management succession planning; (x) stock

ownership guidelines for executives and Directors; and (xi) procedures for an annual self-evaluation of the Board. In 2011, the Corporate Governance Guidelines were amended to update the stock ownership guidelines for executive officers.

 

The Board believes that it is important that a direct and open line of communication exist between the Board and the Company’s shareholders and other interested parties. As a consequence, the Board has adopted the procedures described in the following paragraph for communications to Directors.

 

Any shareholder or other interested party who desires to contact Old National’s Chairman or the other members of the Board may do so by writing to: Board of Directors, c/o Corporate Secretary, Old National Bancorp, P.O. Box 718, Evansville, IN 47705-0718. Communications received are distributed to the non-executive Chairman or other members of the Board, as appropriate, depending on the facts and circumstances outlined in the communication received. For example, if any complaints regarding accounting, internal accounting controls and auditing matters are received, then the Corporate Secretary will forward them to the Chairman of the Audit Committee for review.

 

The Company’s nomination procedures for Directors are governed by its By-Laws. Each year the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee makes a recommendation to the entire Board regarding nominees for election as Directors. The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee will review suggestions from shareholders regarding nominees for election as Directors. All such suggestions from shareholders must be submitted in writing to the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee at the Company’s principal executive office not less than 120 days in advance of the date of the annual or special meeting of shareholders at which Directors are to be elected. All written suggestions of shareholders must set forth: (i) the name and address of the shareholder making the suggestion; (ii) the number and class of shares owned by such shareholder; (iii) the name, address and age of the suggested nominee for election as Director; (iv) the nominee’s principal occupation during the five years preceding the date of suggestion; (v) all other information concerning the nominee as would be required to be included in the proxy statement used to solicit proxies for the election of the suggested nominee; and (vi) such other information as the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee may reasonably request. Consent of the suggested nominee to serve as a Director of the Company, if elected, must also be included with the written suggestion.

 

In seeking individuals to serve as Directors, the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee seeks members from diverse professional backgrounds who combine a broad spectrum of experience and expertise. Directors should have an active interest in the business of the Company, possess a willingness to represent the best interests of all shareholders, be able to objectively appraise management performance, possess the highest personal and professional ethics, integrity and values, and be able to comprehend and advise management on complicated issues that face the Company and Board.

 

Directors should also demonstrate achievement in one or more fields of business or professional, governmental, communal, scientific or educational endeavors. Directors are expected to have sound judgment, borne of management or policy making experience that demonstrates an ability to function effectively in an oversight role. In addition, Directors should have a general appreciation regarding major issues facing public companies of a size and operational scope similar to that of the Company. These issues include contemporary governance concerns, regulatory obligations of an SEC reporting financial holding company, strategic business planning and basic concepts of corporate finance.

 

The Company does not currently have a formal diversity policy. However, the Corporate Governance Guidelines state that the Board seeks members with diverse professional backgrounds. The Board also annually reviews the requisite skills and characteristics of Board members as well as the composition of the Board as a

whole. The annual assessment includes a review of the skills, experience and diversity of the Board in the context of the needs of the Board.

 

It is the policy of the Board that a majority of its members be independent from management, and the Board has adopted Director Independence Standards that meet the listing standards of the NYSE. The portion of our Corporate Governance Guidelines addressing our Director Independence Standards is attached to this proxy statement as Appendix I.

 

In accordance with our Corporate Governance Guidelines, the Board undertook its annual review of Director independence. During this review, the Board considered any and all commercial and charitable relationships of Directors, including transactions and relationships between each Director or any member of his or her immediate family and the Company and its subsidiaries. Following the review, the Board affirmatively determined, by applying the Director Independence Standards contained in the Corporate Governance Guidelines, that each of our Directors nominated for election at this Annual Meeting is independent of the Company and its management in that none has a direct or indirect material relationship with the Company, with the exception of Robert G. Jones and Linda E. White.

 

The independent Directors of the Company are Joseph D. Barnette, Jr., Alan W. Braun, Larry E. Dunigan, Niel C. Ellerbrook, Andrew E. Goebel, Phelps L. Lambert, Arthur H. McElwee, Jr., James T. Morris, Marjorie Z. Soyugenc and Kelly N. Stanley. Ms. Linda E. White is not an independent Director due to the fact that Robert G. Jones, President and CEO of the Company, previously served as the Chairman of the Compensation Committee for Deaconess Health System, Inc., a company for which Ms. White serves as President and CEO. Although Mr. Jones has resigned from the Compensation Committee of Deaconess Health System, Ms. White will be considered non-independent for another year under the Company’s Independence Standards. The only other non-independent Director is President and CEO, Robert G. Jones. Mr. Jones is considered an inside Director because of his employment as President and CEO of the Company.

 

In addition, all members of the Audit Committee, the Compensation and Management Development Committee and the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee satisfy the standards of independence applicable to members of such committees established under applicable law, the listing requirements of the NYSE and the Director Independence Standards set forth in the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines.

 

Members of the Board must posses certain basic personal and professional qualities in order to properly discharge their fiduciary duties to shareholders, provide effective oversight of the management of the Company and monitor the Company’s adherence to principles of sound corporate governance. In seeking individuals to serve as Directors, the Corporate Governance & Nominating Committee seeks members from diverse professional backgrounds who combine a broad spectrum of experience and expertise. The Directors of the Company have an active interest in the business of the Company and possess a willingness to represent the best interests of all shareholders without favoring or advancing any particular shareholder or other constituency of the Company. The Directors are able to objectively appraise management performance, and they possess the highest personal and professional ethics, integrity and values, and are able to comprehend and advise management on complicated issues that face the Company and Board.

 

In addition to the general skills stated above, the Directors do not have any interests that would materially impair their ability to exercise independent judgment, or otherwise discharge the fiduciary duties owed as a Director to the Company and its shareholders. As stated on pages 15 through 20, our Directors have demonstrated significant achievement and generally have significant management experience in one or more fields of business, professional, governmental, communal, and educational endeavors. Our Directors have sound judgment, borne of their management or policy-making experience and demonstrate an ability to function

effectively in an oversight role. Given the tenure of most of the Directors on our Board, they have a general appreciation regarding major issues facing public companies.

 

All outside Directors of the Company receive an annual retainer of $35,000 for serving on the Board. The outside Directors receive $20,000 of the retainer in cash, while $15,000 of the retainer is paid in Company stock. In addition, outside Directors receive $1,500 for each Board meeting they attend. Directors not otherwise employed by the Company also receive $1,000 for each Committee meeting attended and Audit Committee members receive $1,500 for each Audit Committee meeting attended. The Audit Committee Chairman receives an additional annual retainer of $7,500 and Directors serving as a Committee Chairperson on other committees receive an additional annual retainer of $2,500. The non-executive Chairman of the Board receives an additional annual retainer of $25,000. Robert G. Jones, President and CEO of the Company, is the only inside Director on the Board and receives no compensation for his Directorship. For more information on Director Compensation, please refer to pages 11 through 13.

 

The following table lists the current membership of the Company’s standing Board Committees.

 

 

The members of the Company’s Board are elected to various committees. The standing committees of the Board include an Audit Committee, a Compensation and Management Development Committee, a Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee, a Funds Management Committee, a Risk and Credit Policy Committee, and a Community and Social Responsibility Committee. Beginning in January of 2011, the Finance Committee (which had been previously ad hoc) became a standing committee of the Board.

