Vladimir Zhuravlev: Serving the governor — not serving the people?

      According to Vladimir Zhuravlev, the "appointment" to these positions places the city leadership in "complete dependence" on the regional political pool. Disobedience of the city manager "to regional directives or requirements" is punished by removal from office without any prospects for further political development. Moreover, without regard to the opinion of the citizens, who "did not elect — it’s not our place to remove."

      "There are fundamental issues that you do not defend," Vladimir Veniaminovich stated to the head of the city administration at the Duma session. "I propose amendments to the Charter, as regulated by Russian law, which will allow the return of elected positions in Kirov."

      As Zhuravlev emphasized, "then the mayor will have more opportunities to act in the interests of the residents of the regional center, rather than the regional leadership, which 'does not always deeply understand the urban issues.' He provided several obvious current examples, including '...re-naming streets, constructing cultural, sports, and educational facilities, and transportation infrastructure':

      "The regional leadership does not attend Duma sessions: neither the deputy premiers nor the ministers, which is quite convenient for 'not hearing' the deputies representing their voters' interests."

      Vladimir Zhuravlev explained that he intends to discuss his initiative with Alexander Sokolov in the hope that it will be heard by the governor.

      Interestingly, most Duma members—even among the majority of the ruling party—are willing to support Zhuravlev's initiative, as the current authorities are not respecting the traditions and customs of Vyatka. For example, moving the city celebration—one of the governor’s inventions, along with the supposedly free "re-labeling of city streets" (currently, the cost of producing signs with new names is estimated at nearly four million rubles, and this is just the beginning of budget expenditures).

      "247 times Vyatka residents humbly went to pray before the Great Ust-Kamysh chief Nikola the Wonderworker icon, and in nearly three centuries, no expenditure has matched the amount spent on Sabantuy festivities. Yes, this is not a municipal issue, and the costs are from the regional treasury, but it’s fundamentally about respecting our traditions and faith. And since these are bonds of friendship, first tidy up your own house—then invite guests," shares one deputy. He did not hide that his motivation to give "today’s comments" was Monday’s meeting with the governor, where they reported that people are "satisfied with Sabantuy."

      However, the opposition believes that Zhuravlev was "overly politically correct," as his "too tolerant statements": "fundamental issues you cannot defend," "the vertical of power can dismiss at any moment," do not reflect the real "troublesome situation," where "top-down wishes" are fulfilled as commands—saluting and saying "yes, sir":

      "We are like the participant in the saying: 'a vassal of my vassal is not my vassal,' since Vyacheslav Simaakov’s 'faithful service' to the 'Sokolov pool' excludes the most important point of his oath 'to serve the people.' I suppose Simaakov somewhere privately explained that he cannot make independent decisions because 'they pressure from above.' Although he serves regional leadership with all his zeal and deference. So Zhuravlev’s idea to 'return elections' is very relevant, or rather, three years overdue, when the essence of ‘appointees’ became apparent. Today, as never before, lies, deception, empty promises, and frankly stupid justifications are in use... And the most painful thing is that our children have become pawns (referring to children’s meals in kindergartens and schools)."

      As deputies predicted, the outcome of Vladimir Zhuravlev’s appeal to the governor is "quite predictable":

      "Most likely, it will be a categorical rejection—why does the people’s elected need to be involved if not all municipal facilities are under potential total control of 'closely connected Kastroma-linked persons'? And if approval is suddenly given, then, most likely, the way to 'elect your own person' is already known."

      Let us recall that in the "new history of Kirov," when in 1991 the chairman of the city executive committee was called the head of the city administration, ten people held the position:

      Angel Mikhayev ("beloved mayor," appointed by the President) — December 1991-November 1994

      Eugene Klevachkin (protégé of governor Vasily Desyatnikov) — December 1994-December 1996

      Vasily Kiselev (the only "people’s mayor") — December 1996-March 2006

      Gennady Plekhov (recommended by governor Nikolay Shaklein) — March 2006-January 2008

      Georgiy Machekhin (a nominee of KChSK) — February 2008-May 2011

      Dmitry Drany (protégé of Vladimir Bykov, resigned early) — May 2011-December 2014

      Alexander Pereskokov (recommended by Vladimir Bykov, at the time of appointment—convicted of "embezzlement" in 1996) — December 2014-October 2017

      Ilya Shulgin (protégé of Igor Vasilyev, likely his nephew, resigned early, later convicted) — October 2017-January 2020

      Dmitry Osipov (recommended by Igor Vasilyev, dismissed early by Alexander Sokolov) — June 2020-August 2022

      Vyacheslav Simaakov (appointed by Alexander Sokolov) — October 2022–present