Company Name: Croghan Bancshares, Inc. (Jared
E. Danziger)
Public Availability Date: February 6, 2008
Document Sections: INQUIRY LETTER
APPENDIX 1
APPENDIX 2
STAFF REPLY LETTER
[INQUIRY LETTER]
January 15, 2008
VIA HAND DELIVERY
Office of Chief Counsel
Division of Corporation Finance
Securities and Exchange Commission
100 F Street, N.E.
Washington, DC 20549
Re: Croghan Bancshares, Inc. - Shareholder Proposal of Jared E. Danziger
(Exchange Act of 1934 - Rule 14a-8)
Ladies and Gentlemen:
This letter is to inform you that our client, Croghan Bancshares, Inc. ("Croghan"),
intends to omit from its proxy statement and form of proxy for its 2008 Annual
Meeting of Shareholders (collectively, the "2008 Proxy Materials") a shareholder
proposal (the "2008 Proposal") and supporting statement received from Jared E.
Danziger (the "Proponent").
Pursuant to Rule 14a-8(j), we have:
enclosed herewith six (6) copies of this letter and its attachments;
filed this letter with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
"Commission") no later than eighty (80) calendar days before Croghan intends to
file its definitive 2008 Proxy Materials with the Commission; and
concurrently sent a copy of this correspondence to the Proponent.
Rule 14a-8(k) provides that shareholder proponents are required to send
companies a copy of any correspondence that the proponents elect to submit to
the Commission or the staff of the Division of Corporation Finance (the
"Staff"). Accordingly, we are taking this opportunity to inform the Proponent
that if the Proponent elects to submit additional correspondence to the
Commission or the Staff with respect to the 2008 Proposal, a copy of that
correspondence should concurrently be furnished to the undersigned on behalf of
Croghan pursuant to Rule 14a-8(k).
BASIS FOR EXCLUSION
We hereby respectfully request that the Staff concur in our view that the 2008
Proposal may be excluded from the 2008 Proxy Materials pursuant to Rule
14a-8(i)(12)(iii) because the 2008 Proposal is identical to, and deals with
substantially the same subject matter as, shareholder proposals that were
included in Croghan's proxy materials for its 2007, 2006, 2005 and 2004 annual
meeting of shareholders, and the vote on the proposal that was included in
Croghan's proxy materials for its 2007 annual meeting of shareholders did not
receive the vote necessary for resubmission.
THE 2008 PROPOSAL
The 2008 Proposal, entitled "Independent Chairman of the Board," requests that
Croghan's Board of Directors "adopt policy that, there be elected from them a
Chairman of the Board, that the Chairman of the Board and the Chief Executive
Officer (CEO) be two different individuals and that the Chairman be an
independent, outside director, elected by the Directors." A copy of the 2008
Proposal and supporting statement, as well as related correspondence from the
Proponent, is attached to this letter as Exhibit A.
ANALYSIS
The 2008 Proposal May Be Excluded under Rule
14a-8(i)(12)(iii).
Rule 14a-8(i)(12)(iii) permits the exclusion of a shareholder proposal if "the
proposal deals with substantially the same subject matter as another proposal or
proposals that previously has or have been included in the company's proxy
materials within the preceding 5 calendar years" and the proposal received "less
than 10% of the vote on its last submission to shareholders if proposed three
times or more previously within the preceding 5 calendar years...." As discussed
below, the 2008 Proposal is identical to shareholder proposals from the
Proponent that Croghan included in its 2007, 2006, 2005 and 2004 proxy
materials, and the proposal received less than 10% of the vote on its last
submission to shareholders.
A. The 2008 Proposal is Identical to Proposals that were Included in Croghan's
Proxy Materials in 2007, 2006, 2005 and 2004.
In Croghan's 2007 proxy materials, which were filed with the Commission on March
23, 2007, Croghan included an identical shareholder proposal submitted by the
Proponent (the "2007 Proposal"). A copy of the 2007 Proposal as it appeared in
Croghan's 2007 proxy materials is attached hereto as Exhibit B. Croghan also
included identical shareholder proposals submitted by the Proponent (the
"2004-2006 Proposals" and together with the 2007 Proposal, the "Previous
Proposals") in its 2006, 2005 and 2004 proxy materials, which were filed with
the Commission on March 17, 2006, March 15, 2005 and March 16, 2004,
respectively. Copies of the 2004-2006 Proposals as they appeared in Croghan's
proxy materials are attached hereto as Exhibit C. As with the 2008 Proposal, the
Previous Proposals each requested that Croghan's Board of Directors "adopt
policy that, there be elected from them a Chairman of the Board, that the
Chairman of the Board and the Chief Executive Officer (CEO) be two different
individuals and that the Chairman be an independent, outside director, elected
by the Directors."
