LTE misled on Martinez’s financial leadership

A letter in Sunday’s Opinion section repeated the same uninformed, misleading story about Monica Martinez’s financial leadership at Encompass that has been circulating on social media for weeks. Under Martinez’s leadership, Encompass’s budget has grown from $24 million to over $30 million, enabling the non-profit to serve hundreds more people. Every financial audit has been clean, and its funders have never stopped funding, definitively showing that the people who actually know about the finances and have the largest stake in its financial health have full confidence in Martinez’s management.

The letter writer cited one of 12 categories evaluated by Charity Navigator — it scored 100% on 10 of the 12 categories, and concluded “you can give with confidence.”

Martinez has been a star, and is easily the best choice for 5th District Supervisor.

— Peter Gelblum, Boulder Creek

Bradford’s spouse comes forward for husband in 5th

The 5th district stands at a crossroads, and Christopher Bradford offers the new direction we desperately need.

While managing his campaign, I’ve watched him connect with voters while our family navigated life in yurts after the CZU Fire, fought to rebuild while working and raising our five children.

Despite being dramatically outspent, our campaign forced a runoff because voters recognize something genuine: a candidate who truly understands their struggles. At every forum and meet-and-greet, Christopher demonstrates deep knowledge of our district’s challenges, from insurance issues to disaster preparedness, offering innovative solutions that resonate with residents.

Skeptics become ardent supporters after hearing him speak because Christopher combines technical expertise with practical experience, offering fresh approaches to long-standing problems. His ability to unite diverse groups makes him ideally suited to represent our varied district while working effectively with other supervisors.

— Antoñia Bradford, Boulder Creek

No on Measure Z: Won’t benefit public health

A 2023 UC Davis study, “How Well Are California’s Sugar-Sweetened Beverage Taxes Working” highlights the taxes’ limitations in achieving public health goals. A new UC Berkeley study observes significant declines in sweet beverage purchases after similar taxes. Either way, the problem with Measure Z is that it is not accountable to the health purposes it claims or to the people it would unfairly target.

As the UC Davis study points out, these taxes are regressive. Soda taxes in California cities may have reduced the number of sweet drinks purchased, but they have disproportionately impacted lower-income households without any study verifying health benefits.

Worse yet, Measure Z revenue would go into Santa Cruz’s general fund without a penny dedicated to funding public health education programs, unlike more forward-thinking jurisdictions.

Instead of a regressive soda tax, Santa Cruz should consider more progressive solutions, like real estate transfer taxes, that do not disproportionately burden working families. We need a fairer, broader, more effective approach to public health.

— Lynda Marin, Santa Cruz

Yes on Z: Soda tax will reduce medical costs

Measure Z is our chance to improve public health. This Sugar Sweetened Beverage Tax ensures sugary drinks reflect their real cost to society. Sugary beverages are major contributors to diabetes and cardiovascular disease, which have a high cost to individuals and our already strained and poorly managed healthcare system.

PepsiCo and Coca-Cola are the main funders of the “No on Z” campaign, claiming it unfairly targets low-income communities. However, sugary drinks are not essential, nor are they the cheapest source of calories. These beverages are a luxury item. If any members of our community consume fewer sugary drinks, the reduction in medical costs over their lifetimes will likely outweigh the increased cost of the beverages.

Support Measure Z for a healthier, fairer future.

— Seth Dow, Santa Cruz

Sentinel shows bias in coverage, cartoons

After picking up my Sunday paper out of my driveway, yes some still do, and opening up to the front cover headline “Harris Slams GOP” and then the cartoonist’s take on Trump and Harris, guess we all know where you stand.

Why don’t you just go back to the old days of the “Sentinel recommendations” on the inside page as well.

— Ed daRoza, Capitola