SAIC juicy bits, tangled up like a snake ball?

Voting proxies are pretty boring stuff...until you read some  juicy bits, tangled up like a snake ball...in SAIC upcoming shareholder vote. Note this honey, its loaded with language about pay. Why Pay? Why now? Usually it the oh hum of voting the board of directors, ratifying the auditors...but read the choice issues about pay, alias compensation, this round. More mistakes being shuffled around? Seemingly, a small  shareholder Kenneth Stein, brings up to vote and  has placed on the ballot "Proposal 6 STOCKHOLDER PROPOSAL REGARDING SHAREHOLDER ACTION BY WRITTEN CONSENT" part of that vote addresses the following... http://investors.saic.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=193857&p=irol-SECText&TEXT=aHR0cDovL2lyLmludC53ZXN0bGF3YnVzaW5lc3MuY29tL2RvY3VtZW50L3YxLzAwMDExOTMxMjUtMTItMTkxNzMwL3htbC9zdWJkb2N1bWVudC8xL3BhZ2UvNTc%3d "In addition, 20% of annual incentive pay consisted of the subjective evaluation of non-financial goals. Discretionary elements can undermine the credibility and effectiveness of an incentive pay plan. Despite being Chief Executive Officer for only two years, Kenneth Dahlberg was potentially entitled to $11 million if there was a change in control. This was not in the interests of shareholders. " Isn't it Dalhberg,,,,that's on those mounting lawsuits, did he even last the two years...will someone grab that timeline between him and Haverstein...I need a calculator! He backs up the position with the following:  "This proposal topic won majority shareholder support at 13 major companies in 2010. This included 67%-support at both Allstate and Sprint. Hundreds of major companies enable shareholder action by written consent. " Following that is a rebuttal by and section...stating why its not good for SAIC Statement of the Board of Directors Opposing this Proposal  Preceeding  that is Proposal 4, is  laundry  list of salary topics  "provide the same types of benefits for executives as other employees, with no special or supplemental pension, health or death benefits for executives; " "avoid incentives that encourage unnecessary or excessive risk-taking;" "enable us to recover, or “clawback,” incentive compensation if there is any material restatement of our financial results, or if an executive is involved in misconduct;" last but not least during  2009 SAIC website in accordance with retirement policy...He was replaced by Haverstein who then stepped down...who was then replaced by an person old  enough to make you think, what? So you must retire mandatory and then hire a CEO Jumper who seems to be a similar  old man.   http://investors.saic.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=193857&p=IROL-secToc&TOC=aHR0cDovL2lyLmludC53ZXN0bGF3YnVzaW5lc3MuY29tL2RvY3VtZW50L3YxLzAwMDExOTMxMjUtMTItMTkxNzcxL3RvYy9wYWdl&ListAll=1 "announced today that Ken Dahlberg, the company's chairman and chief executive officer, has advised the board of directors that, consistent with the company's mandatory retirement policy for executive officers, he will step down as CEO on September 20, 2009" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_P._Jumper  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kenneth_C._Dahlberg  Reminder: Google SAIC Firelane Police and Fire law sues SAIC, google Gerald Denault vs SAIC