For us and the Devil’s Advocate, specifically.
http://adm.ams.ubc.ca/Elections2009/
Or wait until paper day, to make the counting procedure take longer. That’s what we’re doing.
Archive for January 29th, 2009
29
Jan
09
Vote
2:11 – And that’s a wrap. This is the end of liveblogging debates. We hope to return in some liveblog form for the results party.
2:06 – Closing statements. Paul notes that he has the ability to stay calm and level headed, a good trait for this job. Alex says that he can manage conflicting interests by building a good team. He sounds very Commerce-Team Building-Cooperate Culture, but this is a good thing. The President needs to coordinate the team, and there is a reason they teach the team building in business school – it works. Blake talks about his experience within the AMS, and his knowledge of the issues. He is very “knowledge is power”, and this has some merit. If he wins, I hope Blake can balance that with his quite obvious passion for the issues.
29
Jan
09
the RBT endorses: President
Here is the last of the endorsements of the Big Ticket elections.
The Position and Issues
The President oversees the society and sets priorities for the year. In particular, the President is responsible for the public face of the AMS, as well as coordinating the executive committee. As President, you decide your own targets, as well as those of the organization. The big issues in the portfolio over the next year are: the new SUB project, modernization of business practices, executive coordination.
The Ballot
- Alex Monegro
- Blake Federick
- Paul Korczyk
The Reasons
The President’s biggest responsibility is the coordination of the executive team. Their second biggest responsibility is to negotiate for the new SUB. In our opinion, the candidate who can best accomplish these two huge responsibilities is Alex Monegro. He has experience working with a large team within the CUS, and if you can coordinate as many Type A’s as I know there are in Commerce, we think he can handle anything that the future AMS Exec throws at him. Most importantly, we think that he can play off Tristan in ways similar to Mike when negotiating with the University.
Blake is a good candidate. We like Blake, but we don’t think that he will offer the critical counterpoints needed to get a good result in SUB negotiations. I’ve heard a couple of times throughout this campaign that people would love to vote for Blake were he running for anything other than President, and we agree – Blake’s priorities are better placed within the VP External or Academic portfolios. President this year will be a very internal position, with new SUB demanding most of the President’s time, and Blake’s priorities do not mesh well with this.
We give huge kudos to Paul, but he hates animal rights (see interview coming up). It takes a lot to throw your name in the bin too get torn apart by the hacks, but Paul managed to get through it unscathed. We’ll try harder next time. Paul has a great point about communication, and the AMS does need to prioritize this in future. The President needs context, perspective, and respect for the rest of the executive team at all times, things the other two candidates will be able to accomplish this much more easily than Paul . We hope he sticks around and goes for a council seat, though.
29
Jan
09
the RBT endorses: VP Finance
The VP Finance race is always the most boring of all the races. It’s kind of like how Foreign Policy is always way more exciting than Monetary Policy. However, we find this particular race interesting, because this VP will be the VP who the Arts Undergraduate Society needs to get ACF debt repaid. That said, both candidates have taken the ACF Pledge, so this race is once again, boring.
The Position and Issues
The VP Finance is responsible for the SUB’s businesses, sustainability and the AMS’s financial planning. During slate-era AMS, the portfolio was often neglected and viewed as a liability to the well-being of the society, and staff took over much of it and put down locks. The AMS has matured since those days, and it’s up to the VP Finance to take more control. We think someone whose willing to question ancient bureaucracies, and someone who understands how modern business works will do the best job here. The big issues in the portfolio over the next year are: business migration to New SUB, modernation of AMS financial structure, sustainability.
The Ballot
- Tom Dvorak
- Ale Coates
The Reasons
Tom is a candidate who brings an almost rabid enthusiasm for the job to his campaign. After only one and a half years at the university, he has been the vice chair of a conference and is taking a degree that is strongly tied with the portfolio. His platform is well thought out, and focuses on things that do need improvement in terms of our businesses. Finally, Tom has concrete deliverables in his platform, which will keep him from drifting aimlessly from issue to issue without really getting anything done. Tom also comes in from the outside, but with perspective of real-world best practices, which is needed in the finance portfolio. AMS systems are archaic, and he seems to be the candidate of reform.
Ale is also a strong candidate, but her platform is much broader and values-based than her competitor’s. Some of the things that have come out of the SAC that she was the Vice Chair of have implied that she sees value in directing the activities of clubs, including encouraging creating positions on the club executives that are focused on specific issues, which comes dangerously close to violating club autonomy. We believe in clubs that can run their own affairs their own way (notwithstanding financial/constitutional accountability), and if you try to undermine that, we will undermine you. We also believe in beer.
The Position and Issues
The Board of Governors is de-facto the highest governing body at the University. Board members have instant access to all the strategic decision makers of the institution, and can really direct change all through the organizational chart. Many students only see the meeting-aspect of board member’s responsibilities, but an effective board rep’s work will mostly be done behind closed doors, convincing leaders to lead in a way that benefits students. An effective board representative will work within the structures that be to change the structures that be, instead of jumping in front of the bus. The big issues in these portfolios over the next year are: the Campus Plan, Strategic and Academic Planning, Recession Budgeting, West-of-Blanca Governance.
