Tag Archives: seizures

Braverman’s Land Patrol

Stupin, Ilya. “Braverman’s Land Patrol” (“Zemel’nii patrul’ Bravermana”), Ekspert 41, 26 October 2009, 28-34. 28 June 2010 http://dlib.eastview.com.ezproxy.middlebury.edu/browse/doc/20828585.

An examination of the federal government’s practice of distributing seized land in auctions to developers via the Residential Construction Development assistance fund (RZhS Fund).  The new government organization, an initiative of Medvedev’s aimed at creating a renewed market for construction, has begun seizing land from agricultural institutes on grounds of underuse.  Developers in Tyumen’, Kirov, Cheboksarakh, and Kursk have already begun leasing these lands, promised the opportunity to privatize the land after 9-11 years of use.  The article criticizes the RZhS Fund institution as short-sighted, as it is so far unclear as to who will consist the buyers and renters in this new, real-estate-flooded residential building market.  Although, both RZhS Fund head Aleksandr Braverman and construction business heads credit the Fund’s creation with the streamlining of bureaucratic processes and incentivizing of developers’ building-up and eventually privatizing the plots.  Controls on where developers can set rent rates, as well as insufficient budgetary funds allocated for the RZhS count among the Fund’s problems.

Quoting from an interview with Kirov Oblast governor, Nikita Belikh, the second half of the article examines what may be the RZhS’s greatest weakness: a lack of a central region development plan and poor cooperation with the regions in which these infrastructure-less lands are being auctioned.

Moscow prepares to seize

Sichkar’, Olga and Khalil’ Aminov. “Moscow prepares to seize” (“Moskva gotovit izyatie”), Kommersant 197 (4252), 22 October 2009. 22 July 2010 http://www.kommersant.ru/doc-y.aspx?DocsID=1259907.

An evaluation of new legislature proposed by the Moscow Land Resources Department (Moskomzem).  If passed, the law would give Moskomzem the explicit right to seize land that had been left unused for two years (or used outside its allotted use).  Their arguments are that it would stimulate both the fulfillment of the city land plan, as well as the privatization of enterprise lands’ use-rights.  However, one lawyer argues that the law will only be able to be applied to lands under agricultural and construction uses, saying that city administration would be hard pressed to find a legitimate reason to be seizing industrial enterprise land based on non-use of the land.

News of the Week

“News of the Week,” Ekspert Volga 38 (153), 5 October 2009.  30 June 2010 http://www.expert.ru/printissues/volga/2009/38/news_week/.

The Republic of Tatarstan’s Gossovet deputies proposed an amendment to the RF Land Code that would allow seizures of land, the owners of which have not paid their land taxes or put the land to use in the last three years. The proceeds from these lands’ auctions (minus transaction costs) would be used as compensation for the previous proprietors, from whom the land was seized. “The measures put forth by the deputies, indubitably, could enliven the land market and shrink the number of ineffectively used lands.”

Moscow fiddles with its land

Stupin, Ilya. “Moscow fiddles with its land” (“Moskva khimichit s zemlëy”), Ekspert 25, 29 June 2009, 47. 28 June 2010 http://dlib.eastview.com.ezproxy.middlebury.edu/browse/doc/20287329.

Announcement of a new state land asset company, “Moszemsintez,” and reporting on initial transactions.  Moscow vice-mayor Aleksandr Ryabinin will head the company, formed in order to “manage building projects, mixing the functions of a land bank and of developers, including attracting loans for land assets and real-estate to carry out the company’s goals.”  A few dozen acres in southwest Moscow may be transferred to “Moszemsintez” from Moscow-administration-run OAO “Stroitel’no-sberegatel’naya kassa.”  The lands of jewelry factory “Krasnaya Presnya,” bought out by the city, will now be used as a residential area for resettled residents of Kamushka near Moscow City.  Developers are wary of the new organization, as its role in seizures has yet to be defined.

Land seized from Ekaterinburg developers

“Land seized from Ekaterinburg developers,” (“U ekaterinburgskikh zastroyschikov otobrali zemlyu”), Ekspert Ural 26 (382), 6 June 2009. 1 July 2010 http://www.expert.ru/printissues/ural/2009/26/news_nash_dom/.

Report on ZAO Nash Dom losing two land plots that Sverdlovskii arbitration courts ruled had been improperly divided up by the city administration.  The land, nearly 42,000 m2 now returned to the city, was transferred in spring of 2007 by decision of the Ekaterinburg mayor; the courts noted that by law, after October 1, 2005, transfer of land was only legal through an auction.  Although the Land Code does provide that lands included in contracts drawn-up before the 2005 cut-off could be transferred no later than March 1, 2007, since the actual lease agreement had been signed neither by Nash Dom nor by the city, the agreement made by both parties in 2005 did not hold up against the general prosecutor.

Nash Dom must now return the 79 million rubles to investors in the projects planned for the land’s development, as well as face the lost 130 million rubles already spent in the preparation of the land.  Representatives of the company say they will file for compensation of these monies if the lands are returned to the city.  In Ekaterinburg, there are 200 other property transactions that could be disputed by the general prosecutor in the same way; these are the seventh/eighth substantial plots seized as such.