Company plans to turn Boise assisted living home into apartments. What City Council did

The future of a Boise assisted living community remains in doubt after the Boise City Council imposed restrictions on the owner, who is proposing to turn the community into apartments.

The council on Tuesday moved to require that the owners of Arbor Village, at 1093 S. Hilton St., give tenants extended notice before requiring them to leave, help them find a new place to live, pay for relocation expenses and cover the difference in rent the tenants will have to pay at a new location for three years.

During extended debate over the issue, the council grappled with trying to ensure protection for the elderly residents of the community while also realizing that the privately-owned community could be closed at any time.

Arbor Village is owned by DiNapoli Capitol Partners, a private-equity firm from Walnut Creek, California, that applied early last year to convert the home of about 90 elderly residents into 77 apartments. Doing so requires a conditional use permit, which is subject to approval before the city.

Despite its application, the company sent mixed messages about its plans to residents, telling some that it was a contingency plan and that they did not intend to redevelop the site, according to residents and family members who have testified at public meetings about the project. Some residents also said they did not receive proper notice of a required neighborhood meeting about the project.

In October, the City Council found that correct notice had not been provided and required DiNapoli to hold a new neighborhood meeting about the site. That sent it back to the Planning and Zoning Commission, which held a new public hearing in February.

At that hearing, the commission imposed strict new conditions: If DiNapoli chose to turn the site into apartments, it would need to give tenants a year of notice; identify new housing for each tenant and pay for relocation expenses; and be responsible for any higher difference in rent for three years.

DiNapoli appealed that approval on the grounds that the city was “singling out, blaming and penalizing” DiNapoli for a larger housing crisis. At the Planning and Zoning hearing in February, a company representative said the company has been losing money on the project and cannot afford to continue operating it.

The company said the added conditions would prevent them from redeveloping the site and lead them to either reduce services at the senior home or shut it down altogether.

Intermountain Fair Housing Council, a nonprofit housing advocate, also appealed the decision, arguing that the city did not adequately consider the impacts the proposed project would have on the vulnerable residents, many of whom have disabilities.

The Fair Housing Council said the city did not consider its local authority, multiple federal laws and “the city’s moral and ethical responsibility via its broad police powers to uphold the health, welfare and safety for the residents of Boise.”

DiNapoli says it’s losing money

DiNapoli’s vice president, Michael Sieman, said his company is losing $1 million a year on Arbor Village because of the effect inflation has had on running an assisted living facility, and because of the low rates at which the company is reimbursed by the government for seniors who are on Medicaid.

“We’re being asked to come up with money that we just frankly don’t have,” Sieman said Tuesday.

Sieman asked the council to remove the conditions that the Planning and Zoning Commission had implemented, while offering less expensive alternatives. Instead of one year of notice before requiring a tenant to vacate, he proposed six months. Sieman said the company could agree to pay for moving expenses and offered to hire a third party to assist residents with finding new homes. He asked for the council to remove the three-year requirement that DiNapoli pay for the difference in rent.

The original conditions “are taking a financially untenable situation and just making it worse,” he said. “If we don’t get some relief, then we start exploring what our other options are in terms of vacating the building, selling it — I think everything’s on the table.”

The company has month-to-month leases with its residents, meaning that it could announce plans to close the community with 30 days notice.

Sieman said he thought it was unfair that his company would have likely had an easier time getting approval to build apartments if they had vacated the building before applying for a conditional use permit.

Boise assisted-living residents plead: Save our homes. Don’t turn them into apartments

Public says ‘not enough’ options for residents

Members of the public in testimony said that there are few options for aging residents of assisted living facilities, many of whom have dementia or other disabilities.

Though Medicaid can be used to cover assisted living costs, many communities do not accept patients on Medicaid because the government reimbursements are lower than what private payers pay.

In many instances, seniors who do not initially qualify for Medicaid can begin living at an assisted living home while paying out-of-pocket, with an agreement that they will be allowed to stay at the home once they become eligible for Medicaid after spending their remaining assets.

Because many communities don’t accept Medicaid, it is especially difficult to relocate those seniors who would need a new place to live.

“I just don’t see that there are enough options out there for the people,” said Kristen Pooley, a social work intern who testified at the meeting.

While Arbor Village accepts Medicaid, it is unclear how many of the 89 residents there are on Medicaid.

Tracie Snyder, whose mother lives at Arbor Village, said at Tuesday’s hearing that the company is still trying to attract residents to move in, despite its plans to change the building.

Sarah Rosin, who lives near Arbor Village, testified about DiNapoli’s investment portfolio, which includes close to 40 apartment buildings, hotels and senior communities.

“How is it not feasible for this real estate investment firm to uphold the very reasonable conditions from the city and still remain loyal to their obligations to their (investors)?” she said.

In a letter to the Planning and Zoning Commission, residents of the community said they had few or no other options of where to live. One resident wrote that she has “no other place to live” than Arbor Village.

Council debates how to proceed

While hearing testimony from all parties, the council attempted to find a solution that would allow the company to proceed with its redevelopment plans while still protecting residents.

Earlier this week, the Intermountain Fair Housing Council and some residents had sent in requests to the city asking for mediation, and council members initially attempted to see whether the parties would agree to negotiate over specific conditions.

Council members eventually dispensed with that possibility, concluding that the parties were unlikely to come to an agreement.

The City Council denied the housing council’s appeal.

Bageant then moved to impose revised conditions on DiNapoli. The revisions add requirements for the company to hire a Medicaid specialist to help residents find new homes, stipulate that construction not begin until all residents have vacated and prohibit owners from accepting new tenants while removing others.

Council Member Latonia Haney Keith said she “really struggled” with Bageant’s proposal, since it would be more stringent than the conditions Planning and Zoning Commission imposed and could lead the company to shut down the community on short notice.

Bageant said that while there is always the risk the company could close the community, he hoped their wish to build apartments at the site would be incentive enough for them to “figure out how to get there.”

Council Member Colin Nash said he didn’t want to approve DiNapoli’s plan to build apartments, but thought the council should accept the company’s suggested conditions to avoid litigation and get more “finality.” He then said he needed more time to review potential conditions before ultimately withdrawing the proposal.

Council Member Luci Willits said she wasn’t comfortable voting for Bageant’s proposal because it could set “pseudo-policy” and because she thought part of the Planning and Zoning Commission’s decision was arbitrary.

In response, Bageant tweaked his conditions, shortening the notice to tenants requirement from one year to six months.

Bageant’s proposal passed unanimously.

Sieman declined to comment after the meeting.

Council wants to address long-term care issue

Council President Holli Woodings said Idaho has failed to reimburse assisted living communities adequately, leading to problems for seniors in need of more intensive care.

“I really think that the root of the problem is that we’re not reimbursing Medicaid sufficiently to take care of people when they need assisted living,” she said. “I really think it puts us in a bad position, it puts families in an untenable position, it puts property owners in a frankly bad position because they’re not able to run a business in a way that’s solvent.”

Nash said he wants to see more “tools” to protect assisted living facilities in the city’s rewrite of its zoning code, which is scheduled to come before the council in June.

“We’ve got to figure out as a community how we tackle some of these big issues,” Mayor Lauren McLean said.