WAYS TO INCREASE THE EFFICIENCY OF MUNICIPAL GOVERNANCE
Konovalov Alexander Alexandrovich
Candidate of Economic Sciences, Associate Professor
Rostov State
University of Economics (RINH),
Department of State,
and economic security
ANNOTATION:
The article discusses ways to improve the efficiency of municipal government. Specific measures to improve the efficiency of municipal government are considered and analyzed.
ABSTRACT:
The article discusses the ways to improve the efficiency of municipal management. Reviewed and analyzed specific measures on increasing the efficiency of municipal management.
Keywords: increasing the efficiency of municipal government, local self-government .
Key words: improving the efficiency of municipal management, local government.
By the effectiveness of municipal government, the author understands the effectiveness of the activities of local governments. This performance is reflected in various indicators of the municipality and the management activities of officials of this entity. Efficiency has quantitative and qualitative characteristics.
Local government Russia constitutes one of the foundations of the constitutional system Russian Federation, solves socio-economic problems, considers issues of local importance for the comfortable existence of residents of settlements. Considering the global nature of local government reform in Russia, it should be noted the special role of workers performing municipal service. Not only the present, but also the future of local self-government depends on how professionally trained, purposeful, decent, and competent specialists are.
Many technologies of modern management can significantly improve the efficiency of municipal management. In the modern world, the external conditions for the functioning of any organization are rapidly changing, and the economic environment is becoming increasingly competitive. In this regard, many private and public sector organizations are forced to adopt new management methods.
Majority modern technologies management can be used not only in the commercial sphere, but also in state and municipal administration. New conditions for the development of society lead to the fact that many management methods and techniques that have proven their effectiveness in the commercial sector are gradually transferred to the practice of municipal management. As a result, the differences between the management of commercial and government organizations are decreasing. Most of the approaches, specific techniques and technologies of successful management are relevant today not only for commercial companies, but also for authorities government controlled. IN Lately All over the world there is a change in the management model in the public service in general and in municipal government in particular. These changes to a certain extent coincide with changes in management in commercial organizations.
The process of increasing the efficiency of the municipal government system should not be spontaneous, but a managed and planned process based on:
on the strategic vision of the development of the municipality,
on forecasting development trends and own capabilities,
on the consistent development of strategic, economic, economic, social programs.
It is necessary to move from a passive recipient of budget funds to an active search for ways to improve the efficiency of the economic complex of a municipality, relying on internal resources.
The search for resources for the development of a municipality should be carried out in the field of legal, organizational and management activities.
Table 1 presents the main ways to improve the efficiency of municipal government.
| No. |
Ways to improve the efficiency of municipal government |
Expected Result |
|
Development of rental relations, municipal property in order to replenish the budget from non-tax sources |
Increasing the efficiency of municipal government by increasing the income of the economic complex of municipal government based on internal resources |
|
|
Increasing the value of municipal property due to increased private investment |
Growth in attracted private investment in municipal real estate |
|
|
Stabilization financial situation municipality by increasing tax revenues |
Increasing the efficiency of municipal government due to the growth of tax revenues of the economic complex of local government |
|
|
Finding new ways to develop and stimulate charity as the most important area of social development |
Increasing the effectiveness of charitable activities, solving social problems, increasing the level and quality of life of the population. |
Table 1. Ways to improve the efficiency of municipal government.
Let's consider each of the points in more detail.
Development of rental relations, municipal property in order to replenish the budget from non-tax sources - it is expected to identify possible rental objects, record and control the payment of rental payments, conduct an inventory and audit of real estate, to analyze the efficiency of use of leased space. It is also necessary to develop a regulation “On the procedure for using and disposing of municipal property" Drawing up a lease agreement for real estate as a universal economic lever, a source of income for the local budget. This will improve the efficiency of municipal government by increasing the income of the economic complex of municipal government, relying on internal resources.
Increasing the value of municipal property by increasing private investment - it is expected to create conditions for attracting capital investment in municipal real estate, developing a regulation “On the tenant’s overhaul, reconstruction and restoration of municipal property", development of a methodology for calculating rent depending on the location of the facility in the territorial economic zone; depending on the period and type of activity of the enterprise. All this will increase the attraction of private investment in municipal real estate.
Stabilizing the financial situation of a municipality by increasing tax revenues involves creating conditions for the development of the local budget revenue tax base, establishing general order differentiation of tax rates, development of a mechanism for differentiation of land tax. This will improve the efficiency of local government due to the growth of tax revenues of the economic complex of local government.
Searching for new ways to develop and stimulate charity as the most important area of social development - creating stimulating conditions for the growth of social activity of business entities in the territory of the municipality, developing a regulation “On holding special competitions in order to spread charitable activities and encourage philanthropists”, developing a system of value motivations. This will increase the efficiency of charitable activities, solve some social problems, and improve the level and quality of life of the population.
The current economic situation, the transfer of the center of reform to the regional and local level, require the development of new approaches, methods and forms of organization of territorial management that are adequate to the current situation. The processes occurring during the formation of a market economy determine the need to adjust the content and methodology of research in the field of municipal management, while it is necessary to rely on existing experience and traditions of regional economic research.
Currently, due to the growing importance of the municipal economy, the center of gravity of economic research is moving from issues of production location to problems of increasing the efficiency of municipal management.
Municipal economics studies the objective preconditions different sides development and placement of productive forces, socio-economic processes in the country and its regions in close connection with natural and environmental conditions. And if previously the dominant part of the regional economy was considered the process of centralized and planned distribution of productive forces, in which the economy of each region was considered as part of a single national economic complex, now the socio-economic and social processes occurring in the regions are coming to the fore.
BIBLIOGRAPHY:
- Anichkova A. A. Ways to improve the efficiency of municipal property management // Problems of modern economics. 2011. No. 2 P.407-408.
- FILATOV M.A. Problems of development of municipalities of the Tver region // Regional economics: theory and practice. 2008. No. 2 P.63-67.
