Lawsuit filed against City of San Francisco to prevent Great Highway from becoming a park
SAN FRANCISCO — In just a few days, the Great Highway on the west side of San Francisco is scheduled to be closed to car traffic. It comes after voters decided to turn the area into a park with Prop K on the November ballot.
Almost 55% of voters in San Francisco agreed the section of highway from Lincoln Way to Sloat Boulevard should be re-purposed into a beachfront park.
Now one group of neighbors filed a lawsuit Tuesday saying Proposition K was not legal and should be reversed.
"I get worried about safety. When the upper highway, Great Highway is closed, traffic flows into the neighborhoods," says Matt Boschetto. His family has lived on the west side for 5 generations, and he is also a small business owner.
That's why he decided to get into the fight over the planned park, literally on the Great Highway.
"San Francisco is the most democratic city in the U.S. It used to be a city about people power. It used to be a city that had very, very inclusive processes, and this is the absolute opposite," Boschetto said.
Matt is helping to lead "Livable SF," the group that held a rally Tuesday to announce a lawsuit suing the city saying passing Prop K was not legal.
The idea to close the Great Highway was met with opposition since the start. Residents in the Sunset neighborhoods said by closing the highway there would be more traffic in the neighborhoods, making the streets less safe for families. They also argued it would be harder for people to get to the commercial corridors, which would then hurt small business.
Those in favor of the park say there are work arounds to those concerns.
"We have extended multiple invites to the leaders of the no on K folks to work together on neighborhood improvements including addressing their concerns on traffic. Their answer is filing lawsuits to try to undo the democratic will of San Franciscan's," says Lucas Lux, president of the Friends of Ocean Beach Park, a group that's supported Prop K.
But as many have pointed out, the people most impacted on the west side of San Francisco voted overwhelmingly against closing the Great Highway - where as the people living on the other side of the city generally voted for it.
"We all live in a city together. We all vote together, and we honor the democratic outcome," says Lux.
Opponents, like Matt, say they fought it before voters approved it and they will continue to fight it now.
"I think there's little we can do to stop the closure at this point, but I do think it is a very strong argument and if we do win in the court of law, the ballot measure will be null and void," says Boschetto.
This has all gotten so contentious, the group against the park has even started a recall effort for the San Francisco supervisor who represents this district, Joel Enguardio.
He released a statement today saying he believes the measure was legal and the lawsuit has no merit.
CBS Bay Area also reached out to the San Francisco Mayor's office and the city attorney's office for comment.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
12-06-2025
- San Francisco Chronicle
Recall of S.F. Supervisor Joel Engardio qualifies for ballot
The recall election against San Francisco Supervisor Joel Engardio has qualified for the ballot, with a special vote set for Sept. 16, the San Francisco Department of Elections said. Election officials said Thursday that the petition, submitted May 22, contains 10,523 valid signatures, above the required threshold of 9,911 signatures, or 20% of registered voters in Engardio's District 4. Only voters registered and residing in District 4 will be eligible to participate in the recall election. Sunset District residents launched the recall over anger that Engardio championed a ballot measure last year to permanently close a 2-mile stretch of the city's westernmost coastal boulevard, the Upper Great Highway, to cars to create a park. During November's election, the measure, called Proposition K, was opposed by a majority of voters in the Sunset and Richmond districts, the neighborhoods closest to the Great Highway, although it passed with more than 54% of the vote citywide. The measure spurred a lawsuit even before the park opened on April 12. 'This verifies that the voters of District 4 want better,' said Jamie Hughes, lead organizer of the recall campaign. 'They want a supervisor who represents them.' Hughes said the campaign is 'confident' Engardio will be recalled in September. Engardio said in a statement in response to the recall election qualifying that he will 'continue to fight for District 4.' 'From day one, I've been District 4's champion in City Hall, working to solve real problems in our neighborhood from increasing public safety and supporting small businesses, to improving traffic flow and filling potholes,' he said. Engardio said he understands the concerns of west side residents about the highway closure and is working with San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency to further improve traffic flow and pedestrian safety. 'Attempting to recall me in response will do nothing to reopen the Great Highway,' he said. Recall proponents have described the effort, which received about $144,000 in donations, as 'grassroots.' The 'Stand With Joel' campaign received more than $407,000 in donations so far, including $125,000 from high-profile donors such as Yelp CEO Jeremy Stoppelman. 