Alaska Redistricting Board To Get Census Data "By Sept. 30, 2021" Along With All The Other States

The following notice comes from a US Census Bureau redistricting blog via an email from the Alaska Redistricting Board Executive Director Peter Torkelson.  (He offered to email a notice of the next Board meeting when I asked if there were an easier way to find out meeting times than the State Public Notice site.  Thanks, Peter.)

FEB. 12, 2021 — The U.S. Census Bureau announced today that it will deliver the Public Law 94-171 redistricting data to all states by Sept. 30, 2021. COVID-19-related delays and prioritizing the delivery of the apportionment results delayed the Census Bureau’s original plan to deliver the redistricting data to the states by March 31, 2021.

Different from previous censuses, the Census Bureau will deliver the data for all states at once, instead of on a flow basis. This change has been made because of COVID-19-related shifts in data collection and in the data processing schedule and it enables the Census Bureau to deliver complete and accurate redistricting data in a more timely fashion overall for the states.

The redistricting data includes counts of population by race, ethnicity (Hispanic or Latino origin), voting age, housing occupancy status, and group quarters population, all at the census block level. This is the information that states need to redraw or “redistrict” their legislative boundaries.

In preparation for the delivery of redistricting data products, the Census Bureau has been in close coordination with each states’ official nonpartisan liaisons to understand the impacts of the delayed delivery on individual states. Since 2019, states have had access to prototype geographic support products and data tabulations from the 2018 Census Test to help them begin to design their redistricting systems. This is one tool states can use to help minimize the impact of schedule delays. In addition, the Census Bureau today completed the release of all states’ 2020 Census geographic products needed for redistricting. This will enable states to redistrict promptly upon receipt of their 2020 Census tabulation data.

I'd note that this is a significant delay (potentially six months if it takes until September 30) from ten years ago when the Alaska Redistricting Board got its data from the US Census Bureau on March 15.  That post explains some of the rules at the time - like having to have the first plan done within 30 days of receiving the data.  (I apologize for the missing photos on that page.  They weren't mine and some are apparently no longer on the original sites.)  I don't know whether any laws have been changed since then.  Back then I learned about the rules because they were explained at the Board Meetings.  There have only been a few meetings this time round and they've all been COVID kosher.  

Dear Senator Dan Sullivan (Again? This is getting old)

Dear Senator Sullivan,  

It appears that you have already made up your mind to vote to acquit ex-President Trump.  I don't understand that decision, which most of the Republican Senators seem determined to make.  But this is critically important so I will give you the view of one of your constituents on why you should vote too convict.

As a young man, I listened to most of the Watergate Hearings on the radio.  Let me begin with this quote from Howard Baker, Republican Vice Chair of the Watergate Investigation:

“There's only one way that my party, the Republican Party could be mortally wounded with certainty and that would be for the public to think that we Republicans don’t have the courage, the stamina, the determination to clean our own house."

I've watched four days of impeachment hearings now.  It's clear that the House team made a tight, detailed, well organized, factual case against the ex-president.  They clearly showed how his actions, since well before the election even, set up the mob that ransacked the Capitol.  They showed how he created the big lie - "if I lose, the election was a fraud."  After the election he kept up that refrain - and presented no credible evidence in 61 courts.  All the judges rejected his cases out of hand. Not just Republican judges, but judges Trump himself appointed!

Then he tried to intimidate Republican election officials in Michigan, Pennsylvania, and Georgia into decertifying the elections.  He told the Georgia head of elections to just find enough votes to let him win!

Then he started telling his supporters to "Stop The Steal."  He encouraged them many times to prevent Biden from becoming president.  

Not only was the evidence they presented overwhelming, but for anyone paying attention to legitimate news the last six months, it was all stuff we knew already.  You yourself related how you and Sen. Murkowski sprinted out of the Chamber because the insurgents were knocking out the windows and banging on the doors where the House and Senate were certifying the election.  

Trump's defense attorneys made feeble attempts to reiterate their claim that "impeaching a private citizen was unconstitutional."  But we know he was impeached while he was a sitting president.  We also know that judges and other officers have been convicted after they resigned.  

They argued that his First Amendment rights were violated.  They dismissed the letter from over 100 top Constitutional lawyers, including key people from the Federalist Society, as "partisan."  It wasn't.  I'm guessing by your question today, that you will choose  "You can't impeach a private citizen" as your fig leaf to cover your vote.  It's transparent.  It won't cover what you're trying to hide.

They played five minutes of video tape of every time any Democrat had ever said "Fight" arguing that the ex-president saying it numerous times in his pre-rampage speech was equivalent.  The House team put the ex-president's words into context.  Trump's team did not.  Instead they tried to make it seem that telling people to fight for equal justice for African-Americans who are regularly being harassed and  killed by police is the same as telling an armed mob to take the Capitol and stop the certification of the election by violence.  

Some have argued that the Senate Republicans are suffering from the political version of Battered Woman Syndrome.  I assume that you know about this syndrome since you have championed the ending of abuse against women.  But let me remind you of some of the symptoms:

• learned helplessness
• refusing to leave the relationship
• believing that the abuser is powerful or knows everything
• idealizing the abuser following a cycle of abuse
• believing they deserve the abuse

Here's what some key Republicans said of Trump in 2016:

"On the campaign trail, Rand called Trump a “delusional narcissist” and a “fake conservative,” and Trump mocked his height. Rubio mocked Trump’s small hand size and called Trump a “con artist,” and Trump eviscerated  “Lil Marco.” Graham said Trump was a “kook,” “crazy,” and “unfit for office,” and Trump gave out Graham’s personal cellphone number on national television. Cruz said Trump was a “pathological liar,” a “narcissist,” and a “serial philanderer,” and Trump and basically called Cruz’s wife ugly—while accusing Cruz’s dad of being involved in the Kennedy assassination." (from The Daily Beast.) 

