SCHEDULE 14A

(Rule 14a-101)

INFORMATION REQUIRED IN PROXY STATEMENT
SCHEDULE 14A INFORMATION

Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934

Filed by the registrant þ
Filed by a party other than the registrant o

Check the appropriate box:		o   Confidential, for Use of the Commission Only (as permitted by Rule 14a-6(e)(2)
o Preliminary proxy statement
þ Definitive proxy statement
o Definitive additional materials
o Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-11(c) or Rule 14a-12

COUSINS PROPERTIES INCORPORATED

(Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

Payment of filing fee (Check the appropriate box):

	þ		No fee required
	o		Fee computed on table below per Exchange Act Rules 14a-6(i)(1) and 0-11.

(1)

Title of each class of securities to which transaction applies:

(2)

Aggregate number of securities to which transactions applies:

(3)

Per unit price or other underlying value of transaction computed pursuant to Exchange Act Rule 0-11 (Set forth the amount on which the filing fee is calculated and state how it was determined):

(4)

Proposed maximum aggregate value of transaction:

(5)

Total fee paid:

o

Fee paid previously with preliminary materials.

o

Check box if any part of the fee is offset as provided by Exchange Act Rule 0-11(a)(2) and identify the filing for which the offsetting fee was paid previously. Identify the previous filing by registration statement number, or the form or schedule and the date of its filing.

(1)

Amount previously paid:

(2)

Form, Schedule or Registration Statement no.:

(3)

Filing Party:

(4)

Date Filed:

 

NOTICE OF ANNUAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS
TO BE HELD MAY 12, 2009

 

To our Stockholders:

 

The Annual Meeting of Stockholders of Cousins Properties Incorporated (“we”, “our,” or the “Company”) will be held on Tuesday, May 12, 2009, at 11:00 a.m. local time at 191 Peachtree Street, Atlanta, Georgia 30303. The purposes of the meeting are:

 

(1) To elect nine Directors nominated by the Board of Directors (the “Board of Directors” or the “Board”);

 

(2) To approve the Cousins Properties Incorporated 2009 Incentive Stock Plan (the “2009 Plan”) and the performance goals set forth in the 2009 Plan;

 

(3) To ratify the appointment of Deloitte & Touche LLP (“Deloitte”) as our independent registered public accounting firm for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2009; and

 

(4) To transact any other business as may properly come before the meeting.

 

All holders of record of our common stock at the close of business on March 13, 2009 are entitled to vote at the meeting and any postponements and adjournments of the meeting.

 

By Order of the Board of Directors,

 

ROBERT M. JACKSON

Corporate Secretary

 

Atlanta, Georgia

April 8, 2009

 

Whether or not you expect to attend the Annual Meeting, you are urged to vote, date, sign and return the enclosed proxy in the enclosed postage-paid envelope. You also may vote your shares over the Internet or by telephone as described on your proxy card. If you attend the Annual Meeting, you may revoke the proxy and vote your shares in person.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

COUSINS PROPERTIES INCORPORATED
191 Peachtree Street, Suite 3600
Atlanta, Georgia 30303-1740

 

PROXY STATEMENT

 

GENERAL INFORMATION

 

This proxy statement and proxy card are furnished in connection with the solicitation of proxies to be voted at our 2009 Annual Meeting of Stockholders. Our Annual Meeting will be held on Tuesday, May 12, 2009, at 11:00 a.m., local time, at 191 Peachtree Street, Atlanta, Georgia 30303. The proxy is solicited by our Board of Directors. This proxy statement and proxy card are first being sent to holders of our common stock on April 8, 2009.

 

Why am I receiving this proxy statement and proxy card?

 

You are receiving this proxy statement and proxy card because you owned shares of Cousins Properties Incorporated common stock on March 13, 2009. This proxy statement describes issues on which we would like you to vote at our Annual Meeting. It also gives you information on these issues so that you can make an informed decision.

 

What is a proxy?

 

It is your legal designation of another person to vote the stock you own. That other person is called a proxy. The written document in which you designate that person is called a proxy or a proxy card. Two of our Directors have been designated as proxies for the 2009 Annual Meeting of Stockholders. These Directors are Boone A. Knox and William Porter Payne.

 

Who is entitled to vote?

 

Holders of our common stock at the close of business on March 13, 2009 are entitled to receive notice of the meeting and to vote at the meeting and any adjournments or postponements of the meeting. March 13, 2009 is referred to as the record date.

 

To how many votes is each share of common stock entitled?

 

Holders of our common stock are entitled to one vote per share.

 

What is the difference between a stockholder of record and a stockholder who holds common stock in “street name”?

 

If your shares of common stock are registered in your name, you are a stockholder of record. If your shares are in the name of your broker or bank, your shares are held in “street name.”

 

How do I vote?

 

Common stockholders of record may vote:

 

 

If you hold your shares of common stock through a broker or bank, please refer to your proxy card or the information forwarded by your broker or bank to see the voting options that are available to you. Written ballots will be passed out to anyone who wants to vote at the Annual Meeting. However, if you hold your shares of common stock in street name, you must obtain a legal proxy from your broker or bank to be able to vote in person at the Annual Meeting.

What if I change my mind after I return my proxy?

 

You may revoke your proxy and change your vote at any time before the polls close at the Annual Meeting. You may do this by:

 

 

Attendance at the meeting will not by itself revoke a proxy.

 

On what items am I voting?

 

You are being asked to vote on three items:

 

 

No cumulative voting rights are authorized, and dissenters’ rights are not applicable to these matters.

 

How may I vote for the nominees for election of Directors, and how many votes must the nominees receive to be elected?

 

With respect to the election of Directors, you may:

 

 

Directors are elected by a plurality vote. As a result, the nine nominees receiving the highest number of FOR votes will be elected as Directors.

 

We have a majority voting policy for the election of Directors. The policy, which is part of our Corporate Governance Guidelines, sets forth our procedures if a nominee is elected, but receives a majority of votes withheld. In an uncontested election, any nominee for Director who receives a greater number of votes withheld from his or her election than votes for his or her election is required to promptly tender his or her resignation. Our Compensation, Succession, Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee is required to promptly consider the resignation offer and make a recommendation to the Board with respect to the resignation. The Board is required to take action with respect to this recommendation. The policy is more fully described below under “Majority Voting Policy.”

 

What happens if a nominee is unable to stand for election?

