After extensive discussion with both teams in the AMS executive 2011-12 race, the editorial board of the Journal has chosen to endorse Morgan Campbell, Ashley Eagan and Kieran Slobodin.

The editorial board voted 16-0 in favour of Team CES, with three abstentions.

With the exception of Morgan Campbell, candidates from both teams manage AMS services, commissions or committees. All candidates demonstrated an impressive knowledge of the financial operations of the portfolios for which they are currently responsible.

Both teams presented interesting and varied platforms addressing a variety of campus issues. However, the platform presented by CES appeared to be supported by a greater quality and quantity of background research.

It’s hard to deny that team SDL is friendly and approachable. Of particular note is vice-president (Operations) candidate Dan Szczepanek, who consistently provided detailed and sound answers, and demonstrated an impressive grasp of the issues involved in this election—particularly for someone with little internal AMS experience.

However, it’s hard to be certain how Team SDL’s approachability will translate into an official capacity—the professionalism and preparation demonstrated by team CES gave them a clear edge.

The candidates from Team CES have excellent credentials to assume the executive positions they’re pursuing.

Vice-president (University Affairs) candidate Kieran Slobodin is the strongest candidate in this election due to his extensive experience within the administration and the AMS, his work lobbying for OUSA fees this year and his understanding of a extensive range of issues facing students—issues both directly related and ancillary to the position he is seeking.

President and CEO candidate Morgan Campbell’s role as a student trustee makes her an excellent candidate, due to her understanding of the day-to-day operations of the University and her multitude of connections throughout the University’s administration.

Some expressed concern over vice-president (Operations) candidate Ashley Eagan’s familiarity with the specific workings of the AMS. Given Eagan’s position as Retail Services Director some were confused by CES’s shortage of platform points relating to existing retail and food services.

However, the steep learning curve associated with the operations position means that a great deal of this knowledge is gleaned through hands-on and transitional experience.

Both SDL and CES emphasized the need for a more accessible and visible AMS. Each team stressed the importance of trying to emulate the relationship between students in small faculties with their faculty societies.

However, Team SDL’s “South of Union” strategy seems misguided. While the plan to increase the visibility of the AMS around campus is commendable, it might have a counter-productive effect.

Conducting scheduled open office hours at a rotating location around campus seems like a gamble, and it will only trade approachability for accessibility. The plan will also take the executives away from where most students expect to find them—in their offices.

Each candidate team addressed the financial concerns facing Alfie’s, which is experiencing a downward trend in attendance.

CES pointed to lowered liquor sales revenue and suggested the solution lies in pushing special event nights, like Classic Rock Saturdays—a consistently popular event.

SDL emphasized unexpected costs related to Student Constable licensing, an increased minimum wage and possible drug use at Alfie’s driving down liquor sales.

However, SDL’s proposed birthday line-skip program doesn’t seem likely to mitigate these issues, and could cause problems for event security and access. Allowing for the appropriate number of line-skips in a night could be a management nightmare.

The idea has generated criticism from current hospitality staff—criticism SDL is aware of, but which the team doesn’t appear too concerned about.

Throughout discussion, both teams did an excellent job relating platform points to their skills and abilities. However, candidates from Team CES tended to show a better appreciation of the distinction between big- and small-picture perspectives, while SDL focused on personal experiences. CES also demonstrated a clearer understanding of the timeframe for implementing their platform in a long-term sense.

Ultimately, Team CES was clearer and more confidence-inspiring—both in terms of their candidates and platform points. Their approach was consistently on point and showed a strong degree of preparation for the challenges of assuming the role of AMS executive.

The Journal feels that students’ votes are most effectively cast in support of Team CES.