You yourself said you were ready to support Pence as the candidate and you publicly said you didn't vote for Trump in 2016.  

Yet all these Republican Senators, including yourself, have lined up to staunchly back Trump for four years, and the now the ex-president.  

The battered woman syndrome does seem to fit well in two particular ways.  

• Often women are afraid to get out of relationships because they fear how their men will retaliate.  
• Or they are afraid they can't afford, for economic reasons, to leave the relationship.  

That sounds pretty close to the situation of Senate Republicans.  You're afraid of retaliation by Trump and by his supporters and you are afraid of losing the economic support of Republicans in your next election.  

You've taken an oath to support the Constitution both as a Marine and as a US Senator.  You're allowing your personal interests and the peer pressure of your Republican colleagues to close your eyes to what that oath requires of you now.  The case against the ex-president is more than clear.  Trump's defense team was all smoke and mirrors.  

There is more to life than being a US Senator if that is the price for honoring your oath to office.  But you aren't up for reelection until 2026.  By then, voting to convict Trump will be respected by conservatives as well as progressives.  Or Trump will be using his acquittal to continue to claim he was robbed of the election and will still be stoking the fires of white supremacy and creating more havoc than you can imagine now.  Just as you didn't imagine the storming of the Capitol when you voted to acquit last time.

The American people know Trump should be publicly sanctioned and banned from office.  The world knows that.  And even if Republicans prevent conviction, the House's case is well preserved on video tape for future generations of Americans to see it for themselves in history classes.  And they will.  Your children and grandchildren will see it.  And they will know you didn't have the courage to honor your oaths to protect the Constitution.  They will realize that you grabbed some of the irrelevant sound bytes that Trump's lawyers offered Republicans to use to excuse their votes.  

I urge you to stop hiding and stand up front and proudly and deliberately cast your vote (mine too since you represent me in the  Senate) to convict Donald Trump.

Thank you

"Reporting back from the future: GOP's battered wife syndrome is in full force even after Trump has left office. So SAD!"

 On May 14, 2018 I began a blog post like this:

Congressional Republicans Show Signs of Battered Wife Syndrome

Medical News Today says battered women suffer from PTSD but then adds they suffer their own special symptoms as well.

In addition to PTSD, people with battered woman syndrome show symptoms that may be confusing to outsiders.
Those include:

• learned helplessness
• refusing to leave the relationship
• believing that the abuser is powerful or knows everything
• idealizing the abuser following a cycle of abuse
• believing they deserve the abuse

I then went on to look at each of these symptoms and relate them to Congressional GOP.  (You can see the whole post at the link above.)

Today, Anonymous left this comment:

"Reporting back from the future: GOP's battered wife syndrome is in full force even after Trump has left office. So SAD!"

So sad, indeed.  But the Democrats have laid out such a powerful, logical, and easy to understand case for Trump's treachery.  And it's all there in video - the presentations of the House team and the embedded video they used as evidence.  

Even if the Republicans can't see it, or are too paralyzed to break rank, everyone else can see it.  Historians have never had it so easy.  And their students have never had it so compelling.   

"The Earth is round. Two plus two equals four. Joe Biden and Kamala Harris won the 2020 election for President and Vice President of the United States" Smartmatic v. Fox

Smartmatic, a maker of election technology is suing For News for knowingly broadcasting lies about their company for financial gain.  

Fake news is not new. In a post about Misleading Headlines I wrote about serious problems rife in the US from 1898 when there was a circulation feud between the Hearst's and the Pulitzers.  

But Fox News goes well beyond headlines.  The  whole story is often totally made up.  The First Amendment has been interpreted to give a lot of leeway for legitimate news media to make honest, even sloppy  mistakes.  

However, as you read the allegations in this case (and based on everyone's personal experience either with Fox News directly or on the ever-present clips on different social media) it's clear that Fox has often pushed the protections of the First Amendment to the point that they are actually causing harm to people and companies and endangering democracy, by labeling fiction as non-fiction.

Distinguishing Free Speech from Slander and Libel

So how do we balance free speech and slander and libel?  There have always been laws against slander and libel.  Smartmatic is claiming that Fox and its on air spokespersons not only made patently false claims, but they knew that they were doing it, and in doing it they did Smartmatic irreparable harm, for Fox's financial gain and to help reelect Trump.  

Findlaw outlines the key elements of libel (written) and slander (spoken).

To prove either type of a defamation lawsuit, plaintiffs must prove the following elements:

• The defendant made a false and defamatory statement concerning the plaintiff;
• The defendant made the defamatory statement to a third party knowing it was false (or they should have known it was false); and
• The publisher acted at least negligently in publishing the communication.

It's clear Smartmatic's lawyers know these basic principles of the law and there charges go well beyond claiming damage to Smartmatic and intended gain for Fox.  I'd note I had some personal education on this topic when an attorney sent me an email threatening to sue me if I didn't take down a post the speculated about whether his client was a scam.  Fortunately I had access to a great Alaskan First Amendment attorney who wrote a letter in response.  