 

If a nominee is unable to stand for election, the Board may, by resolution, provide for a lesser number of Directors or designate a substitute nominee. If the Board designates a substitute nominee, shares represented by proxies voted for the nominee unable to stand for election will be voted for the substitute nominee.

How may I vote for the approval of the 2009 Plan and the performance goals set forth in the 2009 Plan and the ratification of the appointment of the independent registered public accounting firm? How many votes must the proposals receive to pass?

 

With respect to the proposals to approve the 2009 Plan and the performance goals set forth in the 2009 Plan and ratify the independent registered public accounting firm, you may:

 

 

These proposals must receive the affirmative vote of a majority of the shares present at the Annual Meeting either in person or by proxy to pass. Abstentions and broker non-votes with respect to a proposal are counted for purposes of establishing a quorum, but will have no effect on the outcome of the vote.

 

In addition, New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”) rules require that the total votes cast on the proposal to approve the 2009 Plan must represent a majority of the shares entitled to vote on the proposal.

 

How does the Board of Directors recommend that I vote?

 

The Board recommends a vote FOR the nine Director nominees, FOR the approval of the 2009 Plan and the performance goals set forth in the 2009 Plan and FOR the ratification of the independent registered public accounting firm.

 

What happens if I sign and return my proxy card but do not provide voting instructions?

 

If you return a signed card but do not provide voting instructions, your shares of common stock will be voted FOR the nine nominees for Director, FOR the approval of the 2009 Plan and the performance goals set forth in the 2009 Plan and FOR the ratification of the independent registered public accounting firm.

 

Will my shares be voted if I do not sign and return my proxy card, vote by phone or vote over the Internet?

 

If you are a common stockholder of record and you do not sign and return your proxy card, vote by phone, vote over the Internet or attend the Annual Meeting and vote in person, your shares will not be voted and will not count in deciding the matters presented for stockholder consideration in this proxy statement.

 

If your shares of common stock are held in “street name” through a broker or bank and you do not provide voting instructions before the Annual Meeting, your broker or bank may vote your shares on your behalf under certain circumstances. Brokerage firms have the authority under NYSE rules to vote shares for which their customers do not provide voting instructions on routine matters. When a proposal is not a routine matter and the brokerage firm has not received voting instructions from the beneficial owner of the shares with respect to that proposal, the brokerage firm cannot vote the shares on that proposal. This is called a “broker non-vote.” Broker non-votes will be counted for purposes of establishing a quorum, but not for determining the number of shares voted for or against the non-routine matter.

 

The election of Directors and the ratification of the independent registered public accounting firm described in this proxy statement are routine matters. The approval of the 2009 Plan and the performance goals set forth in the 2009 Plan is not a routine matter.

 

If your shares are in street name, we encourage you to provide voting instructions to your broker or bank by voting your proxy. This action ensures your shares will be voted at the Annual Meeting in accordance with your wishes.

 

How many votes do you need to hold the Annual Meeting?

 

Shares of our common stock are counted as present at the Annual Meeting if the stockholder either is present and votes in person at the Annual Meeting or properly has submitted a proxy.

As of the record date, 51,352,091 shares of our common stock were outstanding and are entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting. Holders of a majority of the outstanding shares entitled to vote as of the record date must be represented at the Annual Meeting either in person or by proxy in order to hold the Annual Meeting and conduct business. This is called a quorum. Abstentions and broker non-votes will be counted for purposes of establishing a quorum at the meeting.

 

Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy Materials for the Stockholder Meeting to be
Held on May 12, 2009.

 

The proxy statement and annual report are available on the Investor Relations page of our website
at www.cousinsproperties.com.

 

There are nine nominees for our Board of Directors this year. Our Directors are elected annually to serve until the next Annual Meeting of Stockholders and until their respective successors are elected. The Board has nominated the individuals named below for election as Directors at the Annual Meeting. All of the Director nominees are currently members of the Board and were elected as Directors by the stockholders at the Annual Meeting in 2008. Each Director nominee has consented to serve as a Director if so elected at the Annual Meeting.

 

Thomas G. Cousins, our founder and former Chairman of the Board, has served as Chairman Emeritus since December 2006. In this role he is invited to attend Board meetings, but does not have the right to vote as a Director.

 

Our Board of Directors recommends that you vote “FOR”
each of the nominees for Director

 

 

There are no family relationships among our Directors or executive officers.

 

Our Board held five meetings during 2008. Each Director attended at least 75% of the total number of meetings of the Board and any committees of which he or she was a member.

 

We typically schedule a Board meeting in conjunction with our Annual Meeting and expect that our Directors will attend, absent a valid reason. All Directors serving at the time of last year’s Annual Meeting attended the Annual Meeting.

 

Our Board has three standing committees — the Audit Committee, the Compensation, Succession, Nominating and Governance Committee and the Executive Committee.

 

Audit Committee.  The current members of our Audit Committee are Mr. Glover, Mr. Hance, Mr. Harrison and Mr. Knox. Mr. Knox is the Chairman of the Committee. The Audit Committee held eight meetings during 2008. All of the members of the Audit Committee are independent within the meaning of the SEC regulations, the listing standards of the NYSE and our Director Independence Standards. All of the members of the Audit Committee are financially literate within the meaning of the SEC regulations, the listing standards of the NYSE and the Company’s Audit Committee Charter. The Board has determined that Mr. Knox is an audit committee financial expert within the meaning of the SEC regulations and that he has accounting and related financial management expertise within the meaning of the NYSE listing standards.

 

The primary responsibilities of our Audit Committee include:

 

 

Compensation, Succession, Nominating and Governance Committee.  The current members of our Compensation, Succession, Nominating and Governance Committee are Mr. Bowles, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Hance, Mr. Harrison and Mr. Payne. Mr. Payne is the Chairman of the Committee. The Compensation, Succession, Nominating and Governance Committee held five meetings during 2008. All of the members of the Compensation, Succession, Nominating and Governance Committee are independent within the meaning of the listing standards of the NYSE and our Director Independence Standards.

 

The primary responsibilities of our Compensation, Succession, Nominating and Governance Committee include:

 

 

The Compensation, Succession, Nominating and Governance Committee retained Towers Perrin, an outside human resources consulting firm, in 2008 to provide advice regarding compensation for our executive officers,

including the Named Executive Officers listed in the compensation tables in this proxy statement. Towers Perrin provided the Compensation, Succession, Nominating and Governance Committee with relevant market data and alternatives to consider when making compensation decisions for our executive officers, including our Named Executive Officers. For more information about the market data provided to the committee, see “Compensation Discussion and Analysis.”

