Historic Preservation Commission Regular Meeting

Hello everyone. I'm calling to order the Historic Preservation Commission's regular meeting on Thursday, August 13th 2026 at 6 p.m. Public participation is encouraged. The meetings are conducted in a hybrid model providing both in-person attendance and virtual public comment via the Zoom link below. Virtual attendance via Zoom is the only way to remotely provide public comment. Pre-registration is not required for public comment via Zoom. Instead, Zoom participants will utilize the hand raise function to indicate their desire to speak on an item. The meeting is also live streamed on YouTube and on Spectrum Channel 10.

Roll call please?

Chair, I have a question.

Yes.

So last month when we got to Talking, and it's in the minutes. July 9th, 2026 page two of four under item number 10 on fast track process for historic landmarking for individual property owners interested in landmarking Mills Act. When we got to that part I looked at our staff person and she looked at me and said well that's pretty much up to you guys. Did it run out of time?

Oh, OK. And so it says the report was received and filed and then I turned to the chair. And I don't really think there was a report that eventually came forward on fast-tracking the process.

I'm sorry, which item are you talking about right now? The

annual historic reports or the- So one of the- I didn't have a correction on the minutes but now I do. Every page says two of four which is why Brian says it's two of four but it's not so it's actually just if you look at item 10, whatever item ten is.

Yeah that last line says the report was received and filed and I don't think there was a report.

There really wasn't a report though.

That's all I had. OK, thank you. You're welcome. We'll omit that from the minutes.

OK. So besides that and the numbering, does anyone else have any changes? No? Anyone want to make a motion to approve the minutes?

I'll move to approve the minutes. I'll second that.

And Brian is seconding it. OK. Can we have a roll call? Mason?

Yes. Akins? Yes. Sims? Yes. McCattin? Yes Walker?

Here,

I mean

yes.

Passaccia?

Yes

All right thank you now we're on to item two can we have the staff report

Yes, thank you Chair. For the record my name is Lucas Seibert Community Development Director here for the City of Ojai. The item you have before you tonight is a discussion item and really an opportunity to provide comments to the Planning Commission. And what I have here is I'm going to set the table for the discussion. Ginger Anderson who's online, who is going to go through a presentation very similar to what she had put together so it gives you guys kind of the context of the project that's moving forward in the process.

And then we can certainly have some dialogue and then looking forward to the comments from this body. Just to give you some context of this, this is a project at 107 North Ventura Street. It is a project that first came forward as a concept review before the Planning Commission in 2024. During that concept review, The commission, not acting as a member of the Historic Preservation Commission, provided some very noteworthy comments. Those comments were taken back and reviewed by the applicant at the time, as well as staff, and we determined that there was a need for a historic resources report to be put together.

In 2025, that report was put together by ARG which is a part of this packet for your review and comment for tonight. And during that time, it was determined that that report would flow through staff or through the city versus to the applicant. The reason for that was instead of having it go through the applicant, not saying we wouldn't trust them but there was always Any time that we have reports going through a developer, there's always the idea that there's a need for peer review. To take that peer review out of it, having it reviewed instead and processed at staff level seemed like the appropriate mechanism here. Now you may be asking yourself Who's paying for that? It's still the applicant that pays for it. We took the information in, the fees that went along with that and from that was born this report that is before you tonight for comment.

The triggering mechanism for this body reviewing it, because it is not a landmark site. It is not within a historic district, a locally designated historic district. So because of that the triggering mechanism is actually born within your code, your Historic Preservation Code and I believe its subsection O of your code. So within that it gives authorization either through city council or through the planning commission To defer items such as this and you've seen items in the past, not necessarily historic preservation or historic resources reports in the past. But certainly this one is meriting some comments before this body for consideration before it goes back to the Planning Commission for their review and then the project as a whole is required to be reviewed, and then final determination made by City Council at a later date.

So with that, before I have Ginger speak and I do believe that we have Evan on with ARG as well. I see her there and I just want to give you the framework by which, because Ginger's going to talk about the project just as a whole. I kind of want to talk about the nuts and bolts of the project so it requires a number of different applications. Because the use is being proposed to be changed and they're looking to change the zone, the whole project has to receive a final review. And the triggering mechanism for that is a zone change. A zone change cannot be done by this body, by Planning Commission. It requires City Council authority through an ordinance. So that's the reason why that piece is going to City Council because The project as a whole is being reviewed and considered.

