ResSoc team fails to secure vote of confidence in uncontested election

Loss comes after disqualification and reinstatement last week

ResSoc Team FAM.

After they were disqualified and reinstated, Residence Society’s uncontested Team FAM was given a second election period. However, the team proved to be unsuccessful, as they failed to secure the necessary votes of confidence. 

Team FAM consists of Presidential candidate Andrea Colasanti, ArtSci ’19, 

Vice-President of Residential Affairs candidate Jane Mao, ArtSci ’20, and Vice-President of Judicial Affairs candidate Kyesha Fong, ArtSci ’20.

For team FAM to win, they needed at least 10 per cent of the population to vote “yes” in their second election period on Feb. 6 and 7. Given 4,554 people were eligible to vote, the team needed at least 455 votes to secure a vote of confidence. The team narrowly missed the mark, receiving 453.

The loss comes after the team’s Feb. 1 disqualification by the Residence Society (ResSoc) elections team and subsequent reinstatement by the AMS Judicial Committee.

Maddie Perrault, the interim CEO who made the decision to disqualify team FAM, told The Journal that, “on Saturday, February 3, the AMS Judicial Committee resolved the issues surrounding the previous ResSoc executive election by rendering it void and declaring a new election be held this week.” 

According to AMS Secretary Neil Sengupta, Team FAM was disqualified by the ResSoc CEO  for “reproachful conduct.” ResSoc bylaw 8.7.2 indicates that “no candidate shall engage in campaigning which is based on reproachful strategy.” Bylaw 8.10.1 further notes that “any violation of this policy, as determined by the CEO, may result in the disqualification of the offending candidate or team of candidates.”

“Specifically ResSoc believed the team to be threatening and harassing,” Sengupta wrote in an email to The Journal. 

Following this, Team FAM was allowed to appeal to the AMS Judicial Committee (J. Comm) on the basis that they didn’t believe their strategy was reproachful and through questioning the ambiguity of the term “reproachful.”

“They appealed on the grounds that their correspondence with the ResSoc CEO was, in fact, above reproach,” Sengupta wrote.

The committee found no evidence that Team FAM’s behaviour was in violation of the bylaws “given the stress of an election period,” Sengupta noted. The behaviour was deemed non-threatening by J. Comm and they overturned the disqualification.

With this ruling, the previous ResSoc election period was nullified and Team FAM is now allowed to run in the new election. ResSoc must appoint a new CEO prior to beginning a new Election.  The Judicial Committee stipulated a one-day campaign period, followed by two days of voting.  

“As a point of information, oftentimes the AMS will oversee faculty society elections in instances like this. However, as ResSoc is not a faculty society, and instead a separate corporation, the AMS Elections team is unable to oversee their elections,” Sengupta wrote. “The only reason that ResSoc can appeal to the AMS J.Comm is that it is explicitly stated in their bylaws.”

Going forward, ResSoc will hold a general assembly to figure out the next steps.

“Per our bylaws, there will be a General Assembly on Sunday Feb. 11,” Roseman told The Journal.


All final editorial decisions are made by the Editor(s)-in-Chief and/or the Managing Editor. Authors should not be contacted, targeted, or harassed under any circumstances. If you have any grievances with this article, please direct your comments to

When commenting, be considerate and respectful of writers and fellow commenters. Try to stay on topic. Spam and comments that are hateful or discriminatory will be deleted. Our full commenting policy can be read here.