letter to the editor

Letter to the Editor: Letter Short on Facts

By on • ( 10 Comments )

Editor:

We are shocked that you agreed to publish this letter (“Engardio Dismissive of Community Engagement,” by Wendy Liu, on February 21, 2025), which is full of accusations but short on facts.

In its original form, this letter opened with strident outrage about a social media post that Supervisor Joel Engardio made expressing joy for a week of celebrations: the Lunar New Year parade, Valentine’s Day, and his wedding anniversary. Joel has posted multiple times to support Lunar New Year and the many celebrations in the Sunset. We find the author’s outrage puzzling. Is Supervisor Engardio not allowed to acknowledge both Chinese New Year and Valentine’s Day in the same post? As community members who identify as both LGBTQ and Chinese, we’re proud to have a supervisor who is celebrating a joyous holiday with the Sunset community with his husband. Calling Supervisor Engardio’s post a “hijacking” is dishonest at best and homophobic at worst. 

The claims in the letter are a hodgepodge of conclusions without a shred of evidence. Independent journalists from the SF Standard decided the interview questions, not Supervisor Engardio. If the author has a problem with the interview, she should take it up with them.

Similarly, the accusations on Nextdoor come without proof and have more likely explanations. There are many Sunset neighbors who support Joel or oppose the recall. Nextdoor has content policies to encourage civil, high-quality conversations and prevent spamming. If the author has problems with Nextdoor’s moderation, she should bring the issue up with Nextdoor.

Bold claims of “censorship” and “gaslighting” require clear evidence, which this letter utterly lacks. Rather than engaging in constructive discourse, the author conjures up shadowy conspiracies about “control over newspapers and social media.” Sunset voters deserve better.

By contrast, Supervisor Engardio is demonstrably building a brighter future for the Sunset. Supervisor Engardio champions the Sunset every day at City Hall, fighting for public schools, small businesses, and safe and clean streets. He has led on creating our popular Night Markets, bringing algebra back to middle schools, delivering relief funds to Taraval merchants, and bringing more police to the Sunset, among many other notable achievements. These are the policies and representation that Sunset residents want, and that’s why we stand with Supervisor Joel Engardio.

Cyn Wang, VP, Entertainment Commission (for identification purposes only), small business owner, Sunset resident

Janice Li, BART Board Director (for identification purposes only), 10-year westside resident

Mike Chen, San Francisco Democratic Party Central Committee (for identification purposes only)

Categories: letter to the editor

Tagged as: , , ,

10 replies »

  1. I see no reason to be upset with a paper that prints all sides of an issue. There is no discrimination here. Anyone may say anything. As we see, I am taking no side other than to uphold the good reputation of a fine publisher.

    Like

    Reply

  4. Ok now that you feigned clutching your pearls in shock…we are shocked that Engardio that he didn’t listen to his voters. A park is a desire, a road that was a necessity to peoples day-to-day…recall Engardio

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  5. Engardio is a corporate conservative and ardent YIMBY. It is shocking to see (evidently fake) liberals like Janice Li supporting him.

    His goal is to further gentrify San Francisco, while somehow benefiting from that transformation. He wants to see high rises all through SF.

    He filed to put the initiative on the ballot on a Friday afternoon with no neighborhood feedback first.

    Thus, the blowback.

    Deserved!

    Melgar and Preston were, sadly, complicit.

    The question is: Will someone worse replace him?

    NextDoor’s moderators are totally dishonest. The platform shuts down dissenting voices. Of all the “social media” sites, this is the absolute worst. Founded by far-right Israelis, it is designed as an engine to drive positive consensus about further gentrification.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  6. The people in District 4 do know the facts because they are most affected by them and will be living with them ongoing more than anyone else in town. Reciting a well worn and very tired litany of what the Supervisor is doing every day – which we hope he is doing those things, as they are his job description!! and that’s what he gets paid for- hardly compensates for the dishonest way he he hijacked the Great Highway issue in the service of outside interests whose support he seems to be cultivating for future higher office.

    In fact, two of the letter writers do not live in District 4, and represent some of those very same outside interests. Hardly the type of supporters whose views have much credibility relevant to the principal issue of the recall. People out here need someone who puts us and our interests first. Someone who the people in District 4 can trust to understand, support and lobby for those interests. The supervisor is not that person.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  7. The accusation of homophobia is baffling, as nowhere in my piece did I mention Supervisor Engardio’s sexual orientation. Resorting to such false claims only serves to distract from the real issues at hand.To clarify, my concern about ‘hijacking’ Lunar New Year stems from the fact that Supervisor Engardio used a cherished cultural celebration to promote his personal agenda, which came off as dismissive and self-serving. While others may not share this perspective, it’s important to acknowledge the valid concerns of those who felt their cultural event was overshadowed.

    Regarding the SF Standard interview, it was the content of Engardio’s responses that raised concerns, not the questions themselves. Attempts to warn the publication about the need for an open and fair Q&A went unheeded. Similarly, the issues with Nextdoor are part of a larger pattern of silencing dissent and stifling productive discourse. Numerous individuals, including myself, have experienced censorship on the platform, and our pleas for transparency and fairness have been ignored. Instead of dismissing these concerns as baseless accusations or attacking my character, let’s focus on the importance of accountability and open dialogue between elected officials and their constituents. Rather than supporting those who engage in divisive tactics and censorship, we should strive to foster a community where all voices are heard and valued.

    Furthermore, the dismissive tone of the response reflects the very gaslighting tactics employed by Joel Engardio, which have been a source of frustration for many constituents. Dismissing valid concerns and painting critics as irrational or misinformed only serves to further alienate those who feel their voices are not being heard.

    The community deserves better than this. We deserve representatives who are willing to engage in productive dialogue, address concerns with empathy and transparency, and work towards solutions that benefit all members of the community. Unfortunately, the response provided by these Engardio supporters falls short of those expectations and only reinforces the need for a change in leadership.

    The title of the response, accusing me of being ‘short on facts,’ is itself a testament to the disrespect and lack of empathy demonstrated by these writers. The truth is, I have firsthand knowledge of the issues at play and the experiences that many community members share.

    Contrary to the writers’ dismissive claims, the reality is that I and others have been consistently ignored, silenced, and disrespected on platforms like Nextdoor. The fact that these writers are unaware of or choose to ignore these experiences speaks to their own privileged bubble and disconnect from the community they claim to represent.

    True leadership requires empathy, understanding, and a willingness to engage with diverse perspectives. Sadly, the writers’ response falls short of these qualities and serves only to further marginalize those who have been silenced and dismissed.

    Like

    Reply

  9. I highly doubt these three who signed this letter actually wrote it. It sounds like coordinated PR backtalk with as little substance as they purport the original letter to contain. And I highly doubt they are natives of San Francisco. Not that transplants are unable to contribute to a better SF, but it sure seems that the worst ideas come from those who are not one of us.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

Leave a reply to Harry Cancel reply