 

Towers Perrin advised the Compensation, Succession, Nominating and Governance Committee with respect to compensation trends and best practices, plan design and individual compensation amounts. Towers Perrin also provided services to management regarding benchmarking of non-executive officer positions and other matters. The Compensation, Succession, Nominating and Governance Committee is aware of the services provided by Towers Perrin to management.

 

Executive Committee.  The members of our Executive Committee are Mr. Bell, Mr. Knox and Mr. Payne. Mr. Bell is Chairman of the Executive Committee. The Executive Committee may exercise all powers of the Board in the management of our business and affairs, except for those powers expressly reserved to the Board. The Executive Committee did not take any action during 2008, other than the approval of the final price for property previously approved for sale by the full Board.

 

In order to evaluate the independence of each Director, our Board has adopted a set of Director Independence Standards as part of our Corporate Governance Guidelines. The Director Independence Standards are attached to this proxy statement as Annex A. They can also be found on the Investor Relations page of our website at www.cousinsproperties.com.

 

The Board has reviewed Director independence under NYSE Rule 303A.02(a) and our Director Independence Standards. In performing this review, the Board considered all transactions and relationships between each Director and our Company, subsidiaries, affiliates, senior executives and independent registered public accounting firm, including those reported under the section “Certain Transactions.” As a result of this review, the Board affirmatively determined that seven of our nine Directors currently serving on the board are independent. The independent Directors are Mr. Bowles, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Glover, Mr. Hance, Mr. Harrison, Mr. Knox and Mr. Payne.

 

Mr. Bell is not an independent Director because of his employment as our Chief Executive Officer. Ms. Giornelli is not an independent Director because she is an immediate family member of Mr. Cousins, who was one of our executive officers in the last three years.

 

Our Audit Committee and our Compensation, Succession, Nominating and Governance Committee are composed solely of independent Directors.

 

Our non-management Directors meet without management present at least two times each year, and our independent Directors meet at least once per year. In January 2004, our Board named Mr. Payne as the Lead Director. He is responsible for presiding at meetings of non-management and independent Directors.

 

Any stockholder or interested party who wishes to communicate directly with the Lead Director or the non-management Directors as a group may do so by writing to: Cousins Properties Incorporated, 191 Peachtree Street, Suite 3600, Atlanta, GA 30303-1740, Attention: Lead Director.

 

Our Board has adopted a set of Corporate Governance Guidelines. The Corporate Governance Guidelines are available on the Investor Relations page of our website at www.cousinsproperties.com. The charters of the Audit Committee and the Compensation, Succession, Nominating and Governance Committee are also available on the Investor Relations page of our website.

Our Board has adopted a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics (the “Ethics Code”), which applies to all officers, Directors and employees. This Ethics Code reflects our long-standing commitment to conduct our business in accordance with the highest ethical principles. Our Ethics Code is available on the Investor Relations page of our website at www.cousinsproperties.com. Copies of our Corporate Governance Guidelines, committee charters and Ethics Code are also available upon written request to Cousins Properties Incorporated, 191 Peachtree Street, Suite 3600, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-1740, Attention: Corporate Secretary.

 

Any stockholder or interested party who wishes to communicate directly with our Board, or an individual member of our Board, may do so by writing to Cousins Properties Incorporated Board of Directors, c/o Corporate Secretary, 191 Peachtree Street, Suite 3600, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-1740. At each regular Board meeting, the Corporate Secretary will present a summary of any communications received since the last meeting (excluding any communications that consist of advertising, solicitations or promotions of a product or service) and will make the communications available to the Directors upon request.

 

Our Corporate Governance Guidelines include a majority voting policy for the election of Directors. Pursuant to this policy, in an uncontested election of Directors, any nominee who receives a greater number of votes withheld from his or her election than votes for his or her election will promptly tender his or her resignation for consideration by the Compensation, Succession, Nominating and Governance Committee. The Compensation, Succession, Nominating and Governance Committee will promptly consider the resignation offer and make a recommendation to the Board. The Board will act on the Compensation, Succession, Nominating and Governance Committee’s recommendation within 90 days following the certification of the stockholder vote.

 

We will publicly disclose, in a Form 8-K furnished to the SEC, the Board’s decision regarding whether to accept the resignation offer. Any Director who tenders his or her resignation will not participate in the Committee or Board deliberations.

 

Our Directors take a critical role in guiding our strategic direction and overseeing our management. Our Board has delegated to the Compensation, Succession, Nominating and Governance Committee the responsibility for reviewing and recommending nominees for membership on the Board. Candidates are considered based upon various criteria. Candidates must have integrity, accountability, judgment and perspective. In addition, candidates are chosen based on their leadership and business experience, as well as their ability to contribute toward governance, oversight and strategic decision-making.

 

The Compensation, Succession, Nominating and Governance Committee will consider Director nominees proposed by stockholders on the same basis as recommendations from other sources. Any stockholder who wishes to recommend a prospective nominee for consideration by the committee may do so by submitting the candidate’s name and qualifications in writing to Cousins Properties Incorporated Compensation, Succession, Nominating and Governance Committee, c/o Corporate Secretary, 191 Peachtree Street, Suite 3600, Atlanta, Georgia 30303-1740.

 

The following table sets forth, as of February 1, 2009 unless otherwise noted, information regarding the beneficial ownership of our common stock by:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Compensation Objectives

 

The Compensation, Succession, Nominating and Governance Committee of our Board of Directors (the “Compensation Committee”) is responsible for establishing the underlying policies and principles of our compensation program, as well as determining the compensation of our executive officers, including our Named Executive Officers (or “NEOs”) that is detailed in the tables that follow. In assessing the compensation of our executives, including our NEOs, we consider strategies intended to attract and retain talented executives, both new hires and our existing team, in a competitive and dynamic real estate marketplace. While keeping in mind our accountability to our stockholders, we aim to reward executives commensurate with corporate and individual performance in a variety of circumstances.

 

The success of our business plan depends significantly on the performance of the executives responsible for its execution. Our strategy differs from the strategy of most real estate investment trusts (or “REITs”). Rather than growing by acquisitions and focusing on portfolio management, we create value through the acquisition and development, or re-development, of real estate. In order to accomplish this goal through market cycles, we have created an organization that has the capacity to develop or invest in multiple product types in several geographic markets. Our ability to execute development and investment management, to mitigate associated risk and to plan for succession requires us to attract and retain executive talent across all of our disciplines.

