Kenwood Press


Serving the communities of Kenwood, Glen Ellen and Oakmont

email print
Guest Editor: 03/01/2020

Berger remodel now

By Karen Oswald



In the Feb. 15, 2020 edition of the Oakmont News, Building Construction Committee Chair Iris Harrell claimed, “the potential for a new building was not given as much attention as it should have been...” by previous Boards.

I take great umbrage with this statement. As a Member of the Oakmont Village Association (OVA) 2017-18 Board that reviewed those options and voted for the Berger remodel with significant upgrades, I know that the board gave all options serious consideration.

I began studying these issues in 2014 when an in-depth, independent research project was conducted to evaluate this specific item, as well as a number of other issues. Released in May 2015, “Voices of Oakmont” showed 56 percent of Oakmont residents participated in the project and demonstrated:

People move to Oakmont because of the beauty, nature, friendliness and safety

Other amenities were not a priority

65 percent wanted only a Berger remodel

Another study, frequently ignored because it did not support the desired outcome of those wanting a new Berger, verified that Oakmont had more than enough space to accommodate the needs of various meetings, clubs, and committees; and what was needed was better management of allotting space to the various users.

The charter for the Berger Action Committee (BAC) was to determine designs and cost estimates for a Berger remodel and a new facility, maximize flexibility of space, [and find] ways to minimize downtime during construction.

When the 2017-18 board was presented with the various options, the board made all of the options available for resident comments for a 30-day period. Of all of the comments gathered, only one, current board member Heidi Klyn, wanted a bigger Berger.

A number of the materials prepared by the BAC made no sense and the charter element for minimizing downtime was not really addressed. Primarily, the costs for certain options, specifically a new building and repurposing the Berger seemed out of line. Having written numerous successful grants for housing projects, I contacted two independent commercial contracting companies, both of whom verified that the costs for a new Berger were “significantly under-reported” or “laughable,” as one put it.

Please remember, the vote to proceed with a Berger remodel was held on Feb. 6, 2018, before the exploding costs for building materials, shortage of contractors, and significant increases in construction labor costs in the wake 2017 wildfires and before the additional construction costs resulting from the 2019 wildfires.

Jan Young, of the Long Range Planning Committee, stated that priorities include “an auditorium with seating for 500.” The current Berger, without upgrades, currently seats 586. And while Ms. Harrell comments that “we have been talking about this for eight years,” in fact, the decision to proceed with a Berger remodel, with upgrades, was made over two years ago and both the 2018-19 and the current sitting Board have failed to put into action what the majority of residents want and which has been approved and scheduled for 2020.

There have been considerable comments about “new people, new ideas.” However, as confirmed by two real estate agencies specializing in Oakmont, sales run between 160-175 annually, some of which are Oakmont residents that are downsizing. At that rate it will take over a decade for even 50 percent of Oakmont’s population to be “new people.”

The above noted article stated, “an oversight process approved last March ... to assure better control over major projects” concludes that given the outrageous cost overruns of the East Rec, that process is clearly not working.

Additionally, OVA recently incurred debt of $3.5 million to finance the failing Golf Club, our reserves are stretched to the limit and beyond, scheduled or planned regular maintenance is once again being continually deferred, some to the point of having to be replaced because it has been deferred beyond repair. We have also had to implement an assistance program for the hardship caused to some residents by the unprecedented increase in dues starting last month.

The biggest scare tactic in the campaign to buy the golf course was to “prevent development.” However, if one looks at the plans for a new Berger, it is obvious that the feared “developer” will be the OVA itself.

In the Voices of Oakmont, the number one complaint was “extravagant spending for projects that were only wanted by a few” and “Boards that continually defer to a few ‘squeaky wheels’ while ignoring the majority of residents.”

This appears to be repetitive patterns of those few who want what they want, when they want it, and want others to pay for those “shiny new toys” that are sure to be replaced by a new “want” as soon as they get what they were originally crying for.

It is time for the OVA Board and certain committees to start acting conscientiously, adhering to fiduciary responsibilities, stop catering to the few while ignoring the many, and avoid driving Oakmont into potential bankruptcy.



Recently Published:

07/01/2020 - VOTMA – What we’re for, in good times and bad
03/01/2020 - Who are our homeless in Sonoma County and what are the county’s next steps?
03/01/2020 - Berger remodel now
02/15/2020 - Manage landscape now to be fire-smart and wildlife-friendly
02/01/2020 - Heart full of trails, head full of leave no trace
01/15/2020 - Who’s worse for wildfire mitigation, Gov. Newsom or the PUC’s Johnson?
12/15/2019 - Comcast can improve communications during disasters
12/15/2019 - The poster child for a dreadful cannabis project
11/15/2019 - Marijuana dispensary update
11/15/2019 - To park rangers – don’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good
09/15/2019 - Dispensary doesn’t fit with Kenwood’s character
08/15/2019 - FAQs about PG&E Bankruptcy
08/01/2019 - Finding God in the everyday
05/15/2019 - Oakmont Golf cents and sensibility
04/01/2019 - The wrong way to plan for cannabis cultivation
03/15/2019 - Referendum needed on any proposed purchase of Oakmont Golf Club
03/01/2019 - Looking back and moving forward with SDC
02/01/2019 - Sonoma County should protect its residents by abiding by the State SRA Fire Safe Regulations
01/15/2019 - Oakmont East Recreation Center is a sound investment
12/15/2018 - OVA struggles to control escalating East Rec Center costs
12/01/2018 - GEFD – Setting the record straight
11/01/2018 - No on Measure T – No blank check
11/01/2018 - Yes on Measure T
11/01/2018 - Where is Oakmont headed?
10/15/2018 - Remembering Guardians in the Land of Fire

Community Calendar

Sugarloaf Trail Crew
08/13/2020
more...
Night Sky Trails
08/15/2020
more...
Creekside Nature Hike
08/15/2020
more...
Sonoma Valley Mentoring Alliance Fundraiser
08/20/2020
more...
Forest Therapy
08/22/2020
more...
Economic Recovery town hall meeting
08/26/2020
more...