Officials in Mykolaiv are suspected of colluding with businesspeople in road construction procurement

In Mykolaiv, equipment and documents were seized in connection with a case involving an alleged scheme to inflate the cost of road repairs, which resulted in losses to the budget of more than 2 million hryvnias. 

The Central District Court of Mykolaiv issued the corresponding ruling on October 29, 2026.

According to the investigation, officials from the Central District Administration allegedly colluded with representatives of commercial entities while organizing procurement for road repairs. Investigators believe that expenses that were not supposed to be paid for by the contracting authority were included in the cost estimates and certificates of completion.

Specifically, this refers to a 5% single tax and a 1% military levy, which entrepreneurs under the simplified taxation system are required to pay from their own income. According to investigators, these tax obligations were shifted to the Central District administration’s budget by including the corresponding amounts in the cost of the repair work.

A forensic economic examination dated September 18, 2026, established that the budget suffered losses of more than 2.9 million hryvnias as a result of the approval and payment of the inflated cost of the work.

Investigators paid particular attention to the role of two employees of the Central District Administration of the Mykolaiv City Council. According to the case file, the head of the Department of Public Utilities, Urban Improvement, Development, and Infrastructure Restoration coordinated with the head of the district administration on road repair projects, communicated with the actual contractors, and approved the repairs even without signed contracts.

According to the investigation, the deputy head of this department oversaw the signing of contracts, certificates of completion, and other documentation with contractors linked to the scheme’s actual organizer. In addition, she ensured the timely submission of bid proposals from sole proprietors under her control, communicated with the person who prepared cost estimates, and with the entrepreneurs’ accountant.

On September 29, 2026, law enforcement officers conducted a search at the accountant’s workplace. There, they seized a Redmi Note 8 Pro cell phone, an ASUS laptop, a computer tower, 12 bank cards, two notebooks with draft notes, a flash drive, electronic keys, and the seals of several sole proprietorships.

In addition, investigators seized documents related to road repair contracts concluded between the Central District administration and the business owners.

The prosecutor requested that the seized property be placed under arrest. The judge granted the motion and placed all the property under arrest. The pretrial investigation is ongoing on charges of embezzlement of budget funds and abuse of official position.

Анна Літман