Letters to the Editor: Oct. 18, 2012
Don’t support Proposition 30
I’ve been reading through the text of Proposition 30 and it’s a quagmire of misdirection. To over simplify what I’ve read, Proposition 30 in and of itself does not raise money for schools. What it does is add $6 billion of revenue generated by Proposition 30 to be applied to the state’s general fund.
In 1988 Proposition 98 was passed and modified by Proposition 111 in 1990. These two propositions establishes a minimum annual funding guarantee for schools, while also complicated, it basically requires 40 percent of the general fund to be spent on schools. Here’s the rub, they can just shift the money from schools to other general fund expenditures and apply Proposition 30 funds to just the schools without increasing the school budget. They are in essence robbing Peter to pay Paul. In this case, the citizens are Peter and the bureaucrats are Paul.
What the authors have done is state if this proposition fails, they will cut $6 billion from the school budget (since passage of Proposition 30 was included in the budget). If it doesn’t pass they have to reduce the overall budget by $6 billion, so they’ll just take it out of the schools to pressure us into voting for it. They’re also trying to make it easy by saying this proposition will tax the wealthiest 1 percent of the state. Well, doesn’t everyone pay sales tax and won’t the .25 percent increase be paid by the other 99 percent?
Please don’t vote for Proposition 30.
Steven Beaver, Poway
Mangum can’t be trusted
Regarding the Oct. 4 article “Committee formed to study controversial PUSD bonds.”
I live in Poway. I am a firefighter. I have been for 20 years.
In all my years of fighting fires I’ve never heard of a case where a suspected arsonist was allowed to investigate a fire he started.
That’s what is happening in the case of Mangum’s panel investigating the billion dollar Poway school bond. He voted to approve it in 2010 but now that he’s running for office, and being criticized for his role, he wants to lead the investigation.
Adding insult to injury, I wonder about a committee where only “a couple of these folks are vocally critical that the bond payoff is 9-to-1” resulting in a billion dollar price tag for a $100 million loan. Are you kidding me? Are the rest of the committee in la-la land? Every member should be upset about a 9-to-1 bond.
And who is on this committee? Why are their names being kept secret? How do we know Mangum hasn’t simply assembled a group of his supporters? Are we supposed to trust him that they will be impartial?
We trusted him and the school board to look out for our best interests before and we got burned. Trusting a group of people who we don’t know, who are meeting behind closed doors isn’t smart. No thanks.
Matt Blackburn, Poway
President’s new ‘buzz word’
President Obama and Vice President Biden use the words, “leveling the playing field” a lot. What does this mean?
I am a homeowner and go to work every day. My kids are in school and we are probably considered middle class. We comply with everything the government mandates, such as paying federal and state taxes, buying auto insurance, home insurance, and health care insurance.
During the past four years of the Obama presidency, gas prices have been astronomical high, food prices have increased a lot, as well as every aspect of our lives. Obamacare imposes 21 new taxes. Obama has increased our deficit by $6 trillion to give to his select special interests, such as Solyndra. He gave millions to Wall Street, and the big banks that won’t loan money anymore.
President Obama only uses the term “leveling the playing field” as the new liberal buzz word and nothing more. The proof is in his actions, not his fancy speeches.
Tim Williams, Poway
Vineyard best man for the job
The Poway City Council election is getting near and I’d like to tell you about my good friend Gary Vineyard. I have known Gary for over 20 years and he and I have worked together on charitable and community events in and for the community of Poway all that time. I have known Gary as an honest and reliable businessman here in Poway and have trusted him over many years with my cars when he had an auto repair shop and have eaten at his restaurant and had his catering, which is first class.
Many of you may not know of the work Gary has done for Poway but I can tell you he has done more than his share, and for many, many years. He’s the type of guy that just doesn’t talk about it much…he just gets things done. He is the behind-the-scenes kind of guy. I’d classify him as my “Go-To” man.
I hope you’ll think about what I said and vote for Gary for Poway City Council. I believe he’s the best man for the job.
Randy Jones (Former San Diego Padre), Escondido
Don’t back Mangum, PUSD board
I have read about the “Bond Review Committee” that has been formed to investigate the disastrous Poway Unified School District bonds that will cost us one billion dollars.
Mangum said this is not intended to be a political whitewash. So let me get this straight. A secret committee has been formed by Mangum to meet behind closed doors to address a scandal-ridden decision of which he was part. Did I miss anything?
The panel participants are being kept secret “to remove politics from the equation.” Whose politics? Everyone else’s except Mangum’s?
Mangum and his cronies still don’t get it. Why don’t they trust the people? Why not be completely open and above-board? What do they have to hide?
Mangum and the rest of the school board made this mistake before. They didn’t take a serious issue to the people for an open dialogue. And we got stuck.
Well I won’t get stuck again. I will NOT be voting for Mangum or any of the other school board members. They still don’t get it.
