No longer a serf

The director of the Museum of the History of St. Petersburg was fired

Less than a week had passed since the reburial of the remains of Empress Maria Feodorovna in the Cathedral of the Peter and Paul Fortress, when the authorities of St. Petersburg fired Boris Arakcheev from the post of director of the Museum of the History of St. Petersburg - one of the symbols of the northern capital, of which the fortress is the main and integral part. The official explanation for the dismissal is “due to termination of the employment contract.” Some employees are ready to defend their former director, others believe that the dismissal was inevitable, and still others believe that it is almost impossible to find a new director of the museum who will solve its numerous scientific and economic problems.

The government of St. Petersburg is dissatisfied with the activities of the head of the city history museum. First of all, officials are not satisfied with how the funds allocated for restoration and repair were spent - according to state controllers, the fortress could have been put in order at a faster pace. The St. Petersburg Committee for Culture, which oversees the museum, has recently been inundated with complaints from employees of this institution about the activities of the director.

In particular, five of Arakcheev's six deputies recently wrote a letter informing city officials of their boss's various miscalculations. One of them, Natalya Senko, was appointed acting director yesterday. Chairman of the city committee for culture Nikolai Burov said that the reason for the dismissal was “Boris Arakcheev’s inability to cope with the museum staff.”

In almost ten years of work as director of the museum, Arakcheev received four ordinary reprimands, one severe reprimand and one reprimand. The culmination of the scandals surrounding the fortress were the conclusions of the St. Petersburg Chamber of Control and Accounts made this year. The Chamber found that in recent years the city budget has lost about 7 million rubles from the museum’s activities. In particular, he rented out premises without the consent of the St. Petersburg City Property Management Committee, and also did not take into account income from business activities. The museum's management denied all these accusations.

Mr. Arakcheev himself does not exclude the possibility of appealing his dismissal. He says that he was offered to “promote” to the position of deputy director, and claims that most of the staff are protesting against the termination of the contract with him.

Boris Arakcheev’s subordinates claim that he has long had far from rosy relations with the city authorities, and with the scientific staff, and with museum workers in St. Petersburg. “The fortress is focused on making money, and the scientific field, which was not interesting to the management, has a very difficult time - we do not have specialists in some areas of the history of St. Petersburg, for example, on the war and the blockade,” says one of the museum workers. According to the assumption of one of the experts familiar with the state of affairs in the museum, the conflict between officials and Mr. Arakcheev may be caused by the struggle for a house located on the territory of the fortress, in which people still live. Against the backdrop of rising real estate prices, control of this property could be of interest to too many. Perhaps the former director was disturbing someone. Another explanation for what happened is a conflict over control of the Cathedral of Peter and Paul. They say that the issue of transferring it to the St. Petersburg diocese has already been practically resolved or is close to being resolved.

Dmitry ANDREEV, St. Petersburg