 

The core principle of our compensation program is to position our NEOs’ cash and equity-based compensation to be within a competitive range (e.g., +/-15%) of the average compensation paid by the 50th to the 75th percentile of certain relevant labor markets (described below under “Peer Group Analysis”) for similarly situated positions. Providing compensation levels within this range allows us to be competitive in finding and retaining the top talent we need to continue to perform at high levels. Another principle of our compensation strategy is to provide a meaningful portion of total compensation via equity-based awards.

 

All of our employees, including our NEOs, are employed “at-will.” Other than a 401(k)/profit sharing plan, we do not have a pension plan or deferred compensation program for any of our employees, including our NEOs. Rather, we focus on providing cash compensation and long-term equity-based awards in amounts necessary to retain our NEOs and to allow them to provide for their own retirement. However, we have typically made annual discretionary contributions to our 401(k)/profit sharing plan for the benefit of all employees meeting certain service requirements. In addition, certain key employees, including our NEOs, are provided benefits under Change in Control Severance Agreements. These agreements are discussed below under “Severance Policy, Retirement and Change in Control Agreements.”

 

NEOs for 2008

 

Our NEOs for 2008 are Thomas D. Bell, Jr. — Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer, R. Dary Stone — Vice Chairman of the Company, Craig B. Jones — Executive Vice President and Chief Investment Officer and James A. Fleming — Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer. In addition, Daniel M. DuPree is one of our NEOs discussed herein. During 2008, Mr. DuPree was our President & Chief Operating Officer. In February 2009, Mr. DuPree was named Vice Chairman and relinquished the title of President & Chief Operating Officer. In March 2009, Mr. DuPree resigned from the Company.

 

Compensation Review Process

 

Peer Group Analysis

 

The Compensation Committee evaluates NEO compensation by reviewing available competitive data. The Compensation Committee reviews data representing organizations of varying sizes (measured by market capitalization) and operating strategies. For 2008 compensation, the Compensation Committee engaged Towers Perrin to compile data from three primary sources: (1) the 2007 National Association of Real Estate Investment Trusts

(“NAREIT”) survey, (2) the 2006 Mercer Real Estate Survey and (3) a “custom cut” peer group of 11 companies with similar business activities, strategies and asset classes.

 

We have no input regarding the companies included in the NAREIT or Mercer surveys. In contrast, we did select the 11 companies in the “custom cut” peer group, which were:

 

 

The NAREIT survey is conducted annually and collects compensation information for executive and non-executive positions exclusively for REITs. In addition to the total sample of all 103 companies in the NAREIT survey, the Compensation Committee considered data for the 27 companies in the survey with a total market capitalization of $1 billion to $3 billion (as of the time of the survey) and data for the 15 companies in the survey with a total market capitalization of $3 billion to $6 billion (as of the time of the survey). The NAREIT survey is used to provide the Compensation Committee with a broad view of the competitive labor market. Although the Compensation Committee views the entire NAREIT database as the best representation of competitive practices, no single data perspective is targeted in the Compensation Committee’s consideration of appropriate compensation levels for NEOs. The Compensation Committee also uses a survey conducted bi-annually by Mercer Consulting, which focuses on businesses in the real estate development industry. The Mercer survey includes companies that are not REITs, as well as privately held companies. For our NEOs, data from each survey was considered but the primary data reference was the total sample of all companies in the NAREIT survey.

 

Performance Review

 

The Compensation Committee evaluates Company performance when making compensation decisions with respect to our NEOs. In particular, as discussed herein, Company performance is used to evaluate Annual Incentive Cash Awards and Long-Term Incentive Equity Awards.

 

Role of Management and Compensation Consultants

 

In making decisions regarding executive officer compensation, the Compensation Committee considers recommendations from our CEO with respect to each of the other executive officers. These recommendations are based upon the CEO’s analysis of each executive officer’s performance and contributions. However, the Compensation Committee retains the right to act in its sole and absolute discretion. In addition, representatives of Towers Perrin will from time to time attend Compensation Committee meetings and provide guidance regarding interpreting the competitive compensation data and trends in the marketplace.

 

Components of Compensation

 

As provided in the Summary Compensation Table for 2008 below, compensation for our NEOs in 2008 incorporated four primary components: a base salary, annual incentive cash award, long-term incentive equity award (or “LTI”) and certain benefits and perquisites.

 

Base Salary

 

The Compensation Committee, at its December 6, 2007 meeting, determined the 2008 base salaries for our NEOs. The Compensation Committee views base salary as the foundation of our compensation program. We make base salary decisions based on the individual’s scope of responsibilities, experience, qualifications, individual performance and contributions to the Company, as well as an analysis of data from the peer groups discussed previously. Based on these criteria, the Compensation Committee determined that the base salaries of Messrs. Bell, Fleming and Stone were appropriate and were not changed for 2008. The base salary of Mr. DuPree was increased from $375,000 to $400,000 for 2008 to reflect his additional responsibilities after he became President and Chief Operating Officer in May 2007. The base salary of Mr. Jones was increased from $340,000 to $350,000 for 2008 to

reflect his important contributions to the Company. The base salaries of our NEOs for 2007 and 2008 were as follows:

 

 

Annual Incentive Cash Award Opportunity

 

Our NEOs each have an opportunity to earn an annual incentive cash award. This award is designed to reward annual corporate performance, as well as to encourage and reward individual achievement during the year. The target incentive cash awards range from approximately 90% to 125% of the NEO’s base salary amount, with our most senior NEOs at the higher end of this range. The Compensation Committee established a 2008 target incentive cash award opportunity for each NEO following a review of the individual’s scope of responsibilities, experience, qualifications, individual performance and contributions to the Company, as well as an analysis of data from the peer groups discussed previously. The annual incentive cash award opportunity target and the performance goals set by the Compensation Committee (discussed below) are communicated to the NEOs each year. The determination of the actual incentive cash award paid to an executive officer is not entirely formulaic. The Compensation Committee, in exercising its judgment and discretion to adjust an award up or down, considers all facts and circumstances when evaluating individual executive’s performance, including changing market conditions and broad corporate strategic initiatives, along with overall responsibilities and contributions.

