Sergey Serezleev. “We will not offend writers

Original of this material
© "Top Secret", 07/27/2017, Photo: via InterPress.Ru

The muddy waters of St. Petersburg outdoor advertising

Sofia Bardina

In St. Petersburg, scandals surrounding the redistribution of the outdoor advertising market continue unabated. Since 2013, all outdoor advertising in the Northern capital has been “illegal” - for four years the city authorities have not been able to hold a new competition for outdoor advertising. In June 2017, the competition was finally announced, and new scandals immediately broke out. This market is supervised by the chairman of the city Committee for Press and Media Relations Sergey Serezleev. The “achievements” of the official and the St. Petersburg State Unitary Enterprise “City Advertising Placement Center” (St. Petersburg State Unitary Enterprise “SCRR”) subordinate to him, in my opinion, can become the subject of close study by the Chamber of Control and Accounts and the city prosecutor’s office.

"Contractual" scheme

For those uninitiated in the epic of the St. Petersburg outdoor advertising market, I will briefly describe the history of recent years. In 2013, most outdoor advertising operators' contracts with the city for the placement of advertising media expired. The city had to hold a new competition. But the Press Committee responsible for this and its current head Sergei Serezleev (then still in the role of deputy chairman in charge of the advertising market) prepared the outdoor advertising placement scheme and competition documentation in such a way that they caused a lot of scandals and claims from a variety of regulatory authorities. As a result, the Office of the Federal Antimonopoly Service canceled the competition in 2014. For three years, the authorities were unable to organize a new competition. Or they didn't want to. As has been written more than once in the media, the work of all operators outside of contractual relations plays into the hands of those who control this work. The authority to conclude contracts with businesses for the placement of outdoor advertising has been transferred to the State Unitary Enterprise “City Advertising Center”. It is completely controlled by the Press Committee and its chairman. After the old contracts with advertisers expired and no new ones appeared, the committee began filing lawsuits en masse for the dismantling of advertising structures. The courts agreed and issued orders for demolition.

As a result, city authorities were able to legally demolish almost any advertising structure in St. Petersburg at any time. An excellent way, let’s say, of correction and weeding of the market. As they say, not everyone survived. Famous in the past to the Thaler company, Clear Chanell were quickly and cheaply sold.

It was explained to the rest of the market participants that they could continue to work according to a peculiar scheme: the State Center for Reconstruction and Resource Development issues claims to illegal operators for unjust enrichment, thus they will pay for the use of city property. Of course, everything happened against the backdrop of constant talk that a new competition was about to be announced. And so on for three years.

“Unjust enrichment” is collected from illegal operators, of course, in a claim format. But who and how calculated how much to charge? Did anyone care about the interests of the city treasury? It seems that this was done in a very arbitrary order. Throughout the three years, many operators tried to ask to change rates, simply refuse to pay, and disputed the amounts charged in court. And some were successful. Moreover, it is worth looking at the court materials of the proceedings between the SCRR and market participants specifically on “illegal enrichment.” The courts sometimes rejected the SCRR's claims, and if they satisfied them, they often significantly reduced the required amount.

That is, it turns out that there is no reinforced concrete methodology for calculating how much money the budget should receive from the market, clearly stated in official documents? Judging by the same court decisions, the calculations of the committee and the City Advertising Center are based on Decree No. 39-r on changes in fees for the use of city facilities and territories for the purpose of placing outdoor advertising and information, which was adopted... November 23, 2007. 10 years ago! In 2010 - 2011, some amendments were made to this document, and that’s all since then. During this time, the country has changed, the economy... well, we know where our economy is now. Exchange rates, inflation, changes in the advertising market - it was as if nothing had changed.

Is it really true that in all these years, neither the Chairman of the Press Committee nor the State Center for Reconstruction and Research have bothered to assess the changes in the economics of the advertising market?

There are suspicions that they did evaluate it, but they were not very happy with the result. This version is indirectly supported by documents from a competition for placement that did not take place in 2014. Having announced the competition by its order, the Committee for Press and Media Relations published, among other things, an estimate of the cost of the right to place advertising structures in the city. This cost is higher than the amounts charged for “unjust enrichment” and which were calculated according to 2007 patterns.

The cost of placing structures from the 2014 competition documents is the result of the work of an independent evaluation commission. These data have been officially published. That is, starting from 2014, the State Center for Reconstruction and Responsibility, when demanding reimbursements from operators, should have been guided by these calculations and charged at an increased cost? But this was not done. Considering that each demand amounts to millions of rubles, one can only guess how much the city budget has lost in more than three years.