Here's a link to the suit Smarmatic filed.  And excerpts below are taken from the documents filed today.

 

 SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF NEW YORK

--------------------------------------

SMARTMATIC USA CORP., SMARTMATIC INTERNATIONAL HOLDING B.V., and SGO CORPORATION LIMITED,

Plaintiffs, -against-

FOX CORPORATION, FOX NEWS NETWORK LLC, LOU DOBBS, MARIA BARTIROMO, JEANINE PIRRO, RUDOLPH GIULIANI, and SIDNEY POWELL,

Defendants.

The basic narrative of the case is that Fox knowingly made up facts defaming their company for Fox to gain a bigger audience and it did great damage to the company. 

INTRODUCTION1

1. The Earth is round. Two plus two equals four. Joe Biden and Kamala Harris won the 2020 election for President and Vice President of the United States. The election was not stolen, rigged, or fixed. These are facts. They are demonstrable and irrefutable. [emphasis added]

2. Defendants have always known these facts. They knew Joe Biden and Kamala Harris won the 2020 U.S. election. They knew the election was not stolen. They knew the election was not rigged or fixed. They knew these truths just as they knew the Earth is round and two plus two equals four.

3. Defendants did not want Joe Biden and Kamala Harris to win the election. They wanted President Donald Trump and Vice President Michael Pence to win re-election. Defendants were disappointed. But they also saw an opportunity to capitalize on President Trump’s popularity by inventing a story. Defendants decided to tell people that the election was stolen from President Trump and Vice President Pence.

The Table of Contents gives you the general narrative of their case.  I'll give you just a taste of what's there.  Again, the link his here.

 

FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS ....................................................................................................... 12

1. Smartmatic’s Role as an Election Technology Company ..................................................... 13

   1. Smartmatic grew from a small start-up into a successful multi-billion-dollar
      enterprise. ....................................................................................................................... 14

   2. Smartmatic’s success was built on its reputation for secure, reliable, and auditable election technology and software. .................................................................................. 18

   3. Smartmatic had a relatively small, non-controversial role in the 2020 U.S. election. ... 19

      1. Los Angeles County introduced a new Voting Solutions for All People initiative for the 2020 U.S. election................................................................................................ 19

      2. Los Angeles County selected Smartmatic to contribute election technology and software to the Voting Solutions for All People initiative. ....................................... 22

      3. Smartmatic’s involvement with Los Angeles County was a success. ....................... 23

   4. Smartmatic quietly celebrated its success in Los Angeles without knowing what was coming from Defendants. ............................................................................................... 25

2. Defendants’ Disinformation Campaign Against Smartmatic ................................................ 27

   1. Mr. Giuliani and Ms. Powell created a story about Smartmatic. ................................... 30

   2. Fox Defendants joined the conspiracy to defame and disparage Smartmatic and its election technology and software. .................................................................................. 32

   3. Defendants engaged in a widespread disinformation campaign against Smartmatic and its election technology and software. ............................................................................. 34

   4. Defendants used multiple platforms to spread disinformation....................................... 57

   5. Defendants presented their statements about Smartmatic as facts, not opinions ........... 67

3. Defendants’FalseStatementsandImplicationsAboutSmartmatic......................................78

   A.  Defendants falsely stated and implied that Smartmatic’s election technology and software were widely used in the 2020 U.S. election..................................................... 79

   B.  Defendants falsely stated and implied that Dominion used Smartmatic’s election technology and software during the 2020 U.S. election................................................. 84

   C.  Defendants falsely stated and implied that Smartmatic fixed, rigged, and stole the 2020 U.S. election for Joe Biden and Kamala Harris.............................................................. 92

   D.  Defendants falsely stated and implied that Smartmatic sent votes to foreign countries for tabulation during the 2020 U.S. election. ............................................................... 102

   E.  Defendants falsely stated and implied that Smartmatic’s election technology and software were compromised or hacked during the 2020 U.S. election. ....................... 106

   F.  Defendants falsely stated and implied that Smartmatic was previously banned from providing election technology and software in the United States. ............................... 112

   G.  Defendants falsely stated and implied that Smartmatic is a Venezuelan company founded and funded by corrupt dictators from socialist and communist countries...... 115

   H.  Defendants falsely stated and implied that Smartmatic’s election technology and software were designed to fix, rig, and steal elections. ................................................ 122

IV. Defendants Acted with Actual Malice and Ill Will Towards Smartmatic........................... 132
    A.    Defendants had no support for their statements and implications regarding
Smartmatic. ................................................................................................................... 133
Defendants did not have sources to prove something that did not happen.............. 134
Fox Defendants eventually admitted they had no basis for their statements and implications about Smartmatic. ............................................................................... 135
Fox News knew its anchors and guests lacked a basis for their statements and implications about Smartmatic. ............................................................................... 143
Defendants purposefully avoided learning the truth about Smartmatic and its election technology and software. ......................................................................................... 147
B.  Defendants had access to information showing their statements and implications about Smartmatic and its technology and software were factually inaccurate....................... 148
Defendants knew Smartmatic’s election technology and software were not widely used in the 2020 U.S. election (and were not used in contested states). ................. 149
Defendants knew Smartmatic’s election technology and software were not used to fix, rig, or steal the 2020 U.S. election. ................................................................... 160

That's enough to get you started.  The Roberts court has given a lot of deference to the First Amendment, but it seems this case is going to help the draw some lines.  And if the Plaintiffs are successful, there will be a new weapon against fake news.   This could be an important step in the fight against fake news.  

