Medina should have notified about recording
Several months ago PVUSD trustee Gabriel Medina wrote on his social media page that he had recorded a telephone conversation with school superintendent Heather Contreras and that she rudely hung up on him. She denied doing so, and I challenged Medina at a school board meeting to provide the public a copy of that conversation so we could hear who was telling the truth. To this day, he has not done so which can bring us to one of two conclusions: either he did not actually record the conversation as he posted, or that the conversation shows that he is lying.
Recently it has come to light that he posted a conversation with school board president Turley. From what I heard in the recording he posted, it does not appear that he notified her that the telephone call was being recorded as is required by California law.
At the least, this is a breach of trust to release such a recording on one’s social media account. It appears to me with the information currently available that Mr. Medina has violated state law. The essence of the phone call between Medina and Turley was a letter from Dr. Contreras to two district administrators with a copy to legal counsel who then forwarded it to Turley. The content of that letter involved the potential liability of the board of trustees and the district for failure to stop harassment of an employee and the existence of a hostile work environment. It was clear from that letter that Dr. Contreras was referring to the words and actions of Medina. Instead of understanding the gravity of the accusations and the potential liability of the district caused by his conduct, he lashed out at Turley and Contreras accusing them of racism and bias while refusing to accept any responsibility for his actions.
If that recording posted by Mr. Medina does not state that the call is being recorded, I urge Ms. Turley to press charges against her fellow board member. Penal Code 632 prohibits recording telephone conversations without the consent of all parties to the call. If she does not, then I call upon local law enforcement to do their job and arrest him. In addition to fines and potential civil suits, such conduct can be punishable by imprisonment of up to one year, If I am mistaken and Turley was advised that the conversation was being recorded, the issue remains as to the appropriateness of posting on social media information regarding sensitive personnel issues., From what I heard on that recording, there is indeed a hostile work environment caused by Mr. Medina and it is putting the board and the district in legal jeopardy.
President Turley has the ability to be a leader and to take real action. She voted against censuring Medina last year. Maybe she can make up for that mistake now. The district has been advised that it is facing more potential lawsuits and they need to take action before it is too late.
Gil Stein
Aptos
•••
Closing schools not the answer
I strongly disagree with the option of closing “some underutilized schools” unless there is simply no attendance to justify the school remaining open. It is clear that small class sizes are always beneficial to the students, and closing schools would make class sizes of the remaining schools larger. It would also make it necessary for the students to travel farther to attend school. With our current gas prices, that would put an unnecessary burden on families.
I would suggest a better idea would be to give these schools more funding and pay the teachers livable salaries. If campuses are in fact “half-empty,” then those schools should be able to reduce the number of teachers and staff accordingly.
This administration is trying its best to gut the Department of Education after heading it with a dimwit from the fake wrestling world who doesn’t know the difference between AI and A1 steak sauce. It’s understood that the goal of Project 2025 is to make every department of the government fail so it can be privatized and doled out to the people at the top.
It would be interesting to have an honest discussion about the actual reduced attendance in these schools, but as far as budget cuts, I believe there should be more federal and state funding available to bring our schools up to the level of education that is expected from our great state of California. Perhaps taxing the billionaires/companies at the top (of which we have many in California) would be the answer to this budget crisis. California continues to be the largest “donor state.” We might consider reducing that status in order to improve our own state.
There are many other options besides closing schools, in my opinion.
Melody Grandell
Watsonville
•••
Vote NO on the METRO half-cent sales tax
Santa Cruz County residents are already struggling with some of the highest costs of living in the nation, such as sky-high housing, groceries, gas, and existing taxes. This proposed 0.5% sales tax increase would push our local sales tax rate as high as 10.25% in Santa Cruz, Scotts Valley, and Watsonville. That’s a massive burden on working families, seniors on fixed incomes, and small businesses trying to survive. Supporters claim this tax is necessary to “prevent service cuts” and maintain expanded bus service. However, let’s be clear, the recent service expansions under “Reimagine Metro” were funded by a one-time $28.4 million state grant that is now expiring. This isn’t a sustainable plan; it’s a temporary spending spree that Metro now wants taxpayers to lock in permanently.
We can’t afford another tax hike. The county is already facing a $23 million+ budget deficit for 2026-27, with long-term structural shortfalls projected to hit $67 million. Instead of asking voters for more money, Metro and county leaders should focus on cutting waste, improving efficiency, and living within their means, just like families and businesses do.
Sales taxes are regressive. This tax hits low- and middle-income residents hardest. Every grocery run, gas fill-up, clothing purchase, and household item will cost more. Tourists will pay some of it, but most of the burden falls on locals.
No accountability or reforms required. The measure doesn’t mandate cost controls, competitive contracting, route optimization, or performance audits. Past local transportation taxes (like Measure D) already direct significant funding to Metro. Why should we keep layering on new taxes without fixing underlying inefficiencies?
We support good public transit, but not at any cost, and not without fiscal responsibility. Santa Cruz Metro needs to trim its budget, eliminate redundancies, and prove it can manage taxpayer dollars effectively before coming back to voters with another tax.
Vote NO on this half-cent sales tax. Tell Metro and the Board of Supervisors: Fix your finances first — don’t just raise taxes.
Mike Lelieur
Santa Cruz