The whole project, including the HRR goes to City Council for final determination. So that's why you're here. And we're certainly looking forward to your comments in regard to the HRR and then hearing from Planning Commission based on what what we hear from you tonight. So planning commission is scheduled for next week and then a subsequent meeting before city council likely the second meeting or the first meeting in October

Do we

have any questions for staff? Yes, Commissioner Eakins.

Yeah I have a question on this so a few years ago the process took place Historic Resources Report essentially was put together it's April 2nd 2025 And then it sounded like you said that the Planning Commission basically put it on hold. And that's why we're not seeing it until now, because the question I'm getting is, why is this popping up now when there are reports that are a couple of years ago? I asked the applicant and he said, I have no clue.

Yeah, so it was in a draft format from 2025 until recently. So here's the interesting thing about how this works because subsection O requires the Planning Commission or City Council to defer items back to this body for comment. The final version of that report wasn't ready until recently Having a conversation with Evan and ARG got us to a final format where it was in a draft format for the better part of probably a year.

The reason for that is because the overall project was in a draft format, meaning we had incomplete items that needed to be completed before we could take it Planning Commission, and then City Council eventually.

OK. Yeah, I just wanted to get that clarified because again comments are popping up that basically to the degree we're out there hunting for ways to impede something. And in fact, we're sitting here waiting to review something.

Sure, and just so you know the way in which the code is currently written it does require either the city council or the planning commission to defer those items. Because this isn't a landmark site or within a locally designated district, it doesn't have those same triggering mechanisms as either minor work permit or major work permit for review.

Yes, I would like to differ on the point of section O which is about Review proposed amendments etc. So this paragraph is about other duties of the HPC that have to do with reviews of Various projects that might come in and it's divided into two parts The first part has to do with landmark properties and proposed landmark properties And then the second sentence is about all other projects that involve design review permits. And so the first sentence says, at the request of the Council or Planning Commission review proposed zoning amendments applications for permits or applications for zoning variances that affect Proposed or designated landmarks and historic districts.

Okay That's one thought and then the second part of that is review and comment within 30 days For any For the public record of any and all historic resources reports prepared for any other project required a design review permit, conditional use permit and development agreement zoning code permit. And I was part of the committee, as was Brian, that went through the code and tried to clarify and come up with suggestions.

And what we discussed was the fact that a lot of times these historic resources reports are incomplete or they're not correct. They need to be vetted. And they not only need to be vetted factually But also in terms of the local culture and the local feelings about historic buildings. And we are a commission that represents the public, and so it was important, we felt, to get something in there that would allow the HPC to review and to comment on any historic resource report that comes in because As you know, the consultant is not the ultimate authority on whether a project has a significant impact on a building. That rests with the city, okay? And that's including you and including the planning commission and historic but you can't just take...and I've read so much about this, you can't just take what a historic consultant says in their report as the authority.

And this gives the opportunity not only for the Historic Preservation Commission, but also the general public to come because a lot of times we might not know all the facts and somebody in the audience steps up and says you know my grandmother lived there and here's Here's what she has to say, and so the legal I think definition is the fair argument test. Which is that if a case can be made that a building could be historic then it needs to go on for further study. And this really gives the public an opportunity to participate which is really the whole purpose of CEQA is not to have the decisions made in a back room or by a consultant, but to be made at a public forum.

So I really hope that we can meet maybe with the city attorney and if that's not clear which I think it is clear, maybe figure out a way that we can reword it so it is clear because I really think that it's important That we vet any historic resource report that comes in and that was the conclusion in 2019 when this was written.

That is, there's some overlap there. This is item seven that we're going to be talking about our ad hoc that we worked with city council to come up with exactly what are not just what the words are but what do they mean and are we all agreeing on what they mean?

I was

gonna say if I could respond, I get where you're coming from and I heard that from the planning commission last week Here's the thing, in the seven years plus that I've been here this is the first time that I've heard of that specific section being taken in that context. So there's an intent and an understanding of what maybe Commissioner Aikens as well as Commissioner Walker had worked towards in 2019 That's not the way in which I had been prepped on how we were evaluating that. Now, obviously there's different ways in which to interpret it and then to move forward on it. And I know your understanding is pretty clear because you were the author of it, right? You're the one that both of you worked tirelessly to bring that forward to city council in 2019.

