Snowden Chase Modern Day Version of OJ Televised Car Chase

[Think of this as a quick jump into the river of data flowing out over the internet.  A short swim.  Then we get out, dry off, and go about our business.]

There's a lot we don't know and jumping to firm conclusions on any side is clearly premature.  One's gut reactions are probably more related to one's basic belief system than to the actual facts at this point.  But, eventually, we'll know which first impressions proved to be more accurate.

My reaction is in the title - this reminds me of the OJ Simpson car chase coverage.  That one used helicopters to follow Simpson and the police through Los Angeles.  This one is using the internet and who knows what else to give us less direct and less verifiable information.  The OJ chase led to a trial that left White observers shaking their heads and Black observers smiling.  The later may not all have believed in OJ's innocence, but the fact that a Black defendant had been able to get out of a charge of murder of his White girlfriend showed that enough money to get a great attorney now worked for Blacks as well as Whites.  But it didn't end there and everyone seemed to hold to their pre-trial conclusions.  We'll see if that foreshadows what's going to happen here where the stakes are so much higher.  

I went to Twitter to see what was happening there.   Snowden isn't even in the top 10.  Here's what Tweeters think is important at this moment in time*:

Trends 

• #MagnaCarta
 Promoted

• Jim Carrey 

• Adams Morgan

• #Berlusconi

• #SCOTUS

• #questionsforteganandsara

• Deng

• #SB5

• #zimmermantrial

• Fed's Fisher

I searched Snowden (not the hashtag #Snowden.)  Tweets are rushing in.  Most seem sympathetic to Snowden.  Here are just two:

Nancy Kricorian ‏@nancykric4h"He who tells the truth must have one foot in the stirrup." - Armenian proverb #RunSnowdenRun

Occupy Wall Street ‏@OccupyWallStNYC6hIrony in the US getting upset about #Snowden going to Cuba to avoid the law, which is exactly why Bush put Guantanamo there. #RunSnowdenRun

I decided to look for the negative tweets and searched "Snowden traitor" (not the hashtag #snowdentraitor.) Here too it seems tweeters are pretty supportive of Snowden though if you wait a few minutes you get a stream of 'he's a traitor' tweets. From search for "snowden traitor":

Jonathan C ‏@jcpolitech15m

I initially thought Snowden was a whistle blower, but if he is sharing NSA secrets with China & Russia, then he is a traitor 

.POLITICO ‏@politico18 JunMichele Bachmann says Edward Snowden is ‘clearly’ a traitor: http://politi.co/16G31s5 GORKA DE ZAMACONA ‏@GORKAZP18 Jun@politico Traitors r those who swore 2 uphold & defend the constitution & trample it Those who warn U your rights being taken away R heroes
ExpandCSMonitor.com ‏@csmonitor17 JunDick Cheney calls Edward #Snowden a traitor, says fleeing to China suspicious, implies he may a spy for China: http://ow.ly/m6iv6 

The Atlantic Wire ‏@TheAtlanticWire2hThe growing consensus that #Snowden is a terrible traitor, or 'America's #1 fugitive' http://theatln.tc/14T7BmS 

But another tweet took me to newsguild (the newspaper guild, communications workers of America)

which has an online poll:

Snowden Survey

Thank you for taking our survey.*

results

*I had to vote to see the results.



I'm not sure what this all means, but the basic questions falling out are:

• Snowden's motives  - I don't see much about Snowden being motivated by money or any other reason to sell out his country.  Some say he's doing this for the attention.  Most say he's exposing the ugly side of America.  Some say he's helping China and Russia (and other countries with terrible free press records) to score points against the US.  It seems that most people writing think that he, at least, thinks he's doing this as a whistleblower, not as a spy.  
• Traitor/Spy - This charge seems to come more from the act and specific violations of the law and the contract he signed to keep information confidential than from belief that he has been paid to do this by some foreign government - the usual notion of a spy.  The idea is, he broke the law and is doing harm to America therefore he is a traitor.  Implied, I guess, is that he is just a mere cog in the process and therefore doesn't understand the big picture of why the surveillance needs to be done.
• Hero - There are a lot of folks (on Twitter) who see Snowden as part of the Daniel Ellsberg, Julian Assange tradition of whistleblowers who expose government's evil ways.  
• Just a troubled man - Beate Clever ‏@ArtClipsDesign
  22m
  Ex-CIA Chief: Snowden neither hero, nor traitor but very troubled young man http://fb.me/2Fblk6H8J 

Technology may give us access to more data faster, it doesn't make us wiser. It does give us more of a sense of what people are thinking and with that we can start to assemble the ways people are framing the situation and the questions that need more facts to help reach more justifiable conclusions. (Conclusions can include: "We don't have enough information to conclude.")


