Funds for tourism and beautification, while Russia is just 3 km from the city: what's wrong with Pokrovsk's budget for 2025?

The city military administration has formed a budget for Pokrovsk for 2025. According to Oleg Popenko, the chairman of the consumer services society, funds are allocated for the following expenses:

• 30 million hryvnias for "non-existent" heating;
• 34 million for beautification;
• 37 million for disaster prevention;
• 14 million for media support;
• over 21 million for tourism, culture, and heritage protection;
• two million for libraries;
• over five million for museums, palaces, and cultural centers.

"And this is considering that, according to DeepState, the Russians are only 3 km away from the city," emphasized Oleg Popenko.

In turn, Ukrainian serviceman Stanislav Bunyatov, with the call sign "Osman," noted that no one will invest in a destroyed city because the funds would simply be stolen.

"Later, these funds will be used to build houses for the great-grandchildren of Pokrovsk residents who moved to Switzerland," stressed "Osman."

Pokrovsk's 2025 Budget: Who is Responsible?

"The question is how reasonable, justified, and anti-corruption this decision is, but they have the right to make such a decision according to current Ukrainian legislation," said Neskhodovsky.

According to economist Boris Kushniruk, the decision to allocate expenses in the budget is the responsibility of local authorities, but there is a nuance.

He finds it absurd that someone is allocating funds for beautification when there are not enough resources for the army's needs.

"It's not even about salaries, but about everything related to procurement — electronic warfare systems, drones, equipment repairs, and so on. Therefore, this is undoubtedly a question for the authorities — how can this happen? Unfortunately, there are many such examples, including in areas of actual combat," noted the economist.

Cancel the Decision or Redirect Funds? Can the Local Budget Be Changed?

Neskhodovsky pointed out that central authorities do not have the right to interfere in local government decisions. However, local communities have the opportunity to express their position to deputies so that they vote to cancel the relevant decision.

Moreover, the economist is convinced that the Cabinet of Ministers should determine by its order the goals for which funds from local budgets can be spent, and reduce the percentage of the overall budget that can be used for beautification, or eliminate it entirely.

"Then the decision can only be changed by the deputies themselves — to amend the relevant budget," explained Neskhodovsky.

He believes that such cases are the fault of the Cabinet of Ministers, which, despite outlining priority areas for the use of funds in local budgets at the beginning of the full-scale invasion, did not restrict their use.

"This is why throughout 2023-2024, we saw such unjustified expenditures, where funds that could have been used more rationally were directed, for example, to relaying paving stones, planting flowers, trees, etc.," concluded the expert.

Kushniruk noted that military administrations, which determine the local budget, are subordinate to the president. However, he cannot focus on Pokrovsk, so to speak, as it is not his level. According to the economist, there should be a mechanism that prevents the spending of local budget funds on such matters during wartime.

"Perhaps the government should issue an order that, aside from the most essential goals related to ensuring the physical functioning of these settlements, no funds can be spent," added Boris Kushniruk.

It is worth noting that on January 2, poet and serviceman Pavel Vyshybaba reported that the entrance to Pokrovsk has a destroyed stele. Meanwhile, according to serviceman Yevgeny Ievlev, the enemy is located within a two-kilometer zone from the city.

At the end of December, it became known that the Pokrovsk MVA signed a contract for the inspection of a house located in the temporarily occupied territory. The winner of the tender was LLC "Azov-Garret," which offered 32,335.20 hryvnias.