Aloha! Welcome to Moving Hawaii Forward, a show dedicated to transportation and traffic issues but also striving to identify realistic solutions to our traffic headaches. I'm your host Tim Apachella. On St. Patrick's Day, while channel surfing between news stations, I came across a Fox special news report. It was titled, Trouble Transit Project, a taxpayers boondoggle in paradise. Not to my surprise, the show compared the Honolulu Rail project to the Alaska Bridge to Nowhere and Boston's Big Dig. I've always liked the word boondoggle. Boondoggle can be used as both a noun and a verb. As a noun, boondoggle means work or activity that is wasteful or pointless but gives the appearance of having some value. Sound familiar? As a verb, boondoggle means waste money or time on unnecessary questionable projects. That definitely sounds familiar. Whether boondoggle is used as a noun or a verb, it's the right word to describe Honolulu's Rail project. I'd like to use it for a verb for a moment. For example, Mayor Kirk Caldwell is boondoggling the state legislature as he desperately attempts to persuade them to pass the general excise surcharge with no end date or heart boondoggle's all efforts to convince the city council or public that the Rail project is under control. I could use this word all day long as I describe where we are with the Rail project and I bet you could too and come up with far better uses for the word. Another memorable quote that came out of the Fox news special was the term certifiable boondoggle. A great quote for sure and that well-placed term came from today's guests, Panos Prevadoras, Professor of Transportation and Chairman of the Civil Engineering Department of UH Minoa and a long-time outspoken critic of the Rail plan from the very, very start. Panos, thank you very much for coming on the show. I appreciate it very much. You're very welcome, Tim. The Fox news special was kind of a joy for me to find just by happenstance and there you were being quoted and I like that term certifiable boondoggle. How did this interview come about? Well, actually it came about several months ago because this team of Fox news was overnighting here on the way to China, the last trip of President Obama to China and they hear well the biggest news in Hawaii if you want to report something is their Rail. Nothing else at the time was big news and well, out of their own research and all they found me, they found members of heart, they found members of the public to try to gauge what this project is about, how long has been going and how is it going and obviously they found out that it is most likely a certifiable boondoggle by pretty much anybody's definition. Yeah, by anyone's definition. So it doesn't matter where you were at on this. That's right. Yeah, it's true. Well then fast forward a couple of days and here in the New York Times, there's an article as of March 20th and that title of that news article was Hawaii struggles to keep the rail project from becoming a boondoggle. So they're using becoming where we already know it already is. They got a little bit off but nevertheless, New York Times is a very, very national known publication. So I hate to say it but this is not where Hawaii wants to be on the national news stage. No and unfortunately, we are not even completed. I mean, we are already certifiable boondoggle and less than one third of the project has been completed. Can you imagine that? I mean, nobody ever knew that Boston dig is going to become that bad so early on. Later on as they added phases, the difficulties became clear. But for us, it's a simple project, right? It's a copy paste type of thing. It's 20 miles of linear bridge. I mean, it's not like the Boston Bridge. I mean, it's just how hard can it be? Well, and here's what I think is funny is we started with the easy part. Right. We're out in the ag land. That's right. I mean, what happens as we're getting closer into town and what happens to Kaliqi, what happens to downtown, what happens to Kakaako and actually Kaliqi, we just found the news a few months ago that pretty much the same company that is designing part of it, it didn't know that it was designing it on top of a major water main. How is that supposed to happen? I mean, in the middle of Kaliqi, there is a major water main. And you know, at that time, the board director, Colleen Hanabusa says, how is that possible? Clearly, how is that possible? Well, I mean, we're talking about major firms, major engineers, and this is major doing the basic diligence. You don't begin to design before you go. What is that? Yeah, you have to know where your utilities are. And they pocket $250 million, they say complete. And then why is this little detail right there, a water main? I mean, I'm sorry. I mean, this is beyond comedy of errors. Do you think they have a good, I'm kind of jumping around here, but do you think they have a good feel of the geotech reports along the waterfront? This is the big unknown. In fact, everywhere I give an interview, I say, you know, this is a 20 mile bridge. It's a very long bridge. It has nearly 800 segments. Almost statistically, there is a guarantee that one of them will have a major problem. Already two of them have had minor problems, either giant cracks that you can be, you know, 100 feet away. And you can see that the crack is an inch long. And then in Pearl Highlands, one of the segments actually semi collapsed two, three feet, and they had to sort it up and then, you know, do the correction. So already we're having issues. Why Parkway is a sensitive area? Why? Because it is underground water. Then we're going to approach, you know, Dillingham has its problems. Waterfront has its problems. Kakaako has also, Kakaako basically is one or two feet below high tide. So it has natural spring in water, so to speak. You see him coming out of the drains all the time. And when it floods, it doesn't drain. No, it does not. So it's another little Mapuna Puna there. So, which also begs the question about, you know, not changing subs is what some people want to put the drain at level. Well, I'm going to talk about that because I have Scott Wilson on this show about three weeks, four weeks ago. Yeah. And we're going to talk about that. But one thing Scott Wilson did bring up is, you know, when you were using this gigantic elevated rail system, the pads that you need to put in are gargantuan. Yes. And when we get down to the waterfront, those pads are even going to get larger and larger just to stabilize the coil, the coral soil. Yes. So the cost of just pouring those is astronomical. Yes. And in fact, that's a big one of the big concerns because you don't know how big you got to go until you actually hit the exact puka because not all of them have been fully geotechnically investigated because we're not in Kakao. It's going to take another three to five years to be there. So, yes, it's a big open question. There is also questions about the stability of buildings very near it. Because if you start drilling big pukas into the soil, you might be affecting high rises that there are immediate neighbors. A lot of questions like that. Yes. So let's couple that with unstable soil conditions. Let's then add on ancestral burial issues. Yeah. Let's add on utilities that have to be relocated or discovered in the case of the water main. And then let's talk about the cost of business disruption, traffic disruption. The list goes on and on. And a few eminent domain remains.  Yeah, but that's my parking. I cannot operate without that. Not anymore. So take the whole thing, by all means, go ahead. I mean, and then rebuild it. Do the block whatever you want. But you can't just take four to 10 feet and tell me, you know, that's only $15,000. So, and that's it. Right. It doesn't work that way. Yeah. It doesn't work well. Yes. It's going to work, but it's not going to work well. Eminent domain is very powerful. But then, you know, some logic has to prevail too. Correct. I want to get back to the New York time article. Because one thing I think, I don't think people realize is that on a per capital basis, this will be the most expensive rail project per capital and per mile, both. And per mile in the country. And Hawaii taxpayers are the beneficiaries of that. Yeah, that's a heavy burden. That's how you create another grease. And you pointed out something that I don't think a lot of folks have. And that is, when we look at cost to the taxpayer, we're looking at, okay, let's just hypothetically say it's going to go up to $10 billion because of financing costs rolled into it and worst case costs the whole bit. Let's just say it's, in fact, the mayor says it's $10 billion. He's already stated that as a fact. So I'm going to use that number. And let's say we have 997,000 people on this island. We'll round that up to a million. That's right. So simple math is $10 billion divided by a million. Maybe you subtract out 20 to 30 percent because tourists are paying for that excise tax. So you subtract some of that out. But your point is, your point is, we have 400,000 people for taxpayers, not a million. That's right. Now, I haven't seen that mentioned by anyone before. 