“There's only one way that my party, the Republican Party could be mortally wounded with certainty and that would be for the public to think that we Republicans don’t have the courage, the stamina, the determination to clean our own house."

The Watergate Hearings in 1973 were conducted by the with three Republicans and four Democrats. Below in the MacNeil/Lehrer coverage of the first day of the hearings.  It starts with an introduction to the key players and some context.  There never was an impeachment decision because Republicans told Nixon that it was clear he would be impeached and convicted.  Nixon resigned first.  

There's a striking difference from what we're seeing in the Senate these days.  I think it's very instructive to watch these hearing now as we prepare for the Senate trial of former president Trump.

Republican Sen. Howard Baker, Vice Chairman of the Hearings, talking to Robert MacNeil:

“There's only one way that my party, the Republican Party could be mortally wounded with certainty and that would be for the public to think that we Republicans don’t have the courage, the stamina, the determination to clean our own house.  So, it is not only not embarrassing, it’s an absolute requirement that we pursue every fact, wherever it leads us and that every phase that may emerge from that mosaic of fact emerge.  That we do it with enthusiasm but that we do it even handedly and that we have a fair and impartial exposition of the facts but that we establish absolute credibility as Republicans that we are going to take care of it ourselves.”

The introduction is useful, but if you want to skip it, Sen. Sam Ervin (the senior Democratic Senator from Georgia) calls the meeting to order about 9:27 on the tape.

From what I can tell, all the hearings are available from the National Archives here. 

It's Hard To See The Handwriting On The Wall When The Wall Once Made You Rich

The decline of Alaska's oil wealth has been predicted for a long time. It's why the Alaska Permanent Fund was established.  Knowing it was a finite resource and believing that one generation wasn't entitled to use it all up, the Fund was set up to help fund government forever.  Note:  help fund, not pay all the bills.   Even before climate change became a household word Alaskans were being told to diversify.  Even before the price of oil dropped precipitously.  Even before the recent refusal of some the country's biggest banks to fund any more Arctic oil projects.  Then the oil companies didn't bid on the ANWR lease sales.  

But the oil diehards, like Governor Dunleavy, even proposed legislation to get Alaska agencies to boycott those banks.  And to offset the apparent lack of interest in bidding on the ANWR leases, The Alaska Industrial Development and Export Authority, a state owned entity, was the biggest leaser in the auction, bidding about $12 million of the $14 million total bids.   This, from a strong supporter of Donald Trump and the Republican Party that is constantly attacking Democrats with the label "socialist."

It's hard to change habits.  Our brains even change physiologically so we can do those habits almost without thinking.  We all know that mastering all the hand and foot and eye coordination connected with driving a car safely in traffic is rather daunting at first.  But eventually most of us get to the point where we drive almost on autopilot, sometimes even getting to our destination without even realizing it.    

I think about Anchorage's legendary mall builder, Pete Zamarello.  A Greek-Italian immigrant to the US, he worked in construction and then switched to being a builder.  Anchorage is littered with his strip malls.  He'd figured a formula that made him rich.  But when the hot, pipeline economy ended in the 80's, he was still on autopilot.  Cranking out strip malls is what he knew how to do.  

The ADN wrote when Zamarello died:

"That optimism was on full display in 1984, when Zamarello pooh-poohed predictions of an Alaska economic crash. 'The gurus of financing say that we're going to have a catastrophe, but we're not," he told Alaska Business & Industry magazine then. "This downturn won't happen. The next 10 years are going to be even better.'"

But it did.  The blog Wickersham's Conscience wrote:

"In the Alaska real estate crash of 1984-1986, Zamarello helped kill half a dozen financial institutions, bankrupted construction companies and their suppliers and ended up in bankruptcy himself."

The bankers had also gotten into a pre-crash Zamarello lending habit.  

And that's where we are today in Alaska.  Those who have prospered most directly from oil - those in the oil industry, the oil support industry, and the oil supported legislators - are having a hard time turning off the oil habit. They want to keep doing what they've always done, even though the conditions have changed. And since everyone else in Alaska has benefited indirectly because oil made up 90% of the State budget, many others keep expecting to be able to go on living the good life with no individual state taxes and even a $1000 or more Permanent Fund payout every year.  

We're like the rich kid whose Dad has gone bankrupt, and she's having trouble with the fact that her credit cards have been cancelled and the mansion has been replaced with a much smaller apartment and she's going to have to get a job to help out.  

We often don't see what's directly in front of us.  I think about the story of the Japanese businessman watching how Alaska fishers just tossed all the fish eggs.  His reaction created a new product with a large market in Asia for fish roe.  (I can't find this story online, so take it with a grain of salt.  But I could find documentation that the herring fishery was revitalized by selling herring roe to Japan. And, of course, the indigenous peoples of Alaska had been harvesting herring roe for centuries.)

Alaska Constitution Article 8 - Natural Resources

§ 1. Statement of Policy It is the policy of the State to encourage the settlement of its land and the development of its resources by making them available for maximum use consistent with the public interest. § 2. General Authority The legislature shall provide for the utilization, development, and conservation of all natural resources belonging to the State, including land and waters, for the maximum benefit of its people.

