With less than seven days remaining until the polls open, Student Government Board… With less than seven days remaining until the polls open, Student Government Board presidential candidates Sumter Link and Jim Priestas squared off last night in a debate – where both board members challenged each other’s past actions and future plans.

Link, who is focusing his campaign on establishing a fall break and increasing communication between students and the administration, attacked Priestas’ platform of regaining a student vote on the board of trustees.

“When we lost our vote in 1997, we didn’t lose our voice,” Link said, “we got students on committees within the board, where they can discuss the issues with board members.”

Link cited that SGB lost its vote on the board because of its ineffective means of communicating with the board, and he argued that the current system of open discussion with board members is more effective.

Priestas said that a vote on the board would “give students a professional and serious voice to the administration.”

Link also criticized Priestas’ goal of making the SORC events calendar the homepage of every computer on campus, asking why it should “trump everything else the University offers.”

Priestas focused his foray on what he sees as Link’s iffy history as a board member. Since his presidential campaign began, Link arrived at two meetings about five minutes late, and excused himself in the middle of one meeting to speak to a student organization.

“You feel it appropriate to neglect your responsibilities as a board member for your personal interests, which clearly isn’t putting the students first,” Priestas said, mocking Link’s “Students First” slate.

“I feel that in addition to serving my current responsibilities as a SGB member, I also have a responsibility as a SGB presidential candidate to talk to as many students as I possibly can and to tell them about the changes that I want to make,” Link answered.

“If that means that I need to show up five or ten minutes late to an SGB meeting once or twice, then that’s what I’m going to do.”

Link did not miss any board votes in his absences.

In addition to his recent tardiness, Priestas questioned Link about why it took him such a long time to create the referendum permitting students to vote on a potential fall break.

“Your main board project last year – fall break – is just being brought to light now, when you could have polled students at the beginning of the year,” Priestas said.

The candidates also addressed SGB’s controversial $60,000 purchase of 10 fiberglass panther statues to be decorated by student organizations and displayed around campus. Both candidates voted in favor of the statues.

An anonymous questioner said that the project “appeared to be done with only SGB’s legacy in mind.” Accusing SGB of making “a persistent effort to shut students out of the decision-making process.”

Priestas said that student organizations were e-mailed over the summer, but “only one or two responded.”

“As elected officials, you put your faith and trust in us to make decisions for our University,” Priestas said. “If I have to have a little bit of heat for it, so be it, I’ll deal with it.”

While he reaffirmed his vote, Link said that he would have handled the situation differently.

“Let me make it clear that I am for students participating in the decision-making process,” Link said, citing the current online vote being held for his project to create a fall break.

When asked to evaluate current SGB president Shady Henien, Link said that he was “disappointed” in Henien’s handling of the statue project, calling it “rushed” and “not as successful as it could have been.”

“He did a phenomenal job,” Priestas said.

The one thing Priestas said he would do differently than Henien would be to create more accountability for board members who did not follow through on their promises.

“If somebody is not kicking [board members] in the rear end to get stuff done, then nothing’s going to happen,” Priestas said.

Campus safety was also discussed.

In addition to calling for blue light emergency call boxes throughout South Oakland, Link discussed the difference in opinion between “the people who run SafeRider and the people who try to use SafeRider.”

Link proposed an expansion of the University shuttle system as an alternative to changing SafeRider, which has proven to be a difficult process over the years.

Priestas offered a simpler solution. “If you’re feeling unsafe, call the Pitt police,” he said.

Priestas said that the Pitt police may be willing to provide escorts to students in need. “They’re here for your safety,” he said.

The debate was moderated by the Pitt News and broadcasted on UPTV and WPTS.