8 grand times 2.5, it takes you to 20 big ones. 20 big ones per family is a make or break situation for the average. I think Randy Roth and Cliff Slater had mentioned that for a family of five, by the time this was all said and done, they're looking about $25,000 out of that household. Yeah, that's the ballpark. It's a ballpark. But it's starting to make sense. And that number could go north. It will go north. It will go north. My estimate is that the costs are predictable up to Middle Street. Beyond Middle Street, the final 4.2 miles, I believe it's going to be a billion a mile if everything goes according to plan. What are they estimating right now? 500,000 miles? Anything that's going to be double that? That double that. The construction difficulties, particularly in internalizing that, as you said, the business cost. Because, again, you and I won't be able to go to World Theater, so we'll be going with substantial difficulty because it's a whole bridge being built. I mean, who's going to let me under the bridge and thousands of other cars? So for a while, we're going to have tremendous disruption. And once you start entering Kalihi downtown, Kakaako, Alamoana, these disruptions are not tolerable. It's not Waipahu anymore, because Waipahu is not the business center of the town. How come the businesses haven't come out with torches and pitchforks? They don't have time to visualize. Everybody, when they visualize what it is, they begin to go to this point. And after all this time, we still don't have one built station for people to see what it means. A football station, 30 feet up in the air, and we'll have to look at them, 21 of them. I think it looks like a Darth Vader ship from the Star Wars. I really do. I just think it looks horrid. You can put sails on them, but it's still going to look horrid and huge. It's ADA and everything, and you have to straddle an entire Kamehameha highway. It cannot be small, because you have to reach the two sides for people to make it accessible. Well, in this New York Times article, Mayor Kurt Caldwell was quoted, and I thought that was very interesting. In fact, very, very interesting. The first part of the quote was, people are very angry about it. Well, thank you. That's an obvious. But here's the one that caught my eye, and I got to tell you, it made me chuckle. He said, but we are now heading toward eight miles completed. It's like we are pregnant, and we can't just stop or tear it down. Now, that's a very interesting analogy, pregnant, because if the rail project truly is with child, there's got to be a father out there somewhere of this whole project. And I don't know who the father of this boondoggle is, but I'm going to suggest that Mayor Hanuman and Mayor Caldwell check at the front desk to pick up their DNA test case. I don't know why he would use the term pregnant for this project, but it certainly is a boondoggle, for sure. And opens it to questions that what's going to be the offspring. It may not be the outcome that we're expecting, and most likely won't be in terms of ridership. That's my biggest question. We are seeing all the negative developments of the cause. We cannot right now account for anything about ridership. The system is not anywhere near to be operating at any segment, and I think that's going to be the nasty surprise. Well, when we come back from our break, I want to talk exactly about ridership because I think that's a huge component that has not been addressed properly, and I know Randy Roth and Cliff Slater, they wrote an article for Civil Beat not long ago, but I really want to talk about that. So we're going to be right back. I'm Tim Apachele, this is Moving Hawaii Forward. Aloha, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Pauline Sharkmark-Chen. I'm the host for a new show on Think Tech Hawaii called Outside In. Outside In will be taking a look at how the external world can help shape Hawaii's future. And I will be starting the show hopefully next year in terms of regularly scheduled programming. And we hope to invite a wide variety of different guests ranging from history, philosophy, art and architectural fields all the way to robotics, biotech, cryptocurrency, bitcoin, and the like. So we're going to have a full range of guests to cover many different areas of interest, and I hope to see you next year. Until then, Aloha. Aloha, this is Kaili Akina with the weekly Ehana Kako. Let's work together program on the Think Tech Hawaii Broadcast Network Mondays at 2 o'clock PM. Movers and shakers and great ideas. Join us. We'll see you then. Aloha. Hi, welcome back. I'm Tim Apachele, your host with Moving Hawaii Forward. And again, we're here with Pondos Papadoras. We're talking about rail. We're going to talk about transportation issues. We're going to talk about transportation solutions. And I think before we left, we were talking about the New York Times article and specifically what was reported in that. And one of the quotes also that was found was from a former governor Cayetano. And he said, it's gotten to the point where even if I don't recommend walking away, it's gotten to the point that even I don't recommend walking away from it. Now that's quite a statement from Governor Cayetano. So he's saying we're committed now, which leads me to a quote from former San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown, because I think this should be printed on every voter pamphlet that is distributed on any vote that's going to involve a large project. And Mayor Willie Brown had his own article in the San Francisco Chronicles. So back in July 28, 2013, he said the following, in the world of civil projects, the first budget is really just a down payment. If people knew the real cost from the start, nothing would ever be approved. And then he further said, the idea is to get going, start digging a hole so big and make it so big, there's no alternative to coming up with the money to fill it in. Doesn't that sound like our project exactly? Yeah, exactly. But what he's describing actually is real boondoggles. These things haven't happened anywhere else. So I was on the radio earlier today and I said, okay, let's think about it. Recent projects, the Reef Runway, not so recent, the H3, the Superfery. Tell me where any of this applies to. They didn't have excessive costs. They didn't have excessive delays, but the H3 did. But it was a different type of fight, cultural issues, the EAS and the EPA new rules kicked in, et cetera, et cetera. Eventually the project was done, not on time, and yeah, double the cost, but then the double cost had the fact that it was done over 20 years. So it was inflationary things, not really actual costs. But these rail projects and the California High Speed Rail that generates all of that, again, they are facing a three time the cost. And we're close to that. We're past the double and we're going to trouble. So it's just exactly what's going on. But this is very part and parcel of rail projects. You cannot really support rail projects based on truth. This is what it is. So we require to be lied to as taxpayers. That's right. And we need to know that. How do taxpayers hypnotize themselves into a sense of saying, this is going to be good for us. But we truly secretly know that we're going to be paying two or three times more. Well, one of the reasons is because highway agencies have given up on highway capacity addition. You see, communities grow. It's a natural thing they do. So along with the schools, waters and sewers, we got to add highway lanes or new roads. They are not doing their part. So then they know, okay, if the obvious solution is off the table, let's work on the 1%. Okay, let's do that. But not a $10 billion. So as you recall, I ran for mayor in 2008. And I said that if we're designing a light rail project similar to Phoenix, Arizona, where the cost anywhere you look at it is between 300 and 800 cost per person, you can get a traffic ticket for 500 bucks or more. So I wouldn't have run for mayor. Right. I mean, it's a cost but less than 1000 bucks. But from the good morning of this project, already we're at $5,000 per person per person in a place that people work two and three jobs to make. Well, and, you know, from an economic standpoint, a lot of these people are working two or three jobs at minimum wage. And so to take $5,000 out of that individual's pocket. It's unconscionable. It's unconscionable. That's exactly why I had to run. Yeah. And I'm glad you did. In fact, this was an opportunity for me to say thank you because when Cliff Slater was here and Scott Wilson, I didn't have a chance to say thank you. Well, I did say to Cliff Slater, thank you for standing up and speaking truth to power because it seems this time around they hired some very, very good public relation firms, legal firms, you name it. They had everything lined up so that when the opposition came to the table, they were pretty much shoved aside. That's right. And I think that's what happened this time versus what happened in the 1990s. Right. So in the 1990s, it was a clear county project. There was more accountability. You could knock at doors and go see those servants. Now there was a construct called Infra consult.  