Guest Commentary: Response to Davis Enterprise on Senior Housing

Special to The People’s Vanguard of Davis

By Elaine Roberts Musser

____________

It was with some disquiet that I read Claire St. John’s Jan. 2, 2009 article in the Davis Enterprise, entitled “Senior Living”. I immediately fired off a clarification of my position to the Enterprise that same day. I wanted to make clear the reader understood 1) I was speaking as an individual and not in my capacity as the Chair of the Davis Senior Citizens Commission; 2) the issue of how much senior housing is considered necessary in the future was left completely out of the article.

Because I have no 350 word limit as is required in the Enterprise, it would be my privilege to take this opportunity to more fully express my individual opinion. I was asked by Claire St. John what I thought were the most pressing senior needs in Davis. The list I gave included four items: 1) senior housing; 2) transportation; 3) elder abuse prevention; 4) greater fiscal responsibility with respect to city finances.

A lengthy discussion ensued about each item on the list, and what was being done on a city and county level to address these four issues - since I wear both a city and county hat. (I am Chair of the Triad Task Force, the action arm of the Yolo County Commission on Aging & Adult Services.) I mentioned transit mobility training and roving legal clinics at the county level, and talked of my concerns about the city budgeting process. I offered to Claire contact information for various people, to facilitate follow-up discussions - in an effort to assist the research process about her proposed article on senior needs.

However, Ms. St. John’s article only dealt with senior housing, and in my opinion left out the critical element the two of us had thoroughly discussed. How much senior housing is necessary? I doubt anyone would disagree that between now and the year 2013 that some more senior housing options would be nice, as was suggested in the article. Especially to give some desired competition to already existing and very expensive assisted living or continuum of care facilities in Davis. But what specific number of senior housing units would be essential is the million dollar question, the big fat elephant in the room!

In the article, only one number was discussed. The plan under contemplation at the old Covell Village site would have about 800 units of senior housing over ten years. This is an all or nothing approach. Are we only left with two possible options: 800 units or zero growth? In fact a city staff report put the internal need for more senior housing at an estimated maximum of 150 units between now and the year 2013, which from my perspective seems considerably more realistic than 800.

Claire St. John’s article relies heavily on the notion of “downsizing”, i.e. moving to a smaller home to cut down on maintenance needs. Ironically, statistics show that people prefer to remain in their home until the day they die. Often there is an emotional attachment to one’s residence. It is where children are raised and grow up. I doubt very many seniors would want to sell their home for the good of the community just to free up housing for younger families, as was put forward in the article as a reason for development of more senior housing. Nor do many seniors want to live in an age-restricted complex, preferring to live among younger folks.

Some months ago, I strongly advocated for the Davis Senior Citizens Commission to create a set of housing guidelines. The idea was to give developers and the City Council some guidance as to what seniors were interested in, and delineate their concerns. I felt it was time to reverse the trend of new housing in Davis being developer-driven. Such principles that involve sensible planning might also cut down on the divisiveness that seems to come with every discussion in Davis about growth. These guidelines are very close to being finished, but still require a bit of tweaking.

The gist of the guidelines, without getting into specifics, is as follows: 1) provide housing options for seniors of all income levels, with an eye toward meeting “internal” rather than “external” demand; 2) taking into account the fiscal impact of an increase in cost of city services that will entail. Too often residential growth has been initiated under the policy “ build it and they shall come”. Ultimately the developers reap a handsome profit. However, the inherent costs of such a careless strategy have not been fully borne by developers, but rather city taxpayers are forced to make up the difference, which has been substantial.

We are now facing a city budget crisis of epic proportions. Much of that cost is for road repair, and city employee benefits. Costs intrinsic to residential development. To put it bluntly, a massive influx of seniors would further strain the county social welfare system, city fire and ambulance services, city and county medical facilities, etc., above and beyond normal city and county services. Shouldn’t we be trying to further commercial development first, to bring in more tax revenue to pay for existing city services, let alone pay for any new ones created by more development?

Another issue raised in the article is of deep personal concern. “Part of their concept is a community…managed by residents. Maintenance would be paid for out of a homeowners association fund.” As a Board member of the Center for CA Homeowners Association Law (CCHAL), I can tell you from personal experience as an attorney, homeowners associations are rife with opportunities for elder abuse. A homeowners association is not the panacea many assume it is. In fact homeowners associations, and the management companies and debt collection agencies they hire, can perpetrate some of the worst cases of abuse on record. It can include taking away a person’s home and selling it for as little as $1.20; and can result in the death of the homeowner from the stress of any foreclosure proceedings.

I would strongly advise the City Council to tread very carefully, when planning future housing in general, and senior housing in particular. My hope is our commission’s guidelines will serve as a set of talking points, to begin appropriate discussion on projected residential development of senior housing. If the City Council finds these guidelines useful, I would encourage the planning commission to come up with a similar set of guidelines for overall residential development. It serves for better long range planning, should cut down on incivility in community discussion, and will better provide for actual community needs.

Elaine Roberts Musser is an attorney who concentrates her efforts on elder law and aging issues, especially in regard to consumer affairs. If you have a comment or particular question or topic you would like to see addressed, please make your observations at the end of this article in the comment section.

Word To The Wise: Proposed Senior Housing Guidelines

by E.A. Roberts

____________

I usually leave the more controversial issues in DPD’s capable hands, and instead try to provide informative topics of interest on the subject of the elderly and disabled. However, senior housing seems to be a current hot button issue in this community, so I will dare to launch into troubled waters. In so doing, on occasion I will risk giving my opinion on the subject. A previous column I wrote for this blog discussed senior housing, but in a more informative format.

Recently I was invited by Tandem Properties to attend a “focus group”, ostensibly to obtain my view on what senior housing should look like in Davis. Because I am a member of the Davis Senior Citizens Commission, I was very reluctant to attend. My feeling was that as a commission member, I did not want to give any appearance of impropriety in my actions. To attend a developer’s focus group might be construed the wrong way if I was not careful.

Unfortunately, I felt it imperative to go - once fellow commission members urged me to do so, after they had attended some of these focus groups. I began to realize it was necessary to find out what was going on. In the end, I am actually glad I chose to be present. It gave me a heads up on what is in the works for proposal by developers, and an opportunity for me to impart my views to them. As a commission member, it can be a fine line to walk.

It should be understood from the outset that I was the only member of the “focus group” I attended, which felt very uncomfortable. But it also gave me the opportunity to ask lots of questions, and I had many. Here is the gist of what I was told:

• Tandem Properties wants to propose a senior housing development on the former Covell Village site.
• The first phase would include 800 units. There is a second and third phase in the planning stages as well.
• All levels of affordability will be included.
• The developers are willing to kick in the costs of an AMR station, but not a fourth fire station. They feel to fund another fire station would be cost prohibitive.
• Many wonderful amenities are contemplated for this senior housing development, including the concept of “telemedicine” - doctor visits via the computer. Their vision is a veritable wonderland chock full of enticing goodies.
• Tandem Properties has formed a Healthy Aging group, that has put out a newsletter promoting good health for seniors. Naturally, Tandem believes their housing proposal will enhance the good health of any older adult who chose to live in their envisioned senior community.
• According to the developers, the “internal need” of Davisites should include elderly parents who wish to reside near their adult children already residing here.
• Downsizing is the common mantra of the developers, who insist -
• This is what seniors want;
• It will be for the good of the community because:
• It will free up more stock for workforce housing;
• It will bring in more young families to help do away with the declining enrollment problem in the schools.

Since that time, I have also talked with some members of the Housing Element Steering Committee (HESC). One piece of information I have gleaned from them is as follows:

• They are projecting an “internal need” for somewhere between 200 to 400 units of senior housing between now and the year 2013;
• The members I talked with and a person on city staff are indicating there is very little justification for the numbers arrived at, ostensibly because it is a difficult figure to quantify.

At my strong urging, the Davis Senior Citizens Commission has elected to take up the issue of senior housing. The plan is to come up with some guidelines for the City Council to follow as it deliberates on any housing proposal. (City staff would prefer the creation of guidelines be done in coordination with the Social Services Commission, which could be problematic - since the constituencies they answer to are vastly different. The Senior Citizens Commission addresses the issues of all seniors, whereas the Social Services Commission concerns itself with the needs of low income and disabled.) This is so that whatever is built will not be “developer driven”, but rather have sufficient community input prior to its proposal being introduced for consideration. The hope is sufficient guidelines will preclude any future Covell Village debacle, as has happened in the past, where the City Council is not in sync with the community at large.

