Letters to the Editor – Issue of Aug. 30, 2012
The reluctant hero
Since I was a young man, I have followed our space program from the first Mercury missions, to the Gemini missions, the Apollo Program, to Skylab, to the numerous Shuttle flights and just recently to our successful landing of Curiosity on Mars. I look forward to many more but will always look back on one event that changed us forever.
For those who are old enough you know where you were on July 20, 1969, the day Neil Armstrong and his Apollo 11 team landed on the moon. For me I was in Cam Ranh Bay, Vietnam, and I was fortunate to be near a TV and was able to watch the landing with my buddies. For a brief time, we forgot about the war, we forgot we were thousands of miles from home, we were proud to be Americans. We accomplished the unimaginable after President Kennedy challenged the nation to go to the moon and back just eight years earlier.
With the death of Neil Armstrong, we lost an American hero. He was a man made from the “right stuff” just like Charles Lindbergh. He was our reluctant hero, who did not look for fame and fortune, who commanded the greatest mission of all time.
I certainly hope our teachers have spent some quality time with their students this week, to tell them about the Apollo 11 mission, about Neil Armstrong the man and the astronaut. Perhaps there is a future astronaut in one of their classrooms.
Dave Grosch, Poway
Time for new thinking
I have two children at the PUSD high school level. I read the Aug. 2 Viewpoint written by Kimberley Beatty (Quality education is eroding in PUSD). I found the article well-written and supported by facts.
Beatty is legislative vice-president of the Palomar PTA Council. (For the record, I have never met Ms. Beatty.) Her viewpoint reflected exactly the experience that I have witnessed in my children’s education. Class sizes have reached an unmanageable level. Last year my children had 41-45 students per class. Teachers are stretched to the limit, through no fault of their own. We all know the state funding is to blame which makes budget decisions by the PUSD board even more critical.
Then I read about the controversial capital bonds approved by the PUSD board. Is this the same board that we are trusting to lead the district through a state budget crisis? In the Aug. 16 edition, I read numerous letters to the editor faulting the board for the bond decision. Ironically, the newspaper also announced three candidates seeking two PUSD board seats, two incumbents and Ms. Beatty. I don’t have to think too hard about my vote. I think it’s time for some new thinking on the board.
Kim Brenneman, Poway
Loan sharks applauding
Thanks to Mr. Lyles (Aug. 23) for assuaging my anger over the bond by explaining I am being selfish and motivated by personal political gain. And I thought it’s because a we owe almost a billion dollars and no one told us.
Only the government using taxpayer dollars could believe a repayment ratio of 9-to-1 is a good thing. Loan sharks everywhere are standing and applauding. I also agree with those political hacks who believe the bond would have failed if the total payout were known. Just being aware it couldn’t be paid off early is a red flag. Oops, there’s political gain getting the best of me again. After all, what are the odds of needing another bond in the next 40 years?
And please don’t say it’s for the kids so any cost is worth it. Then again, they will need good paying jobs to pay off this albatross.
As for having no recourse about the bond, I disagree. I will not vote for any of the individuals involved in this misuse taxpayer dollars.
So Mr. Lyles was correct, I am politically motivated.
Thomas Drzewiecki, Poway
A weak business plan
Like many people, I am very upset with the details of the Poway Unified School District bond fiasco.
What worries me most is what if PUSD needs any more funding in the next 40 years? Let’s all cross our fingers that no more renovation or similar projects come up.
This is a weak business plan at best.
Steve Reyno, Rancho Bernardo
Take swing at helping others
On Sunday, Sept. 2 Temple Adat Shalom is holding its first Mini Golf for Good event, raising money to help Interfaith Community Services feed the hungry and house the homeless of North County.
Over the past year I’ve seen dozens of sponsors and hundreds of volunteers step up to make this amazing effort happen. We’ve created an experience that will be talked about for years, and look forward to welcoming friends of every faith for the time of their lives.
On behalf of the entire committee and ICS, thank you for helping us help those most in need.
Rob Weinberg, Event Chair, Rancho Bernardo
Missing fall colors
Read Bob Emery’s June 21 column on his trip to the Northeast with amusement. Having grown up in New York and Indiana, I love to see all the greenery when driving. I especially miss all the fall colors.
After living in Poway for 31 years, it’s a shock to see all the trees, grass in the fields, when we do a driving trip back there.
Goes to show that where we grow up has a impact for life. Well, maybe not so much the snow! Too many memories of shoveling my parents’ driveway.