I have a suspicion that the assessment carried out in 2014 was not used to replenish the budget at all, but to solve some other problems.

It’s no secret: a market that is not regulated by contractual relations is an easy victim for the officials supervising it. It turns out that the basis for the “wildness” of the outdoor advertising market turned out to be very “incomprehensible” schemes for receiving budget money by the city Press Committee and the City Advertising Center.

82% reward

In July 2017, deputy of the St. Petersburg Legislative Assembly Alexey Kovalev addressed the Chamber of Control and Accounts (CAC) with a letter, pointing out the opacity of financing of the State Unitary Enterprise “State Center for Reconstruction and Reproduction”, the budget of which, after the appointment of Sergei Serezleev as head of the Press Committee, almost doubled. A very remarkable scheme of work of the State Unitary Enterprise “State Center for Reconstruction and Reconstruction” has become public.

State Unitary Enterprise "State Center for Reconstruction and Restoration" was empowered to enter into agreements with market participants for the placement of outdoor advertising in the city. These powers were given to him by an assignment agreement dated 1995, concluded with the City Property Management Committee (now renamed KIO - Property Relations Committee). The City Advertising Center must transfer funds received from advertising operators to the budget. To cover the costs arising in the course of this work, the State Center for Reconstruction and Research receives a remuneration - a percentage of the amount collected in the budget. This is already very doubtful from the point of view of the law. The amount of this remuneration is determined by the Press Committee... in agreement with the Finance Committee. But, as the OFAS established this year, Serezleev’s department has been doing this for a long time without any approval. Until 2014, no more than 12% of the money collected was returned to the State Center for Regional Development. With the appointment of Sergei Serezleev as chairman of the Press Committee, everything changed. Then we follow every step.

Step one. The State Center for Reconstruction and Reconstruction stopped doing what it was entrusted with: concluding contracts. The old ones are expired, and it is impossible to conclude new ones - the competition did not take place. That is, formally the City Advertising Center has ceased to perform the work for which it is entitled to remuneration.

Step two. The Press Committee and SRRR never held the competition. The operators went underground. Instead of a complex, but easily calculated scheme - an agreement with the operator, clear money into the budget, from the budget - a percentage of what was collected in the State Center for Reconstruction and Development - they built a complex new combination. SCRR collects money for “illegal enrichment.” It’s difficult to calculate exactly how much - the amounts are constantly changing, operators challenge them in the courts, negotiate changes, and advertising structures are regularly demolished.

Step three. In 2015, the percentage of remuneration of the State Center for Reconstruction and Research increases to 20%, in 2016 - to 21%. According to the SRRR itself, in 2014 the remuneration amounted to 121 million rubles, in 2015 - already 195 million rubles, and in the first quarter of 2016 - 52.5 million. (That is, perhaps more than 200 million rubles accumulate in a year.)

According to Mr. Serezleev, this is understandable, since the SCRR’s costs have increased - active work has begun on dismantling advertising structures. This is a particularly clever trick. When the contracts expired, the operators, according to the contract, had to dismantle their structures themselves. But they were told: there is no need to dismantle it - work for now, wait for a new competition and pay after the fact. At the same time, the SCRR received a court order to dismantle all advertising structures. And in recent years, in no particular order, the Press Committee and the State Center for Reconstruction and Reconstruction have been demolishing advertising media here and there. It is for these works, which the St. Petersburg Press Committee and the State Unitary Enterprise “City Advertising Center” invent for themselves, that Sergei Serezleev arranges the remuneration for the State Unitary Enterprise. Market operators were all surprised by the spontaneity, chaos and lack of motivation of the dismantlings. And, it seems, everything is simple: the more he demolished, the more he compensated from the budget.

Against the backdrop of lack of control, in the fourth quarter of 2014, the chairman of the committee, Sergei Serezleev, set the amount of remuneration for the State Center for Regional Development in the amount of... 82% of the funds received. Yuri Burunov, who then held the position of director of the State Center for Regional Development, even wrote to Mr. Serezleev that he could not use this money. Well, he can’t dismantle that much: the owners of the structures are resisting, the work is going slowly - give 18%, we won’t be able to cope with any more. In the spring of 2015, Yuri Burunov left his post. The State Center for Reconstruction and Development no longer complained about its inability to absorb budgets.

