By Alyse Ceirante
On Wednesday, July 24, I, along with other members of Open the Great Highway, attended the first of what would be two meetings of the Department of Elections Ballot Simplification Committee. This Committee looks at each and every ballot measure that is submitted to the City and deconstructs it, almost sentence by sentence, discusses it and reconstructs it into language that would be comprehensible to an eighth grader (by their own standards).
That day, the Committee looked at the ballot measure submitted by Supervisor Joel Engardio and four other supervisors concerning the closure of the Upper Great Highway (UGH) to motor vehicles in order to create a “promenade” (the “park” Engardio and other’s keep touting is years, and a budget measure or two, down the figurative road). The Committee allows for public comment, and it is based on these comments that much of the language of the measure is adopted.
We felt that the language in the measure was overly biased in favor of the promenade and was overly dismissive of the fact that the UGH would be closed to motor vehicles, and our comments to the Committee reflected that. The Committee was persuaded by our arguments and adopted many of the changes we suggested. I left there confident that the language of the measure now truly reflected what the end result of the measure would be should it pass: Closing the UGH to motor vehicles in order to create a promenade (such a pretentious word).
The Committee has an appeal process, however, and public comment is taken into consideration there as well. Supervisors Engardio and Myrna Melgar teamed up to challenge every change to the measure that was made in our favor. The Committee is comprised of five members, three of whom are appointed by the Board of Supervisors and two appointed by the mayor, so it’s no wonder that almost all of the changes were overturned. In short, the measure, instead of emphasizing the closure of the Highway to create a promenade, now emphasizes the creation of a promenade that, incidentally, requires the closure of major highway.
One of the changes that was adopted during the first meeting was our suggested substitution of “personal and commercial vehicles” for “private vehicles.” For some reason, this set off a firestorm among the promenade proponents. Engardio, in his objection to this substitution, was less than truthful when he stated in his written request, “Park Code Section 6.05 prohibits commercial vehicles from using most roadways under the jurisdiction of the Recreation and Park Department, including the Upper Great Highway.” What Park Code Section 6.05 actually states is this: “No person shall bring or cause to be brought into any park any vehicle designed, used or maintained primarily for the transportation of goods, wares, merchandise, soil, building material or other article or thing of commerce or trade .…” The key word here is “park.” The UGH is not a park, and even if the measure passes, it will not be a park. A park, at this point, is nothing more than a pipe dream.
Four other letters of the half dozen submitted by promenade proponents made a similar argument. I was a bit perplexed by this, but then it hit me. Who drives commercial vehicles? Working people, specifically those working people who must carry the tools of their trade with them in order to perform their jobs.
While it is true that trucks weighing more than three tons are prohibited on the UGH, trucks and vans used by those in the building trades and other manual service professions generally weigh less than three tons and drive on the UGH regularly. These vehicles almost always have commercial plates, and it was to these vehicles to which we were referring in our suggested language change.
So why the objection by the proponents? Because nothing screams class issue like that which involves working people. And working people, not always but for the most part, work during the day. This begs the question as to who then, exactly, will be using the UGH during the week should it close to motor vehicles?
It is not likely that the vast majority of the people who use the UGH on a daily basis will be using the “Promenade.” It is not likely that the dental technician who lives in Pacifica but works in the Richmond will be using it. Nor is it likely that the medical worker who lives near Lincoln Boulevard and works at Kaiser in South City will use it. A bricklayer who lives in Daly City and is working on a job near the Presidio certainly won’t find the time to use it; nor will the administrative assistant who lives in the Richmond and works in San Bruno.
So, who will be using it? Proponents will argue that enough people work from home now to justify a weekday closure. While it may be true that more people work from home post-pandemic than pre-, most of those working from home are tied to their desk from 8 a.m-5 p.m., much like when they worked in an office. And if you are working 8 a.m.-5 p.m. from home, and live in the Mission, you are not likely to find yourself wandering down to the promenade during your lunch break.