The only differences between the 2008 Proposal and the Previous Proposals are
insignificant revisions to the supporting statements accompanying the proposals.
In fact, the only difference between the supporting statements for the 2008
Proposal and the 2007 Proposal is that the 2008 Proposal's supporting statement
indicates that an identical proposal "received the support of approximately 6%
of the shareholder [sic] voting for/against this proposal" at the 2007 annual
meeting, whereas the 2007 Proposal indicated that an identical proposal
"received the support of approximately 10% of the shareholder [sic] voting
for/against this proposal" at the 2006 annual meeting. Similarly, the language
of the supporting statement for each of the 2004-2006 Proposals is repeated in
the supporting statement accompanying the 2008 Proposal, with the 2008
Proposal's supporting statement containing only minor differences. These
insignificant changes in the supporting statements do not alter the substance of
the five proposals - that Croghan's Board of Directors adopt a policy requiring
the election of an independent Chairman of the Board.
In order for a company to exclude a resubmission in reliance on Rule
14a-8(i)(12), the proposals must deal with substantially the same subject
matter, but need not be identical. See Exchange Act Release No. 20091 (Aug. 16,
1983) (the "1983 Release"); Great Lakes Chemical Corp. (avail. Feb. 22, 1996).
In adopting the current version of Rule 14a-8(i)(12), the Commission indicated
that the essential factor in determining whether a proposal deals with
substantially the same subject matter is the overall substantive concern raised
by the proposal rather than the specific language. See 1983 Release. Because the
resolutions proposed in the 2008 Proposal and in the Previous Proposals are
identical and the supporting statements are substantially the same, all five
proposals raise the same substantive concern. Thus, the 2008 Proposal is
excludable under Rule 14a-8(i)(12). See, e.g., Loews Corp. (avail. Jan. 16,
2007) (concurring in the exclusion of a proposal that was identical to a
proposal submitted the prior year and included in the company's proxy materials,
which did not receive the requisite 3% vote under Rule 14a-8(i)(12)(i)); Bank of
America (avail. Feb. 14, 2006) (concurring in the exclusion of a proposal under
Rule 14a-8(i)(12)(iii) where identical proposals "with only minor changes to the
supporting statement" were submitted to a shareholder vote and did not receive
the 10% threshold vote on the most recent submission); Verizon Communications
Inc. (avail. Jan. 16, 2003) (concurring in the exclusion of a proposal pursuant
to Rule 14a-8(i)(12)(iii) that was identical to proposals previously submitted
within the last five years, which did not receive the relevant threshold vote on
its last submission); Lawson Products, Inc. (avail. Mar. 13, 2000) (concurring
that a proposal submitted for inclusion in the company's 2000 proxy materials
was excludable under Rule 14a-8(i)(12)(iii) because the company had included an
identical proposal in each of the prior three proxy statements, which did not
receive 10% of the vote on its 1999 submission); American Int'l Group Inc.
(avail. Nov. 8, 1999) (concurring in the exclusion of a proposal under Rule
14a-8(i)(12)(i) because an identical proposal was considered at the prior year's
annual meeting and did not receive the relevant threshold vote); BankBoston
Corp. (avail. May 27, 1999) (concurring in the exclusion of a proposal under
Rule 14a-8(i)(12)(ii) where virtually identical proposals, with only slight
changes in wording, were included in the company's proxy materials for the
previous two years and did not receive the vote required for resubmission at the
prior annual meeting); PG&E Corp. (avail. Jan. 15, 1999) (concurring in the
exclusion of a proposal under Rule 14a-8(i)(12)(iii) that dealt with
substantially the same subject matter as prior proposals submitted to the
company, where variations in the language of the proposal and supporting
statements "merely provide[d] administrative detail, or amplify[ied] the
definition[s]" of certain phrases, which received less than 10% of the vote when
last submitted to shareholders).
B. The 2007 Proposal Received Less than 10% of the Vote.
As reported in Part II, Item 4 of Croghan's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, which
was filed with the Commission on July 26, 2007 (the relevant portions of which
are attached hereto as Exhibit D), the 2007 Proposal received 868,496 "against"
votes and 57,359 "for" votes at Croghan's 2007 Annual Meeting of Shareholders
held on May 8, 2007. Excluding abstentions and broker non-votes1, the 2007
Proposal received 6.20% of the vote2, which is less than the 10% required for
resubmission of the proposal pursuant to Rule 14a-8(i)(12)(iii).