But the most remarkable thing is that in the agreement between the State Center for Reconstruction and Development and the Property Committee there is not a word about dismantling. According to lawyers, this means that the SCRR cannot receive remuneration for this - neither under the contract, nor under the current legislation. Accordingly, the chairman of the Press Committee does not have the right to direct budget money to pay for work that has not been agreed upon by anyone.

Alexey Kovalev also recalled that, in fact, the Press Committee dismantles advertising media with the help of another institution - the State Treasury Institution “City Advertising and Information” (GKU “GRI”), which also receives money from the budget. It is not clear how the two organizations divide powers between themselves, which means that “double payment cannot be ruled out.” Sergey Serezleev, commenting on this claim, brushed it aside - they say that powers between organizations are distributed in accordance with Art. 19 of the Federal Law “On Advertising”. The article is long, it’s difficult to read, but there’s definitely not a word about the powers of the State Center for Reconstruction and Research and State Examinations.

In fact, the main difference between the GKU “GRI” is that it is accountable to the St. Petersburg Finance Committee, receives less money, and all of it is reflected in the budget. You won't turn around.

But this is not the end. As Alexey Kovalev points out, the State Center for Reconstruction and Reconstruction requires operators to pay for dismantling. “In court, the State Center for Regional Development recovers from operators costs that may already be covered from the budget of St. Petersburg. At the same time, it remains unclear whether these funds are transferred to the budget or remain at the disposal of the leadership of the SCRR,” the deputy’s letter says.

It seems to me that the issue is not at all about the altruism of the “big guys”. I don’t think they placed more “social” ads than necessary, not being sure that they would later receive money through lawsuits for placing “free social” ads at a high commercial cost.

Against this background, the confusion with T-shaped shields, for example, seems like a trifle. These billboards have four advertising surfaces. While official contracts were in force, operators owning such billboards were obliged to give one of the parties free of charge for social advertising. There are no contracts for a long time, and operators “sculpt” commercial advertising on all four sides, but... the budget is still paid for three. It is surprising that Sergei Serezleev, with his more than 10 years of experience in the Press Committee of the St. Petersburg Administration, for some reason does not notice this “incident”.

As a result, as many in the market say, for several years now individual operators have been able to underpay millions of rubles per month to the city budget. This allows them to compensate for losses when demand for advertising falls. Unsaleable places are covered with a “product” for which not only do you not have to pay into the budget, but you can later receive compensation.

To summarize, we can conclude: the city Press Committee is manipulating the billion-dollar outdoor advertising market. The finance and financial control committees are deprived of information about the amounts that outdoor advertising operators must pay to the city budget. They do not know the size of discounts for placing social advertising, nor the reasons for providing such discounts. How much budget money is “lost” when passing through the chain “outdoor advertising operator - St. Petersburg State Unitary Enterprise “State Center for Regional Development” - committee - budget”? Nobody can say this for sure.

Probably, observing the wave of appeals to the Federal Antimonopoly Service, the prosecutor's office of St. Petersburg, law enforcement agencies and the courts in his address and understanding the scale of the accumulated “difficulties”, the head of the committee agreed with the city leadership on the smooth reorganization of the State Unitary Enterprise “GTSRR” into the State Public Institution “GTSRR”. In my opinion, changing the format will not fundamentally solve the accumulated problems of the advertising market, but it will allow us to start financial activities “from scratch.” In the wake of the reorganization, no one will scrupulously check the financial activities of the enterprise. And will it be possible to start all over again?

The chairmen of the culture and press committees, Konstantin Sukhenko and Sergei Serezleev, respectively, may lose their positions in late December or early January. Knowledgeable people assure this lack of spirituality. It is alleged that the city government is preparing large-scale changes in several city committees at once. In particular, we are talking about the property relations committee.

The possible departure from his position of Sergei Serezleev is associated with his conflicts with the Putintsev family. Grigory Putintsev heads the City Advertising Center and is also an adviser to the governor on motorsports. His son Dmitry Putintsev received the position of adviser to the governor a few days ago. In the past, he worked in the Office of the Presidential Administration. Both Grigory Putintsev and Dmitry Putintsev are named among possible contenders for the post of chairman of the press committee. However, Dmitry is still more likely, since Grigory Putintsev will soon turn 65 years old.

Also among the contenders for the position of Sergei Serezleev is Andrei Shamray. In July 2016, after three years of work, he left the post of general director of Petrocenter, which is the founder and publisher of the official media “Petersburg Diary” and “Petersburg Photo Chronicle”. Shamray now heads the St. Petersburg branch of MediaSoyuz.