 

2008 Annual Incentive Cash Award

 

At its February 18, 2008 meeting, the Compensation Committee adopted goals for each division and the corporate group. The goals were adopted following a review of our annual business plan and budget for the year. The Compensation Committee assigned each goal a weight of relative importance. The Compensation Committee considered these goals to be aggressive and that, if met, the Company and each division would have had a good year. In May 2008, we reorganized the Company, eliminating our division structure and instead adopting a “matrix” organization focused on functional areas (i.e., Development, Leasing and Asset Management, Investment and Corporate). We believe this new structure will put the Company in the best position to continue to be competitive in the future. Following the reorganization, the Compensation Committee, at its May 6, 2008 meeting, adjusted the annual incentive cash award goals to reflect the new organization of the Company, blending the divisional goals into overall Company goals that would apply regardless of function and area. The following were the annual incentive cash award performance goals for 2008:

 

1. Funds From Operations.  The Compensation Committee established a “Funds From Operations” (or “FFO”)¹ goal for the Company. We believe that FFO is an appropriate measure of corporate performance when it is properly adjusted for activities related to our development and capital recycling strategies. FFO was weighted to be 30% of the overall goal.

 

2. Percentage Leased.  Another goal for 2008 was the percentage of space leased in our office and retail portfolios, both operating properties and those under development. We believe one of our core competencies is to develop and lease property. Therefore, we expect each project to achieve near capacity occupancy after a pro forma lease-up period following completion of construction or acquisition. Leasing targets for 2008 also took into account overall market conditions. Percentage leased was weighted to be 30% of the overall goal.

 

3. Profits From Residential Lot, Condominium and Tract Sales.  Another goal for 2008 was profits from residential lot, condominium and tract sales, which was weighted to be 20% of the overall goal.

 

 

¹ For the definition of FFO, please see our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008 available at www.sec.gov or on the Investor Relations page of our website at www.cousinsproperties.com.

4. Development Starts and Investments.  The final goal for 2008 was new development starts and investments. Our 2008 development starts and investments goal took into account our development capacity, our development pipeline and the status of the real estate cycle. This goal was weighted to be 20% of the overall goal.

 

The Compensation Committee believed that the 2008 performance goals and the weighting of each for the 2008 annual incentive cash awards, were aggressive and appropriate given our business strategy and historic performance.

 

The Compensation Committee, at its January 28, 2009 meeting, evaluated performance against these goals and determined that we had partially achieved our performance goals for the year. In particular, our FFO was substantially in line with our goal if certain non-cash impairment charges were excluded from the calculation. The Compensation Committee considered our level of FFO strong considering the economic environment in 2008. We did not achieve our blended overall leasing goals (operating properties combined with development properties). However, despite the weakening economy, we were able to exceed our leasing goals for operating properties. The Compensation Committee considered that our performance against our sales goals was relatively strong, particularly in light of the overall market. Our land tracts sales were above target, while our condominium and residential lot sales were well below target. One reason we underperformed our condominium sales goal was due to the decision to sell in bulk the remaining residential units at our 50 Biscayne project in Miami, Florida. The 50 Biscayne bulk sale was at a lower profit percentage than our original estimate, but the Compensation Committee still considered our overall performance with respect to this investment strong, particularly in light of the turbulent condominium market in Miami, Florida. Last, we did not achieve our development starts and investments goals for 2008. In fact, we did not start any new developments in 2008 and made only one relatively small investment late in the year. The decision not to start any new developments during the year was primarily due to the overall market conditions. In this regard, the Compensation Committee determined that we had made the right decisions with respect to new development and investments in 2008, by not taking unnecessary risks.

 

For 2008, the Compensation Committee considered that we had achieved 64% of our overall goals. In addition to performance against the established goals, the Compensation Committee considered each NEO’s 2008 individual performance and contributions to the Company during the year. As discussed previously, the overall evaluation of Company and individual performance is not formulaic or quantitative; rather, it is subjective and determined at the discretion of the Compensation Committee. However, for 2008, individual performance did not result in any adjustment to the actual award for any of our NEOs. Based on these considerations and the performance against goals discussed above, each of our NEOs earned annual incentive cash awards for 2008 in an amount equal to 64% of the applicable target, detailed for each NEO as follows:

 

 

Special Cash Bonus Award to Mr. Stone

 

The Compensation Committee awarded Mr. Stone a special $150,000 bonus for 2008 to acknowledge his role in the Company’s receipt during the year of a $13.5 million fee, before commissions and taxes, from the sale of property by a third-party client. The Company expects to receive additional fees in the future with respect to the sale of the property. The Compensation Committee also awarded Mr. Stone a second special bonus of $150,000 for 2009, payable in early 2010, provided that Mr. Stone continues to be employed by the Company. In addition, the Compensation Committee awarded Mr. Stone a third special bonus of $200,000 for 2015, payable on February 28, 2016, provided that the amount of such special bonus will be reduced in the same proportion that certain future

amounts received by the Company from the sale of the property are less than anticipated. The third special bonus is not conditioned upon Mr. Stone’s future employment.

 

2009 Annual Incentive Cash Award Targets

 

The Compensation Committee, at its meeting on December 5, 2008, established the 2009 target annual incentive cash awards for our NEOs as a percentage of base salary and also expressed as a dollar amount in the table below:

 

 

The Compensation Committee, at its meeting on February 16, 2009, established the goals for 2009 annual incentive cash awards. The 2009 goals are comprised of (1) FFO, (2) square footage leased, (3) profits from residential lot, condominium and tract sales and (4) acquisitions and investments, which would include new development starts. Relative to 2008, the Compensation Committee weighted the 2009 goals to emphasize FFO and square footage leased across our portfolio, representing 35% and 40%, respectively, of the overall 2009 goals (both up from 30% in 2008). Given the current status of the real estate cycle, the Compensation Committee weighted the goals for profits from residential lot, condominium and tract sales and for acquisitions and investments relatively smaller than in previous years representing 15% and 10%, respectively, of the overall goal (each down from 20% in 2008). The Compensation Committee considers these goals to be very aggressive in the current markets and that if met then the Company would have had a good year.

 

Long-Term Incentive Equity Awards

 

Our LTI program is intended to provide an incentive to our executives for the creation of value and the corresponding growth of our stock price over time. The ultimate goal of equity-based compensation is to encourage executives to act as equity owners. We believe equity-based compensation plays an essential role in retaining and motivating our NEOs by providing incentives that are linked to our long-term success and increasing stockholder value. The Compensation Committee grants stock options, stock appreciation rights (“SARs”), restricted stock and restricted stock units (“RSUs”) under our LTI program.

