In the past, you were written about in the media in connection with the recreational area in Janov nad Nisou in the Jizera Mountains. In 2020, we were to receive 6 million crowns from the City District of Prague 1 for the operation of this area at the time of the acquisition. Could you explain these financial amounts to the readers?
It is not true that I “received” six million crowns from the City District of Prague 1 in 2020. In the mountain area in Janov nad Nisou, consisting of two buildings: the Outdoor School and the Oáza villa, which are owned by the City District of Prague 1, I provided complete management of the building for almost 27 years on the basis of validly concluded mandate agreements. The City District of Prague 1 financed the operation of the complex in Janov nad Nisou for many years with its regular monthly operating advances of 215 thousand per month for both buildings and also paid a fee for complete management and operation of buildings according to mandate agreements in the amount of 170 thousand per month for and 100 thousand for the villa Oasis. The City District of Prague 1 spent a total of 5,820,000 crowns on the year-round operation of the recreational area in Janov nad Nisou. However, it is necessary to add that all the money that these buildings earned went back to the city district of Prague 1, so the real amount was lower. The same model of operation applied in 2020. From the operating advances of 215 thousand crowns per month for both buildings, fixed costs for the operation of the building were paid every month (for example, advances for electricity and services, payments for legal inspections, waste fees, etc.). All payments made from these operating advances were submitted each month to the Technical and Property Administration Department of the Prague 1 City District, charged for services and any unspent balance, together with income from accommodation, was returned to the Prague 1 City District. 2020 The City District of Prague 1 paid out the amount of 2,580,000, which was a demonstrable way of use for the payment of operating costs that have nothing to do with me. The remaining amount was returned to the City District of Prague 1. All these facts can be verified at the Department of Technical and Property Administration of the City District of Prague 1, which holds all written documentation. The remainder represented the management fee from which we paid for the operation, all remaining costs, and the balance then represented our fee. The idea that you can preserve both objects from day to day and reduce all their costs is completely unrealistic. It is definitely worth mentioning that none of the critics have been watching in person in Janov nad Nisou to this day.
What do you say to what happened around the area of Genoa and your person and family? You say that you were involved in political struggles at the City Hall of Prague 1. Why do you think this happened?
It hit me, upset me, offended me. Personally, I would obviously deal with it somehow, but I can’t accept the fact that my family, husband and son were involved. You know, for almost 30 years, my husband and I have been arranging outdoor stays for children from Prague and Central Bohemia in Genoa. The City District of Prague 1 was satisfied with us all the time. We all spent our free time in the recreation center, we lived by it. We have hundreds or thousands of children with lifelong experiences. I can understand that some of them, especially the new representatives of the City District of Prague 1, had other plans with the recreation center in Janov nad Nisou than children’s stays. My husband and I are, of course, very well aware that we have never owned these buildings. So if part of the political representation of Prague 1 wanted to sell Genoa or wanted to start using it for commercial rents and thus generate more profit, then of course I respect that. In decent society, however, we will not achieve this by unjustifiably defaming someone else. For almost 30 years, the City District of Prague 1 wished and ordered children’s stays at subsidized prices, and at the same time they also received them. If such a wish no longer applies to the City District of Prague 1, so be it. If we take the full occupancy of 100 beds in both buildings and expect only half of the calendar year, then the total cost of the City District of Prague 1 per child was approximately 300 crowns. Judge for yourself whether it is too much or too little. And that’s not counting the funds that we returned to the City District of Prague 1 from the selected accommodation.
Which representatives of the Prague 1 district pointed out certain irregularities with regard to the management of Genoa. These representatives pointed to undelivered lists of accommodated persons, non-publication of documents in the register of contracts or the use of objects for purposes other than the accommodation of children. What is your comment on these allegations?
There have been a number of untruths about me. Our operations in Janov nad Nisou have been inspected by three independent audits, and believe me, when someone sends you such an audit, it is a very thorough inspection. None of these independent controllers found any doubts on our part. By the way, this is also the reason why the Prague 1 City District has never terminated our contracts unilaterally. There was nothing to tell them. After what happened in recent months, however, my husband and I agreed that we did not want to continue in Genoa, and we ended the cooperation by mutual agreement. He waits for any misunderstandings. My husband and I ran a management business in Genoa as part of our business activities, and of course we did not do it for free. However, we performed the administration honestly, for a fair reward and on the basis of validly concluded contracts. Exactly as the City District of Prague 1 wished for years. And I don’t find anything wrong with that. For many years, we paid for all items related to our own operation of the complex from our remuneration. It was our business risk. No idea of some deputies, which was unfortunately taken over by some media, that my husband and I got surprisingly rich in Genoa and that we took millions in our pockets is untrue, absurd and, in my opinion, exceeded the tolerable limit. I believe that anyone who has ever visited some recreational accommodation facilities for children from the past can get a good idea of the alleged “gold mine”.
Representatives of the Prague 1 district also criticized you for drawing on the Antivir program during the covid period. Can you explain to the readers how it was with the support?
Yes, of course I can. After the outbreak of the covid and after it was found that children’s stays will be significantly reduced, we agreed with the representatives of the City District of Prague 1 that we lack any to send operational advances to the Oasis, which covered the cost of electricity and other mandatory payments. . By the way, as a result of this agreement, the City District of Prague 1 received back and saved more than 700,000 crowns in 2020. We didn’t have to do it, the contracts didn’t stipulate this obligation for us, but my husband and I thought it was right. And when it comes to the Antivir program, in those 27 years in Genoa we have created almost a family team of regular employees, many of them have worked for us for over 15 years, many of them are in pre-retirement or retirement age, and my husband and I are simply against they felt a certain moral commitment to these people. We did not want to release them after so many years. In addition, it is necessary to realize that at that time no one knew exactly when the whole covid madness would end and when things would return to normal. And in areas such as the Jizera Mountains, must lose a good and stable employee, because the new search very difficult. Therefore, we submitted a proper application to this program, we communicated all the crucial data and facts and we received the grant. The funds were tied to our employee. I stand behind this, although I realize how easy it can be to criticize this for someone.
Your son has become the new director of the contributory organization. He allegedly knew before the tender was announced that he would become one. You had to use claimed to fall on him from the fall. So how is it? Were you in contact with an official before the competition in this regard?
I must emphatically deny this. I do not consider the way in which my son was attacked to be moral. The new director of the contributory organization was chosen by three independent institutions. The Czech School Inspectorate, the City of Prague and the City District of Prague 1. Does anyone really think that Irena Mühlová can do this? I assure you you must. You know, my son has a relationship with Jan, he grew up with us, he knows the place and he has a very realistic idea of what it means to run children’s recreational facilities. He met all the set qualification requirements. What if, instead of conspiracy theories, we believed, at least for a moment, that he was simply the best candidate? For us and my husband, Genoa is a closed chapter, but we wish our son what No mischiefs and as many happy children and successes as possible.
The case of Genoa