LRPC Workshop: What We Heard from Oakmont May 7, 2019 Session - - PDF document

LRPC Workshop: What We Heard from Oakmont

May 7, 2019 Session Notes

• I Recollect that a super team went out for competitive info from other communities. Issue of the golf course:

learned that competitors funded the golf courses – what was learned?

• Sun city and Lincoln hills don’t own the golf course.
• The course was owned by a third party who also owned water rights.
• The other HOA was buying out their golf course b/c it’s in bad shape.
• Info on level of participation? -How many people actively use the facilities? What’s the participation rate on

use of facilities?

• If you take the 2015 study, the # is high, but we don’t know about the people who didn’t take the

study

• We are interviewing the new residents. 85-90% are interested in an activity here. People like to walk

the residential streets. People are participating since that’s what they are paying for but they don’t necessarily know they are participating.

• There seem to be many contradictions and misrepresentations.
• Yes, because there are many opinions being expressed in Oakmont. This represents what the

community is telling us and there are contradictions in what we are hearing.

• Location was important, not golf per new residents who were polled. This is in reaction to what the

realters said about important things to Oakmont. All realters are selling in Oakmont, Oakmont only.

• Accommodation, we aren’t growing anymore, we’re built out, has anyone ever thought we can do

video between Berger etc. Streaming. Use facilities we have and link them digitally.

• Berger surveys in Summer 2017. In that group of residents, the overwhelming majority was for fixing

existing facilities. There were 3 opinions, remodel using existing footprint.

• Many are in Sub HOA. So add that to 75$
• However, the sub-HOA costs are for things that all homeowners must pay for. Painting, landscaping,
• etc. This is the cost of ownership for everyone
• I was expecting a financials report. This presentation does not provide any finances.
• Response: This presentation is meant to identify needs. The next step in the project management

process is to create the more detailed plans and to generate the financial estimate for those plans.

• I am concerned about our facilities not being maintained now.
• To address the above, please note the multiple slides around slide 20 where we want to keep costs

reasonable PHONES OFF PLEASE

• We need a variety of views to asses everything. I would hope that architecturally this is done with versatility.

Don’t waste space when you could do a big event and break it down to a small venue. Versatility and design. *Applaud the Board for seeking a vision* Concerned with what it will be in 2030. A couple issues.

• It is a serious goal to maintain affordability.
• I think it is very important to maintain Berger’s vision of a middle class community where people can afford

to buy and afford to stay.

• Dues went up 5x as fast as CA consumer pricing index. Prior boards didn’t maintain facilities (maybe) but I

think part of the vision should be dues don’t go up more than inflation.

• Add up everything and divide by # of people paying= budget (board members said this isn’t how it’s

done) is not a good budgetary plan

• We don’t need to compete for new owners. (People seconded that)
• Do we have plans to update the survey? I see a lot of turn-over over the past few years.
• Are we going to buy the architect before or after the golf course is sorted?
• Timing of when we will hire the architect is up to the board.
• Issue with space. Multi-Purpose room from the 60’s. What does it need to look like now? What should

Oakmont look like?

• Important to be thoughtful but major issue is “What is the nature of Oakmont in the future” Vibrant active

community or a has been community? Pickleball, Dog parks, that’s what the new active people want.

• Can we create a capital fund from new house sales? – existing people are on limited incomes and don’t want

dues raised and new people paying a fortune for the homes.

• Avoid war with your neighbors and find a way to get a capital fund to take these in stride (Applauded by

some)

• Make sure the architect has a professional space assessor on staff. Need a true rep of who is where and
• when. We should consider scheduling vs doubling square footage. Space assessment and Space planning is

professional not just what the clubs want.

• Demographics, there isn’t much echo boom. Take this in to consideration
• Loved the 2 financial items, entry fee and introduce user fees b/c it’s equitable. Doesn’t have to be much!
• What’s important is to recognize that we’re an active senior living community. We have become isolated in
• ur homes and we need a centralized place and more space for socialization.
• Don’t spend too much but have an appropriate dues structure so we can stay modern
• Maintaining Oakmont as a middle class is a pipe dream. It is all upper middle class. The new people want nice

houses with nice amenities. The only way you can get around this is to put a house sale price cap.

• Is this report ready to be sent out unredacted to be sent out?
• Response: Yes, it’ll go on the website

• We could have classes of membership. Base them on how long people have lived here or many other things.

It would have to be voted on by community for CC&Rs.

• Add 1k-2k transfer fees. There are ways to deal with this, but it needs to be voted on by the community
• I recently took a course on sustainability. It helps answer the question as to whether I can get the same

sustainability from a remodel vs new build. The remodel will cost you more and they won’t get you the same level of sustainability as a new build.

• Gen Y and Gen X are small, but Gen X plus Gen Y= 50% bigger than baby boom
• In 1966 when the Berger Center was built, Mr. Berger was thinking Oakmont as about 1,000 homes. We now

have 3,200.

• The Berger Center was built in ’64, West in 76, East in ’87. Since then everything has built up but no increase

in facilities.

• For those that don’t realize it, the CAC was a rebuild not a square-footage add.
• Back in 1966 the Berger Center was all we had so it was multi-functional for a purpose.
• People say they need something this size (Berger) for stage purposes.
• However, we need a larger room for community meetings and parties.
• Can’t use room G.
• The Berger Center no longer meets the needs like it did in the past.
• This whole thing is a process. This is first step in a long process and the golf course came up which changed

the nature of the issue, but this shouldn’t interrupt the Long-Range Plan. This is a process we have to accept is going to take time.

• We are missing a Gymnasium for all the activates all year long no matter time or weather
• We should evolve our governance toward participatory democracy. Bigger than build a dog park or where to

hold a meeting. Those should involve education and voting of membership.

• Much easier to connect OVA governance with people voting
• Maybe we could eliminate all of our HOAs. The HOA would become a town or section of Santa Rosa, have
• wn supervisor, help bring you to some equal plane.
• We could become a town of Oakmont. Have a real restaurant that everyone wants to come around to
• visit. What happens if HOA dissolves and we get our own governments and go from there.
• However, we are an HOA of 15 homes. The board is interested in disbanding and going to owner
• maintained. Not opposed to the concept but the hurdles are immense. Very expensive to disband
• Homes have increased in value by 20, 30, 40x in the past many years. We have a stake in maintaining the

value of our homes. Need to think about the people we are selling these homes to.

• How will we meet their needs? Do we know what they need? Tech changes really fast.

• Golf course situation where it might sell in next month because we didn’t plan.
• We have a stake in the future of Oakmont since we will ultimately sell our homes. We are house rich.

Maintain and perhaps enhance the price of home since it’s a large source of our monetary value.

• We may have a falling market if the facilities are no good. (applauded by a few)
• Think about next wave, think about the people that don’t look like us. People of color need to be

remembered because we tend to look at younger white people.

• Asking boards about the possibility of Oakmont expanding. See about the old water treatment plant site.

There are restrictions because of the creek but it is a good location for something.

• Old OVA office building
• Other places could be advantageous for Oakmont to own
• Is there a desire for Oakmont to grow in # of homes, if yes in a couple of decades, Wild Oak may be

interested in becoming part of Oakmont.

• The cheapest way to acquire CA land is to buy a golf course. Perhaps need room to expand.
• Do we want to maintain open space or bull doze the land?
• Think about the spaces and do we need to acquire the space needed.

Thanks for your participation!!