 

Stock Options And Stock Appreciation Rights

 

The Compensation Committee believes that a significant portion of our equity-based compensation should be in the form of stock options or SARs, which reward stock price growth in a more substantial way than full value stock awards, such as restricted stock and RSUs. The Compensation Committee believes that stock options and SARs provide a significant link between the executive and our goal of maximizing stockholder value, as the award will have value only if the market value of our stock increases above the exercise price. Typically, the Compensation Committee allocates LTI awards 60% to full value awards and 40% to stock options and SARs. However, the Compensation Committee will from time to time adjust this allocation depending upon the number of shares available under our equity plan and considering levels of stockholder dilution. For example, the Compensation Committee granted LTI awards to our NEOs using 43% full value awards and 57% stock options in 2007 and then granted LTI awards to our NEOs using 60% full value awards and 40% stock options in 2008.

 

Stock options and SARs (i) are issued with an exercise price equal to the closing market price on the grant date, (ii) vest ratably over the four-year period beginning on the grant date and (iii) expire 10 years from the grant date. The vesting requirement creates an incentive for an executive to remain employed with the Company. Stock options and SARs do not include dividend equivalents or any reload grant features, but they are adjusted as a result of special dividends. Stock options and SARs are valued using the Black-Scholes method for purposes of determining

the number of options or SARs granted to a particular NEO and the contribution of the grant to his total compensation figure.

 

Restricted Stock and Restricted Stock Units

 

For 2008 performance, the Compensation Committee, at its February 16, 2009 meeting, awarded RSUs to our NEOs. Full value equity awards, such as restricted stock and RSUs, do not reward stock price growth to the same extent as stock options and SARs. Nevertheless, the Compensation Committee believes that full value awards are an effective compensation tool because the current value of the award is more visible to the executive, creates an interest that encourages executives to think and act like stockholders and serves as a competitive retention vehicle because the awards vest over four years. For 2008, the Compensation Committee did not grant any restricted stock.

 

An RSU is a bookkeeping unit that is essentially the economic equivalent of a share of restricted stock, the difference being that upon vesting the RSU is settled in cash. RSUs generally vest ratably over a four-year period following the grant. Beginning with the 2009 RSU grants, upon vesting each RSU will pay a cash amount equal to the 30-day average closing price of our common stock as of the vesting date. For RSUs granted prior to 2009, each RSU pays an amount equal to the closing price of our common stock on the vesting date. Also, holders of restricted stock and RSUs generally receive all regular and special cash dividends declared, or dividend equivalents in the case of RSUs, with respect to our common stock. The Compensation Committee periodically issues cash settled RSUs as a portion or the entire full value component of LTI, after considering levels of stockholder dilution since the RSU awards do not result in additional dilution to existing stockholders.

 

2008 LTI Targets

 

The Compensation Committee, at its February 18, 2008 meeting, established the target 2008 LTI awards for our NEOs. The Compensation Committee established a 2008 LTI target for each NEO following a review of the individual’s scope of responsibilities, experience, qualifications, individual performance and contributions to the Company, as well as an analysis of data from the peer groups discussed previously. The 2008 LTI target for each NEO was not adjusted from the 2007 LTI target. LTI target awards are expressed as a dollar amount. The Compensation Committee utilizes a dollar amount as a target, rather than a number of shares or options, so as to neutralize the impact of stock price volatility and permit our equity-based compensation to be budgeted with greater accuracy. The Compensation Committee views LTI as an essential component of annual compensation of our NEOs and, as a result, the committee does not consider prior grants when making current year determinations. The target 2008 LTI awards for our NEOs are included in the table under “2008 LTI Grants” below.

 

2008 LTI Performance Goals

 

In 2006, the Compensation Committee established the following three performance factors for purposes of evaluating LTI awards: (1) “total stockholder return” over various time periods, both on an absolute basis and relative to the Morgan Stanley REIT index, (2) development starts and investments over time and (3) “value creation” over time. For 2008, the Compensation Committee reviewed these LTI performance factors and determined that each was still appropriate. The Compensation Committee may review the factors again in 2009 if it believes it is warranted. Our LTI performance factors are neither absolute targets nor are they applied in a formulaic manner. Rather, performance is evaluated across the three factors and over time. The Compensation Committee believes that the LTI performance factors are aggressive and appropriate given our business strategy and historic results. The Compensation Committee, at its February 16, 2009 meeting, evaluated performance in 2008 against these factors as follows:

 

1. Total Stockholder Return.  Performance of our common stock was considered on both an absolute basis, as well as relative to the Morgan Stanley REIT index. To encourage management to focus on long-term strategy, the Compensation Committee considered performance over 1, 3, 5, 7 and 10-year intervals. Our stock price fell significantly in 2008 and “total stockholder return” assuming reinvestment of dividends was uniformly below both our targets and the Morgan Stanley REIT index for all five intervals. However, the Compensation Committee also considered the fact that our total stockholder return would have exceeded the

Morgan Stanley REIT index for certain periods if the special dividends paid by the Company during these periods were treated as held in cash rather than as reinvested in Company stock.

 

2. Development Starts and Investments.  Our development starts and investments were reviewed for 2008 and for the 6-year period ended December 31, 2008. The Company had no development starts and only one relatively small new investment in 2008. For the 6-year period, the Compensation Committee considered that we had aggregate development starts and investments of approximately $1.755 billion. The level of development starts and investments for the 6-year period ending December 31, 2008 set records for us and exceeded the applicable long-term target amounts.

 

3. Value Creation.  Our “value creation” was evaluated for 2008 and over the 6-year period ended December 31, 2008. “Value creation” is the amount we realize upon the sale or other disposition of an asset, or the value given the asset upon its contribution to certain joint ventures, compared to our investment in the asset, without any adjustment for depreciation. We believe value creation is a core measure of our performance and is an essential component when evaluating management performance. During 2008, we realized aggregate value creation of approximately 14%, or $13 million. The Compensation Committee also considered that over the 6-year period ended December 31, 2008, we had an average of 38% overall value creation, totaling over $595 million.

