• Approved Board and Committee meeting minutes
• Treasurer Reports
• Statements of Financial Position and Management Report
• Association communications issued to members

Hello Patrick:  I have now had a chance to catch up with recent emails and to review the By-Laws (“BL”) and would like to make the following several points:

 

1.  You cannot do anything official at the noticed annual meeting Tuesday evening regarding election of directors or officers going forward because the notice requirements of BL 7.4 and 8.3.2 have not been followed. I suggest that you announce during your opening remarks that this was an oversight and that it will be done at a continued Annual Meeting with appropriate notice to Members. 

 

To clarify, we are not planning to conduct an election of Directors at the Annual Meeting. 

 

With respect to officers (President, Vice President, Secretary, Treasurer), those positions are elected by the Board, not by the Members. Officer elections occur at a Board meeting and are not subject to member notice or nomination requirements. As such, no officer elections will be conducted at the Annual Meeting itself.

 

As discussed with April, the Board welcomes community members who wish to become more involved. Members in good standing are encouraged to participate, attend Board meetings, and engage in future Board and officer elections through the appropriate process.

 

2.  Several of us have asked you to make this meeting primarily focused on the developer issues happening now in our neighborhoods and not have the other speakers as your updated agenda suggests. Specifically, we object that any time be given to Carl Torres and we suggest that he be disinvited to this meeting. Below is what we obtained from Zillow regarding his listing agreement for 17647 Parthenia sold last June.  You will note that he highlights what can be done by a developer on the site—-split the lot, add ADUs to the existing house on 1/2 and build new large house with multiple ADUs on the other 1/2. No matter what he plans to say to our Members he is not a friend nor should he be believed if he says anything other than what he and other brokers are now promoting for our neighborhood which will only duplicate what we already know. We will not hesitate to make this point if he is allowed to speak. 

 

The agenda for the Annual Meeting is set by the Board and reflects our judgment as to what will be most informative and constructive for the community. The focus of the meeting remains squarely on current development activity and its impacts on Sherwood Forest.

 

Inviting a local Realtor to speak to market conditions and investor activity is intended to provide context and perspective. Members are, of course, free to disagree with any speaker’s views and to raise questions or objections during the discussion period. The meeting will be moderated to ensure it remains respectful and productive.

 

At this time, the agenda will proceed as published.

 

3.  BL 8.1 provides that the authorized Board can be up to 12 members and there are only 9 now. In order to avoid a needless time consuming election fight when the election is duly noticed we suggest that you appoint Lisa Corothers, Lee Alpert and me to fill those vacancies under BL 8.4.1 and 8.4.5 and the 12 of us could be the slate put forth at the continued General Meeting which should happen as quickly as permitted by the BL. 

 

While the bylaws allow for a Board size of up to twelve Directors, they do not require all authorized seats to be filled. 

 

This concern can be raised at a future Board meeting, which are held on the third Tuesday of each month.

 

Any changes to Board composition will be addressed in a manner consistent with the bylaws and appropriate member process.

 

4.  If this happens as we suggest, you would call a special meeting of the new 12 member Board to elect new officers and set the date, time and agenda for this continued General Meeting.  Any officer who has served more than the previous 4 years would not be eligible under BL 10.2 to be elected for another term. 

 

 

As noted above, officers are elected by the Board. Officer terms are one year, and officers may serve up to four consecutive terms. This issue is separate from the Annual Meeting of Members and will be handled, as required, at a duly convened Board meeting as stated above.  This subject was brought up during our November meeting.

 

 

Please know Patrick and Board members that I and others copied are available to discuss further if any of you would like to reach out to us. We all plan to attend the meeting and will deliver our checks for current membership dues if the meeting takes place as we have suggested. 

 

Thank you all and Go Rams. John 

 

 

 

John Whitaker

On Sun, Jan 18, 2026 at 6:32 PM Patrick Coffin <patrick@islandtechnologies.net> wrote:
John,

Thank you for your email. I’ll respond inline below to clarify and ensure we are aligned.

See below signature –

We appreciate your engagement and your willingness to participate in the meeting. The Annual Meeting will proceed as scheduled, and we look forward to a constructive discussion on the issues facing our neighborhood.