- Voroshilov N.V. Efficiency of municipal management: essence and approaches to assessment // Problems of territory development. 2015. No. 3 (77) P.143-159.
- Animitsa E.G., Tertyshny A.T. Fundamentals of local self-government, M.: INFRA - M, 2006.
- Vlasova E. M., Tsvetkova E. A., Shikhbabaeva I. F. Methods for assessing the management activities of employees of local self-government bodies as a tool for increasing the efficiency of local self-government // Young scientist. - 2016. - No. 8. - pp. 509-512.
- Kozelsky V. N. Study of essence public services V modern Russia//Bulletin of Saratov State Socio-Economic University. 2011. No. 2 P.148-151.
- Trofimova N.B. The role of communal infrastructure in the economic development of a municipality. Experience of foreign countries //NiKa. 2011. No. S.217-219.
Local government is one of the most important institutions of modern society. It is designed to solve and regulate various economic, social, political, environmental and other issues that arise at the local level. The reality and effectiveness of local self-government is determined, first of all, by the material and financial resources available to municipalities and, in their totality, constituting the financial and economic foundations of local self-government.
The economic basis of local self-government of a municipality consists of municipally owned property, funds from local budgets, as well as property rights of municipalities.
But, despite such a list of resources, most municipalities are subsidized. In the structure of financial assistance from the local budget, not subsidies, areas whose expenditures are determined by the municipalities themselves, are becoming increasingly important, but subsidies, i.e. share participation of a higher level of the budget system in expenses that a subject of the Federation considers necessary.
In such conditions, of course, municipalities lose their economic freedom and independence, which in turn reduces the effectiveness of local government. Municipalities are forced to take all necessary measures to change the current situation. Thus, municipal property serves as the basis for the activities of the municipality as a tool for managing the solvency and financial stability of the region.
In recent years, the interest of scientists and practitioners in the problem of efficient use of municipal property has become increasingly noticeable. The increasing relevance of this problem is due to the ineffective use of municipal lands, which are often rented out or, even worse, sold at minimal prices. Municipal property is in a dilapidated condition, often unfit for use and in need of major repairs.
Analyzing this problem, we can identify several approaches to determining the efficiency of property use.
Firstly, in terms of the amount of income received. Such an indicator can be the share of budget revenues from the economic use of property (including revenues from property taxation; excluding revenues from property taxation).
Secondly, from the point of view of public benefit. Only qualitative indicators (for example, a decrease in child crime as a result of the construction of a network of children's clubs).
Thirdly, from the point of view of the economics of budgetary funds (widely used in pre-revolutionary Russia). For example, construction administrative buildings allows you to free up the housing stock that is occupied by various institutions (SES, housing departments, passport offices, etc.) and transfer it to residents, as well as reduce payments to the private sector for rented space.
In relation to municipal property, the degree of feasibility should be assessed, and not the degree of efficiency of use. If we talk about effective management, then the degree of effectiveness must be assessed by the level of satisfaction of all interested parties in solving certain problems. It is not possible to evaluate the effectiveness of management only by quantitative indicators, since management municipal finances and property is a specific field of activity in which what is often important is not the number of issues resolved, but the quality of their solution.
When assessing the effectiveness of financial and property management, one should proceed from the goals and objectives facing local governments. Since the main goal of the activities of local governments is to satisfy the collective interests of the population living on the territory of the municipality and to ensure their basic living needs in the areas falling under the jurisdiction of the municipalities, we cannot directly use ordinary market assessments (profitability, profitability, etc.). In this case, it is necessary, first of all, to answer the questions of how much the quality of life of the population has increased as a result of management, how dynamically it is developing municipality. Therefore, different approaches are needed to assess the effectiveness of managing the revenue and expenditure parts of the local budget and various municipal property objects.
When assessing the effectiveness of municipal property management, it is necessary to separate property objects necessary for solving social problems and property objects used to obtain additional income local budget.
This analysis can also be presented from the perspective of three aspects, with the help of which the efficiency of using municipal property is assessed: land, urban planning and environmental protection.
From the standpoint of the first aspect, efficiency is expressed by the maximum amount of collected land payments; from the standpoint of the second, by the creation spatial conditions development of the material base of the city's diversified complex, from the position of the third - maximum preservation of valuable natural landscapes and ensuring environmental balance, which ultimately has a positive effect on the health of the population.
Based on an assessment of the efficiency of using municipal property, it is possible to plan options for using real estate (sale, lease, transfer to management, pledge, contribution to authorized capital created society).
The general basis for planning any of the listed activities is to determine the real market value real estate object. The main criterion for selecting an option is the maximum income from the implementation of a particular option for using a municipal property.
Consequently, one of the most important tasks of a municipality is to increase the efficiency of municipal property management as an unusual process of self-analysis, which should be present in the relevant management organizations.
One of the methods for increasing the efficiency of municipal property management is to hold competitions for positions of managers and municipal enterprises and institutions, improve the qualifications of management personnel, strictly control over their work, and evaluate their activities based on the results of the work of the complexes they manage.
The second is strict control over staffing table enterprises, which must exactly correspond to the volume of services they provide or work performed.
The third method is to lease municipal property on a competitive basis and organize auctions so that more profitable projects and investors have an advantage.
The main requirement for the sale or lease of a structure by a local community is that these procedures must be consistent with market conditions (auction, competition, and the requirement to ensure a market sale price, rent). The right to sell and lease buildings of the local community corresponds to its right to acquire old industrial buildings into private property. The purpose of the latter operation is to encourage new use after renovation by providing a discount to the buyer or lessee to cover the difference between the typically higher cost of refurbishment and its market price.
In addition, in some municipal areas that require the promotion of the creation or expansion of economic activity in the areas of local government (for example, in the field of landscaping), local communities may provide discounts from market price sale or rental of real estate, for example, in the amount of 25% of the sale price or rental value of buildings.
