logo
People love the new Great Highway park. Do they love it enough to spare Supervisor Joel Engardio?

People love the new Great Highway park. Do they love it enough to spare Supervisor Joel Engardio?

What controversy?
Being able to take a snooze in a beachfront hammock on a sunny afternoon has made all the turmoil over closing the Upper Great Highway to create Sunset Dunes, San Francisco's newest park, worth it.
At least it did for Fred Reynolds, who lives nearby, when I spoke to him on a recent Saturday.
'I thought it worked very well during COVID,' Reynolds said of the pandemic closure of the roadway. 'So, it seems like a natural progression. I think it's turning out to be a great asset for the city.'
Now the question is if Reynolds' neighbors feel similarly enough about the park and its new amenities to extinguish their political furor.
While San Francisco voted to pass Prop K in November, closing the Great Highway to cars, Sunset residents overwhelmingly opposed the measure — and responded to its passage by revolting against their supervisor, Joel Engardio, who championed the roadway's closure.
The campaign to recall Engardio said it had enough petition signatures from District 4 residents by Thursday's deadline to submit to the San Francisco Elections Department for a ballot measure. If the signatures are certified, the department must hold a recall election 105 to 120 days afterward.
There's also a lawsuit seeking to reopen the Great Highway and the possibility of a ballot measure to reverse Prop K. The recall campaign also opened another front in the city's moderate-progressive political war.
Meanwhile, Sunset Dunes park, the source of all this acrimony, opened officially to great fanfare on April 12.
Politics aside, it's still doing well.
Sunset Dunes is still largely a four-lane road. There's new murals, paintings on the asphalt, sculptures and some added amenities, such as hammocks and tree trunks repurposed into seating.
That's enough for Sunset Dunes to become the third most-visited park in the city during the week, averaging 3,400 visitors a day, and fourth overall on weekends, averaging 7,800 visitors a day, according to the Recreation and Park Department.
'I've been coming out on the weekends pretty much, but I want to start coming out at night every day just for exercise, too,' Sunset resident Osmond Li said after trying out a piano set up for visitors.
So far, 62% of the visitors to Sunset Dunes are from San Francisco, and 35% of them are from the adjacent Sunset, Parkside and West Portal neighborhoods, according to the Recreation and Park Department's sensors that can track cell phone registrations.
A 'honeymoon' surge to a new park is normal, but 'weekday consistency suggests lasting success. Our numbers there have been higher than expected,' said Tamara Barak Aparton, a spokesperson for the Recreation and Park Department.
Is all that foot traffic translating into more sales for area businesses? It's probably too early for anything conclusive, but I checked with a couple of businesses I talked to just after the November election.
Andytown Coffee Roasters co-owner Lauren Crabbe said her count of foot traffic at her Outer Sunset shops is up 20% over last year, compared to 5% at her Richmond District location.
'There's obviously something going on there beyond just the weather if we're seeing one neighborhood performing better than the other,' Crabbe said.
At Aqua Surf Shop in the Sunset, store manager Dagan Ministero, who opposed Prop K, said he hasn't had an influx of customers since the park opened.
'I don't know if it's just the nation overall, but business is kind of down these days,' Ministero said. 'I haven't seen an increase.'
Traffic congestion was one of the chief concerns for Ministero and many opposed to closing the Great Highway. Traffic is at or below pre-pandemic levels on the lower Great Highway adjacent to the park and nearby 46th Avenue, according to monitors set up by the group Friends of Sunset Dunes.
However, the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency is collecting more comprehensive data on the area's traffic conditions that it expects to release this summer, according to Parisa Safarzadeh, a spokesperson for the agency.
'We do anticipate that with every road change there is an adjustment period,' Safarzadeh said, noting that new traffic patterns and potential problems become clearer after drivers settle into routines.
To help traffic flow, there are new stoplights at Lincoln Way and 41st Avenue, and at Sloat and Skyline boulevards. Sunset Boulevard, the closest major north-south route, has been repaved. Speed bumps were added to some streets near the Great Highway to discourage cut-through traffic.
Safarzadeh said traffic data will be evaluated to determine if further changes are needed. 'It's too early to even understand what that would look like.'
Drivers accustomed to using the closed 2-mile stretch of the Upper Great Highway from Lincoln Way to Sloat Boulevard will bear the brunt of these changes. Anecdotal evidence suggests commutes could be longer and not everybody is happy.
Ministero said he's witnessed several fender benders in the area that he attributed to an uptick in traffic and that better infrastructure changes should have been in place before the closure.
'I feel like it was kind of putting the cart before the horse,' Ministero said.
Despite his opposition to the Great Highway's closure, Ministero, who lives in the Richmond, said he loves the new public space and surfs the area almost daily, despite the 'problematic' traffic.
Sunset voters who felt betrayed by Engardio now appear to have a chance at retribution by recalling him.
Or can the new park win them over before Election Day? Either way, the park will remain.
We can throw Engardio out and relitigate this at the polls and the courts. But to what end?
Engardio has a vested interest in making sure Sunset Dunes is a success, so ousting him could jeopardize that.
No doubt, commuters will be inconvenienced. I live in the Sunset, and I'll be one of them, too, when I drive. We should make sure the city upholds its responsibility to make traffic improvements.
Because in the end, Sunset Dunes could become a great city asset, and that's what we should all want.
Harry Mok is an assistant editor, editorial board member and columnist for the Opinion section.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Who makes decisions for public health is changing in Hamilton
Who makes decisions for public health is changing in Hamilton