Thanks,
Patrick

On Jan 18, 2026, at 3:23 PM, John Whitaker <johnwhitaker.home@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello Patrick:  I have now had a chance to catch up with recent emails and to review the By-Laws (“BL”) and would like to make the following several points:

 

1.  You cannot do anything official at the noticed annual meeting Tuesday evening regarding election of directors or officers going forward because the notice requirements of BL 7.4 and 8.3.2 have not been followed. I suggest that you announce during your opening remarks that this was an oversight and that it will be done at a continued Annual Meeting with appropriate notice to Members. 

 

2.  Several of us have asked you to make this meeting primarily focused on the developer issues happening now in our neighborhoods and not have the other speakers as your updated agenda suggests. Specifically, we object that any time be given to Carl Torres and we suggest that he be disinvited to this meeting. Below is what we obtained from Zillow regarding his listing agreement for 17647 Parthenia sold last June.  You will note that he highlights what can be done by a developer on the site—-split the lot, add ADUs to the existing house on 1/2 and build new large house with multiple ADUs on the other 1/2. No matter what he plans to say to our Members he is not a friend nor should he be believed if he says anything other than what he and other brokers are now promoting for our neighborhood which will only duplicate what we already know. We will not hesitate to make this point if he is allowed to speak. 

 

3.  BL 8.1 provides that the authorized Board can be up to 12 members and there are only 9 now. In order to avoid a needless time consuming election fight when the election is duly noticed we suggest that you appoint Lisa Corothers, Lee Alpert and me to fill those vacancies under BL 8.4.1 and 8.4.5 and the 12 of us could be the slate put forth at the continued General Meeting which should happen as quickly as permitted by the BL. 

 

4.  If this happens as we suggest, you would call a special meeting of the new 12 member Board to elect new officers and set the date, time and agenda for this continued General Meeting.  Any officer who has served more than the previous 4 years would not be eligible under BL 10.2 to be elected for another term. 

 

Please know Patrick and Board members that I and others copied are available to discuss further if any of you would like to reach out to us. We all plan to attend the meeting and will deliver our checks for current membership dues if the meeting takes place as we have suggested. 

 

Thank you all and Go Rams. John 

 

 

 

John Whitaker

5. Email from Lee Kanon Alpert

From: Lee Kanon Alpert <LKA@AlpertDRC.com>

Subject: Re: SFHOA

Date: January 19, 2026 at 6:39:03 PM PST

To: Patrick Coffin <patrick@islandtechnologies.net>

Cc: Jenni Harris <jkimharris@gmail.com>, Lisa C <lisadotcar@gmail.com>, Sylvette Artinian <threepointlanding@mac.com>, Dylan Goldstein <dylan.j.goldstein@gmail.com>, Scott Wright <sewproperties@gmail.com>, John Whitaker <johnwhitaker.home@gmail.com>, Jenni Harris <jkimharris@gmail.com>, Scott Wright <sewproperties@gmail.com>

 

Patrick, 

Patrick, 

I have just reviewed your responses to John, as my main system computer was malfunctioning today.  

Disappointing to say the least.  

Your seeming inflexibility or rigidity and or that of others, to accept reasonable suggestions or recommendations, even as small as non substantive agenda changes that serve the best interests of our community while Rome burned’ or damaging projects, which you and others agree are awful,  by either not responding to suggestions, responding until too late to to act timely, or not expeditiously dong what you commit to do, is simply unprofessional and not in the best interests of our HOA, which is the only concern I have.  

A significant number of us including board members perceive correctly, that we unfortunately have to spend as much time pushing the HOA as we do fighting the issues.  

Bottom line is that some change needs to be accomplished for the benefit of our community.  

Please note that I am very sorry to have had to write this, but your frustrating response to my friend, co-professional and decades long neighbor, John, was the catalyst.  That and my experience and familiarity and legally representing successful HOA’s in the past, familiarized me with both the successful and effective HOA’s and those that are not. Unfortunately, at this time ours, at this time, clearly puts us in the latter category. 

I actually think, personally , at least as I write this, that you are a nice man and we could have been friends, but you need to understand a bit more thoroughly where we need to be, where we are and examine candidly your own and others strengths an areas of weakness and act accordingly and not defensively or reactionary.  

