Alaska Redistricting Board: Approves RFI for Board Legal Services and Procurement Procedures

 The Board met from 1:30pm to 1:55.  They approved the Request for Information (RFI) for legal services.  One Board member asked if they should disqualify firms that had challenged previous Board positions in court.  Other members said it's important to consider conflicts of interest, but that if we disqualified firms that had litigated redistricting issues in the past, there wouldn't be any qualified firms.  If they have a current conflict, they won't submit a proposal.

They approved the RFI.  It should be posted by Monday on the statewide (not just legislative) site and will be circulated via the Alaska Bar Association website.  It will be open until Jan 29.  Members believed those with expertise have been waiting for this and will be looking for it.  

The Board also added approving the Procurement Procedures to the agenda, and they noted minor changes and approved it.  One substantive change was to only allow those who bid on projects to object.  

[NOTE:  My very rough verbatim notes are below.  This is only my second meeting and I'm not yet really familiar with people's voices.  Some members were called on by name, or identified themselves (thank you!), but usually by first name.  So I've used first name just because I was typing as fast as I could.]

Redistricting Board Jan 8, 1:30pm

Members and staff present:

• Peter Torkelson as Executive Director 
• TJ Presley as Deputy Director. 
• John Binkley, Fairbanks, Chair of the Alaska Redistricting Board. 
• Melanie Bahnke of Nome, 
• Nicole Borromeo of Anchorage, 
• Bethany Marcum of Anchorage  
• Budd Simpson of Juneau.   

AGENDA:

State of Alaska Redistricting Board

January 8, 2021

1:30 pm

Teleconference:

Public Numbers: Anchorage 563-9085, Juneau 586-9085, Other 844-586-9085

Agenda

1. Call to order

2. Establish a quorum

3. Adoption of agenda

4. Discussion: Request for Information for Legal Services

a. Topic:Timeline for RFI closing

b. Topic: Routing of RFI related inquiries

5. Adoption o fRequest for Information for Legal Services 

6. Adjournment

MEETING NOTES:

1:30 roll call - all members here

John - short agenda

Adopt agenda

4.  Request for Info for Legal Services 

Peter - response by January 29, gives people three weeks to respond

Discussion:  Nicole - adequate;

Budd Simpson - adequate, certainly not shorter, compromise , get this thing moving and enough time.  

Melanie Marcum - probably small pool of bidders and are on the lookout for this.  Want people with experience

Routing - how will the RFI’s come to board and how we respond

Peter - should be careful respondents don’t have direct contact with board members.  Single contact - me - if technical I’ll answer.  If other I’ll contact Board.  

Questions for Peter or TJ?

Melanie - makes sense, I don’t want to be contacted.  Peter is good contact for me.

5.  Adoption of RF legal services

John:  Thanks Nicole and Budd for their work on this.  

Move to adopt by Bethany, seconded by???

Discussion?  

Melanie - I emailed yesterday with suggestion to add to quals, there shouldn’t be a conflict of interest if they are currently or previously engaged in litigation trying to affect outcome of prior Board’s decision.  I’m not an attorney.  You can’t represent two opposing clients at the same time.  Maybe not an issue.  

Budd:  Thanks.  I like that Melanie is concerned about conflicts of interest, but in something like this it’s critical to have legal experience with redistricting, so having been involved in the past with redistricting. [ Noise, please repeat.]  Good you thought about conflicts of interest and we should be aware.  But most critical thing is to have most qualified legal rep. and they get that from some kind of litigation on one side or another it doesn’t matter.  If we made a condition that they couldn’t represent one side or the other in the past, there wouldn’t be any one left with experience. 

We shouldn’t put it into RFI, but be aware and take that into consideration when reviewing proposal.  If we think they wouldn’t be objective and represent our interests, we don’t have to choose them.  But we should consider conflicts when we look at them.  

???:  Current conflicts would be important.  Good firms would have had previous experience.

Melanie - Just want the firm to have no conflicts.  

Budd:  If have a current conflict, they won’t apply.  Example:  If retained already by political party to represent them, they won’t apply.

Bethany? - Rules of Professional Conduct are clear and attorneys expected to comply.

John:  Any objection to motion?  If no objection, we can proceed.  [Adopted.]

All we have on the agenda.  Any comments?

Nicole - Peter and TJ did heavy lifting, though Budd and I willing to take credit, but they deserve it.  

John:  Then the two medals we were going to give you two will go to Peter and TJ.

Budd:  Draft on procurement procedures?

Peter:  Thanks.  Got feedback with some changes, I want to review those and I’ll bring that to board at final meeting.  Thought enough to do at this meeting. 

