In the past, urban village reconstruction may have created millionaires, but now with the mainland’s economy in a downturn and various industries, especially the real estate sector, facing a slump, many projects are left unfinished and people are not as enthusiastic about relocation as they used to be. Recently, in the Tianhe District of Guangzhou, Guangdong Province, residents of an urban village have directly refused to be relocated without discussing compensation.
The urban village reconstruction project in the Tianhe District is known as the Huanshan Village Source Project, which involves the extensive renovation of the Changban and Yuangang urban villages. The official plan covers a total area of 202.66 hectares for the renovation of Changban and Yuangang villages and 10.99 hectares of surrounding reserve land. The renovation area for Changban village is 124.28 hectares, for Yuangang village is 78.38 hectares, and for the Shangyuangang land block is 10.99 hectares. The estimated total reconstruction demand for Changban and Yuangang villages is 1.7858 million square meters.
This project is divided into three phases, involving the relocation not only of village houses but also of schools, village collective land, and state-owned old factories. However, the first phase of relocation has faced strong resistance from villagers. A villager from Changban village named Zhao Pei directly expressed to Epoch Times, “Oppose relocation, disagree with renovation, don’t need renovation.”
According to Zhao Pei, since early June, Changban villagers have been protesting daily at the ancestral hall and voting against relocation, while residents of Yuangang village have been gathering at the village committee holding banners with slogans like “Give back our voting rights” to protest. Police have even been dispatched to disperse the protesters at times. Zhao Pei mentioned, “A couple of days ago in the middle of the night, police came to Yuangang village and there was a confrontation between them and the villagers.”
As of the reporter’s deadline, villagers are continuing their protests.
On April 30, the Changxing Street Office of the Tianhe District government, which oversees Changban village, issued a public notice stating that the majority had agreed to the demolition project, but villagers questioned the legality of the vote.
Zhao Pei stated that the voting results in Changban village had been notarized by the Zhongnan Notary Office, yet villagers believe the government’s operational methods were not legal. Unauthorized individuals voted on behalf of residents without proper authorization, with only names signed during voting instead of fingerprints. Therefore, the entire Changban village refuses to accept the voting results. During the voting, villagers were called by village committee members to sign intention documents, but many elderly folks were misled and were not informed about the compensation plan.
“Something as significant as demolition should involve a village-wide meeting, so now all villagers are standing ground, demanding a revote by the village committee,” Zhao Pei said. Currently, two-thirds of the residents over 18 years old in the village are pooling 1500 yuan each per household and planning to hire a lawyer to follow legal procedures.
The compensation for this relocation is also unsatisfactory to the villagers, as their living standards are expected to plummet after the relocation.
A villager from Yuangang village named Xiaomei mentioned that although the compensation plan for Yuangang village has not been disclosed, based on compensation plans seen in other villages, the compensation calculation for returning to the original site is limited to 3.5 floors, with an upper limit of 280 square meters for the compensated area. Any area exceeding this limit would be compensated at a rate of 4000 yuan per square meter. Cash compensation is calculated at 18,000 yuan per square meter. “If you have a 500-square-meter house, and they only offer you 280 square meters to move back in, would you agree?”
Xiaomei also pointed out that in some villages like Daguan village, the actual area of 3.5 floors is 270 square meters; therefore, the returning area is calculated based on 270 square meters, and there is no possibility of getting more. “The residential areas in our Yuangang and Changban villages are quite large, so this kind of compensation is unacceptable to us.”
“The government is playing dirty, treating villagers as fools. Regardless of the economic situation, they and developers come to exploit the people for achievements, harming the common folks,” Xiaomei remarked. Even after relocation, maintenance fees, sanitation fees, etc., would add to the villagers’ burdens.
As explained by Zhao Pei, nearly every household in Changban and Yuangang villages has six to seven-story buildings, which have been standing for over twenty years, initially permitted by the government to build high-rise structures. For years, the villagers’ main income has been from renting out their properties.
During the period of economic prosperity, the tenants of the villager’s houses were mostly laborers from other provinces such as Hunan, Sichuan, and Jiangxi. However, in the past two years, Guangzhou has seen numerous business closures, leaving workers jobless and many returning to their hometowns. As a result, the village houses are mainly rented to local residents now.
Zhao Pei noted that despite the economic difficulties, villagers are not facing financial constraints due to rental income. “If we are relocated, we will lose all our income, and our living standards will definitely plummet compared to the current situation. So, of course, we are reluctant to relocate.”
Zhao Pei further explained that the real estate industry is almost entirely collapsing, with unfinished buildings everywhere, such as in the Huangpu District, where relocation settlements have been left unfinished. Villagers have been battling the government for years, with real estate companies mostly deep in debt. Therefore, villagers are adamant about rejecting the relocation.
Other reasons for villagers opposing relocation include a lack of trust in the government. “Many promises remain unfulfilled, and local governments often say one thing and do another. In the end, they fail to deliver on their promises,” Zhao Pei said.
“We, the whole village, need to stand united, and the government should not touch any part of our village,” Zhao Pei stated.
Epoch Times attempted to contact the Tianhe District government, with no one answering the phone.