Michelle Mabie, Poway
Cunningham, Mangum ‘professional’
I attended the recent City Council forum and saw the candidates as well as heard their responses to the questions submitted by community members.
The forum brought home to me that not only are Poway council members responsible for Poway’s services along with legislative, policy and financial matters, they also represent Poway’s interests with the San Diego Association of Governments regarding resource allocation and regional planning. Additionally, council members meet and collaborate with public officials from other cities. They also represent the city to both large and small businesses that are contemplating a move here.
As we know, business revenue is crucial to our city’s financial health. Ask yourself, who do we want representing us with these outside entities? I believe Jim Cunningham and Jeff Mangum are much more professional in effective communication, relevant experience, grasp of the issues and appearance than Steve Vaus or Gary Vineyard.
Sharon Reynolds, Poway
Not another lawyer on council
Do we really want another attorney on the City Council? Our government is full of attorneys and we know how that is functioning, they can’t even write a bill that doesn’t have holes in it.
While the city is trying to control cost, we have a current attorney running for re-election that is a labor attorney and sides with labor. Where do you think he will stand when the city starts to negotiate with the labor unions?
We need council members whose primary allegiance is to the residents of the city of Poway and not to the unions
Jack and Sharon Swain, Poway
Vaus is wrong about school bonds
I have seen the Steve Vaus mailed piece claiming that school bonds issued in 2011 were the result of a Jeff Mangum vote in 2010. Only casual research is required to know that the 2010 authorization was not fulfilled and that the 2011 issuance was the result of a subsequent vote in May of 2011 after Mangum left the board.
There are only two explanations for repeating inaccurate information. One is that Vaus doesn’t know the facts, which means he is, by definition, ignorant.
The other is that Vaus knows the facts and chose to misrepresent them, which means that he is, by definition, a liar.
In either case — whether Mr. Vaus declined to do basic research in an attempt to confirm the accuracy of his claim or whether he knew the truth and chose to ignore it, it’s easy to conclude that he is not the kind of person I want representing me or the city of Poway.
Character and integrity do matter and in his case, I don’t see either.
Kathy Mechling, Poway
Mangum not on board for bond vote
I have lived in Poway for 32 years. This is where I have raised my family and owned and operated a small business.
I have known Jeff Mangum, who is running for Poway City Council, for 24 years. He is a man of integrity. He has served our community faithfully and honorably for 16 years as a member of the Poway Unified School District Board of Education. He is one of the reasons our school district enjoys the academic accolades it has received for more than a decade.
I have been concerned about the deceptive attempts to lay the blame for what has been called a “billion dollar bond” at Jeff’s feet. This bond was presented to the school board, approved, and ultimately issued in the year 2011. Jeff Mangum was not on the school board in 2011.
I urge everyone to discover the truth for themselves and to join me in voting for Jeff Mangum.
David Brunson, Poway
Related posts:
- Committee formed to study controversial PUSD bonds
- Four are early entrants to Poway City Council election
- Letters to the editor – Issue of Sept. 27, 2012
- Letters to the editor: Oct. 11, 2012
- Letters to the editor: Aug. 16, 2012
Short URL: http://www.pomeradonews.com/?p=29483
Posted by Steve Dreyer
on Oct 17 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
Kathy Mechling needs to identify herself. She is Jeff Mangum's campaign treasurer so no big surprise she's calling everyone other than her candidate a liar. Her comments are incorrect and intentionally misleading about Mangum not Vaus's.
So once again and with feeling – Mangum was present in 2009 for the baby version of the billion dollar bond. It has a 7 to 1 payoff and $9 million in premiums (used illegally to pay off interest on earlier debt). In 2010 Mangum approved the resolution which was nearly identical to the final version passed in 2011. It does not matter that Mangum was not physically present for the 2011 vote. We already know by his prior actions that he have approved the final billion dollar mess. The history is there. The intent was there in 2010.
Helen, for full disclosure, could you please tell me if you are connected to any other candidate or are you just a citizen concerned about Jeff Mangums ability to serve on the Council?
Is Helen your real name?
Helen, your comment says it all! You yourself just admitted that Mangum didn't vote for the 2011 bond. You can keep trying to make it seem otherwise by ASSUMING he would have voted for it and by trying to mislead people. The fact of the matter is, Mangum didn't vote for it. Simple as that.
It's not an assumption,. The resolution MANGUM passed was the very resolution used in the validation action. It was nearly identical to what went through in July. Now if the validation action attached the wrong documents then that is a different issue. What the court approved and what the AG complained about were the items voted on by Mangum. Period. He is part of the mess. He participated in 2009 he participated in 2010, and by extension – the validation action – he participated in 2011.
If I understand correctly, the committee Jeff Mangum put together has the objective of trying to determine if there is a way to get around the CAB financing. I didn't know they were charged to uncover all the political details and who did what to whom.