Melanie - I didn’t have issues.  I don’t need more time if others ready

???   - I’m prepared.

John - we could Amed the agenda to add approving procurement policy as presented by staff.  

Add item six:  approval of procurement code.

Budd:  Changes that staff made were largely ministerial and we discussed in last meeting in terms of what we want to see.  They provided the draft in advance so we had chance to look at.  We should thus go ahead and approve it so they can go on.

General State, the other was Legislative code.  Since we were thru the Legislative ??, so we deferred to Legislative and replaced the word “Legislative”  with the Board:

Peter:  one change of substance, “interested parties” people who could protest , limited to only those who had actually submitted a proposal.  

After the meeting I will publish the marked up pages.  That will be available for public as soon as possible.  

John:  Other discussion on motion to adopt?  Objections?  None, it is adopted.  

Other items board members want to bring up

Bethany - there’s another caller on the line ends with 19  - 

Someone from Juneau, member of public.

Peter:  One other item on RFI we will post this on full statewide public notice system.  Will put it up Monday morning (not just Leg site) and also through the Alaska Bar Association to make sure attorneys know.

John:  Motion to adjourn.  Talk about next meeting?  OK,  [they didn't talk about next meeting]

Melanie:  Move to adjourn.  Nicole, seconds

Objections?  Adjourned  1:55pm

Narcissists Who Are Also Psychopaths: The Dark Triad - Know Anybody Like This?

 

I was watching a video on YouTube about regional accents in the US and when it was over, a video on narcissism  showed up.  Eight questions a narcissist can't answer.  (They all involved having to admit some sort of personal weakness or listening to another person.)  Then this one was next:

Essentially, this therapist says it's impossible to work with psychopaths and he doesn't.  

And that's why nobody except complete toadies who shower Trump with praise and adoration manage to have any longevity in his administration.  This explains his relentless fight to overturn the election and his ignoring of norms and laws.  

It doesn't explain his followers.  Well, I can understand other psychopaths supporting someone who supports their horribly anti-social behavior, but we can't have that many psychopaths in this country.  

There wasn't any discussion of what happens when two psychopaths get together.  Do they bond?  Or do the quickly fight for dominance? 

Sure, the word narcissist has been used to explain Trump since early on.  Some have even used the word psychopath.  But now that we've seen Trump non-stop for four years, this description seems spot on to me.  

Dear Senator Dan Sullivan:

First, let me thank you working with Senators from both parties to get the Oceans Act passed.  This is a big achievement.  But it would mean nothing if President Trump were to succeed in overturning our democratic election.  As you know the courts have resoundingly rejected about 60 challenges made by Trump because there was no evidence presented to back up his claims.  And yesterday we learned that Trump called the Republican Secretary of State of Georgia and told him to find some 11,000 votes to overturn Biden's win in Georgia, with a threat of legal action if he didn't.  

Today I urge you to strongly endorse the certification of Biden's election and to denounce those senators who are threatening to challenge the election.  There is no doubt that Biden has legitimately been elected president of the United States.  Not denouncing those challenging this election merely feeds the white nationalists and others who want to reestablish 'the good old days' when White men were never challenged by women or people of color.  We need to resoundingly denounce these actions.  

I try to imagine what calculations you are making that prevent you from taking bold action on this issue.  I watched you take the oath yesterday to defend the Constitution.  This certification of the vote is one of the most important opportunities you have to do that.  To end the alarming talk of a number of people in your party, including sitting US Senators.  

I'm not willing yet to believe that you support this seditious action and would welcome an armed resurrection and coup to keep Trump in power.  

The only concern of yours that makes any sense at all to me is that you fear Trump supporters finding a candidate more amenable to their anti-democratic, racist views to run against you in 2026.  But you have nearly six years until you are up for reelection.  The world will be significantly different by then.  And probably most important on this point, Alaska will be using Ranked Choice voting.  There will be no Republican primary where you can be defeated by far right extremists in your party.  

As part of your campaign you told Alaskans that you are a Marine.  We expect you to show the courage of a Marine.  We expect you not to hide in the back of the crowd, but to stand up front to resoundingly defeat this challenge to our democracy.  

Readers can send their own email to Senator Sullivan here.  

AIFF2020: The Festival Picks Versus My Picks

I was going to run through all the categories to compare the award winners chosen by the critics, the audience, and me.  But I just didn't see enough films in some categories to really comment, so I'm leaving them out.  Those that won that I didn't see are marked with an asterisk* in the tables below.  I posted all the winners here. 

As I was writing this, it became clear that the two narrative categories - Narrative Features and Narrative Shorts - were really strong categories with lots of excellent films.  Features, so much so, that I'll do another separate post on that category.  When it's up I'll put in a link here.  