 

The current members of the Audit Committee are Andrew E. Goebel (Chairman), Phelps L. Lambert, Arthur H. McElwee, Jr. and Marjorie Z. Soyugenc. The Audit Committee held eight meetings during 2010. The functions of the Audit Committee are described under “Report of the Audit Committee” on page 59. The Audit Committee has adopted a written charter which has been approved by the Board.

 

The current members of the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee are Larry E. Dunigan (Chairman), Niel C. Ellerbrook, Phelps L. Lambert, and Kelly N. Stanley. The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee met three times in 2010. The functions of the Corporate Governance and Nominating

Committee are described under “Report of the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee and Other Board Matters” on page 5. The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee has adopted a written charter which has been approved by the Board.

 

The current members of the Compensation and Management Development Committee are Niel C. Ellerbrook (Chairman), Joseph D. Barnette, Jr., Larry E. Dunigan, James T. Morris and Marjorie Z. Soyugenc. The Compensation and Management Development Committee met eight times during 2010. The functions of the Compensation and Management Development Committee are described under “Scope of Responsibilities” on page 24. The Compensation and Management Development Committee has adopted a written charter which has been approved by the Board.

 

The current members of the Risk and Credit Policy Committee are Joseph D. Barnette, Jr. (Chairman), Alan W. Braun, Larry E. Dunigan, Andrew E. Goebel and Linda E. White. The Risk and Credit Policy Committee met four times in 2010. The function of the Risk and Credit Policy Committee is to oversee the Company’s policies, procedures and practices relating to credit, operation and compliance risk. The Risk and Credit Policy Committee has adopted a written charter which has been approved by the Board.

 

The current members of the Community and Social Responsibility Committee are Marjorie Z. Soyugenc (Chairperson), Alan W. Braun and Linda E. White. The Community and Social Responsibility Committee met three times in 2010. The Community and Social Responsibility Committee has the responsibility to review the Company’s compliance with the Community Reinvestment Act, Fair Lending Practices, associate commitment and diversity, supplier diversity and the Company’s Affirmative Action Plan. In 2005, the Community and Social Responsibility Committee approved the formation of the Old National Bank Foundation through which major charitable gifts from the Company are funded. The Community and Social Responsibility Committee has adopted a written charter which has been approved by the Board.

 

The current members of the Funds Management Committee are Phelps L. Lambert (Chairman), Alan W. Braun, Andrew E. Goebel and Arthur H. McElwee, Jr. The Funds Management Committee met five times during 2010. The function of the Funds Management Committee is to monitor the balance sheet risk profile of the Company, including credit, interest rate, liquidity and leverage risks. The Funds Management Committee is also responsible for reviewing and approving the investment policy for the Company. The Funds Management Committee has adopted a written charter which has been approved by the Board.

 

For 2011, the members of the Finance Committee shall be Alan W. Braun (Chairman), Larry E. Dunigan and Linda E. White. The Finance Committee has the responsibility to review management’s financial forecasts, goals and budget and to monitor and provide appropriate feedback concerning the financial performance of the Company.

 

In addition to serving on the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee, Kelly Stanley serves as Chairman of the Board of Directors of Old National Insurance, a subsidiary of the Company.

 

In addition to serving as a current member of the Audit Committee and the Funds Management Committee, Arthur McElwee, Jr. serves on the Board of Old National Insurance, a subsidiary of the Company.

 

The Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines (including the Director Independence Standards), Board committee charters for the Audit Committee, Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee, and the Compensation and Management Development Committee, as well as the Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, and the Code of Ethics for CEO and Senior Financial Officers can be viewed under the Investor Relations/Corporate Governance link on the Company’s website at www.oldnational.com. These documents, as well as

charters for all of the Company’s Board committees, are available in print to any interested party who requests them by writing to: Corporate Secretary, Old National Bancorp, P.O. Box 718, Evansville, IN 47705-0718.

 

The entire Board is involved in overseeing risk associated with the Company. The charters of certain committees of the Board assign oversight responsibility for particular areas of risk. The Board and its committees monitor risks associated with their respective principal areas of focus through regular meetings with management and representatives of outside advisors.

 

The following is a summary of oversight responsibility for particular areas of risk:

 

 

The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee annually reviews and recommends the compensation for our non-employee Directors. No fees are paid to Directors who are also employees. As a starting point for its recommendations, the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee uses the peer group compensation data prepared for the Compensation Committee by the Compensation Consultant. The Committee seeks to establish Board compensation that is at the median for the peer group.

 

For 2010, we paid all outside Directors an annual retainer of $35,000 for serving as Directors. Of this amount, we paid $20,000 in cash and $15,000 in the form of our stock. We paid this fee in two equal installments in May and November. In addition, Directors received $1,500 for each Board meeting they attended. We paid Board Committee members (other than Audit Committee members) $1,000 for each committee meeting attended, and we paid Audit Committee members $1,500 for each Audit Committee meeting attended. We pay meeting fees quarterly in the month following the end of the quarter, except fees for the last quarter of the year, which we pay in December.

 

For 2010, we paid the Non-Executive Chairman of the Board an additional retainer of $25,000. We paid the Audit Committee Chairman an additional retainer of $7,500 and other committee chairmen an additional retainer of $2,500. We paid these additional retainers in May.

We maintain a nonqualified deferred compensation plan, known as the “Directors Deferred Compensation Plan,” for our non-employee Directors. A Director may defer 25%, 50%, 75%, or 100% of his cash compensation pursuant to the plan. We credit a Director’s plan account with earnings based on the hypothetical earnings of an investment fund consisting of Company stock, the return on a recognized market index selected by the Compensation Committee, or a combination of the two, as elected by the Director. For the market index fund, we use a Bloomberg fund index, which approximates the risk and return associated with a diversified high quality corporate bond.

 

All amounts paid under the plan are paid from our general assets and are subject to the claims of our creditors. In most circumstances, deferred amounts are not distributed to the Director until after termination of his or her service. In general, the Director may elect to receive his or her plan benefits in a lump sum or in annual installments over two to ten years.

 

The following table shows all outside Director compensation paid for 2010. Mr. Jones is not compensated as a Director, since employees who serve as Directors are not compensated for their service as a Director.

 

2010 Director Compensation

 

 

(1) On May 7, 2010, Alan W. Braun, Joseph D. Barnette, Jr., Larry E. Dunigan, Niel C. Ellerbrook, Andrew E. Goebel, Phelps L. Lambert, Arthur H. McElwee, Jr., Marjorie Z. Soyugenc, Kelly N. Stanley and Linda E. White each received 551 shares of Company stock at a closing stock price of $13.61 per share with a Grant Date Fair Value of $7,499.11. On November 5, 2010, Alan W. Braun, Joseph D. Barnette, Jr., Larry E. Dunigan, Niel C. Ellerbrook, Andrew E. Goebel, Phelps L. Lambert, Arthur H. McElwee, Jr., Marjorie Z. Soyugenc, Kelly N. Stanley and Linda E. White each received 788 shares of Company stock at a closing stock price of $9.51 with a Grant Date Fair Value of $7,493.88.

 

(2) The amounts specified in Column (f) are attributable entirely to earnings credits under our Directors Deferred Compensation Plan in excess of the applicable federal long-term rate, with compounding (as described by Section 1274(d) of the Internal Revenue Code). The 2010 Change in Pension Value and Nonqualified Deferred Compensation “excess” earnings were: Phelps Lambert ($0 and -$2,365); Marjorie Soyugenc ($0 and $2,085); Kelly Stanley ($0 and -$30,615); and Linda White ($0 and $469).

