Nothing extraordinary here as far as I know, just a notice of a couple routine government meetings that happen all the time. But you never know, powerful devils could be lurking in these agendas...
I think I received this because I dropped in on a Park & Rec Capital Committee meeting a couple weeks ago, and probably wrote my email address down at some point. During public comment there I expressed an idea which I think would make an excellent ballot initiative – that whenever presenting proposed policy changes, spending adjustments, etc., at public hearings, government agencies should be required to present arguments against as well as for whatever proposal(s) they are presenting, devoting equal time and resources to preparing and delivering both the positives and negatives, so that elected officials and members of the public will be informed about potential downsides as well as upsides of proposals and better able to evaluate proposed changes as fairly and objectively as possible, rather than just being subjected to a one-sided dog-and-pony show.
I chatted briefly afterward with the chair of the committee, Mark Tompkins Buell – he of misguided philanthropy and Democratic fundraising notoriety – to get his thoughts on the idea. He didn't think much of it. Who would have guessed? 
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))
090419 capital.pdf (285 KB)
090519 operations.pdf (299 KB)