Another method of increasing the efficiency of municipal property management may be to establish a procedure for accepting management decisions in case of failure to implement the program (plan, business plan). In particular, when justifying the impossibility of achieving a goal or implementing programs, decisions can be made on reorganization, liquidation of an enterprise, institution, privatization of municipal property, etc.
One can not only agree with these methods as providing the right approach to the direction of the current situation, but also a normative addition to them should be adopted at the local level legal act, according to which a mandatory clause of the agreement (contract) with the head of the enterprise will be a rule establishing the right of the owner of the transferred municipal property to relieve this manager from his position if the performance of the organization does not meet certain requirements.
However, the range of methods for improving the efficiency of municipal property and financial management is quite limited. The main problem is the preparedness and qualifications of management personnel, as well as their interest in the results of their activities.
Common for most countries modern world the tendency is to reduce the actual communal affairs and expand the mandatory and delegated ones. This situation reflects the increasing integration of local bodies into the state mechanism, their adaptation to solving, first of all, problems of national importance.
In this case, it is necessary to talk about reforming the relations between state and local authorities, namely the need to review the distribution of issues of jurisdiction (and, accordingly, property), municipalities and state power, taking into account the opinion of each municipality, in order to more effectively use municipal property.
Thus, problems associated with the efficiency of municipal property management are caused, first of all, by the imperfection of legislation, which is designed to create conditions for the normal functioning of all participants in legal relations, including in the economic and social spheres. It is here that the municipal property management system is implemented in a single municipality. The social orientation of municipal property is especially important. The problem of bulkiness and dilapidation of a large number of municipal property is also obvious. The ways to improve the efficiency of municipal property management are varied and municipalities need to carry out systematic and targeted work in this direction.
municipal property social economic
It is well known that the reality and effectiveness of local self-government is determined primarily by the material and financial resources at their disposal. The lack of sufficient financial resources in city budgets forces city authorities to improve budget and tax policies. And first of all, this is the establishment of payments for the use of natural resources and, in particular, payments for urban real estate.
Effective management of municipal property is an integral part of the activities of the city administration in order to replenish the budget for solving economic and social problems.
The definition of municipal property is specified in Article 215 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation - property owned by right of ownership to urban and rural settlements, as well as other municipal entities, is municipal property.5
On behalf of the municipality, the rights of the owner are exercised by local government bodies and the persons specified in Article 125 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation.
Municipal property management is a scientific and economic discipline that studies the system of relations of its subject (owner) to the property belonging to him as his own, which is expressed in the possession, use, and disposal of said property, as well as in the elimination of interference of all third parties in that area of economic domination , over which the power of the owner extends.
In recent years, the interest of scientists and practitioners in the problem of the efficiency of use of municipal property has become increasingly noticeable. The increasing relevance of this problem is due to the ineffective use of municipal lands, which are often rented out or, even worse, sold at minimal prices. Municipal property is in a dilapidated condition, often unfit for use and in need of major repairs.
Municipal property, along with local finances, constitutes economic basis local government. The issues of forming effective management and disposal of municipal property are therefore a priority for municipalities. For newly created municipalities, the problem of speedy and comprehensive regulatory support for the activities of local government bodies in managing municipal property is of particular relevance.6 Solving the problem of creating effective system Municipal property management involves the concentration of rule-making, organizational and management efforts of local governments in the following main areas:
1. Ensuring proper (i.e., complete and timely) accounting of municipal property and maintaining its register, including a multidimensional (technical, economic, legal) description of the relevant accounting objects.
2.Ensuring the optimality of management decisions on the disposal of municipal property (maintaining a balanced balance of social, fiscal and investment goals), including when it is alienated, assigned to economic management or operational management, transferred for use or trust management, made as a contribution to the creation business entities, use as collateral for loan obligations (mortgage).
5 Civil Code of the Russian Federation Art. 215 “Right of municipal property”
6 Nekrasov V.I. Municipal property in the system of municipal management // Problems of regional economics. - 2010. - No. 3/4.- P. 302-310.
3. Ensuring proper maintenance and effective use municipal property, including measures to increase the investment attractiveness of municipal real estate.
4. Ensuring effective control over the safety and intended use of municipal property.7
The construction of an integrated system of municipal property management requires the manifestation of active rule-making efforts on the part of the municipalities themselves. In their rule-making activities, municipalities today are following the path of adopting separate regulations in certain areas of activity for the management and disposal of municipal property. Some experience has already been gained in applying such regulations in practice. It seems that this experience can be used to develop a comprehensive legal act that will regulate almost all aspects of the management and disposal of municipal property.
Separate sections of a comprehensive regulatory legal act may be devoted to the following issues:
1.Accounting for municipal property;
2.Control over the use of municipal property; 3.Creation and reorganization of enterprises and institutions; 4. Liquidation of enterprises and institutions;
5.Enterprise management; 6.Participation in business companies;
7. Disposal of real estate assigned to the enterprise; 8. Sale of municipal housing stock;
9. Transfer of property for use under an agreement;
10. Crediting the cost of major repairs against rent;
11. Sublease of property;
12. Trust management of property;
13. Participation in investment activities by transferring property to the investor;
14. Pledge of municipal property;
15. Write-off of municipal property.
Despite its comprehensive nature, this document will nevertheless make references to other regulatory and legal acts. Thus, authorized local government bodies should additionally develop and adopt the following regulations:
Regulations on the commission for the disposal of municipal property;
On the procedure and conditions for insurance of municipal property;
On approval of approximate forms of charters of municipal unitary enterprises and municipal institutions;
On approval of the approximate form of the contract with the head of the municipal unitary enterprise;
Regulations on the Supervisory Board;
On the procedure for establishing and changing the amount of the part of profit of a municipal unitary enterprise transferred to the budget;
On trusted representatives of the municipality in non-profit organizations;
Regulations on the procedure financial incentives activities of municipal representatives in the management bodies of business entities;
On the competitive appointment of sellers of municipal property;
On the procedure for privatization of municipal housing stock;
On the procedure for conducting tenders for the right to conclude contracts for the transfer of municipal property for temporary possession, use and disposal;
7 Vasin V.V. Strategy for managing the property of a municipal entity: mechanisms for development and implementation // Izv. Ural. state economy un-ta. - 2010. - No. 1. - P. 116-123.