Hamilton Spectator

timean hour ago

  • Hamilton Spectator

Who makes decisions for public health is changing in Hamilton

Community members are now at Hamilton's public health decision-making table after long-awaited governance reform got the green light from the province. 'I think it's so vitally important to have those voices there,' Coun. Cameron Kroetsch said in an interview with The Spectator. 'I think, also, it just frankly gives the community more confidence that we have both councillors and health experts who can give a balanced perspective.' Public health policy will no longer be decided by the 16 members of Hamilton's city council after legislative changes passed third reading on June 3 and received royal assent on June 5 as part of Bill 11 , More Convenient Care Act. Instead, six appointed community members , with health expertise or lived experience, will work alongside six city councillors and one education representative to oversee public health. Coun. Cameron Kroetsch says it is 'vitally important' to have community voices on the board of health. The Progressive Conservative government made the required amendments to the City of Hamilton Act at council's request. 'The community pushed really hard for this,' Kroetsch said. 'It's been a long journey.' City council will provide one final approval at its meeting on June 18 but the vote is considered a formality. The new board is expected to meet for the first time on July 7 — over four years after calls for change started in March 2021 when COVID-19 brought inequities, related to social determinants of health, to the forefront as some groups fared better than others during the pandemic. Advocates — including doctors, social workers and academics — argued for a board of health that better reflects Hamilton's diversity, including racialized residents and those with disabilities. 'We didn't have that kind of community voice available to respond to issues of public health in our city and so I think this is going to be great,' Kroetsch said. 'Having these key people around the table, we learned during COVID, would have made things so much better … I just can't say enough about how important I think it is for community voices to be at the table.' The changes bring Hamilton more in line with about two-thirds of the province's public health units that are overseen by autonomous boards. Hamilton's board will be semi-autonomous as decisions related to the budget, the annual service plan and the appointment of medical officers of health will still be approved by city council. Toronto and Ottawa also have semi autonomous boards. However, policy decisions would no longer need any further approval so the board's vote would be binding. 'There's not really a way for council to override the board of health,' Kroetsch said. 'We've given over that autonomy.' The governance reform initially had the unanimous support of council in January 2024. While awaiting the legislative changes, a public health subcommittee was created that will now become the board of health. Up until now, its decisions needed to be approved by city councillors. But opposition to the changes flared up in May after a disagreement over how restrictive the city should be about drinking on municipal property revealed a divide between councillors and the subcommittee. The proposed changes to the municipal alcohol policy were passed with almost no discussion by the subcommittee. In stark contrast, councillors voted 13-1 against it after a charged debate and an in-camera session to get legal advice. It raised questions about what would happen in the future when the semi-autonomous board of health no longer needed councillors' approval for such policy decisions. The subsequent vote went from unanimous to passing 9-5 on the makeup of the future board of health. But Kroetsch, who has been chairing the subcommittee, expects the transition will now be smooth. 'It's just going to be a new day for Hamilton in terms of having that expert advice from the community on the board of health to be able to weigh in on matters that are important,' Kroetsch said. 'We're talking about something that has literally a life and death impact for people. Public health is one of those areas of municipal governance that can impact people's day to day lives.' Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .

How Veteran's Benefits Are Impacted by Trump's Tax Bill: What to Know
How Veteran's Benefits Are Impacted by Trump's Tax Bill: What to Know

Newsweek

timean hour ago

  • Newsweek

How Veteran's Benefits Are Impacted by Trump's Tax Bill: What to Know

Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. President Donald Trump's legislative agenda continues to reshape federal spending, with House Republicans proposing a $453 billion bill for the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) in fiscal year 2026. While the bill preserves core benefit increases for veterans, it introduces a series of controversial provisions that could change how some services are accessed and funded. The new spending proposals, part of the One Big Beautiful Bill passed by the House in May, come amid a flurry of changes at the VA, including staffing cuts at the department, which have sparked protests across the nation. Why It Matters Veterans' programs have historically received bipartisan support and consistent funding increases. Trump's proposed budget continues that trend, with an $83 billion boost over the prior year, largely for mandatory medical care and benefits payouts. However, the bill's inclusion of policy items tied to reproductive health, firearm access, and vaccine mandates could limit or reshape access to VA services. What to Know The VA budget includes: A 22 percent—$83 billion—overall funding increase , with nearly all new funding earmarked for medical care and mandatory benefits like disability payments. , with nearly all new funding earmarked for medical care and mandatory benefits like disability payments. Discretionary program funding up by 4 percent , rising to approximately $134 billion. , rising to approximately $134 billion. $2.5 billion for the VA's Electronic Health Record Modernization program , doubling the prior year's allocation but still $1 billion short of the White House's ask. , doubling the prior year's allocation but still $1 billion short of the White House's ask. $18 billion in military construction funding, which includes $830 million for child development centers and barracks improvements. Policy changes include: A ban on abortion services and abortion-related counseling at VA facilities, unless the life of the mother is in danger. at VA facilities, unless the life of the mother is in danger. Ending the requirement for mandatory COVID-19 vaccination for VA health personnel. for VA health personnel. Restrictions on reporting veterans deemed financially incompetent to the national gun background check system, which Republicans have framed as a defense of Second Amendment rights. Democrats criticized the latter provisions. Florida Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz, a Democrat, said in a statement the bill "needlessly fixates on keeping guns in the hands of those who are potentially a danger to themselves or others, and restricts reproductive rights." A stock image shows a U.S. flag patch on a soldier's uniform. A stock image shows a U.S. flag patch on a soldier's uniform. GETTY What People Are Saying House Appropriations Committee chairman Tom Cole said the bill "honors our commitment to those who've worn America's uniform and supports our military and their loved ones." "By providing critical funding for military bases and improving housing for our troops and their families, we are ensuring that our national defense needs are met both at home and abroad. We are also upholding our pledge to our veterans. This bill fully funds health care and benefits for those who have honorably served. They upheld their sacred oath to us—and now a grateful nation is keeping our promise to them. Today marks the start of our process and our work to fund the government. As this bill moves forward and considerations are made and debated, the pillars of the proposal won't change." Florida Representative Debbie Wasserman Schultz said in a statement: "This bill needlessly fixates on keeping guns in the hands of those who are potentially a danger to themselves or others, and restricts reproductive rights, and [includes] other cruel and pointless policy restrictions. I cannot tell those currently serving and those who defended our nation that this is the best we can do." What's Next The bill faces a tougher showdown in the Senate than it did in the House, where Democratic opposition and the filibuster rule will require bipartisan cooperation in order for it to pass.

How the Vatican manages money and where Pope Leo XIV might find more
How the Vatican manages money and where Pope Leo XIV might find more