Christine Wright, Poway
What rules of road?
As my job has me driving near many Poway schools each morning during the week, I am constantly reminded of the lessons many parents teach their children as they drive them to school. The most common lessons being, that certain laws and common courtesy don’t apply to them, so we can make illegal U-turns, double park, drive around the line and cut in at the front, and do all of this while chatting with a cell phone at their ear.
I wonder if these children can follow rules at school once they arrive. I wonder where bullies come from?
Alan Johnson, Poway
A word from the family dog
My name is Benny, I live in Rancho Bernardo. I’m an old large dog of indeterminate breed.
When I was young I became lost on the beach in Oregon. A nice mailman named Larry found me. We lived together for 13 years and we both grew old. One day for some reason Larry didn’t come back. I never saw him again but his brother and sister came for me. I could smell that they were family so I knew I was safe.
They took me to live in San Diego. I especially liked walks. There are the most interesting pungent plants. I could smell little creatures underground.
As time went by I started having problems walking. I would stumble, scrap my toes and cross my back legs; they didn’t go where they should. I had many visits to doctors and specialists. I might have degenerative myelopathy, which I know isn’t good but it doesn’t hurt or cause me pain.
My people work very hard to look after me and they really know what they’re doing. I may look like there’s no life left in me, but I wish you wouldn’t stare; I’m not a side show at the circus. When you make remarks about putting me down, it really stresses us out.
Pease read more on degenerative myelopathy. We’d appreciate your compassion without all the questions, judgment and interruptions. I know you all learned good manners. All we’d like is to relax and enjoy the time we have left in peace.
Meryl Burke, Rancho Bernardo
Ryan not her choice
Regarding the Aug. 23 letter by Vicki Jo Jones, Paul Ryan is a good choice for those people who feel “Planned Parenthood” is an abomination, but what about the women who cannot afford to have another child because they do not have medical coverage or enough income to feed and clothe another child?
He has voted to cut back on all funding for the helpless in our society and hopes that seniors are stupid enough to believe his proposal for privatization of Medicare will benefit them.
His views on cutting taxes for the richest people in our country who have sent our jobs to China, Taiwan and India will also benefit us.
Ms. Jones should look beyond her nose and realize that she has been manipulated.
Shirley Cooper, Rancho Bernardo
Letters in the Chieftain
Poway can’t afford Mangum
Months ago Dick Lyles insisted the best candidate for City Council was 16- year PUSD Trustee Jeff Mangum. He said Mangum had been “tested with the toughest fiscal challenges” and “passed with flying colors.”
Now that the billion dollar bond bombshell has been dropped on Mangum’s election hopes, in his most recent column Lyles claims that the public reaction is simply the result of “politics” and in any event Mangum had nothing to do with it. Lyles is wrong on both counts.
The strong community reaction has nothing to do with politics and everything to do with the fact that PUSD trustees borrowed $105 million dollars and obligated our children and their children to pay back nearly a billion dollars. The board had the opportunity to purchase a “call feature” and decided on their own not to.
And as to whether Mangum had anything to do with it, the minutes of PUSD’s October 11, 2010 meeting leave no doubt. He made the motion to approve the first Authorization of Issuance for the $105M bond.
It is also important to point out Mangum was a trustee when PUSD burned through the proceeds of 2002’s Proposition U long before its promised projects were completed. That reckless spending led to the need for Proposition C which led to the current billion dollar boondoggle.
Sorry Dick. Poway can’t afford to have Mangum in office. There’s only one true fiscal conservative in the race for City Council. I’m voting for Steve Vaus.
Pat Johnson, Poway
Board responsible to everyone
Based on Mr. Mangum’s response about integrity, don’t vote for him for Poway City Council. The decision by the school board, including Mangum, was secretive, self-serving and most importantly not an urgent crisis situation.
The board talks about some funds from the state, but none of the buildings involved were so bad they couldn’t have waited another five or 10 years if needed. The board wants you to believe that school renovation is a very important part of learning. It is not. It is, always has, and will always be the quality of the teacher and the quality of the child’s attitude toward learning. The current school board doesn’t want to get it because they have an agenda.
It is funny how the board took the issue on bonds to the county tax collector, but not to the PTA or to the taxpayers. The school board thinks they are only responsible to the school parents. They are responsible to all the taxpayers and they better start remembering that. None of these school board members should ever represent taxpayers in Poway, in any capacity, ever again.