It should be noted that Sergey Serezleev has been heading the press committee on a permanent basis since January 2015. Since August 2014 he has been “acting” chairman Before that, he headed the board of directors of OJSC City Agency for Television and Radio Broadcasting (GATR). And in 2011, he held the position of “acting” for six months. Chairman of the Press Committee. Serezleev came to work at Smolny in 2004.

Konstantin Sukhenko is also predicted to resign from the post of Chairman of the Culture Committee. Which may be caused by the insufficiently clear cultural policy of Smolny. However, according to some information, Sukhenko may be appointed head of one of the districts of St. Petersburg. Which is formally a demotion, but in practice it can mean a transition to a more interesting job that requires a greater level of independence.

Konstantin Sukhenko can be replaced by the first deputy chairman of the cultural committee, Alexander Voronko, or the general director of Petersburg Concert, Ekaterina Artyushkina.

Let us remind you that Konstantin Sukhenko has been heading the Culture Committee since February 2015. It is believed that he received this position “as a reward” for participating in the 2014 gubernatorial elections from the Liberal Democratic Party as a spoiler for Georgy Poltavchenko. In the last convocation of the Legislative Assembly, until 2015, Konstantin Sukhenko headed the Budget and Financial Committee of the city parliament. Sukhenko has been a deputy of the Legislative Assembly since 2000.

Previously, Lack of Spirituality was written about the renewed presence in Smolny of Vice-Governor Vladimir Kirillov, who oversees the activities of the Culture Committee.

However, changes after the New Year may affect other committees. For example, the property relations committee, according to rumors, will lose its authority to conclude transactions with land plots and non-residential facilities. This will subsequently be dealt with by the State Inspectorate for Control over the Use of Real Estate.

Causes:

The New Year is a traditional time for making changes to the structure of the work of executive authorities. Perhaps Smolny will face more changes than those described above.

28.11.2014

Interview with acting Chairman of the Committee on Press and Interaction with the Media of the Government of St. Petersburg Sergei Serezleev.

– Sergey Grigorievich, what was this year like for you?

– Summing up the preliminary results of the Year of Culture, we can say that our writers were not ignored. The “Writer's House”, under the patronage of the government of St. Petersburg, was actively working, where comfortable conditions were created for our writing community. We held many significant cultural events together. I admit, it is somewhat awkward for me to assess the work of the committee, but let me give some facts.

The Press Committee actively supports many book publishing projects. This year, more than 20 million rubles have been allocated for them from the city budget. At the same time, the decision to issue subsidies is made not by the Press Committee, but by the Publishing Council, which, along with famous writers, also includes book publishing professionals.

We definitely take into account the opinions of the Publishing Council when allocating subsidies. It should also be noted that the main writers' unions themselves selected the most significant manuscripts and offered them for consideration. We also, as an experiment, included in a special block series of 10 books the works of our most famous and recognizable writers about St. Petersburg in order to promote their books to readers.

Professionally made offers, competent logistics and, if you like, advertising of these books with relatively small circulations made it possible to arouse significant reader interest in them.

Also, a few months ago, with our assistance, agreements were signed between writers' unions and a book distribution company. It's no secret that nowadays it is very difficult for a writer to make his book available to many. Today our writers have such an opportunity.

In December of this year, we plan to begin publishing books in the new book project “Writers at War. Writers about war." Within its framework and in the light of preparations for the celebration of the Great Victory, we want, so to speak, to “bring generations closer together,” i.e. try to “connect” writers of the older generation and current young writers writing about the war.

We are doing all these projects now with an eye to the upcoming, X-anniversary International Book Fair, which will take place in May next year. This year we held the IX Salon, making the Winter Stadium, so to speak, a meeting place for writers and readers. We tried to move away from “just selling books”; We actively collaborated with the Culture Committee, and together we managed to make this salon a cultural phenomenon. Along Kharms Street, visitors found themselves in open areas where our poets read poetry. We revived book sales, where anyone could sell their books. At first, not everyone even believed that there could be bookstores, and for the first two days there were few people in these “huts.” And then people tried this “book dish”, the information spread, and people started coming.

Another innovation of this salon was the placement of portraits and titles of books of our writers on city outdoor advertising stands. And advertising, you see, is a powerful information resource.

And, of course, free entry to all salon events.

As a result, more than 170,000 visitors. The “Unknown Petersburg” competition that we hold on the initiative of Governor G. S. Poltavchenko together with our writers also deserves mention.

