Advertisement

Opinion

Opinion

Letter: Different villages

February 23, 2013

Advertisement

To the editor:

It is exciting to see the interest in attracting and retaining retirees/seniors to Lawrence. This is a diverse community requiring multiple ways to meet the needs of folks currently living in Lawrence and wanting to remain here, as well as attracting new residents. Eastside Village Lawrence and Campus Village are two models designed to do just that. This letter gives a brief description of Eastside Village and its goals. It is hoped that Dennis Domer, who has been so supportive of our efforts, will be able to give more information about the Campus Village, the proposed intergenerational development that recently received some city funding, so Journal-World readers have a clear picture of each model.

Eastside Village’s mission is to enable seniors on the east side of Lawrence, including North Lawrence, to live safe, happy and full lives in their current homes. We will do this by becoming a one-stop referral service connecting seniors with reliable, low-cost, vetted service providers to supply transportation, home maintenance, technical support, social and cultural activities, and the companionship seniors need to live independently.

We are a group of working and retired professionals committed to bringing the nonprofit Village concept to Lawrence and appreciate the support received from many individuals and organizations. We welcome volunteers and supporters from any part of the city and hope there will be groups in other parts of the city wanting to start their own Village so we can work together. Additional information is available at eastsidevillagelawrence.org.

Comments

citizen1 1 year, 1 month ago

Why is it when Lawrence discusses seniors it is only about those that are house bound or in need of help. To me this wrongfully distorts the view of who seniors are, what they do, what they want out of life & the many ways they continue to contribute to society. Certainly there is a need to help those needing it. But no more so than any other person needing help.

Lawrence does not seem to have an appreciation for the "Active 55+" senior citizen.

If Lawrence really wants to attract seniors to Lawrence, they need to understand this latter demographic and provide what they are looking for. They go south not just for the weather. They go there for the life style which Lawrence never mentions.

0

Richard Heckler 1 year, 1 month ago

Babcock Place does this type of situation very well and is an extraordinary place to live. I know you will find happy tenants and staff. Rates here are certainly within reality. Staff is excellent. Babcock Place is a friendly village.

I will never be convinced that private industry can do it better. Government is not necessarily evil.

0

Abdu Omar 1 year, 1 month ago

Babcock Place only had 120 rooms and they are always filled or given to the next person on the very long waiting list. We need to build other facilities and maintain them, but they are expensive and puts a great strain on the Housing Authority. If they are built, they should be private organizations and costs must be kept low for the residents. Is that possible?

0

Richard Heckler 1 year, 1 month ago

Excellent scenario for seniors. Living at home is preferable to a retired center and a whole lot less expensive.

Why do seniors get ripped when time to retire? Babcock Place is a sensible place to live.

1

Les Blevins 1 year, 1 month ago

Speaking of the non-profit village concept - we've been seeing Lawrence City Commissioners leaning toward privitazation of trash services lately but doing so without any authorization from the city's residents. This approach is hitting a snag in one community in California, a state that tends to be on the cutting edge in many areas.

PRIVATIZATION IN FRESNO, Calif. The Fresno mayor's residential solid waste plan has hit a major hurdle. The county clerk's office verified enough signatures needed to hold a special election. Close to 40,000 signatures were turned in last month from opponents of trash privatization. Mayor Ashley Swearengin was visibly upset afterwards, saying she was disappointed with the outcome. She says because of the delay in the switchover, dozens of layoffs are coming in the next two weeks to keep the city financially afloat. Swearengin said, "We will have to do further layoffs and keep police officers off the streets, look at closing fire stations and other draconian cuts should the franchise ultimately not be approved by the voters." Marina Magdaleno added, "It is a big step for us but it is a bittersweet feeling because we know the city is having some financial problems." In two weeks the City Council must decide whether to simply repeal their vote to privatize residential collections, or to hold special election that could cost up to $1 million. The Fresno County Clerk's office verified enough signatures needed to hold a special election on the privatization of residential collections in the city, according to a local news report. City officials verified more than 27,000 signatures out of the nearly 40,000 signatures turned in last month, which is more than enough to delay the new contract with Mid Valley Disposal and hold a referendum, the report said. If the city council does call for a special election, they will have up to 88 days to hold it, according to the report.

1

Commenting has been disabled for this item.