The acting head of the press committee is arguably one of the most controversial figures in the media. Pitersky Serezleev cuts billions on advertising Serezleev Sergei Grigorievich biography

Original of this material
© "Top secret", 27.07.2017, Photo: via InterPress.Ru

The muddy waters of the St. Petersburg "outdoor"

Sophia Bardina

Scandals around the redistribution of the market do not subside in St. Petersburg outdoor advertising... Since 2013, all outdoor activities in the Northern capital have been in an “illegal position” - the city authorities could not spend four years new competition for the placement of outdoor advertising. In June 2017, the competition was finally announced, and new scandals immediately erupted. This market is supervised by the chairman of the city Committee for Press and Media Relations Sergey Serezleev... "Achievements" of the official and his subordinate St. Petersburg State unitary enterprise The “City Center for Advertising Placement” (St. Petersburg State Unitary Enterprise “GTsRR”), in my opinion, may become the subject of close scrutiny by the Chamber of Control and Accounts and the city prosecutor's office.

"Contractual" scheme

For those uninitiated in the epic on the St. Petersburg outdoor advertising market, I will briefly describe the history recent years... In 2013, the majority of outdoor advertising operators expired their contracts with the city for the placement of advertising media. The city was to hold a new competition. But the Press Committee responsible for this and its current head Sergei Serezleev (then still in the role of the deputy chairman in charge of the advertising market) prepared the layout of outdoor advertising and tender documentation in such a way that they caused a lot of scandals and claims from various regulatory bodies. As a result, the Office of the Federal Antimonopoly Service canceled the competition in 2014. For three years, the authorities have not been able to organize a new competition. Or they didn't want to. As it has been written in the media more than once, the work of all operators outside the contractual relationship plays into the hands of those who control this work. The authority to conclude contracts with the business for the placement of outdoor advertising was transferred to the State Unitary Enterprise “City Center for Advertising Placement”. It is completely controlled by the Press Committee and its chairman. After the term of the old contracts with advertisers expired, and new ones did not appear, the committee began to massively file claims for the dismantling of advertising structures. The courts agreed and issued demolition orders.

As a result, the city authorities were able to legal grounds demolish almost any advertising structure in St. Petersburg at any time. A great way to, let's say, correcting and weeding the market. As they say, not all survived. The well-known Thaler companies, Clear Chanell were hastily and cheaply sold.

The rest of the market participants were explained that they can continue to work, according to a peculiar scheme: the RCCR makes claims to illegal operators for unjustified enrichment, so they will pay for the use of city property. Of course, everything happened against the background of constant talk that a new competition was about to be announced. And so for three years.

"Unjustified enrichment" is charged 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? One gets the impression that this was done in a very random order. During all three years, many operators tried to ask to change rates, simply refuse to pay, and disputed the amounts charged in court. And some have been successful. Moreover, it is worth looking at the court materials of the proceedings between the SCRD and market participants just on “illegal enrichment”. The courts sometimes rejected the claims of the SCRR, and if satisfied, then often before 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 prescribed in official documents? Judging by the same court decisions, the calculations of the Committee and the City Center for Advertising Placement are based on Order No. 39-r on changes in the amount of payment for the use of city facilities and territories for the purpose of placing outdoor advertising and information, which was adopted ... on November 23, 2007. 10 years ago! In 2010 - 2011, some changes were made to this document, and since then everything. 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 - as if nothing had changed.

Really, over all these years, neither the Chairman of the Press Committee, nor the State Center for Development and Reconstruction of the Republic of Armenia (SCRD) have bothered to assess the changes in the economy of the advertising market?

There are suspicions that they were still assessed, but the result did not suit them very much. Indirectly in favor of this version is evidenced by the documents of the tender for placement, which did not take place in 2014. Having announced the tender by its order, the Committee on Press and Interaction with Mass Media published, among other things, an estimate of the cost of the right to post advertising constructions in the town. This cost is higher than the amounts charged for "unjustified enrichment" and which are calculated according to the 2007 templates.

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 RCCR, demanding reimbursements from operators, had to be guided by these calculations and charge a fee at an increased cost? But this was not done. Taking into account the fact that each demand is millions of rubles, one can only guess how much the city budget received less in more than three years.

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

It's no secret: a market that is not regulated by contractual relations is an easy sacrifice for the officials in charge of it. It turns out that at the heart of the "wildness" of the outdoor advertising market were very "incomprehensible" schemes for receiving budget money by the City Press Committee and the City Center for Advertising Placement.