I'd also note that evaluating films is never easy.  Lots of factors play a role - the quality of the film, how the topic and technique strike the viewer, and conditions of the viewing and the viewers mood and energy level while watching the film.  

Animated Shorts
	Critics	Audience	Steve
Winner	Gon, the Little Fox	Grab My Hand: A Letter To My Dad	Grab My Hand
Runner Up	Diminuendo	Just for the Record
2nd Runner Up	Just for the Record	Sad Little Fact

Grab My Hand: A Letter To MyDad was fantastic.  The best of the animation I saw by far.  The story was short and to the point.  The animation was original and beautiful and perfectly illustrated the story.  Identity Crisis and Encounters are worth mentioning.  Identity Crisis for the story, Encounters for the visual effect, though it was much too long.  I understand they wanted to show from the few to the many and back to the few, but it seemed to go on forever.  Maybe I wasn't in the right mood at the time.  

Diminuendo and Just for the Record were also worthy contenders.  Gon, the Little Fox and Sad Little Fact weren't my cup of tea.  

Feature Docs
	Critics	Audience	Steve
Winner	Never Too Late Doc Severinsen	Race to Alaska*	Cell
Runner Up	Race to Alaska*	Pushout:  Criminalization of  Black Girls in HS*	Cell
2nd Runner Up	Everything that  Could Have Been	Never Too Late Doc Sev Story	Cell

In the past, this has been a strong category at AIFF.  But this year I didn't see any films that I thought were 'excellent'.  Doc Severinson  was interesting, but as a film it wasn't particularly noteworthy in technique or how it told the story.  Everything that Could Have Been  was to me a family home movie that went on too long.  It was a loving memorial, but it wasn't close to a great film.  

Narrative Shorts
	Critics	Audience	Steve
Winner	Jane*	Masel Tov Cocktail	Masel Tov Cocktail
Runner Up	Masel Tov Cocktail	Kama'aina (Child of the Land)
2nd Runner Up	Undercut*	Rebel

I'm not offering Runner Up winners because I thought Masel Tov Cocktail was so outstanding and it's hard choosing among many worthy runners up. And I didn't see them all.    

Masel Tov for me was the perfect film, meaning it took advantage of all you can do with the medium of film to get its story across.  It packed in LOTS on content but there was nothing unnecessary - not even the gefilte fish cooking video.  The acting was fantastic. And it used humor beautifully to discuss the sensitive topic of Jewish identity and stereotypes in modern Germany, and in the telling, broke all those stereotypes. I did have one friend who said some of it was over his head, so it's possible non-Jews missed some things. 

I didn't see two that the Critics chose, so I can't comment on those.  I would note that I have no problem with the Audience Choice winners.  Kam'aina was a powerful look at a homeless Hawaiian teen.  But I also thought The Woman Under The Tree also told as sensitively  a different homeless story.  

Rebel  looked at immigration from the point of view of a young boy whose dad has taken him to a biker sort of rally/camp in the Canadian woods.  

Gather in the Center  and Thoughts and Prayers  were both about school shootings.  The first featuring active shooter classroom training for the teacher and students that goes wrong.  The second took a more unconventional view and looked at school shootings by highlighting a few kids who would be dead (in the film story, this was a narrative, not a documentary)  by the end of the school day.  

Flora was a visually exquisite Spanish film with a compelling story.  Bainne (Milk)  was a visually striking Irish film.   While Flora had brilliant colors and style as though each frame were a classic painting, Bainne was black and white and eerily represented a time of Irish famine. 

I also thought that When It Falls told an interesting, unusual story.  

Anna and Cake Day are two other worthy films in this category.  

Documentary Shorts
	Critics	Audience	Steve
Winner	Reclamation: Rise At Standing Rock*	Sky Aelans	Sky Aelans
Runner Up	Sky Aelans	Keep Saray Home*
2nd Runner Up	Antarctica	Hysterical Girl

Again, I didn't see all the films in this category, but I'm more aligned with the Audience Awards than the Critics Awards.  .

I would also recommend a couple of other narrative shorts that made a good impression:

Hysterical Girl - did a good job of looking through history - from Freud to MeToo - where women are dismissed as being hysterical and not taken seriously.  

The Marker - very simply and straightforwardly, but effectively, told the story of an artist who is putting up crosses at all the spots where immigrants have died in the desert crossing into the US.  

Alaska Redistricting Board Chooses The Easy Contracting Process For Hiring Its Attorney

 The Redistricting Board met Tuesday, December 29, 2020, to take two actions:

1. Determine whether to use the Legislative or Administrative procurement process.  
2. Start the process for hiring an independent counsel for the Board

It appeared that the Board members were connected via zoom (someone talked about not being able to turn off the hand raised icon), but people like me using the phone line provided were only listening by phone.

