We all remember the infamous “Sobyanin paving tiles” that billions of rubles were blown on. And the only person who wants everyone to forget about those tiles is Moscow mayoral candidate, supposedly tough and efficient manager Sergei Semyonovich Sobyanin. Because once people start talking about those tiles, it turns out that manager Sergei Semyonovich is not all that tough after all — quite the opposite, in fact. Let’s recall the facts: 1. In 2011, government procurement orders were posted on the public procurement website to replace asphalt pavement with tiles — worth billions of rubles. The tile-laying contracts were issued with violations that restricted competition. In half of the tenders, only one company took part. The result: the work was not completed in full, and the quality of the work performed was unsatisfactory.
Information on the contracts that had been signed was missing in most cases, making it impossible to verify whether the money spent matched the volume of work actually completed. 2. Nevertheless, in March 2012, new government tile contracts were posted that (attention) listed the exact same addresses as the previous ones. 3. Our Anti-Corruption Foundation could not let point 2 slide, so we called for volunteers to join a “tile raid” to determine how much of the 2011 work had actually been done and what quality it was. 4. As a result of the “tile raid,” we identified and documented 180 locations where the tiles required warranty repairs or complete redoing
and 102 locations where there were no tiles at all, even though they had already been paid for.
5. The Anti-Corruption Foundation decided to get to the bottom of the “Sobyanin tile scam” and set itself the following goals: determine the extent to which asphalt pavement was replaced with tiles in 2011, and at which addresses work was carried out in 2012; force City Hall to carry out warranty repairs on the tiled pavement; verify the legality of the 2011 and 2012 contracts; 6. To do this, we sent: 8 requests for information (to the Moscow Department of Housing and Public Utilities and Improvement, the Tender Committee, etc.); Sample request. 9 appeals to various prefectures of the city of Moscow and a statement addressed to the Mayor of Moscow (later passed down to the prefecture level), requesting information on the work carried out, listing 188 defects in the tile pavement, and demanding warranty repairs; complaints and lawsuits regarding the actions/inaction of the prefectures. Example (prosecutor’s office). Example (court). a lawsuit filed in Tverskoy District Court against the Moscow Department of Housing and Public Utilities and Improvement because the Department would not provide us with information. 20 complaints to the Federal Antimonopoly Service (FAS). Example. a crime report submitted to the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation; an appeal against the refusal to open a criminal case (submitted again). What responses did we receive: The Department of Housing and Public Utilities and Improvement gave us 3 responses to our requests, but not one of them contained precise information about the specific addresses of the sites where work had been carried out, including warranty work https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_zqzp7rYzlMYmJUOGlWaEhibXM/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_zqzp7rYzlMU0NubUpMa05mNzA/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_zqzp7rYzlMTkxuU0MxeU1rYTg/edit?usp=sharing A number of prefectures never responded at all. A number of prefectures replied that no work had been carried out in their districts (example: https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_zqzp7rYzlMbmo0V1I5X0lBZmc/edit ). After a lawsuit was filed against the Central Administrative District prefecture of Moscow, that prefecture provided some information Our lawsuit in Tverskoy District Court against the Moscow Department of Housing and Public Utilities and Improvement worried the crooks at City Hall so much that it was “lost.” We filed a complaint. FAS found our complaint about the absence of 2011 contracts to be justified, and we were able to verify the information on the published government contracts https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B_zqzp7rYzlMeDdhUGJEM2dmWU0/edit Our complaints about the 2012 auctions were also found justified. Publication of the 2012 contracts was canceled. We received a refusal from the Investigative Committee of the Russian Federation to open a criminal case. As I wrote above, we are appealing that refusal under Article 125 of the Criminal Procedure Code in Tverskoy Court. Again, because the first appeal was also “lost.” The prosecutor’s office is doing everything it can to keep the complaint from being heard: they simply do not show up for hearings and do not provide documents. The last hearing was on July 8; they failed to appear again, and the next hearing was scheduled for August 14. As a result: Numerous requests for the exact addresses of the sites where work was carried out, for information on defects that should be remedied under warranty obligations, and for specific actions being taken by City Hall to fix the problems have, in essence, gone unanswered. This is what “the authorities are hiding things” looks like in its purest form. To this day, there is still no data on the exact addresses where tiles were laid in 2011, or the precise extent of the work completed on the sections listed in the technical specifications. As for the fulfillment of warranty obligations, we received substantive responses regarding only 21 of the 188 locations with tile defects that we documented. Sobyanin’s actions in reposting contracts for the exact same streets in 2012 should be investigated, among other things, as attempted fraud. However, the Investigative Committee is trying by every possible means to bury the case. L[et us recall here Markin’s statement — by the “talking uniform” Markin (Vladimir Markin, then spokesperson for Russia’s Investigative Committee) — that they do not sort corrupt officials into categories. ]({{URL_25}}) Almost all of the 2012 contracts (worth 500 million rubles) were canceled after our appeal to the antimonopoly service. As you can see, the Anti-Corruption Foundation is honestly doing the work, funded by your donations, and acting in the interests of all citizens. As you can see, Sobyanin and his gang of “tough managers” are using every lever of the state to hide the fact that they simply stole half of these “tile billions,” either by doing shoddy work or by not doing the work at all. As a resident of Moscow, as a taxpayer, and as a candidate for Mayor of Moscow, I publicly demand that acting Mayor S. S. Sobyanin immediately publish, for open public access, all information on the addresses where sidewalk tiles have been laid from the beginning of 2011 to the present, with a precise description of the boundaries of each section and copies of the completion certificates. Our volunteer штаб will inspect all of these sites and compare the real situation with the “paperwork.”
If that is not done, our campaign team will distribute a special leaflet about how Sobyanin and his “managers” stole and squandered the “tile billions” taken out of Muscovites’ pockets. Besides this public appeal, I will of course also send a formal legal one today. It would be great if you helped me spread the information from this post, because, as you can see, things are not going especially well for me with Channel One (Russia’s main state TV channel). After all, you paid for these tiles too.