*  As I towel off and get back to other things, here's the Twitter Top 10 as I'm about to hit the publish button:

Trends 

• #MagnaCarta

 Promoted

• Jim Carrey

• #SCOTUS

• Adams Morgan

• #TWLHangout

• #LarryIsLove

• #smarTrike

• #SB5

• Andrew Gaugh

• Fed's Fisher

· Change

When Did Teal First Get Used As A Color Name? Potter Marsh Stop Leads Me To The Answer.

Actually, I never even thought of the question, until I started googling to gets ome background information for these pictures.  


After an anniversary party with friends, we went over to Potter Marsh, not far away.  We got there around ten and stayed an hour.  I'm still learning how to do things on the new camera - which I usually leave home and stuff my old one in my pocket.  Let's say, I have mastered almost nothing in terms of how to control my camera.  Yet despite that, I got far better pictures than I could have with my little Powershot.  But given it was cloudy and late,  I really messed up the lighting with the terns and had to revive the images after the fact in photoshop. 

Green winged teal

From Wikipedia:

"Teal is a deep blue color; a dark cyan.
Teal gets its name from the fact that it surrounds the eyes of the common teal, a member of the duck family.
The first written use of Teal as a color name in English was in 1917.^[1] "

These birds are pretty common throughout the US and Canada according to All About Birds.

Potter Marsh is just south of Anchorage (the city part - Anchorage boundary goes on another 50 miles or so) and was formed when they built the Seward Highway and blocked the water from just flowing out into the inlet.  I was trying to find a link to confirm this history but most google links go to tourist posts on Potter Marsh, but I did find this post about a contractor who was fined for destroying a stream and wetlands that feed into Potter Marsh.  

Beginning in 2005, D'Amato used heavy equipment at the Hunter Heights subdivision to illegally excavate 1,300 feet of streams, then filled nearly an acre of wetlands on a 29-acre property with the stream material, according to the EPA. D'Amato performed this work without obtaining needed permits from the Army Corps of Engineers, a violation of the Clean Water Act, the EPA said.

The excavation caused erosion in the streams and sediment flowed into nearby Little Rabbit Creek, which is used by salmon to spawn. The sediment flows on through the creek to Potter Marsh, where it threatens salmon and bird populations, said Heather Dean, environmental scientist at the EPA.

The EPA sent D'Amato warnings over the years but he never fixed the problem, Dean said. In 2007, the EPA issued D'Amato a compliance order requiring him to restore the damaged wetlands and streams. He hasn't yet taken care of it and continued to dredge and fill the streams and wetlands on his property until at least July 2008, the EPA said.  

I found this story covered in several places but didn't find any stories that followed up on what happened.

 

An Alaska Railroad passenger train  went noisily by while we were at the Marsch.

Arctic Terns are one of my favorite Alaska birds, but they've always been a little tricky to photograph because the move so fast.  I'm posting these shots so when I get better ones, I can go back and remember how bad these were.  These are photoshop enhanced - made much brighter because when I set it at a speed to get these very fast birds in focus, the aperture didn't go along.  These terns fly from the Antarctic to Alaska and then back each year.   And they fly and hover and dive for fish.  Very sleek and beautiful to watch. 

The Arctic Tern Migration Project website this Bird of the Sun:

"Bird of the sun

The Arctic tern is known to make the longest annual migration in the animal kingdom. During its breeding season, it is found far to the north where summer days are long, and it winters far south in the southern hemisphere, where the days are longest during November to February. This means that the Arctic tern probably experiences more sun light during a calendar year than any other creature on Earth. The long-distance travel of the Arctic tern is well-known both amongst researchers and in the broader public. Now, for the first time, technological advances allow us to follow the Arctic tern on its immense journey, practically from pole to pole.