The Ballot
- Andrew Carne
- Michael Duncan
The Reasons
We believe that the AMS Executive should not serve on the Board of Governors. It dilutes student representation, spreads executive time too thin, removes the ‘divide and conquer’ strategy of board lobbying, and has been shown to be a burden on the society at times (see: executive 07/08). As such, we a priori cannot support Blake Federick or Tristan Markle.
Andrew Carne was an easy choice for us. Andrew’s dedication to improving the university for students is immediate. He is one of the most well respected individuals we know within the circles that know him. His dedication to the EUS in its Admin role has seen two organization-changing referendums go through, including most recently the funding for a Ladhaesque building for engineering students. He has a stellar attendance record as a guest at board meetings, understands the variety of interests at play, and always has impassioned, yet excellently reasoned opinions. He will fill the needed role of policy-wonk on the board.
Michael Duncan is who we’ve decided to support for the position of the PR board rep. We like the work Mike has done with the AMS, and we like how he’s managed to maintain strong relationships within the administration while at the same time getting strong, student-focused results. He would compliment Andrew well, playing the extroverted strategy guy, while Andrew develops the stances. We think Bijan would do a good job as well, but we disagree with his rhetoric when it comes to the SUB project.
The Position and Issues
The VP Administration is going to be facing a massive challenge in the next year. They must restart a stalled SUB negotiation, and make sure that the interests of students are not beaten down by a relentless University Administration negotiating team, as well as continue to manage SAC and the other responsibilities of the VP Admin, of which there are few. The only issue in the portfolio over the next year is: the New SUB Project.
The Ballot
- Kommander Keg
- Tristan Markle
- Crystal Hon
- Water Fountain
The Reasons
First off, the Kommander is filled with beer. This alone is enough to secure our endorsement. We also think that the Kommander was, far and away, the funniest of all the joke candidates. However, the Kommander also has a message that he has brought forward, one of engagement and fighting the War on Fun that the other candidates do not come close to matching. Beyond that, we have already seen quick action by the Keg with the recent annexation of Buchanan Tower. If the Keg wins, we hope he serves.
Tristan Markle is the most experienced of the candidates, and the most capable of carrying on the negotiations. He’s got a strong head on his shoulders, and will always have what he believes is students’ interest in mind. The relationship between Tristan and the University is an interesting one, and needs to be balanced by a centrist President, in a good cop/bad cop arrangement. He will continue to do a good job in the portfolio, and has proven that he has the operative experience that will give us the best chance to get us the best deal on the SUB.
Crystal is a capable woman, but she doesn’t have the experience of Tristan. Her platform is much more focused on the structure of SAC and the AMS relationship with clubs than Tristan, which could be incredibly dangerous for the VP Administration. The SUB Project will take up 80% of this person’s time, and some of Crystal’s material does not even mention it, and we unfortunately can’t support that.
The Water Fountain has a good point – there do need to be more fountains on campus, but those fountains should be filled with beer above 0 proof.
29
Jan
09
the RBT endorses: VP External
We continue our countdown toward the debate with another in the RBT endorsement series. These posts come in parts: an explanation and context of the portfolio you’re voting on, our Condorcet Ballot, then our rationale.
The Position and Issues
From the time that the new VP takes office through to the middle of May, there is only one issue in this portfolio – The Provincial Elections. Getting students to vote in a regular election was proven to be difficult enough this year, but this VPX has a much greater challenge: influencing political parties and informing students for an election that happens twelve days after we all go home for the summer. This is going to take some considerable organizational capacity. The other issues in the year are: The CASA Question, the Olympics, Provincial Lobbying Organizations, the Federal Election (?), and Student Funding in an Economic Downturn.
The Ballot
1. Iggy Rodriguez
2. Tim Chu
99. Kings Head
99. Fire
The Reasons
Both candidates would do a good job at this portfolio, but our top choice is iRod himself, Iggy Rogruigez. Iggy threw together one of the most active and impressive campaigns in a very short amount of time. Iggy also seems to have a good grasp of the issues in the portfolio (he is less experienced but has learned a lot in this race) and he is bang on when he talks about timelines for CASA, reforming Student Financial Aid, and Provincial Organizations. However, the style here is the most important. Iggy has a platform and a method of politicing (Next Step Lobbying) which will help build the AMS’s political capital, and when how effective you are at your job depends on your access to politicians, this is paramount.
Tim is someone who has a good idea of where he wants to take the organization, and anyone who says that he isn’t passionate about these issues just hasn’t been paying attention. We also are happy to see that the candidates from both sides of the political spectrum are not separated by the massive ideological gulf of last year. However, Tim has a very broad platform, some of it not within the portfolio, and a philosophy of lobbying (End Goal Lobbying) which could as likely alienate as convince the people we need most on our side. His plan for lower tuition specifically is unrealistic, and I worry about wasting time and resources tilting at windmills during an economic downturn, when the VPX’s time could better be spent elsewhere.