We'll ask the city and all. And basically, it became a wall. It was a firewall of information. Right. Yeah. Well, let's talk about how that happened, but then also the term strategic misrepresentations. And I want to talk about one of them right now. And that is the rail ridership projections. They're obscene because, correct me if I'm wrong, but they're estimating that this rail system is going to carry 116,000 passengers a day. Right. A day. A day. It's trips, actually, not passengers because we can do one way trips, but that's how you count them in transit projects. Yes. Okay. So this isn't unlike what happened in San Juan, Puerto Rico. Right. That's right. They estimated 114, 116,000 trips per day. They estimated 80,000. They got 24. Oh, okay. Stand corrected. Thank you. It's a little smaller project. It's 10 miles. The way we have seen it, it's about $80,000 was the Parsons Brigade of Projection. They got 24,000. They are struggling to get to a little over the half point now after 11 years of being open. So again, it's an interesting thing. When you talk to these people, they say, well, even if the ridership, you don't find it in the opening year because in the opening year here, we expect 90,000. Don't worry. Given enough years, people will get used to it, will hit the ridership. And there you look at San Juan, Puerto Rico. We are looking at 2030. They have had their 2030 already. They've been in operation for 11 years, and they cannot reach the half point of the forecast. The half point, not the forecast. Do you have any thoughts of what the ridership will ultimately be? 50,000 or less. 50,000 or less. Yes. I mean, I have blocked on that. So that's my opinion. I did analysis of all recent systems. And again, we're a very small city. We have an excellent bus system that a lot of people trust. They're going to have a big distrust of transferring to rail and de-transferring back to the bus. So instead of doing that, they're going to form who is to have a little more carpooling, or they'll get cheap cars. So it's not going to work in favor of the rail. Well, I have an unfortunate theory, and that is, and I think developers have used the rail as a basis to get their permits on valuable agricultural land. I'm talking about Hopapili, a project that is 11,750 homes. That's right. And most of those homes are going to cost enough that they're not going to find local employment in Kapolei. They're going to have to come to town on H1. And so is that how they're going to get ridership? Just by developing? Well, is that in their minds what they're going to get ridership? Like what does keep building more and more developments and people have to use the rail if they don't want to stand in traffic for four hours? It is amazing, Tim, but the system is broken because we have a land use commission and myself with other people went and testified, and we didn't have to make up any numbers. We just showed them the page of the Hopapili TIAR, the Traffic Impact Analysis Report. And in the peak hour, they have two stations in the Hopapili area, two stations for the rail. How much ridership are they going to get? Two double-decker buses an hour, about 400 people. That's at best 10% of the trip they generate. Guess what all the rest in the 90% going to do on the freeway? Yeah. So at best, the scenario is 10% of Hopapili will use the rail. Okay, fine. I can dispute that because typically it is not going to happen anywhere else. There is no neighborhood that it's served 10% by the bus and the bus is very flexible, very excellent. I'll give it to them. 10% the rail. Now folks, you in the power, tell me what we do about the 90%. I know you're so good at taking care of the 1% bikers, the 2% this and the 10% rail. Good. 85 to 90% solo or carpools. These are vehicles. This is how our people behave. You were elected to serve the people's needs. Talk to me about the 85%. Right. And there's no expanding the capacity of H1. They may be able to move a zipper lane this way and that way. One more lane maximum and that's highly unlikely. And that's highly unlikely. Yeah. Yeah, I agree. Well, okay, you've just painted a very truthful. Bleak picture, yeah. It's sarcastic, obviously. I know. You have very bleak picture and I wonder what voters are thinking when the mayor is trying to convince the state legislature to give the city in heart a blank check. Well, they have given up because they cannot trust the system to do the right thing. It's so obvious. It's obvious that the numbers are there. You present them to the Land Use Commission. The Land Use Commission gives all the permits and all the OKs. Right. So the system clearly does not work. You probably know the name of a gentleman by the name of Keone Dudley. Dudley. And he is the president of the Friends of Makakilo. And he actually put out a very, very definitive report on contributions received by all the council members that voted for that project. And it was amazing that five or four or five of those council members received up to 70%. 70% of their contributions as a result from either supporters of rail or supporters of that BR Horton project. And I found that amazing. Now he filed a complaint with the Ethics Commission and the report back was business as usual. That's the power of super PACs. And if that is true, if super PACs win the day on any project, I'm afraid that's doesn't look good for Hawaii or any other state in the United States. Well, that's the way to push projects forward. And you know, that's the it's called enterprising politicians, they have gotten into it. And they know that if you form the right who is, that's how you get it done. And it doesn't matter that the project is actually a boondoggle, it's a project. Yeah, let me we don't have much time left. So let me I'm going to express lane right into what do you want to see? Do you want to stop this project? I want to stop the project. I mean, I agree that the quote of Governor Caetano is slightly misquoted. He and I are completely in agreement that this rail should continue because it's too late and it should start it's going to go past the airport and stop at Middle Street at that point we're in front of the H1 of the H1 and Monalua merge Middle Street merge and traffic is more reasonable with express buses we can deliver these passengers that they came the long distance the long delay into town to downtown Waikiki and the UH. That's the smart idea. So Scott Wilson and company through the Honolulu transit task force they believe they could save this project three to four billion yet you're what I saw from you was you think it's going to go to 15 billion if we go on the on the street. Why the delta here? Why the why does the spare? It's a completely different system. The trains are not compatible. It's a completely different contract. So first of all you have to do two separate EISs which is very difficult. You don't know if you're not going to get funding for the remaining four miles is again it's a it's a different system. It's not an elevated fix by by FDA nomenclature you drop off to a different layer. So again it's another new start that needs to be renegotiated. So they'll say okay you're not going to get 1.55 you're going to get only one billion because you did all this stuff now propose this and we'll see and now how you're going to save the old and the new system. It's too far complicated in terms of legalese and also of technology because they're separate contracts. Thank you. We've run out of time unfortunately and I'd like to thank you for coming and being my guest and this is Moving Hawaii Forward. I'm Tim Apacheva. Thank you for joining us.