 

Scalia Says He Doesn't Like Being Moral Arbiter

The North Carolina Bar Association heard from Justice Antonin Scalia Friday morning at their annual conference, just days, maybe a week,  before the Court's decisions on voting rights and same-sex marriage cases.  From the Charlotte Observer today:

"In a speech titled “Mullahs of the West: Judges as Moral Arbiters,” the outspoken and conservative jurist told the N.C. Bar Association that constitutional law is threatened by a growing belief in the “judge moralist.” In that role, judges are bestowed with special expertise to determine right and wrong in such matters as abortion, doctor-assisted suicide, the death penalty and same-sex marriage.
Scalia said that approach presents two problems: Judges are not moral experts, and many of the moral issues now coming before the courts have no 'scientifically demonstrable right answer.'”

You can read the whole article here.

The whole point, as I understand this, is that the courts are NOT supposed to make moral judgments and are not supposed to make decisions based on the outcome - unless the outcome means stopping a violation of the law.  They are supposed to take the facts of the case and match them as closely as they can to the law - either statute or Constitution.  And no one said this would be easy because the law can't consider every possible situation, because different laws contradict each other, because conditions change and science changes our understanding of things.  And every big decision to get to the Supreme Court is tinged with moral implications.  Slavery, the taking of Native American land, school prayer, abortion, voting rights.  It goes on and on.  That's why we have the Supreme Court - to make these hard decisions. 

Science has helped us understand things that were not understood when the Constitution was written.  We now understand that African-Americans are not a subspecies of human being. (And many already knew then.)  That depression, addiction, and other mental illnesses make it much harder to 'choose' the option that society sanctions.  Women, it turns out, can do any job a man can.  And gender isn't as male or female as we once thought.  (Well people always knew there degrees of masculinity and femininity, they just didn't like it.)  Yet lots of people still have a simplistic moral sense of 'personal responsibility,' one rooted in ideas about about hard work and taking responsibility leading to success.  While I subscribe to this as an overarching ideal, I also realize that there are a number of barriers.

First, physical and mental ability or health may prevent people from living society's prescribed 'responsible' life style.  Women were supposed to stay home and raise babies for example.  And some still believe that's their sole function. Brain science tells us that many things we once thought were choices, aren't.    Second, social and economic structures don't equitably connect hard work  and socially beneficial work to financial independence.  A great care-giver will never get rich tending the ill and elderly, while a great basketball player can make earn 1000 times what a great teacher can make.  People of color were barred from education and from better jobs by law and once the law fell, those obstacles stayed up by custom.  And some people inherit wealth without having to work hard or take any responsibility. 

As quick as Scalia's brain is, it appears to have trouble getting past these concepts that seem pretty elementary to me.  We know now through science that the object of sexual desire is not a choice.  Logically, it makes no sense that so many people would choose a path that leads to derision and worse. This is not difficult unless you simply don't want to understand it.

We also know that it is the Constitution, not Leviticus, that Supreme Court Justices are to use as their benchmark.   When we have competing rights, we have to weigh which one is more basic.  Is the right to same-sex marriage more fundamental than the right to live in a society where there are no same-sex marriages?   People who claim they are being harmed by same-sex marriage have the burden of proof and they have to show their harm is greater than the harm suffered by gays who can't marry.   Equal treatment is as fundamental right as the Second Amendment - and 30,000 collateral gun deaths a year doesn't allow much infringement of the right to bear arms.  I haven't heard of any collateral deaths due to same-sex marriage?   Well, there was an apparent suicide in France.

I'm hoping Scalia was venting to the North Carolina bar because he was on the losing side of the two same-sex marriage cases, and that since he didn't convince five other justices,  he's repeating his arguments in North Carolina.   

And if he should feel this moral arbiter role is too great a burden, he knows he can always step down and let someone more capable take his job.  I doubt that's going to happen.  I suspect he loves being the moral arbiter, but only when his side wins. 

