Municipal Politics

[mersar]

Originally Posted by freeweed

I still see plenty of "retirement homes" in this country. Does that mean I could just force my way into one by arguing discrimination?

Hell, correct me if I'm wrong, but I'd swear we still have "adults only" buildings in Canada. Maybe I'm just used to seeing them in the US and getting confused.

We do. Theres quite a few in the Beltline, including some of the newer towers. I believe Bigtime mentioned once that Vetro or Sasso were such.

[Bigtime]

Originally Posted by mersar

We do. Theres quite a few in the Beltline, including some of the newer towers. I believe Bigtime mentioned once that Vetro or Sasso were such.

Sasso, Vetro, and Nuera are all 18+ buildings. Which I would argue hurts the dynamics of the community, believe it or not there are some of us with kids that actually live in condo buildings!

In arriVa alone I would hazard to guess that there are probably about 20 families, not too bad a number when you consider that most assume people flee from condos once they have a kid or two.

[freeweed]

Personally, as much as I joke about wanting to be as far from kids as possible I think I'd rather have families living next to me than a bunch of childless Calgary bachelors. The Bigtimes of the world don't often have thumping bass at 2 am.

[fusili]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

Sasso, Vetro, and Nuera are all 18+ buildings. Which I would argue hurts the dynamics of the community, believe it or not there are some of us with kids that actually live in condo buildings!

In arriVa alone I would hazard to guess that there are probably about 20 families, not too bad a number when you consider that most assume people flee from condos once they have a kid or two.

We have quite a few in Emerald stone too. Mostly young children up to the age of I would guess 6 or 7. Not much past that.

[Bigtime]

Originally Posted by freeweed

Personally, as much as I joke about wanting to be as far from kids as possible I think I'd rather have families living next to me than a bunch of childless Calgary bachelors. The Bigtimes of the world don't often have thumping bass at 2 am.

This is true, and with a 9pm bedtime you can be assured we are asleep before you! Plus Littletime now sleeps through the night! Booya!

[MalcolmTucker]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

Sasso, Vetro, and Nuera are all 18+ buildings. Which I would argue hurts the dynamics of the community, believe it or not there are some of us with kids that actually live in condo buildings!

In arriVa alone I would hazard to guess that there are probably about 20 families, not too bad a number when you consider that most assume people flee from condos once they have a kid or two.

I don't think 18+ buildings would really hold up in court if someone tried to enforce it. As it is I would guess only really peer pressure if you could call it that would be the way to enforce.

[fusili]

[QUOTE=halifaxboyns;5068728]You are close - but it's not the MGA that would control this; it has to do with case law set in the supreme court related to the issue of 'seniors housing' and defining a family.
QUOTE]

I am pretty sure the MGA has some language around this. Earlier legal cases you mentioned are the reasons for the law, the MGA is just one of the legal documents where it is laid out. I would imagine all provinces have similar language in their planning legislation.

[shogged]

they can advertise as adult buildings, but it's against the law to discriminate against Race, Gender, Age, etc. This includes rentals and purchases. So yes, we still have "adult" buildings, but you're not going to get kicked out of your apartment if you have a child one day.

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by shogged

they can advertise as adult buildings, but it's against the law to discriminate against Race, Gender, Age, etc. This includes rentals and purchases. So yes, we still have "adult" buildings, but you're not going to get kicked out of your apartment if you have a child one day.

So I can move into a senior's home tomorrow if I so chose?

[MalcolmTucker]

A home is based on condition of health - at least the government funded ones. I know some young people that are not well end up in a nursing home where almost all residents are seniors.

[Bassic Lab]

Originally Posted by freeweed

So I can move into a senior's home tomorrow if I so chose?

Probably not an assisted living building but a 55+ condo complex legally cannot keep younger people out if they really want in. They still exist largely because there just are not that many people under 55 who would want to live there, let alone want to enough to go through the hassle of fighting the board over it.

If I recall correctly, the case that settled it involved someone who inherited a unit, tried to live there, and then was pissy enough fight the condo board basically out of spite. Such conditions are pretty rare.

[Bigtime]

Some condo boards do need someone with money and an axe to grind to put them in their place. I've heard some real horror stories.

[Ramsayfarian]

Originally Posted by freeweed

So I can move into a senior's home tomorrow if I so chose?

That might be the only chance I have of being a chick magnet. And by chick I mean some old lady.

[freeweed]

Originally Posted by Bassic Lab

Probably not an assisted living building but a 55+ condo complex legally cannot keep younger people out if they really want in. They still exist largely because there just are not that many people under 55 who would want to live there, let alone want to enough to go through the hassle of fighting the board over it.

If I recall correctly, the case that settled it involved someone who inherited a unit, tried to live there, and then was pissy enough fight the condo board basically out of spite. Such conditions are pretty rare.

