Oleksandr Popov, head of the Kyiv City State Administration, is lucky enough to have had “good” predessors. Even if Popov showed no activity at all, he would still stand out against the backdrop of the previous mayor’s “young team.” Yet the current administration head is not taking advantage of this “privilege” and – we must admit this – has done very much over the 18 months in office. The Kyiv Development Strategy until 2025 has been adopted. What is more, this question was put to a public debate, and The Day’s journalists, who participated in the sessions of a special press club, can confirm that the developers really took public opinion into account. The latest document to come up for discussion in Kyiv is the draft General Development Plan.
Clearly, the chief administrator’s political engagements prevent Kyivites from seeing real facts. On the other hand, there have always been and will be a lot of questions to the city head. Having invited Oleksandr Popov to the editorial office, The Day asked him the most topical questions, especially about his vision of Kyiv in the future.
Larysa IVSHYNA: “We are glad to receive you here, and I would like to begin the interview with the well-known, or, taking into account the latest developments, the notorious Vasyl Stus Park. There is a good view of it from the windows of the room we are in. Our newspaper would like to plant some trees here in the spring. And the more land we manage to plant with trees (naturally, with support from the Kyiv City State Administration), the fewer temptations there will be to spoil this place.”
Oleksandr POPOV: “The decision about the Vasyl Stus Park is an example of erroneous, if not criminal, resolutions passed by the Kyiv City Council contrary to the interests of the Kyiv public. I believe our joint project with Den will help resolve this problem. We are already taking legal action to this end. I am going to focus on this problem again in the nearest future. Today, many areas are under study as to whether there are legal grounds for the Kyiv city commune to regain them as property. It is undoubtedly very difficult, in legal terms, to do so.”
L.I.: “What is the size of these areas?”
O.P.: “We came to a conclusion after an analysis that it is about 3,200 hectares of land that belongs to the Nature Conservation Fund. We have already regained 1,700 hectares. The work is going on. We are working to regain assets, not only land. Incidentally, when we came to power, our first step was to regain Kyiv’s strategically vital companies dealing with water, power and gas supply, and civil construction. We solved these problems more than a year ago, but the problem of real estate is still unresolved. We have already managed to return 30,000 square meters to the Kyiv commune by legal action and thanks to support from the law-enforcement bodies. We are planning to regain more.”
L.I.: “Mr. Popov, the Kyivites still have to pay twice – for the second time to buy the object from a new owner. I think in general that all these structures are monuments to corruption. We, Kyivites, are looking at this and thinking: when will all this be over?”
O.P.: “Well, we all have some legacy – and it is full of problems. But what I can give you as a positive example (although it is a disputable view) is the building on Bohdan Khmelnytsky Street near the Teatralna metro station. The builders were guided by resolutions and permissions that were in line with the law. We had to solve the problem on the principles of social responsibility of business. The sponsors bought out the premises and then transferred them to the commune as a place for the Museum of Kyiv. We are planning to open it on the eve of Kyiv Day. Stories of this kind also have a political aspect. To tackle problems, the city authorities need support from the Kyivites. We should shape public opinion and furnish people with more information. And we are trying to do so. For example, on Mondays I appear for one and a half hours live on the Kyiv TRK channel. I must say this is not so simple, for it takes very much time and energy.”
L.I.: “But you have loved the press since you worked with the former mayor. Do you think you would have projected your current image had it not been for the press? Or would you feel easier if nobody were asking you anything?”
O.P.: “No, I think none of the officials or public figures will have positive prospects in the current conditions unless the mass media do their work honestly.”
L.I.: “When we walk down the city streets, we see no little bakeries or tailor shops which make up the face of Europe. All we can see is huge slag stone structures all around. What is your idea of encouraging the Kyiv middle class?”
O.P.: “It’s a difficult question. The crucial point here is an economy that allows people to gain incomes. The people’s incomes in turn form demand for business. The authorities’ job is to create an atmosphere that would let the economy develop. What is to be done in Kyiv? Strategically, there are both medium- and high-profile projects. We intend to bring into play the mechanisms of their implementation as soon as the next year. This is about big, medium, and small-scale businesses, deregulation, simplified administrative procedures, and many other things.”
