HomeStreet director Mark Paterson issues shareholder letter on Scott Boggs
Mark Patterson, a member of the Board of Directors of HomeStreet, the parent company of HomeStreet Bank, released an open letter to shareholders in connection with the Company's upcoming 2018 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, which is scheduled to be held on May 24, 2018. The letter read, in part: "As you likely know, I joined the HomeStreet Board in January of this year. Although I've only been on the Board for a few months, I am in fact deeply familiar with the Company...I understand both working in and investing in financial services companies, and I have especially extensive experience evaluating banking industry investments. I am also a substantial individual investor in HomeStreet with over 95,000 shares, which I acquired over the years.The reason I say all this is that I truly believe - having seen how the HomeStreet Board operates firsthand - that shareholders' best interests are well represented by the current directors. In particular, I have appreciated how Scott Boggs exercises the role of Lead Independent Director. I see him as an absolutely terrific advocate for shareholders and as highly qualified to head the Audit Committee...That's why I respectfully disagree with the decision by proxy advisory firm Institutional Shareholder Services not to recommend in favor of Scott's re-election to the Board. As a reminder, proxy advisory firm Glass Lewis & Co. recommended in favor of the election of all the Company's nominees, including Scott, Doug Smith, and me, and ISS recommended in support of Doug and me. I believe that ISS' decision to recommend against Scott was driven by an under-appreciation of the Company's strategy and performance. From my perspective, HomeStreet's operational strategy has worked, and continues to work, very well. At the Board's direction, HomeStreet's management has steadily executed on its strategy to grow the Commercial and Consumer Banking Segment at a faster pace than the Mortgage Banking Segment in order to reduce the Company's historical reliance on Mortgage Banking. This strategy is designed to build the strength of the Company over the long-term...My bottom line is this: Scott is a valuable voice on the Board and should retain his seat. Voting against Scott would not be just a protest vote - it could result in him coming off the Board, which would be a highly undesirable outcome for the Company and its shareholders, in my opinion."