On the use of funds received from the rental of non-residential premises;
On the organization of maintenance and operation of municipal non-residential facilities located in the municipal treasury.
It should also be borne in mind that a comprehensive regulatory and legal act will not apply to the procedure for managing and disposing of such municipal property as land and other natural objects, budget funds, extra-budgetary and currency funds of the municipality, as well as securities(except for shares). The procedure for managing and disposing of the specified municipal property will also be established by other regulatory legal acts.
Thus, the problems associated with the efficiency of municipal property management are caused, first of all, by the imperfection of legislation, which is designed to create conditions for the normal functioning of all participants in legal relations, including economic and social spheres. It is here that the system of municipal property management is implemented in a single municipality. The social orientation of municipal property is especially important.
Bibliography
1. Vasin V.V. Strategy for managing the property of a municipal entity: mechanisms of development and implementation // Izv. Ural. state economy un-ta. - 2010. - No. 1. - P. 116-123.
2. Civil Code of the Russian Federation dated November 30, 1994 No. 51-FZ ( current edition from 10/22/2014)
3. Nekrasov V.I. Municipal property in the system of municipal management // Problems of regional economics. - 2010. - No. 3/4. - P. 302-310.
In order to increase the efficiency of use of municipal property, we propose the following measures within the areas outlined above.
1. It seems necessary to sell, as soon as possible, land plots under privately owned real estate, which will allow:
· merge the land plot and the buildings, structures, structures located on it into a single real estate object;
· significantly increase the creditworthiness, capitalization and competitiveness of the copyright holders of such objects, and therefore the country as a whole;
· introduce a unified real estate tax.
1. It is necessary to carry out a large-scale transformation of municipal unitary enterprises into state-owned enterprises and joint-stock companies with subsequent privatization in accordance with certain functions of local governments. In particular, it is necessary to privatize unitary enterprises that perform such “economic” functions as technical inventory, land management work, provision of municipal transport, etc. at the federal level, in order to clarify the legal status of state-owned enterprises, it is necessary to develop a federal law “On state-owned enterprises”.
It is necessary to reconsider the principles of state management of unitary enterprises. In the case of transfer of a municipal enterprise as an object to trust management, local government bodies will receive profit from such an enterprise, since for this there will be a real mechanism for the responsibility of the trustee for the results of its activities. According to Art. 1022 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, a trustee who has not shown due care for the interests of the beneficiary or the founder of the management during the trust management of property, compensates the beneficiary for lost profits during the trust management of the property, and the founder of the management - losses caused by loss or damage to the property, taking into account its natural wear and tear, as well as lost profits. The liability of the trustee-entrepreneur is not conditioned by evidence of guilt; he is released from liability only by force majeure or the actions of the beneficiary (the founder of the management).
When a unitary enterprise is transferred to trust management, local government bodies receive a real mechanism for monitoring the compliance of the trustee with the qualifications of a high professional entrepreneur and have the right to terminate the trust management agreement with the trustee at any time, subject to payment of remuneration to him. Note that the head of the organization is the subject labor law subject to dismissal only in exceptional cases: making an unjustified decision that entailed a violation of the safety of property, its unlawful use or causing damage to another organization, or a one-time gross violation of one’s labor duties, or in cases provided for by the employment contract.
3. Equity participation and partnership. Local authorities may enter into partnerships with private sector businesses to provide certain services on a contract basis (partnership). In addition, they can purchase as many shares of private enterprises as necessary to establish full control over the decisions of the enterprise as the main shareholder (equity participation).
The choice between equity participation and partnership is a reflection of the circumstances and nature of the economic activity. If a private enterprise already provides a certain type of service in a given territory, and local government has legislatively acquired the authority to provide these services, then equity participation may be the most realistic way to ensure control. On the other hand, if a certain type of economic activity has not previously been carried out in a given territory, then it may be more practical to partner either with a private enterprise engaged in it in other regions, or with an enterprise that has experience in providing similar services.
The main difference between a partnership and an equity interest is that stock interests are generally easier to give up. This can be done simply by selling your shares to the relevant business. Relations with enterprises through partnerships are less flexible, since they are usually fixed by agreement, and the sale of a share in the partnership may be either practically impossible or not permitted by this agreement.
4. Creation of intermunicipal enterprises. The main goal of the activities of local government bodies is to resolve issues to satisfy the everyday, social, cultural, educational, medical and other vital needs of the population of municipalities. Resolving these issues is possible only if local governments have sufficient financial and material resources at their disposal, through which it would be possible to organize the provision of relevant services and goods to the population of these entities on the territory of municipalities. At the same time, the funds and material resources available to local governments for the implementation of plans and programs for the socio-economic development of municipalities, capital investments and budgetary investments in the development of the economy of the respective territories are currently insufficient. The insufficiency of revenue sources of local budgets does not allow local governments to ensure the full and high-quality execution of their powers in the context of the municipal reform carried out in the country.
Due to the fact that the size financial resources necessary to fulfill the expenditure obligations of municipalities does not correspond to the level of real needs of municipalities, and count on significant change in this area is unlikely to stand in the foreseeable future, municipalities need to look for more flexible and effective mechanisms solving the problems facing them to meet the needs of the population living on their territory.
In order to resolve socio-economic issues and in accordance with the Federal Law “On general principles Organizations of Local Self-Government in the Russian Federation" local self-government bodies are currently given the right to participate in the creation of business societies, including intermunicipal ones, necessary for the exercise of powers to resolve issues of local importance. Having the opportunity to combine financial resources, material and other resources of several municipalities within the framework of the relevant business entities and relying on their activities, local governments will be able to:
Expand opportunities to meet certain needs of the population for services and goods;
As a result of the production activities of these companies, receive additional funds for the needs of municipalities in the form of distributed profits.
