Candidates square off at debate

Author: Mia Lieb-Lappen

The candidates for the Student Co-Chair of Community Council (SCCOCC) and Student Government Association (SGA) President were given a chance to publicly voice their opinions in a debate Sunday evening as they addressed issues ranging from campus smoking policy to the Commons system to the off-campus party scene.

The two junior candidates for SCCOCC, Dean Atyia '08.5 and Eric Hoest '08, spoke in agreement on numerous issues but explained the different approaches they would take if elected.

Even though Max Nardini '08, former Wonnacott Senator, will run unopposed for SGA president, he did not ignore the opportunity presented at the debate to announce his planned innovations for the SGA.

The panel first asked each candidate to briefly introduce his platform. Nardini led by answering a question one first-year posed to him, "Why get involved?" Using the recent housing change as an example, Nardini, with several initiatives already in mind, responded that involvement in student government gives one the valuable opportunity to foster change.

"[Being] SGA president would put me in a fine position to do so," said Nardini at the debate.

Hoest presented his platform for SCCOCC from a different angle.

"Instead of coming up with specific initiatives, I would rather see myself as someone who could get clear opinions from all the members of our community," he said. Hoest emphasized the need for the student voice to be heard and contribute to the decision-making process.

Atyia presented his campaign for SCCOCC from yet another angle. "My platform is based on the need for change," Atyia said. He then provided examples of fresh ideas, including all-access College debit cards, a concert series, a wireless campus and a deadline for teachers to hand back papers.

The candidates varied based on previous leadership experience and involvement on campus. Nardini's previous leadership positions include sophomore senator and Wonnacott senator. Moreover, he had experience working to initiate blue lights, Xanadu, and the new smoking policy, to name a few.

"This has armed me for future pursuits," said Nardini. Hoest emphasized his involvement in various positions such as alumni relations co-chair, member of the crew team, and leadership roles in residential life. Atyia, on the other hand, was a Feb representative on SGA and has had previous experience with the Community Council.

"I think I might have valuable insight in the best way to get [the Council] to collaborate with the SGA," he said.

Despite their different angles of approach and various previous experiences, the three candidates expressed similar viewpoints on several of the issues the panel asked. For example, all candidates were eager to improve social life and were willing to collaborate with MCAB and other pre-existing social programming boards.

"They run the organizations well," Hoest said. "The goal of the Community Council shouldn't be to find ways to restrict or artificially enhance them, but rather it should be to enable these able leaders to continue what they are doing."

Atyia, however, suggested the formation of a separate committee to hold a concert series. "I would like to see something independent of IHC and MCAB with little oversight of the administration," he added.

Hoest and Atyia came to agreement on other issues such, as engaging the student body and bridging the gap between students and administration. Moreover, they were in concurrence with supporting environmental awareness and MOQA. They all agreed to have no tolerance for homophobic graffiti and supported the need for disciplinary action. Nardini has participated in the homophobia discussion forum and suggests a more open campus-wide debate. Hoest thought such issues should be addressed with incoming first-years.

"Find ways through dialogue for this to be a discussion right off the bat so people are confronted with their own feelings," he suggested.

Atyia did not blame the administration but rather advocated "social castigation."

All three candidates were skeptical of instituting a social honor code, which the panel presented as one option.

"It is a quick fix that doesn't actually fix anything," Nardini said. Atyia agreed that it was not necessary and would not get to the root of the problem.

All three candidates were in favor of continuing the Commons but had suggestions regarding the room draw system. Atyia called for more mobility.

"It should not be a system of restraint," he said. Nardini responded to the panel's reference to an increase in competition for rooms. "The drawback is balanced by the fact that you will be able to get something great," he said.

Another social issue discussed was the off-campus party scene. Nardini said he believes Middlebury students are looking for more to do, which fueled his own involvement in Xanadu.

"We need to provide the great social opportunities on campus that have waned in the past year as social houses have faced more restrictions," he said.

Hoest pointed out the need to get people to and from these parties safely, while Atyia suggested serving liquor at Xanadu.

"We need a means to cater to the entire community," he said.

The last issue debated was the smoking policy. Hoest thought the new policy was a good compromise and that specific cases could be looked into further. Nardini agreed and compared smoking complaints to noise complaints.

"As far as I can see," said Nardini, "our policy has been working." Atyia, on the other hand, thinks smokers should be given a patio in return for the loss of some freedom. "We have to do something to re-compensate smokers," Atyia said.

Voting opens this Thursday and will take place online.