Bill Barnick, Poway
Related posts:
- Challenger enters PUSD board race
- Letters to the Editor: Aug. 23, 2012
- Quality education is eroding in the Poway Unified School District
- Guest Viewpoint: The ‘new normal’ in public education
Short URL: http://www.pomeradonews.com/?p=28065
Posted by Staff
on Aug 29 2012. Filed under Letters to the Editor, Opinion.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0.
You can leave a response or trackback to this entry
As both a parent and former teacher I thank Mr. Barnick for his comment "it will always be about the quality of the teacher and the quality of the child's attitude toward learning."
One school board member told a little story that seemed to imply she voted for the bond because a student had told her she wished she could take a magic wand and wave it over her school to make it new. Though I understand many children desire the newest of everything, and this may have been good-hearted reason to approve the bond, it certainly was not practical, researched or in the best long term interest of property owners or for that matter future improvements for the yet to come students in these public schools.
Pat Johnson in his/her criticism of Jeff Mangum obviously does not know what it meant when Mangum moved to "approve the first Authorization of Issuance for the $105M bond" in October 2010 and is desperately using that inaccurate understanding to place blame on Mangum and mislead the public. The 2010 vote referenced by Johnson was simply a motion to authorize the district to go out into the current bond market and see what kind of bond financing was available to pay the $105 million bridge loan which was coming due in 2011. That's all the motion meant. Nothing more. Nothing less. Just find out what's out there. Mangum was NO LONGER ON THE BOARD when six months after his departure the board voted to approved the final financing which included the inability to refinance the bond (i.e., the lack of a call feature). Mangum didn't even know what kind of financing was being considered because — once again — he was NOT ON THE BOARD when the final bond financing was voted on. Now Johnson wants to incorrectly use that motion to tie Mangum to a vote he did not make. Please get your facts straight.
Moreover, Johnson needs to do some research about the real reason the district ran out of Prop U money instead of, once again, using inflammatory misinformation to mislead the public. Johnson's obviously wants Vaus' main competition (Mangum) to be knocked out of the running for city council. And some of you question why Dick Lyles said there was a political agenda behind a lot of the inaccurate characterizations of what happened?
To GoPoway! – Mangum was present and accounted for during the entire bond fiasco which begins early on and several years before the 2011 mess. Mangum left as the house of cards came crashing down but he absolutely was part and parcel of the negligent CAB financing.
It was his foot along with the entire board that helped kick this can down the road. To state otherwise is ignorance on your part or just a tremendous desire not to accept the complicity of the entire Board including Mangum. The research that has gone into the bonds issued by the District is young and with each new document more evidence is coming to light that doesn't exonerate anyone.
It would be irresponsible of any voter to re-elect Vanderveen or Patapow (except we're short a challenger) and it would be just as irresponsible to elect Mangum to the city council until a full investigation is complete – which will no doubt involve a lawsuit and/or a grand jury investigation.
What rules of the Road.
Alan, I have witnessed much of what you see on a daily basis also. Teenagers today are given everything as opposed to when I grew up. We had to earn our keep back then. Now it's the gimme, gimme, gimme generation. Therefore teens today have no sense of pride and if they wreck Daddy's car because of their reckless behavior, its like oh well, wasn't mine to begin with. Remember this Mom & Dad, Cell phones + Cars + Immature teens = heartache.
I couldn't agree more with Go Poway! If you look at campaign contributions, Pat Johnson is listed as one of Vaus' contributors (and this was *before* the bond story broke). Most letters to the editor and outspoken Mangum critics are connected to Vaus' campaign, whether through donations, sign distribution, etc. Vaus' supporters are doing everything they can to make Mangum, a man of integrity, look bad. You're grasping at straws.
No one is attacking Mangum's integrity. Far from it. It is about his lack of judgment on financial decisions during his tenure as a Trustee of PUSD. To JohnN and GoPoway are you really suggesting that the spending habits over the last 18 years are to be admired and passed on to city hall?
Yes, I am suggesting that Mangum's spending habits over the last 16 years are to be admired and passed on to city hall. He did an outstanding job on the school board at a time when the budget was incredibly difficult and there were many cuts. Please enlighten me on his 16 years of spending habits, since you seem to be so informed to make that kind of judgement. Don't bother citing the 2011 bond, because HE DID NOT VOTE ON IT. I am so tired of seeing people trying to misplace blame on Mangum.