Radio Babies And 113 Year Old Public Opinion Put Redistricting Into Context

Three white men, two over 60, from Kenai and Fairbanks and Kodiak.  A white woman from Juneau, and a Native woman from Kotzebue.  These are the members of the redistricting Board who are mapping the election districts for Alaska.  And those labels don't capture who these people really are any more than do their maps capture what Alaska is and how significantly their task affects all our lives.   They have state requirements and federal requirements to meet, plus the conflicting expectations of those Alaskans who are paying attention.  It's not an easy task.  I left the Board meeting Friday feeling a little empty.

They adopted all seven Board maps and all four third-party maps, which were only due at the time the meeting began - noon.  So how could they have rejected any?  Not only had they not articulated any criteria for selection, they really hadn't even seen the third-party maps.  I'm not sure it matters.  Having them all gives people more ideas to look at.  Or some might be so outrageous that mediocre ones look good in comparison.  I don't know.

But I decided to stop by the museum on my way home to wash out my brain.  And it worked. 

With the Board meeting in mind, things took on a new meaning.  For one, fighting over land in Alaska goes back a long way. Here are some images from the museum that the Board and all of us should consider.





A Haida Gwáahl beaded hunting bag.  From Southeast.  Not sure of the date.

 A diorama of a traditional bowhead whale hunt on the Northwest Alaska Coast.

The Episcopalian church in Anvik.  The mission was established in 1887.

I try to get the captions so I know what I have but here I only got part of this one and the wrong one on the wall.  But this is Siberian and Alaskan indigenous leaders coming together  - I think - in Wales around 1900.

Still pretty accurate 113 years after it was published in 1900 in the Dawson Daily News.  If you click on the image it gets bigger and clearer and you can see that Public Opinion is propped up on a lot of broken promises, oratory, credulity.

German artist Julius Ullman got talked into a trip to Alaska when he was 35 to see the Gold Rush, and stayed around in Dawson City for six years.










If you click on the image with the red wing, you can read the airfares from Anchorage to points around the state in 1926.  Rates are per person for one, two, or three passengers.  Shipping rates are also on there.  Trip to Nome for one passenger was $750!  Wasilla was only $35.

Ketchikan sketched by WPA artist Prescott Jones in 1937.














This one is one of the more amazing and magical pictures I saw.  It's called Radio Babies and it was done by George Ahgupuk in 1940.

Be sure to read the second paragraph below. Again, click on it to see it better.  Can you see the baby going from Anchorage to Bethel via radio waves? 

This one is called "Headquarters Camouflaged Umnak."  It was painted by an army artist, Ogden Pleissner, in 1943.  Umnak was an important location in the book Thousand Mile War, I read recently.

Fighting over land isn't new.  We all need to see ourselves in the larger context and make decisions that history will look back on favorably.  We aren't just Republicans and Democrats.  We're human beings.  We all have (or had) mothers and fathers, struggles becoming adults, figuring out who we are and how to be true to ourselves and those around us.

We should be striving to create a place where parents can raise their kids to fulfill their human potential.  We should be thinking about a legislature that keeps those basics in mind and doesn't get caught up in petty politics.

This summer the museum's special exhibits include spectacular Alaskan portraits by photographer Clark James Mischler.  Here are a couple to help remember who we are and what Alaska is.

Mischler:  St Mary's

Mischler - Gun salesman Al 'Bondigas' Anchorage

Mischler:  Vera Spein Kwethluk

Alaska is a lot more than this:

Viewing Friday's Redistricting Board Meeting

Some photos of the meeting and after.

After the meeting, Calista attorney Marsha Davis discusses their map with Board attorney Michael White. Carolyn is working with Calista too and has been there most days I've dropped in during the last two weeks. 






I posted my rough notes of the meeting Friday, right after it ended.

Then I added some of the maps Friday night.   The link has links to the other maps I already posted. 

 

Above, around the table counter clockwise - attorney Michael White, member Marie Green from Kotzebue, Chair John Torgerson, administrator Mary Core, member Jim Holm, and member Bob Brodie.  Member PeggyAnn McConochie was there by phone.