CONCLUSION
Based upon the foregoing analysis, we respectfully request that the Staff concur
that it will take no action if Croghan excludes the 2008 Proposal from its 2008
Proxy Materials pursuant to Rule 14a-8(i)(12)(iii).
If you have any questions or require additional information regarding this
request, please do not hesitate to call me at (614) 464-5465.
Very truly yours,
/s/
Anthony D. Weis
cc: Jared E. Danziger (w/encls.)
Steven C. Futrell (w/encls.)
-----FOOTNOTES-----
1 In Staff Legal Bulletin No. 14, Question F.4 (July 13, 2001), the Staff stated
that for purposes of counting votes under Rule 14a-8(i)(12), abstentions and
broker non-votes are not included.
2 The Proponent acknowledges in his supporting statement accompanying the 2008
Proposal that "[t]his proposal received the support of approximately 6% of the
shareholders voting for/against this proposal at last year's annual meeting."
[APPENDIX 1]
EXHIBIT A
November 14, 2007
Mr. Barry F. Luse, Seoretary
Croghan Bancshares, Inc.
323 Croghan Street
Fremont, Ohio 43420
Dear Mr. Luse:
Please be advised the undersigned requests the Inclusion of the enclosed
Shareholder's Proposal B and supporting statement in the proxy material for the
2008 Annual Meeting of the shareholders of Croghan Bancshares, Inc. In accord
with applicable SEC Rule 14(a)-8(b) I intend to continue ownership of my shares
through the date of the 2008 Annual Meeting or continuation thereof. It is
expected the Board of Directors will advise me promptly should there be
non-compliance with the applicable SEC Rule together with a timely period within
which to achieve compliance.
The undersigned anticipates the Board will include a statement in the proxy
material setting forth a contra position. Therefore, this letter is to formally
request a shareholder list as of November 30, 2007, and periodically thereafter,
so that the shareholders of record can be advised of the desire of the
undersigned to have the resolution placed in the 2008 proxy materials as well as
the undersigned's position. The request for a shareholder list is provided for
by statute (see Ohio Revised code 1701.37, etc.). Additionally, a current copy
of the NOBO list is requested at such time as it becomes available to
Bancshares.
Very truly yours,
/s/
Jarecl E. Danziger
113 Shares
Enclosure-Resolution and Supporting Statement
[APPENDIX 2]
2008 SHAREHOLDERS PROPOSAL B
A proposal is being presented by Jared E. Danziger. The Corporation's address of
record for Jared E. Danziger is 45 W 67\th/ Street, New York, NY 10023. The
share holdings that have been reported to the Corporation by the proponent is
113 shares for Jared E. Danziger. The Proposal B is as follows:
RESOLVED: That the shareholders urge the Board of Directors to adopt policy that
there be elected from them a Chairman of the Board, that the Chairman of the
Board and Chief Executive Officer (CEO) be two different individuals and that
the Chairman be an independent, outside director, elected by the Directors.
SUPPORTING STATEMENT
Supporters of an independent Chairman of the Board point out that one of the
Board's primary responsibilities is monitoring management, including evaluating
and, if necessary, terminating the employment of the CEO. The effectiveness and
vigilance of such monitoring will be impaired if there is no recognizable person
as Chairman of the Board or Lead Director, as at present. It appears that the
person leading the board is the President/CEO and this should not be the case as
the President/CEO should be subordinate to the board. The failure to appoint a
Chairman of the Board or Lead Director appears to be an intentional effort to
avoid recognized good corporate governance practice. This proposal received the
support of approximately 6% of the shareholder voting for/against this proposal
at last year's annual meeting.
I URGE YOUR SUPPORT FOR THIS PROPOSAL.
[STAFF REPLY LETTER]
February 6, 2008
Response of the Office of Chief Counsel Division of Corporation Finance
Re: Croghan Bancshares, Inc. Incoming letter dated January 15, 2008
The proposal urges the board to adopt a policy that the chairman be an
independent, outside director.
There appears to be some basis for your view
that Croghan may exclude the proposal under rule 14a-8(i)(12)(iii). Accordingly,
we will not recommend enforcement action to the Commission if Croghan omits the
proposal from its proxy materials in reliance on rule 14a-8(i)(12)(iii).
Sincerely,
/s/
William A. Hines
Special Counsel
|