 

(3) Includes additional retainer for services as Board Chairman and Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee Chairman.

 

(4) Includes additional retainer for services as Chairman of Risk and Credit Policy Committee.

(5) Includes additional retainer for services as Chairman of Compensation and Management Development Committee.

 

(6) Includes additional retainer for services as Chairman of Audit Committee.

 

(7) Includes additional retainer for services as Chairman of Funds Management Committee.

 

(8) Includes retainer for services as a member of the Northern Indiana Advisory Board.

 

(9) Mr. Morris was elected to the Board on October 28, 2010.

 

(10) Includes additional retainer for services as Chairperson of Community and Social Responsibility Committee.

 

(11) Includes additional retainer and meeting fees for services as Chairman of Old National Trust Company Board and as Chairman of ONB Insurance Board.

 

 

The first item to be acted upon at the Annual Meeting is the election of twelve Directors to the Board of the Company. Each of the persons elected will serve a term of one year and until the election and qualification of his or her successor.

 

If any Director nominee named in this proxy statement shall become unable or decline to serve (an event which the Board does not anticipate), the persons named as proxies will have discretionary authority to vote for a substitute nominee named by the Board, if the Board determines to fill such nominee’s position. Unless authorization is withheld, the proxy, when properly validated, will be voted “FOR” the election as Directors of all of the nominees listed in this proxy statement.

 

Pages 15 through 22 contain the following information with respect to each Director nominee of the Company: name; principal occupation or business experience for the last five years; skills and other qualifications to serve on the Board; age; the year in which the nominee or incumbent Director first became a Director of the Company; the number of shares of common stock of the Company beneficially owned by the nominee or incumbent Director as of March 11, 2011; and the percentage that the shares beneficially owned represent of the total outstanding shares of the Company as of March 11, 2011. The number of shares of common stock of the Company shown as being beneficially owned by each Director nominee or incumbent Director includes those over which he or she has either sole or shared voting or investment power.

Listed below is certain biographical information of each of the nominees for election including his or her principal occupation and other business affiliations.

 

Nominees for Director to be Elected

 

 

 

Our Board unanimously recommends that you vote “FOR” the election of the twelve candidates for Director.

 

The following table and accompanying footnotes set forth information concerning the beneficial ownership of the shares of common stock of the Company as of March 11, 2011 by (i) each person or entity known by us to own beneficially more than 5% of our Common Stock; (ii) each Director and Named Executive Officer; and (iii) all Directors and Executive Officers as a group.

 

 

*Less than 1%

 

 

 

 

The executive officers of the Company are listed in the table below. Each officer serves a term of office of one year and until the election and qualification of his or her successor.

 

 

The Board appoints the members of the Compensation and Management Development Committee (“Compensation Committee”). The Compensation Committee is currently composed of five non-employee Directors, each of whom is independent from management and the Company (as independence is currently defined in the NYSE’s listing requirements and in the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines). No member is eligible to participate in any management compensation program.

 

Compensation and Management Development Committee Charter

 

The Compensation Committee operates pursuant to a written charter. A copy of the Compensation Committee’s charter is available on our web site, www.oldnational.com, under the Investor Relations/Corporate Governance link. As required by the charter, in early 2011 the Compensation Committee reviewed the charter and conducted an annual performance evaluation, the results of which have been discussed with the Compensation Committee members and shared with the Company’s Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee.

 

Compensation Consultant

 

The Compensation Committee retained Mercer(US)Inc. (“Mercer”) to provide information, analyses and advice regarding executive and Director compensation, as described further in this report. The Mercer consultant who performs these services reports directly to the Committee Chairman. With consent of the Committee Chairman, Mercer may, from time to time, contact the Company’s executive officers for information necessary to fulfill its assignments and may make reports and presentations to and on behalf of the Committee that the executive officers also receive. All of the decisions with respect to determining the amount or form of executive and Director compensation under the Company’s executive and Director compensation programs are made by the Committee and may reflect factors and considerations other than the information and advice provided by Mercer. To the extent that the outside consultant’s work involves Director compensation, that work is shared with the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee, which is responsible for reviewing and making recommendations to the Board regarding Director compensation and benefits.

 

Although Mercer provided guidance to the Committee for 2010 compensation decisions, in May 2010, the Compensation Committee retained the services of Pearl Meyer & Partners to provide information, analysis and advice regarding executive and director compensation for the upcoming fiscal year 2011.

 

Scope of Responsibilities

 

The Compensation Committee is responsible for approving and evaluating the Company’s employee compensation and benefit programs, ensuring the competitiveness of those programs, and advising the Board regarding the talent development and succession management of key executives of the Company. The Compensation Committee is responsible for annually reviewing, approving, and recommending to the Board for its approval all elements of the compensation of the Chief Executive Officer and other executive officers who report directly to the Chief Executive Officer. The Compensation Committee is also responsible for determining awards to employees of stock or stock options pursuant to the Company’s 2008 Incentive Compensation Plan.

 

Compensation and Management Development Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

 

No member of the Compensation Committee is or was formerly an officer or employee of the Company. No executive officer of the Company currently serves or in the past year has served as a member of the compensation committee or board of Directors of another company of which an executive officer serves on the Compensation Committee. Nor does any executive officer of the Company serve or has in the past year served as a member of the compensation committee of another company of which an executive officer serves as a Director of the Company.

Assessing Risk in Compensation

 

Our compensation programs do not use highly leveraged incentives that drive risky short-term behavior. The programs of the Company are focused on the long-term, and therefore the highest compensation can be earned through the achievement of consistent, quality earnings over an extended period of time. With the adoption of stock ownership requirements that require Company management to maintain a significant ownership level of stock, there is a strong incentive to ensure the Company is managed with a long-term view, and this helps to ensure that Company management avoids excessive risk taking in the short term. With the balance of compensation among annual salary, short-term incentive and long-term equity awards, no particular element of compensation is excessively weighted on a single performance measure.

 

In 2010, the Board adopted a Bonus Recoupment or Clawback Policy that provides the Board with authority to recover a bonus or other incentive payout paid to any Named Executive Officer or executive officer in appropriate circumstances where there has been a material restatement of the Company’s financial results. This Policy, along with a requirement that executive officers maintain a significant level of stock ownership in the Company while they are employees, serves to ensure the Company is managed with a long-term view.

 

Our Compensation Committee reviewed the relationship between our risk management policies and practices and the incentive compensation provided to the Named Executive Officers at its January 21, 2010 meeting. After review with the Company’s Chief Risk Officer and representatives of Mercer, the Committee determined that our incentive compensation programs do not encourage unnecessary and excessive risk taking.

 

Compensation and Management Development Committee Report

 

The Compensation Committee has reviewed and discussed the Compensation Discussion and Analysis required by Item 402(b) of SEC Regulation S-K with management and, based on such review and discussions, the Compensation Committee recommended to the Board of Directors that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in this proxy statement.

 

 

Submitted by,

 

 

Members of the Compensation Committtee

 

 

Niel C. Ellerbrook, Chairman

Joseph D. Barnette, Jr.

Larry E. Dunigan

James T. Morris

Marjorie Z. Soyugenc

 

Overview

 

This Compensation Discussion and Analysis describes the key principles and approaches used to determine the compensation of our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and our other three most highly compensated executive officers. Detailed information regarding the compensation of these executive officers, who are referred to as “Named Executive Officers” or “NEOs”, appears in the tables following this Compensation Discussion and Analysis. This discussion should be read in conjunction with those tables.