But there was an agenda posted and links to the documents in the Board Members' packets.  Those present were: 

• Peter Torkelson as Executive Director 
• TJ Presley as Deputy Director. 
• John Binkley, Fairbanks, Chair of the Alaska Redistricting Board. 
• Melanie Bahnke of Nome, 
• Nicole Borromeo of Anchorage, 
• Bethany Marcum of Anchorage  
• Budd Simpson of Juneau.   

I'd note that the documents include the 2010 RFP for an attorney and the winning bid by attorney Michael White.

Which Process?  Below is a chart prepared by staff comparing procurement constraints of using the Administrative Code versus the Legislative Code.  

The brief discussion focused on:

• Minimum and Maximum bids
• Who could protest the decision
• How long each process would take

Procurement Code Features

State Procurement Statute is found at AS 36.60

Feature                              Administrative Code              Legislative    Code
No Bid Maximum	$50,000	$35,000
No Bid Max with documented justification	$100,000	No fixed ceiling
No Bid Direct Procurement Exception for State Agencies (UAA/Dept. Labor)	No	Yes
No Bid Direct Hire of Legal Counsel Allowed	No	Yes
RFP Time on the Street	20 days	20 days
RFP total time to complete once published	60 days	45-60 days
Protest Allowed	Yes, bidders only within 10 days	Yes, “interested parties” within 10 days
– Protest freezes contract execution	No	No
– Protest Step 1	Procurement Officer documents findings may implement remedy	Procurement Officer documents findings may implement remedy
– Protest Step 2	Commissioner of Administration who may refer case to an Administrative Law Judge	Appeal to Legislative Council
– Right of Appeal	Superior Court	Superior Court
Inter-branch payment coding required	Yes	No

They had several people available for questions:

• Emily Nauman, Attorney with Legislative Legal Services
• Rachel Witty, Attorney with Department of Law
• JC Kestel, Procurement Officer, Legislative Affairs Agency

The memo to the board discussing the options in more detail (and available as one of the links) was written by Legislative Legal staff member Emily Nauman and is dated December 23, 2019.   It concluded: 

"It is advisable that the Committee abide by competitive procurement rules.  However, the statutes establishing the Committee are silent as to what procurement rules apply.  Therefore, the committee can likely choose which procurement rules to abide by.  There are three options, the state procurement code (AS 36.30), the Legislative Procurement Procedures, or the Court System Procurement Guidelines.  Whatever set of procurement rules the Committee choses, it should abide by them consistently for all of its procurements.:

 In the discussion they also talked about the difference between using an RFP or an RFI.  Here, a key differences was that the RFP had to be "on the street" for 30 days and the RFI only 10 days, plus the RFI was much less 'formal.'  That is it has fewer checks in the process.  Some may see those checks as red-tape, but they were originally put there to make bodies more accountable.  But as long as the Board puts all their documents online, that should compensate for a faster process.  

Board member Budd Simpson of Juneau said that in any case he wanted the bid out on the street the full 30 days to make sure anyone interested had time to find out about and respond to it.  

He and Nicole Borromeo of Anchorage volunteered to work on the draft Request with Executive Director Peter Torkelson.  

Melanie Bahnke larified that the Board would be the evaluation and selection committee.  

Below are my rough notes as the meeting moved to the end:

Melanie Bahnke:  Move Board begins RFI process for Legal Counsel, board needs to approve.

John Binkley:  Discussion?  If no objection, the motion is adopted.  

I think that’s the only two items on the agenda

Let’s get this done as fast as possible.  

John Binkley:  Maybe we can get a time next week when we can all get together.

Budd:  I’ll send out an email notice.

?? - Going to have to be a weekend If next week.  We have other meetings.  

John:  Anything else?

Budd Simpson:  Peter and PJ could you run thru the Request for last time (ten years ago) and make necessary edits for dates and names to give us a first cut at what Nicole and I would take a look at.  When you make changes, do it with red lines so we can see changes easily.  Continue to use that so everyone can see changes.

Peter Torkelson:  OK, you guys should have in your head, how the RFI is going to deal with the Voting Rights Act changes.  Old one has clear language about pre-clearance and Voting Rights Act, not as important as last time since requirements no longer apply.

Melanie Bahnke - that was the main thing I saw about Voting Rights Act and pre-clearance.  Something else, these meetings are being recorded and made available.  Requirements of minutes, are these required?  Court reporter.

Peter:  On our agenda.  Chasing them down.  They are being recorded and posted on website within a week and stay there.  