The right to participate in the creation of business societies, including intermunicipal ones, necessary for the exercise of powers to resolve issues of local importance is also provided for by the Federal Law “On the General Principles of the Organization of Local Self-Government in the Russian Federation.”
The creation (establishment) of business companies (limited liability companies, additional liability companies, open and closed joint-stock companies, including intermunicipal business companies in the form of limited liability companies and closed joint-stock companies) - participants in civil circulation, is determined by the norms of civil legislation, as well as the norms of special legislation of the Russian Federation. State registration of intermunicipal business societies is carried out in accordance with the Federal Law “On State Registration legal entities and individual entrepreneurs,” and their activities are in accordance with the Civil Code of the Russian Federation and other federal laws.
In our opinion, the comprehensive implementation of the above measures will improve the efficiency of use of the property of the Administration of the Taimyr Dolgano-Nenets Municipal Formation.
Effective management of municipal property
The topic is certainly very significant and interesting, especially from the point of view of the prospects for the development of local self-government. At the same time, it is undeniable that municipal property, including municipal property, is one of the economic foundations of local self-government, which is reflected in the European Charter of Local Self-Government, and in the Constitution of the Russian Federation, and in the Federal Law of October 6, 2003 No. 131-FZ “On the general principles of organizing local self-government in the Russian Federation” (hereinafter also Federal Law No. 131-FZ. ). Municipal property in fact exists from the moment of recognition of the right of municipal property and the delimitation of state property into federal, state subjects of the Russian Federation and municipal property and will exist insofar as local self-government exists. From a practical point of view, it is advisable to consider the issue of effective management of municipal property as the most important aspect of effective municipal management as a whole.
Where there is economic activity, there is always the problem of ownership. Property relations permeate the entire system of economic relations and accompany a person from the moment of his birth until his departure to another world. Under effective management(disposal) of property is usually understood as obtaining from it the maximum possible benefit, usually understood as direct income. This would be true if we were talking about private or corporate property, but we are dealing with public property, the disposal of which is carried out in the interests of the population. Here we can talk about benefits (benefits), but in a broader sense. Of course, receiving additional income to the local budget is also in the interests of the population, but it must be borne in mind that the goal of local self-government and, accordingly, municipal government is to ensure the livelihoods of the population, which constitutes the content of issues of local importance. Actually, Federal Law No. 131-FZ, defining the possible composition of municipal property, contains the phrase “property necessary for...”, first of all, “for resolving issues of local importance...”.
In this regard, without establishing specific efficiency criteria (this is a separate problem that requires in-depth study), we will consider the management (disposal) of municipal property to be effective if such goals are achieved. Municipal property is the property of a municipal entity (Article 215 of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation) , that is, the property of urban and rural settlements, as well as their finances, which - at the same time - are separated into a separate component (the totality Money, formed and used to resolve issues related to the financing of certain events).
The territory of the municipality is home to a population united by common interests in resolving issues of local importance. This is a local community that exists on the territory of any municipality.
The population of a municipality is the source of power in the corresponding territory. And since the local community is, in fact, the population living on the territory of the municipality, the local community is the source of power in this territory, and decision-making, including regarding municipal property, is carried out on behalf of the local community.
The Constitution of the Russian Federation talks about independent ownership, use and disposal (by the population) of municipal property (Article 130), self-management(local government bodies) municipal property (Article 132). The Civil Code of the Russian Federation, defining the content of property rights, establishes that “the owner has the rights to own, use and dispose of his property” and that “the owner has the right, at his own discretion, to take any actions in relation to his property that do not contradict the law and other legal acts and not violating the rights and interests protected by law of other persons, including alienating one’s property into the ownership of other persons, transferring to them, while remaining the owner, the rights of ownership, use and disposal of property, pledging property and encumbering it in other ways, disposing of it in other ways.” .
Ownership and use of property, in essence, can hardly be considered an act of management. The word “management” is used in the Civil Code of the Russian Federation in the phrases “trust management”, “operational management”; The word “management” has no independent meaning in civil legislation. In relation to the actions of the owner in relation to property, the Civil Code of the Russian Federation uses the word “dispose”. Based on this, we will further understand the management of municipal property as the disposal of this property by all legal means.
Local governments only “manage (dispose of) municipal property.” And on this basis they are secondary subjects of municipal property rights. These include:
· head of the municipality;
· representative body of the municipality;
· structural bodies and divisions of local administration;
· municipal management body;
· municipal unitary enterprises and municipal institutions;
· other organizations with the right to manage municipal property.
The law includes local budget funds and municipal extra-budgetary funds as municipal property. They act as financial resources for local government. In addition to them, municipal property as material objects includes: property of local governments, municipal lands and natural resources that are in municipal ownership; municipal enterprises and organizations, municipal banks and other financial and credit organizations, municipal housing stock and non-residential premises, municipal institutions of various industries, other movable and real estate.
An analysis of the rule-making documents adopted in recent years indicates that the federal legislator has a basic understanding of the municipality as an ineffective owner (compared to private business), managing, at the same time, significant amounts of property on a national scale. The federal legislator saw a possible solution to the problem in the need to establish compliance of municipal property with the public tasks assigned to municipalities. Such normative legal acts should include, first of all, the following:
· Constitution of the Russian Federation of December 12, 1993;
· Civil Code of the Russian Federation, part one of April 30, 1994;
· Federal Law of October 6, 2003 No. 131-FZ “On the general principles of organizing local self-government in the Russian Federation”;
· Federal Law of December 21, 2001 No. 178-FZ “On the privatization of state and municipal property”;
· On amendments to the legislative acts of the Russian Federation and the recognition as invalid of some legislative acts of the Russian Federation in connection with the adoption of Federal Laws “On Amendments and Additions to the Federal Law “On General Principles of the Organization of Legislative (Representative) and Executive Bodies of State Power of the Subjects of the Russian Federation " and "On the general principles of organizing local self-government in the Russian Federation": Federal Law of August 22, 2004 No. 122-FZ.
