Anderson's Fairy Tales

Once Upon A Time.....
Like a few years ago - word gets around Nelson that the school-board office will come down to make room for a building of residential units for people with mental health/drug issues. Word on the street has it. Rumors. The preferred - often only - way of spreading the news locally, what with City Hall rarely connecting substantially with the electorate and news-reporting frequently lacking incisive depth and usually linear follow-up.

The rumor is gaining substance - indirectly, but substance nonetheless - when the Canadian Mental Health Association (CMHA) asks Council for financial high-figure concessions to help facilitate a project which - Nelson Star, May 28, 2011 - will provide low-cost housing for 33 seniors at risk of homelessness. The connection between mental health and seniors is not addressed; the most simplistic conclusion to be drawn by those not present - on the street - could be that seniors in general are deemed to be mental cases. Seemingly pushing this further along in the same direction is an announcement during the meeting that residents will receive one meal per day, prepared in a kitchen on the premises. Mental seniors too out-of-it to look after themselves?

Jumping a year ahead to a press-release on this (the only one so far) - available by googling Anderson Gardens Nelson - from:
Ministry of Energy and Mines
and Minister Responsible for Housing
Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation
Feb. 10, 2012

Affordable seniors' housing underway in Nelson
Nelson - Construction is now underway at Anderson Gardens, a new 33-unit affordable housing development for seniors and persons with disabilities in Nelson, funded by the governments of Canada and British Columbia along with community partners.
This is the first - 1 of 2 only and both in this release - time people with disabilities are mentioned officially. And not in the heading. In this press-release - in fact throughout the entire gestation/birthing-process of the project - not once is an explanation given of what is meant by disabilities, are people with disabilities addressed: including whether for them age/income/assets requirements are the same as those for the ubiquitous seniors. 
The Nelson Star fails to clarify these basic points in its reports.

"The project partners had a shared vision of building more affordable homes for local seniors," said Jack Wong, CEO of Real Estate Foundation of British Columbia.
Disabilities?
BUT! The Canadian Mental Health Association - Kootenays Branch will manage and operate Anderson Gardens. Why they, unless disabilities - possibly involving mental health - are deliberately downplayed because those in charge don't want to frighten the horses.

Which would be counter-productive in view of today's community-models of inclusion - as opposed to those of segregation/exclusion practiced too long and recognized as outdated elsewhere.

This development provides Nelson seniors with quality, affordable housing, but more importantly it gives them peace of mind that their housing needs are met so that they can focus on things that matter most to them," said Wally Eddy, board chair, Canadian Mental Health Association - Kootenays Branch.
Disabilities?

BACKGROUNDER
Anderson Gardens, located at 302 Anderson Street in Nelson, provides 33 new apartments for seniors, including 20 Seniors' Rental Housing apartments for seniors and persons with disabilities.
You may want to read this again! No, it's not you!

So much for the press-release. Although BC Housing is involved, accessing Anderson info through their website doesn't work. No Anderson Gardens. There is a 1-800 number.

And In The Castle.....
All finished now! At a cost of - on the street, where else - 9 mill, as opposed to the official 7.5. An overrun would make sense, seeing that construction-costs of larger developments habitually end-up higher than planned.
But the money out-flow doesn't end with that. There is/should be a tremendous overhead: staffing, maintenance, electricity, water, food supplies.
Staffing
Due to the nature of the place, there must be professional staff-presence 24/7. Plus office- and union maintenance-help during the day.
Lunch
Yes, there still is a free lunch - at Anderson Gardens! This needs an officially approved costly commercial kitchen, costly food supplies and costly cooking/serving staff. For one meal a day!
Even though tenants have a kitchen in their self-contained apartment and - as they must be able to live independently - presumably are able to use it and do so for breakfast and dinner. With a supermarket across the street.

Mental health professionals commonly advocate that keeping seniors and those with disabilities physically active contributes to their psychological well-being - thus overall health. As gerontologist I share this opinion. Here management infantilizes as far as - when the other day there was no lunch for whatever reason - all tenants (not patients!) being given a $15 pizza-voucher!
Water
With local water-rates now way up and the new bizarre way of punishing those with secondary units in their homes on one hand, it will be interesting to see how Anderson Gardens will be charged - and surely subsidized - on the other. 33 bathrooms, 33 kitchens, the large commercial kitchen and major toilet-facilities in connection with this kitchen and the dining-room.