John Binkley?:  I have name of court reporter and haven’t followed up with them.

JP:  Open meetings and public notice, we’ll have to adopt how we’re going to do that, voted on and all agreed on.  

John:  Anything else?

??:  Thank Peter and PJ for getting documents out well in advance.  

John Binkley:  Motion for adjournment?  Made and seconded.  Adjourned.  

??:  Someone is going to have to figure out who made the motions etc.  plus time adjourned etc.  3:10pm Adjourned.

Here are a few thoughts I have after following most of this process starting in March or so 2011:

Voting Rights Act (VRA) - 1964 law pushed through by President Lyndon Johnson after Kennedy was shot.  It recognized that a number of states had traditionally discriminated against minorities in voting and it identified 16 (I think) that needed to get pre-clearance from the Department of Justice before their redistricting plans could be approved.  Alaska was one of those states because of treatment of Native Alaskan voters. Many of the others were Southern states.  

Last time round the Board had to make sure that they didn't diminish, through redistricting, the voting power of Alaska Natives.  There could not be fewer districts than before in which Alaska Natives were a key block of voters.  Thus, the first plan was carefully worked on to be sure Alaska Native districts would not be diminished in order to get pre-clearance.  This involved a lot of terms like "Minority/Majority district":  Here's a post I wrote on the issue in April 2011.

After the Board got its pre-clearance (which included testimony by a VRA expert who helped the Board,  the first plan was successfully challenged and a second plan had to be undertaken.  Somewhere in this process the US Supreme Court, in Shelby v Holder in 2013  ruled that the section of the VRA that required the pre-clearance was out of date and no longer applied.  But the Board here pretty much kept the Native districts in compliance anyway.  However, since then many of the states that were required to get their plans pre-cleared have done everything they could to suppress black and other minority voters.  

We'll see to what extent Alaska Native districts are preserved this time round.  It isn't easy because in rural Alaska where Natives have a majority, the population is very sparse, resulting in some huge districts geographically.  And while there are enough Alaska Natives to have their own district in Anchorage, they aren' living just on one or two areas.  

Timing -  You may have noticed that the memo I quoted above was dated Dec. 23, 2019.  At the meeting they mentioned that the previous board had gotten their RFP for the independent counsel in October 2010 and so they were a bit behind and thus can't wait the long time period needed for an RFP.   I realize that we're in the middle of a pandemic, but we've all gotten better at distanced meetings and I'm not sure why the Board didn't start this process earlier.  On the other hand, the Bureau of the Census isn't going to be handing over the census data on time and it may arrive later than it did in 2011.  

Virtual Board Meetings -  There were a few times during the last board's tenure that I had to listen in online or by phone.  But by then I'd been to many, many meetings and I could recognize the voices of all the Board members and staff.  Listening in this time was trickier.  If someone didn't call on someone by name, I had to guess at who was speaking.  It appeared that the Board was connected by Zoom.  There's no technical reason why people who want to 'attend' the Board meetings can't do that via Zoom as well.  I've been on a couple of national zoom meetings where the key speakers had their video and sound on and everyone else just listened in, no video, no sound.  

I'd also note that the transcripts of the prior board were many months behind.  I later learned that one of the problems was the stenographers, who were getting audio tapes of the meetings, couldn't figure out who was talking and they needed to have that info on their transcripts.  

The Board has posted  video of three of the six meetings listed at the AKLeg website, including the December 29 meeting I'm reporting here.  And transcripts are so much easier to scroll through and search.  The the video that the Municipality puts up of the Assembly meetings does allow for searches.  

Transparency and Openness - I got to listen in to the last meeting because someone sent me a link to the site.  I'm still looking for the Board's website.  There are a couple of 'redistricting' sites for Alaska, but they look like someone has just bought the names.  They don't have anything to do with the actual Board that I can tell.  

And when the Board does get its website up, I'd like to request that they plan where it is going to be preserved.  There are lots of important Alaska documents there and they shouldn't disappear after the Board closes.  The various links to documents and maps shouldn't just go missing.  Perhaps the legislature needs to require the preservation of the website and all the linked documents.  One of the Alaska history related libraries in the state could be given the funds to maintain the site after the Board concludes its business.  

For those looking for transcripts of what happened ten years ago, the best resource I know are my own posts which are indexed here in chronological order starting March 15, 2011.  I'm hoping that the increase in local and state reporters at the ADN and at Alaska Public Media means that paid journalists will be covering this decade's redistricting board.  And I can just drop in now and then.   