Before I start throwing stones I'll wait for their report, which will hopefully come out before election time.
What is the analyst hired by John Collins supposed to do?
Could someone please enlighten me?
Tom the "committee" Mangum created is not charged with anything. iT is a private group he has put together. The member's identities are secret. There is an impression that his committee is legitimate and has some authority. They do not. As a matter of fact both the PUSD audit and this committee's report should both be viewed as highly suspect and self-serving. An independent audit would by necessity be called for and completed by no one affiliated with the district. Tom you are an intelligent man and for the life of me I can't figure out why you don't get this?
Helen, you may not know that early on I called for hearings by a committee with the authority to put witnesses under oath. That is documented. Since that has not been forthcoming from either the D.A. or the Grand Jury, I assume there has been nothing illegal about the issue. A horrendous mistake? You bet.
I would like to know the details. Was the PUSD Board and John Collins overly influenced by the slick bond underwriters/analysts? What was the Boards motive beyond the best interest of our students? Do you think Jeff Mangum was the ring leader of a devious plot?
Don't you want the truth instead of just hearing people throwing around accusations to get their man elected?
I believe the committee is better than no committee.
The Grand Jury is only convened once a year. The investigation will come from the AG or from a taxpayer lawsuit. I don't think Mangum is the ringleader. I think he was part of the problem going back to 2008 and 2009. Read Chris Cruise's Poway Blog Spot. She has the actual bond details and the payoff. And I don't buy the argument they were deceived by "slick" bond salesman. The focus on the 2011 bond is short sighted. The bond underwriters donated $25k to the Prop C committee. In 2009 the board issued a bond with a $9 million premium. In order to get the extra cash they had to jack the interest. And no call feature. Not one of the bonds issued has a call feature. It's not complicated. We elected these people to pay attention to the details. Now Collins has ordered the foreclosure of 7 homes, yet his own home is in foreclosure. This is a leadership problem from the top down. I consider myself to be a fairly conservative republican but for the time being I have no confidence in Mangum being able to focus on the city issues. His next few years are going to be spent focusing on defending himself from what will either be a taxpayer lawsuit or the AG's office challenging the legality of ALL the bonds with excessive premiums.
Helen, will you be disappointed if the committee finds a way to re-do the bond and have it financed in a reasonable fashion?
Will you be disappointed if people do not go to jail for their "apparent" egregious actions.
Will you be disappointed if the AG does not file a charge against the PUSD Board and John Collins for malfeasance?
Will your crusade continue after the election, or will all be forgiven if your man wins? That's the way it usually works in politics.
My last word.
Of course not. The issue is – while Mangum is focused on trying to fix the bond issue he was part of – you seriously think he should be running a city? The deception that you're buying into is that the resolution Mangum signed in 2010 somehow "died" before the 2011 final bond. The fact is the 2010 resolution is what was sent to the county, attached to the validation action and is identical to what was passed in 2011. So I suppose the real question is-how deep is the deception by PUSD and how dumb are Poway voters to buy that there is any difference between 2010 and 2011. Plausible deniability is not real.
Tom — you are AWESOME!
Vaus' people ( in this case Mr. Blackburn and Ms. Mabie) continue to write deceptive and misleading attack pieces against Mangum, rather than write positive letters about the candidate that they support. It's pathetic and disgusting. And yes, I'm positive these are Vaus' people…it doesn't take much research to find out that they are. Gotta love the internet.
There have been all kinds of positive pieces about Vaus. Just because your focus is on the negative doesn't mean the rest of us haven't seen it.
It's like I said before – this whole thing has been discussed to death. At this point, Mangum is something less than credible. His "committee" is questionable. With so much more to be investigated, Mangum needs to just sit this one out. Besides, he may get appointed to council in the long run. Higginson's term is up in 2 years. Cunningham has been chomping at the bit to be mayor – so we know he'll run. That will leave a vacancy on the council. Mullin can appoint his buddy Mangum and everyone is happy. Well except the voters because once again we'll have an appointee on the council.
Helen, since Mullin will only have one vote I'll bet he will slip a wad of developer money under the table and buy off the other four members of the Council. Right?
So are you somehow "pinging" private accounts? That's rich. I'm pretty sure that's illegal.
Wow, you overestimate my technological skills…it's called Facebook. Check it out sometime.
California State Treasurer Bill Lockyer, "I would fire staff that made a deal [PUSD Bonds] like this. And if I were a voter, I’d pick a different school board. But that’s just how I react to how egregious I think this deal is.”
http://www.voiceofsandiego.org/education/article_...
Gary Vineyard must feel that it's ok to "skirt" the sign code by creating one giant sign out of three smaller sides. Gary – your signs may technically be legal but they show your complete disregard for the spirit of the law. 3 smaller signs connected together equates one giant sign.
Next sign ordinance update will be named Vineyards Law. No campaign sign for a candidate shall be closer than 10 feet from another for that candidate.