letter to the editor

Letter to the Editor: On the Sierra Club’s San Francisco Group Endorsements

Dear Editor,

I am not a trekker or hiker or camper. I don’t go into the wild, or go canoeing on lakes or rafting on rivers or mountain climbing. I am, however, a devout believer in the mission of the Sierra Club. For me, that mission is best expressed by the Club’s Conservation and Outdoors Campaign: protect public lands from dangerous oil, gas and mineral drilling; safeguard our last remaining old-growth forests; defend public lands in Alaska; preserve biodiversity – the web of life and fighting off-shore oil development.

If you think these values are worth supporting, then please support the Sierra Club. The Sierra Club does a lot of good work. They will have my life-long gratitude for going to court to try and prevent artificial turf being installed at the Beach Chalet Soccer Fields.

The Sierra Club’s San Francisco Group lists its “conservation priorities” on the Sierra Club’s website. Some of them, like “reduction and clean up of toxics,” and “wetlands restoration and protection,” are straightforwardly Sierra Club values. Other “conservation priorities” are: preservation of City parkland; preservation and construction of affordable housing; maintaining and improving mass transit; acquisition and protection of open space and sustainable job development.

Affordable housing? Job development? Acquisition and protection of public space? It seems we are now at “moderate” Democrats HQ or an Abundant SF meeting and no longer at the Sierra Club.

I did not agree with the Sierra Club supporting full-time closure of John F. Kennedy Drive to cars. That did not serve the interests of the broader community. People with disabilities and those who are distant from the park, or can’t easily use public transit, have their access to Golden Gate Park diminished.

The San Francisco Sierra Club supported Prop. K in 2024. I did not agree then with closing the Upper Great Highway to cars between Lincoln Way and Sloat Boulevard, and I do not agree with the the club’s opposition to Prop. G. I find that there is nothing “green” about closing the Upper Great Highway (UGH) to cars on weekdays. Not a single car will be taken off the road because UGH is closed. Pushing stop-and-go traffic onto nearby neighborhood streets will increase air pollution from exhaust fumes. Before you can get to Sunset, you now have to go up Fulton Street for 15 blocks, stop and go. What is green about that?

We don’t need Cabrillo Street to be a Slow Street anymore. I walk on Cabrillo Street in the Outer Richmond several times a week and, even on weekends, there seems to be rarely anyone on the street and cars are just ignoring the signs and barriers. The Bicycle Coalition is funded by SFMTA, and, with the SF Sierra Club, are on a crusade to get everyone out of their cars. Laudable, but unless public transportation in the Bay Area improves significantly, people will continue to need their cars.

I may not agree with all the policies of the San Francisco Group, but I have to look at the big picture.  The Sierra Club does important and valuable work.

From,

David Romano

San Francisco CA 94121

Leave a Reply