Potential Conflict of Interest

When the Binkley family bought the Alaska Dispatch (formerly and presently the Anchorage Daily News) the ADN noted:"

"The buyer is the Binkley Co. LLC made up of siblings Ryan Binkley, Wade Binkley, James Binkley and Kai Binkley Sims. The group is working with Jason Evans, owner of Alaska Media LLC, though the proposed sale agreement lists only the Binkley Co. as buyer."

From what I can figure out - sorry, I haven't kept close tabs on Fairbanks personalities - these are John Binkley's children.  So there is at least the appearance of a potential conflict-of-interest in how the ADN might cover the Board.  Though it's also possible they allow the editor to run the newspaper independently.  

KTOO reported  that John Binkley took over the opposition to the recall of Governor Dunleavy last March.  Since then that campaign has gotten a huge assist from the Corona Virus.  But it means that Binkley is the third Board member with ties to Dunleavy, who appointed Bethany Marcum of Anchorage and E. Budd Simpson of Juneau to the Board.   I'm merely pointing these things out.  The Board has been pretty partisan in the past and as long as the members are appointed by politicians it will continue that way.  

The Alaska Redistricting Board Meets Tomorrow (Tuesday) Afternoon [Updated]

 Some of you may recall that my life got hijacked for almost three years after I innocently went to the Alaska Redistricting Board meeting in 2011.  Sine then technology (for mapping and for meeting) have changed a lot.  And so has the depth of local/state news coverage in Alaska.  And I have out-of-state grandkids who hadn't been born yet last time.  

I've been wondering if I really want to get so deeply involved this time.  And considering that the meetings won't be in person (for a while at least), it will be easier to attend, but more difficult to chat with the board members and other members of the public during breaks and after meetings.  

But my stalling got a bit of a jolt today when I got an email from someone who is interested in doing an academic project on the board.  She's already done a bit of homework and reminded me I'm getting out of date on this topic.  And part of her homework got her to my tab above that indexes all the redistricting posts I did in the past.  

Here are three links she just sent me:

Tomorrow's meeting* - starts at 2:30pm:

http://www.akleg.gov/basis/Committee/Details/31?code=HRDB#tab2_7

Free map-making - my quick look suggests this is based on the 2010 census numbers and the districts the board created last time.  I'm not sure how quickly this will be updated when the new census data come in.  But last time, this sort of free citizen available software was definitely not available.  

https://davesredistricting.org/maps#home

(I just noticed there is more than one open-source map-making website!)

Paper on nesting districts:

https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/2330443X.2020.1774452

(This is an article that was published in April of this year looking at how you can gerrymander districts in states that allow nesting.  That is states where Senate districts are made up of two paired House districts.  The study is about Alaska.)

*[Updated 11pm]:Here's the agenda

Discussion: Procurement Code Options, TELECONFERENCED

Legislative vs. Administrative

Available for Questions:

- Emily Nauman, Attorney, Legislative Legal Svcs.

- Rachel Witty, Attorney, Dept. of Law

- JC Kestel, Procurement Officer, LAA

Adoption of Procurement Code

Discussion: RFPs for Proposals for Independent

Legal Services

- Review of 2011 RFP

- Timeline for publishing RFP & selection of firm

- Review options to proceed

- Provide direction to Executive Director

"We humans are willing to believe anything rather than the truth." More Shadow of the Wind Quotes

Here are some more quotes from Carlos Ruiz Zafón's The Shadow of the Wind, which I wrote about yesterday.

But since it's December 25, I should wish readers who celebrate Christmas a good holiday.  Rather than argue about politics with your errant relatives, you can debate these quotes.  I think they can be seen as truths across political divides.  

Or maybe not.  This is a description of a sociopathic (he even tortured small animals as a kid) police officer in Barcelona about 1965.  

"Francisco Javier Fumero had joined the Crime Squad. There was always work there for qualified personnel capable of confronting the most awkward situations, the sorts of situations that needed to be solved discreetly so that respectable citizens could continue living in blissful ignorance. Words to that effect had been said to him by Lieutenant Durán, a man given to solemn pronouncements, under whose command Fumero had joined the police force. “Being a policeman isn’t a job, it’s a mission,” Durán would proclaim."

You know anyone like this?

"It was a smile full of disdain, typical of self-important jerks who hang like stuffed sausages from the top of all corporate ladders."

This seems timely.  But I guess it always is.  

"There are no coincidences, Daniel. We are puppets of our subconscious desires. For years I had wanted to believe that Julián was still the man I had fallen in love with, or what was left of him. I had wanted to believe that we would manage to keep going with sporadic bursts of misery and hope. I had wanted to believe that Laín Coubert had died and returned to the pages of a book. We humans are willing to believe anything rather than the truth. "(emphasis added)

I'll offer this one with no comment.  

