letter to the editor

Letter to the Editor: Tired of Being Lied To

By on • ( 22 Comments )

Editor:

Prop K’s Problem? Voters Don’t Take Kindly to Being Misled

While losing our common sense in San Francisco is not a new phenomenon, it’s definitely at a fever pitch over Prop. K, closing the Upper Great Highway (UGH) to cars. I refuse to call it a park because that’s a lie; it’s not going to be a park at all, it’s just closing the road to vehicles. By the way, not all vehicles, since a road is still legally required for emergency vehicles. 

Prop. K supporters would have you believe that the UGH is already closed so often we might as well call it “The Great Ghostway.” They claim it’s closed 65 days a year for sand removal, so why not just throw in the towel? Well, funny thing about that – it’s simply not true. UGH is almost never closed entirely, and it’s nowhere near 65 days. DPW reports that this year it’s only been partially closed for 14 days. That’s a whopping 80% less than the Prop. K folks claim. Plus, when those closures do happen, DPW doesn’t just shut it all down; they keep at least one lane open and plan around rush hours to avoid that UGH-ly traffic nightmare.

Oh, and that $1.6 million they say it costs annually for sand removal? A bit of sandstorming there, too. DPW says it actually costs about $300,000 on average each year – again, 80% less than what Prop. K is trying to sell you. Yes, the cost went up in 2023, but why? All the pedestrians and party-goers having their sand-splattered shindigs on UGH.

Because the traffic on Sunset and 19th Avenue is already atrocious, even with the UGH open, a couple of residents (not most) with fantastic views and a bit too much time on their hands thought to themselves, “Hey! You know what would be even better when I’m sipping my Pinot on my deck? Getting rid of these pesky cars interrupting my view of the vast and glorious ocean!” And just like that, everyone else has to suffer because a handful of people got the bike coalition (many of whom drive to the UGH to bike) and anti-car fanatics on board with closing down a road. A vital road that tens of thousands of people use a week to get to where they need to go. To get to jobs and schools and doctors’ appointments. You know, the things that keep a city functioning and vital.

Screw the elderly that need cars to get places, and kids who have to get from school to an activity nowhere near a bus route. That construction worker can carry his air compressor on the bus, if he really wanted to make a difference in the environment! Let them eat cake! I need MORE than the already existing 15-foot path spanning the entire Great Highway. I need more than the miles of beach I can readily walk on! I need more open green space than the enormity of Golden Gate Park five minutes to my right, I want it all and damnit, I absolutely deserve it. 

Let’s be clever and package it as a park even though there is zero plan for one, and zero budget for one, and oh yeah, legally the road has to stay open for emergency vehicles so we couldn’t recreate Playland at the Beach even if we wanted to. Ooh it costs money to move the sand every month off the road? It still will.  And it will be even more expensive according to SFCTA, you know, with benches and flower beds to work around.

There is a reddit where a sweet soul asks why folks are against the closure, because to them, living on the east side of the City, it sounds like a nice plan. And that’s exactly the plan, make everyone think this is some noble closure for the betterment of society.  Down with cars but let’s do NOTHING to make public transportation better. Closing UGH doesn’t add a mere five minutes to people’s commutes – it will add 1,333,333 hours of additional commute time annually for the 20K people per week who currently use UGH. That’s a lot of time wasted. (And before we hear about only 14K cars on UGH now:  1) use numbers are going up monthly due to more and more people going back to work, and 2) there are more than 1 person per car). 

By the way, have you been on 19th Avenue or Sunset Boulevard lately anywhere near rush hour? It’s a parking lot. This is another land grab for a carriage road for elites. I really feel insane saying this part out loud, but roads are an integral part of city development in order for people to get to and from places. The cost of living is so atrocious already here and now we aren’t allowing people who live in or outside of the City and need to commute a road to do that on? 

To recap: There is an existing path for walking and biking, there are more than 3.5 miles and 80,000 acres of free space AT THE BEACH to walk on, there are over 1,000 acres of open space at Golden Gate Park, and head a bit more south and hit the 33 acres of nature at Stern Grove. Still not enough? We hear you, you can also get your butt over to one of the other eight playgrounds and parks in the neighborhood.

This isn’t Times Square in New York, we aren’t gasping for air on the west side. In fact, we are abundant in our fresh ocean air and nature, if you could be bothered to walk across the road to get to it. 

San Franciscans, please see this for the massive hoodwink that it is; a very few, very entitled people wanting a main thoroughfare closed for their own enjoyment with complete disregard to those who suffer in the wake of it. There is no plan for a park, no money for one either, and they are just messing with us at this point.

Real San Franciscans know when the wool is being pulled over their eyes in the name of “open spaces and progress.” Don’t trust the catchy marketing and b.s. Vote no on K and keep the damn road open to real working people who need it to get around.

– Marie Hurabiell, executive director, ConnectedSF, concerned citizen who’s tired of being lied to.

Categories: letter to the editor

Tagged as: , , , , , ,

22 replies »

    • How is the author’s party affiliation relevant to the false statements being blasted by the proponents of this awful proposition that shouldn’t even be on the ballot? Everything written is true. Vote No on Prop K.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

    • alexisc: I am a strong democrat and I am a HARD NO ON PROP K. Nothing in your comments to discredit the author has anything to do with Prop K. Your intention is sus just like Prop K: Lied about climate impact, lied about volume of use, lied about a park with $0, 0 budget, lied about traffics/pollutions, even exploited the plover birds to gain votes. Disgusting gentrification/land grab tactics! Vote No on K!

