Translated material
House fig
Muscovites intend to fight against fictitious HOAs
Muscovites want to manage their own housing. Residents of condominiums in the capital flooded parliamentary reception offices and the mayor's office with complaints. Citizens accuse employees of the state institution “Engineering Services” (GUIS) of the city of Moscow of falsifying voting results when choosing the method of management and governing bodies of the HOA. Moreover, the scandal that began last spring, when many city residents began to notice that homeowners’ associations were being created in their buildings without the actual participation of residents, is apparently only gaining momentum.At the end of last week, representatives of initiative groups of citizens from almost all districts of the city gathered in the Moscow City Duma, on the initiative of the Communist Party faction. Residents demanded the abolition of the compulsory procedure for the formation of house self-government and stated that they intended to seek in court the liquidation of the managers imposed on them.
According to the discussion participants, the three-year city program for the support and development of HOAs, adopted in 2007 by Moscow government decree No. 398-PP, in practice does not give residents “neither material nor psychological incentives to organize an HOA.”
Townspeople argue that the government decree, on the contrary, gives officials an excuse to abuse power. The document, in particular, provides for the allocation of budget funds for the creation of HOAs. According to a resolution in 2007, for example, about 200 million rubles were allocated for these purposes. In addition, management organizations are guaranteed the allocation of non-residential premises in buildings under their jurisdiction “on a priority basis without tendering and at minimum rental rates.” Thus, Muscovites believe that representatives of the interests of city authorities as owners are not interested in residents participating in the management of common property.
The complaints of representatives of citizen initiative groups gathered in the Moscow City Duma were identical. According to social activists, residents learn about the creation of a homeowners’ association in their building after the fact and completely by accident. At the same time, the documents submitted for the establishment of the HOA contain their signatures. The founders of management companies, as a rule, are representatives of the GUIS of the districts or third parties who do not even live in the houses belonging to this partnership. For example, according to representatives of the initiative group of residents of the Teply Stan district, the head of the local engineering service headed partnerships in 33 houses at once.
In addition, the majority of the HOA board members (two thirds) are representatives of the city executive branch. “In the case of the creation of HOAs directly by citizens, they are faced with opposition in obtaining information, documentation and, in general, in the ability to ensure the management of their housing,” says the official resolution of the round table participants in the Moscow City Duma. Townspeople insist on abolishing HOAs created without the participation of residents, and limiting the role of officials in the formation of homeowners' associations.
However, the mayor's office, apparently, believes that the participation of citizens in the formation of building management bodies consists of tacit agreement with the city's decisions. At least, as Vitaly Akimkin, head of the department for coordinating the activities of HOAs and organizing self-government in apartment buildings of the Department of Housing and Communal Services and Public Improvement, said at a meeting with residents, those gathered did not at all present an objective picture of the city’s housing sector.
“The owners who are negative towards the idea of self-government have gathered here,” said Mr. Akimkin. In three years, according to the management, HOAs have been created in more than 9 thousand condominiums. “Not everything is so negative in Moscow,” the official is sure. According to Vitaly Akimkin, the mayor's office did receive complaints, but over the course of a year there were a little more than 300 such complaints. According to Mr. Akimkin, as a result of checking these complaints, “insufficient targeted information work with the population and non-compliance with the deadlines for notifying” residents about general meetings were revealed.
As for the personal signatures of citizens on the constituent documents of the HOA, their authenticity, according to the official, can only be determined in court. According to representatives of the mayor's office, residents could simply refuse the previously signed signature under the influence of negative neighbors.
As Andrei Chechin, deputy head of the State Institution “Engineering Services” of Moscow, told Vremya Novostei, district GUISs only carry out the order of a higher executive body - the district government. “By decree of the Moscow government, GUISs are entrusted with the functions of representing the interests of the city as the owner. And the GUIS employee is forced to obey, otherwise he will be fired,” said Mr. Chechin. According to him, the board of the HOA includes employees of engineering services exclusively as representatives of another owner of both residential and non-residential premises in apartment buildings - the mayor's office. Mr. Chechin, apparently, considers the passivity of the residents to be the cause of the social tension that has arisen. “Until people really start holding meetings and are interested in doing this, they will be voted for. But when they come out, hold meetings and choose a form of management, then no one else will fit into this house,” said a representative of the State Institution “Engineering Services”.