 

This Compensation Discussion and Analysis consists of the following parts:

 

 

We seek to closely align the interests of our Named Executive Officers with the interests of our shareholders. Our compensation programs are designed to reward our Named Executive Officers for the achievement of short-term and long-term strategic and operational goals and the achievement of increased total shareholder return, while at the same time avoiding the encouragement of unnecessary or excessive risk-taking. Our Named Executive Officers’ total compensation is comprised of a mix of base salary, annual cash incentive awards and long-term incentive awards paid in equity.

 

Despite a difficult economic environment, we significantly improved our operating performance during the last completed fiscal year. As described in “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditions and Results of Operations” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K, our fiscal 2010 financial results were strong relative to our fiscal 2009 results.

 

Our fiscal 2010 financial performance, including our performance relative to our peers, along with the individual performance of our executive officers, served as key factors in determining compensation for 2010, including as follows:

 

 

We believe that our compensation program builds upon the Company’s compensation governance framework and our overall pay-for-performance philosophy, which are demonstrated by:

 

 

 

 

We encourage you to read this Compensation Discussion and Analysis for a detailed discussion and analysis of our executive compensation program, including information about the fiscal 2010 compensation of the Named Executive Officers.

 

Responsibility for Executive Compensation Program

 

Subject to full Board approval, the Compensation Committee of our Board is responsible for establishing and implementing our general executive compensation philosophy and determining the compensation for all of our executive officers reporting directly to the Chief Executive Officer, including our “Named Executive Officers.” The Compensation Committee’s charter permits the Compensation Committee to delegate authority to

subcommittees. In 2010, the Compensation Committee made no delegation of its authority over compensation matters relating to our Named Executive Officers.

 

Compensation Philosophy and Objectives

 

Through our compensation program for executive officers, we strive to attract and retain superior executives in a highly competitive environment and provide financial incentives that align our executive officers’ interests with those of our shareholders. The Compensation Committee believes that the primary components of each executive officer’s compensation should be a competitive base salary and incentive compensation that rewards the achievement of annual and long-term objective performance goals. The Compensation Committee also believes stock ownership is important, because it aligns our executives’ interests with the interests of our shareholders. Thus, equity compensation represents a significant element of each executive officer’s potential compensation.

 

The Company believes that it is important to maintain consistency in our compensation philosophy and objectives, although it is sometimes necessary to adjust certain programs as economic and business conditions change. Value creating performance by the executive officers of the Company does not always translate into an immediate appreciation in the Company’s stock price or net income performance. This is particularly true in the financial industry where many financial institutions are currently experiencing economic stress. The Board of Directors and executive management are aware of the impact of the financial industry distress on the Company’s performance in 2010, but the Board intends to continue to reward management performance with cash and equity compensation based on a philosophy and belief that the strong operating fundamentals in the Company will be reflected in earnings growth and eventual stock price appreciation. It is in this context that certain actions were taken by the Board to reward executive management for 2010 performance and to establish incentive goals for 2011.

 

Role of Executive Officers in Compensation Decisions

 

The Compensation Committee reviews, approves, and recommends to our full Board each element of compensation for each executive officer reporting directly to the Chief Executive Officer, including all Named Executive Officers. The Compensation Committee considers the recommendations of the Chief Executive Officer in determining the base salary, annual incentive compensation and long-term incentive awards for each of the executive officers of the Company other than the Chief Executive Officer, but ultimately the Committee make all determinations in its discretion as to final pay outcomes. Together with the Compensation Committee, our Chief Executive Officer annually reviews the performance of each of our other executive officers, the compensation of each executive officer, including base salary, annual incentive compensation and long-term incentive awards and makes recommendations to the Compensation Committee regarding the compensation of those officers for the following year. The Compensation Committee Chairman annually reviews our Chief Executive Officer’s compensation with representatives from Mercer (following an annual performance review lead by the Company’s non-executive Chairman) and makes recommendations to the Compensation Committee regarding the Chief Executive Officer’s compensation for the following year. The Chief Executive Officer is not involved in the final determination regarding his own compensation, and all decisions with respect to the Chief Executive Officer’s compensation are made in executive session of the Compensation Committee, without the Chief Executive Officer present.

 

Committee Procedures

 

The Compensation Committee engaged Mercer, a nationally recognized compensation consulting firm, to assist it in evaluating our executive compensation structure and expenses. Mercer has fulfilled this role since 2003. For 2010, Mercer:

 

 

 

In examining our business performance, Mercer focused on:

 

 

In evaluating the competitiveness of our compensation levels for Named Executive Officers and other members of management, Mercer gathers pay and performance data from a peer group of publicly-traded financial services companies that includes a broad representation of regional banks within the Company’s region of operation and which are similar in asset size to the Company. Mercer selects the peer group with input from the Compensation Committee. The Compensation Committee considers the peer group data when evaluating the compensation for all of the Named Executive Officers. The composition of the peer group may be amended from year to year to take account of mergers, acquisitions, and other changes that make a company more or less appropriate for inclusion. The Compensation Committee has at times removed companies from the peer group because the companies’ asset sizes were deemed by the Compensation Committee to not be representative of the other companies in the group and in excess of the Company’s asset size. The median size of the peer group is now more closely reflective of the Company at approximately $8 billion. Under SEC disclosure rules, companies generally limit executive compensation disclosure to their most highly compensated executive officers. To determine competitive pay for these positions, Mercer uses data from publicly-filed documents as well as data from its proprietary market surveys. For the remaining executives, Mercer uses data from its proprietary market surveys only. The market surveys include a broader range of companies and do not provide company-specific information. The survey data is used as a “general reference” and is one of a number of factors considered in determining where pay is actually set.

 

For 2010 compensation decisions, our publicly-traded peer group consisted of the following 29 companies which have asset sizes ranging from $1.7 billion to $16.6 billion:

 

 

Mercer has agreed that this peer group continued to be appropriate for the Company’s pay and performance benchmarking for 2010.

 

In making its recommendation to the Compensation Committee regarding executive officer compensation, Mercer reviews the compensation practices and performance of the peer companies and discusses our performance and strategic objectives with our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer. Before the beginning of each fiscal year, Mercer provides the Compensation Committee with a detailed written report regarding our executive compensation structure, its competitiveness relative to the peer group companies, and the alignment of our executive pay with the Company’s performance.

In preparation for the evaluation of 2010 compensation and development of the written report, Mercer reviewed the business performance of Old National and the peer companies over one-year and three-year periods through the end of 2008, as well as projected results for 2009 and evaluated the alignment of pay and performance.

 

Mercer noted that Old National’s 2008 business performance and 2009 year-to-date results were slightly above the median of the peers. Using an unweighted average of the performance measures, 2008 business performance was at 53% and 2009 performance was at 56% by the end of the third quarter as compared to peers. Mercer reviewed the same performance measures for the three year periods through 2008 and through the third quarter of 2009. Performance for the three-year period compared to peers was at 45% and 51% respectively.

 

As part of its written report, Mercer reported that Old National’s targeted compensation levels were slightly below the relevant market benchmarks, primarily due to low salaries for certain executives. Incentive opportunities (both annual and long-term) were competitive with the market. Mercer noted that actual compensation levels approximated median market values. Base salaries and actual total cash compensation were slightly below the market median, while long-term incentives (based on expected values of awards when granted) were slightly above the market median. Total direct compensation was slightly below the median.