Welcome to the Anxious Morning, where each weekday morning we take a look at ideas, concepts, and lessons designed to help you understand and overcome your anxiety. For more information, visit us at theanxiousmorning.com. But this is working for me. When we find things that calm us, soothe us, or help us go around or otherwise escape from fear, we often declare that these things work for us. Here's a common exchange I might have with someone new to this process. New person. Everyone is different and I know it works for me. Me. Great. What are you doing that works? New person. Diet. Exercise. Essential oils. Eliminating stress. Avoiding triggers. In this exchange, the new person is usually arguing against the approach I am describing and trying to convince me that what they are doing is working for them. Oddly, these exchanges always take place in my anxiety recovery Facebook group or in the comments section of an anxiety-related video or Instagram post. The conversation takes place in a space occupied by people that are struggling with anxiety and looking for answers. See the issue here? This is like listening to someone tell you that they're winning the Tour de France as they bolt training wheels onto their bike. The point is that you may have an arsenal of rituals and techniques that work for you. But you're reading this so my guess would be that those things either don't work enough or don't work all the time. I'd wager that you're hoping to fill in the gaps in the wall you're trying to build between you and your anxiety and that's why you're here. I have a bit of bad news for you. Your wall will never be complete. You will never fill in all the gaps. As soon as you fill one in, another will appear. Unfortunately, if you're looking for a durable solution that actually does work without winding up in an endless game of whack-a-mole with your anxiety, you're going to have to tear down that wall and start a new project. It is very difficult to reach full recovery when your strategy is based on coping, soothing, escape, avoidance, and anxiety suppression techniques. You can't hold on to those. Then try to sprinkle acceptance and surrender on top as needed to try to cover all the bases. The two approaches are for the most part incompatible. If you insist on strapping 17 flotation devices onto your body before you get in the water, actually learning to swim is going to be a nearly impossible task. I understand that sometimes I frustrate members of the community. When I steer conversations away from cherished soothing techniques, I'm often asked why I bother trying to help with anxiety if I won't let people talk about the things that they are certain are working for anxiety. Tomorrow, we'll address this common point of confusion and frustration. A quick note. This discussion was 100% inspired by some very smart things that were said by my friend Connie. Connie is one of the admins in my Facebook group, and she knows a thing or two about a thing or two, so she gets full credit for speaking this post and tomorrow's post into existence. If you're enjoying The Anxious Morning and you'd like to get a copy of the podcast delivered into your email inbox every morning, visit theanxiousmorning.email and subscribe to the newsletter. If you're listening on Apple or iTunes, take a second and leave a five-star rating, maybe write a small review. It really helps me out. And finally, if you find my work useful and you'd like to help keep it free of advertising and sponsorships, you can see all the ways to support the work at theanxioustruth.com slash support. Thanks so much.


Well, they're limited. We have the census data, of course, and in Mexico they ask Mexican citizens in their census if they've been to the United States in the last five years, and so we know about return migrants who've been to the United States, who are in Mexico, and then US Census asks where you were born, and so we know the number of you were born in Mexico. We also know the number of people who entered in the past five years, and that gives you some data on who are coming and going. And then on the US side, there's immigration statistics system, which is basically entries. So we know how many people enter with permanent resident visas, temporary work visas, business visas, exchange visas, and so on. And so that's about the extent of the official statistics system. Then there are a lot of private efforts, like I run the Mexican Migration Project, and we've been collecting data on documented and undocumented migration from Mexico to the US for about 30 years, and every year we do a new round of surveys. And with this data set, we can really characterize and follow the trajectory of both documented and undocumented migration over time and let them see the dynamics underneath the flows that we observe in the official statistics. But that's a project that I've been running with my colleague in Mexico, Jorge Durand, and so it's not part of the government statistics system. I think if we had a migration module on the American surveys, like the current population survey, which is done every month, if they had more questions on migration, and particularly in the census, we need to ask a question on place of birth of parents, which was eliminated from the US census in 1970. And so now we have about a quarter of the population in first or second generation of immigrant status, and the second generation is crucial to see how immigrants are adapting and integrating, and there's no data on a nationwide source of large sample of Americans on the second generation. It's a big defect in our statistical system. So simply adding a question to the census or the American community survey on parental birthplace would help us quite a bit. One of the lessons that come out of my work is that statistical systems and official data can't do it all, and so there's always a place for researchers launching their own research projects to gather data that explain the trends, that go behind the trends to look at the dynamics underlying what you observe from national level statistics, and that's what I've tried to do over the course of my career with the Mexican migration project.


Also in the news, the Nigerian Labour Congress, NLC, has insisted that workers and masses will not accept any further increase in the pump price of petrol in the name of a subsidy removal, urging workers and citizens to prepare for total war against full price hike. Present of the Nigerian Labour Congress, NLC Ayuba Waba, in a new year message to workers, also named Zamfara, Taraba, Benwe, Kogi, Cross River, and Abyan Emo State are seven states yet to implement the 30,000-hour minimum wage that took effect on April 18, 2019. The NLC directed the affected states to commence indefinite strides to force the respective state governments to implement the new wage.


Wel'r ffeir gyd nesaf, ydyn ymwneud yм hynny, gretyr Stinechyn yn ei ddiffwng i Ndech, efo'r erbyn rhai oedd yma, yr ystod yma. Mae'r Ffyrdd efo'i ei ddifo, mi fydd yn gymryd hon yn ei ddigon. Mae'r ffyrdd efo'i ddigon oherwydd i gyrwm oherwydd i'n digon oherwydd i chi ddydon ni'n efo'r profi'r ffordd hynny'n i'n ei ddiffwng. Mae'r ffordd i gyd yn ddesgau'r Ffyrdd efo'i ddychol, i'n gweithio mewn gweld yn d newsenol. some people in the club want to keep him for continuity while others think it's best to make a clean break with that regime and start with something different. so the athletic report in this, it's really interesting to see what Evan will actually do, whether Styrton will stay or whether Evan will appoint a technical director as opposed to a new director of football. I guess we're gonna find out over the next few weeks but just Right now he's still there, but he does seem, as though the club are considering whether to let him go as well just following brands changes out there from the club earlier in the week. Djavidаг Cab tri but he made his third appearance of Sport in Lisbon last night in the Portuguese goal keeper ad is on loan at Sporting for the season with a view to a permanent deal that is, his impressions. He played in the Champions League against Iax. Iax won the game by four goals to two and Sport manager Reuben Ammerin admitted afterwards that a decision would need to be made at the end of the season. He said we need to see Virginia in more games like this to be able to make an informed decision. It is reported that there is a fee of £3 million being agreed between Everton and Sporting for the young goalkeeper should they decide to keep him. I guess he just needs more games but obviously he has got Adnan who is an excellent goalkeeper ahead of him but we will see what happens with him. Play more games, impress and then he might get his move to Sporting at the end of the season. Everton today again linked with a move for Juventus midfielder Aaron Ramsey, Calcio Mercato reporting that Everton are in first place for the 30-year-old Welsh midfielder. He has been linked with Everton on a number of occasions even when Carlo Mancillotti was here he was constantly linked. His wages he is on £300 grand a week. I don't think he will be getting anywhere near that to come to Everton if indeed Everton are interested in him. Newcastle have also been credited with an interest in him as well so there you go. Everton Hull has been chosen as BBC's live game on Saturday the 8th of January. The game will now kick off at 5.30. I wonder why BBC have chosen that one. They obviously feel there is an opportunity of a giant killing that is going to be up to Everton to make sure that that is not the case. So Hull City vs Everton FA Cup third round tie will now be shown live on BBC One and it kicks off at 5.30pm. That's it for us. Make sure you give the video a thumbs up, subscribe if you haven't. Don't forget to play Ultimate Fan. It is free to play. The link is in the description and if you want more videos including daily live videos join us over on Patreon. See you later.


