Mangum: Letter mailed to supporters filled with ‘lies’
UPDATE: On Friday, Nov 2 Les Bailey, an elder with the Panorama Congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses, said that his church has not used a post office box for “at least five or six years.” He speculated that the box has since been assisgned to someone else.
By Steve Dreyer
Poway City Council candidate Jeff Mangum is fuming over the contents of a letter mailed anonymously this week to his supporters that Mangum says is riddled with false and misleading statements.
The awkwardly worded letter, signed by “Your neighbors” accuses Mangum of being responsible for future increases in the recipient’s property taxes though his support of Poway Unified School District school construction bonds.
“It is unfortunate that you are promoting this fiscally egregious candidate for a position on the Poway city council,” the letter says. “Shame on you.”
“I agree that someone should be ashamed — whoever sent out these lies, whether it was my opponent personally or one of his surrogates, should be ashamed,” Mangum said Thursday. “These kinds of dirty, dishonest politics have no place in Poway.”
Council candidates Steve Vaus, Jim Cunningham and Gary Vineyard on Thursday each denied any connection to the letter.
The one-page letter comes in an envelope with the return address of a post office box in Cathedral City. An Internet search revealed the box is one used by “Panorama Congregation.” There was no answer Thursday afternoon at the listed telephone number. A phone message was left at the business of someone listed as a church official.
The letter is addressed to “Resident at” and begins with “I saw your sign in front of your house promoting a candidate for Poway city council. It is good to see that your are exercising your First Amendment right.”
The second paragraph begins with “Based on public records your yearly taxes are currently …” and gives a cash amount. In a letter provided to the News Chieftain, the amount was $11,843. “That’s about $911 per $100,000 on the value of your home,” the letter says.
“In twenty years, when the bonds that are now extant come due, your tax bill will be approximately $59,215.00 per year. That’s assuming your house will still be valued at $1.3 million.
“You can thank the candidate you are promoting for this increase in your property taxes, since these figures are based only on his predictions of what the average tax bill will be in the future.”
The letter says “In 2010 this candidate DID VOTE to create the bonds that are the basis of the $1.2 billion bond debt and he was at the time on the PUSD board. This fact is a matter of public record that he does not dispute, in fact, he admitted that he did participate in constructing and promoting the bond issues as they eventually went to the voters in 2011 and later.”
Asked to respond to the letter’s allegations, Mangum released the following statement:
“With regard to content, the letter is false and misleading on so many levels that I hardly know where to begin.
“The letter implies that the bonds are responsible for the entire property tax. In reality, the bonds account for a maximum of $55 per $100,000 of assessed valuation (AV). If the house referenced in the letter is valued at $1.3 million as the letter claims, that would be $715 ($55 x 13) or about 6% of the tax bill ($715 divided by the entire $11,843 tax). The remaining 94% has nothing at all to do with the PUSD bonds.
“The letter claims that $11,843 in property taxes due in 2012 will grow to $59,215 in 20 years when the bonds are due. (Actually, they are not due in 20 years.) But that is literally impossible: Proposition 13 limits annual AV growth to 2%. By my math, the maximum AV growth over a 20 year period would be 48.6% (2% x 20 years). That would make the maximum tax about $17,500, between one-quarter and one-third of the $59,215 the letter claims. And once again, the portion attributable to the bonds would be only 6% of that amount or about $1,050.
“The letter’s statement that “this candidate DID VOTE to create the bonds that are the basis of the $1.2 Billion [sic – the amount is overstated] bond debt and he was at the time on the PUSD board” is patently false. I left the board in December 2010. The bond was created by the May 2011 vote, not by the October 2010 vote. The bonds authorized in 2010 were never negotiated, issued or sold. Period. Anyone who wants the truth can confirm this with PUSD.”
Mangum added: “Perhaps the most shocking thing about the letter is its obvious purpose: To intimidate people who support me. That is a new low in Poway politics.”
Asked about the letter, Vaus said, “The short answer is, I know nothing about it. I have no clue. It kind of boggles the mind. It makes no sense.”
Cunningham said, “I suspect the anonymous authors of this letter seek to get a reaction from the citizens of Poway and drive home their goal to have all of us reduced to the sad populous who are force-fed reasons to vote against someone rather than being encouraged to vote for a candidate based upon their accomplishments and character. I predict that tortured logic will fail in Poway.”