And that's where we are now.  While the state's GOP keeps pointing to the State's constitutional duty to develop natural resources as the reason to keep pumping oil, they fail to see the most famous and sustainable and valuable resource of all - our huge, mostly untouched, natural beauty and our wild fauna a flora.  These are things the world knows Alaska for.  These are the things they come to Alaska to see.  Tourism is way below oil now as a source of income for the state, but it has huge potential.  

We have some of the largest tracts of nature left in the world.  Let's exploit it - sustainably - for tourism, for the health of the planet, for science, for spiritual renewal.   In a world fast becoming urban and electronic, Alaska is an oasis of peace and calm as well as awe inspiring powerful natural phenomena from grizzly bears to glaciers to giant mountains and volcanoes and earthquakes.  

We'll still produce the oil in existing developed fields.  The earth still needs oil as we move to more sustainable and less climate changing sources of energy.  But the world knows that we must reduce our carbon output.  Just as it was clear to people not living in West Virginia and Kentucky that coal mines had to shut down, it's clear to those not financially benefiting from oil, that the age of oil is over.  That's why the banks decided not to finance Arctic oil development and why nobody bid on the ANWR leases.  

Everyone knows but our governor and those whose incomes come directly from oil.  Even the large oil companies know.  

[Yeah, I'm not sure if the title is inspired or awful.]

Blogging Fun - Visitors From Around The World Check Out Seven Year Old Post About Mr. Doob

 

Blogger says I have published 6914 posts since 2006.  There are another 594 drafts that never got published.  Statcounter gives stats on the visitors to the blog.  Their count is significantly lower than Google's (who bought Blogger a while ago.)  But Statcounter makes it easy to see details about who is visiting.  I've posted about this before, but it's important for people to realize all the finger prints they leave behind when they visit a website.  (I think you should be able to click on the image and enlarge it to see it larger and focused better, but after recent 'improvements' at Blogger, I can't tell until I publish it. After posting:  Yes, click on it and see it much bigger and clearer.)

In recent weeks I've notice a lot of people visiting a post entitled "The Yeti of Creative Coding - Who is Mr. Doob?"  When I originally published that in August 2013, there wasn't much about Mr. Doob and I scrounged bits and pieces to put the post together.  It was a fun post to write because Mr. Doob was (at that time at least) an elusive programmer who made cool graphics online.  I even found an interview with him that revealed a bit more of his bio.  

So, the other day I collected from my Statcounter data all the visitors they reported who had visited the seven year old Mr. Doob page in the past 24 hours.  (They keep coming and the Dutch example above is from the latest Statcounter pages.  

Riyadh, Ar Riyad, Saudi Arabia

George Town, Pulau Pinang, Malaysia

Sibiu, Romania

Pune, Maharashtra, India

Batangas City, Batangas, Philippines

Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia

Rogers, Arkansas, United States

Orem, Utah, United States

Centreville, Virginia, United States

Palm Coast, Florida, United States

Markham, Ontario, Canada

Bloomfield, New Jersey, United States

Bronx, New York, United States

Laveen, Arizona, United States

Villisca, Iowa, United States

Hamilton, Ohio, United States

Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio, United States

Ashland, Ohio, United States

Atlanta, Georgia, United States

Medan, Sumatera Utara, Indonesia

Tampere, Western Finland, Finland

Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India

Quezon City, Philippine

This was the order of the visits.  My guess is that you see more international ones when it's early morning (like midnight to 6am)  in the US.  

And if you want to see what's drawing them, below is the link.  A fun break from the other issues we're constantly dealing with.  

https://whatdoino-steve.blogspot.com/2013/08/who-is-mr-doob.html  

AK Redistricting Board: January 26 - Approving Their Own Pay And Per Diem, Public Hearing Notice & Public Records Policies

 The Board met and passed the policies recommended by the staff.  The main change they made was to combine the meals ($60) and incidentals ($25) into on $85 which, it seems bumps up their meal allowance when traveling.  There was no mention or discussion of whether it was appropriate for that to cover alcohol.  Board member Melanie Bahnke, the President and CEO of Kawerak,  a Native non-profit Corporation of the Bering Straits Native Association, asked that her pay go to Kawerak because that's the corporation's policy when employees do this sort of work on corporation time.  Staff thought that could be arranged but will check.  

One item was added to the published agenda - an update on the progress of the website. The staff is working on it, but no dates were given for when it goes up.

Chair Binkely reiterated several times that these policies could be revisited and amended if that seemed necessary.  

I posted the other day saying I didn't think a board like this should be asked to set its own compensation.  I further raised various ethical and socio-economic questions about the role of public boards like this.  My personal sense is that in many cases per diem and travel allowances are often abused by both private and public sector employees.  I agree fully that members of such boards shouldn't have to spend out-of-pocket to serve on boards, but I also feel that given Alaska's severe cutting of public programs because of the drop in oil revenues, that members of public boards, particularly when they have other well paid jobs besides their board appointments, should be very conscious that many people, many children in Alaska today eat on much less than $60 a day, let alone $85.  

Again, this is something I feel is important and not really aimed at the Board itself, but more at the contradictions between some politicians who vigorously promote cutting the budget and then want to be generously compensated by a government agency.

Below is my rough transcript of the meeting as I listened in by phone.  Occasionally I had trouble identifying who was speaking and I try to indicate that with a question mark.  This is not verbatim, but it's enough to get the gist of the discussion.  Audio tape will eventually be up at this link (and later on their own website when they get that up. 