Um, at this point, we're going to go to the next presentation before the break. This is the work that's being done at the University of Arizona on what they are calling the digital border lines, Borderlands initiative, which is dealing with data intensive scholarly work around the borderlands between the US and Mexico. It's a really very interesting kind of multifaceted project. We have four presenters on this. Megan sense any Veronica Ries. I'm sorry, Ries Escadero and a lot of partner. And without further ado, I'm going to turn it over to them. Can you see my screen. The presentation. Alex good. Thank you, Cliff. On behalf of our project team really happy to be with you today I'm Sean Sutton Dean of University Libraries at the University of Arizona. And today we're going to share some information on our project that's in process right now the digital borderlands project which focuses on integrating library services into research workflows here at the University of Arizona. And we're going to talk about the origins of humanity scholarship on the US Mexico borderlands. So I'll provide a brief overview and then we'll dig a little deeper into the details. Next slide please. So our project team presenters who are here today and order of presentation myself also as PI for the project. Megan sense me is co PI as well as head of our research engagement department here at UA libraries and Veronica Ries Escadero is co PI and the Catherine be a lot ahead of special collections here at U of a libraries. We're at a really high level here. One, we're really grateful to the Andrew W Mellon Foundation for their generous support of this project, and also want to acknowledge this project is inspired by work that was done at the University of Calgary library grant a few years back. And we really appreciate all the work that was done at Calgary that helped lay the groundwork on which we are now building an additional kind of version of this model. I really appreciate Tom Hickerson, John Bros and Leonora crema who recently published an article on the Calgary model in college and research libraries and we put the link here if you'd like to learn more about that project. Now those of you who are familiar with the Calgary model will see some similarities but some important differences and how we're approaching this work at a root level, we are dispersing two rounds of four grants each round. To UA faculty led research teams, the grants can range up to $60,000 a piece, and these are for one year projects so we're approaching the end of cohort one, we're in the RFP phase for cohort to the objective of this project is really to use the grants to facilitate the integration of library services resources and expertise into these workflows. And you'll see a little bit later we don't leave it completely open ended as to which library services can be utilized. We're pretty directional in laying out the options for the research teams to consider as they're putting together their, their proposals so more on that in just a moment. A few of the distinctive features of this project. One, we are really focusing on data intensity intensive humanities research, and while we are defining data pretty broadly or allowing the proposals to define it pretty broadly. We are interested in a very intentional use of data and various forms to inform this research and its findings. We're also specifically interested in how data intensive methodologies in this area can work with the humanities and partnership with the libraries. Although we're happy to see that many of the proposals are very interdisciplinary and have certainly a humanities focus but bring in many other disciplines as well, which is something that we hope to see and indeed are seeing related to that an aspect we're really emphasizing in the RFP is data storytelling. So, the idea that the data and form some form of story some form of analysis that is very accessible not just a specialist in the field but also to the general public students and others and so we really want the applicants to be thinking about what kind of storytelling can you do what kind of methodologies can you use that really help to interpret analyze and present the data in a way that's widely understandable and accessible. We also require focus on the US Mexico borderlands which is of course a very multifaceted subject area, but we do that for a couple of reasons. One, the US Mexico borderlands research is really an institutional priority at the University of Arizona we have a large cohort of existing researchers in this area across disciplines. So our thinking is we knew we would have a solid constituency of potential applicants on campus. Secondly, the University of Arizona is a Hispanic serving institution and we feel that this focus aligns very well with supporting the university's commitments around that designation and different areas of research teaching and learning and experience that center. HSI designation. And then, finally, the University of Arizona libraries are really interested in how we can be facilitators of this kind of research across different library services, including digital scholarship support services data services but also our special collections as one of the top archival holdings of borderlands materials in the country so that's another asset that can be brought to bear in these projects. Finally, as the granting agency we use that leverage to require open access for all research outputs that we're funding through these projects. So the research teams know that coming in they need to be thinking upfront about how their work will be made openly accessible. That is both to support the library's commitment to open access as one of our fundamental fundamental values, but also again this idea that we want this research to be widely accessible to folks within United States within Mexico and indeed around the world. So as the granting agency we do require open access for all outputs and a tangible commitment to that with the library serving in a partnership role. So that's kind of the basic outline of what we're up to here. I'm going to turn it over to Alana to tell us a little bit more about the proposal development process which is a really critical aspect of this to ensure success, both for the research teams as well as the libraries providing the kind of services and expertise that will be required for their success. Over to you Alana. Thanks Sean. As Sean mentioned the proposal development process is a pretty critical part of the project we're doing here. So applicants in the Digital Borderlands seed grants are required to participate in this commercial proposal development process that includes attending a four hour proposal development session, and also getting some deeper consultation with library personnel. And one of the key things that we do in these workshops is to introduce the proposal to introduce the digital Borderlands initiative to the applicants. So we share information about the project's influences like the work of our colleagues at the University of Calgary and their success in building out new research services using a similar approach. We talk about the efforts of the United Frontiers project to map digital humanities work in the Borderlands. And the workshop includes a hands on activity where participants are invited to explore a variety of digital humanities projects that look at questions about the stories being told. So we're getting used in those projects and the scope of those projects, providing all of this context prepares applicants to apply for the funding with an understanding of the overall goals of the initiative and the potential scope of a project that has a maximum of $60,000 in funding, and a one year performance period. So our goal here is to manage expectations and shape realistic project timelines and it's been really successful so far. The other thing we do is we scaffold the proposal development process itself. So during the workshop we review each of the required elements of the proposal and allow participants to ask questions and get clarifications and ensure that after going through the intensive application process. We're not getting applications that we have to reject because they're missing elements. And then we also help to establish connections between the researchers and library personnel. Applicants are introduced to library personnel through a series of pre recorded lightning talks that cover the library services that are supported through the grant. So these are sessions were initially planned in a pre COVID context. And one of the things we noticed in our shift to offering the sessions remotely over zoom was that having a pre recorded content allowed for greater consistency across the sessions. It allowed us to incorporate the feedback of a larger number of library personnel without having to wrangle. We have 10 15 different people in one small zoom conference. And it also helped us to ensure the applicants were starting the process with the same information. And then we also have library consultants join the last hour of the workshops and applicants are able to share information about their projects and get feedback, allowing them to begin the deeper consultation process with library personnel, where they're able to meet one on one or in small groups with folks to scope the library services for their projects and solicit solicit letters of attestation for the proposal. So it's a really exciting part of the process. We've seen a lot of folks who maybe don't get funded, come back to the library with relationships that they've established and ask about different ways they can incorporate library services into their work outside of the grant. And it's a really great sign that that