During the “focus group” I attended at Tandem Properties, my input was solicited. In general I remained fairly noncommittal, but did offer the following advice:

• It is important for any developer to first offer up proposed housing development plans for feedback at various city commissions, such as the Planning Commission, Senior Citizens Commission and other appropriate venues - before making a formal proposal to the City Council. In so far as Covell Village is concerned, there was a perception that developers were attempting to make an end run around process by going directly to the City Council majority for approval. With Measure J in place, that gambit will not be very effective.
• Necessary to the process will be for developers to consider “internal” community needs rather than “external” needs of those who live outside Davis. (This is not an elitist attitude, by the way, but a recognition that the efforts of the City Council need to be directed toward addressing community problems first and foremost, if at all possible. This is the charge of the City Council.)

To date, I am trying to keep an open mind on the subject of senior housing. I am not anti-developer by any stretch of the imagination. However, as things have unfolded, certain concerns have taken root. The ensuing discussion may help frame the issue of how much senior housing should the city of Davis build for the future.

Up until now, I strongly believe our community housing needs have been largely ignored in favor of a housing policy that is “developer driven”. It has resulted in some unfortunate byproducts, not the least of which is the present public school disaster. Home builders are promising new construction of schools as an enticement to homebuyers - without adequate assurance the school system will have enough in the way of operating expenses to run the new facilities. In consequence, too many schools were built in Davis, which resulted in the closure of Valley Oak Elementary and the threatened closure of Emerson Junior High.

Another unfortunate derivative of new housing is an increase in taxes - brought on by additional city services it inevitably brings. In this day and age of tough budget cuts, and the resulting decrease in state revenue to our city, the escalating tax burden factor becomes critical for our citizens on moderate or fixed incomes. It should be noted the City Council is proposing a new public safety tax. The School Board is proposing another parcel tax on top of the one we already are paying. Water and sewer rates are increasing at an astronomical rate.

Developers are in the business of making money for themselves, and there is nothing inherently wrong with this. However, it must be remembered they are in the building industry first and foremost to maximize their profits. Thus if their proposals are not in the best interests of the city, it is incumbent upon the City Council to raise red flags where appropriate, and get the developers to rethink and revise their proposal. This did not happen with the original Covell Village project.

Instead, it felt as if some on the City Council had already had their minds made up by developers, and merely wanted the commissions to rubber stamp approval. This was an unfortunate position to take, especially in light of the impending Measure J vote. Because some on the City Council failed to first obtain sufficient community and commission input, the entire Covell Village matter ended in an embarrassing defeat at the polls.

Which brings up the issue of Measure J, which will be a thorn in the sides to developers unless it is somehow weakened with amendments. I am a strong supporter of Measure J in its present form, as a check on the abuses of process that often take place in local politics. It ensures that the City Council truly listens to the electorate when weighing in on the important issue of how much we should grow as a city, and in what direction. Any City Council member that tries to monkey with it does so at their political peril.

That said, there are a few disturbing arguments being bandied about by the pro-developer contingent, that I find quite disturbing. The notion that all seniors want to downsize is fallacious. An AARP survey indicates otherwise. Actually 83% of those 45 and older would prefer to stay in their existing home, and not downsize. If that statistic is applied to:

• Tandem Properties’ alleged “internal need” of 800 units by year 2013, the “internal need” shrinks to 136 units;
• HESC’s estimated “internal need” of 200-400 units by year 2013, the “internal need shrivels to between 34-68 units.

In fact, the current wait list for Shasta Point and Eleanor Roosevelt, both essentially low-income senior facilities, is virtually zero. As is the wait-list at Atria Covell Gardens, an assisted living facility for the elderly.

It is also completely inappropriate to argue seniors should downsize for the good of the community, to free up housing for the workforce and help end the problem of declining enrollment in our schools. Seniors have a constitutionally protected right to remain in their homes for as long as they want. Furthermore, seniors often use extra bedrooms for visiting relatives, live-in caregivers, and to rent for supplemental income. The elderly often have an emotional attachment to their home as well. Moreover, to sell to a stranger would eliminate the possible transfer of tax advantages of Prop 13 to the senior homeowner’s children.

Nor can one argue, with a straight face, that parents of adult Davisites represent part of the “internal need” of Davis. This line of misleading reasoning is as follows: parents who live outside the city will eventually want to move to Davis, to live where their adult children reside. But logic tells us that just as many elderly parents who live in Davis will want to move outside the city to be with adult children who live elsewhere. Not to mention those elderly in Davis who want to move AWAY from their adult children!

Be it good, bad or indifferent, here are a set of proposed guidelines I would like to see the City Council follow any time they are thinking of approving new housing, along with a checklist. I welcome any and all comments, constructive criticisms and new ideas.

General Housing Principles

A. General Housing Principles

• COMMUNITY PLANNED - Determination of housing requirements should not be “developer driven”, but accomplished in response to the expressed desires of the community.
• INDEPENDENT MARKET ANALYSIS - Market analysis of the true community need for housing should be done by an independent consultant who has no ties to the developer/city staff/city council members. The analysis should speak to:
• Affordability - in which the term is used in its broadest sense to include those of moderate income within the city of Davis.
• Marketability - determination if there is a true demand for specific types of housing proposed.
• BUILD IN SMALLER INCREMENTS - Build housing developments encompassing all housing types when practicable in smaller increments (phases), to better ascertain if it is meeting the true ongoing community needs of the city.
• COST TO TAXPAYERS FOR CITY SERVICES - An examination of cost in city services (additional tax burden) to all citizens, of a new development, should be mandatory as part of any application to build.
• City services to be investigated would include but is not limited to fire protection, law enforcement, parks maintenance, increase in water/sewer rate increases and the like.
• Developers should be required to pay mitigation fees in full, to decrease the cost of city services to residents of Davis.
• SOUND PLANNING PRINCIPLES - Implement sound planning principles that take into account what is best for the entire community, including but not limited to:
• Avoidance of development in larger flood plains or next to toxic sites;
• Air quality considerations;
• Good traffic management.
• ACCESSABILITY/VISITABILITY - The principles of accessibility/visitability should be incorporated into all new housing.

B. Senior Housing Guidelines

In determining the need for senior housing in Davis for its citizens, the following factors need to be taken into account in any market analysis:

• AGE DEFINITIONS - Age definitions or restrictions must be well defined, e.g. age 65 and over.
• PREFERENCE TO REMAIN HOME - Preference of 87% of seniors to remain in their homes, according to AARP survey.
• DOWNSIZING - A need to downsize - because either a) there is a medical crisis that requires it; b) the owner of a larger home recognizes s/he can no longer manage its upkeep; c) or there is simply a desire to be among peers.
• HOUSING OPTIONS - A need for different housing types for seniors, who cannot/do not wish to remain in their homes, should be considered.

• HOUSING SUITABLE FOR SENIORS - Many seniors are not in favor of living in age-restricted housing, preferring housing suitable for seniors. Creative options should be explored, such as cooperative housing or shared housing alternatives.
• AGE-RESTRICTED SENIOR HOUSING - Age-restricted senior housing types to be contemplated are as follows:

• Independent living: cottage, townhouse, mobile home, independent living facility;
• Assisted living facility (residential care facility for the elderly - RCFE);
• Skilled nursing facility (skilled nursing facility - SNF);
• Continuum of care facility.

• SUPPORT SERVICES - Nearby or accompanying support services should be taken into account for any senior housing built:
• Transit;
• Social services
• The impact of importing seniors from outside the county and the attendant drain on existing city/county social services should be assessed, in determining the overall “internal” need for senior housing.
• The wait-lists of current city facilities should be factored into the overall picture as to true community need.
• LOCATION - Because seniors often no longer drive a car, the preferred location for any proposed senior housing should be close to:

• public transit if there is no on-site shuttle;
• shopping (especially grocery store and pharmacy);
• a medical facility.

Lesson to be learned: Planning ahead and getting true community input about housing needs can head off a lot of potential problems in the future. It will also result in projects that are designed for the best interests of the community. While Tandem Properties’ proposal sounds like a veritable Disneyland for the elderly, it will bring with it high costs in additional city services. Without additional commercial development instituted to raise more tax revenue, current citizens in Davis may not be able to handle the greater tax burden required.

(Please note the opinions expressed are solely my own, and not stated as a reflection of the view of the Davis Senior Citizens Commission.)