That said, please note that a significant number of residents  and Association members, intend to not sit idly by, tomorrow night should those in charge of the meeting seek to deflect issues, take undeserved credit, misrepresent the true facts or attempt to create false perceptions of the facts and truth.  If conflicts exist with the officers and/or the officers and the speakers we intend to disclose them if appropriate.  

Please note that I am also personally, very familiar with if asked whether an LAPD officer from Devonshire Division would have been available to speak at our meeting tomorrow night, had they been asked. 

That said, I look  forward to seeing you tomorrow night, with my check in hand and sincerely hope for a productive and successful meeting.  

All the Best, 

Lee

 

Lee Kanon Alpert, Esq.

REDACTED

REDACTED direct

6. Board Response to Lee Alpert

No response

On Jan 30, 2026, at 1:27 PM, Lee Kanon Alpert <LKA@alpertdrc.com> wrote:

Patrick, 

 

The ‘appropriate’ and respectful step for the President or Chair or leader of any organization, particularly a 501(c) organization, is to meet with members their organizations to discuss organizational business when respectfully asked to do so. You for some unknown reason have refused to do so. 

 

You say you don’t mean to put anyone off, however, your response requiring us to put things in writing, is simply inappropriate, dilatory, divisive and not required by any by-law or other rationale requirement.  

 

What you have done by, for some unknown reason, not agreeing to meet with your own members without precondition is to not only do what claimed you did not want to do, and that is to put off your own members, force them to take other actions, such as the formal requests Lisa sent you with likely other actions to follow.  No one asked you to make decisions at that meeting that would require board approval. 

 

Patrick your claim of transparency is also ironic as your actions are simply contrary to that.  For example, in your leadership role you either fail to, or do the following: 

 

1. Rigid set limitations on the length of organizational meetings, with no rationale, at one hour regardless of the important issues facing the community. 

 

2. You did the same at the annual meeting.

 

3. You gave a totally non- transparent treasurers report, not the treasurer, but you simply indicating that we were in good shape, failing to and refusing to specifically provide a substantive and transparent report that gave any numbers, discussed any income and the sources or any expenditures and their reasons. Inappropriate at the annual meeting.  

 

4. While now asking for writings of what a group wants, which you likely know as an intelligent person and from other writings(which is a transparent and honest discussion), yet when you are communicated with in writing, by many, you either ignore the communications, respond exceedingly late or not at all. Or you ignore the questions or pass the buck, so, basically delay or deflect. So, what good is it to communicate in writing with you ? To be insulted by your inactions or delays?

 

5. You constantly blame delays on your board members responses, to your requests, inappropriately throwing them under the bus and when at the annual board meeting it was suggested that the way to avoid that was to give them a date by which to respond or the ask would be considered a consent to the request, you without any reason or any rationale said you wouldn’t do that. Simply astounding as that policy is used in business, corporate and not for profit boards as a recognized and regular standard to enable the organization to effectively and efficiently function.  

 

6. You have failed to abide by the by-laws of this not for profit including maximum length of terms, even for your own office, and when asked at the annual meeting how long you have served, you incredibly acted as if you did not know. Transparency you claim ?   

 

7.  When you were sent specific requests regarding board participation and suggestions of ‘appointed’ members, by-law permitted, as well as other suggestions to improve the organization you ignored them. 

 

We also have no idea if your refusal to meet with the officers was even discussed with the officers. 

 

So the list goes on.  

 

Frankly, it is my belief, rather accurate or not, you either do not have the time (of which you have expressed) or the fire in the belly to continue to ‘lead’ this organization after more than a decade or so as President.  Issues have changed, emergent issues arisen that need immediate action and perhaps fresh and new board leadership is necessary for the benefit of the organization and community. What say you? 

 

It is not an embarrassment nor should it be an ego driven decision. 

 

Thus you ask for comments in writing rather than meeting, and you now have them from me.  

 

If you want to be a leader during these difficult times, then please act like one, even if you disagree.  Even you know the correct action if you truly care about the issues facing our community. 

 

That is true leadership, to know and step down, at the right time when in the best interests of the organization. 

 

Stay in the board if you wish or as a member. But please don’t permit this once effective and necessary organization, once so effective trail off into the abyss or become fractionalized, as is happening now.  That is if you truly care for Sherwood Forest.  

 

Your response ? 

 

 

Lee

 

Lee Kanon Alpert, Esq.

REDACTED

REDACTED – direct