'The successful recall petition against Joel Engardio is a clear reflection of the Sunset community's unity, resilience and demand for accountability,' recall organizer and Sunset resident Selena Chu said in a statement. 'Residents from all walks of life came together — gathering signatures, knocking on doors and standing up for our voices — because we refuse to be bypassed or silenced.' The issue highlights the divisive debate over public space in San Francisco, with urbanists such as Engardio arguing for the creation of safer pedestrian routes, more bike paths and less dependence on cars, while opponents to Proposition K said many west side families, especially multigenerational ones, rely on efficient car commutes for getting their kids to school, ferrying elderly parents to appointments and commuting to work. West side residents said the closure has hurt their quality of life, lengthened commute times and increased stress as they navigate congested alternative routes around their neighborhoods. Some of Engardio's constituents were also outraged by what they considered his failure to consult them before putting the issue on the ballot last summer. Five other supervisors and then Mayor London Breed also backed the ballot measure, though current Mayor Daniel Lurie opposed it. Opponents said it was unfair to let the entire city vote on an issue that disproportionately impacted west side residents. 'Some people felt left out of the process that led to putting the park on the ballot,' Engardio said Thursday. 'I'm committed to doing more outreach, having more conversations and making sure everyone's voice is part of the work moving forward.' Engardio has consistently argued that all voters, not just his constituents, deserved to decide how San Francisco's coastline should be used. He also said that if the issue was not put on the ballot, the 11 supervisors would have been forced to decide on the fate of the Great Highway anyway at the end of 2025. That's when a pilot program to close the Upper Great Highway to cars on weekends was slated to end. 'The coast belongs to all San Franciscans,' Engardio told the Chronicle last week. 'The cost to our convenience, does it outweigh the benefits of a park?' Supporters of Engardio said a recall is a waste of taxpayer money, especially given that the supervisor is up for reelection in 2026, that he has done a good job otherwise representing west side interests, and that all San Franciscans have benefited from the Sunset Dunes park. Bill Maher, who served as a San Francisco supervisor in the 1980s and '90s, was at a rally outside City Hall to support Engardio on May 22, when the recall organizers submitted petition signatures. He said he voted against Prop K but still opposed the recall. 'To recall a politician every time they make a bad vote, we'd have monthly recalls,' Maher had said. Lifelong Sunset resident and business owner Lareina Chu previously told the Chronicle that she thought Engardio had done a good job, such as organizing the Sunset Night Market, and that he didn't deserve to be recalled. She added that she had not heard of a viable candidate to replace Engardio. Lurie will get to appoint Engardio's replacement if he is recalled. 'The city's got bigger problems, and if we're focusing tax dollars on recalling Engardio, I think it's a dumb effort,' Lareina Chu said, pointing out that San Francisco is already having an election in November 2026 when voters could make their voices heard and oust Engardio.
San Francisco Chronicle
11-06-2025
- San Francisco Chronicle
Letters: Want to show true patriotism? Challenge Trump's military parade with peaceful protests
On Saturday, while tanks rumble down Pennsylvania Avenue in Washington, D.C., for President Donald Trump's military parade, we must rally against the cruelty and madness of this administration. Perhaps Bruce Springsteen, Neil Young or other great performers can give free concerts, all voices against what is being perpetrated against law-abiding citizens, legal residents and migrants seeking asylum in our country. Come all protesters, music lovers and peaceful people from all backgrounds who are the backbone of this once great country. Let us take back Flag Day from those who have no understanding of what our flag represents and show the world that good, empathetic human beings populate our country. I challenge political leaders and celebrities to organize this quickly around the country to celebrate humanity. There are too many vulnerable people who need to know that we have their backs. Mitchell Goldman, Richmond Kindness amid ugliness Regarding 'How support helped AB Hernandez, trans track and field champ 'with mad attitude,' brave national backlash' (High School, June 9): Thank you for the wonderful story about AB Hernandez; her accomplishments to date, on and off the field, bode well for her aspirations in life. But let's not forget the kindness and affection shown her by her fellow competitors. The decade is only half over, and promises to be eventful, but I already have my photograph of the 2020s — the podium picture of Hernandez and her co-runner-up, arm in arm, glowing in accomplishment and togetherness. In that unforgettable moment, these two young women showed us moral compasses that point true north. Four centuries ago, Shakespeare reminded us that 'when lenity and cruelty play for a kingdom, the gentler gamester is the soonest winner.' Current events are putting that proposition to a stern test, but when I read about the twisted view of humanity at work in Washington and around the nation, I will remember that photo and feel better. Bill