Vineyard also denied any connection with the letter.
Related posts:
- Mangum, Vaus clash at Poway forum over PUSD bonds
- Committee formed to study controversial PUSD bonds
- City Council forum works around no-bond ruling
- Council to consider refinancing City Hall bonds
Short URL: http://www.pomeradonews.com/?p=29792
Posted by Steve Dreyer
on Oct 25 2012. Filed under Local News, Poway.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0.
You can leave a response or trackback to this entry
Vaus may have denied having anything to do with this particular letter, but he has certainly fueled the lies and misconceptions regarding Jeff Mangum and the PUSD bond issue. Poway has never seen a campaign like his and he should be ashamed. If he can't win on his own merit, he doesn't deserve the seat.
There is NO WAY Steve Vaus is behind this letter. Your specious claim is what's shameful. I know Steve. He is a man of honor who is committed to making his community a better place for all of us. He is a truth-teller and a bold activist. Poway will be lucky to have him on her city council.
I have known Steve Vaus for a long time. His negative smearing campaign against Mangum is no surprise to me.
His public persona is one of great caring and community mindedness. The other, however, ONLY cares about his own interests and he will do or say ANYTHING to get what HE wants. He says he is the People's Candidate, but my experience is that this is anything BUT the truth. He says he speaks from the heart, but his Jekyll and Hyde personality makes me wonder what is really in there! If he had a good heart, why would he purposely tear down a man who has helped our Poway schools be some of the best in the state. We do NOT want this kind of person on City Council.
Many of the falsehoods in the letter are the same ones Vaus has been using in the negative postcard against Mangum that he has been mailing/distributing. What a coincidence.
Hmm, why does this reminds me of the unsubstantiated firetruck story and the bogus numbers of youth drug arrests?
While I agree with much of what Mangum said, I disagree with his calculation on the school bonds. The tax rate on the school bonds is not guaranteed to stay below $55/$100,000AV. Nobody knows for sure what the total AV in the district will be in 20 yrs, or what the resulting tax rate will be. We do know that the bond payment in 2032 will be around $45 million, which is 4 times greater than it is now. If no new properties are built and the $1.3 million home had the same relative AV in the district in 20 yrs, the school bond payment would be about $2860 ($715 x 4), not $1050. The $59,215 figure, which includes regular property taxes is grossly inaccurate.
I
Bogus number of youth drug arrests? Are you kidding me? Poway leads the pack in drug problems! I can't believe there are still people out there that believe there is no problem! Regarding the bond issue I have been to the open debate forums and although Mr Vaus brings up the issue, as he should, he would never stoop so low as to send a letter out like that. Wow. I think the race is getting testy as it gets further toward the election but I would hope a letter like this wouldn't become an "article" in the paper!
While I agree with Mangum that anonymously sending inaccurate information to supporters is dirty, nasty politics, I don't think this sets a "new low". Vaus set the low mark in Poway politics when he sent a recall notice to Betty Rexford, while she was at her dying son's bedside. All to remove her from office a few weeks before her term expired.
Oh my god Chris 80% of the voters understood that Betty was unethical in her behavior. The timing wasn't great – but when is it a good time to get rid of a bad councilmember? Give it a rest and get over it. You don't like Vaus. We get it. You were correct about the bonds. What I want to know is how can you possibly support Mangum knowing what you know about the bonds? This election has got to be giving you serious heartburn. Vote for Mangum and by extension approve of his poor choices or vote for Vaus the guy who got rid of your buddy Betty and admit that you may be wrong about him. I know that Vineyard doesn't even factor in your thought process.
Guest…I'm tending to agree with you. I got a very negative post card in the mail from Steve Vaus. On it was a little address-type label with some partial quotes from a UT article. I looked up the article and, while the words he quotes were contained therein, they were totally out of context. Even the hint of deception or misrepresentation from Mr. Vaus to smear an opponent is reprehensible. After all his Rexford recall accusations, you would think he should know that members of our council must be ethical beyond reproach. If this is how he runs his campaign, I don't think we want him on the council.
What a load of horse poop. Any idiot can figure out this was not done by Vaus or any of his supporters. Sheesh. Grow up people. The fact this made the Chieftain is ridiculous.
