Up and down the country, communities are struggling to meet the legal cantonal quota of 1.6 percent for accepting asylum seekers. The community of Bassersdorf is also confronted with this issue. Only 20 percent of the 192 refugees assigned to Bassersdorf can now be accommodated in community-owned properties. The majority of accommodation therefore has to be rented on the open housing market, which presents the municipality with major administrative and financial challenges. This will also place additional strain on the already dry housing market in the community.
Defuse living situation with more rooms of your own
The local council would therefore like to defuse the situation in the medium term with more of its own premises in terms of space and costs. He therefore envisages two so-called social buildings on community-owned land, each with 50 places, the first of which is now to be built in the Ufmatten district, right next to the recycling collection point. The people of Bassersdorf will vote next weekend on a corresponding loan of 5.99 million francs (including costs for the property, which is already owned by the municipality).
Controversial submission
It has been a long time since a municipal ballot in Bassersoerf was so controversial. After a lengthy discussion, the preliminary community meeting also disagreed. With 52 yes to 52 no votes, the recommendation for the ballot on November 24th remained neutral.
Obviously, the issue of asylum is polarizing here like no other issue. Above all, the residents of the Ufmatten district are doing their best. They are fundamentally against social housing in their neighborhood. Shortly after the first orientation meeting, the residents of the neighborhood founded the Ufmatten Association to jointly defend themselves against the project. With posters on the side of the road and flyers, which the initiators handed out to Bassersdorf residents as they went to the recycling collection point these days, they are trying to convince those eligible to vote of their arguments. “No asylum accommodation in residential areas with families,” it says in red letters on the flyers, and “No more hasty solutions – well thought-out solutions are needed,” they try to encourage voters to say no. It is the diffuse fear of the unknown that concerns the residents of the neighborhood.
Local parties mostly in favor
The issue of social construction has also brought local parties and political organizations onto the scene. They post their slogans on advertisements (including in the dorfblitz) and flyers. But interestingly, only the SVP is opposing the project at hand. For them it’s about fundamentals: The SVP local party also shows “concerns about the failure perceived Swiss asylum policy. A clear signal is needed here to the canton and the federal government,” they write in their statement.
The FDP, SP, Green Liberals, EDU and IG Basi, on the other hand, are in favor of the proposal, as a survey by dorfblitz shows.
“Our social workers should not have to surf the Internet to get apartments or organize relocation campaigns and apartment inspections – but should integrate, look after and monitor asylum seekers,” says the FDP.
The SP flyer reads: “Basi urgently needs more places for people in need. The social building is sustainable and future-oriented. Basi significantly reduces rental costs and saves in the long term.»
The GLP writes: “Building your own building is a sensible investment and is significantly cheaper in the long term than continuing to rent apartments on the already tight housing market.”
The EDU recognizes the need for social buildings. “With this solution, there is no need to rent expensive apartments. There are too few cheap apartments anyway, so the housing market is driving up prices.”
Finally, IG Basi writes: “The proposed solutions also relieve the burden on taxpayers by avoiding costly rentals in the limited housing supply. That’s why IG Basi recommends a yes to the planned social buildings.”
But what if voters reject the loan for the proposed social housing next weekend?
Plan B: everything stays the same
“Plan B,” said mayor Christian Pfaller at the preliminary community meeting, “is to continue renting expensive living space.”
Voters will have their say next Sunday. You can be excited.
