A year has passed since the administrative territorial reform has been completed and the Environment Protection and Regional Development Ministry has given its assessment. LETA asked Adazi municipal council chairman Maris Sprindzuks (Latvia’s Regional Alliance) about the first year after the merger of municipalities.

How has the first year after the reform been?

I have been a mayor for nine years, and, I should say, that this has been the most difficult year so far. Winter was especially hard when budgets and regulations had to be coordinated in order to ensure equality and balance. It was all very complicated.

Was there huge difference between Adazi and Carnikava?

Yes. Even though we were neighboring municipalities, friendly, still each municipality historically had selected a different strategy. For example, Adazi had focused on the education sector - it has the largest secondary school in Latvia, a large art school, a large sports school, strong extra-curricular activities. Carnikava is a municipality by the sea, its local residents most likely spend time there mostly in summer, thus, the education sector was small, and there was a focus on other aspects. The budgets were different. If Carinkava could afford free meals at school for pupils of grades 1-9, Adazi just cannot afford it because of a much larger number of pupils. It was complicated to coordinate all that, explain the residents why we cannot afford it.

The Environment Protection and Regional Development Ministry said that municipalities are on the road of development. What about Adazi and Carnikava municipalities. Has the merger given hope for faster development?

Honestly speaking, I think that we slowed down our development with this reform. At least Pieriga lost the development speed. Instead of thinking about development, we were busy serving the government’s idea that the reform is necessary, Many of the mergers in Pieriga region were not logical or necessary. What should be considered is coordination of functions and planning of joint investments - in relation to public transport, development of road infrastructure, the police offices, the State Fire and Rescue Service offices. This is where cooperation is necessary. But this reform does not promote or stimulate this cooperation in any way. Even the opposite, we are now busy with technical merger issues of structural units because the government decided so. One or two years in development are lost. Local residents do not understand it either, the development center migrated further away from them. Speaking about Latvia in general, the local power moved further away from people, and it objectively is a negative effect.

Would it be more logical to merge the whole Pieriga region in one or two municipalities with Riga as a development center?

Riga is the center of Pieriga and the center of half of Latvia. A half of Latvian residents commute to work to Riga or send their children to schools there. At the same time, Copenhagen, for example, is not just one municipality - it consists of 12 municipalities. The metropolis model can be formed in different ways, and it could be done without merging Pieriga municipalities, leaving Babite, Marupe, Adazi, Carnikava as separate units. I think this would have been better. It is clear that Riga will always offer such services as universities, vocational schools, large hospitals, and Pieriga municipalities should not copy these functions, while preschool education and sports infrastructure should be developed on the spot. People do not wish to live in the city. As Pieriga municipality we should serve this development. This is why a simple and mechanical merger will do no good. The local power should be close to people to the local situations.

There were discussions about extended Rigas Satiksme routes to Pieriga. This is a second summer already, but the buses are not running. Who will finance it?

The population density around Riga is high. Adazi and Carnikava would like to have more bus runs and buses will be full. The number of bus runs, however, is planned based on how big the subsidy budget is. A new route can be opened only if another one is closed. It turns out that Pieriga does not provide transportation services at the level people would like to and are willing to pay, but at the level of the target subsidy granted by the government. The whole system is wrong.

How to solve it? In Riga, one bus ride costs twice the ticket price and Riga cannot finance transportation of Pieriga passengers. Would Adazi be ready to pay?

If we could separate bus transportation from Rigas Satiksme, the company should be restructured. Then we should form a unified company with Pieriga municipalities as shareholders. In that case there would be one company, unified tariffs, unified principles. The buses could run 15 kilometers outside Riga - to Adazi, Carnikava, Saulkrasti. If buses are full, there is no logical need for target subsidies. Now, passenger transportation in Riga is subsidized because there are protected social groups with discounts. In my opinion, a huge audit should be carried out, also because transportation companies are using the soft spots of the system, cash transactions and we do not know the real number of passengers. This is what should be done, but the administrative reform did not go in this direction. It did not cover regional problems and functions.

Reduction of the number of local lawmakers has been mentioned as one of the most significant benefits of the reform. How much have Adazi and Carnikava saved on this account?