This was by far the most people I've seen at in this room in the last two weeks.  Mostly this was people turning in maps and attorneys or staff of interested organizations.

[For the record, I photoshopped two photos together - I couldn't get everyone in.  It's a little distorted, but it's pretty much what it looked like with Leonard Lawson on the far right, now in the picture.]

Board members Marie Green, John Torgerson, and Jim Holm looking over the Calista map after the meeting.  I think the large Calista map hadn't been printed off yet and posted on the wall.

Some of the audience looking at the Gazewood & Weiner map after the meeting.  G&W is the law firm representing the Riley plaintiffs, the people who filed the suit against the Board.

 

Maps in one of the Board member's office.  This gives you a little sense of how much the Board has been through.  

Alaska Redistricting Board's Draft Options C and G and the Four Third Party Maps

One of the effectst of not having an executive director is that the Board can't get the website to do what little even the Board wants it to do:  post the maps of the options.  They are all sitting in huge files at a GoogleDrive page.  You have to download all of files for each map - including all the GIS files needed to put them on the mapping software the Board is using.  All this kind of stuff was getting up on the Board's website quickly and easy to use formats when they had an executive director last year.  And let's hope that by 2020, there will be software that's free and available for anyone who wants to try doing their own maps.

So, here's what I'm doing here.  I've already put up the Board's Options A, B, D,  and E and F.  in earlier posts.

So in this post I'm going to put up

• Board Draft Option C and
• Board Draft Option G here and

the third-party options from

• AFFER (Republicans), 
• Gazewood-Weiner (attorneys for the Riley Plaintiffs in Fairbanks and the Democrats have had involvement with this map), 
• Calista (Native Corporation who used the same GIS guy as the AFFER group), and
• Ketchikan Borough (who just did a Southeast Alaska map).

I've put these files on SCRIBD which should make them easier to see than the earlier ones.  (Plus they were PDF files and much bigger than the previous ones.) (There's no enlargement option when I tried this on the blog, but you can click on the linked heading of each map and go to the map on SCRIBD where you can enlarge it.)

Board Draft Plan C Map by Steve

Board Draft Plan G Map by Steve

AFFER Map (Alaskans For Fair and Equitable Representation)

Gazewood and Weiner Map by Steve

Calista Map by Steve

Ketchikan Gateway Borough by Steve

Board Meets - Accepts 7 Board Options, Four Private Options in 30 Minute Meeting

I'm going to post this quickly. These are raw notes. I'll proof them later and also add some photos of the new maps in another post. 

Roll call - all here - PeggyAnn McConnochie by phone.

White:  Court adopted our schedule as the Court ordered scheduled.  Issues was never that, whole public hearing thing, couldn't believe ordered to do so.  After court finished with process, whole litigation process starts anew.  Based upon historical proceedings on remand and article VI of Constitution, Board doesn't believe right interp.  Should be remand as in the past.  After we adopt one of these or if Section 5 thrown out, people would be able to challenge, but wouldn't start over , with petitions, .  . . so we're seeking final approval from SC to lodge this appeal.

PeggyAnn McConnochie:  moves to

Brodie:  I understand limited application to court to determine how they interpret the Constitution on this.
White:  What process is required - Court thinks we're starting anew.  Our interpret.  people can challenge, filed a few days after adopted.  Eight or nine people replied.  Same as 2001.  Not go back and do whole new trial.
Torgerson:  Questions

Motion approved 5-0.

Item 5:  Approval of draft plans.  There are seven board draft plans.  Walk through with a little explanation.
A:  Valdez to Matsu, similar to some other plans
B:  Utilizes Valdez population, Richardson Highway, Girdwood, South Anchorage
C:  Bob's -
Brodie:  Major difference is Western Alaska, instead of getting 5 districts and combine with urban.  4 districts.  Kept all boroughs whole, split minimally those that had excess population in house districts.
D:  Torgerson:  Takes North Slope Borough down to Canadian border.  Different approach
E:  From one of our GIS techs, (Ray) takes PWS and Yakutat to Chugiak.  Larger Bethel district.
F:  Another person on loan drew:  North Slope divided, NWAB and takes more Yukon River and creates district on Canadian Border to Aniak, relatively large district.  Takes pop from Chugach to Valdez.
G:  Same as A in Rural.  Major difference is Matsu and Anchorage same as Proclamation

So seven options, I'd recommend the Board take them all to hearings.

