By Letters to the Editor | Santa Cruz Sentinel October 11, 2022 at 5:00 a.m.
In her column Brunner admits her goals are identical to that of her employer.
When Brunner asserts her intention is a downtown that works well for “everyone,” her actual goal is a downtown that works well for economic business interests, not the public, not the environment, not the Santa Cruz community at large. Remember this when reading her critique of Measure O.
— Sara Bassler, Santa Cruz
By Letters to the Editor | Santa Cruz Sentinel October 8, 2022 at 7:00 a.m.
Like the tragic monster, this so-called “library complex” has been cobbled together from assembled body-parts that will never form an organic whole. “Our” City Council is peddling a vast and inhumane, concrete-and-glass library combined with a massive, unneeded and unfunded carpark, with some “affordable” housing tacked on. With the smoke and mirrors gone, we see the real intention – making money for wealthy developers and their council shills.
— Anthony McNaught, Santa Cruz
By Editorial Board | editorial@santacruzsentinel.com | Santa Cruz Sentinel October 5, 2022 at 5:00 a.m.
Measure O – City of Santa Cruz Our Downtown Our Future – General Plan and Downtown Plan Amendment Initiative: Yes. In 2016, when voters approved a tax measure for county libraries, there was nothing said about a parking garage and affordable housing to be combined with a new library. Measure O would stop plans for a library/garage/housing complex on the downtown parking lot currently used by the farmers market, but still allow housing on that lot or other identified city-owned spaces. Backers hope the current Civic Center library will be renovated using the 2016 voter-approved funds.