The number of local lawmakers was cut by half. These are 15 jobs. But lawmakers did not receive full-time wage. At the same time, we have new functions. Thus, the administrative expenses did not decline, but increased by EUR 200,000 this year. Administrative costs have increased also in other municipalities. What former environment protection and regional development minister Juris Puce promised earlier on economy of EUR 180 million or EUR 4 million in each municipality - I am sorry - it is rubbish! There is no saving of money because we have not developed more efficient systems. Wages of lawmakers cannot ensure millions in economy. Also, these mergers require additional expenses in IT systems, unified accountancy software, etc. Thus, in the first two years expenses will grow. Maybe only in municipalities merging several territories something can be economized on account of several structural units merged into one. Maybe the reform did good in those regions with low population, but in Pieriga we were forcibly merged and not on principles that seemed logical for local people. We were not asked for opinions.

Environment Protection and Regional Development Minister Toms Arturs Pless believes that municipalities now can save on joint procurements. Is it so?

I partly agree. For example, if we buy salt for treating streets in winter or some outsourced services on a larger scale, such as insurance for employees, I agree that we might get better prices. But it was not the central goal when the reform was started.

What is the situation with the municipal budget? Is it so that Carnikava is pulling Adazi downwards?

I would not like to go into such detail because we are living like one family. Of course, there were peculiarities in management of resources in Adazi and Carnikava, and we were surprised at some aspects. There are mistakes in the large European funds projects, and it left an impact of several millions on the budget. But it is just half of the problem. The main problem is, which I do not understand, why the government for the third year tries to take away EUR 100 million from municipal budgets, knowing that municipal expenses for services are only growing. Instead, there is a weird instrument created - the investment program for high-readiness projects - distributing money to any projects that have been prepared and can be categorized as "high readiness". It could be understandable during Covid-19 pandemic as the economy had to be warmed up, but this year there is no reason to use this instrument. Covid-19 has slowed down, economy does not have to be warmed up, inflation is skyrocketing, and municipalities are taken away income from their residents’ income tax.

What are you doing to ensure that Carnikava residents do not feel like they have lost any influence in the municipality?

First, when going to the elections, we tried to define that the main value will be equality. So that people in both municipalities feel equal. For example, Adazi had one social support program, Carnikava had different programs. By merging the budgets together, we could not fund everything. We had to explain why some things are improving, some others are kind of deteriorating compared to the historic approaches. For example, free lunches at schools - Adazi has the biggest secondary school in Latvia and the impact of free lunches on the budget would be EUR 1 million. We are now focusing on families with many children. We were developing new policies where we understood that the old ones in one or another municipality were not good. We are developing new principles fair and just for everybody.

The ministry mentioned that another benefit from the reform is improvement of availability and capacity of human resources. Is it now easier to find specialists now?

Unfortunately, it is the contrary. Before coming to the interview, I had a conversation with a school director. We have 14 vacancies at schools. We cannot find teachers of chemistry, physics and other subjects. We have to think how to attract them. At the same time, the Education and Science Ministry carries out a reform and says that wages for teachers in Pieriga will not be increased, but wages will be increased for other teachers, irrespective of the number of children or any quality indicators. The same situation is withy the municipal services. Riga and Pieriga are a joint job market and we are not competitive. The situation is getting worse. If we cannot find preschool teachers, it means that we are heading in the wrong direction.

Would increase of wages solve anything?

This is a complex issue. There is a wage, there is workload, there is school prestige. What I see in Riga - prestigious center schools and gymnasiums, huge competition, children from Pieriga municipalities want to get in. And there are schools in suburbs, half-empty, they have problems with the education level and teachers. We have developed a group of elite schools and then there are others. Another problem is that the number of children in Pieriga municipalities is growing and will grow until 2030. It means that we should build new schools. In order to build new schools, we need loans. Adazi and Carnikava already have built two new schools, we cannot afford another loan. And this is where a targeted state support should come, instead of distributing EUR 37 million based on political grounds.

If you build a new school, what will you do if there are not enough teachers for the existing schools already?

This is what I mean by saying it is a complex issue - premises, prestige of teacher’s job, state policy and the rest.