these relationships are taking and that we're helping to adopt the service model. I'm also going to talk a little bit about the projects that we funded in our first round we've just finished our second call for proposals and are in the review process now. And we also have these four ongoing projects. So the border hub reporting on race and ethnicity in the border lands from 1882 to 1924 is a project that builds on an existing relationship between library personnel and faculty in the history journalism, Spanish and Portuguese departments. And it allows us to produce a web based platform that serves as a centralized hub for data focused humanities research teaching and digital storytelling that brings historical intent and context to contemporary questions about race and ethnicity in the border lands. We've incorporated library services from special collections, including digitization of special collections materials and consultation on metadata and digital curation and presentation. And they've also incorporated some data science support, as well as text mining support support from our catalyst studios which is our maker space and beyond. And they've also started to incorporate support for mapping and GIS using story maps as one of their outputs. We partnered with several community organizations in Arizona so they're working with the Arizona Historical Society, is being mining and historical museum, and the Douglas oral history project, as well as the new no gallas community development. All of the projects that I'll talk about have some community partners and as we go further in our presentation. We'll talk a little bit more about the importance of the way that we're asking people to approach community work. But it's, it is a central component of each of these projects. The next project that we funded in the first round is a project called detained voices from the migrant incarceration system. We're working collaboratively with former detainees to document their experiences in detention through a combination of multi-lingual written visual and audio forms. Detainee testimonials are archived alongside correspondence art and digital storytelling that contextualizes the growth of the migrant detention industry, presenting a synthesis of the personal and political repercussions of the modern day internment. They've incorporated library services including support for oral history, metadata and permissioning, as well as building out a digital archive in Omeca, and they've partnered with the Florence immigrant and refugee rights project to help make this project a reality. The next project I'll talk about is one called forensic citizenship in the borderlands. This is a visual and oral history project that documents, analyzes and shares the stories of civilian forensic expertise on both sides of the Arizona Sonora border. They work with community organizations, such as the Madres Vospedora de Sonora and the Colibri Center for Human Rights to create an interactive website highlighting the work of people doing forensic recovery work in the borderlands. And they're producing videography of the landscape alongside oral history interviews and a binational map displaying the GPS locations where they found or identified human remains in the desert. They're incorporating oral history, GIS, and consulting as well as support for building an Omeca platform. And the final project that I'll share is one called the Raramari Dressmakers of Chihuahua City. It's a documentary film project that tells the story of a Raramari community in northern Mexico who have been forced by issues, such as ongoing food crisis due to prolonged drought, as well as growers taking over farmland to plant marijuana and poppies. And so these communities have been forced out of their traditional homelands and made to migrate to government-funded settlements in Chihuahua City and Ciudad Juarez, where they struggle to maintain autonomy over their culture and traditions. This project narrates the way in which the Raramari women uphold their sharing economy and identity through dressmaking. They're collaborating with the Oasis community in Chihuahua City, and they've incorporated support from the Catalyst Studio, special collections, digitization of materials, as well as Omeca support. And I'm going to put a link in the chat to a story map that goes a little bit more into details about these projects because they're all really beautiful and deep. And it's very hard to share all of the great information about them in such a short span of time. And then we've also seen now with the close of our second proposal period, some really exciting projects coming in that are dealing with issues such as climate, biology, disability, water justice, and community history, as well as housing discrimination. So we're excited to see what what the review board selects for our next round of projects. And with that I'm going to hand it off to Megan, who is going to talk a little bit about lessons learned in our first round. Yeah, so we learned a lot by engaging with the applicants during the proposal development process and then by collaborating with awardees from round one. There were three areas where we found projects were consistently needing more support and attention than they initially anticipated. Data management, rights and risk management, and project management. By increasing data management discussions, especially in the second round, we've been able to work with awardees to think about various aspects of their project work as data. There's things like collaborative file management and standardized file naming strategies. But with these digital projects, it's also helpful to think through the different components of each project with the applicants, so that we can help them identify which parts of the work should be prioritized for long term preservation, and which parts might be more ephemeral. We also have really useful conversations about the fact that a lot of what looks fresh and engaging in 2022 will appear dated in the not too distant future despite the fact that the content being presented will remain important and relevant. Distinguishing the content from its digital representation, we were able to develop strategies for long term content stewardship and strategies for documenting and contextualizing initial representations that may become obsolete over time. We discovered that when we required a single pre application consultation with the data management specialist applicants routinely sought to write in further data management consults at different points throughout their projects. It suggests to us that the applicants themselves readily understood the value of these conversations and adopted the mindset that data management is a continuous process throughout their work, rather than a checkbox during the planning phase and a headache at the end. While working with our first round of funded projects, we also encountered some sticky challenges associated with rights, risk and data ethics. We really required deeper consultations with our scholarly communications and research services librarians. The first major issues related to a fair use assessment for a drawing that a young person in an immigrant detention center had made depicting a certain infamous mouse. We resulted in really significant conversations with the project team about how to incorporate four factor fair use considerations within the broader context of vulnerable populations to determine appetite for risk among project participants and content creators. Another area that emerged as a point of active discussion related to institutional review board applications. And whether to pursue IRB applications within the context of oral histories and journalistic inquiry can be really nuanced, and it can predetermine which avenues a project might take over time. Similarly, the IRB does not address a range of emerging web based data collection methods that raise really important questions about ethical use of data. The conversations with one of our round two applicants about scraping Twitter data became a really important feature of our proposal development work. We were able to discuss potential ethical concerns, while also walking through the logistics of data collection and discussing how those data are sampled. Our experiences suggest that these are areas where libraries and research offices might start to collaborate to expand some of our programming to address new topics in responsible conduct of research. One final point of interest for digital borderlands in particular is the issue of cross border copyright regimes. There is significant variation between us and Mexican copyright laws that really warrants deep discussion, especially for by national digital projects. And so this is an ongoing area of conversation for us. The third area that required significant engagement on our part was supporting awardees as they managed complex projects. They required coordinating across business offices to help awardees understand institutional policies, providing consultation on scoping work and setting project expectations for graduate student labor, and investigating strategies for optimizing collaborative collaborative access across a range of digital tools and platforms. While this work is specific to the seed grant strategy of our project. It did reveal potential areas for programming and consultation, where the libraries can share their expertise with scholars. Next slide. I also want to briefly discuss how several of our earliest findings from our first award cycle informed strategic and operational planning at the University of Arizona libraries. During the 2021 fiscal year our libraries embarked upon a year long process of future state planning