Fraud Alert: An ad appeared in the Davis Enterprise some weeks ago entitled “The Disturbing Truth About Reverse Mortgages!!!”, touting a free report on the subject. I called the number given, only to connect with a recording that wanted me to leave my name and address. Not a single bit of information was imparted to make me aware of what I might be receiving or give some indication if I would even be interested.. I hung up immediately, since I did not want to take the chance of being placed on some mailing list (sometimes known as a ‘sucker list’), which could then be sold to who knows what unsavory financial predator. What is important here is to note the tiny print in the left hand corner which reads “Paid Advertisement”. If there is a product or service for sale, the retailer should be up front about it.

A notice appeared in the June 26^th Davis Enterprise, advising the public that a seminar on trusts had been conducted at the Davis Chamber of Commerce office. It wanted to make sure the public did not construe this as a Chamber of Commerce endorsement of whoever rented their facilities for this seminar. My terse comment would be such a notice was nothing more than “too little, too late”. The disclaimer would have been far more appropriate if stated directly before the seminar, on site. A 1.5 in. x 1.5 in. disclaimer buried among huge ads in a newspaper is hardly sufficient. As an attorney, I have dealt with several cases involving these trust mills, and the results have not always been what they should be. Trust mills tend to be a one size fits all operation, where most seniors have no idea what they purchased or whether it is suitable for their particular circumstances.

Elaine Roberts Musser is an attorney who concentrates her efforts on elder law and aging issues, especially in regard to consumer affairs. If you have a remark or particular question or topic you would like to see addressed in this column, please make your observations at the end of this article in the comment section.

Word To The Wise: Speak Up Or Nothing Changes

By E.A. Roberts
____________

Recently I had the opportunity to attend the Open House given at Atria Covell Gardens, an assisted living facility for seniors. Its purpose was to showcase the new double occupancy suites, which were created as a result of resident complaints. Rent increases for this residential care facility for the elderly (RCFE) jumped to as much as 16% over a two year period, a drastic spike in price. What ensued is a prime example of democracy in action.

Oddly enough, the Davis Senior Citizens Commission just so happened to have one of their regular off-site meetings at Atria Covell Gardens last winter. Without knowing what was coming, commissioners convening the session were greeted with a firestorm of protest. Atria Covell Garden residents had just received word of an extreme rate hike in rent and services the evening before. This feisty group of seniors were infuriated, and let the commission know just how they felt.

Our advice as a commission was for them to complain long and loudly, with Letters to the Editor of the Davis Enterprise, or to the Davis Vanguard, as a way of obtaining publicity for their cause. We also suggested contacting state and local legislators. There were also talks with the company that managed the facility as well. All avenues were sought for redress, including the state licensing board. Just about anyone who was in any way connected with the situation was contacted by these angry seniors.

The result was not only several different bills now wending their way through the legislature having to do with notification of rent increases at RCFEs. In addition, Atria Covell Gardens has made changes to several single suites to accommodate two persons in a shared arrangement - to cut costs for those of lesser income. More of these units are planned there for the future. Had the seniors in residence at Atria Covell kept quiet about their predicament, then nothing much would have changed.

Instead a private company has been encouraged to make necessary alterations to keep competitive with the current market. The fact of the matter is that Atria Covell Gardens represents the only sole RCFE in the city of Davis. University Retirement Commons is the only Continuum of Care Facility (Independent Living Facility; Assisted Living Facility; Skilled Nursing Facility; Alzheimer’s Unit all in one) within town limits. In consequence, these two facilities have virtually no competition, and have been able to charge prices at a rate that is as high as whatever the market will bear.

However, because of the complaints about the sudden, drastic rent hikes at Atria Covell Gardens, there has been the introduction of new legislation which may warn of perceived price gouging. There has also been talk of building another lower cost assisted living facility, for middle income older folks. Both of these factors surely played into management’s decision to devise a way to create more affordable units at Atria Covell Gardens. High praise goes to the seniors that spoke out against their financial predicament; and to private enterprise for coming up with a creative solution! It may not be the perfect solution, but it is a start in the right direction.

Legislation Pending:

• AB 2101 Author: Wolk [D]; Title: RCFEs; rate increases

Requires RCFEs to develop emergency plans, give residents advanced notice of rent increases, and give prospective residents information about rate increases over the past 5 yrs.

• 
  

• AB 2370 Author: Bass [D]; Title: RCFEs; rate increases

Requires RCFEs to disclose annually to current residents their average monthly rate increases for each of the previous 3 years, to be posted near the entrance to the facility and provided to any prospective tenant upon request.

CA Commission on Aging Public Hearing: Health Access for Older Californians

The California Commission on Aging (CCoA) held a public hearing in Yolo County, on the topic of health access for older Americans in rural areas. CCoA is an advisory body to the governor of CA on senior issues. Its 25 members are appointed by the governor, Senate Rules Committee and Speaker of the Assembly. They serve as volunteers, for up to two three year terms.

Our own Dave Soto, of the Area 4 Agency on Aging, pointed out that his organization encourages:

1. A multi-disciplinary approach;
2. Disease and injury prevention;
3. Home-centered services;
4. Transportation options;
5. Technological innovation.

Dawn Purkey of Yolo Adult Day Health stressed the following:

• Age distinctions should be made when providing services, because the needs for each age group can be so different, e.g. 65-75, 75-85, 85 and above;
• Service providers need to be protected with programs like respite care;
• Caregiver assessment tools should be developed;
• Nontraditional models of caregiving should be tried;
• Volunteerism should be encouraged.

Nancy Guenther, the Program Manager of the Office on Disability and Health, CA Dept. of Public Health, Injury Control Section advised as listed below:

• Transportation networks; more transportation options;
• Mobile units to dispense healthcare;
• Use of new technology, e.g. videophones; internet interactions
• Care calls to check on isolated seniors;
• Health promotion visits;
• Universal fund, paid by doctors, for language interpreters

Teri Boughton, Senior Program Officer for State Health Policy, CA HealthCare Foundation advised:

• Allowing greater independence of nurse practitioners;
• Align licensing requirements with the military, to encourage retired military medical personnel to practice in rural areas;
• Raise reimbursement rates for Medicare and Medicaid, to encourage doctors to take more low income patients;
• Encourage development of telemedicine by remote technological devices

Then questions were invited from commission members and the audience. Suggested solutions for improving access to healthcare in rural areas included:

• Retail medical clinics, as long as there was integration with more comprehensive care;
• Great ideas are funded through local, state and federal grants; volunteerism; and operating on a shoestring budget;
• Recruitment of physicians (especially geriatric physicians) with: debt forgiveness as an incentive; and develop hospital districts;
• Mobilization of resources to come together to meet senior needs, e.g. use of Fish & Game airplanes to medivac rural patients to urban trauma centers, recruit both Vets with medical experience and retired physicians; physicians should tithe 10% to public clinics; medical networks need to work outside the Medicare/Medicaid system, e.g. by municipalities paying doctors to come back on occasion and provide services;
• National Health Services Corp - education is paid for if recipient doctor works in rural area for a period of years;
• Provide more transportation options;
• Push for universal health coverage;
• Provide more public education on available services;
• Have sliding scale with respect to fees charged for accessing services.

In proposing transit mobility training as a possible solution to get seniors to their medical appointments, I was lucky enough to be informed by a commission member that he was aware of Yolo County’s grant application to Caltrans for this teaching project. Transit mobility training instructs seniors how to use public transit, so they are not in fear of getting lost or stranded. It will assist them in using public transit to get to a doctor‘s office or medical clinic, by starting them off with group training for a social event. An out-of-service bus is utilized to take a cadre of willing senior citizens by the hand to the local downtown area for lunch, or the movies.

This program is being developed by the Triad Task Force of which I am Chair. Triad is the action arm of the Yolo County Commission on Aging, chaired by Mariko Yamada. The transit mobility training project is being facilitated in conjunction with a private company. Paratransit Inc. already provides this type of training in Sacramento County, so Davis Senior Citizens Commissioner Tansey Thomas and I asked them if they would be willing to expand their services into Yolo County. JD Culver and Kevin Walch of Paratransit Inc. were delighted to oblige! A pilot project would begin in Davis, and expand to encompass as much of Yolo County as possible.

I also mentioned to the CCoA some other projects in Yolo County that Triad has either completed or is in the works:

• Rebuilding Together - a nonprofit organization that provides safety devices in the home, such as grab bars, wheelchair ramps, smoke detectors, custom railings, toilet risers, etc., regardless of income status.
• Caregiver Registry - to provide trained caregivers to those seniors not wealthy enough to afford private pay services, but too wealthy to qualify for gov’t subsidized in-home supportive services.
• Proposition 63 funded mobile assessment team known as the Yolo County Older Adult Program - to assist seniors in crisis.
• Triad Task Force, a community-based organization willing to take on projects that assist seniors.
• Building Bridges - an elder abuse prevention program, which is key to the protection of older adult health. Once a senior has been abused, either physically or financially, it begins a downward spiral that often results in the death of an elderly person.