82% remuneration

In July 2017, Aleksey Kovalev, a deputy of the St. Petersburg Legislative Assembly, addressed the Chamber of Control and Accounts (CAC) with a letter, pointing out the lack of transparency in the financing of the State Unitary Enterprise "GTSRR", whose budget almost doubled after the appointment of Sergei Serezleev as the head of the Press Committee. A very remarkable scheme of work of the State Unitary Enterprise "State Center for Reconstruction and Development" has become public.

State Unitary Enterprise “GTsRR” was empowered to conclude agreements with market participants for the placement of outdoor advertising in the city. These powers were given to him by the agreement of assignment from 1995, concluded with the Committee for City Property Management (now renamed into KIO - Committee for Property Relations). The funds received from advertising operators must be transferred to the budget by the City Center for Advertising Placement. To cover the costs arising in the course of this work, the RCCD receives a remuneration - a percentage of the withdrawal from 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 approvals. Until 2014, no more than 12% of the collected money was returned to the SCRD. With the appointment of Sergei Serezleev as chairman of the Press Committee, everything changed. Then we follow each step.

Step one. The RCCR stopped doing what it was entrusted with: concluding contracts. The old ones are expired, but the new ones cannot be concluded - the competition did not take place. That is, formally, the City Center for Advertising Placement has ceased to perform work for which it is supposed to be remunerated.

Step two. The Press Committee and the State Center for Reconstruction and Development never held a competition. The operators went into an illegal position. Instead of a complicated, but easily calculated scheme - an agreement with an operator, understandable money to the budget, from the budget - a percentage of what was collected in the State Center for Development and Development of the Republic of Kazakhstan - they built a complex new combination. RCCR collects money for "illegal enrichment". It is difficult to calculate exactly how much - the amounts are constantly changing, operators are challenging them in courts, agreeing on changes, and advertising structures are regularly demolished.

Step three. In 2015, the percentage of remuneration of the SCRD increases to 20%, in 2016 - up to 21%. According to the SCRD 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 accumulates in a year.)

According to Mr. Serezleev, this is understandable, since the SCRR has increased its costs - active work has begun on dismantling the advertising structures. This is an especially tricky 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 - work for now, wait for a new competition and pay after the fact. At the same time, the State Center for Reconstruction and Development received a court order for dismantling for all advertising structures. And all recent years, in no particular order, the Press Committee and the State Center for Reconstruction and Development have been demolishing advertising media here and there. It is for these works, which the St. Petersburg Committee for Press and the State Unitary Enterprise "City Center for Advertising Placement" invent for themselves, Sergei Serezleev and draws up the remuneration of the State Unitary Enterprise. Market operators were all amazed at the spontaneity, randomness and lack of motivation of dismantling. But it seems that everything is simple: the more he took down, the more he compensated from the budget.

Against the background of lack of control in the IV quarter of 2014, the chairman of the committee, Sergei Serezleev, set the amount of remuneration for the SCRD in the amount of ... 82% of the funds received. Yuri Burunov, who was then director of the Center for Reconstruction and Development, even wrote to Mr. Serezleev that he could not use this money. Well, he cannot dismantle so much: the owners of the structures are resisting, the work is proceeding slowly - give 18%, we can’t handle it anymore. In the spring of 2015, Yuri Burunov left his post. The SCRD did not complain about the inability to master the budgets.

But the most remarkable thing is that there is not a word about dismantling in the agreement between the RCCR and the property committee. According to lawyers, this means that the RCCR cannot receive remuneration for this - neither under an agreement, nor under current legislation... Accordingly, the chairman of the Press Committee does not have the right to send budget money to pay for work that has not been approved by anyone.

Aleksey Kovalev also reminded that the Press Committee is actually dismantling advertising media by the efforts 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 share powers between themselves, which means that “it is not excluded double pay". Sergei Serezleev, commenting on this claim, dismissed it - they say that the powers between the organizations are distributed in accordance with Art. nineteen Federal law"About advertising". The article is long, difficult to read, but there is definitely not a word about the powers of the RCCR and the SRI.

In fact, the main difference between GKU "GRI" is that it is accountable to the St. Petersburg Finance Committee, receives less money, and all of them are 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 Development requires operators to pay for dismantling. “In court, the Center for Reconstruction and Development is collecting costs from operators, which may have already been covered by 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 State Center for Development and Development of the Republic of Kazakhstan, ”the deputy said in a letter.