Brodie:  I move to adopt them for public hearings.
Green:  I second
McConnochie:  Wonderful idea.
Torgerson:  Discussion?
Green:  I appreciate what we've received so far.  That we have that type of data.  Looking forward to hearings, especially looking forward to hearing from rural Alaskans.
Torgerson:  There are some strikingly similar districts and some totally different.
Roll call vote:  5-0 yes.  Adopt plans A-G

Torgerson:  Now to Private plans - all are posted except Calista. [White drew a map on the board.]
Gazewood and Wiener (Wallerie works for this firm)
AFFER
Partial from Ketichikan Borough - Ketchikan-Craig

Three complete statewide plans and one regional plan.

Brodie:  I move we accept the three complete and one regional plan and take them to public hearings for discussions.
McConnochie seconded.

[Calista gave White a small version.]  Torgerson:  It's being printed off.
I'm not aware of any other plan.  Marie you said SE has a plan?
Green:  That's what I was told.  I haven't heard anything since.
Torgerson:  If you want to add the SEAlaska plan - the deadline was noon - but . . .
Green:  ???
Torgerson:  Motion to adopt the three plan and Ketchikan Regional plan [not SE].
5-1 approval

Torgerson:  We had a little issue with the website yesterday.  I apologize.  I told people we'd have it up by Wednesday but didnt' get up til yesterday.  In the process of hiring a website firm.  None of us know how to do this.  There is a link to Google drive.  As soon as Eric can, we'll have the third party plans up.
Brodie:  Just want to think everyone who participated int he last two weeks, when the air conditioning was off and we had subtropical heat.  It was hard, thank everyone who pitched in.
Holm:  Thanks for the hard work.  Eric especially worked hard.
First day in 15 without fans running.  Silence is deafening.
Next meeting June 28 at Anchorage LIO, then July 1 in Fairbanks, July 2 in Juneau.

We'll be working 5,6,7 - we'll have a majority but not all members and will work if we need.
White:  Board needs to make steps to do steps 2 and 3 of the Hickel process - Court ordered.  I hated coming over here last week.  Everyone working hard.

Torgerson:  No other discussion we'll adjourn this meeting

Hangin' In There

Headed to the Redistricting Board meeting.  This guy we saw last night on the way to the Thai Kitchen seemed like a good metaphor.

What's Fair Game When Public Officials Get Careless?

OK, that's a loaded question.  Careless isn't even quite the right word. Here's the context.  The Redistricting Board has had working meetings.  There are Board members in and out almost all day each day as the techs work on maps.  Sometimes the Board members are working on maps in their offices in the back, sometimes they're out in the meeting room.  It's an open meeting, though it's a work session.  It's not really formal.  People are trying out ideas.  They're talking casually.  Even joking.  Except I'm there.  So, careless only in the context of being 'on' long enough that they might forget there's a blogger in the room.

Talking is intermittent.   So I'm not sitting their typing everything they're saying the way I often do at meetings.  And sound recording is iffy because of the ventilation noise due to the unusual heat outside and the broken air conditioning in the building. Mostly they aren't saying anything. There's not much happening to video tape.  People working on their computers with little changes happening on the screens that wouldn't mean much to someone watching.    

So, when the chair stopped to talk to Ray about the map he was working on, I got out my pocket cam and turned on the video to see what I could get.

What rules should I use to decide what to post in this situation?  Here are some of my thoughts on this.

1.  It's a public meeting.  Everything is fair game.  They know I'm a blogger and that I'm listening.  They need to be professional about how they handle themselves and in what they say. 

2.  It's good for people doing serious work to joke at times.  But joking often reveals what they are thinking.  Joking is a way, in some settings, to say what you're really thinking, but then be able to back off and say, "Just kidding" if it doesn't go down well.

