TAMRMS#: B06
title
City's Initiatives for Age Friendly Community Designation
Presented by: Cindy de Bruijn, Manager, Community & Social Development
label
RECOMMENDATION(S)
recommendation
That the May 15, 2017 agenda report entitled “City’s Initiatives for Age Friendly Community Designation" be received as information.
body
PURPOSE OF REPORT
To provide background information to help Council determine if they wish to pursue age-friendly designation.
The process to obtain age-friendly designation, in summation, is as follows:
Step 1: Establish an age-friendly committee.
Step 2: Have a Municipal resolution passed.
Step 3: Conduct an age-friendly assessment of the community.
Step 4: Develop and implement an action plan.
Without going through the proper process (steps), it is not possible to accurately determine which elements or criteria are currently being met or provided and which are not. Only after the first two steps are completed, would the Municipality (guided by the committee) then conduct an age-friendly assessment of the community. At that stage, we would be in a better position to identify the many initiatives the City undertakes to receive Age-Friendly Community Designation.
At minimum, it is estimated a full-time equivalent staff and appropriate operating resources would be required to satisfy the first three steps of the process. This would not include implementation of any action items identified in the plan (step 4) and/or sustainability.
COUNCIL DIRECTION
On November 21, 2016 Council passed the following motions:
(CM-16-054)
That Administration provide a report to Council by Q2 of 2017 that documents the City’s current initiatives that work to meet the needs of an age-friendly community.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
In the entire province of Alberta only a few communities have the age-friendly designation. The Age-Friendly Alberta Recognition Program is designed to recognize success and encourage communities to act towards becoming age-friendly.
Currently there are several initiatives the City (through various City Departments and community partners) are undertaking that would likely lend themselves well to the designation. A few of these include:
• The Universal Access and Barrier Free Prioritization Plan that is currently being led by the Development Services department.
• The accomplishments of the Seniors Working Group, facilitated by Community & Social Development, that is a collaborative effort of community partners and aims to increase the quality of life of St. Albert seniors.
• Transit’s ongoing efforts to ensure service levels are being evaluated so that the transportation needs of the aging population are met with access to public transportation.
Further examples that would need to be explored through Step 3 would include analysis on matters such as:
• Sidewalks, pathways, trails, public restrooms and rest areas;
• Safety and security, building accessibility;
• Amenities such as social services, government buildings, community centres;
• Roads and parking, snow removal;
• Access to communication and information in alternative, accessible formats;
• Housing options and ‘aging in the right’ place initiatives; and
• Social and civic participation, employment opportunities.
There are many City of St Albert initiatives that likely meet some of the estimated 90-95 elements most often described in Age-Friendly Communities, but that cannot be determined with any accuracy until the identified steps are followed and the proper assessment (Step 3) is completed.
STAKEHOLDER COMMUNICATIONS OR ENGAGEMENT
A few years back, the Senior’s Working Group considered Age-Friendly Community Designation and chose not to initiate the process due to anticipated cost, time and what they perceived as little reward ($1000 to be spent on a plaque). Rather, the Seniors Working Group (and both the youth and family working groups led by the Strategy and Mobilization Committee) chose to continue their efforts on championing the values under the Social Master Plan, as they spoke to age-friendly principles. Many of the SMP values and goals speak to creating a community friendly for all ages.
If it was determined that pursuing age-friendly designation was a priority, significant stakeholder consultation would need to incur, both internally and externally.
Internally, several departments would be impacted such as Community & Social Development, Public Works, Transit, IT, Recreation and Parks, Culture, Engineering, and Planning Services. Externally, significant consultations with the senior population and senior serving organizations would be required.
IMPLICATIONS OF RECOMMENDATION(S)
Financial:
None if designation is not pursued. A thorough cost analysis would need to be done if pursued.
Legal/Risk:
None at this time. Further consideration would need to be given if designation pursued.
Program/Service:
None if designation is not pursued. A thorough cost analysis would need to be done if pursued.
Organizational:
Significant impact on many City Departments if designation pursued.
ALTERNATIVES AND IMPLICATIONS CONSIDERED
If Council does not wish to support the recommendation, the following alternative could be considered:
a) That Administration initiate the process of pursuing an Age Friendly Community designation and provide the necessary resources to do so.
STRATEGIC CONNECTIONS
Council’s Strategic Outcomes and Priorities (See Policy C-CG-02)
• Social Pillar - 2 2.1 Embrace a safe and healthy community that promotes diversity through inclusive community design, universal accessibility, programming and cultural celebrations.
Long Term Plans (e.g. MDP, Social Master Plan, Cultural Master Plan, etc.)
Age-Friendly Community Designation, the principles of which are to be inclusive and accessible, fit with the Social Master Plan.
Corporate Objectives
N/A
Report Date: May 15, 2017
Author(s): Cindy de Bruijn
Committee/Department: Community & Social Development
Acting General Manager: Kevin Scoble
City Manager: Kevin Scoble