Mayoral debates are not like their presidential counterparts. Instead of a crowded auditorium, candidates speak to an austere room, empty save for a handful of local news reporters. Mundane topics like neighborhood restoration take the place of war and global epidemics.

Despite these shortcomings in entertainment value, mayors generally affect the lives of citizens more than the presidents. On Wednesday night, the three candidates for mayor of Pittsburgh debated issues facing the city.

They met the low expectations set for local politics — incoherent statements littered with political euphemism and generalization — but some issues guaranteed to affect students were hidden amid their rhetoric.

Kevin Acklin, one of the two Independent candidates, provided ideas most in line with the needs of students. He also made some major allegations against Mayor Luke Ravenstahl, the Democratic incumbent.

Acklin said it was “offensive” that Ravenstahl proposed to levy a $50 tax on all college students, among other new taxes. To find the $15 million needed to close a budget gap, Acklin proposed taxing corporate non-profits — which would include Pitt — instead of taxing students directly.

The University would likely just raise tuition to compensate, but Ravenstahl came off as pugnacious to student interests. Throughout the debate, he acted like Mayor Luke Skywalker defending Pittsburgh against the parasitic Darth Student.

Ravenstahl said, “We need $15 million in revenue,” and he validated the student tax by saying that the city already provides a lot of services to students. His viewpoint is that the city needs to spread the tax burden and students are one of the beasts to carry it.

Ravenstahl claimed that the city would need more than $15 million if either opponent was elected, but he didn’t offer details, instead saying it was a topic “for another day.” All three candidates are speaking at David Lawrence Hall on Sunday. Hopefully an enterprising student will remind Ravenstahl it’s another day.

While the debate didn’t showcase Ravenstahl favorably, it’s difficult to say that he lost. He remained calm in his speech while the other candidates nervously stumbled for sentences or spoke like they had just shotgunned a Red Bull.

Unfortunately, the latter was the case for Independent candidate Franco Dok Harris, son of Franco “Immaculate Reception” Harris. He offered some beneficial ideas and harshly criticized Ravenstahl’s tax proposal, as well. Harris seemed genuinely concerned with lower-income neighborhoods, especially in encouraging small business startups.

He also fervently talked about cracking down on the flow of guns, mostly in reference to gun show loopholes that allow buyers to bypass background checks. Wrong move in Allegheny County, Harris.

These loopholes need to be closed, but anyone who goes after guns as much as Harris promised — no matter how illegal in theory — will get branded as anti-Second Amendment, and that hurts in this area.

A poor performance by Ravenstahl in one debate isn’t likely to sway the election much. When Acklin charged him with corruption in city contracts and callously placing Bloomfield-labeled trash cans in Homewood, Ravenstahl nonchalantly batted away the accusations. Both the allegations and his reaction were disconcerting, but Ravenstahl has such money and machine support that wild refutations would have only lessened his stature.

Acklin and Harris must communicate their messages more effectively if they want to win. Both have proposals more beneficial to students than Ravenstahl. They just have to get students to listen and, harder yet, care.