• Some jokes are neutral - joking about the weather and heat in the room.  
• Some jokes are self-effacing - talking about one's own faults.  This works ok if you you're generally pretty good at what you do.  It shows modesty, though it could come across as false modesty.  It might not work so well if you joke about a fault that is driving everyone crazy.  
• Some jokes are directed at others - your perceived opponents (in court or the media for example) or people over whom you have power.  Or the public. These are not jokes you should make publicly.  These are for relieving stress with your inner circle.  Such as something like, "Not even Wallerie would sue over this." [Wallerie is the attorney for the Riley plaintiffs in Fairbanks.]  OK, this seems innocuous enough and Wallerie would probably laugh if he heard it.  And I'm guessing if Wallerie were in the room, they still might have said it.  It's natural given the growing sense of them versus us when you're being challenged in court.  Yet there's a difference between being personally sued and when you're being sued as a public official doing your job.  You should be more like athletes - competitive in the game, but able to go out together for a drink afterward.  But the Board does seem to be a tad touchy about the Plaintiffs and members of the Supreme Court.   It's understandable, but the Board should recognize that people have differences of opinion and  that's part of the process.  If they take it personally and get bristly with some people they become less effective in the quest to find a fair and equitable plan for all Alaskans.  

3.  What if people are saying things that help reveal the process?  What's going on?  That's really what I'm here to learn about and to share with the world.  After all, the point of making this all as transparent as possible is to make sure the Board does its job as competently and as fairly as possible.

4.  What if they don't know I'm recording what's going on?  Again, it's a public meeting and they know there's a blogger in the room.  They're public officials.  They're grown ups.  No, they can't let their guards down too far.

5.  What if it prevents them from talking frankly about their doubts and questions?  I'm not doing "Gotcha" journalism.   I'm not trying to get headlines by trapping people into saying something stupid or by writing things out of context to make them look bad.  But anything going on at a public meeting is on the record.  Even these work sessions that aren't (to my knowledge) being recorded or transcribed.  In fact, that's even more reason for me to be vigilant and to record what's happening.  Last year, I thought long and hard before posting a video of the Board's attorney talking pretty candidly about what he thought about an Alaska Supreme Court's decision.  It was during a break.  But I had my camera out and he was looking at me.  And I'd recorded him like that a number of times before.  Even so, I sought guidance from journalism ethics sites and  people with actual journalism degrees before I posted it.  The clincher for me was that he said pretty similar things in an written appeal to the Supreme Court.   I'm glad I did all that, because he wasn't pleased when he saw me next and complained that he didn't know I was recording.  And he wouldn't talk to me again if I was recording.

All this is preface to a video that's pretty bad technical quality - both video and audio.   I took it because it was the first time I actually heard the Chair talking more than a sentence here or there during the work sessions and he was close enough to me there was a chance the audio would get past the noise of the cooling equipment.  It was more to just give readers a sense of how this process works, how decisions are made, the kind of conversations that go on.

Ray, one of the new techs on loan from the Department of Natural Resources, was working on Anchorage and the chair came over to see what he was doing.  It seemed like a good thing to record.  To let readers get a sense of how this works.  As it went along - it's pretty brief  - it touched on a topic I've been trying to understand.  Exactly how much are they starting from scratch and how much is borrowed from old maps?  Both Torgerson and Eric had already told me they started with blank maps.  Torgerson even showed me on the computer how to create a new blank map.  But how, I keep asking myself, did these maps often seem to look so similar to old ones and how did they get such similar numbers for the districts?  This seems to add to my questions here.

The audio's not great, so I've written up a transcript that, I think, catches the meaning if not all the exact words.

Torgerson:  So these deviations came from?
Ray:  Already in the plan????
Torgerson:  See how tight those are?  That one is zero
So there are already constitutional in their nature?  So you’r saying you didn’t change these from one plan to the next.  The court said we might have painted ourselves into a corner because we didn’t do something different from what we did.   But in reality, there’s not a hell of a lot we can we can do with a lot of those districts.  Particularly the ones that are kind of isolated.  The ones like you’re working on, the south Anchorage and maybe the north Anchorage,  east and west, yeah, those are in play. The ones like 28 are pretty hard to do anything with that.  But if you change one, you might change all, you might have to because of deviation.