Since there is not a true student in tomorrow’s special election for District 5’s representative on the city council, we endorse the candidate who is most honest about his priorities and has made the greatest effort and commitment to familiarizing himself with and pursuing students’ concerns.

That candidate is Ron Rosner.

Students have not fared well in recent District 5 elections, including last year when two thoroughly uninspiring candidates vied to represent the district. The eventual winner, Jessie Tolkan, resigned soon after amidst allegations she did not reside in the district, and her seat was filled by county board supervisor Tom Powell, with the condition he not run for the seat as an incumbent.

So now we have a special election to fill Tolkan’s vacancy, but once again the candidates are not very special, at least as far as students are concerned.

After faring poorly in county redistricting, Powell went back on his word and is running for the seat as an incumbent. Powell styles himself as a student seeking to represent students, but while he is still pursuing his doctorate, his actions and priorities more closely mirror Progressive Dane then they do student concerns.

Powell voted against soliciting free designs for the State Street Design Project, a primary concern for students. As far as the city’s dealings with student drinking — the other major student issue on City Council — we are pleased Powell is against the banning of drink specials, but we are disappointed he has offered no alternatives to dealing with what is a serious problem.

Meanwhile, Powell’s primary concern — affordable housing — is not an issue for most students and arguably could make the downtown housing scene more costly overall by forcing landlords to raise prices on “non-affordable” housing typically used by students.

Ron Rosner freely admits he is not a student — it would be a difficult argument to make, considering he is retired — and that is certainly a concern for us. The priorities of homeowners and students can certainly differ, and we are nervous about the decisions Rosner may make if those priorities come into conflict. However, we have been very impressed by the lengths Rosner has gone to in order to educate himself on student issues, and we believe his commitment to be accessible and an advocate for students in their dealings with landlords.

Especially important is Rosner’s commitment to prioritize the State Street Design Project. We are disappointed Rosner is, in theory, open to the idea of banning drink specials, but we are encouraged by his belief that such a ban should only be instituted as part of a more comprehensive approach to the issue of student drinking, and city-wide at that (which will not happen).

The next few months will be pivotal for student issues on City Council. We trust Rosner to effectively represent our concerns.