that directly coincided with the first phase of the digital borderlands project. Our future state efforts resulted in significant reorganization around three key areas, student learning and engagement, research engagement and collection services. The research engagement department now consists of three units with digital and data services incorporated throughout. We have the research incubator that data cooperative and scholarly communication. Our experiences with the proposal development workshops cemented the value of prioritizing early engagement in the research process. In creating a research engagement department, we established a new research incubator unit that focused on providing support for research planning data collection and reuse data management planning and evidence synthesis. Our cooperative unit includes support for data science GIS and digital scholarship, and it also currently hosts our research data repository pilot, which will be integrated into a scholarly communication unit later this year. We also brought a former content and collections librarian into the scholarly communications unit to provide more concerted support for open educational resources as part of our goal to advance open access to resources and to build out our library publishing footprint. Borderlands was also our very first pilot initiative for exploring reclaim hostings domain of one's own for digital scholarship services, and we're now assessing further directions for how to integrate domain of one's own into services that are focused on community engaged research and community archiving. On that note, I will turn it over to Veronica to talk a bit more about lessons learned on her end. I apologize to my, my fellow speakers here because I'm just coming off of medical leave and I'm a little bit rusty but I'm happy to be here. I will talk a little bit about the kind of the practicalities of this here in a second but I wanted to sort of start off by saying that, given its inherent cross disciplinary nature. The US Mexico borderlands has the opportunity to make significant contributions to diversifying representation in the digital humanities, which has been heavily critiqued over the past decade for centering the research and concerns of white Anglophone scholars. So with this in mind and our goal has always been to have, at least in the special collections arena is to have material so that primary sources material so that we can enhance the, the historical record and add more materials that would be relevant to the communities in our US Mexico borderlands. So some of our opportunities that we saw with the grant and working with our faculty is that we had opportunities to use some of the existing digital content. But along with that of course we have limitations with machine readable. There were limitations with the machine readable content because we had material that was scanned many years ago and of course they're not up to date to this point at to the state sorry. The other piece then that we did see though is to further our digitization goals along the with materials related to the US Mexico borderlands, certainly with the border hub project which has selected quite a few collections to fully digitize, we were able to contribute to that digitization so that the faculty would have the material but also so that we could have the material incorporated to our collections, which is in line or in alignment with our goals to provide more more content in that area. Some of the challenges that we have faced in in these digital realm and Megan alluded to this is that we have had to really talk with the participants in scoping their projects. So let's walk them through a lot of the intricacies of digitization project planning that we maybe didn't anticipate fully, but it is certainly getting us stronger in our consultation role from our colleagues here in special collections to consult with faculty on on how to go about digitization project. And if you want to go on to the next one. So these here with research methodologies and border studies. There was a work that was not too long ago published it was to reigns new directions and border research methodology ethics and practice, which acknowledged as the title says you know the importance of racing methodological ethical questions when researching in a transnational context. So because a lot of these projects are community center. And it's this, this practice really has is relatively new it's, it's not so new and indigenous research methodologies, but it's new and in an academic arena and how we look at it, how we see it we've been used to doing IRB. But it doesn't necessarily encompass like, for instance, oral history projects, which have not been considered research per se. And so we wanted to make sure that the criteria encouraged relationships were set long before the proposals and the award period for sure because we understand that in having community centered research we want to have equal partnership with both the faculty who are working or the or the partners that are working. That are copy eyes in the projects but also with the communities that they're working with the research tends to be because of how I think because of how we set up that that projects or that proposal. But they center on mutual reciprocity and that's something we discussed in the workshops is to ensure that whatever the projects are that it's beneficial both to the communities that they're working with. And of course as well to enhance the research that the faculty are working on. And then of course centering border studies, as I think somebody mentioned earlier, furthers the library and university goals. So we're not doing something that's completely outside of our realm. We wanted to make sure that we for support what is happening on campus already with the border lab for instance, through the Confluent Center, which is an effort to enhance border studies and have cross disciplinary research across campus. And for us in special collections to include some of our consultation role that we've had with whether academics or community members who are looking to do projects like this. In addition to then adding more digital content to the to the record. I was, I am Catherine be well I kind of special collections, but I was also in the sort of serving as interim borderlands curator that's my, my role has been that for quite a few years. And so the, the, sorry, losing my thoughts here. Yes, we as a, as a team, recognize that at the core of humanistic, humanistic approach to research is understanding the human, the human condition as scholars investigate to better understand communities and cultures. Border studies research naturally calls for working in a binational and transnational sphere. So we wanted to ensure that that was a possibility with these projects. But that is it for me, I think we're set or we're going back to Alana or Sean sorry. It's a pardon me back to me again for a little wrap up before the Q amp a so these kinds of projects naturally bring about questions on replicability and sustainability so I want to take a couple minutes to share some thoughts from the team on that. And lastly, the strategy on which this project is based is to use funding to inspire faculty to think about ways to integrate library services into this kind of research in this subject domain, comprehensively. There's a real strong linkage between, yes, the funding gets their attention. But what we want the funding to be is a bridge towards deep collaboration. And the hope of course is that the faculty members who are funded, moving forward we'll see the libraries as even more instrumental to their future research endeavors, but also as Alana mentioned earlier, even the equity proposals that are not successful. We're starting to build a relationship there that can lead to greater collaboration and partnership with those groups as well. And then in terms of scale, we hope that they will tell their colleagues and peers, how instrumental we've been and that that can help spread the word around. Speak just for a second about kind of scalability because I think that's important here in terms of replicability. So, to our mind, this kind of approach can be scaled at a very large or medium or small level depending on what your circumstances are so. In my view, you could scale down the number of awards, the amount of money offered if that's what's possible to you and I think projects like this have the potential to be attractive to funding bodies within a university like a provost office or a research office. I just want to acknowledge that you can definitely scale this kind of approach according to your resources. The ultimate goal for us is for this project to really help to advance the cause of library engagement throughout the research workflow from conceptualization, through execution, through dissemination, and as Megan outlined that model really informed how we structured our own research engagement department during this process in a parallel fashion. And then finally, it's important to acknowledge the strategic balance between consultative roles for the libraries in balance with deep integration into research workflows. We probably couldn't handle 20 of these at a time. In fact, I'm sure we couldn't logistically and we scale we scaled it to do four at a time. And it's just being realistic that in our view the library should be able to strike an appropriate balance long term beyond this project to say, we have expertise that can be provided to you in a consultative manner a fairly lightweight manner to help your research process but we also have the potential to be deeply integrated partners in your research process to and different faculty members on