The PUSD bonds affects more than those just in Poway proper. Are all the people with San Diego addresses who are part of SFID and who are just as ticked at Mangum and the Board (and have no say in our elections)- are they making this political too? Hardly. This is strictly an issue about bad financial planning and whether or not we can risk having someone with that type of financial history on the city council or elected back onto the school board. Nice guys can make bad choices.
It's true that the bond affects more than those in Poway. But what's not true is that Mangum has a financial history that should keep him from being elected to the city council. To focus in on one thing (the 2011 bond) that he didn't vote on and not give credit to the amazing work that he did is ridiculous. And if you're going to accuse him of bad financial choices from his16 years of service, you'd better have some facts to back you up.
I know it is possible, but it is difficult for me to understand that five, apparently, outstanding citizens would conspire to ask the voters to pass a bond measure while knowingly hiding the details from the public. There just must be more to the story than is being told. Could they have been overly influenced by an analyst looking for a super investment and are embarrassed to admit it? What are the other factors?
I would really like to hear their side of the story, including Jeff Mangum who spent 16 years on the Board and should have some credible information.
The only way to defeat both incumbent candidates is for someone to register and campaign as a write in candidate. Could be a lost cause if we ever get the true facts.
Vanderveen, Patapow, could we at least hear from you before Nov?
You can't be serious about great financial shape. The cost overruns and the ridiculous bond returns EXCLUDING 2011 are shameful.
The district is in great financial shape. You don't see the state coming in and taking over the district (which has happened to some districts in the state). The bond is a separate issue from the other financial aspects of the district. For years the district has experienced severe budget cuts, yet has still managed to provide a great education for our kids.
I'm still waiting from some actual facts from you, "guest". Saying "The cost overruns and the ridiculous bond returns EXCLUDING 2011 are shameful" proves NOTHING.
Furthermore, you're putting words in my mouth. I said that PUSD did a good job in the circumstances they faced: a difficult financial situation and state budget crisis.
And did you bother to look into why there were cost overruns? Have you ever remodeled? I have. It was the unforseen problems that sometimes show up when you open up a wall and discover the unexpected. It was the unforseen, unprecedented increase in building materials that — even though you put a fudge factor into your calculations — could not have been anticipated. Who knew China was going to have a building boom that would gobble up resources and send building materials sky high? Shame on the district and board for not having a crystal ball!
No. Shame on you for thinking their behavior is acceptable. Shame on you for thinking any of this is ok.
Now you are putting words my mouth. Not surprising given the way you fast and loose with other facts.
No. Shame on you for playing off of people's fear and lack of understanding on this topic in order to advance your political motives.
Your writing sounds so much like a certain Steve Vaus' supporter's writing, I wonder if you're hiding your true name in an attempt to hide the fact that you are one of Vaus' main supporters.
Now you are putting words in my mouth (or apparently in my brain). What I think is a shame is that there is not more courtesy involved in this discussion. Quick to judge. Quick to condemn. It's easier to armchair quarterback when you have hindsight to back you up. Critics are not interested in trying to understand all the complexities of the issue. And it is complex. You attack viciously, assuming everyone has ulterior motives. It's a natural reaction to defend when people make cruel remarks about decent people who may have made a mistake — as if they themselves are perfect and would never have done such a thing (again armchair quarterbacking). I am actually very disappointed in our community. Not that they are upset. I get that. But that so many of them are jumping to conclusions, viciously attacking and engaging in character assassination. Again, no courtesy in the way they express themselves.
Mangum, in his own comments at the recent PUSD Board meeting voiced support for the Trustees' decision. Isn't it reasonable to assume if he had been on the board when the deal was finalized he would have approved it? If not he certainly would have said so. Wouldn't he? Instead expressed his solidarity with the board. That speaks volumes.
Further, when he and the other Trustees voted for the initial Authorization of Issuance they should have included parameters. Instead they signed a blank check that was ultimately cashed for a billion dollars. As for the rest of his financial history, construction cost overruns, approval of at least one other CAB with an exorbitant payback ratio and no "call" feature, none of that leads me to believe I want him anywhere near the City Council.
So now we're making judgments on someone based on how we think they might have voted? That's a scary path to start down.
How would YOU have prevented construction cost overruns? And the no call feature that you mention is only on the 2011 bond that Mangum did not vote on. What CAB are you referring to? The 2009 series A bond has a repayment ratio of 3.5, which is not exorbitant. This attempt to misrepresent the facts furthers my belief that those who are most outspoken on this issue and pointing their fingers at Mangum are those who have political motives to make Mangum look bad. I'm not saying that you're not truly concerned about the bond and it's implications, I'm simply saying that you are trying to place unnecessary blame on Mangum using inaccurate information because it helps your political goals.