We appreciate the strong efforts by the joke candidates, Fire and the Kingshead, but we still don’t understand their platforms.
29
Jan
09
the RBT endorses: VP Academic
You decided it, this is the first of the endorsement series. These posts come in parts: an explanation and context of the portfolio you’re voting on, our Condorcet Ballot, then our rationale.
The Position and Issues
The VP Academic is the student with the most influence over the way the university conducts its business. It’s also the busiest Executive portfolio, having the most breadth of issues under it, as well as a swath of administrative duties. The position political, so we need a candidate that is persuasive and friendly, as well as a candidate that’s strategic and visionary. The big issues in the portfolio over the next year are: the Campus Plan, West-of-Blanca Governance, recession effects on UBC Budgeting, and UBC Academic priorities.
The Ballot
1. Johannes Rebane
2. Sonia Purewal
3. David Nogas
4. Jeremy Wood
The Reasons
Johannes is our first choice. He has the most related experience, having done the role for the CUS this past year. He is well respected within that institution, as well as within that Dean’s office, showing he can talk the talk needed to be effective. Related experience can go a long way here, as the University is an extremely complex place and it can take months to learn the players and the history needed to be effective. Reading Johannes platform shows that he understands the history and has a vision for the University. We also appreciate his focus on academics, and are confident he will hire a team that will make up for his weaknesses.
Sonia impressed us with her conduct in debates, but we remain unconvinced. We were explained the issues, instead of the techniques that will be used to solve them. We think she would still be focused on the right issues, and would do a decent job, but we’re more excited about Johannes.
David is ranked third because he impressed us in his interview. David came off poorly in debates, but seems to be excited about the job and has some interesting and creative ideas that have the potential to change the AMS for the better. He doesn’t have a track record in student politics though, so if he were elected, he’d hit the learning curve like a vertical concrete slab. We love Starcraft though, and hope that tourney happens anyways (so we can 6pool our way to victory).
Jeremy dropped out of the race on this blog. To us, he’s still out. We afraid he will burn bridges built over the past four years, which are needed to get efficient change within UBC. He comes off as articulate in person, but his painting of other candidates as devil-like, without giving cause, gives us enough concern to rank him last.
29
Jan
09
the RBT endorses: Senate
The Ballot
N/A
(Geoff Costeloe and Sonia Purewal acclaimed)
The Reasons
Only two people ran for these five at-large spots. We’re still trying to figure out what will happen to the three vacancies. The current leading theories are:
- A by-election is held after this round of elections.
- AMS council, by resolution vote, appoints the vacancies.
- Acclamation seats are offered to Senators from the year prior, in order of most-votes received.
We think the first will actually happen, and would be the best option, though we believe the rules say the second should. The third option guarantees our editor’s reign as democracy at UBC.
Voter Funded Media
The Position and Issues
VFM money should go towards beer. This is why VFM was created in the first place (and we should know – one of our editors was on Turbo-Democracy-Committee). After a while, the Knollogarchy started to realize they could embezzle this elaborate booze fund and use it to fund their biannual rag, but the people will have no more of it!
The Ballot
Radical Beer Tribune: $2000 Devil’s Advocate: $2000The Reasons
We have formed an unholy pact with the Devil’s Advocate to throw an epic party if selected winners. All profits from VFM will go towards a wicked public party for the support received. Beats embezzlement, doesn’t it?
The Ubyssey Board of Directors
The Position and Issues
The Ubyssey has two arms: a business arm and an editorial arm. Our campus paper, to put it lightly, sucks balls when it comes to scale compared to our national peer schools. Case in point, the Ubyssey publishes about half the material than the Peak does per week. This is because of an aging business arm of the paper which is stopping it from growing in to the modern age.
The Ballot
No for everybody.
The Reasons
If everyone is voted out, then a byelection will be forced, and we can stack the ballot in a coup d’état. Seriously, we have it on good word that this is needed.
Student Legal Fund Society
The Position and Issues
Four score and one bonfire ago, some students when faced with the dichotomy of “extinguished bonfire” or “prison”, somehow chose both. Lo-and-behold, the justice system costs money. Instead of fundraising, those associated with this event have decided to undermine the principle behind the student legal fund’s administration–independence for sober thought–and if elected, will likely just allocate the fund to this cause. After all, when democracy isn’t working, it’s best to use it for selfish gains. The fund needs to be more active, we agree on that point, but it needs to be used on issues for all students (such as parking class-actions, residence evictions, blockades to students voting, unjust expulsions, academic discipline), not a self-righteous few. We should be vigilant to make sure our money is being spent wisely, and that might mean taking action if the SLFS steps outside the very narrowly defined terms in its mandate.
The Ballot
CJ Liu Colin Simkus Aaron Sihota Arash Amouzgar Gordon McCullough Wladimiro WoynoThe Reasons
This is more of an anti-ballot than anything. The above people we could find no/minimal association with the bon fire incident.