In 2013, 1,600 applications were sent to this competition, and this year there are already more than 2,000. The Publishing Council will have to roll up its sleeves. It should be noted that the winners of the competition have already been rewarded (including financially), and works by non-members of writers' unions will be included in the book being prepared for publication. We believe that we are finishing the Year of Culture with dignity.

– Do you intend to continue this practice next year?

- Undoubtedly. In 2015, we plan to allocate at least 20 million rubles for book publishing projects. Writers already know about this and are preparing manuscripts for future books.

I have already spoken above about a block series of books about St. Petersburg. So: this experiment was considered successful, and next year we plan to increase the number of books in this series to 15.

A few words about plans to prepare for the upcoming international Book Fair. I said that the coming year is a special year for our country, and therefore, after analyzing the work of the last Book Salon, we plan to allocate an entire city block for this event. At the same time, book sales in this quarter will be not only during the salon, but in the period from May to September. There will be 25 “theme stalls” where our leading bookstores will be open rent-free.

Invitations to the anniversary Book Salon have already been sent to all regions of the Russian Federation. At the same time, I am not afraid of these words, we are developing the ideology of the book holiday, that is, we are forming an understanding of the purpose for which we are holding it. People should receive information at the salon that is difficult for them to obtain elsewhere.

In our opinion, the following should be put at the forefront: patriotism, connections between times and generations, love for one’s history and the older generation, as well as the ability to defend one’s point of view.

In order to fulfill our plans, we need to saturate the salon with interesting and significant cultural events. We will invite the best Russian and foreign writers. Currently, with the active support of the governor, we cooperate with many committees of the government of St. Petersburg.

To achieve success, you need a team, an integral organism that has certain goals, objectives and ways to implement them. And, of course, all this is being done for our citizens, and especially for young people.

– The city’s literary community is extremely concerned about the fate of the Writers’ Book Shop and the Komarovo House of Creativity...

– In our city there are quite a lot of business entities with various forms of ownership, carrying out socially significant activities. The Press Committee together with KUGI (City Property Management Committee) provide them with significant benefits. At the same time, control over the implementation of the law according to which these benefits are provided is carried out accordingly. Unfortunately, there are cases when business entities try to cheat and thereby break the law.

On the merits of the question you asked, I can explain the following: our St. Petersburg writers are a very sensitive barometer, they react sharply in the event of even an attempt to violate their legal rights. They contacted the governor about what they considered to be the improper use of retail space in the Writers' Book Shop on Nevsky Prospekt.

We tried to resolve this conflict without resorting to extreme measures. But despite numerous appeals to the business entity and founder (Literary Fund of Russia), the situation did not change for the better. But the most important thing: in the short time it has been in business, LLC “St. Petersburg Bookstore - Club of Writers of the Literary Fund” has managed to create an extremely negative attitude towards itself among the writers.

We were simply offended that the people who run this facility and consider themselves part of the writing community turned out to be deaf to the aspirations and needs of their colleagues in the writing workshop.

As a result, at the request of the writers and the Press Committee, KUGI appealed to the court with a request to evict the above-mentioned organization from its occupied premises due to failure to fulfill its obligations. On June 20, 2014, the Arbitration Court of the city of St. Petersburg and the Leningrad Region (first instance court) made the decision: “To evict the limited liability company “St. Petersburg Bookstore - Club of Writers of the Literary Fund” from non-residential premises at the address: St. Petersburg, emb. . Fontanka River, 29/66, lit. A, room. 3-H.”

As could be expected, the management of the LLC, evicted from its premises by court decision, was in no way satisfied with this state of affairs.

The losing party, in accordance with the established procedure, filed an appeal against the court decision to the Thirteenth Arbitration Court of Appeal (court of second instance). And so on November 19, 2014, the Thirteenth Arbitration Court of Appeal upheld the decision of the Arbitration Court of the city of St. Petersburg and the Leningrad Region without change, and the appeal was not satisfied.

I immediately want to stop here all possible fabrications regarding a change in the type of activity of this socially significant object: book trade has been carried out in these areas, and will continue to be carried out. When the legal proceedings were going on, we only said that the legal entity carrying out economic activities did not meet the requirements set by the writing community and city residents.

– How do you see the future fate of the “Writers’ Book Shop”?

– We will actively interact with our “House of Writers”, which, it seems to us, will better understand the aspirations of writers. We have already discussed this issue with them and came to the understanding that this will be both effective and understandable to everyone.