Koopman, Palo Alto Lowell High is elitist Regarding 'These graduating Lowell students were called 'lottery kids.' The stigma never went away' (San Francisco, June 6): 'You belong in every room you walk into,' Lowell High Principal Jan Bautista said at the commencement for the school's class admitted through the lottery system. The sad truth is that students like them will no longer 'belong' at the school even though the data shows they were just as able as students accepted through test scores. Yet, the San Francisco school board has no plans to reconsider Lowell's merit-based admissions policy. This is despite data and evidence that show that such admissions and hiring policies are contributors to class and racial inequality. As a San Franciscan committed to fighting the worsening inequality in this city, I'm grateful to the now-ousted school board members for having made lottery admissions at Lowell possible, if only for a couple of years. Given the data from these graduates, as long as Lowell stays elitist in its admissions policy, it will remain not our star in the school system, but our shame. Dave Madden, San Francisco RFK Jr. is bad for health Regarding 'RFK Jr. ousts entire CDC vaccine advisory committee' (Nation & World, June 9): Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. is worse than an anti-vaccine activist or vaccine skeptic. He is a vaccine cynic. He does not understand the scientific method in clinical trials. Real scientists, such as the 17 who were ousted Monday by Kennedy from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, are always skeptics. Seeing is believing for them. They want to see data in appropriate clinical trials before they will accept that a proposed treatment is safe and effective. On the other hand, Kennedy is a cynic. He only sees what he already believes, even when repeatedly confronted with properly conducted research that refutes his beliefs. In his position of authority, this obstinacy is a danger to the health of us all and will lead to a rise in vaccine-preventable diseases. Brian Klein, San Francisco
Yahoo
04-06-2025
- Yahoo
Grand Jury: City Needs to Buck Up Nonprofits and Get Out of Its Own Way to Better Help Vulnerable San Franciscans
2024–2025 San Francisco Civil Grand Jury Report calls out obstacles to effective social services grantmaking. SAN FRANCISCO, June 4, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- San Francisco spends more than a billion dollars per year on grants to social services nonprofits. The provision of critical services with this money, such as housing, mental health treatment, childcare, and senior services, is hamstrung by weak organizational capacity and an overly complex procurement process, the San Francisco Civil Grand Jury reported today. The Jury found that nonprofit grantees often lack the skills to manage city funds effectively and that the city's lengthy, over-complicated and under-resourced procurement process further impedes service provision. Moreover, the city's monitoring programs do not lead to timely correction of mismanagement problems, aggravating inefficiency and undermining public trust. Investigation Committee Chair Nicholas Weininger said, "Social services nonprofits struggle to do their best for vulnerable San Franciscans. The city fails these nonprofits, and their own employees, by entangling them in layers of over-complicated, time-consuming bureaucracy. As a result, city residents are denied timely, effective delivery on specific promises to make the city a better, healthier place. This erodes both quality of life and trust in government." The Jury's report details the management problems commonly experienced by social services nonprofits and the inefficiencies in the city's process for awarding grants to these nonprofits. The report's recommendations include: Starting up a dedicated team to proactively help nonprofits manage themselves better. Simplifying and speeding up the granting process through comprehensive reform that eliminates unnecessary review steps and sets clear deadline goals. Investing in training and tools to help city employees make grants efficiently. Monitoring nonprofits for mismanagement risks and addressing those risks before they turn into expensive problems. Weininger added: "The Jury presents in its report clear analysis of how we got here and prudent, budget-sensitive recommendations for improvement. As it stands, inadequate risk management and byzantine processes are setting money on fire. In a time of budget austerity, the city must step up and reform, for the sake of every taxpayer and every vulnerable San Franciscan." To read the full report, Capacity to Serve–Setting Social Services Nonprofits Up for Success, please visit: About the San Francisco Civil Grand Jury The Superior Court selects 19 San Franciscans to serve year-long terms as Civil Grand Jurors. The Jury has the authority to investigate City and County government by reviewing documents and interviewing public officials and private individuals. At the end of its inquiries, the Jury issues reports of its findings and recommendations. Agencies identified in the report must respond to these findings and recommendations within either 60 or 90 days, and the Board of Supervisors conducts a public hearing on each Civil Grand Jury report after those responses are submitted. For more information, visit the San Francisco Civil Grand Jury website: View original content: SOURCE San Francisco Civil Grand Jury Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
