Stephan Podrygula

Seven candidates are vying for three seats on the Minot City Council in the city’s June 9 election. Each of the candidates provided comments on their interest in serving and how they would approach city government.

Stephan Podrygula is a former city council member who is running again to bring experience to the council.

What motivates you to want to serve on the city council?

In the 47 years I’ve lived in Minot, I’ve seen us grow and develop, but feel we can do even better.

In these challenging times, experience, understanding, and judgment do matter. I believe I have these qualities, along with a unique skill set, that can help us keep moving forward.

When three incumbents announced they weren’t running, I felt an obligation to step forward, given the challenges that we face, the relative inexperience of the three remaining aldermen (who haven’t even served two years each), the large turnover of senior staff (e.g., city manager, assistant city manager, police chief, HR director) and the fact that none of the other candidates have any experience at all in city government.

What knowledge, interests or personal qualities can you bring to the council that will help you to represent the community?

My 16 years of experience on the Council (from 1998 through 2024) have provided a deep understanding of how the city operates, including budgeting, planning, staffing, equipment, and facilities. Professionally, as a clinical psychologist, I have spent decades helping individuals, groups, and organizations work through challenges and function more effectively. This background has strengthened my ability to listen, understand different perspectives, and focus on solutions.

I have extensive experience across multiple activities (e.g., clinician, teacher, consultant), organizations and sectors (public, private, and nonprofit). As an entrepreneur, I started my own business in 1989 and continue to operate it today.

Is city spending too high, too little or about right? What approach would you take to setting city spending?

Considering the many needs we have, and citizen desires for more and better services, the current spending level seems like a reasonable compromise.

We should develop a shared vision, set specific goals and objectives, measure performance, and establish incentives to improve effectiveness and efficiency.

In setting spending levels, I would take a “back to basics” approach, emphasizing the core functions of municipal government: enhance public safety, through better police and fire protection; provide basic infrastructure, particularly flood protection and better street maintenance; and deliver a variety of other services in a more effective and efficient manner.

How do you feel about shifting certain general fund property tax expenses to special assessments or utilizing user fees to hold down taxes?

Special assessments should be limited to projects that directly benefit a limited geographic area and serve a clearly defined purpose (e.g., repaving neighborhood streets). I don’t think they should be used as a general means of increasing government revenues.

User fees (e.g., water and sewer, trash collection) must reflect the actual cost of delivering services, and be adjusted as those costs change. We need to be more aggressive in looking for grants and lobbying for funding support from the state and federal governments (e.g., to pay more of the $1.8 billion the flood control project will cost, something which local funding will never be enough for).

Is Minot providing adequate public safety? What needs to be changed, if anything?

Unfortunately, I don’t believe that Minot is providing adequate public safety.

Although our new police chief has done very well in recruiting officers to fill about 18 open slots, keeping them filled is a never-ending challenge (e.g., we expect about eight additional vacancies, in the next few months), and it takes probably a couple of years before a new officer is fully effective.

As for the fire department, we have often operated with a minimum staffing level of 15, although national standards call for 17 firefighters to respond to a residential alarm. About 1/3 of the time, we have two simultaneous calls, which jeopardizes both firefighter and citizen safety. Response time to many growing neighborhoods is excessive, and we really need to look at realigning the location of our stations.

The council and city manager need to make public safety our number one priority.

How would you prioritize the city’s infrastructure needs, such as flood protection, roads, watermain replacements, etc.?

Our capital improvements plan for the next five years – covering “big ticket” expenditures, improvements and projects (such as replacing century-old cast-iron water mains, repaving and improving many streets, and buying land for a relocated fire station) comes to $880 million!

We need to be realistic: some of these projects will take years to complete (20-30 years to replace the iron water mains, and until 2040 for flood control), and will require much more money than we can raise locally. Part of the reason so much needs to be done is because we’ve often deferred maintenance and had a habit of “kicking the can down the road”, rather than making improvements when needed, or avoiding cost-saving investments (e.g., switching to energy-efficient LED street lighting pays for itself in less than two years).

The priority needs to be on safeguarding lives and property: flood protection, assuring a steady supply of clean and safe drinking water, and improving roads and traffic flow.

Should the city continue pursuing a police station remodel and if so, how would you like to see it unfold?

Shortly after I first was elected, around 2000, I served on a police station remodeling committee, and it became abundantly clear to me, even back then, that we needed a significantly remodeled, or even new, station. More recently, in 2023, an outside consultant presented a detailed space needs and feasibility assessment, which confirmed that the current space is inadequate. Among the problems are: HVAC, electrical, and other systems that are at the end of their useful life; a very poor workflow; deficient evidence storage; lack of space for Municipal Court and special operations; need for more office space; and inadequate room for expansion.

The dilemma is this: making basic renovations now, and building a new facility (when it would be needed) in 2050, would cost $217 million (for a 50-year solution); while starting from scratch, with a new $71 million facility now, and a small expansion in 2050, would cost only $101 million. Clearly, building new is cheaper in the long run, but I don’t think anybody wants to spend $71 million at the present time. A new (more efficient and easier to maintain) facility would save even more in operations and maintenance costs.

I think we need to continue with the current plan of remodeling our existing facility, identifying priorities, going step-by-step, and seeing where savings can be made. Discussions should continue with the county about relocating Municipal Court to the County Courthouse.

How do you feel about automated license plate reader technology?

With my conservative leanings, I’m very concerned about increased government surveillance. However, automated license plate reader technology offers significant benefits (e.g., finding vulnerable individuals identified through Amber and Silver Alerts) with risks that can be mitigated (e.g., strict limits on which vehicles can be searched for, careful auditing and supervision of use, criminal penalties for misuse, and very short record retention periods). While I would not be willing to accept fixed cameras on the streets, having them on police cars strikes me as not all that different from having another officer, with a second set of eyes, watching for vehicles of interest; many cities, after all, have two-officer patrol cars, and this technology provides pretty similar results.

What is your assessment of Minot as a community? Are there ways to make it better, help it thrive or maintain what is good about the community?

Overall, I think Minot is a pretty good place to live in, work, and have a family. It’s safe, the air is clean, we have good schools and parks, people are friendly, social problems are manageable, the economy is in decent shape, we have grown through overcoming adversity (such as the floods), and we have a strong sense of community.

Economic development, slow but steady growth, a shared vision for the future, and more effective and efficient local government would help us continue to thrive.

Are there other specific issues you want to address if elected to the council?

In addition to the things I’ve already mentioned, I would like to see the city take a more active role in developing more available and affordable childcare options, and also partner with builders and developers to increase the supply of affordable housing.