How so, Frank? It fits with everything else he's done so far. Where's your proof? How can any idiot figure out Vaus didn't do it? Your condescending attitude doesn't help you at all. This story made the Chieftan because people need and deserve to know what kind of dirty, disgusting politics are going on right now. Bullying and intimidating someone who supports a particular candidate is WRONG. Period.
Vaus should have condoned the bullying letter and distanced himself from it as much as possible, because even if he didn't send it, it fits with his actions and people will think the worst of him. I'm not saying that's fair or right, but Vaus missed a great opportunity to condone this kind of pathetic, deceptive behavior.
Excuse me, I meant condemn, not condone.
DrewN – obviously you've never dealt with the paper or reporters. They take an entire interview and condense it to a few words (except when they quote entire paragraphs from a written response like Mangum's). I think Vaus expressed himself well in saying this was senseless. Sorry he didn't use the exact words you wanted. Probably did but got edited . . .But you probably wouldn't be satisfied no matter what he said so it's rather moot.
Let's see now if I understand your logic. Vaus may have been edited or strip quoted by the newspaper. What about Mangum newspaper quotes that have been strip quoted by Vaus and used against Mangum (which they have been)? Were they perfectly recorded and therefore the absolute truth?
Correction…in my comment above I should have said that the school bond tax (not payment) would be about $2860….not $1050 for the $1.3 million house if no new properties are built and if the relative value of the house is the same in 20 yrs as it is today. That is a tax rate of a bit less than $150/$100,000AV. However, because there will likely be new construction/remodels and because resales will likely increase assessed valuation in the SFID (area that pays the school tax), it is very likely that in 20 yrs, the owner of the $1.3 million home will pay less than $2860 in school bond tax, and a much lower tax rate than $150/$100,000AV.
Thanks Chris for the explanation. Chris' figures and Jeff's figures come at the issue from two different directions. Chris' figures assume AV growth rates will not be sufficient to keep up with the bond obligation and Jeff's figures assume that AV growth will keep up. If AV growth does keep up, the taxes would remain at $55 per $100,000 AV. Right now AV's are currently growing, and I think can be expected to continue do so through the life of the bonds.
John, PUSD projected 5-8 percent. growth in AV from 2008-2012. That didn't happen. Yes, AV grew this year but it was less than 1 percent. It is highly unlikely that AV growth will keep up with the increases in bond payments, especially when we have to pay back both Prop U and Prop C. You can read about it here in my blog. http://powayblog.blogspot.com/search?updated-max=...
Jeff calculates the school bond tax as a proportion of total property taxes that remains constant over time. That is not how tax rates for bonds are calculated. They are reset every year by dividing the bond payment that is due by the total assessed valuation in the district that has to pay those bonds. The payments for PUSD's bonds will grow by 400 percent by 2032. Assessed valuation of properties that are not resold will grow by almost 50 percent per prop 13 during the same period. The difference has to be made up by new growth and increased value of resales. It is highly unlikely that AV can keep up. It hasn't kept up with PUSD's projections in any year after Prop C was passed. Nevertheless, my hypothetical assumption of a $2860 school tax bill is pretty much the upper cap of what the homeowner would have to pay, and it is very likely that the homeowner will pay less than that. How much less nobody knows for sure, because nobody knows how much assessed valuation will grow. The area is mostly built out, but there will be some new construction. Nevertheless, a school tax of between $1050 and $2860 is not going to raise the overall tax bill to $50,000-$60,000. That is crazy.
And for the record, I do not support any of the candidates who are running for council. I just have this freaky compulsion about accurately presenting the data.
I am stunned that this paper would take ONE letter and inflate it into an article. The letter isn’t worth the paper it was written on. It isn’t credible and no one believes it is. Your sole intent is to try and inflame a discussion against Steve Vaus. Steve has walked the community and spoken with literally thousands of people and has been met with kindness and absolutely no anger or ill will. Vaus has been met with encouragment. Vaus has been embraced as standing up for solid values and for honesty and openness in government. The only hostility has come from those in the Mangum camp assaulting him on a personal level (which by the way Mr. Mullin – you rode the coattails of the Recall to get elected and even walked streets to get the petition signed). Not one statement Steve Vaus or his supporters have made is anything less than the complete, verifiable truth. Mangum was present in 2010. No one has said Mangum is a bad person – he made a bad decision. But there are those in the Mangum campaign that will have you believe that Vaus is a bad man for even discussing the bond issue.
