Senior citizens evicted to house asylum seekers in Germany as controversial policy sparks outcry

By willowt // 2025-06-18

Mastodon

Parler

Gab

Copy

Senior residents in Bargteheide, Germany, were forcibly relocated from a housing complex they were told was “uninhabitable,” only for local authorities to repurpose the building for asylum seekers.
The city’s decision to reverse plans for demolition after relocations drew criticism, with council members accusing each other of hypocrisy and electioneering.
Elderly tenants expressed dismay at losing their homes, citing decades of investment in the community and calling the policy “unfair.”
Similar evictions of seniors for migrants have occurred recently in Berlin, Lörrach and other German cities.
Local leaders argue the move is necessary to prepare for future migration surges, though opponents say it undermines residents’ trust.

In a decision igniting fierce public debate, the German city of Bargteheide abruptly halted demolition efforts at a senior living complex last week and instead began housing asylum seekers in the very apartments it had previously deemed “unfit for habitation.” The 104-unit facility on Nelkenweg, originally slated to be torn down amid concerns about mold and structural issues, now faces criticism as local officials pivot to shelter thousands of migrants. The reversal has exposed deepening rifts over immigration policy, with residents, critics and even some city council members accusing leaders of prioritizing external obligations over the rights of long-term citizens.

A swapped mandate: How Bargteheide’s policy backfired

The saga began when Bargteheide’s city council informed 120 elderly residents in January that their homes were unsafe and marked for demolition. Residents were evicted, their apartments swiftly vacated. But in June, the city reneged, announcing repairs on only five of the units. The remainder would remain untouched and open to asylum seekers. Mayor Gabriele Hettwer defended the U-turn, stating, “The costs for mold removal are manageable,” and insisted the complex is a temporary solution to “prepare for potential migration increases.” Yet the abrupt shift has sparked outrage among demonstrators and even members of her own coalition. SPD councilor Andreas Bäuerle, who initially supported the eviction, called the reversal “an unpleasant taste,” noting, “I’ve seen the deplorable conditions firsthand. We’re letting refugees into buildings we called uninhabitable?” Meanwhile, CDU’s Sven Meding accused the SPD of “political posturing,” asking sarcastically, “Should we house migrants in tents?” The city’s revised strategy stems from the refugee crisis’ fluid nature. While arrivals have slowed due to stricter border controls, Hettwer stated, “We’re casting as wide a net as possible. The future’s uncertain.”

A divided council: Who wins and who pays?

The decision passed 17-3 in the city council, with CDU, Greens and the local WfB party in favor. The SPD lone objectors argue the policy sacrifices long-term residents for “statistical” preparedness. Residents’ anger boiled over at a June 15 town hall, where elderly tenants lamented losing homes they’d lived in for decades. Senior citizen Frieda Miller, 82, told Remix News, “I’ve paid my rent here 20 years. This isn’t my country anymore?” Neighbor Dagmar Pardubitzki added, “They promised transparency but lied. We’re the ones who support this city with taxes—and now we’re shoved aside.” The council’s refusal to allow seniors to return even after inspections — noted by Meding as “well habitable” — has further fueled distrust. Hettwer admits no timeline for residents’ return exists, citing “ongoing assessments.”

Echoes of a shifting policy culture

This isn’t Bargteheide’s first clash over housing. In 2021, the city mandated landlords renew rentals for refugees indefinitely, leaving them vulnerable to tenant disputes. Nor is it unique to Germany: Similar evictions of seniors to make way for migrants occurred in 2023 at a Berlin nursing home and Lörrach’s municipal housing estate. In Lörrach, officials dismissed public protests as far-right incitement, urging a “fight against the right.” Critics argue such measures risk normalizing migrant prioritization, widening societal fractures. Political analyst Dr. Lena Klein, of the German Institute for Social Research, notes, “Germany faces a choice between humanitarian obligations and its citizens’ rights. When both collide, marginalized groups are often pitted against each other—not just seniors, but also refugees themselves, who deserve safe housing.”

The cost of “temporary” compromises

Bargteheide’s policy shift underscores a deeper tension: In an era of mass migration, who pays the price for flexibility? While officials frame the complex’s new use as pragmatic, residents question the values driving such decisions. As neighboring states grapple with similar dilemmas, the case reveals a systemic issue. As one displaced tenant remarked, “They call it temporary… but forever is just a series of ‘for now.’” Unless governments reconcile their competing obligations to newcomers and longstanding citizens, such backdoor policy reversals may keep the elderly — and everyone else — paying the steepest price. Sources for this article include: TheNationalPulse.com FreeRepublic.com X.com