We hope that in the future this cultural object will turn into a place of attraction for the creative intelligentsia, and people walking along Nevsky Prospect will be able to easily stop by and take part in any event held at the Writers’ Book Shop. This will help somewhat reduce the lack of communication that is acutely felt in our society. We must restore historical justice: return this cultural object to the city in the form in which it was once conceived.

– Do you intend to follow the same path with the Komarovo House of Creativity?

– The writing community has already expressed interest in this. But let's not rush. There are legitimate legal procedures, and all of them must be strictly followed.

The most important thing is that we manage to restore the writers’ faith in justice by solving the long-term problems that have accumulated in the Writers’ Book Shop as an example. But I can say one thing with complete confidence: we will not allow our writers to be offended.

The conversation was conducted by Vladimir SHEMSHUCHENKO

Chairman of the Committee for Press and Interaction with the Media of St. Petersburg Sergei Serezleev is convinced that “a return to state management of the entire media system, fortunately, is impossible.”

Sergey Grigorievich Serezleev has been working in the Committee for Press and Interaction with the Media of the Administration of St. Petersburg for several years. Since January 2015 - as its chairman. We met with Sergei Grigorievich in his office in Smolny. In an exclusive interview for Nevsky Vremya, the northern capital’s chief media official shared his vision of the results of the completed X International Book Salon, spoke about his speech at the VIII Congress of the Union of Journalists of St. Petersburg and the Leningrad Region, and also revealed his views on the role of the state in life of modern media.

— Sergey Grigorievich, you were a guest at the VIII Congress of the Union of Journalists of St. Petersburg and the Leningrad Region. Usually journalists are not very fond of officials. How do you assess the atmosphere of this forum?

“I accepted with great pleasure the invitation of the union leadership to speak at the congress. And it seems to me that your colleagues and I understood each other. There is no trace of any confrontation. Moreover, it seems to me that there is an understanding on the part of the union and its members that only through joint efforts can we solve the problems that concern journalists and cause concern to city authorities.

- What are these problems?

— For example, the system of distributing periodicals. We are ready to allocate several hundred points in the city for the placement of appropriate newsstands. But what is important to us is the authoritative opinion of experts represented by those who publish newspapers, those who make them, about where and what we can and should publish. We are ready to cooperate with the union in solving this problem.

— How do you assess the state of the media market in our city?

“Like everywhere else, the situation is difficult. There is a redistribution of information flows, a change of owners in various media. We are closely monitoring the development of the situation, but our position is balanced and far from the intention of interfering... For example, you may recall that for six months now there have been heated debates, even litigation, around the radio station “Echo of Petersburg”. I believe that the decision of their fate is a matter for the creative teams themselves and those who are the founders and owners of the media. Fortunately, a return to the previous system of state management of the entire media system is neither legally, nor practically, nor organizationally, nor ideologically possible.

— But can the state support the media?

— Support should not be understood solely in financial terms. The state and its structures at all levels must create those favorable conditions that would allow the media to develop and provide the state with appropriate information assistance. If you like, support in covering those socially important projects that are implemented in the interests of the majority of people.

— What type of media, in your opinion, is leading today in terms of audience attention?

- The answer is known - network sources of information. Next comes television, followed by radio and periodicals.

— Sergey Grigorievich, the X International Book Salon has ended in St. Petersburg. What are your impressions? How many people visited the salon?

“We kept track of visitors all four days using a special system. And we got the figure of 210 thousand people. And I am glad that the ideas that we put into this project were adequately implemented in the center of our city. Readers reigned here for four days. They came here to meet books, writers, and those who provide contact with literature. The idea of ​​combining the celebration of two important events in one salon - the 70th anniversary of the Victory and the Year of Literature in Russia - also fully justified itself. The efforts of many dozens and hundreds of people who prepared this real book festival gave an obvious positive result. And today I want to say thank you to everyone who took part in organizing and holding the salon. After all, we conceived it as a comprehensive cultural event, where, of course, the main character was the book.

— I remember that we discussed the prospects for the development of the salon in connection with the possible transfer of its venue to some larger venue. And, in my opinion, you were right in this dispute: the salon suited Manezhnaya Square...

“The fact is that we managed to create an appropriate atmosphere around the historical place, so that everyone who came to Manezhnaya Square and Manege, young and old, could find an appropriate book and something to do. And this is how it really happened. By the way, the Culture Committee helped us with this, whose support was useful to us. After all, a significant part of the cultural program on the square and in the Manege itself was carried out by artists from St. Petersburg theaters.

— What do you see as the reasons for the success of such a complex and multi-component event as the International Book Fair?