It seems to me that the point is not at all in the altruism of the "big people". I do not think that they have posted more "social media" than necessary, not being sure that later they will receive with the help of lawsuits cash for the placement of "free social" advertising at a high commercial cost.

Against this background, confusion with T-shaped shields seems like a trifle, for example. These billboards have four advertising surfaces. While the official contracts were in force, the operators who owned such shields were obliged to give one of the parties free of charge under social advertising... There are no contracts for a long time, and the operators "mold" 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, it is not the first year that individual operators have the opportunity to underpay millions of rubles a month to the city budget. This allows them to compensate for losses in the event of a drop in demand for ad placement. Unsold places are covered with a “product” for which not only does not have to be paid to the budget, but you can get compensation later.

Summing up, we can conclude: the city Press Committee manipulates the billion dollar outdoor advertising market. The finance and financial control committees are deprived of information on the amounts that outdoor advertising operators must pay to the city budget. They do not know the size of the discounts for the placement of social advertising, nor the reasons for providing such discounts. How much budget money is “lost” when going through the chain “outdoor advertising operator - SPb GUP“ GTsRR ”- committee - budget”? Nobody can say for sure.

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

The post of the acting chairman of the press committee is temporarily held by the deputy of Alexander Korennikov, Sergei Serezleev. Temporarily - because according to the statement of the vice-governor Vasily Kichedzhi, more than 20 candidates are now being considered for the post of head of the department. Nevertheless, the appointment of the official caused understandable bewilderment among the city's media community, which was replaced by a sigh of relief due to the very status of the "interim".

Sergei Serezleev can be considered a cult figure for the St. Petersburg media. Suffice it to note that he was a member of the commission that made the decision to allocate 60 million rubles from the budget to the St. Petersburg TV channel. From the biography of the official, one can only glean that, before the administration of St. Petersburg, Sergei Serezleev worked in the internal affairs bodies. In the department responsible for the interaction of the city government with the media, he oversaw the financial sector. Now the entire committee is at the mercy of the official, albeit temporarily.

His name surfaced in the media in connection with other stories, however, as you might guess, also related to the distribution of budget funds. In particular, city subsidies to regional newspapers (in 2010 the FAS found violations of the law in the actions of the Press Committee) and official ones. For example, in the first half of 2010, the publishing center of the St. Petersburg government "Petrocenter" won the Smolny auction in the amount of 14.6 million rubles. At the same time, the commissioning committee itself - Yuri Zinchuk (chairman of the committee at that time), Sergei Serezleev, Anatoly Agrafenin - were members of the board of directors of Petrocenter. Also a member of the Expert Council at the press committee, which made a decision on the distribution of 86 million rubles to more than 40 St. Petersburg mass media.

Communication with the media in the epistolary genre

However, the editorial board of Lenizdat.Ru will remember Sergei Serezleev not only for his active participation in the distribution of budgetary funds. In interaction with the press, Sergei Serezleev remains a consistent supporter of communication in the epistolary genre. So, for example, the committee's know-how can be considered the transition to correspondence exclusively by regular mail - employees deliberately do not send answers to inquiries by fax. From Smolny to the editorial office, a letter takes an average of three weeks - the committee workers nod at the sluggishness of the postal department. However, the content of the messages is quite consistent with the old-fashioned way of delivering them.

“In order to expand my professional horizons and in order to provide methodological assistance to the information agency, I am sending the requested information,” Mr. Serezleev made it a rule to begin his answers with these words.

In the person of the latter, the committee was actively engaged in interaction with the media: it ignored the questions directed by journalists or chose only those that were convenient to answer from them, suggested looking for information in open sources, or simply announced that the requested information was not provided.

An example is a request on the conditions for allocating 60 million rubles from the budget to the unlicensed TV channel "Saint Petersburg". Last fall, Lenizdat.Ru made an official request to the Press and Media Relations Committee. In it, we were interested in the department:

What is the full composition of the Expert Council that made the decision on the allocation of budget funds? Who attended the meeting?

How was an applicant who did not have a broadcasting license been admitted to the competition?