Interesting. It's not exactly something I care about too much, for as you say there aren't exactly hordes of young people trying this. Good on that guy/gal for fighting the good fight.

I wonder how long until the rest of our age discrimination goes by the wayside. The feds and provinces still practice plenty of it, but housing is a start.

[charper]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

Some condo boards do need someone with money and an axe to grind to put them in their place. I've heard some real horror stories.

I've served on many boards and condo boards have by far been the most difficult boards to be on. Few people engage their condo communities and this leaves the governance of the building to those few who are engaged or those who have personal agendas. Sadly, the later has been most common in my experience.

Condo boards are very important and should be scrutinized before making a purchase... as the Millrise residents found out after their homes were destroyed by the fire.

[suburb]

Originally Posted by charper

I've served on many boards and condo boards have by far been the most difficult boards to be on. Few people engage their condo communities and this leaves the governance of the building to those few who are engaged or those who have personal agendas. Sadly, the later has been most common in my experience.

I sat in as proxy for my folks at their recent condo board meeting. I asked for there to be a review of if they can add furniture in the lobbies. The lobbies have been bare since creation over a decade ago - so people waiting for a ride or what have you lean against walls and such - and it looks badly on the entire unit. The Chair and friends (IE rest of the board) immediately said no, stating that people may steal the furniture. I said that the proposal was to investigate how it could be done. Another board member interjected immediately saying, lets have a vote to see how many people would like to see the fees increased to meet this request. I replied saying that this would not be required as just the dollars from the last year were in the positive $50K, far more than a one time $5K cost with virtually zero on-going costs. They they said I need to make the request formally with a letter, to which I responded that it was the AGM and the minutes should be sufficient. Anyway - the board has been virtually the same for the last decade. I voted for a couple new folks but they did not get in. Still no furniture and I suspect nothing will happen. Oh, and it turns out that the Chair's larger condo unit is the one immediately above the entry lobby.

[charper]

Originally Posted by suburb

I sat in as proxy for my folks at their recent condo board meeting. I asked for there to be a review of if they can add furniture in the lobbies. The lobbies have been bare since creation over a decade ago - so people waiting for a ride or what have you lean against walls and such - and it looks badly on the entire unit. The Chair and friends (IE rest of the board) immediately said no, stating that people may steal the furniture. I said that the proposal was to investigate how it could be done. Another board member interjected immediately saying, lets have a vote to see how many people would like to see the fees increased to meet this request. I replied saying that this would not be required as just the dollars from the last year were in the positive $50K, far more than a one time $5K cost with virtually zero on-going costs. They they said I need to make the request formally with a letter, to which I responded that it was the AGM and the minutes should be sufficient. Anyway - the board has been virtually the same for the last decade. I voted for a couple new folks but they did not get in. Still no furniture and I suspect nothing will happen. Oh, and it turns out that the Chair's larger condo unit is the one immediately above the entry lobby.

Great example. If they would like furniture, you could petition for a Special Meeting of the Members (requirements should be in the bylaws) which would need to state the proposed business for the meeting (you cannot add or change the business afterward). In this case the business would be a motion to the effect of "direct the Corporation to purchase to the maximum sum of $5,000: one couch, 2 lounge chairs, and 2 small tables... yada yada". It would be best if you also set a date for the purchases and placement to be complete by. If you fail to do that, the board retains the power to decide the date and... well... that might be a loooong way off.

Key is to be as specific as possible. If you say "put furniture in the lobby" you leave it up to the board to use it's judgment which may not agree with your definition of furniture.

Bottom line is members delegate authority to the Board and the Board to the Management Company. But the members always have ultimate authority. They just need to know how to execute it.

[shogged]

Originally Posted by freeweed

So I can move into a senior's home tomorrow if I so chose?

yes. assisted living homes no, because they aren't "housing" as much as they are medical facilities. You could live in retirement villas or something like that though. If they turned you down even though you have proof of income, a good reference or basically nothing that says you would be a bad tenant, you would have a case in court for discrimination.

[freeweed]

Interesting. Like I said, I've never exactly challenged this, but always wondered.

[halifaxboyns]

[QUOTE=fusili;5069527]

Originally Posted by halifaxboyns

You are close - but it's not the MGA that would control this; it has to do with case law set in the supreme court related to the issue of 'seniors housing' and defining a family.
QUOTE]

I am pretty sure the MGA has some language around this. Earlier legal cases you mentioned are the reasons for the law, the MGA is just one of the legal documents where it is laid out. I would imagine all provinces have similar language in their planning legislation.

I had a quick flip through the MGA's planning section (Part 17) and there actually isn't any reference to senior's homes or family. The MGA has sections relating to both in regards to taxation, but nothing in the planning section. I don't believe the MGA touches the issue at all, but feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.