This is a CTP of initiative: Ecovillage Bergen (Netherlands)
In 2014, there was a very fierce and serious conflict with the municipality regarding the asbestos clean-up. After purchasing the land, the people of ecovillage Bergen had hired a company to conduct the asbestos abatement. However, this company was found by the local government to have violated regulations. Some co-founders in charge of overseeing technical matter were held responsible, found suspect with criminal charges and threatened with serious repercussions including fines over 100.000 € and even a potential jail sentence. At some point in this process, the gates of the premises were closed and people were forbidden to enter the land of ecovillage Bergen. “We were working on the land during a volunteer day while the contractor was working on the asbestos clean-up at a different spot on the land. The municipality came to check on us and found that it was not good. A few hours later we had to leave the premises and the fence was locked, and we ended up not being allowed on the premises for three months. There was a whole investigation set up, I was officially found suspect and interrogated. (…) The contractor had started the asbestos clean-up before mentioning it to the municipality and the removed elements with asbestos were not properly wrapped so that contamination of the terrain could be possible. The ecovillage was found liable. [Another co-founder] and myself were technical suspects so we were the ones being interrogated. So that was a process of a couple of months, which is now finalised. The whole process had quite an impact, at least for me and for us as a group” (co-founder 2).
The process took several months, and it is considered as a critical turning point due to its intensity and threatening nature, as it could have been the end of the ecovillage. As described by co-founder 2: “It could have been the end. And it was also shocking that we could not enter our own premises. Like we are now sitting here, we were here, and then the next moment, we were not allowed to be here! There was a fence around it with a lock on it. You could get a fine of 30.000 euros if you did enter. So suddenly we had lost our place”. Co-founder 1 also recalls the shock of that moment: “When we had that story with asbestos, when the promises were locked down, when there was talk of prison sentences and a fine of 100.000 euro... I saw the ecovillage disappearing”.
However, the issue was eventually resolved, and nobody was charged. The fact that this conflict was overcome and that the community survived it together, is part of the reason why this process is seen as a critical turning point.
The main parties involved in this critical turning point include the municipality, in particular the department of public enforcement, the co-founders, and the contractor. Public enforcers claimed that the implementation of the asbestos abatement did not occur properly. Co-founder 2 explains that the first contractor who was hired to take care of the asbestos abatement turned out to be too “creative” in his approach: “The contractor who was doing the asbestos, did it in his own creative way. He had already begun before having registered. The license was ready, but he had already begun dismantling several places before giving official notice, and there were quantities of asbestos that were no longer present. It was all very unclear”.
What followed was a process of several months of formal proceedings and hearings. Co-founder 2 recalls, visibly with emotion, that throughout this whole process, he felt much supported by the community: “The moment that the investigator got to us, I was the first to be called for interrogation. That could have gone wrong (…) What was special, two days before the interview, we got together and prepared for it. I still get emotional about it. We sat in the circle with one another, and discussed the threat that was there. That whole baggage… I really felt like a weight fell of my shoulders when it disappeared in the group. It became light again”.
While it was a very difficult and threatening process, including potential criminal charges, high fines, legal action and lawyers, the group stuck together and overcame this challenge: “It felt like we carried and transformed it as a group. When being suspect you feel the pressure, of course, and because of the group I felt that I did not have to carry it alone. I always used to do a lot of things on my own, and I still do. But I felt that I was not alone facing this challenge” (co-founder 2).
When asked whether there was one main thing that really changed after the critical turning point, co-founder 2 emphasises that the trust in the group significantly increased: “If you survive a crisis with each other, that creates a bond. That you can actually survive an attack together. Now the storm has passed and we can move on again”.
An obvious preceding event to this story, was the purchase of the land itself in May 2013, when the people of Ecovillage Bergen fully agreed with the programme of requirements which included the asbestos abatement of the entire area (see CTP PURCHASING THE LAND).
In the summer of 2014, a contractor began to implement the asbestos abatement. The trouble with the department of enforcement, started the moment that the department visited Ecovillage Bergen on October 30 to check on the implementation of the asbestos clean-up, and concluded that rules had been broken (e.g. the contractor had not given official notice of the starting date of the asbestos clean-up).
On the 30th of October 2014, the municipality ordered the gates to Ecovillage Bergen to be locked and people were forbidden to enter. They also ordered Ecovillage Bergen to have a certified investigation to prove that the land had not been contaminated with asbestos. The investigation started two days after the terrain was locked. After a first report, on December 15th, that proved that the 8 warehouses that were to be cleaned were not contaminated, the municipality ordered a second report to prove that none of the other buildings was contaminated. This was proven in a report from the 18th of February 2015.
Co-founder 2 was called for a hearing on the 1st of April with investigators. Two days before, the 30th of March, the core group of the ecovillage initiative gathered to discuss the situation and to prepare the hearing. This meeting was perceived as very empowering by co-founder 2, as it helped to feel less pressure and more focused: “The tension and the burden that I felt, it became light. That was very pleasant. I felt open and relaxed, and also very concentrated”. The hearing itself took place a few days later. “That hearing actually went very well. I had to come back once, and the investigator called once more with some additional questions. (…) In the end we actually escaped from the suspected charges quite smoothly” (co-founder 2)
On the 9th of December 2014, the Municipality gave permission to continue the asbestos abatement. A new contractor was hired to finish the clean-up. In February 2015, the ecovillage Bergen communicated on its website that the asbestos abatement had been finalised on the western side of the territory and that it was now finally available for reconstruction.