[I've included some of the staff recommendations from the Documents for the meeting which were online as well.]

Alaska Redistricting Board January 26, 2021

Present:  Board members: Nicole Borromeo, Melanie Bahnke,  Bethany Marcum, Budd Simpson, John Binkley, 

Staff:  Peter Torkelson and TJ TJ Presley 

Open meeting at 2:34

Approval of Agenda - Simpson - amend to add # 6 Webpage

Adopted

Agenda

1. Call to order

2. Establish a quorum

3. Adoption of agenda

4. Board Policy Review and Discussion

a. Public Meeting and Notice Policy

b. Public Records Policy

c. Member Compensation Policy

d. Member & Staff Travel Per Diem Policy

5. Adoption of One or More Board Policies 

Added new 6 -Website progress -  and made Adjournment 7

6. Adjournment

1. Board Policy Review and Discussion

Turn it to Peter

Peter:  Worked through this.  TJ drafted the first two. (Hard to understand)

Public Meetings and Notices Policy:  

Melanie - about screens on Zoom

Dept Director TJ Presley:  

Public Meeting - how the board communicates to public about when there’s a meeting.  Executive and Legislative branch policies.  Executive Branch uses public meetings - all bodies, pretty broad.  

Notice given reasonable time, but no definition.  (Reviewing info in documents covered in earlier post on the Board.)

Banke:  It’s hard to understand, very muffled.

Move to Second Policy Public Records Policy

Hoping to procure a minutes taker as well.  How to keep records varies.  AIDEA - has statutory requirements.  Legislature has uniform rules - court proceedings electronically.  

In this case Board could adopt Legislative or Administrative. 

Staff recommendation - electronic recordings and minutes provided.  (Again see previous post )  

More discussion about TJs audio.  

Peter doing quick summary.  Here’s the official written staff rec:

Meetings and Notice

“Staff Recommendation: Redistricting Board should adopt Alaska Open Meetings law, AS 44.62.310, as its public notice requirements. This action directs staff to ensure notice of themeeting, its location, attachments, and teleconference options, would be posted to the Alaska Public Notice System website within a “reasonable time”. Staff will further make notice of its meetings available on the legislative website.

It is the policy of the Alaska Redistricting Board that the board comply with the Alaska Open Meetings act and seek to provide 72 hours of public notice prior to board meetings with 24 hours notice being allowable. Notices shall be posted to the State of Alaska Public Notice System.

Advance public notice can be difficult if you aren't organized or if things come up at the last minute, but it's important for the public to be able figure out when the board is meeting.  Furthermore, while the State Public Notice System is there, it's not something that most people regularly use.”

Public Meetings 

"Staff Recommendation: Adopt a policy that includes recording and maintaining electronic copies of the audio recording of each meeting and keeping minutes that capture votes, motions, and a “brief statement of the position of any Board Members who makes a statement on the issue before the board” (This is modeled on legislative committee minute recording language). This could be a simple summary like, “Member A expressed concern that the proposed House District 12 did not take into account the city boundary”

It is the policy of the Alaska Redistricting Board that meetings be electronically recorded and made available to the public and that written minutes be kept of each meeting which identify motion makers, seconds, vote tallies and a brief summary of the concerns of any Board member who states a position on the issue under consideration.

Binkley:  Public Notice questions?

Borromeo:  Public Notice.  On Legislature’s website?  Tied to Governor’s office?  I had problems finding us.  

Peter:  We were under umbrella of Legislature because they funded us.  Now on both  Alaska Notice dot Gov [I'd give you a url if I could figure out the right one- Steve] also on http://w3.akleg.gov/index.php#tab4 (?)   So we’d be on both.  

We have our own website being set up and we’ll notice there as well and also have email notification for those who subscribe.  

Binkley:  Compensation Policy.  The Constitution says they should be compensated.  Board members spend a lot of time on Board matters not just on meetings.  We send hundreds of pages to the members.  Done on daily rate, but should also cover hours working on Board issues not at meeting.  

We recommend $477.  Legislators at $486.  We don’t know how many weeks we’ll have before Census Data arrives.  This is our 8th meeting.  Board has been in place about 5 ? months.  

Banke - My company policy says it should be directed back to the organization since I’m doing this on company time.  Otherwise I have to take personal leave each time.

John?:  Check with Leg Legal.

Peter:  Staff will check on how this gets done. I think it’s possible, but we need to check

Borromeo?  - Presume every day a Board meeting being held?  Not per day, right?

Peter:  Per Board Meeting Day.  

Budd:  If 15 minute meeting, say procedural, I wouldn’t feel right about taking a full day meeting rate.  Perhaps a half rate for shorter meetings.  

Binkley?  - in my experience - corporate boards, sometimes preparation is lengthy even if meeting short.  It’s hard to quantify every possibility.  It should balance out with time you spend preparing, meeting with public, but no recognition on that.  Maybe we can proceed and make adjustments.  I don’t see these policies as static.  

Banke:  Hand up?  No, forgot to put it down.

Borromeo:  I have same reaction that Budd did.  I don’t think any of us accepted appointment to this Board to make money.  In another board it’s a sliding scale.  This is a high meeting fee, but it is in line with other Boards and commissions and if we can review it in the future, I’m comfortable moving forward.

Binkley:  Travel and Per Diem Policy

Peter:  Given COVID right now different.  2010 Board did numerous meetings around the state.  We should be able to travel in the future.  We’ve looked at different options.  Using the AK Boards and Commissions policy.