different projects will have different needs, but we're trying to find a way to sustain both understanding that the deeper partnership can be very demanding on FTE and resources. But we do feel that there is an appropriate balance to be struck so that we are deeply integrated partners, as well as more lightweight consultants in these kinds of digital scholarship and data focused research areas. So that's it for our presentation. We do have a few minutes and are happy to open it up to your questions. If you have any. I should also note that on the online program for the online CNI conference there is a link under our project description to our project website. You can find more details there including our call for proposals and some more in depth information about the library services that are part of this project. So take your questions if you haven't. Thanks. Thank you very much, all of you for a really comprehensive look at that work. A very interesting product program. It really is a program to not a project. I'd really welcome questions, either in the chat or if somebody'd like to just ask a question. Alison. Hi, thanks. Thanks for that presentation that was great. And I don't know this is an easy way to answer this question but I was just thinking about the fact you have, you know, four projects probably so you can be able to manage expectations as you say and maintain the work. Do you have a sense of with with your library staff and librarians that worked on these projects was there a lot of was it the same people working in all four projects or how much overlap was there in terms of trying to get on it when we're all these projects being done at the same in the same time period I got the sense that they were but just a couple questions around I guess those logistics. Let's start with that. So we did have two separate calls for proposals round one and round two. In round one projects had the option of starting with a June 1 date or a September 1 state, mostly so that faculty could decide how they best wanted to use those crucial summer months. So that was the end of a project. We had developed a process of attestation for library faculty, who were consulting on projects to provide information both on what their capacity was across all potential projects, as well as what they anticipate their contribution to any given project applying. And I will say that was something that we adjusted between round one and round two, we, we, I think created a simpler form for the librarians to librarians and library staff to estimate what they thought their contribution would be.  So we were able to look at the applications as a cohort and make some decisions within our review board selection criteria to try to think about the cohortive approach of like, let's get a group together that is doing enough that touches different library services that we really are exercising the broader model. And I think that has been helpful. That said, I think the area that got the most hit was probably requests around digitization of some of our special collections that are yet to be digitized. Would you say, I think Veronica's nodding. I don't know if Veronica or a lot of have more to add on that front. Yeah, I'll start but I think Alana has probably a better picture but it is something to be aware of that faculty weren't as I guess knowledgeable of the digitization project planning piece so we've had we have had to do quite a bit of, you know, running through those those pieces and maybe Alana I don't know if you want to share more about that. I can just say that the, you know, the great thing about having this grant is that it is really allowing the library to learn a lot of lessons and so some of those lessons have been, you know, helping library personnel figure out how they can scope their services and and kind of manage their time and expectations and doing that kind of consultation because as Sean said we're looking towards replicability and sustainability in a way that we don't have the continued funding to do. We need to figure out how to make this part of the library service. The other thing is, is with the lessons that we've learned right in the first round there were a lot of questions about digitization and all of these things that required the library to do a little bit of like work to come up with, you know, a digitization time and make them accessible and figure out like, you know, does a grant need to pay for the library to digitize an entire run of a collection that we should probably eventually want to digitize anyway or do we need to figure out how to digitize those materials for the grant to make them accessible. And so it's allowed us to figure out a lot of those kinds of services as well as helping library staff say what they can and can't commit to. That's a fantastic great answer. Thank you very much. We have time from some additional questions and I want to also just note that there's some extra information in the chat as well on this. Further questions. I'm not seeing any. Oh, here we go. Robert. Okay, so I wanted to kind of follow up actually a little bit on Allison's question and the and the answer and circle back to something that Veronica had raised which, you know, being that this is community centered research, there was this interest in ensuring mutual reciprocity. I'm curious if, and this kind of goes to like managing the relationships with partners. Was there some form of like a written document that was like co authored, I mean, I'm thinking, you know, right, we would do like an MOA, but maybe that's a little legalistic of a model for something of this nature so I'm curious if you did something like that and what it looked like and how that works. I can answer that. Yeah, I think I do. So we in in the proposal process we require documentation for many things so one of those, one of those components, in addition to letters of attestation from library service providers is letters of commitment from community partners that that kind of attest to the existing relationship and the expectation so that it's also very clear to the review board that the project team has been forthright with with the communities they're working with about what, what the project is and what outcomes they can expect, as well as assigning clearly the roles and responsibilities for those projects. So we, we want lots of documentation. Thank you. We also had a lot of conversations as project applicants were putting their proposals together around really understanding what the stakes were for their partners, because, you know, in our academic context sometimes what what's legible as value to us is than what's the most valuable to our community partners and so it was really interesting to see what people wanted that we could accommodate and then some of the things that people wanted that were really hard to accommodate like anybody who's ever tried to purchase gift cards knows that in like a public university that's that they might be impossible. So people would love it. And so it was really great to see as people were writing up their proposals. How were they thinking about what people would want and so sometimes that was like with the Raul Ramore dressmakers doing some really cool workshops with the community to do skill sharing about storytelling about animation about some other things. So that it was clear that the people participating we're getting something that felt valuable to them in whatever form that took, and that we were also able to support it. You know, within the confines of our institutional policies. Thanks Megan I literally had a conversation about gift cards for something this morning so I feel, I feel you on that one. Well, I think it's about time for us to go on break for a little less than 15 minutes will restart promptly at four o'clock and please come back for what I think will be a very interesting. Let's look at the actual costs, or at least attempts to discover the actual costs of making research data public, and then some concluding comments for the day. So we'll be back in about 13 minutes. Thank you for a great presentation.


Hello everybody, Hooded Cobra Commander 788 here and this is a very quick look at Tiger Force Duke from 1988. This is the first Tiger Force figure that I've gotten as an adult collector. I did have this figure as a kid and I got this figure because I wanted a Duke action figure. My original Duke figure was long gone by 1988. It had been lost or broken or something. So I really wanted a replacement Duke. So with these Tiger Force figures, they started reissuing older action figures but with different colors. So I'm very happy to get a Duke action figure even though he looked a bit different. He had some stripy pants and a green shirt. That's fine. I didn't mind that. One thing that I always found odd about this figure though is the hair color change. Original Duke was blonde and reissued Duke with Tiger Force for some reason his hair is brown. I do prefer the original color quite a bit over the change. This one I have a full back card, not just a file card. Reason I wanted to get the full back card on this is when I review it, I want to show the back and show how the Tiger Force figures that were introduced that year had this special little partition here on the cross cell on the back and I find that very interesting. There is the file card for Tiger Force Duke here and this is different from his file card that he originally came with. But we will talk about all of that as well as compare this figure to earlier versions of Duke when I do the full review but that's just a really quick look at it for now. I hope you enjoyed this. Keep an eye on this channel for more full GI Joe toy reviews coming up and I will see you later.