I was well aware of that effort, it was a fairly robust effort. Obviously it happened after or before I was here so we were taking that over, I was taking that over through our department. So- Yeah. I get where you're coming from. I do think and this gets to some of the items that the city attorney had brought forward for City Council consideration. One of those items is in fact the historic preservation law and taking a look at that and providing some clarity on it. So I think those different pieces that we're teasing out here, the one you just mentioned right now that we're talking about tonight in terms of process and procedure, I agree needs to be teased out because I'm looking at it and in the seven years I've been here Aside from hearing from last Wednesday, I was pretty confident in the way in which I was interpreting it.

So I'm hearing a different way in which to interpret it, which is, it happens. But I need a code that's clear.

Exactly.

And

that will be

helpful.

Has there ever been a time when an HRR came before you that wasn't put before the HPC or is this the first time?

In the seven years, I can't think of a time because... So maybe it never came up before. Well, okay so maybe it hasn't. I can think of an example where it's come up distinctly but I know I've vetted through that question before.

And I think one of the reasons it says 30 days is because we really recognize the need for these to come before us quickly, you know at the beginning of the process and still instead of as an afterthought. Because once it's gone for two years like this project has and then all of a sudden this pops up at the end Then it makes it almost seem hard to believe that this would become an issue so late. So, it seems like the 30-day is a good deal because then we can do that work, we can clear it or suggest changes to mitigate or whatever and then they can be on their way with their architect

And then, yes. I was just a little dismayed in watching the planning commission that they didn't even want it to come here and neither did the woman from Bronstein. They saw no need for it to come here and there was quite a bit of tension you know and finally okay if you can get it back real fast what do they need to see it for? So I just We want to be a friendly body and get in there, and we don't want to stop progress. But if we can't see it legally, you know what I'm saying? They really shouldn't be saying we have no right to see it.

You get what I mean.

I see where you're coming from there. And I think you were hearing some of the opinions from the commission in terms of process and procedures. Right.

Right, so I would like to add that whenever an HRR is contracted the HPC should be notified. It is in letter O of our functions and powers like we just discussed and it's important function to assist in the preservation and integrity of the city of Ojai and its historic resources. This HRR is dated April 2nd, 2025 and the application for conceptual review was August of 2024. So now this HRR is 17 months old and just coming to the HPC. So when historic reports come to us this late in the process it often causes frustration, expense and could be even litigation.

Having the HPC be the first stop in the process allows the HPC to educate the city and applicant of any and all reasons of concerns we might have about the property, as well as give the public a place to come and be heard. Comments back to the conceptual review phase become educational and efficient. So we have been working with the city and the council to make sure that is a top priority and goal. So I'd like to thank the planning commission for bringing this back to us tonight, even though it's out of order.

But we are working on the process which is going to be coming up in item seven, which has been a year-and-a-half long. Ad hoc with City Council to try and look at our functions and powers and say okay. We're seeing this you're seeing that Let's decide which one or some sort of middle and and then work from that so we're all speaking the same language It's not, you know different versions of the same thing. And I thank you all for giving us copies of the CEQA book so we're all looking at the same book, the same year everything is makes more sense when it's we're all looking at the same information and that's what we just want to do is get in early. We are not a deciding body. We just do comments and education but that makes more sense early on than late in the process

Well, from a CEQA standpoint you're the first commission that I've ever heard of that's asked for the books that we use on a regular basis. So it's kind of an interesting... It's what? To ask to... You're the first commission that's ever asked for the CEQABooks that we use. All books? It's the same CEQAL book I'd been using when I was working in cities in LA so...

I've noticed we have a very – I'm very proud of the seven of us and are willing to spend a lot of our personal time and effort reading these books, taking classes, getting educated as we can so we're not just talking from a place of opinion but a place of fact and law. And so, thank you for getting us those books.

Yeah, these books never get thinner. I've noticed over the years they just keep getting thicker. OK so thank you. I think that's a part of setting the table which is what I was hoping to do. Now I'd like to turn it over to Ginger and I do believe Evan is on as well to answer any questions that the commission may have. But Ginger, do you have a PowerPoint presentation that you wanted to go over?

You're on mute. Ginger, we can't hear you. I can rip lip radio. We can't hear you. You're either muted or Sherry is she on mute?

