I work for Mayor Nenshi, ask me anything!

[V]

I always love a good Sun article, especially one that quote Ghandi. The comments never disappoint either.

Nenshi is just another scumbag socialist that only cares about himself.

That's awesome.

This whole situation is unfortunate, though. I have a friend that lives in there, but haven't talked to him yet. I do hope they have somewhere to move everyone before 2017.

[nik-]

haha, another socialist scumbag that only cares about himself has to be right up there in the hilarious comments pantheon.

[Coach]

Yeah, just can't get away from those self-serving socialists. Not like the free-market capitalists. Those people are definitely all about sharing the wealth and working for the common good...

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by northcrunk

I've got a question, wtf is the city thinking here:

http://www.calgarysun.com/2014/05/27...-park-eviction

Most of the park are seniors, my sister and brother in law just spent over $50,000 buying one of these trailers 6 months ago which required city approval. The city approved the purchase and told them the park will stay until the last tenant moves (or dies) and now only a few months later they change their minds. Is there a developer lobbying for this land? Do some on council have a special interest in having this land developed for their own personal gains? Pretty sad as most of the seniors here will have nowhere to go and cannot even sell their trailers and will lose anywhere from 50-100K while the city offers them a $10,000 relocation fee. Pathetic.

The politicians in this city cry for more "affordable housing" yet they pull this.

Long and very complex history to this issue, of which I can't really delve into on the site. It's a gut-wrenching decision to make, but there are many reasons. The closure will happen in 3 years, there will be compensation, and expertise provided to help residents relocate. The 3 yrs allows the market to respond to providing some more supply for this type of housing elsewhere - it just won't be the City building in East Hills.

[northcrunk]

Must feel nice to make a bunch of seniors homeless.

[Tyler]

Originally Posted by northcrunk

Must feel nice to make a bunch of seniors homeless.

Care to propose a viable solution that is better than what the City is doing instead of just whining about how unfair life is?

[burn_this_city]

Bunk,

Any chance the city can add a lane on the right hand side of Macleod Trail between the ramp from Stoney Trail West to NB Macleod? There's a merge that could be extended 100m to exit into Sundance at 162nd. People drive on the shoulder there in the morning because traffic is backed up beyond the entrance to Sundance. It's illegal but I don't blame them, it shaves 5-10 mins off the commute and through traffic even seems to accommodate them.

[Reaper]

Originally Posted by northcrunk

Must feel nice to make a bunch of seniors homeless.

Maybe there will be less of them when the park closes?

[Bunk]

Originally Posted by burn_this_city

Bunk,

Any chance the city can add a lane on the right hand side of Macleod Trail between the ramp from Stoney Trail West to NB Macleod? There's a merge that could be extended 100m to exit into Sundance at 162nd. People drive on the shoulder there in the morning because traffic is backed up beyond the entrance to Sundance. It's illegal but I don't blame them, it shaves 5-10 mins off the commute and through traffic even seems to accommodate them.

I see what you're saying. An interchange at 162nd/Macleod is now funded through the latest transportation capital plan. It won't be too long before that area's configuration completely changes through that project. I'm guessing this issue will be addressed in the creation of new on ramps. I'll pass it along to Transportation.

[Swift]

Originally Posted by Reaper

Maybe there will be less of them when the park closes?

...says the Reaper.

[Reaper]

Originally Posted by Cameron Swift

...says the Reaper.

Well, I do have a schedule to keep...

[northcrunk]

Originally Posted by Tyler

Care to propose a viable solution that is better than what the City is doing instead of just whining about how unfair life is?

Not whining, just telling it how it is. Seems the city sees them as undesirables they want to kick out of town. Personally my sister and brother in law are getting screwed as they purchased their house 10 months ago and another newlywed couple just bought 8 months ago (2 units were sold this week alone). They we're looking forward to actually owning a home instead of renting and the mobile home came up as they were looking for a rental after the flood (which there was slim to none available) . Instead they get financial hardship from the city.

As for me, I'm fine, I've got a big house and a good paying job. Not everyone is as fortunate though and mobile homes provide a good place for young couples to build equity to get into something bigger and low income seniors a place to call home.

As for the park, the residents were promised by the city that they would be moved and all of a sudden they pull the rug out and tell them your s.o.l and go find your own place to move the park. My sister will be fine but the seniors in the park will have to end up losing the values of their homes (as mobile homes are worthless without somewhere to put them, most end up being given away which is anywhere from a $50,000-$100,000 loss) and will financially cripple anyone in retirement.

Thank you for your helpful snipe comment though, much appreciated.

[V]

Originally Posted by Tyler

Care to propose a viable solution that is better than what the City is doing instead of just whining about how unfair life is?

That's not really fair. I don't see why relocation isn't a viable alternative, and that's all he's looking for. Booting these people out to fend for themselves is a pretty crappy way to do this. Looks pretty greedy on the City, too. Really it looks like they just want these people gone so they can sell some highly desireable land. Whether that's reality or not, it's hard to get past how this looks.

[BigNumbers]

Originally Posted by northcrunk

Not whining, just telling it how it is. Seems the city sees them as undesirables they want to kick out of town. Personally my sister and brother in law are getting screwed as they purchased their house 10 months ago and another newlywed couple just bought 8 months ago (2 units were sold this week alone). They we're looking forward to actually owning a home instead of renting and the mobile home came up as they were looking for a rental after the flood (which there was slim to none available) . Instead they get financial hardship from the city.