Two weeks later, the reception of the department reported that the letter with the answers was sent by mail a week ago and that the staff of the committee were not responsible for the fact that the correspondence did not reach. The committee refused to duplicate the replies by fax. The deputy head of the committee, Sergei Serezleev, proposed to forward the claims to the post office and said that the letter would not be re-sent. As a result, a month later, a letter from the Press Committee arrived at the editorial office. It reported that all the requested information is contained on the website of the city administration in the section of the press committee, which was not true. The committee responded similarly to other media inquiries.

The Governor of St. Petersburg Georgy Poltavchenko has appointed a new chairman of the Committee on Press and Interaction with Funds mass media... On January 28, he will present it to members of the city government. The head, predictably, was Sergei Serezleev, who had been acting head of the department for the past several months after Alexander Lobkov left Smolny. The heads of the city media are not surprised: Serezleev is called a professional in his field.

Collage "Fontanka" / DP

The Governor of St. Petersburg Georgy Poltavchenko has appointed a new chairman of the Committee for Press and Interaction with the Mass Media. On January 28, he will present it to members of the city government. The head, predictably, was Sergei Serezleev, who had been acting head of the department for the past several months after Alexander Lobkov left Smolny. The heads of the city media are not surprised: Serezleev is called a professional in his field.

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

In July 2014, when the former head of the committee, Alexander Lobkov, was dismissed from office, Serezleev began to act as head of the department. However, Georgy Poltavchenko decided not to make a final decision on the fate of this chair until the gubernatorial re-election. Back in the fall, after winning the elections, Poltavchenko changed the structure of a number of Smolny's divisions, after which the Press Committee came under the supervision of the head of the Smolninsk administration, Alexander Govorunov. And only at the end of January Poltavchenko made the final decision on the appointment of Sergei Serezleev as the head of the press committee.

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

Fontanka inquired about the opinion of the heads of various St. Petersburg media on this appointment.

Director of AZHUR Andrey Konstantinov:

“I am sincerely happy for Sergei. This is one of the most successful in the series of Smolny's current appointments. profile committee on the different positions... Started under Manilova, was the first deputy at Zinchuk, Korennikov, Lobkov. And all this time he worked effectively, which means he delved into the problems of the industry. Unlike many colleagues in rank, it will not take him an extra minute to get up to speed. Serezleev knows how the bureaucratic corridors of the government are arranged, and, at the same time, he does not arouse rejection among the majority of city media leaders. He has a good reputation as a first deputy, who will be considered a fortune for the head of many departments, Smolny. He, perhaps, is not so much a politician as a production worker, a man of action. But he is able, if necessary, to cope with the political functions. These are the 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, knows this job better than anyone else. We wrote two bills together, so I understand that he is productive and knows the problems of the industry. "

Andrey Ershov, editor-in-chief of the Kommersant-Saint Petersburg newspaper:

“Mr. Serezleev is personally acquainted with many journalists and heads of the 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, he listens to the opinion of the Union and is in control of the situation. "

Head of the Union of Journalists of St. Petersburg and the 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, incentives, holds competitions and government awards, is familiar with the advertising market. This, of course, is better than a new person comes and delves 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. "

General Director of the TV channel " Saint Petersburg"Sergei Boyarsky:

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

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

Sergey Grigorievich Serezleev has been working for several years in the Committee for Press and Interaction with the Media of the Administration of St. Petersburg. Since January 2015 - as its chairman. We met with Sergei Grigorievich in his office in Smolny. In an exclusive interview for Nevsky Vremya, the main media official of the northern capital 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.

- Sergei Grigorievich, you were a guest of the VIII Congress of the Union of Journalists of St. Petersburg and the Leningrad Region. Usually journalists do not like officials very much. How do you rate the atmosphere of this forum?

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

- What are these problems?

- For example, a system for distributing periodicals. We are ready to allocate several hundred points in the city for the placement of the corresponding newsstands. But we need the authoritative opinion of experts in the person of those who publish newspapers, those who make them, about where and what we can and should place. 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?

- As elsewhere, the situation is not easy. Redistribution occurs information flows, change of ownership in various media. We are closely following the development of the situation, but our position is balanced and far from intending to interfere ... For example, you may recall that for six months now there have been heated disputes, up to litigation, around the Echo Petersburg radio station. I believe that the decision of their fate is the business of the creative teams themselves and those who are the founder and owner of the media. Fortunately, a return to the previous system of state governance of the entire media system is neither legally, nor practically, nor organizationally, nor ideologically possible.

