Jenny Warwick pjwar@telcomplas.com

Gary Mass gmmass@aol.com

Opportunities and Challenges

The following is a listing of opportunities and challenges relating to planned housing (co-housing, retirement housing, intergenerational communities, and so forth). They are sorted under categories that emerged from a previous discussion of our individual interests and concerns. Some of the questions are quite broad and some more narrow. Although far from comprehensive, we hope that they will be of use in promoting further discussion in the broader Shambhala community.

• Existing Shambhala land centres or urban centres may provide natural reference points for locating planned housing.
• We may get land donated or begin with existing property owned by Shambhala organisation or members on which to build/renovate housing.
• Some non-profit housing groups have been able to obtain land/facilities at low cost through innovative approaches such as using closed military bases, closed-down institutions, or abandoned industrial facilities.

• We may need to choose whether to direct our energies at the creation of a prototype community in one location or support the development of models at multiple sites.
• Many of us have strong preferences about region and may only choose to settle within a reasonable distance of home and other family members.
• There also may be strong differences in preference among urban, suburban, town, or rural sites.

• We have considerable knowledge and expertise in health and well-being services within the Shambhala community.
• Because caring for others is an integral part of the Shambhala path, we may have more than our share of individuals willing to provide different levels of personal care to those in need in a community.
• We could form a joint venture partnership with a health care institution in or near our community site.
• Naropa University might be willing to develop a health care internship program in relation with a planned community.

• Although it may be our ideal to support "ageing in place," what level of advanced care can we feasibly provide in a planned community? Advanced levels of care can require special equipment, regulated facilities, and licensed professional caregivers.
• Can we provide transportation and proximity to medical care for those who may need such care with frequency?
• What are the legal requirements for our organisation to become involved in providing assisted living or more advanced levels of care?

• We have a large "captive audience" in our community of middle-aged people who are seriously thinking about how they live out their end years.
• We have developed many social forms and have considerable experience in working and living together.
• Building a housing/community situation gives us a powerful opportunity to extend GES vision by opening our living situation to non-Shambhalians and devising new models for community that could benefit the larger world.

• Many in our community who would be carrying through on a housing program may be currently overburdened with other Shambhala duties and/or are facing a decline in energy levels as they age.
• There may be sharp differences in individual preferences about who should be part of a community housing situation: old and young together or only adults; practitioners and/or non-practitioners; those who need minimal assistance and/or those who need greater levels of assistance.
• How can we maintain GES vision and principles if we wish to fully integrate non-practitioners into social and governance functions?

• We may have large contingents of members who would be willing to sink retirement monies and other investment funds into projects that promise to provide them with a place to live in later years.
• Joint venture partnerships with outside institutions may be possible.
• Profit-making centres related to care programs may be possible.
• Grant funds, especially for research and planning, may be available.
• We have a number of experts within our community on financial planning and housing development.
• Some tax breaks may be available.

• If we want housing to be open to people of various income levels, a sliding-scale system would be necessary.
• We may need to educate ourselves more fully about personal financial planning so that members are ready to subscribe to community investment plans.
• Existing pools of Shambhala organisational capital for planning and investment seem to be very limited and/or earmarked for other purposes.
• Many of us have considerable neurotic baggage in our attitudes toward money (as well as in our tendencies to deny death an put off any decisions relating to end-of-life).

• We have highly competent architects and designers in our community, as well as professionals with expertise in special needs facilities.
• We can get major donations of "sweat equity" for projects, as demonstrated by Great Stupa.

• Costs of building special care facilities can be very high, and there is usually a plethora of local/state/federal governmental regulations to contend with.
• There may be sharp differences in individual preferences for the balance between private and communal space; we need to clarify how various models would work this out.

• Request the group members make presentations to their local centres -- to pass on information, inspire collaboration and be the local contact person.
• To establish a web presence and list serve.
• To review the previously drafted questionnaire and provide feedback and revise for use in local centre presentations.
• Create a proposal for a future conference.