Not that I can see.

You've got her off mute?

I'm guessing Ginger's

in the

top left. Is that her?

Correct.

That's Lucas.

Yep. I didn't see much in the way of lip movement.

I'm calling James, hold on.

I think it's on Ginger's end because she's off mute over here at least looks like.

How about now?

Perfect. Ah, there we go.

There we go. OK, we found one that works. All right. Hi everyone. Good evening. I'm Ginger Anderson with Brownstein. I am a land use planner not an attorney. Sorry, I couldn't be there this evening. Thank you for having us tonight. The purpose of my presentation will be to go through the total of our project what we are and are not proposing to do just to give more context where we are. So as Lucas did a great job, we came to Planning Commission in 2024 the applicant and our team spent some time getting a complete application put together so we were working on providing additional details that Lucas had asked for to be able to understand and digest the whole of the project And making certain revisions to that project. So there has been some time and then kudos to Lucas, that once we were deemed complete the time to hearing at Planning Commission was actually pretty quickly so I do appreciate that.

So I'm told I can share my screen. I hope it works. Can you see my screen? Yes, yes we can hear you. I see it thank you great all right um so i apologize this i'm just recycling my uh presentation but this is the overall project description it's going to be a spa and wellness center that functions as a component of the Hotel El Roblar there is a desire of course to continue to serve the community as they have shown to be It's going to be used primarily by hotel guests during peak hours and times, being the weekends and high seasons. And then it will be available to local residents during off-peak hours and times.

That's embedded in our project description. So there is this idea that potentially additional local Availability and capacity would be available depending on the vacancy rate at the hotel, and all of that is really driven by parking. So that's kind of a conversation for Planning Commission. But in terms of the building itself, there's going to be interior modifications to create a fitness area lobby treatment rooms and locker rooms and back-of-house areas.

The exterior improvements are rather limited. They're primarily focused to the southwest corner of the project site, and that's where we're going to remove some paving and impervious surfaces and replace that with spa-like landscaped area for respite lounging hot and cold plunge. And additional wayfinding signage to safely deliver guests from the hotel to the spa.

And then some limited amount of courtyard landscaping in front, which is meant to be more of an organic decision over time as to kind of how that looks. And I'll talk more about that in a minute. There is an existing residence on site with two parking spaces, which will remain and the parking area is proposed to remain the same as it is now as well with eight parking spaces on site along the north edge of the project.

So all of that is shown on our plans. Where this is kind of the open courtyard area. This will all stay, all this parking stays the house and this parking stays and then this area back here is where we would be the most majority of the change would occur to create a nice planting area. So From there, what we heard from Planning Commission was more questions about circulation and way in finding courtyard fencing and things like that.

And we feel we've done a good job to respond to those issues or questions. This is just more about the operations of the business. And then the courtyard landscaping and fencing at one time this was Proposed to be fenced off, and then based on feedback that we got from Craig and from others was to kind of open this up so that we created more of a visual permeability from the public right-of-way into the back courtyard. And so now what we've got is an idea to screen that somewhat but have a visually permeable barrier there with some A gate and some planting. And the purpose of all of that is because there is a need to secure this area at night and in off-business hours, so there's a little bit of a need to close that off in a certain way for that kind of security issue but trying to do that in a way that's respectful to the open courtyard.

So that's kind of what we're seeing in this elevation. This is more about the circulation and wayfinding that if you've been to the hotel I got to go recently, they're very accommodating and wonderful. And they are very helpful with wayfinding at signage and with direct guests out the front door and over to the spa using the existing Pedestrian sidewalks, this is just some of that really nice signage that's around.

And then this is the rezone piece of it which is the property is currently PL zoned which is very limited in what's allowed And probably why it's been sort of underutilized over time. And so then what the VMU zone does is opens up a lot of different types of uses. We are proposing a CUP to allow the use that we are proposing, and then this column shows you what's allowed in both zones. So I don't know if you're interested in that, the rezone but essentially I think going to create a site that is more sustainable in terms of use and contribution to the local community.

So, that's kind of my presentation. But I think what I want to highlight with that is just whether or not it qualifies for landmark designation is not something that I'm going to argue, or want to argue. It's not in my purview and nor do I think anyone should be. Really thinks that's a part of what we're talking about tonight. But I think that the takeaway is that there is no impact to the structure or the site because as you see in our project description and plans, we're really not doing much to the site.