While The Villagers.....
According to the Star, Jan. 17, 2013 - All applicants must be able to live independently and be either over 55 or in an established relationship with someone over 55. I have no idea what the established-relationship scenario means - it may contradict the independence- and age-angles. It is regrettable that the Star failed to seek clarification on this from the CMHA, unless it is just careless reporting. And then - the usual also-ran - An adult with a disability can also apply. Also! The Star unquestioningly aligning with the CMHA's mindscape.

Canadian Mental Health Association's Kootenay branch operates the facility and will be conducting personal interviews with eligible applicants. Found eligible by BC Housing in Burnaby. Where does mental health enter at this end, and what criteria does CMHA (volunteer?) personnel use to ultimately (surely subjectively) determine who gets in? Keeping in mind - one hopes - that neither all seniors nor all physically disabled necessarily have pronounced-to-certifiable mental-health issues. Which the CMHA is not qualified to assess clinically anyway. One wonders! There is more to wonder about!

Like Because the 33 units are reserved for low-income individuals, applicants must earn less than $26.000 annual income and have assets valuing (sic) under $100.000. For starters: this is hardly low-income! Less than could mean just a bit under. An eligible senior - who earns/gets close to $26.000 - has about $2000 per month. Which breaks down into about $12.50 an hour. This is what many younger - fully employed and fully taxed - husbands/wives with children and an unsubsidized apartment earn.
Topping that: seniors have many benefits out there simply because they're seniors. Free medical care, lower taxes, transportation, substantial local shopping-discounts (PHARMASAVE, Shoppers). Their clothing-needs are generally met: not wearing-out duds quickly any longer, they also stopped growing a while ago - while children may grow up to about 23.
A single senior in that income-position - at Anderson Gardens paying about $350 rent per month - is doing extremely well in today's econoscape. Having a bit under $100.000 in assets - having assets, period! - provides a cushion many/most renting younger families don't have. Who - ironically - will end-up subsidizing these cushioned and cuddled seniors! Actually they already have! 

Subsidizing seniors - with allowed income in these upper-regions - is ill-conceived, misguided and highly inappropriate - they clearly are not more in need and/or vulnerable than most everybody else in the "real" world!  
I do not see any of this applying to people with disabilities!

   
Villager X
X has unfailingly been playing Bingo once a week for years. At $65 a pop winning is not guaranteed. Taking a taxi back and forth in inconvenient weather-conditions. Having an attitude, X is not particularly popular at Bingo - so this is not about seeing friends. The attitude has made X move frequently - risk of homelessness has not been an issue. X is self-sufficient and may have more money for discretionary spending than lots of other seniors - if they have any at all, thus possibly are more deserving. And possibly not getting into the Gardens!
Villager Y
About-To-Be-Villager-Y has been living in a large apartment in a preferred neighborhood for years. Y's major concern right now is how to simply get rid of most accumulated furniture and and stuff - selling is not an issue - and the move itself. On the other side of the moving-trauma (we all experience!) is that Y knows several tenants at Anderson Gardens. Aside from downsizing -  it's a social thing!
Villager Z
Z has been parked in the Gardens by the family. With neither money nor disabilities an issue: Z got in!

About parking. In the building's car-port, 4 out of the 7 spaces are filled. Have been on different mornings - 5:00am - with the same cars. The building is not nearly fully occupied yet.

    
But The Gate-Keepers.....
Again - according to the Star, Oct. 4, 2011 .....the 33-unit, three-storey complex that will provide low-cost housing for seniors at the risk of homelessness. Of course we need to provide satisfactory living-conditions for those in need. Yet how many average, single local seniors actually are at high risk? They all live somewhere, generally have all the above-mentioned seniors' advantages plus - BIG plus - SAFER, the governmental rental-assistance for seniors.
Our focus instead must be on those probably more vulnerable/at risk because of disabilities. Yet they are never mentioned within this context! Less convenient? Less telesexy?
The organizations which pulled this project-as-such together are to be commended. But it all has been very expensive - with only a miniscule return on the investment possible - and will continue to be a major drain in the future, with the number of those actually served relatively small - and at least some of them quite literally served for invalid reasons.
With tax-payered subsidies needed ad infinitum.

