Recent protests erupted in the relocation settlement of Maojiawan in Luodian County, Zhaotong City, Yunnan Province, due to the forcible collection of parking fees by the streets and properties. According to some interviewed villagers, the parking fee was just the spark that ignited the protest, as the lack of stable income and continuously rising living costs after relocation were the bigger sources of pressure.
Online videos and posts circulated showing that around May 7th, a large group of villagers gathered at the entrance of Maojiawan settlement, protesting against the local street and property fees. Tensions escalated with a standoff between police and civilians, with a police car surrounded by the crowd. The protest continued into the afternoon until local officials intervened, promising to temporarily halt the collection of parking and property fees, leading to the dispersal of the villagers.
The controversy stemmed from the imposition of parking fees starting in May, amounting to 30 yuan per vehicle per month, totaling 360 yuan annually. A interviewed villager mentioned that while this amount may not seem significant, it poses a burden for many relocated households relying on subsistence allowances or scavenging for a living.
Maojiawan settlement is one of the large-scale poverty alleviation relocation sites across counties in the area, promoted by the Chinese Communist Party as a “poverty alleviation model.” The settlement houses nearly 40,000 people, mainly from impoverished mountainous counties like Luodian and Qiaojia.
A 57-year-old villager who moved from Heitie Village in Hongshan Township, Qiaojia County, Zhaotong City to Maojiawan expressed his struggles. He claimed that after the relocation, there was no improvement in income, yet he had to pay 1,656 yuan annually for property management fees in Maojiawan, making life there extremely challenging. Consequently, he returned to his hometown to live in a makeshift shed and grow vegetables for sustenance.
He recounted how during the poverty alleviation relocation in 2020, officials stated that houses were free and provided to them to live in, with no fees for the first three years. However, shortly after moving in, services like water and electricity were cut off for non-payment, diverging from the initial promises made by the authorities.
With six family members, including five receiving subsistence allowances, his household had minimal sources of income apart from the allowances. The rising expenses of over 1,650 yuan for property fees annually, coupled with retirement insurance, medical insurance, water, electricity, garbage disposal fees, and others, left him in a situation of endless expenses without sufficient income.
The villager emphasized that returning to his hometown was also not a definitive solution. The old houses there had been demolished by the government, and with the relocation, their household registration had been transferred to Maojiawan, rendering their original home unrecognizable in terms of population and registration.
He lamented the lack of the promised dividends from projects like scallion farms, greenhouse bases, and apple farms meant for relocated households to address their livelihood challenges, questioning where those benefits had disappeared to over the years.
The ongoing protests in Maojiawan were not solely about parking fees but a reflection of the long-term livelihood pressures faced by relocated households. The villager depicted the chaos persisting for days, with concerns beyond the immediate parking fee and focusing on the sustenance challenges post-relocation.
The villager who participated in the protests for several days mentioned that around May 9th, the local government intervened, temporarily suspending the parking fee collection and promising further considerations on providing property subsidies.
After the protests escalated, local officials promised through loudspeakers to remove barriers, suspend parking and property fees, and collect villagers’ feedback on production, livelihood, employment, and property management aspects.
Many elderly residents within the settlement struggled with the additional financial burden, making it challenging for those reliant on subsistence allowances, especially the elderly. Younger relocated villagers who could work outside the settlement faced relatively better living conditions. In contrast, the older residents, only receiving modest allowances, some resorting to scavenging in county towns for meager earnings, found it distressing to pay substantial amounts.
Due to many areas being converted from arable lands to afforestation and the demolition of old houses, many relocated individuals felt they had no option to return, with no dwellings left for them back in their original villages.