In reality, those who will be using the promenade during the week have something that the vast majority of us do not have – the luxury of time. This is a luxury of a privileged class, that tiny and elite group that has not only time, but for the most part has money and power as well. And that ain’t most of us.
I have a poster with the quote: “Class consciousness is knowing which side of the fence you’re on. Class analysis is knowing who is there with you.” Open the Great Highway knows exactly which side of the fence we are on. The question is, are you there with us?
Alyse Ceirante is the volunteer coordinator for Open the Great Highway.
Categories: Commentary
Richmond Review/Sunset Beacon 
Such notice, converting a highway for recreation. Why not try freeways next? The proponents of this measure probably don’t own cars and, out of some resentment, are proposing this.
Automobiles need access to our city to visit friends and conduct business.
A century ago, most people would consider this proposal of closing the Great Highway preposterous and plain nuts.
In fact, the proposal is a sick joke with awful consequences.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Open the Great Highway. This major roadway is vital to so many hard-working people, and must remain open during the week. Thank you, Alyse Ceirante, for highlighting the inequity of this ballot initiative. It is one of the many reasons it must be defeated. Hopefully, the majority of San Franciscans will all vote against this misguided initiative in November. Open the Great Highway.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Thank you Alyse and well written. It’s nice to see the real truth of the Great Highway and not a bunch of lies spread by Supervisor Joel Engardio and SF Bicycle Coalition. SF Bicycle Coalition is nothing but a lobby company paid for by SFMTA and Jeffrey Tumlin with tax payer money. They claim the city gives SFBC millions of dollars for consulting yet what are their qualifications?? I don’t know of any engineers or road safety experts in their staff?
The residents of District 4 will make sure this will be Joel Engardio’s last political office. Once he’s gone, probably some moron in City Hall will appoint him on some commission again wasting tax payer money.
Read Mission Local’s article about San Francisco’s Vision Zero accomplishing Zero.
https://missionlocal.org/2024/03/sf-vision-zero-lacks/
Again, Zero vision on trying to turn a highway into a park. Where do these morons come from?
LikeLiked by 3 people
Joel Engardio wanted to divide SF and threw his district’s interests to the wind.
He also shamelessly pursues this as if the most important initiative in SF, while Breed’s sweeps of people living in vehicles and myriad other issues loom large.
RECALL ENGARDIO. No more “Grow SF” BS carpetbaggers, ELECT LOCALS.
LikeLiked by 2 people
Very well said, Alyse. And thank you for all of your (and the team) hard work in getting the wording to the point where it is reflective of the actual aim and goal of the ballot measure. And agree – let’s make sure it’s his last political office. However, I wonder exactly what transpired between the first and the second meeting? I’d love to know.
LikeLiked by 3 people
Thank you to Alyse and team for ensuring (or trying to) that the wording is fair and accurate. I do wonder what happened between that first and second meeting?
LikeLiked by 3 people
LikeLiked by 1 person
Thank you Alyse for an excellent analysis of who benefits from a permanent closure. It will not be working people. It will not be low income workers and residents. It will not be disabled people– the Great Highway has been fully or partially closed to cars for 4 years, and park and rec has not seen fit to construct any kind of ADA Compliant access to the walking path and the Great Highway itself for 10 blocks along the lower Great Highway. This is an ableist, selfish, and classist attempt to get voters to vote against their own interests to create a private bike raceway during the week for people whose income level and privileges allow them to use this park Monday to Friday. Joel Enguardio has ignored his own constituents; he blindsided us with this ballot measure for November, and he conveniently withholds certain information or alters information in his written and oral public statements that seek to manipulate the voters so they will vote yes on this ballot measure that will benefit only a very small segment of the population: RICH PEOPLE.
VOTE NO ON THE PERMANENT CLOSURE OF THE GH!
LikeLiked by 1 person