 

Mercer’s review evaluates overall compensation as well as each significant component of compensation. It evaluates whether the compensation structure continues to provide the appropriate incentives and alignment of executive officers’ interests with those of our shareholders. Mercer meets with the Compensation Committee to discuss its written report, answer questions, and discuss issues that require further study.

 

The Compensation Committee considers the information provided by Mercer, including compensation reports and Mercer’s recommended best practices as a baseline for establishing targeted total compensation, principal compensation components, and determining the allocation of total potential compensation components for each Named Executive Officer and other executives in the Company. In general, we seek to establish total compensation, base salaries, annual incentive compensation, and long-term equity incentive compensation for each position at or near the median for the peer group, if targeted performance is achieved; and at or near the 75% percentile of the peer group, if exceptional performance is achieved. The Compensation Committee also seeks to allocate potential total compensation among base salary, annual incentive compensation, and longer-term incentive compensation in proportions that reflect peer group averages.

 

Executive Compensation for 2010

 

Components of Compensation. In establishing the 2010 compensation for our executive officers, the Compensation Committee:

 

 

The principal components of each executive officer’s compensation used by the Compensation Committee to reward, align and retain our named executives are:

 

 

In general, we strive to target the percentage that each of these components bears to the total compensation for our executive officer group as a whole, assuming the achievement of targeted performance, to approximately the corresponding percentages for the peer group.

 

According to Mercer’s report, the following chart represents each element of compensation and the corresponding percentage of total compensation represented by each element for our peer group for the Named Executive Officers’ compensation for 2010:

 

 

 

The Company’s allocation for 2010 for the Chief Executive Officer and the other Named Executive Officers was:

 

 

 

The actual mix of these components for each individual executive officer varies, depending on our evaluation of the executive officer’s responsibilities, the percentage of the executive officer’s compensation that should be at risk, and the reasonable potential compensation in light of that risk. Additionally, the pay mix data set forth in the above chart for the Named Executive Officers other than the Chief Executive Officer is represented in the aggregate as each Named Executive Officer does not have the same pay mix.

The only elements of our executive officers’ compensation that we pay in cash are base salary and annual incentive compensation. For 2010, we paid the following cash compensation to our Named Executive Officers:

 

 

Base Salary. Base salary is the only component of compensation that is not subject to the achievement of performance or vesting criteria. Base salary is designed to provide a fixed level of cash compensation for performing day-to-day responsibilities. We establish base salary ranges for each position based on the ranges for similar positions at other peer group companies. In general, we target base salary ranges near the median for the peer group. We review base salaries annually and we adjust them in April of each year to take into account such factors as market changes, changes in duties, individual performance, and experience.

 

In assessing Mr. Jones’ performance for 2010, the Compensation Committee considered the role Mr. Jones played in selecting and leading the management team in its 2009 strategic, operational, and financial performance. The Compensation Committee attributed the Company’s success to Mr. Jones’ leadership skills both within the Company and as a leader in the banking industry. However, given the extraordinarily difficult banking industry and general economic environment, Mr. Jones proposed, and the Compensation Committee agreed, that he would not receive a salary increase for 2010.

 

In assessing the performance of the Named Executive Officers other than the Chief Executive Officer, Mr. Jones considered their contributions to the strategic, operational and financial performance of the Company in 2009 in evaluating salary adjustments for 2010. Although each of the Named Executive Officers met or exceeded expectations in 2009, given the banking and economic environment, salary adjustments were only given for Named Executive Officers whose salaries were below 90% of the 50th percentile in the range of comparable positions in the Company’s peer group. Mr. Mounts was the only Named Executive Officer to receive a base salary increase for 2010, and his salary was adjusted because his salary was at 56% of the 50th percentile in the range for comparable positions within the Company’s peer group. Mr. Jones proposed and the Compensation Committee agreed, to provide no salary increases to the other Named Executive Officers for 2010.

 

Annual Incentive Compensation. Our practice is to award cash incentive awards based on our achievement of pre-established objective performance goals. The objective of awarding annual incentive compensation is to reward short-term financial and operational performance. The Short Term Incentive Plan,

which was approved by shareholders in 2008, is our primary vehicle for awarding such incentives. The Short Term Incentive Plan does not preclude us from making discretionary bonus payments or special awards to Short Term Incentive Plan participants outside of the Short Term Incentive Plan.

 

Under the Short Term Incentive Plan, the Compensation Committee establishes quantitative performance goals for each fiscal year prior to March 31 of that year. The Compensation Committee has established the Target Incentive Payout for the Chief Executive Officer of 75% of his base salary. The Target Incentive Payout for the Chief Financial Officer and Chief Banking Officer is 45% of base salary, and the Target Incentive Payout for the other Named Executive Officers is 40%. The maximum payout under the Short Term Incentive Plan is 200% of the Target Incentive Payout.

 

The amount of cash incentive payments under the Short Term Incentive Plan is based entirely on the achievement of the established performance goals. These payout levels are determined by the Compensation Committee after reviewing peer and survey data provided by Mercer. The percentage payout levels are consistent with the payout levels paid to similarly situated executives within the Company’s peer group.

 

In practice, the Compensation Committee makes recommendations that the Board then approves or adjusts. Performance measures permitted under the Short Term Incentive Plan include:

 

 

The Compensation Committee has used EPS in the past as the performance measure for the Short Term Incentive Plan, because it believes that EPS is the best method of measuring our growth and financial performance. In 2010, in light of the extraordinary banking environment, management recommended, and the Compensation Committee agreed, to not award an opportunity to the Named Executive Officers under the Short Term Incentive Plan for 2010. As a consequence, no short term incentives were paid to the Named Executive Officers in 2010.

 

Long-Term Incentive Compensation. We believe that stock ownership by our executive officers is an important tool for aligning their interests with those of our shareholders over the long-term. Therefore, our long-term incentive compensation consists entirely of equity compensation awards. The 2008 Incentive Compensation Plan, which was approved by shareholders in 2008, is our primary vehicle for providing equity compensation.

 

In 2010, the awards for the Named Executive Officers (other than the Chief Executive Officer) under the 2008 Incentive Compensation Plan consisted of a combination of:

 

 

The pay mix for the Chief Executive Officer consisted of 100% performance-based restricted stock units. Each of these forms of award encourages executives to use their best efforts to increase the value of our stock, since the value of the awards increases with the value of our stock. In addition, because an executive officer’s right to an award generally vests over time, such awards provide a valuable retention tool.

 

Our practice is to determine the dollar amount of equity compensation that we want to provide, based on consultation with the compensation consultant who advices the Compensation Committee concerning current market practices. In general, we seek to pay equity incentive compensation that approximates the median for our

peer group, if targeted performance is achieved and the 75th percentile for our peer group, if maximum performance is achieved. In recommending equity compensation awards for an executive, the Compensation Committee considers previously granted but non-vested awards, but it does not generally consider equity ownership or previously vested awards. The Compensation Committee typically makes recommendations regarding equity compensation awards at its first meeting in January, depending upon the availability of the financial results for the preceding year. Typically, these awards are then approved or adjusted by the Board at its next meeting. We make the awards as early as practicable in the year and communicate them to executive officers so that the incentives will be known as early as practicable, thereby maximizing their potential impact. We make equity awards after financial data for the preceding year is available, because this information enables us to refine our expectations for the current year. The proximity of any awards to earnings announcements or other market events is coincidental. Under special circumstances, such as the employment of a new executive or substantial promotion of an existing executive, the Compensation Committee may award equity compensation at other times during the year. The Compensation Committee did not make any special grants of equity incentive compensation to any Named Executive Officer in 2010.

