OVA Board Meeting Notes – 2025 May

Originally published 2025-05-16, updated 2025-05-24

On Tuesday, May 20, 2025 at 1 pm, the Oakmont Village Association (OVA) Board of Directors held its regular monthly meeting in the Berger Auditorium. OVA members may view the agenda and meeting packet here and may view the video of the meeting live from a link that you will find here. Also available is Harriet Palk’s At-a-Glance Summary May 20, 2025 OVA Board Meeting — this article may provide some additional information and a different perspective from Harriet’s article, and will include some brief commentary after covering what occurred in the meeting. All of these links, and others in this article, connect to OVA member-only web pages, so if you do not have an OVA member login account, you will not be able to view them.

The purpose of this article is to encourage OVA members to attend OVA Board meetings, either in person or via Zoom, and to call attention to a few items of interest that were in this month’s agenda. Section headings below duplicate the section headings in the meeting agenda. Information about interesting discussions and decisions made at the meeting will appear after “At the meeting:” in the sections below, with approximate times during the meeting noted within brackets, e.g. [1:02 pm].

Note: this was the first regular meeting of the new 2025 – 2026 Board. I strongly encourage anyone who was not able to attend to view the video of the meeting, in order to familiarize yourself with the directors and to observe how they worked together and with the audience during the meeting. This article is necessarily incomplete, only touching on highlights of the meeting and leaving out many important details that you will find in the meeting video.

4. Consent Calendar

At the meeting: [1:04 pm] Two items were removed from the Consent Calender: Approval of the Finance Committee Chair was, at the request of new director Robert Williams, moved to New Business, to allow discussion and a separate vote. And Approval of the Architectural Committee Chair was deferred until at next month’s Board meeting, because Susie Lee has declined to serve, so a different person must be selected. The rest of the Consent Calendar, including selection of David Simpson as the new Governing Documents Committee chair, was approved without discussion.

5. President’s Report

There is no written report for this item in the meeting packet.

At the meeting: [1:07 pm] President Matt Oliver noted that, in the interest of allowing member viewpoints to be heard, this year’s Board would include an Open Forum segment, after Board discussion and before a vote is taken, on every issue to be voted on by the Board. [This practice has been in place for some years, but was largely ignored by the 2024-2025 Board.]

7. Other Reports

Item 7. A. The Treasurer’s Report for the four months ending April 30 starts at page 15 of the Board Meeting Packet. See the Financial Summary for such key figures as net income for the year-to-date and end-of-April balances for the Operating Fund, the Asset Replacement Fund (ARF), the Capital Improvement Fund (CIF), the Oakmont Village Property Association (OVPC), and the CIF loan balance.

At the meeting: [1:09 pm] Treasurer Tom Kendrick discussed the reasons for the current excess of income compared with budget projections. Specifics include: Dues revenue is higher than projected, because the number of two-person households has increased, contrary to the projection; there are currently about 4,670 dues paying OVA members, about 40 higher than expected. The OVA insurance policies, to be renewed in May, will cost less than projected and twelve thousand dollars than the previous year’s policies. Payroll is currently under budget, because OVA has a job opening that has not been filled. The net result of these and other discrepancies between projections and actuals is that OVA has an income surplus of about $251K, 2025 year to date.

Item 7. E. At the meeting: [1:22 pm] General Manager Christel Antone reported on several on-going OVA issues. She has attended a Santa Rosa City Council meeting, at which they were considering how to respond to budget shortfalls. A major concern would be if Station 7, the fire station located within Oakmont, were to be closed — this would necessarily increase the emergency response time from the currently typical 3 minutes. Decisions have not been made, so it bears watching. Christel also reported that the Stonebridge Duets have begun to sell, with an expected total of $137K in impact fees that will eventually be received by OVA and put into the Capital Improvement Fund (CIF).

Item 7. F. At the meeting: [1:25 pm] Jeff Neuman gave committee reports for the Emergency Preparedness Task Force (EPTF), the Architectural Committee (AC), and the AV Task Force (AVTF, not on the agenda). The EPTF and the Meet Your Neighbor (MYN) task forces are to be renamed as the Emergency Preparedness Communications Task Force (EPCTF) and the Emergency Preparedness MYN Task Force (EPMYNTF?). Jeff also reported on numerous activities of these committees/task forces, and noted that new chairpersons will have to be found, since as an OVA director, he can no longer chair them. Please watch the video for more details.

Item 7. F.3. At the meeting: [1:34 pm] Gary Smith reported on the Golf Course Advisory Committee and on progress made improving the golf courses and The Oak restaurant. Improved winter weather, vs recent years, have allowed rounds played and revenues to approximately achieve their targets this year.