Actual housing costs.  $60 food and incidentals.  We felt $25 for incidentals and $60 for transportation.  

[From the documents:

"Staff Recommendation: Adopt a policy based on the State of Alaska Boards and Commissions Per Diem table with actual lodging and $60 per day for meals. Amend this to include up to $25 for incidentals and $60 per day for ground transportation or car rental to reflect the fact that board members may be sent on road shows to distant communities with little logistical support available on the ground. Provide the Board Chair the ability to waive policy caps if there is documented need (for example, renting a car in Utqiagvik may cost more than the specified daily car rental rate).

“'It is the policy of the Alaska Redistricting Board that members and staff receive per-diem reimbursement for actual lodging, meals to a value of $60, actual incidentals to a value of $25 and ground transportation to a value of $60 per day for board related travel that is authorized by the Board Chair or Executive Director. Reimbursement for actual costs incurred over the maximum amounts may be made at the discretion of the Board Chair.’”]

Banke:  Up to $25 for incidentals.  Is that by request or added to meals?  

Peter:  You can submit receipts for optional - topped at $60 and topped at $25.

Barromeo:  All sounds good except for the meals at $60 per day.  You’d be hard pressed to eat at that price in even Anchorage and Fairbanks.  Can we raise it to $75?  What do others think?

Budd Simpson:  Agree it would be tight.  Either way works for me.  

??? :  I agree with Nicole.  What if we just mix meals and incidentals at $85 and all it good.

Peter:  Board traveled with lots of maps that required skycaps to get them on planes.

Bethany? :  I’m comfortable.  I don’t thinks it’s reasonable to raise the rate, but if we merged with incidentals I’m ok, but otherwise don’t think we should raise it above $60.

Barromeo:  I like the suggestion to merge the meals and incidentals to $85 and above that give receipts and get approval.

Binkley:  Public Notice - Should include meetings AND Hearings   and agree to change the per diem to meals and incidentals together at $85 and other actual expenditures require receipt and approval.

Banke?  - Can we hold off til Peter gets confirmation they can take care of my issue of giving my payment to my corporation?  

Binkley - I don’t think adopting this language would preclude that from happening.  

Motion to adopt these?  Seconded.  Discussion?  Hearing nothing.  Motion adopted.

Web page discussion:  Peter.  We need to have a website so public can be introduced to what we’re doing etc.  Also posting existing districts and maps.  So public will have ready access to maps as they are adopted.  Map section is core to website.  

I can post some mock up examples for public to see.  

Binkley:  appreciate what you’re doing and that you want to get it out to the public so we can get public input.  Any other comments?  

Budd:  Thanks to the staff for putting that together, Like the idea of using the old map as a graphic for this.  Beside being interesting, it doesn’t emphasize urban or rural areas like modern maps do.  

Barromeo?  Thanks for making the changes I sent the other day.  

Adjournment, but anything else first?  

Barromeo? - consider prioritizing with various organizations to say what redistricting is - time to educate public before we get into the details.  

Banke - traveling during quarantine hard from Nome because of quarantines, but things getting better, but next week I get my second shot.  More available for people in rural areas than for Anchorage folks.

Adjourn?  Borromeo, move.  Budd Second.  

Adjourned.  2:35

How Much Does It Cost To Eat Out In Anchorage? The Redistricting Board Thinks $6o A Day Isn't Enough

The staff of the Redistricting Board today recommended a per meeting compensation of $477 a per diem for meals of $60, and incidental costs allowance of $25, and a ground travel allowance of $60. The incidentals were taken from the previous Board that said often they carry lots of maps and other displays for traveling to various communities and that requires extra costs getting those things onto planes.  Hotel allowances were "actual costs." 

I thought, overall, the Board members sounded responsible about this.  While I personally think pay for such service should be more like an honorarium, I also don't think they should have to pay out of pocket to travel to the meetings and spend the night away from home.  Further what was approved was within the general parameters of other Boards and Commissions.  

A couple members of the Alaska Redistricting Board today said the equivalent of "You can't eat three meals in Anchorage for $60."  In the end they combined the meal allowance and the incidentals into a single category of $85, which, for the most part means there's now an $85 a day meal allowance.  Any incidentals above that need receipts and approval to get reimbursed.  So, that also means that if the Board member eats for $50 a day, they'll probably get an extra $35.  (I don't think they need to show actual costs below $85, but I'm not sure.)

I also don't think that the Board should be put in the position to decide how much they should get paid.  The legislature should spell out guidelines for this.  

All that said, I think it's also reasonable to consider that lots of people are eating courtesy of the Food Bank these days.  That lots of Anchorage kids are not eating much at all because schools aren't open and they aren't getting the free meals they normally get there.  And there are lots of people who, when they go out to eat, go to food courts, fast food restaurants, or order pizzas.  

I'd also guess that everyone on the Board has made contributions to charity greater than they'll get back in the $25 per diem they'll get each time they travel.  So, just for appearances, it would be a nice gesture for Board members to accept the $60 limit and if they want to eat fancier than that, or have drinks with their meals, they pay for that out of pocket.  After all, if they stayed home, they would probably spend at least $25 on food anyway.  

I've traveled for work and I know that it's often useful to have meals with colleagues at conferences. But the Board members can't get together in groups of more than two (I think) without it being considered a secret, un-noticed Board Meeting.  And the Board members are all likely folks who know lots of people in Anchorage who will invite them for a meal while they are in town.