“'This city is a sorceress, you know, Daniel? It gets under your skin and steals your soul without you knowing it.' 'You sound like Rociíto, Fermín.' 'Don’t laugh, it’s people like her who make this lousy world a place worth visiting.'  'Whores?'  'No. We’re all whores, sooner or later. I mean good-hearted people.'"

 

 

". . . one of the many places in Barcelona where the nineteenth century has not yet been served its eviction notice."

After I post the daily Alaska COVID-19 update, I'm not really ready to do a post.  Partly because I don't want to just post something everyone else is talking about and partly because the things that are important take longer to think about.  Partly because I've been trying to read my next book club book

before the library Kindle version evaporates tomorrow.  100 pages a day.  Made it to page 302 last night. Should get to 400 today, the just 88 more pages tomorrow.  I really love the book - Carlos Ruiz Zafón's The Shadow of the Wind (The Cemetery of Forgotten Books).  But I'd much rather have a paper copy than spend more time looking at a computer screen.  

The book is a maze of stories inside stories.  The narrator is ten when the book starts and grows older as the story progresses.  He's searching for more about the life of the author of a book that he, apparently, has the last existing copy of.  His life and the mysterious author's life become intertwined.  Minor characters eventually take center stage for a while.   The main stage is post-War Barcelona.  And the writing is lyrically infused with wisdom.  Tragic love stories abound.  Here are some quotes that Kindle makes easy to copy, find, and share:

“How old is the lad?” inquired Barceló, inspecting me out of the corner of his eye. “Almost eleven,” I announced. Barceló flashed a sly smile. “In other words, ten. Don’t add on any years, you rascal. Life will see to that without your help.”

It's a book lover's book, which is one reason it feels particularly wrong to read this one electronically.

“This is a place of mystery, Daniel, a sanctuary. Every book, every volume you see here, has a soul. The soul of the person who wrote it and of those who read it and lived and dreamed with it. Every time a book changes hands, every time someone runs his eyes down its pages, its spirit grows and strengthens. This place was already ancient when my father brought me here for the first time, many years ago. Perhaps as old as the city itself. Nobody knows for certain how long it has existed, or who created it. I will tell you what my father told me, though. When a library disappears, or a bookshop closes down, when a book is consigned to oblivion, those of us who know this place, its guardians, make sure that it gets here. In this place, books no longer remembered by anyone, books that are lost in time, live forever, waiting for the day when they will reach a new reader’s hands. In the shop we buy and sell them, but in truth books have no owner. Every book you see here has been somebody’s best friend. Now they have only us, Daniel. Do you think you’ll be able to keep such a secret?”

Julian Carax is the mysterious author of the book Daniel has bonded with in the Cemetery of Forgotten Books.  

"Bring your precious find with you so that I can examine it properly, and I’ll tell you what I know about Julián Carax. Quid pro quo.” “Quid pro what?”

“Latin, young man. There’s no such thing as dead languages, only dormant minds. Paraphrasing, it means that you can’t get something for nothing, but since I like you, I’m going to do you a favor.”

Barcelona is one of the main characters of the book.  I've opened a Barcelona map on my computer so I can follow the action from place to place. 

"The Ateneo was—and remains—one of the many places in Barcelona where the nineteenth century has not yet been served its eviction notice."

The author and the main characters are clearly a religious skeptics:

"He begged the Lord to send him a signal, a whisper, a crumb of His presence. God, in His infinite wisdom, and perhaps overwhelmed by the avalanche of requests from so many tormented souls, did not answer."

Life, in this book, does not favor the timid (though the risk takers don't do much better):

“Look, Daniel. Destiny is usually just around the corner. Like a thief, a hooker, or a lottery vendor: its three most common personifications. But what destiny does not do is home visits. You have to go for it.”

The police are not seen as people's friends and protectors.  After Fermín is beaten to a bloody pulp:

"'Tell me, Daniel, now that nobody can hear us. Why isn’t it a good idea to report what has happened to the police?' 'Because they already know.' 'You mean…?' I nodded. 'What kind of trouble are you two in, if you don’t mind my asking?'” I sighed.

I'm not sure that's totally clear to readers out of context, you just have to consider why the police would already know.  

This is a book about books, about writing, about solving mysteries, about love, about life, about freedom and the obstacles to being oneself.  

Thanks, Brock, for recommending The Shadow of the Wind.   

 

 

AIFF2020: Awards - Watch The Ceremony

 I don't spend a lot of time on Facebook.  So I only just found out last night that the Anchorage International Film Festival Awards was at noon today.  But you can watch the Awards now.