L.I.: “Are there any signs that this not only should be but is there?”
O.P.: “We have already opened the City Licensing Center. This kind of centers will soon appear in every district. This system will begin to work to capacity on January 1, when a relevant law comes into force. This requires a comprehensive approach. We know how to carry out this project. The prime requirement is that Kyiv should get as soon as possible the maximum number of investment projects that will allow replacing budgetary investments, many of which are intended for Euro-2012, with private ones.”
L.I.: “But private investments are a question of trust. How can we help investors to show trust?”
O.P.: “There can be nothing new in this. There should be stability in politics and certain priorities. Naturally, absence of corruption is of paramount importance. The solution of this problem depends not only on the efficiency of law-enforcement bodies. It depends, above all, on the introduction of simplified procedures that are free of bureaucratic arbitrariness. For instance, the City Administration is going to carry out the Electronic Government project in the nearest future. This will allow simplifying a lot of processes and making decisions in a short time as well as free people of being dependent on the biased viewpoint of a certain bureaucrat.”
Maria TOMAK: “Is the e-government project a long-term or a short-term prospect?”
O.P.: “We are now working with consultants, studying world experience, and, what is more, have adopted a program to this effect. We will begin to apply electronic management as soon as this year. It is a comprehensive project that we hope to fully implement in 2013 at the latest.”
M.T.: “You have experience of working at the regional level. Do you think it is realistic to introduce e-government in the Ukrainian regions?”
O.P.: “It is realistic. Moreover, we must do this. There can be no up-to-date and effective management without electronic government. I admit that the present-day management system is over-bureaucratized at all levels. The government has already done very much to combat this, but we will continue to lag behind unless we take up the modern forms of immediately responding to the needs of individuals, including businesspeople. When I was on an official visit to Kyoto, we were shown, among other things, the electronic system of city management. I was shocked to learn that they had begun to operate it 30 years before! This is the answer to the question why we do not live the way they do. We are awfully behind Japan even in management techniques, not to mention the economy and industrial technologies. I still believe this will not last forever.”
Alla DUBROVYK: “What are the prospects of the program to dismantle small architectural objects in the capital? Although these objects disfigure the city, they are, on the other hand, one of the sectors that keep small- and medium-scale businesses afloat in Kyiv. What alternatives are the local authorities going to create for these entrepreneurs?”
O.P.: “It is also a very difficult question. We are sure to dismantle the objects that hinder the city’s normal life, i.e., the objects situated near subway station entrances, at public transport stops, or in the underpasses, as well as those in an emergency condition. But others can be left intact provided they have been renovated and make regular payments to the city budget. Now a huge part of this businesses is the gray area and is, unfortunately, lining the pockets of some corrupt officials and even police officers. The entrepreneurs themselves admit this in private. But they rarely agree to cooperate with law-enforcers. So it is not easy to catch a briber red-handed. Still, we are not going to put up with corruption. We will try to ensure that regulations, licensing and inspection procedures for small-size and medium businesses be as transparent and stable as possible. We have already drawn up the relevant standard-setting instruments and will soon get them approved at a Kyiv City Council session. We will keep business informed about our policies. I think there will be a better situation in the relationship between the government and business in a two or three months’ time, particularly, as far as the attitude of businesspeople to their social commitments, including the formation of the city budget, is concerned. We have studied the situation and found that almost 80 percent of the so-called small architectural objects are controlled by a few owners. Then we held several meetings with the owners and the others who work in this sector. If they agree to our proposal that they work openly and do not violate the law, public hygiene and safety standards, and work in the interests of the Kyivites, the latter and the authorities will take a more favorable attitude to this segment of business. But I am sure the present-day small architectural objects will sink into oblivion in a few years’ time. They will be replaced either by more civilized retail outlets or by other personal-service projects that we are going to offer. We are trying to civilize the relationship between the authorities, city residents, and business. Incidentally, we are finishing drawing up the so-called street certificates that set out housing development requirements for every street in Kyiv.”