Funny. I was at that same meeting. I didn't hear him say he supported their decision. I heard him say his integrity wouldn't allow him to throw the board under the bus just to get elected to the city council. Now you are putting words in Mangum's mouth.
Also, the parameters for the issuance of the bond were already set by Prop C.
See my earlier comment about cost overruns.
I don't know what other CAB you are referring, but I do know the Prop U bond interest is 4% which is pretty decent.
All of this bickering clearly indicates we need to get "the rest of the story".
Trustees, where are you?
Thanks Tom for giving the board members the benefit of the doubt. I am assuming the board members would like to respond but can't because of threats of litigation.
It appears by the positive/negative responses that no one is buying the GoPoway!/John N spin. What further amazes me is because many of us are critical of the entire Board situation we somehow disloyal to this wonderful community. Maybe if s a few people had actually paid attention to Allen Hemphil and Chris Cruse we wouldn't be having this discussion. That somehow GoPoway and JohnN are only qualified to dispense information or those in their group. There were other parents who were opposed to the bond measures and were told to shut up and get on board.
Just an FYI in 2006 there was a Capital Appreciation Bond with no call feature and a 6 to 1 payment ratio. So 2011 wasn't anything new just bigger.
We could do this all day and it just won't change the fact that the bond financing issues overshadow all else for the time being. I do believe we have beat this discussion to death for the time being and until new information is shed through litigation or whatever I believe most voters will choose to err on the side of caution this November and not elect Mr. Mangum or Linda Vanderveen or Andy Patapow. Although unfortunately it looks like at least Vanderveen or Patapow will be back.
I'm not entirely sure what you mean when you say I'm only qualified to dispense information for those in "my group". But you're right Clariece, we could do this all day…and it won't change the fact that (even though you are angry about the bond itself) I can't trust what you say about Mangum and your motives for saying it.
I'll have to look into the 2006 CAB, my apologies if I was incorrect about the no call feature (though I'm still not seeing this 6 to 1 repayment ratio you keep mentioning, where are you finding this numbers?). However, I still have not seen credible evidence, that proves Mangum was fiscally irresponsible. But hey, we're all entitled to our own opinion.
Oh, and as for all the "negative feedback", I have my own "spin" on that too! Even before the bond controversy, I noticed there were a select group of people negatively commenting (and thumbs downing) every article and comment here that referenced either Jeff Mangum or PUSD (and bringing Mangum's name into PUSD articles that didn't even mention Mangum). I think that Mangum's opponents have a group of of about 20 people who troll these boards, waiting for any opportunity to criticize him.
Now that you mention it, JohnN, I must admit I noticed the same thing!
Follow up to A word from Family Dog. We got the DNA test back for DM and it's clear. What this means is that Benny doesn't have the particular genetic marker for DM. The Vet said it could be a different type of myleopathy or other condition causing the neurological problem inside the myelyn sheath of the spinal cord. We are fitting Benny for his wheels and hope to get them to see if they can assist him to be ambulatory again. If you see your dog has a problem in his rear legs and you would like to know more about DM use these links. We are living in an age now where we have better nutrition and medical help for our pets. We want to give our pets all we can to help them and expect to see more handicapped and disabled pets being cared for today and into the future. The time is coming when it will be as rude to gawk or comment on a disabled pet as it is to comment on a disability in humans. DM is linked to the same genetic disorder that causes, ALS, (Lou Gehrig's disease in humans. The University of Missouri is testing dog's DNA for the gene that shows if they carry DM. http://www.caninegeneticdiseases.net/DM/basicDM.h...
Here's an article showing the link between humans and animals in Science Daily http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/0901...
Shirley Cooper did nothing more than repeat the democratic talking points. Nothing new in her comments regarding the choice of Paul Ryan for vice-president. If women can't afford children after 4 yrs of Obama, what makes her think the next 8 years will be better? Nancy Pelosi is quoted as saying, "we're going to tax everything that isn't nailed down. That means you too Ms. Cooper! A quick fact check tells us that Mr. Obama's stimulus financed several companies who have sent jobs abroad. And, if Ms. Cooper can tell us that she has viewed a video of an abortion in progress, and still agrees with the work of Planned Parenthood, I will cheerfully change parties. If she listens to the campaigns she will not have to guess that a vote for Romney/Ryan is the smart one for her and her family.