8. Open Forum

At the meeting: [1:47 pm] Several OVA members made comments or posed questions during Open Forum, and I encourage everyone to watch the video, starting around 47 minutes in. Deborah Quam, via AskOVA, recommended that the new Oakmont Facilities Evaluation Committee (OFEC, see item 10.C. below) make its meetings easily available for OVA members to watch and participate by using Zoom and making meeting videos available on the OVA website, as has been done for one other committee. The Board listened, but made no response.

Elke Strunka spoke to advocate her nomination of Tom Kendrick to chair the Finance Committee. [Author’s note: Tom is a very controversial figure in Oakmont, representing, for some, the old guard who advocated expensive capital improvement projects and resisted calls to submit very large projects to community votes before proceeding with them. The icons of this old guard, Tom and Iris Harrell, were soundly defeated in their run for the Board last year, but Tom continues to wield tremendous influence, some say too much, in his multiple volunteer positions. These positions include: OVA Treasurer, now chair of the Finance Committee, president of the Oakmont Village Property Association (the for-profit subsidiary of OVA which legally owns the golf courses), and de facto member of the Long Range Planning Committee (he does not appear in the LRPC roster, but when he attends, he is treated more as a member than as a guest).] Elke’s Open Forum comments initiated an animated debate, touching on possible conflicts of interest and the general OVA tradition that no member should serve in too many different capacities within OVA. See Item 4.C. under New Business, below, for the Board vote on this issue.

Kerry Oswald spoke to a number of issues — see the video starting around 54 minutes in.

[1:57 pm] Steve Spillman, who served on the Board 2023 – 2025 but did not run for reelection this year, made an impassioned plea for OVA transparency, both as a best business practice and as a way to quell the frequent and sometimes ill-informed speculation that inevitably occurs when key information is withheld

9. Unfinished Business

Item 9.A. was a Central Complex Area Update by President Matt Oliver. There is no documentation of this in the meeting packet, other than the agenda item.

At the meeting: [2:02 pm] Matt opened by making the point that the Oakmont 2030 Project no longer exists, its products having been incorporated into OVA’s long range planning, in particular for the Central Complex Area. He repeated what we have heard from him previously, i.e. that the Board is in the process of estimating costs for various elements that are candidates for future implementation, i.e. to be in a long range plan, and that the costs of future construction will be compared with the projected costs of maintaining existing facilities. He asserted that he hopes to present something more concrete to the community “in a couple of months”, but did not provide any more specific date. Matt also promised that any such capital improvement plans will go to a vote, allowing the OVA membership to decide among alternatives, before their inclusion in a long range plan. In response to an Open Forum question from Kerry Oswald, Matt assured us that there would be town halls, workshops, and/or other opportunities for OVA members to become fully informed about capital improvement alternatives.

No vote was associated with this item.

Item 9.B. was a Governing Documents Committee update by Director Matt Oliver. There is no documentation of this in the meeting packet, other than the agenda item.

At the meeting: [2:06 pm] Matt thanked Steve Spillman for his leadership of the GDC over the past year, and announced the appointment of David Simpson, an attorney himself, as GDC chair going forward. Acknowledging that the effort has not moved as quickly as hoped, for a variety of reasons (a key one of which has been the apparent inability of the previous attorney to provide timely support to the GDC), Matt announced that a different attorney would be hired specifically to support the GDC.

No vote was associated with this item.

10. New Business

Item 10.A. is a resolution, submitted by Treasurer Tom Kendrick, to transfer a surplus of $326,018 from 2024 OVA operations into the Capital Improvement Fund (CIF). When a similar resolution was made and passed last year, some OVA members asked pointedly why those funds weren’t simply used to reduce the dues amount, or even to refund the money to members. [For context, the 2024 surplus amounted to 4.6% of the 2024 total OVA budget. The surplus, if transferred into the CIF, will increase the OVA contribution by 36%, from $900k to $1226k. If the surplus was used to reduce OVA dues (or to avoid increasing them), it would amount to around $6/member/month, or $70/member/year, based on current OVA membership of 4,670.]

At the meeting: [2:12 pm] There was considerable discussion over this proposal. Elke noted that it was more flexible to transfer the funds into the Capital Improvement Fund (CIF), from which they could legally transfer it into operations if the need arose, than into the Asset Replacement Fund (ARF), which has very strict rules for disbursement. Also noted was that it is still more financially advantageous to pay down the loan than to invest the funds into CDs. And it was claimed that moving the funds into the CIF last year allowed lower member dues to be charged. [This assumes that the same contribution to the CIF would have been made from dues if it had not been made from transfer of surplus 2023 funds. This isn’t necessarily true because, unlike the ARF, CIF funds are not required to be at any particular level.] After discussion, the resolution was passed, with Robert Williams the only director voting against it.

Item 10.B. is a resolution, submitted by director Jess Marzak, to re-establish an OCDC.