 

On February 1, 2010, we granted performance-based restricted stock units and service-based restricted stock to the Named Executive Officers (with the exception of the Chief Executive Officer who only received performance-based restricted stock units) pursuant to our 2008 Incentive Compensation Plan. These awards are reflected on the Table on page 43 entitled “Grants of Plan-Based Awards During 2010.” The Compensation Committee and Board, in order to align the Chief Executive Officer’s incentive compensation directly with shareholder interests and to place 100% of his equity compensation at risk, determined that his equity compensation should consist of performance-based restricted stock units with no service-based component.

 

The portions of the total potential equity award represented by each type of award generally reflected the allocation of such types among our peer group. The Compensation Committee awarded the right to earn shares to the Named Executive Officers and certain other executives based on the performance of the Company in 2009. The awards differed for each of the Named Executive Officers and they were determined by the Compensation Committee, according to each officer’s salary level and based on competitive survey data provided by Mercer. The awards were not based on individual performance.

 

Performance-Based Restricted Stock Units. The Compensation Committee continued the use of restricted stock units in 2010 instead of restricted stock because the use of restricted stock units simplifies the administration of the performance awards, as shares are not actually granted until the end of the performance period and dividends are not paid on the units until the units vest into earned shares. In general, our executive officers will not earn performance-based restricted stock units unless we meet pre-established objective performance criteria for the performance period, and the executive officer remains employed throughout the required service period.

 

In 2010, the performance-based restricted stock unit awards for the Named Executive Officers were allocated as follows:

 

 

The Named Executive Officers must be employed by the Company through the distribution date, which would be after December 31, 2012 and before March 31, 2013, in order to be entitled to receive a distribution of any earned 2010 internal or external measure awards.

The financial factors used and the weighting attached to each factor (in parentheses) for the internal measure awards (2010 measurement period only) were:

 

 

For each factor, we have established minimum, target and maximum performance levels. The weighted average performance level will determine the percentage of shares for which restrictions will lapse. If target is achieved, restrictions will lapse on all of the shares awarded. If maximum performance is achieved, the number of shares awarded will double.

 

We define EPS as GAAP EPS, disregarding, however, extraordinary items and non-recurring charges, both as determined under GAAP, recognized in a period after the quarter ending December 31, 2009. The threshold EPS was $.22, the target was $.35, and the maximum was $.48 for 2010 performance. The actual result for 2010 was $.44, resulting in a 84.5% payout for the EPS component of the 2010 award.

 

For the 2010 internal measure award we defined net charge-off ratio as the net charge-offs to average loans for 2010 only. The minimum net charge-off ratio for 2010 was 1.25%, the target was 1.05%, and the maximum was .95%. The actual result for 2010 was .75%, resulting in a 100% payout for the net charge-off component of the 2010 award. Combining the results for the EPS and net charge-offs in 2010, the actual payout for the 2010 performance only award was 184.5%.

 

Total shareholder return is our only external relative measure for determining performance-based units earned. We define total shareholder return – which is measured against the peer group for the three-year measurement period – as the three-month average stock price for the period ending December 31, 2009 compared to the three-month average stock price for the period ending December 31, 2012 for the Company and the Peer Group. The three-month average stock price will be determined by averaging the closing stock price of each day during the three months ending on the applicable December 31, including adjustments for cash and stock dividends. This measure was chosen because the committee believes it correlates to shareholder value creation over time.

 

The performance-based restricted stock units must be held for one year following the vesting of the award. Dividends earned on vested shares are paid in stock and are accumulated during the performance period and are paid on the shares that actually vest to the executive. The dividends are also subject to the one-year holding period unless the executive has met the stock ownership guidelines.

 

If an executive officer’s employment is terminated on account of death, or there is a change in control of the Company, the target performance criteria will be deemed satisfied, and restrictions on the shares will lapse. If the executive officer terminates employment on account of disability or retirement, the executive officer will be treated the same as if he or she had continued employment.

 

Service-Based Restricted Stock. Service-based restricted stock is not contingent on our business performance. In general, with the exception of dividends, an executive officer will not realize value for service-based restricted stock, unless he or she remains employed during the required service period. If an executive officer terminates employment on account of death, or there is a change in control of the Company, restrictions on the stock will lapse. If the executive officer terminates employment on account of disability or retirement, he or she will be treated the same as if he or she had continued employment. The service-based restricted stock granted in 2010 will vest in three approximately equal annual installments over a three-year period ending on February 1, 2013. We pay cash dividends on service-based restricted stock to our executive officers, even if the stock remains subject to restrictions. The service-based restricted stock must be held by the Named Executive Officer for one year after vesting.

In 2010, the Compensation Committee maintained the 2009 awarded percentage of long-term incentive awards allocated to service-based restricted stock (except for the Chief Executive Officer) due to the extraordinary economic environment and the need to ensure the retention of key executive officers in the Company.

 

Nonqualified Stock Options. Stock options allow an executive officer to purchase shares of our stock at a future date for the closing price of the stock on the date of grant. In general, an executive officer must remain employed by us until the end of a stated vesting period to exercise a stock option. Special rules apply if the executive terminates employment on account of death, retirement, or disability, or if there is a change in control of the Company. For 2010, there were no awards of nonqualified stock options. In 2010, Mercer recommended, and the Compensation Committee and Board agreed, to eliminate the use of stock options in order to align the Company with developing peer group practices.

 

Retirement Plans. Until December 31, 2005, we maintained a traditional qualified defined benefit pension plan, known as the Old National Bancorp Employees’ Retirement Plan (“Retirement Plan”). We froze the Retirement Plan as of December 31, 2001, except for employees who were at least age 50 or who had 20 years of credited service as of December 31, 2001. As of December 31, 2005, we froze the Retirement Plan for all remaining employees. We also maintained a nonqualified retirement plan to replace any reduction in benefits under the Retirement Plan due to limitations on benefits under the Internal Revenue Code (“Supplemental Plan”). We also froze the Supplemental Plan as of December 31, 2005. No executive officer will earn further benefits under the Retirement Plan or the Supplemental Plan after 2005, although benefits as of December 31, 2005, are preserved.

 

We continue to maintain a tax-qualified defined contribution plan, known as the Old National Bancorp Employee Stock Ownership and Savings Plan (“Savings Plan”), for eligible employees. The Savings Plan allows employees to make pre-tax 401(k) contributions. Subject to the conditions and limitations of the Plan, an employee will be eligible to become a participant of the plan on the first day of the month after completing one month of service. All active participants will be eligible to receive a match of fifty cents on the dollar up to the first 6% of eligible compensation that is contributed to the plan. We may also make profit sharing contributions, in our discretion. To receive profit sharing contributions for a year, an employee must have (i) completed at least 1,000 hours of service during the year and (ii) been employed on the last day of the year or retired on or after age 65, died, or became disabled during the year.