 

2008 LTI Grants

 

Based on the foregoing, the Compensation Committee at its meeting on February 16, 2009, granted LTI awards to our NEOs for 2008 at 64% of the amount targeted for each NEO. The number of stock options and cash-settled RSUs granted by the Compensation Committee are set forth in the table below. The 2008 grants were made on February 16, 2009 and, therefore, the grants to each NEO are not included in the Grants of Plan Based Awards in 2008 and the Outstanding Equity Awards at 2008 Fiscal Year End tables that follow this Compensation Discussion and Analysis. The value of the awards for purposes of determining the number of stock options and RSUs granted to each NEO was determined using our average stock price over a 30-day period ending on February 11, 2009. The exercise price of the stock options granted was the closing price on February 13, 2009 since February 16, 2009 was not a business day.

 

 

2009 LTI Targets

 

The Compensation Committee, at its meeting on February 16, 2009, established 2009 LTI targets for each of our NEOs as follows:

 

 

The 2009 LTI targets for each NEO were established by the Compensation Committee following a review of the individual’s scope of responsibilities, experience, qualifications, individual performance and contributions to

the Company, as well as an analysis of data from the peer groups discussed previously. Mr. Bell’s 2009 LTI target was increased to $1,500,000 from the 2008 target of $1,350,000 to reflect his contribution to the Company and to be more in line with our peer group. Mr. DuPree’s 2009 LTI target was decreased to $350,000 from $800,000 in 2008 to reflect his new role as Vice Chairman of the Company. Mr. Fleming’s 2009 LTI target was increased by $25,000 to $350,000 to reflect his contribution to the Company and to be more in line with our peer group data. The 2009 LTI targets for Mr. Stone and Mr. Jones were not adjusted from 2008.

 

LTI Grant Practices

 

Prior to 2008, for at least 10 years, we have granted LTI awards to key employees at a regularly scheduled meeting of the Compensation Committee in November or December of each year, in anticipation of our fiscal year ending December 31 and at the same time as annual incentive cash awards are evaluated. For 2008, we made the LTI decisions in early 2009. We anticipate that decisions with respect to 2009 LTI awards will be made in early 2010.

 

We do not have any program, plan or practice that coordinates the grant of equity awards with the release of material information. We generally do not grant options to newly hired employees.

 

Benefits and Perquisites

 

To remain competitive in the market, we provide certain benefits and perquisites to our NEOs. These include health, life and disability insurance premiums paid by us on behalf of our NEOs, certain club membership dues and contributions to our 401(k)/profit sharing plan. In addition, our CEO is permitted to use the Company aircraft for personal use, the cost of which is borne by us. We have also paid the travel expenses of our CEO, including the cost of using the Company aircraft, to attend meetings related to his service on boards of other companies. The Compensation Committee has reviewed the benefits and perquisites provided to our NEOs in 2008 and determined that they are appropriate. Additional information on the aggregate incremental cost to us of providing these benefits and perquisites to our NEOs in 2008 is shown in the Summary Compensation Table for 2008 below.

 

Stock Ownership Guidelines and Insider Trading Policy

 

Our Corporate Governance Guidelines include stock ownership guidelines for our executive officers. Generally, these guidelines require the executive officers to maintain ownership of our stock with a value equal to the following multiple of his or her base salary:

 

 

The guidelines are consistent with our belief that our executive officers’ interests should be aligned with those of our stockholders and our expectation that executive officers maintain a significant level of investment in our Company. The following count toward the executive officer stock ownership requirements:

 

 

Existing executives have five years from the adoption of the guidelines in 2006 to accumulate the required shares. New executives are allowed five years from the date of election, promotion to executive officer, or commencement of employment as an executive officer to accumulate the required shares. The Chairman of the

Compensation Committee may approve exceptions to the guidelines from time to time as he or she deems appropriate.

 

Our insider trading policy does not permit trading in our securities on a short-term basis, purchases of our stock on margin, short sales or trading puts or calls with respect to our stock.

 

Severance Policy, Retirement and Change in Control Agreements

 

We provide severance benefits to all employees, including our NEOs, following termination of employment by us other than for “cause.” In general, the severance benefit payable is an amount equal to the employee’s weekly pay times the sum of the number of his or her full years of service plus four.

 

The 1999 Incentive Stock Plan (the “1999 Plan”) and the 2005 Restricted Stock Unit Plan (the “RSU Plan”) generally provide for accelerated vesting of awards upon a “change in control.” However, under our 1999 Plan, if the plan is continued or assumed after the change in control, accelerated vesting occurs only in the event a participant’s employment is terminated for any reason (including voluntary resignation) during the 2-year period following the change in control. Our NEOs participate in the 1999 Plan and the RSU Plan on the same terms as our other key employees. The Compensation Committee believes that the accelerated vesting of outstanding equity awards following a change in control is a customary and reasonable component of an equity incentive program.

 

In general, an employee will forfeit any unvested LTI grants upon termination of employment for any reason other than following a change in control. However, stock options and RSUs vest upon retirement of the employee if the employee is at least 60 years of age and the sum of the employee’s whole years of age plus whole years of service equals at least 65 (collectively, the “Rule of 65”). The Rule of 65 does not apply to restricted stock awards. The Compensation Committee adopted the Rule of 65 to provide a further incentive for long-term employment, as well as to recognize that options and RSUs are part of annual compensation and if an employee retired after satisfying certain age and service requirements then he or she should get the benefit of outstanding options and RSUs. The Compensation Committee did not adopt the Rule of 65 for restricted stock grants because it would result in adverse tax consequences to the recipient.

 

In addition, each of our NEOs is a party to a Change in Control Severance Agreement (the “Severance Agreement”), which provides the NEOs with an additional severance benefit in the event that his employment is terminated under certain circumstances following a “change in control.” The Compensation Committee approved the Severance Agreements at its meeting on August 13, 2007. The committee received input from Towers Perrin regarding the competiveness of the benefits provided to each NEO under the Severance Agreements. The Compensation Committee believes that the cash severance and other benefits provided to each NEO pursuant to his Severance Agreement is a customary and reasonable component of a plan to keep our NEOs focused on the interests of the stockholders in the event of a potential strategic transaction. The amount of the estimated payments to each NEO assuming retirement, severance or a change in control and a qualifying termination of employment as of December 31, 2008 are set forth in Potential Payments Upon Termination, Retirement or Change in Control table below.

 

Tax Implications of Executive Compensation

 

Our aggregate deductions for compensation paid to certain executive officers during 2008 was limited by Section 162(m) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the “Code”), primarily because our compensation elements generally are not considered paid under a predetermined objective performance plan meeting certain requirements, and, in addition, did not meet other exceptions that would permit a deduction. The exception to this treatment is compensation resulting from the exercise of stock options, which qualify for a deduction. While we are mindful of the impact of the deduction limitation, we feel that our NEO compensation was structured in an appropriate manner. In light of our current pay levels and practices applicable to NEOs, the tax deduction limitation of Section 162(m) does not, in the aggregate, have a material impact on our financial results.