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  7. The No on K crowd is the one crying of lies and is the one lying.

    A few of the lies and baseless claims from No on K:
    -Roads are good for nature
    -“Everyone” can use UGH
    -GHE is not closing
    -UGH doesn’t bypass Sunset
    -Sunset Blvd has no capacity-
    -Massive land grab for hotels on the beach
    -UGH takes no money to maintain
    -Parks can’t use private funding
    -Ocean Beach Park isn’t a park already on the weekends
    -Joel Engardio lied and didn’t let anyone know a ballot was going to be created.

    Like

    Reply

    • -UGH has *two* pedestrian lanes on either side of it, which are open 24/7, including a beach promenade you can walk five aside along. Those paths are very underutilized during the week.

      -A Lincoln –> Sunset diversion involves a *one* lane bottleneck turn either direction. Sunset has 17 stoplights along its length and empties onto Lake Merced Blvd, meaning another one-lane turn followed by yet another one-lane turn onto Skyline.
      And if you skip that and decide to to take Lake Merced Blvd to John Daly, you have to deal with Lakeshore Elementary, Lowell High and (drum roll..) SF State. Been on that road when SFSU is in session? Lotsa traffic.

      -A park would cost $200 million (see India Basin), the city has no money earmarked for it and it is ludicrous to think private funding would yield even a fraction of the cost.
      Oh, and forget any big beautification work, GH must maintain access for emergency and govt vehicles. So it basically remains a road.

      -Because it must maintain a road, the cost of maintaining UGH remains the same. Maybe more, if park benches are put in, which makes plowing more difficult.

      -19th avenue multi-year repaving starts soon, which means more folks will take Sunset already, and adding 20k cars per day to that will stretch things horribly.

      -The billionaires who fund Yes on K aren’t known for being overly altruistic and not to types to give something for nothing. So yes, a land play is involved, otherwise why would the YIMBYs’ best friend, Scott Wiener, have SB 951, which removes coastal commission authority from UGH?
      Wonder why he would do that?

      -The snowy plover won’t exactly thrive if Yes’ fever dream comes true and hundreds of thousands use UGH during the week and stomp over its mating grounds. (Which won’t happen– see my first point above re: weekday use)

      -Indeed, UGH *is* a park on weekends. Residents swallowed hard for that compromise and many of them regret it, owing to the 8k cars per weekend day that now occupy their streets. Weekday closure nearly triples that number, and will be especially bad during commute hours.
      Why is Yes trying to overturn that and grab the whole pie?

      -The southern spur closing can *easily* be dealt with via a Sloat diversion rather than Lincoln.
      Oh, and SFPUC has plans to build a service *ROAD* where the spur now exists, so claims that erosion is making things impossible to drive there ring very hollow indeed.

      Otherwise, you’re dead on.

      Like

      Reply

    • “-Roads are good for nature” – Nobody said that, don’t lie.

      “Everyone” can use UGH – Is a fact.

      -GHE is not closing – Is a fact, it hasn’t yet and there is no plan for the area.

      -UGH doesn’t bypass Sunset – Yeah, it does, nobody is claiming that.

      -Sunset Blvd has no capacity- You made that up. 19th has no capacity.

      -Massive land grab for hotels on the beach – And anything else.

      UGH takes no money to maintain – Nobody claims that, don’t lie.

      -Parks can’t use private funding – No SF parks are 100% privately run, don’t lie

      -Ocean Beach Park isn’t a park already? Ocean Beach is a Beach, Einstein.

      Joel Engardio lied – REPEATEDLY, and springing the Billionaire-backed proposition at the last minute for a citywide vote is nuts. It’s a PR stunt for his corrupt legacy.

      A bicycle zealot is not someone interested in actual veracity.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  8. NEXT- Let’s close San Jose Avenue in the Mission. Who uses that, anyways! People can just go to Cesar Chavez and get on the 101, it’ll only take 3 minutes more! … Dolores Street is a big waste of space, let’s close it and make Dolores Park MUCH BIGGER! Who doesn’t want a Free Bigger Park! … Highway 80 has such wonderful Views of Downtown! Let’s shut it down, and have benches, tables, music, dancing- It would be such a lovely Promenade!

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  9. Enough of this nonsense already. I’ve live in SF for 57 years and have seen a lot of crazy, stupid things on ballots, but this one is the worst! Open the Great Highway. Vote NO on K.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  10. This article is a mess. Grammatical errors, factual errors, faux-populism, and just a total lack of coherent structure. Stream of consciousness ranting and weaving. The author has certainly demonstrated a lack of respect for San Francisco voters in the past, and this piece is sadly no different. The measure will pass, wealthy San Franciscans will line up to donate to fund a new marquee park, Chain of Lakes will get a signal, and life will go on for all San Franciscans – not just the “real” ones that Marie choses to divisively elevate.

    Like

    Reply

  11. Thanks Marie for the great article and the truth of the matter! The next step is to get rid of Joel Engardio at the next election! Should K pass it will be a nightmare of traffic. There will be no park, just a mass of sand covering a roadway. These people are already afraid of going to the beach where there is no asphalt. You can’t ride a bike or push a stroller through sand. All the negative comments about your article are from people still wet behind the ears. They don’t know San Francisco and never will. Some of the comments against your article are pure ignorance. I have pity on them.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a reply to andrew harding Cancel reply