 

We also maintain a nonqualified deferred compensation plan, known as the “Executive Deferred Compensation Plan,” for a select group of management employees designated by the Compensation Committee, including our executive officers. All executive officers are eligible to participate in the plan. An executive officer may elect to defer up to 25% of his or her regular compensation, and up to 75% of his or her annual bonus under the Short Term Incentive Plan, in which case the deferral amount will be credited to his or her plan account. We provide matching contribution credits under the plan up to 6% of compensation, reduced by matching contributions under the Savings Plan. In addition, we may provide discretionary contribution credits to make up for any reduction in discretionary profit sharing contributions under the Savings Plan due to Internal Revenue Code contribution limits applicable to tax-qualified retirement plans. We did not provide discretionary credits for 2010.

 

We credit an executive officer’s plan account with earnings based on the hypothetical earnings of an investment fund consisting of Company stock, the return on a recognized market index selected by the Compensation Committee, or a combination of the two, as elected by the executive officer. For the market index fund, we use a Bloomberg fund index, which approximates the risk and return associated with a diversified high quality corporate bond. The earnings credit under the Executive Deferred Compensation Plan could be in excess of earnings that would have been credited using the applicable federal long-term rate. Any excess earnings are reported in column (h) of the Summary Compensation Table on page 41.

All amounts paid under the nonqualified deferred compensation plan are paid from our general assets and are subject to the claims of our creditors. Except in the case of financial emergency, an executive officer’s benefits under the plan may not be distributed until after termination of employment. In general, an executive officer may elect to receive his plan benefits in a lump sum or in annual installments over two to ten years.

 

Severance and Change in Control Arrangements We have entered into employment agreements with each of the Named Executive Officers that were amended effective January 1, 2011. The changes to these agreements are more fully discussed in the section entitled “Changes in Executive Compensation in 2011.” Under each of their respective employment agreements, the Named Executive Officers are entitled to a base salary, incentive compensation (both cash and equity) and other employee benefits as determined by the Board. Based on information provided by the Compensation Committee compensation consultant, the Committee determined that the benefits, including the various multiples of components of compensation, were within the market range for such payouts and benefits. The Committee regularly reviews the Company’s employment and severance agreement arrangements and uses peer data to determine whether these arrangements are consistent with prevailing market practices. In January 2011, after evaluating the recommendation by management to amend the Employment Agreements, the Committee recommended to the Board, and the Board agreed, to adopt several amendments to the Employment Agreements. The Committee agreed to amend the Employment Agreements after reviewing the prevailing market and developing executive compensation best practices.

 

Pursuant to the employment agreements, we are generally obligated to pay certain non-change of control severance benefits to the Named Executive Officer, if we terminate his or her employment without cause, or the executive resigns within 90 days after we have taken certain actions that adversely affect him or her. The agreements also obligate the Company to pay certain severance benefits if there is a change of control of the Company as defined within the agreement. A Named Executive Officer must satisfy the terms of the agreement, including its non-solicitation and non-compete provisions, to receive his or her benefits.

 

The employment agreements also provide for change of control severance benefits for each Named Executive Officer. The Company is required to pay change of control severance benefits if, within two years following a change of control (as defined in the agreements), we terminate the Named Executive Officer’s employment for a reason other than “Cause” or the Named Executive Officer’s disability, or if the executive resigns within two years after a change of control after we have taken certain actions detrimental to the Named Executive Officer.

 

The Compensation Committee believes that the employment agreements, which include change of control severance benefits, assure the fair treatment of the Named Executive Officers in relation to their professional careers with the Company by assuring them of some financial security in the event of a change of control. The change of control provision also protects the shareholders of the Company by encouraging the Named Executive Officers to continue to devote their full attention to the Company without being distracted by the need to seek other employment following the change of control. The Compensation Committee established the change of control payouts to each of the Named Executive Officers after reviewing peer data and consulting with Mercer.

 

In the Committee’s view, severance benefits, including in the event of a change-in-control, are contingent and operate as a form of insurance rather than a principal component of compensation strategy. In that regard, the Committee does not reduce or otherwise modify compensation elements on the basis of eligibility for severance benefits. The Potential Payments on Termination or Change-in-Control tables on pages 50 through 54 and the discussion of the employment agreements beginning on page 47 set forth the estimated values and details of the termination benefits under various scenarios for each of the Named Executive Officers.

 

Other Compensation. Detailed information regarding other compensation is provided in note 7 to the Summary Compensation Table on page 41. In general, we believe that perquisites should not constitute a consequential portion of any executive officer’s compensation. No executive received perquisites in excess of $10,000 in 2010. Moreover, certain of the perquisites provided to executive officers also provide a benefit to us.

For example, executive physicals, which we require, help us to assure that our executive officers do not postpone addressing health issues that could result in great cost to us in lost productivity and covered treatment costs.

 

Stock Ownership Guidelines. In 2010, the Compensation Committee and Board amended the previously established stock ownership guidelines for the Company’s executive officers, including the Named Executive Officers, to make the guidelines more consistent with market practices, and to ensure executives retain a specified percentage of stock of the Company until the target ownership level is achieved and to reduce the risk that stock price volatility could impact the achievement of the target ownership requirement. Under the guidelines, the Named Executive Officers are required to hold shares of our stock with a value which is the lesser of the following:

 

 

As of December 31, 2010, Mr. Jones, Mr. Moore, Mr. Mounts and Mr. Wolking have met the stock ownership guideline requirement for ownership.

 

For purposes of the guidelines, in-the-money options, unearned performance-based stock and phantom shares in the Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plan are taken into account. The Named Executive Officers have a significant number of outstanding stock options not currently exercisable due to the recent stock price performance, and there has been a recent emphasis by the Compensation Committee on performance-contingent awards that have not been earned.

 

Changes in Executive Compensation in 2011

 

In May 2010, the Compensation Committee retained the services of Pearl Meyer & Partners to provide information, analysis and advice regarding executive and director compensation for the upcoming fiscal year 2011.

 

In January 2011, based on results of a review by executive management of the compensation program, the Compensation Committee approved certain changes to the program which will be effective in 2011. In this review, the Compensation Committee considered the balance between short and long-term incentives, cash versus stock, revenue and risk metrics and absolute and relative performance measures and considered the time horizon of payments versus risks.

 

The Compensation Committee agreed with management’s recommendation to not award an opportunity to the Named Executive Officers under the Short Term Incentive Plan for 2011 due to the extraordinarily difficult banking industry environment. For 2011, the Committee and Board agreed that any annual cash incentive for the Named Executive Officers would be determined at the sole discretion of the Compensation Committee and Board and paid based on the achievement of financial results of the Company that are in excess of the 2011 budget target.

 

In 2011, the Compensation Committee agreed with management’s recommendation to continue the approach toward long-term equity incentive awards adopted in 2010. During 2010, the decision was made to include only full value awards and eliminate the use of stock options as a component of long-term equity incentive plan awards. The service-based restricted stock component will continue to be 50%. The Compensation Committee agreed to maintain the service-based component at this level in order to align the Company with peer

group practices and to ensure the retention of key executive officers of the Company in a time of extraordinary economic distress.

 

In 2011, our long-term equity awards for the Named Executive Officers (other than the Chief Executive Officer) will be allocated as follows:

 

50% performance-based restricted stock units; and

 

50% service-based restricted stock.

 

The performance-based restricted stock units will be allocated as follows:

 

50% of the award will be based on internal measures and measured based on 2011 performance only; and

 

50% of the award will be based on external measures.

 

The financial factors for the internal measures award will be EPS growth and net charge-off ratio. The financial factor for the external measure award will be total shareholder return compared to peers over a three-year performance period.