· On amendments to the legislative acts of the Russian Federation in connection with the expansion of the powers of state authorities of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation on subjects of joint jurisdiction of the Russian Federation and the constituent entities of the Russian Federation, as well as with the expansion of the list of issues of local importance of municipalities: Federal Law of December 29, 2004 No. 199 -FZ.
· On amendments to certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation in connection with improving the division of powers: Federal Law of December 31, 2005 No. 199-FZ.
As a tool for implementing the ideology of the strictly targeted nature of municipal property in Art. 50 of Federal Law No. 131-FZ, an attempt has been made to use the “closed lists” model, according to which municipal property may exclusively include:
Property intended for resolving issues of local importance established by legislation on local self-government;
Property intended for the implementation of certain state powers transferred to local authorities, in cases established by federal laws and laws of constituent entities of the Russian Federation;
Property intended to support the activities of local governments, their officials, municipal employees, employees of municipal enterprises and institutions.
In cases where municipalities acquire ownership rights to property that cannot be part of the property of the municipality, such property is subject to repurposing (changing the intended purpose of the property) or alienation. The deadline for alienation is 01/01/2012 (subclause 4, clause 8, article 85 of Federal Law No. 131-F3).
The specifics of the emergence, implementation and termination of the right of municipal property, as well as the procedure for recording property, are established by federal legislation. No special law has been adopted in this regard. However, some of the legal relations regarding the transferred property have been settled - clause 11, art. 154 of the Federal Law of August 22, 2004 No. 122-FZ “On amendments to the legislative acts of the Russian Federation and the recognition of some legislative acts of the Russian Federation as invalid in connection with the adoption of Federal Laws “On Amendments and Additions to the Federal Law “On General Principles of the Organization of Legislative Acts” (representative) and executive bodies of state power of the constituent entities of the Russian Federation" and "On the general principles of the organization of local self-government in the Russian Federation" (hereinafter referred to as Federal Law No. 122-FZ). It has been established that the basis for the emergence of the right of a municipal formation to the property transferred by the Russian Federation and the subject of the Federation is, respectively, a decision of the Government of the Russian Federation and executive body state power of a constituent entity of the Russian Federation. The same decisions (only in this case we are talking not about the transfer, but about the acceptance of property) are also the basis for the termination of the right of a municipal entity to the property transferred to the Russian Federation and the subject of the Russian Federation.
Direct economic activities of local governments should certainly be limited, and in truly competitive areas practically stopped. At the same time, it would be more correct to legislatively recognize that the subject of regulation can only be a restriction on certain types of economic activities of local government bodies, but not on the composition of property. Encouraging the release of municipalities from income-generating, but non-core property weakens the economic basis of local self-government, which is already inadequate to the scope of powers, and in the future, limits the ability of municipalities to increase non-tax revenues, which ultimately go to solving issues of local importance.
Let us consider the dynamics and structure of non-tax revenues of municipalities of the Russian Federation in 2006-2008. According to the Ministry of Finance of Russia, the actual receipts of non-tax revenues (including income from business and other income-generating activities of institutions) in 2008 amounted to 278.6 billion rubles, which exceeds the level of 2006 by 107.3 billion rubles. - 62.6% (Table 1). The bulk of non-tax revenues went to the budgets of urban districts (in 2008 - 68.3%, in 2007 - 69.5%, in 2006 - 64.8%) . The share of non-tax revenues of municipal districts in 2008 was 24.2%, in 2007 - 25.2%, in 2006 - 29.0%, and settlements - only 7.5%, 5.3%, 6 .2% respectively.
In the structure of non-tax revenues in 2008, 46.4% were revenues from the use of property in municipal ownership. This is 52.1 billion rubles, or 67.8% higher than the 2006 level. At the same time, the lion's share of income comes from urban districts - 69.8%. The share of this type of income in municipal areas is 20.9%, in settlements - 9.3%.
It should be noted that for 2006-2008. local budget revenues from the sale of material and intangible assets increased by 2.2 times. This is due to the fact that municipalities urgently got rid of non-core assets.
Privatized facilities bring revenue to the budget to a certain extent, in particular in the form of taxes, but these revenues are significantly less than what municipalities could receive if these facilities remained in municipal ownership. In other words, for local governments, privatization has become a unique form of exchanging a long-term source of income for a short-term one. Of course, this exchange allowed municipalities to resolve a number of current issues, but deprived them of a stable channel of revenue to the municipal treasury.
The privatization process left a significant imprint on the structure of municipal property. He excluded from its composition many income-generating objects and thereby entered into a certain contradiction with the needs of local governments. The redistribution of property is not carried out in favor of municipalities, primarily this applies to urban districts and settlements. At the same time, there was a certain imbalance in the volume and quality of property transferred from municipalities of the Russian Federation to the subject of the Federation and vice versa. For example, municipalities transfer into state ownership (in accordance with the division of powers) institutions of social protection and social services, healthcare (specialized medical care, blood transfusion stations, etc.), vocational education, culture (theatrical and entertainment complexes, sports complexes of the Olympic reserve and international class), property of registry offices, post offices, passport and visa service departments, military registration and enlistment offices, environmental control services, sanitary and epidemiological supervision, etc. Basically, the premises occupied by these structures are in satisfactory condition.
In turn, the Russian Federation and the constituent entities of the Federation transfer to the level of local self-government property located in in emergency condition(emergency housing, household enterprises, sewer collectors, water pipelines, etc.) with all the burden of creditor obligations and fines. But the volume of even such transferred federal and regional property is significantly less than that with which municipalities part with. At the same time, on the territory of municipalities there still remains a significant number of state-owned objects that are not used for their intended purpose (abandoned or rented property).
The same situation arises when delineating the property of municipal districts and settlements. Thus, municipal districts first of all transfer property that requires costs to the settlement level. Property that generates income is retained, for example, by markets. According to the author, as a result of such a redistribution of property, the possibility of solving the social and economic problems of most municipalities is reduced.