San Francisco Chronicle​

time5 hours ago

  • San Francisco Chronicle​

How the Vatican manages money and where Pope Leo XIV might find more

VATICAN CITY (AP) — The world's smallest country has a big budget problem. The Vatican doesn't tax its residents or issue bonds. It primarily finances the Catholic Church's central government through donations that have been plunging, ticket sales for the Vatican Museums, as well as income from investments and an underperforming real estate portfolio. The last year the Holy See published a consolidated budget, in 2022, it projected 770 million euros ($878 million), with the bulk paying for embassies around the world and Vatican media operations. In recent years, it hasn't been able to cover costs. That leaves Pope Leo XIV facing challenges to drum up the funds needed to pull his city-state out of the red. Withering donations Anyone can donate money to the Vatican, but the regular sources come in two main forms. Canon law requires bishops around the world to pay an annual fee, with amounts varying and at bishops' discretion 'according to the resources of their dioceses.' U.S. bishops contributed over one-third of the $22 million (19.3 million euros) collected annually under the provision from 2021-2023, according to Vatican data. The other main source of annual donations is more well-known to ordinary Catholics: Peter's Pence, a special collection usually taken on the last Sunday of June. From 2021-2023, individual Catholics in the U.S. gave an average $27 million (23.7 million euros) to Peter's Pence, more than half the global total. American generosity hasn't prevented overall Peter's Pence contributions from cratering. After hitting a high of $101 million (88.6 million euros) in 2006, contributions hovered around $75 million (66.8 million euros) during the 2010's then tanked to $47 million (41.2 million euros) during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic, when many churches were closed. Donations remained low in the following years, amid revelations of the Vatican's bungled investment in a London property, a former Harrod's warehouse that it hoped to develop into luxury apartments. The scandal and ensuing trial confirmed that the vast majority of Peter's Pence contributions had funded the Holy See's budgetary shortfalls, not papal charity initiatives as many parishioners had been led to believe. Peter's Pence donations rose slightly in 2023 and Vatican officials expect more growth going forward, in part because there has traditionally been a bump immediately after papal elections. New donors The Vatican bank and the city state's governorate, which controls the museums, also make annual contributions to the pope. As recently as a decade ago, the bank gave the pope around 55 million euros ($62.7 million) a year to help with the budget. But the amounts have dwindled; the bank gave nothing specifically to the pope in 2023, despite registering a net profit of 30 million euros ($34.2 million), according to its financial statements. The governorate's giving has likewise dropped off. Some Vatican officials ask how the Holy See can credibly ask donors to be more generous when its own institutions are holding back. Leo will need to attract donations from outside the U.S., no small task given the different culture of philanthropy, said the Rev. Robert Gahl, director of the Church Management Program at Catholic University of America's business school. He noted that in Europe there is much less of a tradition (and tax advantage) of individual philanthropy, with corporations and government entities doing most of the donating or allocating designated tax dollars. Even more important is leaving behind the 'mendicant mentality' of fundraising to address a particular problem, and instead encouraging Catholics to invest in the church as a project, he said. Speaking right after Leo's installation ceremony in St. Peter's Square, which drew around 200,000 people, Gahl asked: 'Don't you think there were a lot of people there that would have loved to contribute to that and to the pontificate?' In the U.S., donation baskets are passed around at every Sunday Mass. Not so at the Vatican. Untapped real estate The Vatican has 4,249 properties in Italy and 1,200 more in London, Paris, Geneva and Lausanne, Switzerland. Only about one-fifth are rented at fair market value, according to the annual report from the APSA patrimony office, which manages them. Some 70% generate no income because they house Vatican or other church offices; the remaining 10% are rented at reduced rents to Vatican employees. In 2023, these properties only generated 35 million euros ($39.9 million) in profit. Financial analysts have long identified such undervalued real estate as a source of potential revenue. But Ward Fitzgerald, the president of the U.S.-based Papal Foundation, which finances papal charities, said the Vatican should also be willing to sell properties, especially those too expensive to maintain. Many bishops are wrestling with similar downsizing questions as the number of church-going Catholics in parts of the U.S. and Europe shrinks and once-full churches stand empty. Toward that end, the Vatican recently sold the property housing its embassy in Tokyo's high-end Sanbancho neighborhood, near the Imperial Palace, to a developer building a 13-story apartment complex, according to the Kensetsu News trade journal. Yet there has long been institutional reluctance to part with even money-losing properties. Witness the Vatican announcement in 2021 that the cash-strapped Fatebenefratelli Catholic hospital in Rome, run by a religious order, would not be sold. Pope Francis simultaneously created a Vatican fundraising foundation to keep it and other Catholic hospitals afloat. 'They have to come to grips with the fact that they own so much real estate that is not serving the mission of the church,' said Fitzgerald, who built a career in real estate private equity. ___ AP reporter Mari Yamaguchi in Tokyo contributed. ___

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store