I'd note that there were so many films - many of them shorts - that it's hard to keep them all straight. And a number of winners are films I just didn't get too.  But the website is still up and you can browse through the titles with one screenshot each and a short description to jar your memory.  The Trailers are also still up.  

Jury Awards - Jurors are selected by the festival to review and choose the best films in the festival.  While trying to pick 'the best' is often fraught with personal biases (what one judge likes or relates to compared to what another likes) and often means great films aren't chosen, they also help film makers get attention of funders and distributors.  

Made in Alaska Short Films

2nd Runner Up  Pebble Redux Yáa at Wooné

Runner Up - Who We are

Winner:  To Keep As One

Made in Alaska Features

Winner:  Classic

Animated Shorts

2nd Runner Up:  Just for the Record

Runner Up:  Diminuendo

Winner:  Gon, the Little Fox

Horror Shorts - Late Night Chills

2nd Runner Up  - Antique

Runner Up - History of Monsters

Winner - The Burden 

Feature  Documentaries

2nd Runner Up  - Everything That Could Have Been/ On Our Own Island

Runner Up - Race To Alaska

Winner - Never Too Late:  The Doc Severinsen Story 

Narrative Short

2nd Runner Up  - Undercut

Runner Up - Masel Tov Cocktail

Winner - Jane 

Short Documentaries

2nd Runner Up  - Let's Go To Antarctica

Runner Up - Sky Aelans

Winner - Reclamation:  Rise at Standing Rock

Narrative Features

2nd Runner Up  - Last Days of Capitalism

Runner Up - The Woman In the Photographs

Winner - Dinner in America

Screenplay Competition

2nd Runner Up -  Bloodletters

Runner Up -Brook Farm

Winner - The Orchestra’

Audience Awards - Film makers often say these the the most important awards.  These are the films the audience enjoyed most.  In a number of cases, I think the audience chose better than the jurors.  

After School Special

2nd Runner Up - Son of Salvation

Runner Up - Fragments

Winner - Where Did She Go?

Made in Alaska

2nd Runner Up -To Keep As One

Runner Up - Pebble Redux

Winner -  Bad River

Made in Alaska Feature

Winner - Classic

Animated Shorts

Narrative Feature - 

2nd Runner Up - Sad Little Fact

Runner Up - Just For The Record

Winner - Grab My Hand:  A letter To My Dad

Documentary Shorts

2nd Runner Up - Sky Aelans

Runner Up-  Keep Saray Home

Winner - Hysterical Girl 

Narrative Shorts

2nd Runner Up - Rebel

Runner Up - Kama’aina (Child of the Land)

Winner - Masel Tov Cocktail

Documentary Feature -

2nd Runner Up -  Never Too Late:  Doc Severinsen Story

Runner Up -Pushout:  The Criminalization of Black Girls in High School

Winner - Race To Alaska

Narrative Feature - 

2nd Runner Up -  Paper Spiders

Runner Up -Foster Boy

Winner - Dinner in America

I'll try to do another post looking at the winners and comparing them to my favorites.  But I would mention a couple of narrative features that got left out that should have been recognized, but this was probably the strongest category and the films recognized were strong.

The Subject 

My Son

My two top picks for the festival - Masel Tov Cocktail and Grab My Hand - both got top honors from the Audience.  Both were 'perfect' films - that is they told their stories using film techniques to make their points beautifully.  Everything worked - the content and the filmmaking.  They wouldn't have the same impact in another medium.  

I'll focus more on them in a follow up post.  

Regular Snowfalls Outside, Things Growing Inside

 My personal trainer is working on my upper body this winter.  It keeps giving a little more snow to shovel four or five times a week.  Today there was about three or four new inches.  

We've also had foggy days.  Which in December, when we get down to five and a half hours or so between sunrise and sunset, makes it seem even darker.  But the snow and ice do such beautiful tricks.  

Here's ice patterns after shoveling the deck.  We'd had a couple days where it got above freezing and then froze again.  I hadn't gotten the snow off the deck, so there was this thin glaze of ice after shoveling.  It should get more focused if you click on it.

And my van was used by the snow as a canvas too.  

And here are some spruce needles holding up a blanket of snow that's turning icy.

Inside, the green stuff continues to give the illusion of a different season.  This is a bromeliad I brought up from my mom's yard where they grow like weeds.  We've had it here maybe 20 years.  It bloomed the first two years, but hasn't since.  I guess I need to check the local bromeliad society to get some tips.  It has offered up new sprouts so now I have three of these.  

But I can't put them where people move back and forth.  The thorns - look closely - are nasty.  

And it's nice that I still have geraniums blooming.

And someone sent us a box of pears.  We've been eating away.  I made a pear omelette and J made a couple of pear tarts.