As for me, I'm fine, I've got a big house and a good paying job. Not everyone is as fortunate though and mobile homes provide a good place for young couples to build equity to get into something bigger and low income seniors a place to call home.

As for the park, the residents were promised by the city that they would be moved and all of a sudden they pull the rug out and tell them your s.o.l and go find your own place to move the park. My sister will be fine but the seniors in the park will have to end up losing the values of their homes (as mobile homes are worthless without somewhere to put them, most end up being given away which is anywhere from a $50,000-$100,000 loss) and will financially cripple anyone in retirement.

Thank you for your helpful snipe comment though, much appreciated.

If someone was naive enough to buy in this situation, when they knew the park was in an uncertain position, and didn't get the promises you reference in writing - Then they deserve what they got and I feel little sympathy.

As for the seniors - This was an implicit risk in 'buying' a trailer and then using it on leased land - no different then me buying ikea furniture for my rental apartment, only to have my lease terminated (and we all know you can't move ikea furniture, unless you like sawdust). It's an inherent risk in buying ikea furninture for a rental apartment - same with a mobile home.

This issue for the parkees would be the same if it was a privately owned park and the owner decided to cash in on appreciating land values -except here the city is going above and beyond, giving 3 years notice and financial assistance.

Instead of whining on here and attacking other posters, why not take that energy and use it to educate your family members on getting decision-making promises in writing on things that are important to them.

[Bigtime]

I would also hope that under the stewardship of Nenshi and his great staff in the mayors office that the city will indeed do everything they can to assist those affected with finding new accommodations over the three year period.

[Kjesse]

Originally Posted by Bigtime

I would also hope that under the stewardship of Nenshi and his great staff in the mayors office that the city will indeed do everything they can to assist those affected with finding new accommodations over the three year period.

I think the information released does say as much, though its always a matter of degree.

Lots of notice, and really, everyone knew this place was closing down in the near future, knowledge that has been around for several years. I don't know where this alleged promise to "move" the trailers comes from, I can't see that being a promise the city could make. Which land? How much? Its just too uncertain and obviously so.

[CubicleGeek]

Originally Posted by V

That's not really fair. I don't see why relocation isn't a viable alternative, and that's all he's looking for. Booting these people out to fend for themselves is a pretty crappy way to do this. Looks pretty greedy on the City, too. Really it looks like they just want these people gone so they can sell some highly desireable land. Whether that's reality or not, it's hard to get past how this looks.

Aren't they building a new park per the quote in the article:

“The ‘Go Forward Strategy’ calls for the City to develop a brand new, and much larger, mobile home park on the south side of 16th Avenue and on the east side of the Ring Road,” wrote Coun. Gian-Carlo Carra, in a letter to Midfield residents dated Nov. 2011.

“Called the East Hills Mobile Home Park, the plan is to relocate Midfield residents to this new park and then redevelop Midfield as a higher density, mixed use area in accordance with the Winston Heights/Mountview and the 16th Avenue North Urban Corridor Area Redevelopment Plans.”

Or is this not happening anymore, which is why there is no place for these people to go? The Sun "journalism" seems to be quite ambiguous on this.

[northcrunk]

Originally Posted by CubicleGeek

Aren't they building a new park per the quote in the article:



Or is this not happening anymore, which is why there is no place for these people to go? The Sun "journalism" seems to be quite ambiguous on this.

That was the cities plan and decided F it. These people have nowhere to go with their trailers as all other parks are full.

[ranchlandsselling]

Originally Posted by northcrunk

Must feel nice to make a bunch of seniors homeless.

Originally Posted by northcrunk

Not whining, just telling it how it is. Seems the city sees them as undesirables they want to kick out of town. Personally my sister and brother in law are getting screwed as they purchased their house 10 months ago and another newlywed couple just bought 8 months ago (2 units were sold this week alone). They we're looking forward to actually owning a home instead of renting and the mobile home came up as they were looking for a rental after the flood (which there was slim to none available) . Instead they get financial hardship from the city.

As for me, I'm fine, I've got a big house and a good paying job. Not everyone is as fortunate though and mobile homes provide a good place for young couples to build equity to get into something bigger and low income seniors a place to call home.

As for the park, the residents were promised by the city that they would be moved and all of a sudden they pull the rug out and tell them your s.o.l and go find your own place to move the park. My sister will be fine but the seniors in the park will have to end up losing the values of their homes (as mobile homes are worthless without somewhere to put them, most end up being given away which is anywhere from a $50,000-$100,000 loss) and will financially cripple anyone in retirement.

Thank you for your helpful snipe comment though, much appreciated.

But you're not telling how it is, you're telling how you see it with an emotional bias influencing you. Not only that but you're also implying the people behind this feel good about doing such a thing.

Personally I'd never consider buying a mobile home and can't understand why someone would. But without being in that income bracket it'd be hard to accurately understand the reasoning. That said, it seems like a poor way to "build equity" almost like buying bank supplied mutual funds with high fees as your primary investment vehicle.

[Jimmy Stang]

This sounds like a good opportunity for a private landowner. They get a three-year lead time to set up a new park with a guaranteed influx of people to fill it.

I'd much prefer something like this to be run privately instead of by the city. Especially considering it isn't even viable for the city anyway.