- But can the state support the media?

- You shouldn't understand support solely in the financial aspect. The state, its structures at all levels should 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 being implemented in the interests of the majority of people.

- What type of media, in your opinion, is in the lead today in terms of audience attention?

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

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

- We kept a register of visitors with the help of a special system all four days. And we got a figure of 210 thousand people. And I am glad that the ideas that we put into this project have been adequately embodied in the center of our city. The readers reigned here for four days. They came here to meet books, writers, and those who provide contact with literature. The idea of ​​combining in one salon the celebration of two important events - the 70th anniversary of Victory and the Year of Literature in Russia - has also fully justified itself. The efforts of many tens and hundreds of people preparing this real book festival have yielded obvious positive results. 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 complex 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 the venue to some larger venue. And, in my opinion, in this dispute you turned out to be right: the salon came to the face of 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 Manezh, young and old, could find an appropriate book and something to do. And this is how it actually happened. In this, by the way, the Committee on Culture helped, 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 in holding such a complex and multi-part event as the International Book Salon?

- 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 the holding of the salon. And it helped to solve and solve emerging problems. It can be said that it played its mobilizing role.

- Salon is a holiday that has already ended. What was your “homework” for preparing the next salon? Did you succeed in everything conceived? What bottlenecks did you see in the current event?

- First of all, we saw firsthand that the city needs a salon. Petersburg is a book city, and where, if not here, such book holidays can be held. On the other hand, we saw a huge 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 a more thoughtful approach to the logistics of such participants and their representatives directly. We also realized that the territory of the salon needs to be expanded, while the venue in the center will most likely not change. There is already a fresh idea on this topic.

- Will you reveal a secret?

- Everything has its time. When we discuss everything with stakeholders and make a decision, then it will be possible to talk about it. For now, I can definitely say only one thing: the 11th book salon in our city will definitely take place.

- When?

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

- During the salon, the books of those two series that were initiated by your committee were in great demand. This is a series of books by 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 committee's activities in the future?

- Note that the selection of books for publication of 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 department, managed to organize the preparation and publication of books in this series. According to my information, she is popular with Petersburgers. Books are not stale either in shops or in 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 the publications increases. Secondly, the price is not very high. Most townspeople can afford such books. After all, a book is to some extent a socio-cultural product that requires both attention and respect. Thirdly, the increased demand for such publications, which we previously called local history literature.

- Why not resume the once popular series about life famous people in our city?

- We are ready to study and consider any proposals regarding such publishing projects. For this, a system for the distribution of the corresponding grants was created under our committee. We need fresh ideas and 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 is just created for the collegial decision of questions about the possible distribution of grants and subsidies. It consists of respected and authoritative specialists in the book world of St. Petersburg. But I would like to see a more active participation of the council in the book life of the city. For example, for peer review proposals for the identification of socially significant cultural objects that can count on benefits in terms of paying rent for premises. Indeed, today it is quite obvious that such objects are bookstores and publishing houses. And there are a lot of them in our city. We must support and develop what is related to the publishing industry, 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 on my desktop is a volume of poems by Joseph Brodsky.

- Is it in connection with the past anniversary?

- Not really. The fact is that we have his birthday on the same day. So I wanted to get to know each other better ...

- How do you start your working day in the Smolny office?

“I turn on my computer and check the news. Then I proceed to the newspapers. There they are on my special table.

- What do you think: the personal preferences of an official can influence his decision-making in the field of activity that is accountable to him?

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

- Like that.

- I, of course, rely on my own impressions. But together with me, qualified specialists work in the committee who can give an objective and professional assessment any project or proposal. In addition, I am used to relying in my work on the opinions of those who themselves work in a particular area. That is, for practitioners. I consult with publishers, booksellers, media executives and others. Naturally, I am personally responsible for the decisions made. But the collective intelligence reduces the likelihood of a subjective factor, helps to better understand even the most difficult problem.

Serezleev Sergey Grigorievich, was born on May 24, 1968. Graduated from the Higher educational institution of the KGB of the USSR. 2004 - St. Petersburg University of Finance and Economics. From 1999 to 2004 he worked in the St. Petersburg Tax Police. Since 2004 he has been working in the Committee for Press and Interaction with the Mass Media of the Government of St. Petersburg. He served as 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 public policy in the field of printing, publishing, distribution of books and periodicals printed matter, media, social advertising.

Sergey Ilchenko