It is essential that the CMHA start talking openly about those with disabilities, about tenancy-determination based on clearly defined need instead of the convenience of an unrealistic living-standard. The system in place is begging for abuse!
The current government-pension for seniors out there is about $1500 per month in total - a whopping $500 less than what the gate-keepers allow. Seeing that initially 2 distinct target-groups were labeled - seniors and people with disabilities (physical? mental?) - I am concerned with altogether 4 essentially different groups being morphed into a single unit by the CMHA. The 3 above and seniors with disabilities of one and/or the other kind.
What with deliberate official emphasis on "basic" seniors throughout: many of them may be in for a strong dose of reality come the first melt-down of a tenant with mental-health problems - the untidy disability-factor! At lunch?

According to the one and only Anderson Gardens press-release mentioned earlier, The Canadian Mental Health Association - Kootenays Branch will manage and operate Anderson Gardens. Incorporated in 1994, the Canadian Mental Health Association - Kootenay Branch is a non-profit organization committed to raising awareness and promoting the mental health of all people through the provision of services, programming, advocacy and public education. So where's their experience with basic seniors - unless crankiness puts them within local mental-health parameters. Conversely - those with mental disabilities - the CMHA's area of expertise - have received no P.R. whatsoever. And physical disabilities? Who knows! Does the CMHA?

The CMHA has received major concessions from City Hall and probably will continue to receive them - all backed by local tax-payers. In return they deserve to be kept in the loop with what the organization is doing here and - more important - how/why it is doing what. Simplifying all that for itself by only running the woolly affordable-housing-for-seniors mantra is not enough!

The Brightest Star.....
The Nelson Star - in several articles - has been instrumental in getting a modicum (at best) of information to the public, yet it has failed to address any of the points addressed in this post.
It is not clear whether low-cost housing for seniors at risk of homelessness has been a concern voiced by the gate-keepers (if so - when and where?), or whether the Star just got into the spirit of things - carried away a bit with going Dickens.
Over time, there have been 6 write-ups on Anderson Gardens - there has been only 1-one-a single comment (from a realtor advertising himself) on the Star's website. The Nelson thing.

Anyway, now that the Gardens' gates have been thrown open, it seems appropriate for the Star to provide answers which were raised in its write-ups but not answered throughout or which just popped-up and have remained ignored.
1.
What is the City's financial part in this project: initially waived/lowered fees; ongoing/future commitments; water-usage.
2.
What exactly is meant by disabilities, and why has dealing with this part of the project - at least publicly - been a deliberate side-issue at best, particularly as the CMHA is running it all. There clearly are 20 units for seniors, but I do not see mentioned anywhere specifically who will live in the remaining 13.
3.
In regards to Nelson's buy-here/hire-here policies - with the developer being the Culos Group, Kelowna:
3a.
How much in total did the development's building-materials cost, and how much of that was spent in Nelson - provided the materials were available through Nelson sources?
3b.
How much in total did temporary use of heavy equipment cost, and how much of that was spent locally - provided the equipment was available through Nelson sources?
3c.
How many subcontractors were employed for this project - from beginning to end - and how many of them were locals?  
3d.
How many workers were employed for this project - from beginning to end - and how many of them were locals?
4.
What are the CMHA's long-range plans for operational funding of the facility?
5.
What about restructuring income/asset criteria realistically to assure that the limited number of apartments will actually go to those most in need?
What about clearly acknowledging 4 groups: basic seniors; people with mental disabilities; people with physical disabilities; seniors with one and/or the other disability - aimed at impartiality in handing-out apartments?
6.
How many permanent full/part-time positions have been created at/through Anderson Gardens? 



....and once they had fumbled to their hearts' content:
they lived happily ever after.

Though never ever cost-effective.

We are not rich by what we possess but by what we can do without.
                                                                             Immanuel Kant