- For me the answer is obvious. For the first time in the history of organizing such an event, a wise administrative step was taken - a special resolution of the government of St. Petersburg was adopted, entirely dedicated to holding the salon. And it helped solve and resolve emerging problems. One might say that it played a mobilizing role.

— The salon is a holiday that is already over. What was your “homework” to prepare for the next salon? Did everything you planned succeed? What bottlenecks did you see in the current event?

“First of all, we saw with our own eyes that the city needed a salon. St. Petersburg is a book city, and where else, if not here, to hold such book holidays. On the other hand, we saw great interest in it not only from citizens and guests of the city, but also from those who are professionally involved in the development of the book business. And we need to take a more thoughtful approach to the logistics of such participants and their representative offices directly. We also realized that the territory of the salon needs to be expanded, despite the fact that its location in the center will most likely not change. There is already a fresh idea on this topic.

—Won't you tell me the secret?

- Everything has its time. When we discuss everything with the interested parties and make a decision, then we can talk about it. I can definitely say only one thing for now: the 11th book fair will definitely take place in our city.

- When?

- Of course, in the spring. Traditions must be preserved. Remember, in the old days, the Leningrad Book Spring was held every year on Ostrovsky Square? The St. Petersburg International Book Salon is its direct successor.

— During the salon, books from the two series that were initiated by your committee were in great demand. This is a series of books by St. Petersburg writers about the Great Patriotic War and a series of books about the secrets and mysteries of St. Petersburg and its buildings. Do you plan to continue this publishing line in the activities of the committee in the future?

— I would like to note that the selection of books for publication in both series was made by the writers themselves. Here I want to thank our House of Writers and its director Vladimir Malyshev, who, together with his colleagues in the writing workshop, managed to organize the preparation and publication of books in this series. According to my information, she is popular among St. Petersburg residents. Books are not stored in stores or kiosks.

- What do you think: what is the reason?

- There are several of them. Firstly, the uniform design of each of the two series. That is, the recognition of publications increases. Secondly, the price is not very high. Most city residents can afford such books. After all, a book is to some extent a socio-cultural product that requires attention and respect. Thirdly, the increased need for such publications, which we previously called local history literature.

— Shouldn’t we resume the once popular series concerning the lives of famous people in our city?

— We are ready to study and consider any proposals regarding such publishing projects. For this purpose, our committee created a system for distributing appropriate grants. We need fresh ideas both in terms of what to publish and how to publish.

— What role does the committee’s public publishing council play in this process?

- The most direct one. It was created specifically for collegial resolution of issues regarding the possible distribution of grants and subsidies. Its members include respected and authoritative specialists in the book world of St. Petersburg. But I would like to see more active participation of the council in the book life of the city. For example, during an expert assessment of proposals to identify socially significant cultural objects that can count on benefits in terms of paying for the rental of premises. Indeed, today it is quite obvious that such objects include bookstores and publishing houses. And there are a lot of them in our city. We must support and develop what is related to publishing and the book world. I think that no one needs to be convinced that St. Petersburg is the book capital of Russia.

- What are you reading now?

— Now I have a volume of poems by Joseph Brodsky on my desk.

— Is this in connection with the past anniversary?

- Not really. The fact is that he and I have the same birthday. So I wanted to get to know each other better...

— How do you start your working day in your office at Smolny?

— I turn on the computer and watch the news. Then I move on to the newspapers. There they are on my special table.

— Do you think that an official’s personal preferences can influence his decision-making in the area of ​​activity under his responsibility?

- Good question. Simply put, should I listen to myself, my feelings and thoughts when assessing possible support for a particular publication, organization of an event or allocation of a subsidy?

- Like that.

— I, of course, rely on my own impressions. But along with me, qualified specialists work on the committee who can give an objective and professional assessment of any project or proposal. In addition, I am used to relying in my work on the opinions of those who themselves work in one field or another. That is, for practitioners. I consult with publishers, those involved in the book trade, media executives, and other specialists. Naturally, I am personally responsible for the decisions made. But collective intelligence reduces the likelihood of a subjective factor and helps to better understand even the most complex problem.

Serezleev Sergey Grigorievich, born May 24, 1968. Graduated from the Higher Educational Institution of the KGB of the USSR. In 2004 - St. Petersburg University of Finance and Economics. From 1999 to 2004 he worked in the Tax Police of St. Petersburg. Since 2004, he has been working in the Committee for Press and Interaction with the Media of the Government of St. Petersburg. He held the positions of head of the committee department, deputy chairman of the committee, first deputy chairman of the committee. Since August 2014 - and. O. chairman of the committee. On January 28, 2015, he was appointed chairman of the committee. The Press Committee is responsible for state policy in the field of printing, book publishing, distribution of books and periodicals, media, and social advertising.