 

The Chief Executive Officer’s long-term equity award in 2011 consists of 100% performance-based restricted stock units, with 31% allocated to 2011 performance only and 69% allocated to the relative award, which is measured over a three-year performance period. The purpose of awarding 100% of the Chief Executive Officer’s stock award in performance-based restricted stock units is to ensure his interests are totally aligned with the interests of shareholders.

 

The reason the Compensation Committee and the Board agreed to continue to award the service-based restricted stock to the Named Executive Officers, other than the Chief Executive Officer, at the 50% level was primarily to ensure the retention of the executive officers, given the view of the Compensation Committee and Board that despite exceptional performance in years prior to 2011, the equity program of the Board was not adequately rewarding executives from a performance standpoint.

 

The decision to continue to base 50% of the performance-based restricted stock unit award on 2011 performance only (31% for the Chief Executive Officer) was made to ensure that Named Executive Officers would place immediate and equal focus on earnings and risk in a challenging economic environment, and it would also eliminate the challenge of multi-year goal setting in an extraordinarily challenging financial services industry operating environment. Both the action to increase the service-based component of the award and to base the internal measure performance-based restricted unit awards on 2011 performance only was designed to ensure retention of the Named Executive Officers in a period of extreme economic distress generally.

 

The Compensation Committee and Board agreed that in order to align the Chief Executive Officer’s incentive compensation directly with shareholder interests, the Chief Executive Officer’s equity compensation should continue to consist solely of performance-based restricted stock units with no service-based component.

 

The Chief Executive Officer proposed, and the Compensation Committee and Board agreed, to not increase his salary for 2011.

 

At its January 27, 2011 Board meeting, the Board of Directors, at the recommendation of Management, amended the Employment Agreements for the executive officer of the Company (including the Named Executive Officers). The agreements were amended as follows:

 

 

The Company has adopted a “best after-tax provision” whereby the executive receives the full 280G payment and has the responsibility for any excise tax, or the payment is reduced to the safe harbor amount, whichever will put the executive in the best after-tax position with the most compensation and income.

 

There will be a continuation of coverage to be provided by the Company for the requisite number of months. However, any tax resulting from these payments will be the executive’s responsibility.

 

 

The Company has eliminated the ability of the executive to voluntarily terminate his employment within 12 months of a Change in Control without good reason. The executive will continue to have the right to terminate within 24 months of a Change in Control with good reason and receive a severance and other benefits.

 

 

All future grants or performance-based restricted stock will vest upon the closing of a Change in Control on a pro-rated basis as determined by the performance of the Company on the closing date as specified by the agreement. Future grants of stock options and service-based awards will vest immediately upon an involuntary or good reason termination of the executive following a Change in Control. Otherwise, the shares will vest according to their original terms and conditions.

 

The following table provides information regarding compensation earned by our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and the three other executive officers employed at the end of 2010 who were most highly compensated for 2010.

 

 

 

(1) Base salary increases for Named Executive Officers are effective in the first pay of April during the calendar year.

 

(2) 2009 Bonuses are for 2009 performance, but were not approved or paid until 2010.

 

(3) Stock awards included in Column (e) consist entirely of service-based restricted stock and performance-based restricted stock granted under our 2008 Equity Incentive Plan. Award values are based on the closing price for our stock on the grant date. For performance-based restricted stock, the grant date value is based on the number of units that would be earned at target levels of performance. The value of the award assuming the highest level of performance conditions are achieved for the 2008, 2009 and 2010 awards would be: Robert Jones ($1,070,300, $775,852, $642,798); Christopher Wolking ($267,575, $180,951, $284,775); Barbara Murphy ($267,575, $180,951, $284,755); Daryl Moore ($168,190, $111,651, $174,662); and Allen Mounts ($229,350, $157,851, $246,805). For the number of shares of service-based and performance-based restricted stock awarded in 2010, see the Grants of Plan-Based Awards Table.

 

(4) The amount reflected in Column (f) is the grant date value under Statement of Financial Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic 718 (formerly FAS 123-^®. The awards included in this Column consist entirely of non-qualified stock options granted in 2008 and 2009. We determined the fair value of each grant as of the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option pricing method with the following assumptions:

 

 

(5) These amounts represent incentives that were earned under the Company’s Short Term Incentive Plan. The Company’s Short Term Incentive Plan was suspended for 2010.

 

(6) This amount is the increase of the actuarial present value of the executive’s benefit under our frozen defined benefit plans, plus the amount of the executive’s earnings credit under our Executive Deferred Compensation Plan in excess of the earnings that would have been credited using the applicable federal long-term rate, with compounding (as described by Section 1274(d) of the Internal Revenue Code).

 

The 2010 Change in Pension Values and Non-Qualified Deferred Compensation “excess” earnings were: Robert Jones ($0 and -$14,623); Christopher Wolking ($2,215 and $99); Barbara Murphy ($0 and $288); Daryl Moore ($53,283 and $11,397); and Allen Mounts ($21,770 and $6,011).

 

The 2009 Change in Pension Values and Non-Qualified Deferred Compensation “excess” earnings were: Robert Jones ($0 and -$59,649); Christopher Wolking ($7,158 and $5,369); Barbara Murphy ($0 and $411); Daryl Moore ($159,646 and $23,618); and Allen Mounts ($63,086 and $11,617).

 

The 2008 Change in Pension Values and Non-Qualified Deferred Compensation excess” earnings were: Robert Jones ($0 and $32,915); Christopher Wolking (-$4,385 and $1,468); Barbara Murphy ($0 and $88); Daryl Moore (-$99,176 and $13,289); and Allen Mounts (-$32,068 and $5,815).

(7) The amounts specified in Column (i) include the following: perquisites, company contributions to defined contribution plans, cash dividends on restricted stock and life insurance premiums.

 

(8) On March 17, 2011, Mr. Mounts announced his retirement from the Company effective July 1, 2011.

 

 

(a) The listed executive officers receive group life coverage equal to two times base salary, whereas other employees receive coverage of one times base salary. The amounts in this column are the premiums for the executive officers’ coverage.

 

 

(1) All non-equity incentive plan awards are made pursuant to our Short Term Incentive Plan. No award opportunity was made available under the The Short Term Incentive Plan in 2010.

 

(2) The shares in Columns (f), (g), and (h) are performance-based restricted stock units granted under our 2008 Equity Incentive Plan. The performance period for 50% of the 2010 grant is the one-year period ending December 31, 2010. The performance period for the remaining 50% of the award is the three-year period ending December 31, 2012. The restriction period for 100% of the performance based 2010 grant ends when earned shares are distributed. The distribution of earned shares will occur after December 31, 2012 and before March 31, 2013. For 50% of the award, the financial factors used and the weighting attached to each factor (in parenthesis) are: earnings per share (50%) and net charge off ratio (50%). For the remaining 50% of the award, the relative financial factor used is total shareholder return (100%) as compared to the company’s peer group. Dividends accumulate during the vesting period based on the number of shares at target (g) and are paid at vesting on earned shares.

 

(3) The shares in Column (i) are service-based restricted shares granted under our 2008 Equity Incentive Plan that vest in three substantially equal installments on February 1 of 2011, 2012 and 2013. Vesting is contingent upon the Executive Officers remaining employed during the required service period. Executive Officers are entitled to dividends during the vesting period on the number of outstanding shares.

 

(4) No stock options were granted in 2010.

 

(5) The fair market value of the performance-based restricted stock awards reported in Column (l) is the grant date value of the awards as determined under FASB ASC Topic 718.