Finally, I noted the need for elder abuse prevention, as key to the protection of older adult health. It was pointed out by me that once a senior has been abused, either physically or financially, it begins a downward spiral that often results in death.

Lesson to be learned: Speak out, or nothing will change for the better. Volunteerism, creativity, and a willingness to address problems are the solutions to a better life for senior citizens.

Elaine Roberts Musser is an attorney who concentrates her efforts on elder law and aging issues, especially in regard to consumer affairs. If you have a comment or particular question or topic you would like to see addressed in this column, please make your observations at the end of this article in the comment section.

Word To The Wise: Senior Housing and Other Interesting Tidbits

By E.A. Roberts

____________

SENIOR HOUSING

Senior housing is a complex issue at best. However, there have been some new developments locally which bear discussion. According to a 2003 AARP survey, “more than four in five (83%) of Americans age 45 and over say they strongly or somewhat agree that they would like to remain in their current residence for as long as possible, even if they have to hire outside help to care for them.” This would suggest there is a strong national preference for aging in place, rather than a desire to move to independent living facilities or downsizing to a smaller residence.

Another important point needs to be made. According to a staff report drawn up for the Davis Senior Citizens Commission: “[There is]… a lower population growth rate in Davis between 2000 and 2006 as compared to the Sacramento-Yolo CMSA. While the Sacramento-Yolo CMSA’s population increased by 15 percent, the City of Davis grew by approximately 7 percent. That 7 percent increase represents a rise in Davis’ population of slightly more than 4,000 persons, to an estimated 2006 level of 64,600.” A table of age distribution shows the rise in Davis’ population age 65 and over between the years 2000 and 2006 was 470 senior citizens; age 55 and over was 2,379 seniors.

The staff report went on to say: “Household growth trends generally mirrored population trends between 2000 and 2006, with the City lagging behind the CMSA. In the CMSA, the number of households increased by nearly 15 percent over the six-year period. In contrast, at just over six percent, the growth rate in Davis represents less than half the CMSA level. The 2006 estimate of just under 24,500 households in Davis represented an increase of approximately 1,500 new households from the number of households in the year 2000.” In other words, it could roughly be predicted in Davis there will be 24,500 + 1,500 = 26,000 households by the year 2013.

Whereas the Recommendations of the General Plan Update Steering Committee - March 20, 2008 states: “In 2006, the proportion of the Davis population ages 55 and over was 15%, while for the Sacramento-Yolo CMSA the proportion was 21%. 5% of the 6% difference between those two proportions is the result of the 16,285 UC Davis students who live in Davis. Removing that age distribution anomaly, the Davis proportion of residents over 55 grew more than twice as fast as those of the CMSA, and therefore it is reasonable to expect a change in the proportion of senior households in Davis from 15% to 18% of all households over the six years from 2008 through 2013. This change in proportion would increase the number of senior households by approximately 1,104 from a total of approximately 3,900 (=15% of approximately 26,000 total households in 2008) to 5,004 (=18% of approximately 27,800 total households in 2013). As convoluted and confusing as this “information” appears, the one thing that can be gleaned from the General Plan Update Steering Committee is their estimate that in Davis there will be 27,800 households in 2013.

National estimates of senior housing demand assume that 15% of senior households seek age-restricted housing units. Thus, the increase in “internal demand for age-restricted housing from current Davis residents is projected to be approximately 166 households (-1,104 x 15%). This demand can be rounded to 200 due to the recognized imprecision of the assumptions. The additional “external” demand from the senior parents of existing Davis residents who want to live in age-restricted housing near their children is difficult to project. This type of demand is real, however, and is arguably internally-generated by the children living in Davis. Based on proportion of ages in the 35 to 54 group, it is reasonable to project this demand as being equivalent to at least another 200 age-restricted housing units through 2013.” Despite the admitted imprecision of making such predictions, the General Plan Update Steering Committee is projecting a total need of approximately 400 age-restricted housing units by the year 2013.

Let’s take a look at the above statements more closely -

According to AARP: 83% of seniors would prefer not to move at all;

• According to the Davis Senior Citizens Commission staff report:

• The rise in Davis’ population between the years 2000 and 2006

• For age 65 and over was 470 senior citizens;
• For age 55 and over was 2,379 senior citizens.

• It can be inferred that in Davis there will be 26,000 households by the year 2013.

• According to the General Plan Update Steering Committee (GPUSC):

• It is predicted in Davis there will be 27,800 households by the year 2013.
• It is estimated in Davis there will be a need for approximately 400 age-restricted housing units by the year 2013.

Note the following:

• There is no attempt to differentiate the housing needs of those between the ages of 55 and 65, versus age 65 and older, even though it can be vastly different.
  
  
• In regard to the rise in Davis’ population between the years 2007 and 2013 of roughly 2,400 seniors age 55 and over, only 17% will want to move = approximately 400;
  
  
• Staff report: in Davis by the year 2013 the number of households will be = 26,000;
  
  
• The GPUSC: in Davis by the year 2013 the number of households will be = 27,800.
  
  
• The GPUSC estimate of a need for approximately 400 age-restricted housing units by the year 2013 erroneously assumes all seniors want to move, whereas 83% probably will not wish to! The desire to “age in place” cuts the need for age-restricted housing down to approximately 70 units (17% of 400) - which in effect represents another facility slightly larger than the size of Eleanor Roosevelt Circle (60 units).

I had an interesting, if reluctant, conversation with the Covell Village developers the other day. They are conceptualizing a much smaller but interesting project, about a third the size of the original one. It is to be a large housing development for seniors and their families - of about 800 units at the Covell Village site. They claimed to have met with more than 340 individuals to collect opinions regarding the need for senior housing in Davis. To put it briefly, theirs is a “vision of a senior neighborhood design that will provide choices in home ownership, housing sizes and styles, and convenient access to healthcare and fitness opportunities.”

It all sounded very nice. Transportation in the form of a facility bus would be provided; the developers might be willing to kick in the cost of an ambulance station (a fourth fire station is cost prohibitive); greenbelts will abound; medical care will be had by teleconferencing; all income levels will be addressed and every senior should be able to afford something within the environs of the development; safe passage across the street to the shopping center would be built in. The list goes on.

Eventually I was asked if I would vote for approval of such a development. My answer was very equivocal, but to the point. The following questions were posed to the developers, to which I did not really receive an adequate response:

• What are the internal needs of seniors in Davis, as opposed to external requirements? Are the developers serving internal needs first and foremost?
• How will the city pay for the services it must provide to this new development? Will developers pay their fair share of those costs?
• Is there a partnership between Covell Village and the Cannery project? Is there some way to influence the Cannery project to bring business into Davis, as well as workforce housing?

I did encourage the developers to come to the Davis Senior Citizens Commission, and make their pitch. They were also strongly urged by me to visit other commissions, and to listen to any responses carefully. Frankness compelled me to note their previous circumvention of governmental process led to bad feelings among commissioners and citizens alike. Trying to influence certain city council members to gain prior approval, with insufficient commission and community input, will not get them past the hurdle of the all important Measure J vote.

My concern has always been that development decisions are not being made based on the best interests of the city, e.g. developers promising schools without determining if there is sufficient funding to run the proposed facilities. Currently this latest rendition of development at the Covell Village site is nothing more than an attempt to resurrect the old project, but build it in smaller sections phased in over time. There is nothing inherently wrong with that approach - it has more likelihood of succeeding. The sticking point for me is to put a number to the “internal” need of Davis seniors for housing. How many units will be required?

The Covell Village developers seem to think 800 units will be necessary by the year 2013. Yet the GPUSC indicates somewhere between 200 and 400 is the optimal number, a rather loosey goosey estimate, with the acknowledgement such a figure is difficult to project. Whereas our commission’s staff report seems to forecast only a demand requisite of about 70 units. Which number is the most accurate becomes the million dollar question!

Now add onto that another layer of complication. Atria Covell Gardens, an assisted living facility for the frail elderly, saw rent and service hikes as high as 16% over two years. The residents were at the mercy of the corporate office, because other options are limited or nonexistent in Davis. Consequently there is probably a need for a continuing care facility that could offer effective competition.