Sergey Ilchenko

Governor of St. Petersburg Georgy Poltavchenko appointed a new chairman of the committee on press and interaction with the media. On January 28, he will present it to members of the city government. Predictably, the head became Sergei Serezleev, who had been acting head of the department for the last few months after Alexander Lobkov left Smolny. The leaders of the city media are not surprised: Serezleev is called a professional in his field.

Collage "Fontanka"/DP

Governor of St. Petersburg Georgy Poltavchenko appointed a new chairman of the committee on press and interaction with the media. On January 28, he will present it to members of the city government. Predictably, the head became Sergei Serezleev, who had been acting head of the department for the last few months after Alexander Lobkov left Smolny. The leaders of the city media are not surprised: Serezleev is called a professional in his field.

The chairman of the press and interaction with the media committee was the previously acting Sergei Serezleev. He is not a new person in Smolny. For the last 10 years, Serezleev has worked on the press committee, remaining in the role of first deputy chairman - both in the team of Vice-Governor Alla Manilova, and when Vasily Kichedzhi was vice-governor.

In July 2014, when the former head of the committee, Alexander Lobkov, was relieved of his post, Serezleev began to serve as acting head of the department. However, Georgy Poltavchenko decided not to make a final decision on the fate of this seat until the gubernatorial re-elections. Back in the fall, after winning the elections, Poltavchenko changed the structure of a number of divisions of Smolny, after which the press committee came under the supervision of the head of the Smolny administration, Alexander Govorunov. And only at the end of January Poltavchenko made the final decision to appoint Sergei Serezleev as head of the press committee.

Sergei Grigorievich is 46 years old. He graduated from the higher educational institution of the State Security Committee. In 2004, he received an economic education, graduating from St. Petersburg FinEk. From 1999 to 2004 he worked in the Tax Police of St. Petersburg. Since 2004, he went to work at Smolny.

Fontanka asked the opinion of the heads of various St. Petersburg media outlets regarding this appointment.

Director of AZHUR Andrey Konstantinov:

“I am sincerely happy for Sergei. In the series of current appointments at Smolny, this is one of the most successful. Serezleev has a glorious military path behind him, which few in Smolny can boast of. He worked for 10 years in the relevant committee in various positions. He started under Manilova, was the first deputy of Zinchuk, Korennikov, Lobkov. And all this time he worked effectively, which means he delved into the problems of the industry, unlike many of his colleagues, Serezleev does not need an extra minute to get up to speed. how the bureaucratic corridors of the government are structured, and at the same time, he does not cause rejection among the majority of city media leaders. He has a good reputation as a first deputy, whom the heads of many departments in Smolny will consider it a blessing to have. He may not be so much a politician yet as he is. a production worker, a man of action. But, if necessary, he is also able to cope with political functions. These are the kind of professionals that are needed in times of crisis.”

Deputy of the Legislative Assembly Marina Shishkina:

“I take this appointment normally. He worked on the committee and knows this work better than others. We wrote two bills together, so I understand that he is productive and knows the problems of the industry.”

Editor-in-Chief of the Kommersant-St. Petersburg newspaper Andrey Ershov:

“Mr. Serezleev personally knows many journalists and heads of St. Petersburg media, he is an open person. As the deputy head of the Union of Journalists of St. Petersburg and the Leningrad Region, I can say that Sergei knows and is completely immersed in the history of the restoration of the House of Journalists, listens to the opinion of the Union and is in control of the situation.”

Head of the Union of Journalists of St. Petersburg and Leningrad Region Lyudmila Fomicheva:

“He is a professional person, he knows a lot, since he has been working as deputy chairman of the committee for 8 years. Knows the system of grants and incentives, conducts government competitions and awards, and is familiar with the advertising market. This, of course, is better than a new person coming in and delving into these details. Serezleev will be useful to journalists in this difficult time. Yes, I mean the crisis, perhaps in the near future there will be many unemployed people soon.”

General Director of the St. Petersburg TV channel Sergei Boyarsky:

“As First Deputy Acting Chairman, he was always responsive and professional. He knows this area deeply. Unfortunately, I learn about his appointment from you, so I don’t want to comment. This news was supposed to be given by the St. Petersburg TV channel and the Petersburg Diary.