Anatoly Podgorny stated, "The community's assets belong to every resident of the region, including those currently on the front lines."

The war has significantly impacted the life of every Ukrainian, particularly in the management of communal property. The head of the Cherkasy Regional Council, Anatoliy Podhorny, shared his views on privatization, property management during wartime, and future decisions that the council must make. We discussed the conflicts from the last session, the necessity of inventorying, and the importance of preserving resources for veterans and the community.

In this interview, Anatoliy Podhorny explains why his faction opposes hasty property sales, discusses the war's influence on the region's economy, and shares his vision for the future.

Anatoliy Viktorovych, what are your expectations for the next session of the Cherkasy Regional Council on December 20, 2024?

— I anticipate constructive and coordinated work from the council's deputies during this challenging time of armed conflict. Cherkasy expects the adoption of specific, balanced, and consolidated decisions that are crucial for the community. Many pressing issues are on the agenda, and I hope they will find positive resolutions in the upcoming session.

There was a conflict during the last session. What urgent decisions should be made to resolve this conflict and ensure transparency in property management?

— The issue of property management is not new. We did not wait for the session; instead, we made traditional annual decisions to conduct a complete inventory of property. All enterprises of the regional council have complied with this directive by the end of the year. Once the inventory was completed, we informed the deputies and provided them with the opportunity to participate in the process, demonstrating our openness regarding property matters.

Every deputy can obtain answers to any questions, particularly directly from the property holders or managers of communal enterprises. The results of the inventory will be presented to the relevant committee on communal property, entrepreneurship, and regulatory policy. The head of this committee is Deputy Usik Viktor Mykolayovych. I instructed to systematize the inventory results and provide proposals to the relevant committee.

Moreover, during the session, we were accused of inaction regarding privatization; however, the relevant committee has not initiated this issue even once during the term. In contrast, in other councils, deputies initiate important issues they deem necessary to address during meetings.

How do you assess the effectiveness of communal property management in the Cherkasy region over the past few years? Is there a need for systemic changes?

— As deputies, we strive to remain constructive and take into account the realities of this time. At the beginning of our term, we recognized that there are issues that have remained relevant for many years, and we worked on a system of measures to address them. One of the fundamental decisions was the issue of privatizing non-core property that does not perform socially significant functions. This pertains to healthcare, education, and other specialized institutions.

However, the COVID-19 pandemic and the full-scale war forced us to reassess our approaches to privatization. We have not allowed the situation at communal property enterprises, which inherited specific problems, to deteriorate. Despite the challenging conditions, some enterprises are demonstrating good profit dynamics. There are no bankrupt or illiquid enterprises, and we are managing to pull loss-making ones out of crisis.

What is your stance on the accusations of a political force "Cherkasyans" during the last session of the regional council?

— There are certain political forces in the region that, not understanding when the war will end, have already begun political and electoral processes, which negatively affects not only the work of the regional council but also the importance of decision-making within the region.

- We tried to find a compromise and agree on a position. We are not opponents of privatization or of relieving the regional council of illiquid property, but we insist on the transparency of this process. Specifically, we proposed to create a commission led by a representative of the "Servant of the People" faction to evaluate privatization objects.

Due to the lack of agreement, we issued a political statement, which resulted in the failure to achieve a quorum for decision-making.

Why do opponents accuse you of being against the privatization of communal property in the region at this time?

We are not against privatization. We support transparent privatization with the conduct of a public independent audit to carry out this process more effectively and to secure as many funds as possible for the military at the front, for the integration and rehabilitation of veterans, as well as for regional programs.

— The property of the community belongs to every resident of the region, particularly to those who are currently at the front. Selling this property to help them seems illogical and, forgive me, cynical. We spoke with military personnel, and they expressed a desire to be involved in this important process. We are preserving the property so that after the war, the community, together with veterans, can decide how to use it.

Additionally, in the current conditions, the market price for this property will be low, and the proceeds are unlikely to significantly address pressing issues. We believe that privatization is inappropriate at this time and should be postponed until better circumstances arise.

Do you see a possibility for compromise regarding privatization?

— There are no issues that cannot be resolved. The main thing is the willingness of all political forces. The "Cherkasyans" are always ready for dialogue. In all decisions concerning the life of the region, we have always actively participated, regardless of whether the issues are military, political, or social challenges.

— In the current situation, finding a compromise is difficult but very important. There are no clear criteria that would define which property can be privatized and which cannot. For a compromise, some deputies must set aside their personal interests and work for the benefit of society. We are convinced that those who are currently defending Ukraine and represent our communities should be involved in the discussion of the sale or management of property.