L.I.: “Architecture is one of our pet subjects. Somewhere in 2004, a certain structure on the Dnipro hill slopes was one of the most talked-about issues. Then all this blew over, and other structures cropped up next to this mammoth pyramid. And where were all those who used to say that Kyiv’s landscape had a great historical value? In reality, all these hills – the Bald Mountain, Shchekavytsia, Khorevytsia – should draw the attention of philosophers, culture researchers, and historians, as well as the city administration. But we can see that construction is still going on. What will you say to this?”
O.P.: “This issue is connected with the shady schemes that have worked in the capital before. The illegal decisions made at the time bear the signatures of architects, land managers, the City Council, the Ministry of Civil Construction… Those decisions, made well before our team came to the City Administration, are being fulfilled within the framework of the current law. For this reason, what we should be discussing today is how to avoid this kind of situations in the future. As for specific objects, each case requires a special approach. One must obey the law. I brought highly-skilled lawyers to the City Administration. We are doing our level best to restore the Kyivites’ rights in an exclusively lawful way. As the City Administration head, I cannot order swinging a wrecking ball at or setting a bulldozer on an object or its owners. Yet, frankly speaking, I sometimes feel like doing so.”
L.I.: “But you know that many are expecting this very thing. Everybody wonders who will dare do this…”
O.P.: “It may be so. But there is such thing as the law, and we must work in its framework. Lawlessness is very dangerous – even when it is done for a good cause.”
A.D.: “Incidentally, Mykola Zlochevsky, Minister for the Environment, recently put forward a plan of preserving nature-conservation territories and reserves, which also envisages demolition of the structures that were illegally built in these areas. Are you going to support this initiative of the minister?”
O.P.: “I will support him willingly. All the more so that I have certain experience: I’ve always been demolishing or filling up something in the last while… To be more exact, it is being done by public utility facilities on my instructions. This work is very troublesome, full of conflicts, and sometimes even dangerous, but it should be done.”
A. D.: “It is also costly. I mean that we have to pay twice…”
O.P.: “This may happen. But, in most cases, we do our best to make builders offset the consequences of illegal activity at their own expense. For example, we recently filled up a foundation pit in Darnytsia, which was dug out seven years ago.”
L.I.: “And what is the most scandalous construction project today?”
O.P.: “I think the one on Honchar Street. We have sued the builders and urged them to stop the construction. They did not believe in the seriousness of our intentions. But prosecutors are on our side. We are sure to stop the construction and see what they have already put up and how this has affected St. Sophia’s Cathedral. I fully share the opinion of civic organizations and the media that this barbarity must be stopped. Building a highrise in a sanctuary is just… Words fail me.”
L.I.: “This means it is too early to speak about a super-centralized government. Everybody hoped that the vertical chain of command would stem the tide of illegal seizures. But this proved insufficient.”
O.P.: “Sufficient and insufficient at the same time. In the 18 months of my service at the City Administration, we have not even a single decision that resulted in a conflict. The truth is we have to overcome, step by step, the grave legacy that we inherited. But, not to revert to old practices, we must, first of all, broaden the powers of Kyiv society itself, including supervising all the branches of power.”
Olha RESHETYLOVA: “About the legacy… As far as I know, you intend to have the Master Plan, now being drawn up, approved by the Cabinet. Do you hope this will help fulfill the Master Plan irrespective of whether or not you will stay on in power?”
O.P.: “Yes, we are striving to formulate the Kyiv development strategy in the shape of a Cabinet resolution. It is easy to explain. It will always be tempting to alter the plans to serve the interests of a certain business or government. But if you try to challenge a Cabinet resolution, you will have to haunt the threshold of many offices. For example, I was shocked to learn that the mayor of Washington and his municipal colleagues have sometimes to picket Congress to defend the residents’ rights. It is Congress that forms the budget of Washington and allots land. You will see no too high buildings there, but the system is very much bureaucratized over there… In other words, there should be a ‘check’ – and more than one. The Master Plan we are going to adopt should have a chapter that lays down in no uncertain terms the inviolability of our architectural and cultural heritage. The latter will be under special care. There has not been a chapter like this in the Master Plan before. We are now putting the finishing touches to it in our draft.”
