{shortcode-e0acace82badb102a28eff268ba8af530c682b84}

The four tickets vying for the Undergraduate Council’s top spots in the upcoming presidential elections praised Council leaders but attempted to differentiate themselves from the current administration at a debate at the Institute of Politics Thursday night.

Attacking a perceived disconnect between students and the UC, as well as between the Council and administrators, candidates offered different platforms for reforming the Council, with some suggesting the UC needs to be more fun and others criticizing the UC’s internal structure.

All candidates conveyed frustration at the lack of student input in the recently announced decision to close Stillman Infirmary. Vice presidential candidate Stephen A. Turban ’17 said he was “disgusted” by the decision, and Ava Nasrollahzadeh ’16, the presidential candidate of a competing ticket, called the impending closure “really bad” and demanded more details on how the system would affect nightly health service and the College’s amnesty policy.

Meghamsh Kanuparthy ’16, who is running with Ema H. Horvath ’16, criticized the UC’s current leaders, who were aware of the some of the health service changes before Wednesday’s announcement, for failing to notify students of the shift. He further argued that channels of administrative decision-making are not accessible to students and that task forces are only formed after decisions are made, “patronizing” the students.

{shortcode-a79568880401d9d542009634bd08fc5a70914e6e}

“I’m still mad,” he said, pointedly glancing at UC President Gus A. Mayopoulos ’15 and Vice President Sietse K. Goffard ’15.

Happy Yang ’16 and Faith A. Jackson ’16 cited last year’s election, in which a joke ticket won the vote, as a referendum on the Council. Though they applauded Mayopoulos and Goffard for increasing awareness of student issues, they made clear there was still room for change.

“I currently think [the UC is] 'derpy' in that it’s decentralized, it’s exclusive, the relevance is lacking, the power for change is unclear…. The role of the UC should involve drastically changing that,” Jackson, who has not served on the Council, said.

Luke R. Heine ’17 and Turban, the only ticket composed of sophomores, argued that the UC should be viewed more as a “culture element” and a “cheerleader” rather than “pragmatic.” They argued that the UC should be a more “fun” institution, and not aspire to mimic state and federal governments. Yet Heine also said that the UC should work to ensure that the College takes student voices more seriously.

“The UC is a joke because the administration treats us as one,” Heine said. “The administration is what delegitimizes the UC.”

Kanuparthy, along with Turban and Heine, attacked the structure of the UC, describing the meetings as “incredibly boring.” He argued that the UC should remain vocal but “actually have more things get done.”

The candidates also offered different views on securing increased UC funding.

Goyal and Nasrollahzadeh laid out a plan to draw funding from alumni donations.

“We need to move on,” Goyal said, referring to the Council’s ultimately unsuccessful campaign to convince University leaders to increase the UC budget by $250,000.