But to help them find places to eat for under $60 I here's Trip Advisor's list of place to eat on the cheap in Anchorage.  I suspect they are so refined that they can't eat at these places while they are in town for meetings.  

Here's the menu for one place on the list:  Arctic Road Runner:

"BIGGER, BETTER, MEATY BURGERS

the following are 1/4 pound patties, served on a hamburger bun, unless otherwise roasted. we cook our burgers "medium well" unless you request otherwise.

"All American $4.35

ketchup, mustard, onion.

Alaskan Banquet $5.25

mayo, lett, tom, onion.

Arctic Cheese $5.50

mayo, lett, tom, onion & amer cheese.

Bacon Burger $6.30

mayo, lett, tom, onion, amer cheese & bacon.

Pepper Burger $5.95

mayo, lett, tom, onion, 1/2 mild chile pepper & mozz. cheese.

Kodiak Islander $6.15

mayo, lett, tom, onion, 1/2 mild chile peppers 1/2 slice. each: bologna, salami, ham, amer, mozz, cheese. an onion ring to top it off.

Kenai Whopper $6.50

our biggest meaty burger. two 1/4 pound patties, mayo, lett, tom, onion, 1/2 mild chile pepper & mozz cheese.

Mexican Burger $5.95

mayo, lett, tom, onion, 1/2 mild chile pepper, meat sauce & amer cheese.

Nature Burger $6.15

on a wheat bun. mayo, sprouts tom, onion & mozz, cheese, not this is not veggie burger."

Uncle Joe's Pizzeria has pizzas from $8.99 to $13.99 and a bunch of salads for under $6.  

Most dishes at the Thai Kitchen are $13 and rice comes free.  Three people could have a filling meal sharing, Thai style, a green curry, pad thai, and cashew chicken.

There are pages and pages of places to eat on Trip Advisor's list.  

Campobello Bistro is a little more upscale, with real tablecloths even, but you can get several different pastas for under $20.  Yes, if you add a salad and dessert, you're going to have to keep your breakfast and lunch combined under $20.  [UPDATE Jan 27, 2021:  a reader informed me this restaurant has closed.]

Part of me says, this is small potatoes.  The state spent too many millions buying ANWR drilling leases in (legitimate) fear that no one else would bid.  

Another part of me says, a few dollars here and a few dollars there start to add up.  Assume the five members of the Board all spend $85 for meals when they travel to Anchorage for meetings - if and when it's safe to do that - say for 100 days.  How much does that extra $25 add up to?  (Some may travel more than others, but just to ballpark this let's go with this.  The last Board ended up taking three years to get their work done, so I'm sure there will be more than 100 per diems racked up by the Board.)  

That's $25 X 5 X 100 = $12,500.  Again, not a lot in terms of Alaska's budget. But $12,500 savings here and $10,000 savings there, adds up.  The Governor says that we have to make millions more in cuts to the Alaska budget. Other legislators argue there's fat to be cut. Well, here's a place to do that. It's not so much large expenditures that are they problem.  They get lots of scrutiny.  It's more stuff like this that tends to be invisible in the budget.  

And, while the Board member bios aren't up yet for the Board members, it doesn't appear to me that any of these people are strapped for money.  They don't have to do this to make ends meet.  It's an honor and a public service to be performed.  One Board member today said that when members of her Corporation serve on boards like this on company time, they get the boards to give the money straight to the corporation.  (I'm guessing she makes a lot more on her regular salary anyway.)

And a third part of me thinks about the fact that these Board members are doing this for the people of Alaska.  How connected are they with the people of Alaska if they either can't imagine how to eat out in Anchorage for $60 a day or they can't imagine eating at places that don't have cloth table cloths and where they can't get a few drinks with the meals.  (The Board did not talk about whether the meal allowance will cover drinks too.)  $60 a day is more than many families spend a day on food.  

Final Note

This issue isn't really about the Board.  It's about how people in different income brackets think about what is normal, think about what level of restaurant is suitable. It's about a system that goes well beyond the State, where people get perks with their jobs that allow them to stay in hotels and dine in restaurants that would stretch most people's budgets, because the company or in this case the government is paying.  I'm all for reimbursing legitimate expenses, but when government employees are traveling they should be reimbursed to stay in the least expensive accommodations that are clean and and quiet enough to do work and close enough to places they have to go to minimize extra costs for transportation.  If that doesn't suit the traveler, she is free to stay and eat at better places by paying the difference from their own pockets.  I think most Alaskans would agree. Legislators often go after travel budgets when they want to cut agency costs.  I think a lot of travel is necessary.  Much of it has long term benefits to the organization.  Cuts should be on the edges to allow reasonable, but not extravagant travel. 

There was more to the Board meeting and I'll talk about that in a different post.  Tomorrow I hope.  I would add that for the most part I think the Board members discussion was reasonable.  But I do think the issue about not being able to eat in Anchorage for $60 a day does reflect that at least some on the Board have different standards of acceptable eating than many of the people whose district boundaries they are going to be setting.

50

 This was my bride and me 50 years ago yesterday.  We had to celebrate via internet with our kids and grandkids.  Then we had a surprise party in reverse.  Some friends decided to break the isolation with a zoom get together.  So we surprised them by announcing it was our anniversary.

The actual event didn't have many people - just our parents, my brother, and the couple that negotiated peace between me and J's parents.