It is also unclear to me if we have enough low cost housing for seniors in Davis. Middle income senior housing is most assuredly nonexistent. Eleanor Roosevelt Circle was supposed to address the lack of middle income housing, but almost completely failed to solve the issue. Instead, because of the mixed income rate structure that was not seen as desirable by potential residents, ERC is virtually filled with nothing but low income folks. Nevertheless, it is a model to be emulated for its on-site Social Services Director.

Mayor Sue Greenwald has suggested building a continuing care facility for the elderly in the downtown area, particularly at the PG&E site. I have no idea how feasible an idea that is, nor how practical. If I were to sum up my estimation of the situation, I have more questions than answers. But what I do know is it is not effective planning to have developers driving the process rather than being an integral part of it. My hope is that by inviting developers to speak with commissioners, perhaps we can help frame projects that better serve the needs of the city. Call me an eternal optimist!

Lessons to be learned: Statistics can be twisted to derive whatever result is desired. It will be very important for both the City Council and the public to take a very hard, skeptical look at the data. Allowing developers to drive the planning process will end in disaster, but making them an integral part is an absolute necessity. Developers are not inherently evil because they want to make a profit. However, land use planning should ultimately be decided by those who have no hidden agendas or built in conflicts of interest. Citizens should keep an open mind to development, but make sure it will meet internal needs that the city can afford.

From a personal perspective, I think the City of Davis should push hard for more business before it considers additional housing. We need greater sales tax revenue to pay for the inevitable increase in basic city services that will come with the expansion of residential housing development.

DISASTER PREPAREDNESS

As part of the county planning committee, to develop the Yolo Operational Area People With Disabilities and the Elderly Annex (PWD/E Annex), I can give some insight into the multi-county emergency planning process that is currently taking place. Yolo is part of a ten county disaster preparedness project, that is attempting to build regional specific template designs of emergency shelters for the elderly and disabled in time of disaster. The individual counties will then “fill in the blanks” with details that will work for their particular area.

If a flood should occur in this county, the most likely emergency event for our region, the Yolo Office of Emergency Services will use the PWD/E Annex to form emergency shelters for the elderly and disabled, a special needs population. However, this Annex is only a small piece of an overarching emergency protocol, which as yet is still in the planning stages. The overall plan is expected to be completed in approximately 9 months. The Hurricane Katrina debacle served as a stark lesson on how not to do things when a state of emergency occurs.

Approximately 20 dedicated volunteers from various agencies and community based organizations have been diligently working on the Annex. Many times I expressed my concern that it was not addressing the harder issues of: 1) finding transportation to the shelter; 2) how to identify and notify vulnerable populations, especially those not appearing on any list; 3) developing memorandums of understanding between entities to ensure cooperation in an emergency; 4) educating the public as well as facilities for the elderly in regard to their responsibilities in any state of emergency.

I was assured that those topics would eventually be addressed at some time in this mammoth process. Apparently our group worked so efficiently and diligently, we have to wait for the other nine counties to catch up with us! Because we are the smallest of the ten counties, I suspect the delay may have to do with many counties having more complex considerations because they are more urban in nature. Large cities bring their own specialized problems to the table. The State of CA itself has some overall concerns of its own that need to be focused on as well. I will keep you posted as to any further progress.

Lessons to be learned: Prepare, prepare, prepare for emergencies, at all levels. As the county readies itself for future natural or manmade catastrophes, so must the public and senior facilities. All segments of the community must take on the responsibility of disaster preparedness.

FUN TIME FOLLIES CONCERT

On April 12th, Social Services Director Rose Levinson, Davis Senior Citizens Commissioner George Hinkle and I put on the “Fun Time Follies” at Eleanor Roosevelt Circle (ERC). It was a concert designed to promote intergenerational interplay between young and old alike, the intergenerational aspect being the brainchild of Lamar Heystek. Often seniors have nothing to do on weekends, feeling isolated and lonely. Rose, George and I decided it was high time to provide senior citizens with some weekend entertainment.

Originally the idea germinated by creating an informal group of musicians to play at Eleanor Roosevelt Circle. The residents there are stuck way out at the end of town, and have no facility bus. They seemed starving for something to do, and surprisingly the residents themselves have some pretty hefty musical talent. A little combo formed, called the Geriatric Generation Jammers (Jammers for short), consisting of Janet on accordion, George and June on ukulele, Sid on guitar while crooning Latin tunes, myself on flute. Aldo, a resident at ERC, belts out songs with superb operatic style. Robert on keyboard and base has recently hopped aboard our group.

The Jammers meet the first Saturday of each month from 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. at ERC - and has a blast! Anyone who wants to join in the fun may drop in to either play with us, or just enjoy singing along, clapping, dancing, or sit back and listen to good music. (There is no charge.) Just about any song is fair game for us, if we can find the sheet music for it. We’ve played just about every style of composition, from classical to rock, sprinkled with various golden oldies.

The April 12th concert itself was a huge success. About 60 people attended, on a warm spring day. At least half the audience were residents of ERC. Mayor Sue Greenwald was kind enough to grace us with her presence. Food was donated by Konditerei and Ciocolat. Nugget and Safeway supplied gift cards so residents could purchase ingredients for making special food. Other residents kept the punch bowl filled, the service flowing smoothly, and provided decorations. Those in attendance munched on cake, tea sandwiches, fudge, egg rolls, and pastries in an informal café-like atmosphere.

The musical talent was amazing. The Jammers led off with a patriotic medley; Sid and Ramon played guitar while Sid sang Latin tunes as he walked around the room; Ramon riffed off a few jazz guitar numbers; Aldo gave a stirring rendition of opera selections and popular tunes; Robert provided keyboard and bass accompaniment; a High School Madrigal octet performed some lovely numbers; and the show was rounded out by a jazz duo playing trumpet and piano - who were so popular they were asked to do an encore.

I honestly don’t know who had a better time, the players or the audience! All the musicians are eager to put on another performance; and listeners begged to know when the next concert would be. As it turns out, there are plans in the works to have another resoundingly successful event on October 25, 2008 - so put that date on your calendars! Our hope is to open up the doors to the patio off the Community Room at ERC, to make space for even more people to attend. It was an honor and a privilege to be part of such a wonderful event, and a special thanks goes to Rose Levinson and George Hinkle, without whom this experiment would never have been possible!

As an aside, when the Jammers were initially formed and first started to play, a resident from ERC was so delighted to have such entertainment, she demanded to know when we were coming back. To our great disappointment, she passed away a few days later. The group was honored to have made her last few days on earth a little brighter. Another ERC resident seems to know the name of every tune we play. Thus far we have not been able to stump this sharp cookie! Seniors have clapped and sung along as we play with gusto, and it is not unknown for them to get up and dance a polka when the proper mood strikes. What a joy it is to play for such an appreciative audience.

Lessons to be learned: You are never too old to learn new tricks! Nor to be a vital part of the community. Enjoy life to its fullest by being a participant rather than just an observer, even if all you do is sing along or support an event by just showing up.

Elaine Roberts Musser is an attorney who concentrates her efforts on elder law and aging issues, especially in regard to consumer affairs. If you have a comment or particular question or topic you would like to see addressed in this column, please make your observations at the end of this article in the comment section.

Guest Commentary: Where's the Fire?

Word To The Wise: Where’s The Fire?

By E.A. Roberts

____________

The first ever Senior Academy was held on February 28, 2008. This project was the brainchild of Trease Petersen of the Davis Police Department, and also sponsored by the Yolo County District Attorney’s Office. Approximately fifty highly motivated seniors attended, which made for some quite lively discussion. One elderly citizen posed a provocative question to Emily Lo of the Davis Fire Department, asking about a recent column that appeared in the Davis Enterprise.

In the newspaper, columnist Rich Rifkin had expressed frustration that a full contingent of fire trucks with equipment would show up along with ambulance service, for a simple medical emergency. His contention was this overkill seemed unnecessary. He has since followed up with another editorial, highly critical of past and present City Council members on a related issue. Sizable salaries, pensions and medical benefits for city fire/police personnel are of great concern. The fear is Davis may be headed for bankruptcy as is threatened in Vallejo.

As it was explained to those of us seated in the audience at the Senior Academy, ambulance service in Davis is contracted out to a private company (AMR) in one location. On the other hand, the city has three fire departments strategically located throughout the community. By the way, it is in need of a fourth station, because of all the new housing developments that have been built in north, south and east Davis over the past several years. The operational area of the city’s fire departments covers not only the city, but Highway 113 and the Yolo Causeway as well.