Why do these elite schools not face shortage of teachers?

I think that they are short of teachers too. My child attends Riga Gymnasium No. 3, and they have the same problems with teachers as Pieriga. Local governments are considering new and new incentives to attract teachers - we are stealing them from each other, but it is not a solution. The whole situation should change.

Is Adazi still short of places for children in preschools?

Last year we opened 300 new places in preschools and the situation slightly improved. But the trends are obvious. The number of troops in Adazi is growing, the number of building permits in Adazi and Carnikava is rising. Therefore, we should build more kindergartens, but I do not see how we can do it in the current financial situation. It would be right to develop a targeted state policy for services that are obviously needed. Demography is an accurate science. The number of children in Pieriga is growing. Such municipalities as Marupe, Adazi should definitely build education institutions. In Riga, for example, the number of children will drop by one fifth for 2030. Cooperation, model and data are necessary. Now each municipality if fighting its own battle.

Latvia has population of less than two million, which is just one municipality in a global scale. Maybe we do not need municipalities at all?

There is such a model in Russia. In the post-Soviet system, municipalities are a part of the centralized budget. What is happening here after the reform is similar. Latvia is not copying the European model where local governments are autonomous and focusing on increasing their own income, agreeing with residents on such taxes and duties that would be used for matters important for residents. Now the money is redistributed for the good of the central budget, and politicians, at their own understanding, distribute money for the goals and municipalities that seem right to them. This approach is wrong. People living in Cesis, Adazi or Liepaja know better what they need.

Adazi is a different municipality from others in Latvia because it has to live with NATO military base, having its pros and cons. Are there plans to expand the military base and what it would mean for Adazi?

I have had close cooperation with all ministers. However, I have no dialogue with the Defense Ministry. The minister had not visited me and I have not visited him. Of course, on occasions we meet and shake hands. As far as I understand, it is a matter of political affiliation. But there are many issues that require solutions. I believe that military municipalities, like in the rest of Europe, should receive taxes from the infrastructure there. Then residents would be compensated in some way for the inconveniences - noise, accidents. But we have another large city like Adazi on the other bank of the Gauja river that is not paying property tax. If the troops live there, they cannot register their residency there. How can we repair roads around the military base which are used by us and your military equipment? This money is fought for in tough battles in a form of investments. Even for increase of capacity of the water supply system - we had to prove that the base is growing so fast that our water treatment facility was not able to deal with it, and you should buy your own quota like Orkla production plant has bought its quota. And again, we are spending time and resources, and they have to think whether to buy new uniforms or give this money to the municipality. The system is not right. Their children also need schools, kindergartens, health care, therefore they should participate in the tax system. It is do in Denmark, Sweden and Germany. We should not ask for it. Now we are beggars.

How successful are you in cooperation with the former political forces of Carnikava? The formation of the coalition was heated. Do you still have to find complicated compromises?

A year has passed. We are cooperating, consulting. The issues are quite complicated. I try to avoid any public finger pointing. They were doing the best they could in their situation, we are doing our best. I am thinking more about the residents who are now living in a merged municipality. There are people behind every lawmaker. They have been elected by a certain group of people, and this group should be respected. Thus, I try to follow the principle of equality so that the coalition does not make decisions behind closed doors. I am trying to run a transparent process. All decisions are made at meetings, everybody receives information at the same time, all lawmakers are equal.

We should congratulate you with Adazi becoming a town since July 1. Is it just a status and name or are there any real benefits from it?

Marupe, Kekava and Adazi voiced objections to the ministry about the necessity to grant the status of the town. Four example, Kekava has four centers - Daugmale, Kekava, Baldone, Balozi, Adazi has two centers - Adazi and Carnikava. There is nothing good from the status of a town. I would like to have these decisions made from the part of residents. If we want to feel like a town, we call ourselves a town. If we want to feel like a rural territory, then it is a value that should be respected. But we were forced this status by law, under the administrative territorial reform. But then I see that we are called a town when it is convenient, but when the money is being distributed, then the ministry says that we are not development centers and money will not be granted. I do not understand it. There is no principle, no logic. The law says that we are a town - let’s be a town. Let’s celebrate it!