Another example of narrowing opportunities for the development of services at the municipal level are provisions that, on the one hand, allow local governments to assume additional powers to resolve other issues (not within the competence of local governments of other municipalities or government bodies), and on the other hand, on the other hand, they can take these powers only if they have their own material and financial resources. Thus, a vicious circle arises: it is impossible to have material resources without authority, and it is also impossible to exercise authority without resources.
In practice, there are difficulties in determining the composition of property for objects that may be in municipal ownership. A closed list of property does not make it possible to clearly determine whether municipalities have the right to have any property within their jurisdiction, which is assigned to them by law with the wording “creating conditions...” for carrying out a particular activity.
In a number of cases, when listing municipal property required to resolve issues with the wording “creating conditions...”, for example, “creating conditions for organizing leisure time and providing residents of the settlement with the services of cultural organizations,” “providing conditions for the development of mass media on the territory of the settlement.” physical culture and sports” some property is assigned. In this case, it is allowed to have property intended for organizing leisure time and providing residents of the settlement with the services of cultural organizations, as well as property intended for the development of physical education and sports (clause 10, article 50 of Law No. 1E1-FZ).
In other cases, this property is not assigned, for example, under the authority “to create conditions for providing residents of the settlement with communication services, public catering, trade and consumer services.” The rules on municipal property do not specify any property necessary for the exercise of this power.
The process of forming municipal property also revealed the following problems:
At the federal level, only some procedures for the delimitation of property have been defined, but there is no procedure containing the criteria for delimitation (for example, identifying the circle of users of the disputed property);
Objects of public property (federal, regional, municipal) do not have technical passports, there are no documents establishing ownership or other property rights, and financial resources are required to create such documentation;
The procedure for registering public property rights continues to be complex;
Municipalities have a problem with maintaining ownerless property. At the same time, there is a constant need to amend the rules governing municipal property, caused by the expansion of the powers of local governments. So, for example, at present, in connection with innovations in the delimitation of expenditure obligations (Federal Law dated December 31, 2005 No. 199-FZ “On amendments to certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation in connection with improving the division of powers”, Federal Law dated December 29, 2006 No. 258-FZ “On amendments to certain legislative acts of the Russian Federation in connection with the improvement of the division of powers”) it is necessary to make an addition by expanding the list of property necessary for the improvement and protection of forests, the implementation of civil defense measures, the protection of the population and territory from emergency situations , creating and organizing the activities of emergency rescue services, organizing events for mobilization preparation of enterprises and institutions, ensuring the safety of people on the waters, creating and developing medical and recreational areas and resorts of local importance.
Separately, it is necessary to consider the issue of the right of municipal ownership of land plots. If we talk about land plots as an element of municipal property, then it should be said that municipal property includes land plots that are recognized as such by federal (regional) laws - Art. 19 of the Land Code of the Russian Federation (LLC RF). The right of municipal ownership of plots arises when delineating state ownership of land and when acquiring them on civil law grounds. At the same time, only land plots classified as municipal property in accordance with federal laws (Articles 14-17 of Law No. 122-FZ) are considered municipal property. The same legal norms are contained in the legislation on local self-government (Article 50 of Law No. 131-F3). There is a certain institutional contradiction.
It is necessary to keep in mind that the RF Land Code adheres to the concept of “presumption of alienation” of land from state or municipal property (when compared with the “presumption of alienation” of property that cannot be part of municipal property). The Land Code of the Russian Federation establishes when a refusal to provide land plots in state or municipal ownership for construction is allowed (clause 4, article 28 of the Land Code of the Russian Federation): withdrawal of land plots from circulation, established federal law a ban on the privatization of land plots, the fact of reserving land plots for state or municipal needs.
To summarize, it should be noted that the process of redistribution of property between federal center, subjects of the Federation and municipalities, which is carried out following the delimitation of spending powers by levels of government, is contradictory and slow, which leaves a significant destabilizing and disincentive imprint on the property independence of regional and municipal budgets.
The property redistribution scheme requires improvement. Therefore, in order to strengthen financial and property relations at the municipal level, the author proposes:
Eliminate contradictions arising due to the strict linkage of issues of local importance to the composition of municipal property, as well as soften the imperative requirements for the transfer of municipal property. This will reduce the risks of narrowing opportunities for the development of services at the level of municipalities;
Eliminate problems with the objective determination of the composition of property, including bringing the procedure for delimiting public property into line with the new structure of local government.
At the level of municipalities, it seems advisable to strengthen the organization of control over the calculation and receipt of land tax and property tax for individuals. To do this you need:
Systematically carry out measures to identify the owners of land plots and other real estate and involve them in taxation;
Assist in registration of ownership rights to land plots and property individuals;
Establish economically feasible tax rates for local taxes.
The formation of objective information about buildings and structures on the territory of the municipality determines the creation of a register of municipal property, information system urban planning activities, which will also allow timely identification of newly constructed objects for which property rights have not been registered in the prescribed manner. At the same time, it is important to follow the principles of complete accounting of taxpayers and specifications for taxation of land plots.
In order to ensure completeness of registration of taxpayers, it seems advisable for local authorities to carry out work to identify owners of property and land plots who have not formalized property rights in the prescribed manner, as well as explanatory work with individuals who are potential payers of property tax for individuals. This work must also be carried out when issuing permits for construction and commissioning of objects, since the developer is obliged to submit title documents for the land plot to local authorities.
For the effective and efficient management of numerous city property objects, the Property Management Department of the Samara Administration conducts register of municipal property, which is regulated by the Regulations “On accounting and maintaining the register of municipal property of the Samara urban district” (Approved by Resolution of the Samara City Duma No. 63 of April 26, 2001). Maintaining the Register allows you to clearly determine the composition and structure, condition and movement of municipal property in the territory of the urban district.