The purpose is sort of to reuse the inside pretty up the outside and essentially leave the rest kind of as it is today. So just to show those elevations and kind of hit that point one more time, the property, the building itself has been modified over time. These are our elevations showing what it is now and then the proposed is quite minor. It's painting some wood leaving some roof area and then I'm noticing that this elevation did not get updated, but i would direct you to the elevation in my presentation as the updated set of plans that shows that visual openness here. So other than that one elevation excuse me for Clicking around so much. Other than that difference to this elevation, you can see there's really not much going on to the building.

So yeah I'm looking forward to hearing your thoughts and I'm here to answer any questions if you have any for me. Maybe they're for Evan, I'm not sure but

thank

you.

Let's open public comment first. Do we have any public comment on this item? No. Abbott Online?

No.

OK, does anybody have questions for the applicant? I'm going to close the public hearing then or

public comment period. Sorry.

Yes, I'm closing public comment. Commissioner Eakins.

Just wanted to clarify one thing and I mentioned it to you when I talked earlier, I think we're taking some type of action on this minor or not. I did go on a tour yesterday and so I was taken around the grounds by Sean from across the street Showing the different areas it was. And I've watched the changes over the years because, you know, I'm on the museum board but one of the things I do is I want to lay out so you have the back corner that they're talking about doing something there That back corner abuts the back of the museum, where the museum collections is. So there's no one there, no noise there if there's any noise on this side or any disturbance at all it's not going to affect the museum. The other people that are right in front of it and there's quite a distance between them as the mob shop and so I really enjoyed the tour.

I did get to peek into that large building and was shown the hopscotch courts that were still on the cement inside there, and so if you can imagine opening this up to families, to individuals instead of it just staying there dormant, it was very impressive.

Thank you. Anyone else?

I just think that the spa situation and all of it really goes well with what it used to be when it was World University. It all sort of ties in with the spirituality and all of that, but I think will be brought into this facility with the yoga and with the meditation and with the quietness a little different than when it was a police station or city hall or... What other things was it?

Chamber

of Commerce?

Yes.

Yeah. Are you done? Yep. Commissioner Walker?

Yes, I'd like to reiterate what already been said. I really appreciate what they're doing with this building and I appreciate everything they've done to try to accommodate. I do have some comments that I've thought carefully about but I wanted to write them out because I wanted to make sure that they got to the Planning Commission as I intended them to Tonight we are reviewing the Historic Resources Report for 107 North Ventura Street, the former World University campus. The Planning Commission requested this review but it is also part of this commission's responsibility under the Ojai Municipal Code to review and comment on any and all historic resources reports prepared for development projects other than landmarks. I think that responsibility is especially important here About a year and a half ago, the El Roblar owners announced plans to repurpose the former World University campus as a health spa.

Early plans contemplated substantial changes to the design of the building. As you may recall they said they wanted to mimic the design of the El Roblar Hotel. More recently, the applicants have submitted plans that retain much of the historic mid-century design with some notable modifications. What we did not know during much of that discussion was that a historic resources report had already been prepared and submitted to the city 15 months ago.

It is also written in City Code that planning department must notify the HPC when they discover a potentially historic property, which was not done. During this time, in fact the property was repeatedly described as not historic. Yet when the report was finally released its conclusion was essentially the opposite. The property is historically significant and eligible for designation as both a city of Ojai landmark and for listing in the California Register of Historic Resources. This is an important finding and one that should have been part of the public review process much earlier.

Historic resource reports are prepared by qualified consultants to help cities meet their responsibilities under CEQA. They provide professional analysis and substantial evidence, however they do not replace the judgment of the local agency. This distinction matters because consultants can make mistakes, research can be incomplete and reasonable professionals can disagree about significance or impacts.

Local commissions also bring knowledge of Ojai's history, setting and community character that an outside consultant may not possess. Ojai has officially taken a protective approach towards historic resources The city's initial assessment study guidelines state that Ojai intends to maintain a low threshold for determining whether environmental review is warranted in order to provide the fullest possible protection to the environment. That philosophy is important. The question should not simply be whether after alterations, enough historic integrity remains for the property to continue qualifying for the California Register. A historic resource can remain eligible even after an inappropriate alteration. That does not make that alteration insignificant or unacceptable.