At the meeting: [2:26 pm] Jess discussed the historical activities of the OCDC and the current activities in the Oakmont vicinity that bear monitoring for their potential impact on Oakmont. Among these are the Elnoka property now owned by Burbank Housing, which is of particular interest because we hope to have an emergency evacuation route through that property; a hotel that is going up in Kenwood; and the massive plans for redevelopment of the Sonoma Development Center property. The resolution was passed unanimously.

Item 10.C. is a resolution, submitted by President Matt Oliver, to establish a Facilities Evaluation Committee (OFEC). See pp. 45-46 of the meeting packet.

At the meeting: [2:30 pm] Matt presented the proposed activities of this new committee. There was very little discussion among the Board or meeting attendees, and the resolution was passed unanimously.

Item 4.C. Approval of new Finance Committee Chair. As mentioned above, this item was removed from the Consent Calendar and considered under New Business, to allow for discussion.

At the meeting: [2:32 pm] This topic had been discussed fairly extensively during Open Forum, so there was little discussion when it came up under New Business. It passed 5 to 2, with Robert Williams and Jerry Gladstone voting against. Tom Kendrick is now the chairman of the Finance Committee.

Review

This section of the Agenda is empty this month, and nothing was presented at the meeting.

11. Next Meetings

Item 11.A. Agenda Topics for the next meeting

At the meeting: [2:36 pm] Heidi Klyn requested that the possibility of adding a basketball court be added as a topic. Jeff Neuman requested consideration of adding EV charging stations to OVA parking lot(s). Neill Ray requested adding the topic of AI training for the OVA Board and staff.

Item 11.B. Director’s Comments

At the meeting: [2:38 pm] Matt noted that at next month’s meeting the Board should receive reports from the Communications Committee, the Long Range Planning Committee, the Landscape Committee and the Emergency Preparedness MYN Task Force .

12. Adjournment

The meeting was adjourned at 2:42 pm.

This unusual section, immediately following the agenda in the meeting packet, explains the Authority and Duties of the Board of Directors. As the new Board begins its work, it is important to understand their responsibilities, as well as their limitations. Every OVA member would do well to read and try to understand these things. Another source for similar information is the Davis-Stirling.com website page on Fiduciary Duties of HOA Directors.

---

Commentary

The new OVA Board has gotten off to a good start, promising to correct some of the issues that plagued the 2024-2025 Board. Specifically:

• Meeting order: President Oliver immediately set the tone, declaring that going forward there would be an Open Forum segment after Board discussion on every topic voted on by the Board. He also carefully followed Roberts Rules plus OVA traditions/policy to run an orderly meeting that allowed all interested parties to speak.
• Democratic engagement: In item 9.A., the report on the Central area, President Oliver promised that there will be not just town halls and workshops, but membership votes to decide which capital improvement plans are pursued. That, and the promise of revisions to the OVA governing documents, are encouraging signs that the tide has turned away from the governing philosophy of some previous boards, that jealously guarded the Board’s power to make important decisions without such membership votes.
• Transparency: OVA has seen major advances in transparency since the mid-2010’s, when board packets were never distributed to the OVA membership and there were few workshops or town hall meetings to educate the membership. A lingering transparency issue that has not been resolved is the refusal of the Board to reveal whatever it was that ArchiLOGIX delivered that was named “cost models”, or even a description of just what the “cost models” consist of. The committees and task forces frequently fail to post agendas and minutes to the OVA website in a timely fashion, and committee products (e.g. reports made by working groups) are often not posted, making it difficult for OVA members to be fully informed. One concerning informal policy is that such reports should not be posted on the OVA website until getting Board approval to do so — this is only justified in instances where the subject matter is required to be maintained as confidential. In short, we are still a long way from maximum legal transparency. Nevertheless, with the changes in Board membership over the past two years, we can hope that there will be a commitment to greater transparency, a realization that withholding information is generally worse than releasing it, and modification of key policies to enforce transparency.
• Progress on governing documents revision: From having attended most Governing Documents Committee (GDC) meetings since last fall, I would say that the reasons for slow progress were (1) the attorney chosen to consult with the GDC gave advice but failed to deliver any first drafts of restated governing documents — as far as I know, he still has failed to deliver any draft documents, (2) the 2024-2025 Board was fearful of controversy, and so was not anxious to have the GDC move quickly, and (3) the task of bringing our largely 60-year-old documents up to date is unavoidably very complicated, both legally and politically. There was also the desire, by chairman Steve Spillman and the committee members, to make sure to get the process right, i.e. to come up with a plan that would likely be able to achieve the goals of modernizing the documents and responding to membership desires for substantive changes. The GDC now has a logical plan (although the details may change, under direction from the new Board), a new chairman, and a commitment from President Oliver to get the process moving.

Overall, these developments make me optimistic that the 2025-2026 Board will make real progress on multiple fronts. I wish them well, and success in achieving their goals for our community!

---

As noted in the meeting agenda, next month’s regular Board meeting will take place on June 17, 2025.

---