If a call comes in for a car crash on Route 80, it is not uncommon for the receipt of another emergency dispatch message, while personnel and equipment are at the accident scene. Multiple alarms such as this occur with great frequency, requiring a fire station to “move up and cover” the next request for assistance, without having to go back to the station to pick up what was left behind in either manpower or equipment. This type of “move up and cover” situation in the Davis operational area has happened 800 times in the last year.

Furthermore, every fireperson is EMT trained, which allows them to stabilize a patient if the ambulance has not yet arrived. Ambulance lag time can happen if the call comes in from the opposite side of town from where AMR headquarters is situated. Because the city’s fire department has three stations advantageously located, fire personnel frequently arrive ahead of any ambulance service. That one or two minute discrepancy can mean the difference between life or death for some critically ill citizens. A rapid response time (maximum strived for is five minutes) is all important in a medical emergency.

If the incident in question is an automobile accident, several people may be hurt. This will require far more paramedics than what a single ambulance may carry. Even for a simple medical emergency, one person will take vital signs, while another is doing chest compressions, and another is collecting information, as another quickly collects medications and soothes distressed family members. It should also be noted firefighters get paid whether they are sitting back at the fire station or are out in the field.

Firefighter Lo imparted some other invaluable information as well. She advised the elderly audience to consider preventing falls - the highest incident call the fire department receives. Simple things suggested were the removal of small mats that can be tripped over; installation of grab bars in the shower; or provision of appropriate lighting where necessary. Smoke alarms that can be installed with a ten year shelf life without changing batteries are now available. It was my understanding the fire department will provide and install smoke alarms upon request.

Everyone was advised to have a disaster preparedness plan in place, and a minimum of whatever is necessary (e.g. food, water, batteries, battery operated or hand crank radio) to survive in place for three days. Emergency kits in the form of backpacks can be purchased at Home Depot in Woodland. The kits can then be inserted in a small suitcase with wheels, for easy transport. Emergency contact numbers should be placed under the acronym ICE (In Case of Emergency) in your cell phone directory. A copy of any DNR (Do Not Resuscitate) order should be placed on your refrigerator.

Whether or not the reader objects to the liberal salaries fire and police are paid is an entirely separate matter; or that they are allowed to “double dip” (collect a pension from one employer while working for or receiving a pension from another). This subject has come up quite frequently at City Council meetings of late. I can remember Mayor Greenwald repeatedly demanding to know how the city was going to pay for these generous reimbursement packages. Councilman Souza insisted Davis would somehow manage, it always does.

My comment to that is the Davis School Board probably said the same thing in the past. But look at what has happened since - the school district is actually being forced to close schools to make ends meet. I have never believed in engaging in the ostrich syndrome - that allows politicians to hide their heads in the sand. It is important to make some attempt to divert potential disasters. Think HURRICANE KATRINA! “An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.”

However, what do we do now, since these generous salary packages are already in place? It is one thing to complain about what has gone on in the past, but quite another to determine how the city is going to keep paying for it. If I remember correctly, our chief financial officer stated he was certain the city’s budget gap would be closed within the next five years. Yet as Mayor Greenwald pointed out, not taken into account was the payout of employee benefits due and owing in the future. That appears shortsighted at best, disingenuous or downright dishonest at worst.

Also speaking at the Senior Academy was Dave Edwards from the Yolo County District Attorney’s Office. Identity theft was his main topic of interest. Seniors were warned that because they are primarily the ones with the financial wherewithal, it makes them a prime target of predatory con artists. The elderly were advised to limit the information carried on their person; not to give out date of birth, Social Security or Drivers License Numbers to anyone unless absolutely necessary (especially over the telephone); and to monitor their finances (www.AnnualCreditReport.com; 1-877-322-8228) and take quick action if something is amiss.

All trash should be shredded if any personal or financial information shows on it. If your identity is stolen, then the following steps need to be taken: 1) notify the credit card company; 2) contact one of the major credit reporting agencies (Equifax: 1-800-525-6285; Experian: 1-888-EXERIAN; TransUnion: 1-800-680-7289); 3) put a fraud alert on your account; 4) contact each creditor of a fraudulent account (I would advise doing it in writing); 5) report the incident to law enforcement, and get a copy of the police report; 6) contact the Federal Trade Commission (ftc.gov/idtheft; 1-877-IDTHEFT); 7) close out all tampered accounts. Identity theft destroys the ability to obtain credit, and can subject the victim to harassment by collection agencies. DETER, DETECT, DEFEND.

Detective Bezuglov of the Davis Police Department talked extensively about cyber crime, of which identity theft is the top offense. The number one target are students, followed by senior citizens. Attendees were advised not to do banking online; nor open any emails from an unknown source; and make sure to have security protection for any computer. Nevertheless, thieves can still hack into a computer, so the less personal information on the hard drive, the better.

Thieves can fill out a change of address card, and reroute mail. Thus if your mail goes missing, check it out. “Dumpster diving” at a place of business is commonplace now, which makes it imperative that all documents be shredded. If a business becomes aware that a consumer’s information has been stolen, there is a responsibility to report it to the customer involved. However, if the company does not have the contents of their computer backed up, resurrecting information may not be possible.

There is a device out there that can be purchased called a “key logger”, that can read every stroke made on a computer. It is meant to be used as a parental control device for software, but in the hands of the wrong person, can be used to gain access to personal information. Do not allow anyone, including friends or relatives, to use your laptop or home computer. Beware of wireless connections, as it allows for computer “sniffing” - another name for wireless “phishing” (fishing for personal information on a computer by pretending to be a legitimate financial institution).

Make sure to put your name on the DO NOT CALL list (www.donotcall.gov; 1-888-290-4236), but beware of ensuing telephone surveys. If you give to some charities, they may sell your name to other entities. There are actually websites that sell fake ID’s for any state in the nation. Credit card fraud is committed with a device called a “skimmer”. A dishonest waitress at a restaurant, who takes your credit card away to make payment, can “skim” all your credit card information (name, account number, how much money is available, other account information) in one quick swipe. It is better if you pay cash.

Bank debit cards are not as safe as credit cards. A debit card is not insured, and allows a con artist to reach directly into your account if they can bypass your PIN #, whereas a credit card is covered by federal insurance except for the first $50. By the time Detective Bezuglov was finished speaking about cyber crime, one senior said she was thinking about getting rid of her computer altogether. Clearly for most of us, this solution is not practical, since we use our computers as such an integral part of our lives. Nevertheless, don’t neglect computer security as a regular practice.

Peggy Osborne from the CA Attorney General’s Office warned of Medicare/MediCal fraud. As she pointed out so acutely, when a senior is conned out of their money, it often results in a downward cycle of shame, despair and depression, accompanied by premature death. She warned not to answer the door if the person on the other side is unknown. A clever salesman can talk anyone into some very detrimental schemes.

I had a case not long ago, involving a Russian speaking salesman. This sly swindler sweet-talked a Spanish speaking senior, with Parkinson’s Disease, into enrolling in a completely unsuitable Medicare health insurance plan. My client was promised the moon, that there would be no cost to him (it was on the paperwork), which was an outright falsehood. The insurance company in question has since been reported to the appropriate agency, and the original insurance policy was reinstated. But my client is still on the hook for any medical costs attributable to the period of time he was not covered (one month), which he cannot afford. To have Parkinson’s Disease is expensive.

Caregivers have to be watched diligently. They can steal personal information, medications, jewelry, and/or money. Many seniors will not report the crime because they are in absolute dread of being placed in a nursing home. A Durable Power of Attorney can be a license to steal if it is not carefully crafted and well thought out. Limit the powers given to the absolute minimum as a general rule.

Operation Guardian has been instituted by the Attorney General’s Office in CA, to make spot checks in nursing homes. The current law only requires one inspection every five years. If the Attorney General’s Office receives a complaint, they can send in an agent unannounced at any time of day or night, accompanied by a doctor, nurse and forensic accountant. Charts can be pulled, anything can be inspected. Various skilled nursing facilities have been charged with fraud, neglect, failure to report, and elder abuse. 65% of patients in nursing homes have no one visiting them. If your loved one is in a skilled nursing facility, make spot checks and get to know the staff. Be vigilant.

Last but not least, Ike Iketani from the CA Highway Patrol talked about older driver safety. He reminded the audience that a Request for Reexamination has nothing to do with age, and everything to do with driving ability. Law enforcement looks for a pattern of behavior of cognitive impairment. As of July, using a cell phone in your hands while driving will be illegal. CHP officers are given empathy training, in which actual medical conditions of the elderly, such as neck rotation problems, are simulated. Young officers tend not to cite older drivers because the offender reminds them too much of their own aged mother or father.