I have to agree. I can't believe the paper inflated one letter to all of this. With that said, I'm saddened with the reaction of the Mangum supporters. They decry jumping to conclusions and then do just that by blaming everything on Vaus and his supporters. Haven't you figured out there's another group out there doing signs and opposing Mangum? They are independent of any campaign. Vaus is a man of integrity and honesty. He also has courage, which I much admire. His postcard showed the facts. His leadership on the recall helped our community (80% voted in favor – sorry Chris). We understand Mangum supporters are upset but slewing accusations all over the place won't solve anything.
I'm concerned with the headline and the way it was worded. It reads (Mangum :Letter Sent To Supporters Filled With Lies) It would read better if it said (Letter Sent to Mangum Supporters Filled With Lies). The way it was written, suggests the misleading letter was written by Jeff Mangum. If one only scans the headline, I think it leaves the wrong impression.
There are so many false inferences in this article it boggles the mind. Let's start with the letter. It has absolutely nothing to do with Steve Vaus. Your attempt to tie him in to this bizarre letter written by someone possibly outside the community is beyond the pale. My family has known Steve for several years and he is nothing but forthright and honest. I can trust Steve to look outside the box for solutions. I have seen him motivate hundreds to positive action with a single email during the fires, through the Poway Leadership Institute and through the Townhall meeting. I have seen him motivate this community for real change and in meaningful positive ways. This article is nothing short of malicious and inflammatory and not based on not on any real journalistic integrity.
You say your family has known Vaus for several years, but yet you didn't sign your real name? That makes no sense and when something doesn't make sense, usually it's not true, right Steve.
This is out of control!
Let me say that Steve Vaus had nothing to do with this letter and I can say that because I have known Steve for several years and he is a man of integrity… He is straight forward, honest and is committed to make Poway a better place to live. He is NOT a liar, he is NOT dishonest and he is NOT the kind of man that would go behind someone’s back and do anything like this letter. Finally, I can’t believe this is even news worthy… We have bigger issue in our City that we all should focus on and not waste time with this type of non-sense.
How is this not newsworthy? This story made the Chieftan because people need and deserve to know what kind of dirty, disgusting politics are going on right now. Bullying and intimidating someone who supports a particular candidate is WRONG. Period. Whoever sent this letter should be absolutely ashamed of themselves. And Vaus should have condemned it and distanced himself from it as much as possible.
Vaus immediately distanced himself from the letter and said it was wrong for anyone to do that. What would you have him do – personally hunt the individual down, drag him over to your house so you can kick the guy? What exactly would it take to satisfy you that not only did Steve have nothing to do with the letter but that he was appalled anyone would send it? This is not newsworthy. It was one wacko bobo person who sent a letter to his "neighbors." It has nothing to do with Vaus. He said so.
I've been helping with the Steve Vaus campaign. We have knocked on over 5000 doors. The people we've met have been enthusiastic and supportive because they have seen all the good Steve has done in the community. I'm so glad most of the people in Poway are focused on what is best for our City. That attitude will lead to a victory for Steve on election day
I know Steve Vaus from church. Some of you obviously don't know him at all. The attempts to demean and denigrate him are disgusting. He is a man of honor, integrity and character. If you took the time to talk to him you would find that to be true. But reading your comments it is clear you are less interested in truth than you are in viciously attacking a good man in the hope of helping your candidate. That is sad and pathetic.
I'm glad election is almost over. I look forward to all of you awful hateful people crawling back under whatever rocks you came out from. You are trying to smear one of the kindest people in Poway. It won't work. People who know what he has done for the community will turn out in droves on election day to vote for him.
Seriously?!?! The people who have been attacking Jeff Mangum's character for the past two months are the ones who are hateful! I can't believe some of the things I've heard people say (inaccurately, might I add) about him. Then one person says something negative about Vaus and you start calling everyone hateful. SUCH HYPOCRISY!
Just because Vaus has pointed out Mangum's role with the school bond doesn't mean he had anything to do with this silly letter. There are plenty of angry residents. I'm casting one and only one vote for City Council and that is for Steve Vaus. He will continue to make Poway a better place to live just like he has been doing for years.
In the article Steve Vaus is quoted saying "I know nothing about it." That's good enough for me.
