Jack Evans has represented Ward 2 in the D.C. Council for 20 years, and that is long enough. Every four years, the D.C. councilmember has won re-election, scoring landslide wins or running unopposed. Next year, however, may come as a watershed moment: A hotly contested election is on the horizon for Ward 2, thanks to Georgetown resident Fiona Greig’s entry into the race last week. While no contender is perfect, Greig’s candidacy provides an opportunity for both residents and students to consider what they want and deserve in a councilmember — and Jack Evans just doesn’t cut it. The university, many of our neighbors and this very editorial board have taken a reasonable, thoughtful and consistent approach to student-neighbor relations in Ward 2. Unfortunately for both parties, Evans has not. Rather than committing to facilitating discussion and working toward compromise, Evans has chosen to demonize the Hilltop, becoming a major antagonist in the 2010 Campus Plan approval process. Like many of the most vocal neighbors in West Georgetown and Burleith, Evans believes that the university’s plan to modestly increase the student population without building a new, on-campus dorm is unacceptable. Last spring, at neighbors’ and Evans’ behest, the Zoning Commission decreed that Georgetown must house all undergraduates on campus by 2016. This plan is unrealistic, even outlandish: Not only is there no space on campus to make this feasible — the university has gone so far as to consider converting the Georgetown Hotel & Conference Center in the Leavey Center into a dormitory — but it is a waste of our limited finances. What’s more, Evans’ proposal is unfair to students, many of whom count down the days until they can live off campus. For many students, the housing hunt — dealing with landlords and troubleshooting residence issues, for example — becomes a stepping stone to the real world, teaching us all valuable lessons. As the city council faces accusations of unethical behavior, Evans is no exception. For example, Evans has spent roughly one third of his constituent service funds on tickets to D.C.-area sporting events. These funds are privately raised by councilmembers and can be used on anything a member deems to be relevant to serving his or her constituents. While Evans says that he gives the tickets away to constituents, he has yet to produce any evidence to support this claim. For those who support Jack Evans, the economic expansion that Ward 2 has experienced since he was elected is a campaign talking point. They are correct in arguing that the Georgetown economy has improved since 1991 — hitting its peak by reaching a AAA bond rating — but the economy is not in an ideal state. The growth in the 1990s mirrored nationwide trends, and Georgetown likewise has suffered during the recession. Evans’ work in recent years has done nothing to protect the District from this economic downturn. Evans has had some undeniable accomplishments. His public safety push has seen strengthened criminal penalties and a call for a bump in the number of Metropolitan Police Department officers patrolling the area. He co-sponsored the Religious Freedom and Civil Marriage Equality Amendment Act and has supported extensive renovations to Ward 2’s parks and recreational spaces. But for students, those accomplishments should not outweigh his hostile attitude on the issues most prevalent to them. That’s where Greig comes in. As a backer of the campus plan, the candidate has told The Hoya (“Vying for Council, Grieg Backs GU,” Nov. 4, 2011, A7) that she supports some off-campus housing for students and that she hopes to boost collaboration between the council and the university. Given many vocal neighbors’ opposition to the plan, that’s about as much as students can hope for. Greig is currently a manager at the consulting firm McKinsey and Company, and though she does not have significant public office experience, she holds a doctorate in public policy from Harvard. In 2008, she led a team to brainstorm economic development for the greater Washington area and then spent a year in the Office of the Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development. Before she moved to Ward 2 in 2007, Greig worked to improve global outcomes for women and those living with HIV/AIDS. Greig’s shortcomings have cropped up more recently, with the Washington City Paper reporting that one of the candidate’s volunteers classified potential donors as “homosexual” or “super-rich” in documents filed in the city’s Office of Campaign Finance. While Greig maintains that this was an embarrassing oversight on the first draft of records, it reveals a politicking side of the candidate that could be offensive to voters. Even so, Greig’s record in public policy makes us think this instance is a mere bump in an otherwise smooth, reassuring career path. Voters should take a long, hard look at Evans’ record in the lead-up to election day 2012. While it’s too soon to tell if Greig is the best candidate, this election gives students a chance to take a stand by giving Evans the ouster, an opportunity they haven’t had in years. Perhaps Greig’s courage to run may even inspire other worthy candidates to join the race and broaden the field of appealing contenders. After years of deteriorating community relations, we find ourselves at a fork in the road. Diverging from the Evans trajectory and opting for a reasonable path to town-gown ties like Greig proposes will position the university well as it seeks to thrive in tandem, not in conflict, with the community beyond the front gates.