And just think if the wall around the museum were eliminated, that wouldn't mean it wasn't eligible to be a landmark anymore but it wouldn't be something we would approve because that really does provide the setting for the landmark. The central issue for the Planning Commission is the proposed barrier along the Ventura Street side of the property, originally shown as a seven-foot wooden fence and now redesigned as a planter with tall hedge.

The Historic Resources Report itself identifies two important character defining features, the campus' U-shaped plan facing Ventura Street and its central open courtyard Yet, the proposed barrier would visually close the open end of that U-shaped plan and substantially screen the very courtyard the report identifies as an important historic feature. That is difficult to reconcile. The relationship between the buildings, the courtyard, and Ventura Street is part of how this building has historically been experienced by the public.

A six or seven foot visual barrier across the primary elevation would significantly change that relationship, and yet the report says that it wouldn't change it at all. This fact does not automatically mean the project cannot be approved as submitted. It means the impact should be clearly acknowledged, considered and mitigated where reasonably possible. I appreciate the applicant's decision to replace the solid fence with landscaping and a planter. That is an improvement, but a tall hedge remains a visual barrier. A lower treatment perhaps approximately three feet Could provide separation and landscaping while preserving the visual relationship between the courtyard, the U-shaped campus and Ventura Street. Ultimately this design decision belongs to the planning commission.

And we all are limited to a three foot fence at the front of our houses to provide security so that there is some kind or four foot. So I don't think it's unreasonable to ask that a three foot, that would allow visual connection with what is really one of the central character defining features of the property. There was also a larger procedural lesson here. The report existed for approximately 15 months without review by the Historic Preservation Commission and apparently without being brought to the Planning Commission's attention. During that period, the property historic status was inaccurately represented to the public record There were many debates at those planning commission meetings where people debated whether or not it was historic, and yet now we know that it's confirmed that it definitely is historic.

Historic review is most useful when it occurs early while designs can still be adjusted not after major decisions have already been made. The report provides substantial evidence that the former World University property is historically significant and eligible for both local designation and California register. I believe we should accept that fundamental conclusion.

But I also believe the planning commission should work with the applicant to preserve one of the property's most important character defining relationships. The open courtyard and U-shaped campus as they face Ventura Street, the property's primary public elevation. This would protect an important part of Ojai's history while still allowing this property to enter a productive new chapter. Thank you.

Anyone else have anything they want to add.

I have something I want to add. I do really like what I read about in the packet about the project and it seems like it'll be well done. I mean, in spite of some of our differences with the El Roblar when that was first presented to the HPC Some time ago, the owners of that property have certainly proven themselves to have great taste. And I think that they'll bring that to this project. Also in reading the historic report because I had experience as a teenager both being called into the police station that was there at that time But also, I was in a trial there in the large room at the west end of that campus there.

I believe it was satellite of Ventura Superior Court and Judge Richard Love presided there. He lived like a block away But there was a court there in the late 60s and early 70s, at least. And that is completely missing from the history or the historic report. So I just wanted to add that for the record.

And that's another reason that it's important that an HRR goes into record at an HPC meeting. It has its proper place in history, so when somebody in the future wants to go back and look at this then it's in the right place. They don't have to go well maybe it was at this meeting or maybe it was at that meeting. And then having historians and commissioners weigh in, it all is in the right place. So I appreciate that. It also proves

that it doesn't have to be a structure to be worthy of coming to the HPC because this on its own, I believe as having been World University Place in the New Age spirituality movement would have on its own Is that yeah. Yeah would have made it a Historic resource not just because it has a building associated with it so we would have missed that So I think it's that was a great report, I think except it's missing a

It really did play a big part in Ojai's history, you know. I think everyone knows that the alternate New Age spirituality going all the way back to 1922 when Krishnamurti arrived has really been an identifying part of this community and We don't really have any elements of that within the city limits. They're mostly on the outskirts, like at Krotona or the Krishnamurti Foundation or Meditation Mount or Mayor Mount. These organizations and their buildings are not in the city but here you have right in the heart of the city this wonderful university that really played a role not just in Ojai but also in the state of taking these New Age spiritual practices and making them into academic subjects. Now it's pretty common to go to a university and take a class in yoga or take a class in holistic health or something like that, but that wasn't the case back in the mid-70s so this was really a pioneering effort by Mr.