Candidates running for Provo City Council may not agree on every subject, but they all agree input from BYU students is important.

During a formal candidate debate Thursday night, city council hopefuls addressed important issues concerning the city of Provo. One in particular was BYU student involvement with council decisions.

“We know that you are 30,000 students,” said Steve Clark, husband of candidate Cindy Clark who was not at the debate. “You have a huge impact on our economy. You have a huge impact on our environment, and we need to work with you and talk with you. We need your input.”

Steve Clark said there hasn’t been enough student input into city government. He suggested regularly integrating student input into council meetings.

Opponent Paul Warner said there are already opportunities for student input to be heard.

“One of the things that has been exciting to me is there has been a lot of opportunity for input from the students with regards to our decisions,” Warner said. In fact last year, your student body president assigned somebody to be a liaison with the Provo City Council.”

Warner said a lot goes on behind the scenes that isn’t totally understood or brought to student’s attention.

For instance, students influenced the decision to adjust the booting and towing ordinance in Provo, Warner said. Because of student input, the council responded to it.

“I think we are trying, but we can do better,” Warner said.

Adam Clark, running for district five, said he was one that tried to get the ordinance changed the first time. He suggested forming a group of students from different schools in Provo to represent students to the council.

LeGrand Richards, husband of candidate Cindy Richards, filled in for her. He said he agreed with his opponent Adam Clark that student input is vital.

“It’s just a matter of how you address the issue,” Richards said.

One issue that candidates disagreed on regarded Provo’s zoning policy. It addressed the issue of the number of single, non-related occupants in an owner occupied rental house within family residential neighborhoods, reducing the number from three to two.

Warner opposed the reducing of the occupancy. He said its original intention was it would be applied to the entire city.

“It’s something you have to take into account,” Warner said. “Your vote counts for the whole city.”

Steve Clark disagreed with Warner and said the proposed zoning policy was not originally intended to affect all of Provo but to preserve neighborhoods.

District five candidates were less vocal about their disagreement.

Adam Clark said the zoning issue is a sensitive issue in all of the districts.

“When you change it to two instead of three, it basically becomes impossible to rent it out unless you charge a large amount of money to those two students,” Clark said. “Basically it’s saying we don’t want you to rent at all.”

In some neighborhoods it’s appropriate, and in other’s it is not, Adam Clark said. When it is reduced to two, it gives the landlord only one option: to rent it as a single family home.

Richards, who’s wife supported reducing the occupancy to two, rebutted and said the new zoning policy wasn’t intended to affect student housing, except for those in illegally transformed houses.

One part of the zoning issue that all candidates agreed on is zoning is important to a city, and there needs to be a balance of it in Provo.