L.I.: “I can understand the logic of managers. I’ve heard constantly, since the early 1990s, that the economy comes first. But we still missed a historic moment. When the Soviet Union broke up, the Baltic countries pulled up stakes, so to speak, and rushed to Europe and NATO. Naturally, the Ukrainian situation was far more complicated, but not to the extent that there has been no de-communization in the past 20 years. Now again, monuments to Stalin and Lenin…”
O.P.: “Do you agree that if we go out on the street now and try to poll the people, especially old-age pensioners, we will find many who are taking the opposite view?”
L.I.: “I do, but I am seeking out my allies in the intellectual sectors of society. I think that, in the time of doubts, one must look for a ‘prime-mover group’ which will be able to shape a public opinion that will support the government with rational perception. When we are speaking of the necessity to name a Kyiv street after James Mace, we are doing so not because he worked at The Day for eight years but because he did very much for the Ukrainians. The same applies to Professor Serhii Krymsky who loved Kyiv so much and made such a contribution to re-conceptualizing the phenomenon of St. Sophia of Kyiv. If we continue the ‘vampiric’ tradition of Postyshev streets and wait for ample supplies of sausage, we will be finally left behind all the global processes.”
O.P.: “My position coincides with yours in principle and strategy, but it is different in terms of tactics. Let us form and support together what you call a ‘prime-mover group.’ Let us make a joint effort to shape public opinion. Then people will support us, and we will effect changes together with, not contrary to, them. History teaches that any attempts ‘to make people happy’ by force come to a bad end. I am against ‘making happy’ by force. We should seek the topics that can rally society together.”
L.I.: “We can see that you are a person of compromise, which is a big plus in the conditions of today’s Kyiv. And, you know, I also come from the Soviet past. And I partly understand why you are saying so. But now, apart from anything else, there is a global wave rolling on us. There is a thousands-year-old town of Bilohorodka not far from Kyiv. Maybe, its history is more ancient than that of Kyiv. And what do we see in Bilohorodka? ‘Happy Land,’ ‘Green Mountains…’ And where will Ukraine be? Between Postyshev and ‘Happy Land’? It is a question to both local and central authorities. Even Russia regained its memory long ago: they have a powerful TV channel, Culture, and five historical channels. History is a tremendous resource for us. But very few are aware of this.”
O.P.: “I absolutely agree with you here. We should educate the younger generation and ourselves on the basis of history and spiritual traditions. This needs no debate.”
L.I.: “And what decisions are to be made with due account of this?”
O.P.: “As for spirituality, it is not a question of one conversation and one day – it concerns practically all spheres of life, including religion. Recently I had a meeting with church leaders, and we came to terms about pursuing a policy in a proper key. Incidentally, they suggest instituting an advisory body which will function at the City Administration on a fulltime basis. There are some common human values which we must adhere to and abide by. As for Bilohorodka, it is the territory of Kyiv oblast, not the city of Kyiv. As a citizen of Ukraine, I share your preoccupation. But, as an official, I am supposed to work exclusively within the area of my jurisdiction. I wish God would give me enough strength to tackle Kyiv problems.”
L.I.: “One should exercise legislative initiative. The point is that, in reality, such places bear a colossal aura. They should be protected by the law. I don’t think there is any other European capital with such a huge number of inscriptions in foreign languages as Kyiv.”
O.P.: “I agree that these problems must be addressed. I am certain to find time for this.”
L.I.: “There are fantastic public figures in Kyiv: some are saving trees, others the Trukhaniv Island, still others a historical structure. Do you think they are your allies?”
O.P.: “I am very grateful to them. The vision of the Kyiv executive authorities coincides with theirs. Moreover, we have already achieved some common successes – for instance, in solving the problems of managing land resources, including the Kyiv islands. The question is: what’s next? How can a Kyivite relax today in the Hydropark or on the Trukhaniv Island? They are full of unsanitary conditions and lack recreational facilities. We must also focus on this and do our best to develop these areas. Instead of building houses there, we should improve the beaches, playgrounds, and sport sites. This is a topic, where the authorities and the territorial commune should seek understanding and cooperation. We are using today the experience of architects and city builders in various countries to find the best idea. Once we draw up proposals, we will put them to a Kyiv-wide debate.”
