Witnesses in the high-profile case of changing the stadium to the depot in Tula doubt the losses

The next court hearing in the case of the exchange of the central stadium at the depot was held in Tula on August 31. Recall that Tatyana Silaeva, Deputy Chairman of the Committee for Property and Land Relations of the Tula Administration, is in the dock. She is charged with abuse of power under Article 285 of the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation. It follows from the position of the prosecution that as a result of the agreement signed by Silaeva for the exchange of the Arsenal stadium for the depot of the MCP Tulgorelektrotrans, the latter suffered losses in the amount of 204,701,667 rubles. The side of the state prosecution at the next meeting was represented by a new prosecutor.

The testimony of two witnesses, Gennady Melnik and Aleksey Marushkin, was heard. Melnik managed the enterprise MCP “Tulgorelektrotrans” in 2013, in 2014 he was an adviser to the director. Marushkin is the director of the ITUC at present.

Gennady Melnyk told the court that he later learned about the exchange deal only from the media, he did not alienate any real estate himself. He reported that the depot at Oboronnaya, which, along with other property, was under the right of operational management of the MCP, was old.

“It was a specialized depot for trams, built in the post-war years, of poor quality. In the 1990s, it was converted into a trolleybus depot. When I was the director of the PCR, there was a bus depot there,” Melnyk said, focusing on the fact that the buses were kept there “with difficulty”: “In open parking lots, not even paved. The pits for repairing trams were not suitable for repairing buses, which is why the latter literally hung over the pits.” And the workers took risks.

Numerous tram tracks also interfered. According to Melnyk, the company took money from the municipality to fill at least part of these tracks, “so that the suspension of the buses that run daily through these tracks would be “alive”.

The management of the ITUC was already considering other options for locating the bus fleet, although, according to Melnik, they were inactive. The maintenance of the depot at Oboronnaya required complex maintenance, which, according to Melnik, required capital expenditures. The enterprise itself, meanwhile, was unprofitable and subsidized, says Melnik: “The amount of subsidies was, if my memory serves me, about 600 million a year – for the transportation of passengers, for repair work … In order to ensure the current activities of the enterprise, this was enough.”

Aleksey Marushkin also spoke about the fact that the property on Oboronnaya in Tula required a major overhaul. In the year when the exchange was made, he worked in the Shchekino separate division of the Tula transport company. He joined the ITUC in 2017 and has been working here to this day with a break from 2021 to 2022.

“The buildings were not officially recognized as emergency. The examination was not carried out. And if it was carried out, the buildings would have to be closed. Other sites were considered, but, unfortunately, the city does not own a single facility where a bus fleet could be located,” says Marushkin.

At the same time, the territory on Novomoskovskoe Highway, where the depot moved after the exchange, according to Marushkin, is completely satisfied with the MCP: “Yes, we have a new cost item for renting a park, but on Oboronnaya we would also have a new cost item – only for major repairs “. Questions about losses as a result of the barter, about the possibility of terminating the barter agreement, recognizing it as invalid, were not considered at the enterprise during Marushkin’s leadership. He himself did not apply to the city administration with the relevant statements either. When asked whether the depot’s move to the Novomoskovsk highway as a result of the exchange could be considered a loss, Marushkin replied: “It is unlikely. A loss can be considered when the alienated property belongs to the MCP. And when it belongs to the city, how to assess whether it is a loss or not? The city just took its property.” According to Marushkin, the exchange did not affect the implementation of passenger transportation: there were no failures.

In the course of his testimony today, the prosecutor petitioned for the disclosure of the testimony given by this witness earlier, “due to the existence of contradictions regarding the rent, as well as the significance of the costs for the enterprise.” The prosecutor pointed out that earlier the witness spoke about the high rent for the site on Novomoskovskoye Highway, which allegedly affected the work of the PCR. “That was two and a half years ago and I don’t have to remember every word I said. And my words that this (ed. rent of a new depot on Novomoskovsk highway) did not affect our activities are based on the fact that since 2014 the enterprise has also been operating, performing the same volume of transportation, ”commented Marushkin.

At a meeting on August 31, he stated that the lease payments of the MCP, which arose as a result of the barter transaction, amounted to “a minimum share of 1-2%”, while the company’s cash flow per year is about 1 billion 300 or 400 million rubles. But he also failed to substantiate his position regarding the amended statement of claim against Silaeva: “The amount of information is large, but we will prepare for the next court session.”

Recall that Tatyana Silaeva, under article 285 of the Criminal Code of Russia, imputed to her, faces up to 10 years in prison.