New traffic devices are cutting down on car accidents. Some recent pedestrian buttons can be held down longer if there is a need for more time to cross because of a physical impairment. Roundabouts are intended to be “traffic calming” measures, but the blind and disabled don’t always hear or can’t get out of the way of oncoming traffic. Crosswalks are considered a right of way for pedestrians, even if they are not painted as such. The CHP now has airplanes that can target multiple vehicles for speeding. You can feel for the number 5 on your cell phone in the dark in an emergency, because it has a raised bump, and then figure out where the other numbers are from there.

If you should be unfortunate enough to have a flat tire on the freeway, pull over as far to the side of the road as is practicable. Try and make it to the next exit, rather than remain as a sitting duck for another car to hit. It is permissible to drive on the shoulder of the road with a flat tire. If you have a car service like AAA, have them change the flat tire, rather than attempt to do it yourself. It is imperative to always carry a cell phone with you. Even if you don’t have one, you can purchase a very basic type with minutes on it at your local grocery store. It is encouraged to report stolen cars, by calling 1-800 TELL CHP.

Make sure to monitor driving skills regularly, by signing up at the Davis Senior Center, for Car Fit and AAA Roadwise Review. AARP also has some sort of driving course for the elderly. Those with limited driving abilities can restrict their driving to daytime only, avoid freeways or left turns (three right turns make one left turn!), travel to only well known destinations close by, take public transit whenever practical (more on this in a future article). Any sort of medical condition that could cause blackouts (e.g. uncontrolled or severe diabetes) require driving be given up altogether, for public safety.

A thank you to Quiznos, Dos Coyotes, Noah’s Bagel’s, all on Cowell Blvd, for donating food for guests at this event.

LESSON TO BE LEARNED: Be safe, not sorry. Try and head off trouble before it happens. Never hesitate to report criminal activity to law enforcement. Deterrence is vital.

Rebuilding Together - If any senior is in need of safety devices (e.g. toilet risers, grab bars, railings, wheel chair ramps), and lives in their own home in Yolo County, the equipment and installation can be obtained: free of charge to low income folks; a reasonable fee for service program is also available. Please refer Davis seniors to this program if you know of anyone applicable. There is still $10,000 available in community development block grant funding to serve our city's elderly population in this regard.

Anna Zoubak - The lovely Russian lady that received redevelopment funding, to rebuild a modular home on her condemned property, has died. Her disabled adult son will now benefit from the beneficence of the federal dollars generously distributed by the City of West Sacramento.

FRAUD ALERT - You are not going to believe this one! Here is how it works: A bogus clinic with access to real medical information starts fraudulently billing insurance companies/Medicare/Medicaid for treatment never delivered. Patients are not swindled out of money, but medical records have fraudulent treatments difficult to remove/correct because of federal HIPPA regulations. The modified records are then used if a life threatening emergency occurs, and can result in the patient being given the wrong medication. Several deaths have been the result.

FRAUD ALERT - A company is asking seniors to provide extensive personal information, including SSN, Medicare #, financial details, medical information. The customer completes an IRREVOCABLE Durable Power of Attorney that gives the company the right to lifelong access to medical records. A form is signed authorizing and directing the heirs to provide a copy of the death certificate. In exchange for completing the “survey” and participating in the program, the senior is given $1,000 immediately and receives $250/yr for the rest of his/her life.

The packet is extensive and confusing, and improper use/disclosure of the information will put seniors at risk for financial exploitation and identity theft. This appears to be a STOLI operation (Strange Oriented Life Insurance), which may be technically legal. It appears to be a company that purchases information, then may insure the individual or sell the information to a speculator, who could be out of the country (see www.KCRA.com and search for STOLI).

Elaine Roberts Musser is an attorney who concentrates her efforts on elder law and aging issues, especially in regard to consumer affairs. If you have a particular question or topic you would like to see addressed in this column, please feel free to remark in the commentary section below.

Guest Commentary: Preparing For The Worst At Any Age

by E.A. Roberts

____________

Obviously disaster preparedness is on everyone’s mind, since the little mini-emergency that occurred in January and last week's council discussion on what we could do better. A furious wind and rain storm blew into town, attended by a checkerboard power outage of the weirdest variety. Some folks in Davis had power, while others without huddled in the dark and cold - often directly (and infuriatingly) across the street from each other. Oh the whims of mother nature - very unpredictable. On the other hand, some resulting responses to this event were quite unsurprising.

Many politicians and citizens were flabbergasted at how unprepared our local government was in handling this crisis, while others took things in stride remarkably well. I was of the latter assortment, but only because I knew ahead of time what to expect. Not too long ago I was involved in an attempt to address the issue of disaster preparedness for residential care facilities for the elderly and skilled nursing facilities. This interesting endeavor had its extremely eye-opening moments.

The Hurricane Katrina disaster was of monumental proportions, but instructive nevertheless on how government should NOT respond in the event of a major disaster. What follows is my very simplistic analysis of what went wrong, and how it relates to our own lack of emergency readiness. Firstly, the governor of Louisiana refused to make a decision to evacuate ahead of time, after learning that a severe storm was headed in her direction. Why? For many public officials, it feels better to make no decision than the wrong decision.

Evacuation of vulnerable seniors would have meant the coordination of a complex and massive effort, and some older individuals would have died in transit. The frail elderly do not travel well. In addition, the Gulf coast had weathered many hurricanes just fine without going to the necessity of a complicated mass departure. Besides, there really was not an overarching emergency plan in place of the magnitude necessary to displace that many people at one time. It was much simpler just to wait out the storm as they had successfully done every time in the past.

Secondly, the mayor of New Orleans was heard to say in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina some very telling words. When asked why he didn’t have a better disaster plan in place, his reply was something to the effect that it had just been too difficult. Now I took that to mean he did not have the leadership skills to get everyone who needed to be involved to cooperate in developing a disaster plan on the scale required to be truly effective. Again, an abdication of responsibility - no decision rather than the wrong one.

Thirdly, when the federal government realized the governor was not going to evacuate the helpless, either before or after the storm, the president should have stepped in much earlier. He could have overridden the governor’s paralysis by declaring a state of emergency - which was not done until AFTER television cameras appeared on the scene to embarrass all levels of government. Again, the president abdicated his greater responsibility, under the guise of FEMA regulations, which indicate assistance is by state invitation only. The president had determined he was not invited, until public embarrassment dictated otherwise.

However, it should also be noted that a thirty foot wall of water crashed over the city of Biloxi, Mississippi. Huge levees gave way in New Orleans, a city built below sea level. Water poured in and rose to the level of one and two stories. A decision had to be made quickly to let loose hardened criminals from the city jail or sit by and let these prisoners drown. During the storm communications stopped working, including land lines and cell phones. Even satellite telephones were inoperable.

Transportation out of town for seniors was supposed to have been provided by school buses - that were useless and under water by the time any government official decided it was time to act. Emergency personnel and law enforcement found themselves torn between staying on the job or taking care of their own families. Mass desertions were the order of the day. Looting was rampant. Chaos was in the ascendency.

Even when the National Guard was sent in to rescue folks, many citizens, especially the elderly, refused to leave their homes and/or pets. As a result, there was very little cooperation among/by citizens themselves. Nor was there any between agencies, government entities or administrators. There was no clear chain of command, no one willing to really take charge. In fact, if I remember my facts correctly, the one person who finally did assume authority of the situation was a highly placed officer in the National Guard.

It is important to take stock of what went wrong during Hurricane Katrina that is common to most disasters and/or emergencies:
1) communications failure;
2) power outages;
3) blocked roads;
4) lack of transportation;
5) insufficient community shelters;
6) no decision made rather than the wrong one;
7) inadequate disaster plans;
8) no clear chain of command;
9) citizens not personally prepared;
10) uncooperative citizens.

However, the severity of the disaster must be factored in. Hurricane Katrina would have been devastating no matter how well prepared everyone was. The type of disaster also has to be taken into account. A heat wave requires a different sort of response than a flood, fire, terrorist attack, or disease epidemic. And that is not an exhaustive list of catastrophe categories by the way. I remember living through a severe gasoline shortage in the early 1970’s and a locust swarm in the 1960‘s (crunch, crunch). The age and health of citizens is another dynamic to consider.

