Editor:
District 4 Supervisor Alan Wong recently wrote in the February 2026 issue of the Sunset Beacon about the Upper Great Highway and his efforts to reopen it to weekday car traffic. He presents himself as someone searching for a middle ground. But the most important truth is simple: San Franciscans already decided the future of the Upper Great Highway at the ballot box.
Proposition K permanently closed the Upper Great Highway to cars and converted it into public space. It passed citywide.
It is also true that District 4 voters opposed Proposition K. That reality deserves to be acknowledged and respected. But in a citywide democracy, we do not undo outcomes because one district disagrees. The responsible response is not to search for procedural ways around the result – it is to come together as a community and build the next chapter of this park together.
I’ll be honest: I was once an opponent of Sunset Dunes.
When I first heard about closing the Upper Great Highway, I thought it was a terrible idea. I worried about traffic. I worried about seniors. I worried about how it might affect our neighborhood.
But over time, I’ve seen what this space has become, and it has changed my mind. Every day, people are out there walking, biking, gathering and connecting.
Shortly after my mother-in-law passed away, my family and I attended an Ocean Calling event at Sunset Dunes. At sunset, musicians played while community members stepped forward to speak the names of loved ones they had lost, offering them to the ocean one by one. Strangers stood side-by-side in quiet reflection. It was a collective act of remembrance, grief and love.
It was one of the most beautiful, healing and community-centered experiences I’ve ever witnessed.
Beyond the ballot box, legal challenges seeking to block or overturn the closure have failed. Courts have allowed the voter-approved measure to stand. The closure is lawful, valid and settled.
Supervisor Wong labeling the failure to place a reversal measure on the ballot as “sabotage” mischaracterizes what occurred. The proposal failed because there was not sufficient support to even put it on the ballot. That is not sabotage. That is not securing the votes of the other supervisors. That is not leadership.
Meanwhile, District 4 faces urgent challenges that deserve our full attention: safer streets, reliable transit, small business support, affordable housing, clean public spaces, and meaningful investments for seniors and families.
Endlessly reopening the Upper Great Highway debate drains time, energy and trust.
Let’s build on what’s working. Let’s make Sunset Dunes a true urban and natural park for Sunset residents, for all San Franciscans and for everyone who wants to experience the best of our City.
It’s time to stop refighting yesterday’s battles and start building a better Sunset together.
Jeremy Greco, candidate for District 4 supervisor
Categories: letter to the editor
Richmond Review/Sunset Beacon 
Thanks for letting me know who I won’t be voting for.
LikeLike
Wow, completely wrong about Supervisor Wong’s efforts, and wrong about Sunset Dunes. But it has eliminated at least one candidate for D4 Supervisor from any serious consideration!
LikeLike
Voters in D4: “We didn’t want this.”
Candidate: “Have you tried not having that opinion?”
LikeLike
Completely reasonable takes aren’t allowed here unfortunately. Good luck to your campaign!
LikeLike
If ‘reasonable’ means ignoring that D4 voted against Prop K and then recalled the supervisor aligned with it, that’s a pretty selective definition of reasonable.
LikeLike
It takes courage to publicly change your mind, and your journey from skeptic to supporter shows real openness to how our community continues to evolve and grow through Sunset Dunes.
I understand District 4 residents who opposed Prop K feel disappointed, but the ballot box spoke. Moving forward together—rather than endlessly relitigating—is the right path.
We need leaders who can see value of community.
District 4 has real challenges that need attention. I appreciate your focus on what actually matters to our daily lives: safety, transit, housing, and supporting our seniors and small businesses.
LikeLike
The ballot box did speak… citywide. BUT District 4 voters opposed Prop K, and then they recalled the supervisor most closely aligned with it. Jeremy clearly doesn’t want to listen and hasn’t learned anything from the Engardio recall. Pretending that didn’t happen, or calling continued debate “relitigating,” ignores the very real voices of the residents most affected. The fight is not over. His framing suggests he wants to silence a huge part of D4, and we don’t appreciate that. This isn’t obstruction OK? It’s civic engagement and representation. If we’re going to invoke democracy, we need to acknowledge all of it, not just the parts convenient to the narrative of “moving forward together.”
LikeLike
I read this twice and still don’t know what Jeremy’s qualifications, experience, or record of serving this community actually are.
The only clear message is that residents who are still unhappy about the Upper Great Highway closure should get over it.
That may be his position, but it’s not a reason to vote for someone.
LikeLike