I've known Steve Vaus for years. He has been a coach for youth sports. He volunteers with the Poway Park Ranger Mounted Patrol. He is Chairman of the Budget Review Committee. He led the Recall to remove a corrupt Council member. He has led the battle against substance abuse in Poway. He is an overwhelmingly positive influence in Poway. Those of you trying to tear him down based on something he had nothing to do with obviously don't know him or have an agenda. Those of us who do know him admire him greatly.
This is another typical political tactic to distract from the real issues in Poway. The school bond is a shameful nationally covered disaster for our community. Steve and Jim have denied any connection to the letter and I believe their statements. As a long time resident of the "City in the Country" I have known Steve Vaus and Jim Cunningham to be genuinely interested and working to improve our quality of life in the "City in the Country" .
You're kidding me, right?? Those of you accusing Steve of dirty politics should take a look in the mirror. You're the ones stooping to dirty tactics and name calling. Everything Vaus has done in the community has helped Poway.
Steve Vaus has been making the same false claim about Mangum's 2010 vote that the letter makes. There is no difference between the letter and the lies Vaus has been spreading. How does it feel having to defend Vaus? What hypocrites. It's okay to defame Jeff Mangum by spreading the lie that he passed a bond that cost $1 billion, but heaven forbid that Steve Vaus, the man who spread those lies, be anything other than good and righteous. To quote Logan Jenkins recent Union-Tribune column: "Though he comes off as a no-B.S. straight shooter whose only agenda is serving 'The People,' Vaus the politician ain't no Buck Howdy, his kid-friendly stage alter ego. Vaus has a talent for sticking in the knife with a hate-to-do-it attitude of sorrowful duty."
So Vaus supporters. If it is true that Vaus had nothing to do with the letter, how does it feel having him be accused of something he didn't do? Wait — sounds familiar. Isn't that exactly what Vaus has been doing to Mangum?
Mangum is responsible for the 2010 vote that led to the 2011 bond issuance. That is not a lie and that is not a distortion of facts. It is a matter of public record and fact. Get over it.
What's sad is the Chieftain reporting this and not focusing more on the bond issue. The purpose of the mailing seems to be to get people to think about the character of those running and what position Poway is in because of the bond. But instead the Chieftain (and Mangum) try to make this about "poor me." True leaders do not complain when their politics and character are put in question.
We know who is supporting Mangum. Try and keep your heads high and not stoop to his level, None of us is perfect, but telling the truth is easy when you care about people the way Vaus seems to.
Guest, 1. The bond issue has been focused on to death, kept alive by Vaus to deceitfully malign Mangum and defeat him. Guess Vaus couldn't hope to beat Mangum on merit alone. 2. I wish you could have heard the laughter in our house as I read your comment "True leaders do not complain when their politics and character are put in question."
Even without the bond issue Vaus was a strong candidate to beat Mangum. Sorry. Keep throwing that horse dookie. Maybe something will stick but not to Vaus. He's a good guy and will be a solid city councilman.
Then why is he trying so hard to accuse Mangum of something he (Mangum) didn't do? Seems he must have been nervous about his chances.
And really, "keep throwing that horse dookie"? That's the second comment of that type I've seen today, and I'm so unimpressed. Did a cowboy write this?
Monkeys always laugh…
Guest #1: Continuing the Vaus mantra that "It is a matter of of public record and fact" does not make it true, no matter how many times you say it. I have seen and read the public record documents, and I say that you are wrong. It is not a fact. You and Vaus are distorting the facts. Too bad we can't line up the documents and let everyone see for themselves. I am confident that if ALL public documents on the issue were examined, not just a select few used to distort the truth, the jury would decide in Mangum's favor.
Me too. Not only can I read but I have a strong group of legal and financial experts who back that it was bad business from the outset. You can try and say it didn't happen the way it reads, but the fact is the 2010 resolution was attached forwarded to the County, attached to the Validation Action and was virtually identical to what was passed in 2011. You just can dodge the evidence.
How pleased Jim Cunningham must be. He doesn't even have to put up an illegal street sign. He apparently does not have to put up any signs.
Mr. Clean prevails, deservedly so.
