High-profile case: the deal of the exchange of the stadium at the depot in Tula was considered “brilliant”

Another court session

On November 25, a regular court session was held in Tula in the case of the exchange of the Arsenal stadium at the depot of the MCP Tulgorelektrotrans. In the dock is Tatyana Silaeva, deputy chairman of the Committee for Property and Land Relations of the city administration. She is charged with abuse of power, which was allegedly followed by losses for the ITUC in the amount of 204 million 701 thousand 667 rubles.

The witness Igor Gusev appeared at the meeting. According to him, in 2014, the governor of the Tula region, Vladimir Gruzdev, approached him and other entrepreneurs with a proposal to purchase the Arsenal stadium from the owner and donate it to the city. The entrepreneurs did not agree. Then, according to Gusev, the idea of ​​concluding an exchange agreement arose. It did not suit him himself, and therefore he addressed this proposal to his business partner Kitanin, who agreed. According to Gusev, the parties to the exchange agreement are unknown to him, but he is aware that it was Kitanin’s wife, Irina Zlobina, who formalized the acquisition of the Arsenal stadium and the exchange deal.

The witness says that he did not visit the facility on Oboronnaya, where the bus depot belonging to the Tulgorelektrotrans MCP was located. He repeatedly visited the facility on Zheleznodorozhnaya Street, which was one of the subjects of the exchange agreement, since the cleaning equipment belonging to him was located here. The witness believes that the territory was quite suitable for transferring the bus fleet of the enterprise here, as it was planned to do when concluding the exchange agreement.

“There was electricity, garages, a modern building with a good repair. Of course, it was necessary to equip something, since the base was not directly designed to accommodate buses. But the facility on Zheleznodorozhnaya Street was no worse than the site on Oboronnaya Street. In fact, it was impossible in principle to place buses on Oboronnaya Street: people complained about exhaust fumes from vehicles warming up in the morning,” Gusev said.

He assesses the exchange in terms of the consequences for the city positively: “This is a brilliant deal. Very profitable – Tula received a huge sports facility in the city center. Now we have our own football field, we do not pay rent for it. This is very important for Tula residents,” the witness says.

Defendant Tatyana Silaeva also has no doubts about the positive result of the exchange deal. At one of the previous meetings, she noted: “The city has acquired the stadium, which operates in accordance with the interests and needs of the population. New houses have been built on the site of the old tram depot, and apartment owners pay property taxes to the local budget. The development of sports, physical education and solving the problems of providing citizens with housing: all these are the tasks of local self-government.” As for the expediency of the transaction from a regulatory point of view, Silaeva did not analyze it: “This is the task of the ITUC,” the defendant emphasized, answering questions from the state prosecution during today’s meeting.

The defendant again focused on the fact that any of the parties could not agree with the transaction. But, according to Silaeva, Valery Semakovich, who at the time of the conclusion of the exchange agreement was the director of the PCR, did not contact her on these issues.

“Theoretically, there was a possibility of a call from Semakovich, but in practice, there was no such call,” says Silaeva.

She believes that she fulfilled her job descriptions for the preparation of the draft deal in good faith.

“The interests of the city are observed by the Committee. I personally did not and could not make decisions on the alienation of property – this is not my competence. I did not exert any pressure and influence on the employees of the KIZO. I signed the approval sheet for the draft resolution, as there were no reasons not to sign it. I also signed the exchange agreement, since there were no reasons not to do this, ”says Silaeva.

The defendant does not recognize the claim against herself. The next meeting will be held on December 2, the debate of the parties will take place.