 

The Compensation, Succession, Nominating and Governance Committee is responsible for, among other things, setting and administering the policies that govern executive compensation, establishing the performance goals on which the compensation plans are based and setting the overall compensation principals that guide the committee’s decision-making. The Compensation, Succession, Nominating and Governance Committee has reviewed the Compensation Discussion and Analysis and discussed it with management. Based on the review and the discussions with management, the Compensation, Succession, Nominating and Governance Committee recommended to the Board of Directors that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in the 2009 proxy statement for filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

 

COMPENSATION, SUCCESSION, NOMINATING
AND GOVERNANCE COMMITTEE

 

William Porter Payne, Chairman

Erskine B. Bowles

James D. Edwards

James H. Hance, Jr.

William B. Harrison, Jr.

 

The foregoing report should not be deemed incorporated by reference by any general statement incorporating by reference this proxy statement into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Acts”), except to the extent that we specifically incorporate this information by reference, and will not otherwise be deemed filed under the Acts.

 

The following table sets forth information concerning total compensation for our NEOs for 2008, 2007 and 2006.

 

 

 

		Aggregate
		SFAS No. 123R				Aggregate Market
		Expense 2004-2007				Value of Stock Awards
		Stock Award Grants				as of December 31, 2008
		(a)				(b)
Thomas D. Bell		$	1,891,393			$	920,291
Daniel M. DuPree		$	1,041,869			$	509,444
R. Dary Stone		$	375,234			$	186,421
Craig B. Jones		$	607,655			$	295,282
James A. Fleming		$	316,116			$	158,749
Total		$	4,232,267			$	2,070,187

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

We maintain a Profit Sharing Plan for the benefit of all eligible employees. The annual contribution is determined by the Compensation Committee and is allocated among eligible participants. During the first three years of a participant’s employment, contributions vest ratably each year. After a participant has three years of service, all contributions are fully vested. Vested benefits are generally paid to participants upon retirement, but may be paid earlier in certain circumstances, such as death, disability or termination of employment.

 

For Mr. Bell, perquisites include $68,133 for the aggregate incremental cost of his personal use of the Company aircraft. We calculate the aggregate incremental cost for personal use of the aircraft by taking total variable costs, which include parts, repairs, maintenance and fuel, and dividing by total yearly engine hours to establish a per-hour rate. This rate is then multiplied by flight hours for personal flights. In addition, perquisites include $19,554 for the aggregate incremental cost associated with repositioning the aircraft in connection with Mr. Bell’s personal use of the aircraft. The table does not include $16,402 for the aggregate incremental cost of his use of the Company aircraft to attend meetings of the board of directors of other companies on which he serves.

 

For Mr. Stone, perquisites include $13,811 of club dues paid on his behalf.

 

We did not provide perquisites to the other NEOs that are above the reporting threshold.

 

The following table sets forth information with respect to grants of plan-based awards to each of our NEOs during 2008. As described in the “Compensation Discussion and Analysis,” beginning in 2008 the Compensation Committee determined that plan-based equity awards would be granted early in the year that follows the year covered by the awards based on the actual results for the year. Accordingly, no plan-based equity awards were granted during 2008. Awards for 2008 were granted at the February 16, 2009 meeting of the Compensation Committee based on actual results for 2008 and are detailed in the “Compensation Discussion and Analysis” section under the heading “2008 LTI Grants.”

 

 

 

 

The following table sets forth information with respect to all outstanding option and stock awards for each of our NEOs on December 31, 2008.

 

 

 

The following table sets forth information concerning the amounts realized upon the exercise of options and the vesting of stock, including RSUs, during 2008 by each of our NEOs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

We provide severance benefits to our NEOs as described in “Severance Policy, Retirement and Change in Control Agreements” above. In 2007, we entered into Severance Agreements with our NEOs. In the event that (1) a “change in control” occurs and (2) during the 2-year period thereafter, the NEO’s employment is terminated without “cause” (discussed below) or the NEO resigns for “good reason” (discussed below), then the NEO will be paid the amount described herein. The severance benefit is payable in a lump sum six months and one day after termination.

 

For Mr. Bell, we have agreed to pay an amount equal to 2.99 times the sum of his annual base salary plus his average cash bonus. For Messrs. DuPree, Stone, Jones and Fleming, we have agreed to pay an amount equal to 2.00 times the sum of his annual base salary plus his average cash bonus. Mr. DuPree resigned effective March 15, 2009. Therefore, Mr. DuPree is no longer eligible to receive benefits under his Change in Control Agreement. The amount Mr. DuPree received upon his resignation from the Company is described following the table below.

 

For purposes of determining the severance benefit, “annual base salary” is the NEO’s annual base salary in effect on the day before the NEO’s employment terminates in connection with the change in control. The “average cash bonus” is the sum of the annual cash bonuses that were paid to the NEO during the three years immediately prior to the date the NEO’s employment terminates in connection with the change in control, divided by the number of annual cash bonuses the NEO was eligible to receive during such period. The table below assumes a triggering event occurred on December 31, 2008. The annual base salary is the salary in effect for 2008 and the average bonus is based on bonuses paid in 2006, 2007 and 2008. Neither the annual base salary nor the average bonus include the value of any stock option, restricted stock or RSU grants made to the NEO, or any dividends, or dividend equivalents, paid with respect thereto, in any calendar year, or any income realized by the NEO in any calendar year as a result of the exercise of any such stock options or the lapse of any restrictions on such restricted stock or RSUs.

 

The other terms and benefits of each Severance Agreement is substantially identical and are summarized as follows:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The following table shows the potential payments to the NEOs (except for Mr. DuPree) upon a termination of employment under various scenarios, assuming that the triggering event occurred on December 31, 2008. The amount received by Mr. DuPree as a result of his resignation on March 15, 2009 is described after the table.

 

The table does not include a severance benefit payable generally to all salaried employees following termination of employment other than for cause and not in connection with a change in control, in an amount equal to the employee’s weekly pay times the sum of the number of his or her full years of service plus four. The table also does not include the value of equity awards that are already vested, as described in the compensation tables earlier in this proxy statement.