Readers can draw their own conclusions as to how well Davis fared during the recent storm. From a personal perspective, my family and I sheltered in place quite comfortably. We had plenty of food, blankets, flashlights and batteries. A battery operated radio was tuned into a Sacramento station to keep abreast of the weather and power outage situation. As it so happened, our gas tank level was low, but we did manage to find a filling station open. It was determined we needed to keep a little spare fuel in an appropriate container on hand in the future.

Two of our three cell phones did not work, nor did our regular cordless telephones. It was not that cold outside, so it wasn’t difficult to keep warm, but could have been had the temperature dropped. We determined it would have been best to keep a bag or two of charcoal briquettes on hand, to fire up our two small hibachi grills for cooking outside. Then I took a trip to a large store, and headed for the fishing/hardware department.

You would not believe the wonderful survival gear that can be found there. Flashlights that are rechargeable, freeze dried foods that last seven years, fire sticks that are waterproof and can provide heat and light, solar lanterns, hand crank AM/FM radio/flashlight/siren, night lights that stay on in a power outage, reflective warmth blankets, combination compass/whistle/match holder - you name it, they had it. I must have spent at least two solid hours marveling at the variety of clever things that can keep a human being alive in an emergency.

It would be interesting to see how readers rate our city’s collective response to the storm. On a scale of one to ten, ten being the nth degree of readiness possible, how would you rate:
a) The city’s response to the recent storm? Take into account the type of emergency and its severity.
b) Your response to the recent storm? Take into account your age and health, type of emergency and severity.
c) PG&E’s response to the recent storm? Take into account the type of emergency and its severity.
d) What could the city have done better? What did it do well?
e) What could you have done better? What did you do well?
f) What could PG&E have done better? What did it do well?

Here is my assessment (click to enlarge):

My reasoning is as follows:

Communications failure - The city was remiss here, in not figuring out a way to communicate with its citizens during a power outage. Only one family turned up at the emergency shelter, because Davisites had no way of knowing a shelter was open. There has been a suggestion there be a physical place in Davis for communications to be posted, which sounds like a very good idea. The Davis Fire Chief did contact facilities housing the elderly, so I gave the city three points for that on the plus side. I had the good sense to have a battery operated radio, and could charge my cell phone via my car battery. On the other hand, I made no prior plans to call family or friends as contact points, so I only gave myself six points. PG&E really fell down on this one, failing to notify anyone about anything, so they received a big fat zero in this category.

Power outages - The city failed abysmally here, not making contingency plans in case of a massive power outage. The local radio station was down, as was the city’s website. I wonder if there would have even been a heated community shelter available, if the entire city had been without electricity? The 911 system was inoperable for a short time, but I gave the city one point for rerouting calls while getting 911 back up and running. >From a personal perspective, I was pretty prepared for a power outage, with plenty of batteries, some charcoal briquettes, hot water, gas stove, and flashlights. I only gave myself a nine because I should have laid in a better supply of charcoal for my two hibachi grills. PG&E received a nine from me for doing a fantastic job fixing downed poles and whatever else they had to do, in order to restore electricity. I deducted a point because there was someone without power several days after the storm.

Blocked roads - The city gets a nine for removing tree limbs and debris to keep the roads open. I, on the other hand, made no effort to do so, and thus am given a zero. Of course PG&E is not responsible for that particular task.

Lack of transportation - As far as I know, the city did not provide any way for an elder in crisis to get to the community shelter. But since the ambulances were probably running, I decided to give the city one point. Of course our family had a car, but I only gave myself a score of five on this one because we did not think to keep a small amount of gasoline on hand in case of an emergency.

Insufficient shelter - I only gave the city one point because even though a shelter was provided, it was done almost as an afterthought. Nor did most people even know of its existence, which effectively made it nonexistent. Our family sheltered in place quite nicely, but I deducted one point from a perfect ten because we should have done a bit more to ensure heat.

No decision rather than wrong one - At least the mayor had the good sense to urge a warming shelter be created, and has suggested some future alternatives. But let’s face it, some planning should have been done long before the storm hit. So I gave the city three points on this one. Our family was fairly well prepared, and I had no hesitancy to make whatever decisions were necessary to protect my family, so I gave myself a nine (still could have planned a bit better). PG&E received five points for deciding to fix the problem rather than worry about communicating with the public. But I deducted five points for their failure to communicate. Why couldn’t they have put something out over the radio to reassure us, if nothing else?

Inadequate disaster plan - I gave the city five points because about half was done right and half wrong. The city did a great job in removing debris, and contacted the facilities for the elderly and disabled. However, city government did not do a great job in communicating with its citizens, and only provided a warming shelter as an addendum. On the other hand, I gave myself and my family an eight, because we were fairly well prepared, although we could have done a few things better. PG&E, like the city, did half their job right and half wrong - a virtuoso performance in fixing equipment to get the power back on line, but no plan in place to notify customers what was going on and when to expect relief.

No clear chain of command - The mayor had to argue with the city manager on who was in charge, so the city only gets five on this one. I am the clear boss in my household, and took charge in this crisis, so of course I gave myself a ten.

Citizens not personally prepared - The city does not seem to have made citizens aware that personal responsibility has to take place when it comes to disaster planning. This is true of even the frail elderly, who must make sure family or neighbors come to their rescue in an emergency. Everyone needs to have a prior plan. I gave the city one point for at least having set up a CERT (Community Emergency Response Team) program through our local fire department. Since I was fairly well prepared, I gave myself an eight, but there is still room for improvement. I am not sure if PG&E has put disaster preparedness literature as inserts with their bills. If yes, they get a ten, if not a zero.

Uncooperative citizens - The mayor should not have to argue with the city manager to be heard when making suggestions. However, some steps were taken to at least open a warming shelter, so I gave the city a five on this one, which may be a bit high. A score of one went to me for not making the effort to check on anyone else. Twenty lashes with a wet noodle to me!

Take note of the final overall scores - about three and a half for the city; over six for me, and about a five for PG&E. I felt more prepared than the city, but I didn’t take the trouble to check on others or contribute to the solution in terms of my community. The city definitely needs to make some changes - partner with UCD to house a community shelter in a place that will always have power, or purchase a generator for the senior center and use it as a warming center in an emergency; post communications on a community board in case of power outages; educate the public as to each individual’s responsibilities to have in place a personal disaster plan prior to any emergency; promote the CERT program to promote “block captain” training; encourage private facilities to coordinate better emergency plans. PG&E definitely should work on building a better communication network in case of power outages, to reassure the public.

LESSON TO BE LEARNED: Forewarned is forearmed. Always be prepared. If you are an older person residing alone or live in a facility for the elderly, make sure to develop emergency plans with nearby relatives or a friend that can get to you fast. Your government may not be available to assist in a disaster, so don’t rely heavily on their presence when developing a crisis policy.

FYI, the county is undertaking disaster planning for the elderly and disabled, for a nine county area. However it must be noted any emergency scheme is only as good as the people executing it. Any municipality can have the greatest disaster strategy in the world ready to roll out, but if leaders are not capable, or repeated drills are not done, the best laid plans can go to pieces under pressure in a heartbeat.

DEATH NOTICE: My client, the one having extreme difficulty with her homeowners association, died suddenly just after Christmas. If you would like to better understand what happened, a very tragic story, you can listen to my prerecorded radio broadcast at www.onthecommons.net. I am still pursuing her case, and will apprise you of an update at the appropriate time. What isn’t well known is the mortgage meltdown across our country is not the only reason for the current spate of foreclosures. Gargantuan increases in homeowner association fees has been another contributing factor.

FRAUD ALERT: “The Yolo County District Attorney Elder Protection Unit wants to alert you about two telephone scams. The first scam involved a call from someone claiming to be from PG&E who said …the victim’s last payment check bounced and they would cut off …power that night unless she provided a credit card number. In less than two hours $400 in fraudulent charges were made by the crooks.

The second scam was from a senior in Esparto who received a telephone call from someone saying that everyone on Medicare needed a special ID card verifying that they are a US citizen. The caller asked for a date of birth and then a bank account number. District Attorney Jeff Reisig wants to remind people to be very suspicious when someone calls asking for personal information EVEN IF THEY SOUND OFFICIAL. These people are experts at using your emotions to trick you.

Unless you initiated the contact with a business, don’t give out any confidential information - like your credit card number, social security number, PIN, birth date or even your mother’s maiden name. Remember you CAN stop phone fraud - just hang up.”

Elaine Roberts Musser is an attorney who concentrates her efforts on elder law and aging issues, especially in regard to consumer affairs. If you have a comment or particular question or topic you would like to see addressed in this column, please make your opinion known in the comment section.