The main tension in this critical turning point lay between the Ecovillage Bergen and the enforcement department. “It was one of the first encounters with the enforcement department, and that was not a pleasant experience” (co-founder 2). Obviously, the threat of criminal charges, including fines and potential prison sentences, came with considerable pressure, stress and tension. However, as the process developed, the threat seemed to decrease. When asked at which moment the co-founder started feeling confident that the issue would be resolved, s/he refers to the hearing itself: “The investigator made a whole report, and then added his recommendations, after which it went to the prosecutor for his interpretation. As the investigator was speaking, this is when I thought: ‘this will be fine, I do not need to worry about this’. You have a certain expectation of an interrogation, but it's not like I was tortured for 24 hours. It is still the Netherlands. Across of me was an older police officer who was complaining about the slow computer… there was something very human about it”.
When asked how this process has effected the relationship with the municipality of Bergen, the co-founder argues that they still mostly have a good working relation with the municipality (although some other co-founders might argue differently – see CTP CURRENT STALEMATE). Co-founder 2 emphasises that the municipality has several layers, from policy-makers to politicians and law enforcers. The main struggle that the ecovillage initiative has, are with the bureaucrats and in particular the rule enforcers. This does not only apply to the asbestos issue, but also to many other developments and activities on the ecovillage premises. As described by co-founder 2: “They say we have done a lot without official authorization, which is true. But we have also done many things with authorisation. For example, this thing here [an artistic structure in the garden], requires a permit. In the building on the culture square there are things that require permits. Even the stage that was constructed requires a permit. And they are very precise, so there are always 20 things that they find problematic. But I have developed a confidence that we get through all that. We are still on speaking terms”.
While it seems that the ecovillage initiative continues to have difficulty with the enforcers over e.g. construction rules, it also seems that co-founder 2 tries to understand the position of the enforcers and to overcome the tensions through constructive dialogue: “The enforcement officers have the task to control whether everything is done according to the rules. And that's a type of person who thinks very much according to the rules. While here, we are looking for renewal. The objective is not to keep everything according to the rules. The intention is to create new ways of construction, creativity and art that can arise here. Rather than stopping the creation because it is not accordance with the building regulations. That tension continues. It is not an impossible tension. We talk to the enforcer and try to find solutions. It's not quite as black and white. For politicians it is easy to talk because they do not have to enforce the rules. They say ‘just go ahead, how awfully nice’. But when you ask them whether they can arrange for it, they cannot”.
While the requirement of asbestos abatement was long known before the purchase of the land, the conflict with the municipality and the seriousness of the threat of criminal charges, all this had not been anticipated whatsoever.
When the conflict did unfold the way it did, co-founders experienced it as a real critical turning point while it was happening. On the one hand, because they realised that this could be the end of the ecovillage. On the other hand, because they also discovered their capacity to survive this crisis together: “There was a kind of peace. I felt at peace. We did not panic. We kept everyone together peacefully and nobody left. But because the thing was so rigorous and sudden, we realise that things can happen that you do not expect. More unexpected things can happen” (co-founder 2).
The main insight that co-founder 2 has gained from this critical turning point is that there is a community in which people support one another: “That there is a group to lean on. (...) Not everyone has to be involved in everything, but when it comes down to it, everyone's heart is in it. That gives me confidence in the strength of the group”.
When asked whether something could have been done differently to avoid this situation, co-founder 2 explains that they had trusted the first contractor that they hired. “How far can you see through someone? Maybe stay more on top of it? But now with the current contractor, we also have full confidence in the work and we're not going to screen everything. So what else could we have done… I wonder if we would have done it differently. If a contractor has a good financial offer, which makes a big difference, should one choose a much more expensive option, without having the money? It’s very difficult”. Nevertheless, co-founder 2 stresses that they were very lucky that the issue was solved, and that it is a risk they cannot and will not take again. It seems probable that the people of Ecovillage Bergen will have this incident in mind every time they select a contractor for conducting work on their premises.
Last but not least, an important lesson gained from the whole asbestos conflict is that unexpected things can and will happen, and that it is necessary to put the gravity of such developments in perspective, because no matter how important the ecovillage is, it is in the end just a place to live: “The ecovillage is obviously a fantastic place, but it is not about the life of my daughter. In the end, it is just a place. If it would not work out here, it would of course be dramatic and we would be mourning for a year, but it is not a human life we are talking about. (...) The ecovillage is completely integrated in my system and I am preoccupied with it day and night, but still it is not the most important thing in life. It is an idea to which you gradually want to give all your energy, but there are also other options. And this of course is fantastic and unique in the Netherlands” (co-founder 2).
Stay informed. Subscribe for project updates by e-mail.