I can't quite wrap my mind around the hypocrisy here. For two months I've watched people accuse Mangum of things that are false and say all sorts of awful things about his character and what kind of horrible person he is. I know him well and know that he is a good, honest man of integrity who would hard for the city of Poway. And one anonymous commenter makes a comment about wondering if Vaus had written this letter, and people react as if Vaus has been so horribly wronged. I guess now you know how it feels to be a Mangum supporter, watching the person you know to be a good person be accused of complete lies. Mangum didn't say Vaus wrote the letter. I can't believe that it is ok to make accusations and negative comments about Mangum but not about Vaus. That's complete hypocrisy. It's ok to spread lies (like the one in Vaus' mailer) that Mangum voted for a bond he didn't vote for. Go read the public documents you like to cite so much, rather than continuing to parrot what Vaus tells you. Truth is truth, even if nobody believes it and lies are lies, even if everybody believes it. You guys have been lied to and are continuing to spread those lies.
I love Betty's comment about not "stooping to Mangum supporters' level". Please, this is the "level" you all have been at all along.
And for every positive comment about Vaus that I've just read, I've heard a negative comment from someone who personally knows Vaus. These people are just too polite to say anything.
And I'm done, because you all aren't worth this much of my emotion and energy.
Good, hot air is for ballons
So mature.
Can we stop and focus on the real issues, what is best for Poway for the next four years. Negative ads and letters distract – view Mangum and Vaus on their prior work and proposals and ideas for Poway's future and leave the anonymous letter writer out in the cold.
Interesting to see this article turn into a referendum on Mr. Vaus and not Mr. Mangum. Jeff tauts his experience as President of the board trustees as significant in running for council, so his tenure is fair game. He and the trustees put the '08 bond question on the ballot, a measure that disclosed nothing. We trusted the trustees to fill in the unfilled blanks. But the trustees turned out to be just politicians. They blew the first bond measure, running out of money half-way thru the work. Why not come back with the same type of bond in '08? Would it hurt their image, egos or call into question their competency? It was sneaky to use the CAB, which could be likened to a derivative – would you take out a mortgage, the terms of which would not be disclosed for several years? . A true trustee would’ve told us “there’s no more money and until we can do a bond in a normally accepted, fully disclosed way, there will be none.” Trustee = fiduciary = prudent actions = care/skill/caution. I don’t see any of these elements present. It’s semantics folks – Jeff did not vote for the bond issuance, Jeff did vote for a resolution 6 months earlier containing the same onerous terms (no prepayment and interest rates double that for other bonds at the time). It did not pass, presumably because the terms either weren’t favorable for us or to the investment advisors. All the trustees shirked their duties as fiduciaries and played politicians instead – even their investment advisors didn’t care about the fiduciary aspect, they just wanted their money. How fortunate Jeff was able to leave the board before the vote and how disingenuous for him to claim he had an arms length from the final vote (taken because of a deadline), especially when he was chairman much of the time. It just comes down to do you believe the trustees have learned their lesson and does Jeff deserve to sit on our council at this time?
I suppose Mr. Cunningham could not have wrote that, so it means that Vaus or his supporters did. That seems unconscionable to me. If I were Vaus, I might think of asking publicly that people see the good Mr. Vaus has done in this community not the bad by others. I cant help but think, I didn't see Jeff Mangum out there volunteering in the community while Steven Vaus was working his tail off in "non-elected" public service. Steve, you're the one who deserves and earned my vote for Poway City council.
All you people who supposedly are friends with Vaus, yet you don't sign your real name.
Why's that? I don't know "Why's that." Maybe because no one has been using their names on this.
And who are you?
Wait, am I really the only one who finds Betty's comments unbelievably hypocritical?
Betty says : "We know who is supporting Mangum. [who are you referring to here, Betty?] Try and keep your heads high and not stoop to his level, None of us is perfect, but telling the truth [too bad Vaus isn't telling the truth] is easy when you care about people the way Vaus seems to. "
Then Betty turns around and says:
"Monkeys always laugh… " and "Good, hot air is for ballons"
Uhhh, Betty? How is mocking people not stooping to a low level (not to mention incredibly immature)? I have seen far more negative, rude comments from anti-Mangum people…such hypocrisy.
Why on earth would a church in Cathedral City be involved with something like this?If they actually did this, you'd think it might jeopardize their tax-exempt status.
Enough said, we all know that Steve Vaus is an asset to our community. He has proven it not by what he says, but by what "HE DOES". I'm not wasting my time getting caught up in more political rhetoric. With a whole heart I know he is the best candidate on the ticket for Poway City Council.