Plato said, "A good decision is based on knowledge and not on numbers."
Is a good decision being made at 700 Stearns? Is it based on knowledge or numbers? It appears to me the decision is predicated on money and not one that addresses community needs.
Eliminating independent living options in our hospital district community is of great concern to me. It appears that aging in place is no longer viable. Folks read the newspaper articles that told them they would be grandfathered and the transition to assisted living would be gradual. The public trust has been broken.
Furthermore, the last article printed about the "decisions" at 700 Stearns says to community residents, "If you wanna stay you gotta pay" even if you don't need additional services. I question the need for this kind of heavy-handed approach. It may be within the law but it lacks integrity.
I am a former director of the West Central Area Agency on Aging and staff to the Minnesota Board on Aging. I worked for the state during the years when the options for remaining in community were developed. I developed the Minnesota Caregiver support program with the federal dollars Minnesota received. A continuum of care is an asset to a community. If we lose that, we lose more than a housing option.
Virginia L. Strand