In accordance with the Register, all city property objects are divided into three categories:
1. Property of municipal enterprises and institutions;
2. Property included in the city treasury, that property that is not assigned to municipal enterprises and institutions - movable and immovable property - machines, machines, equipment, buildings and structures, engineering infrastructure objects.
3. Land plots.
To date, the register of municipal property of Samara has included :
187 land plots with an area of 125 hectares;
9,871 residential premises (including 124 dormitories);
3,630 non-residential objects, which include unfinished construction projects.
916 structures (technological complexes, electrical and telephone networks, gas pipelines, heat, sewer, water and other networks);
65 road and bridge facilities (roads, parks and squares, embankments, bus turning areas, squares, lawns and sidewalks);
3,411 objects of movable property - transport, baby equipment container sites, technical means traffic management, satellite location system GPS-GLONASS.
If speak about distribution of non-residential premises of municipal property according to certain species rights, then on the territory of Samara they are presented as follows. Most of the premises - 58.6% - are under operational management, 15.4% - rental property of the municipal treasury, 12.9% - under economic management, 7.4% - for rent and 5.7% - for free use.
Non-residential premises, which the City District Administration provides for rent, are distributed among commercial enterprises (62%), entrepreneurs (19%), state enterprises and institutions (9.28%), individuals (8.44%), public organizations (1 .2%), municipal enterprises and institutions (0.05%) and religious organizations (0.03%). A small proportion of premises rented by municipal enterprises and religious organizations is explained by the fact that these organizations are provided with premises on the basis of free use, operational management and economic management.
- 616 municipal institutions (including pre-school educational institutions - 201, school - 184, medical - 42 and others / additional education, culture, sports / - 189);
- 78 municipal enterprises;
- 28 business entities, co-founded by the Property Management Department of the Samara Urban District.
Of the 78 municipal enterprises registered in the city, 54 are operating, 24 are at the stage of reorganization, liquidation and bankruptcy, and 4 are not operating. economic activity(MP “Promzhilservis”, MP Cinema “Plamya”, MP “Zimovets”, MP “Metallservice”).
Of the 54 operating municipal enterprises, a large share - 34% (20 MP) - falls on the housing and public utilities sector, 12% (7 MP) - on public improvement, and 10% (5 MP) - on the transport industry. Five municipal enterprises (10%) represent the cultural and leisure sector, 3 municipal enterprises (6%) are cinemas, two municipal enterprises (4%) each account for construction, public catering and funeral services, and one more enterprise (2%) each for parks culture and recreation, and healthcare.
We see that the bulk of institutions work in the field of education. At the same time, in other sectors, institutions of municipal ownership are poorly represented. This allows us to speak about the poor development of public service industries in such important areas as the healthcare sector.
In addition to those listed, the municipal property of the city of Samara also includes other objects in accordance with federal legislation (for example, municipal lands, financial and credit institutions, etc.), as well as the finances of the municipality.
Consideration of the issue of the formation and composition of municipal property of the Municipal District "Samara City District" allows us to draw the following conclusions. Firstly, the process of formation of municipal property in the city took place in ways characteristic of the entire Russian Federation; At the same time, the municipality practically did not participate in the privatization process. Secondly, the total fund of municipal property on the city’s balance sheet is quite significant and cumbersome when compared by this parameter (the number of municipal property objects) regional center with other cities and districts of the region. And thirdly, a significant part of municipal property is in disrepair or dilapidated condition, which requires city authorities to high costs for the maintenance and upkeep of these facilities.
To change the current situation, it is necessary to take a number of measures:
· increasing the amount of information about competitions and auctions at which the privatization of municipal properties takes place, attracting the interest of potential buyers through advertising;
· carry out a market valuation of objects subject to privatization and leasing and other transactions in order to determine the real market price;
· reconsider the terms of lease on unprofitable municipal facilities that require significant investments;
· strengthen control during purchase and sale transactions, leasing and other transactions, to prevent the illegality of the acquisition and use of municipal facilities;
· introduction into the practice of managing all property objects of the principles of indicative regulation, involving the introduction of benchmark indicators of management efficiency and the establishment of responsibility of managers for their achievement;
· optimization of the city's ownership structure;
· develop a Concept for municipal property management;
Literature
1. Bedov G. A., Neskorodov V. B. Features of the status of municipal property (statement of the problem). Vladimir, 2008. P. 103.
2. Mishurov S. S., Ledyaykina I. I. Ways to improve the efficiency of complex management commercial real estate subject of the Russian Federation // Socio-economic problems of regional development / ed. count V. N. Eremin, N. A. Amosova. Ivanovo, 2006. P. 119
3. Petrenko P.A. Municipal property management. - M.: Prospekt, 2006.
4. Problems of managing state and municipal property in the process of privatization. Ed. Yu. V. Kuznetsov and V. N. Ivanova - St. Petersburg: St. Petersburg University Publishing House, 2006
5. Rudoy V.V., Ignatov V.G. Local government. - M., Phoenix, 2006
6. Savranskaya O.L. Territorial public self-government // In collection. "Local self-government: problems and ways to solve them" St. Petersburg. 2006
7. Faseev I. On the structure of local government // newspaper "Local Self-Government" No. 7 (94), 2006
9. Shokotko M.A. The main problems of determining the legal regime of property in municipal ownership // Administrative and municipal law, 2008, No. 3 P.13.
Internet resources:
1. http://www.AUD.ru/booksGrischenko O.V. Analysis and diagnostics of the financial and economic activities of the enterprise. Tutorial.
2. http://www.Gordumasamara.ru/budget/Portal of the City Duma. Samara, budget section http://www.citv.samara.ru Official website of the Samara city district. http://www.sqpress.ru/novosti/politika/kazusi-oblastnogo-minfina “Samara newspaper” issue dated 04/16/2010.
3. http://www.regnum.ru/news/971591.htmlInformation agency “Regnum” release dated December 29, 2008.
4. http://news.samaratoday.ru/news “News Samara” issue dated March 18, 2008,