As Eli Judge vacates the District 8 City Council seat he filled nearly two years ago, four contenders have done their best to try to fit the mold of a popular, visible student alder. However, after meetings with most of the candidates and evaluation of the debate between all four, it has become obvious Bryon Eagon is by far and away the best choice to represent the overwhelmingly student-filled district.

Eagon’s approach to the two biggest issues facing the district — safety and alcohol policy — are by far the most sensible and comprehensive of the four. We applaud Eagon’s approach to the Alcohol License Density Plan, advocating for the sunset clause built into the bill to allow the plan to expire in 2010 and emphasizing a more thorough “case-by-base” basis for each liquor license. What’s more, on the subject of bar raids, he proposes cutting money from the Downtown Safety Initiative for mobile ID scanners and killing two birds with one stone — removing money from a safety initiative not focused on the intended target and redirecting those funds to more deserving projects.

Furthermore, his approach to safety includes a range of short-term (continued funding for the Downtown Residential Lighting Initiative, consolidating safety organizations and promoting neighborhood watch programs) and long-term solutions (focusing on tactics to handle Madison’s habitual offenders, addressing poverty issues in the area) that are not only sensible, but recession-conscious.

Eagon also gave us two answers to the question of what he would cut if faced with prioritization: the previously mentioned ID scanners and the Sister Cities program. While these programs have regrettably little impact on a multi-million dollar city budget, they’re at least pieces of the pie that could be reallocated to more deserving social and safety services.

However, the gulf is miles wide between Eagon and the other contenders.

Jacob Schmidt, who has been ill-prepared this entire campaign, should have dropped out when he realized his mono was going to keep him from doing proper research and campaigning. Schmidt was entirely frank during our discussions with us, criticizing Eagon’s ID scanner cut as ineffective and Mark Woulf’s plan for expanded entertainment licenses, but offered almost no solutions to the current state of safety or alcohol issues in the district. We appreciate his honesty in answering our questions about cutting city programs — where he suggested we could save a small amount of money by slashing city grants for art projects — but feel his mere suggestion of fiscal conservatism is not enough to make his campaign viable.

Mark Woulf doesn’t fare much better, as his only real ideas are not practical. His idea to broaden definitions for entertainment licenses may increase the likelihood of bar raids, not decrease them. Furthermore, his suggestion of a city-funded mediator to settle landlord-tenant disputes seems to be a costly, overkill response to protect tenant rights in this city. Woulf has two cards up his sleeve, but they’re both jokers.

Katrina Flores, despite being pegged as a frontrunner, seems to be one of the most confusing candidates of the bunch. While we were unable to interview Flores due to a last-minute personal matter, all scheduling and correspondence we had with her was rerouted through campaign manager Michael Johnson.

Let us make it clear: Candidates for state Legislature need press managers. Candidates for governor need representatives. City Council candidates need to be able to speak up themselves. If Eagon, Schmidt and Woulf were all able to set up meetings themselves, Flores could have done the same.

But communication aside, Flores’ policies seem hazy at best. Her only safety plan that differentiates her from the other candidates is a measure to increase blue light phones on campus. Her plan to require the tenant bill of rights be posted in apartments and residences is a fine plan, but it is far from comprehensive. Every other question at the District 8 debate was answered by way of grassroots organizing or repeating Eagon’s solutions. Certainly, she may overlap with Eagon on some areas, but her failure to distinguish herself from the rest of the field is not encouraging.

But the biggest warning sign was her closing remark at the District 8 debate, where she referenced calls for pragmatic solutions in City Council and summed up her opinion of such demands: “Whatever.”

We have the same opinion of her candidacy.

It is because of this massive leadership gap between the candidates and our confidence in Eagon’s dedication to proper representation and cost-effective solutions that we endorse him for the City Council District 8 seat.