a sweet deal, if you can get it

i was walking down the street today, and an SEC 8-K flew into my hands from across the street. (that’s the slightly less embarassing way of saying that i read SEC filings when it pleases me. yes, i’m hopeless.) the 8-K, for a company called Security Capital Assurance (SCA), described a compensation package for a claude leblanc’s continuing service as executive vice president, corporate development and strategy.

here’s just select portion of claude’s compensation package for the term (through june 2009) described in the 8-K filing:

• base salary of $300,000
• a minimum 2007 bonus of $700,000 (he served as evp at SCA in 2007)
• a 2008 bonus opportunity of up to 150% of his base salary ($450,000)
• an additional “long term incentive award” of up to 150% of base salary ($450,000)
• an $11,000/month housing allowance ($11,000 x 12 = $120,000 annually)
• stock grants and options on various vesting schedules
• “In addition, SCA has agreed to indemnify Mr. LeBlanc in the event that his services result in his becoming liable for U.S. federal, state or local income taxes.” (… “hey leblanc! you’re not really accountable for your actions!”)

much of this is subject to approval by the board’s compensation committee for leblanc’s services. but, the very fact that the compensation committee approved these terms in the first places means they’ll probably just say “yeah, sure, pay the man” to each item. i don’t know what claude does, if he’s worth it, or what the circumstances of the situation are here. (for example, maybe they’re making him move to iraq to work, in which case the compensation might be appropriate.)

my question here: is the board acting in the best interest of SCA here, given that SCA has been just about the biggest loser there is in the securities insurance sector?