A San Francisco supervisor who pushed to turn a 2-mile stretch of highway into a car-free park faces a recall vote in his district.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.world/post/36015848

SAN FRANCISCO (AP) — During the coronavirus pandemic, the city closed a stretch of a four-lane highway along San Francisco’s Pacific Coast and made it an automobile-free sanctuary where bicyclists and walkers flocked to exercise and socialize under open skies and to the sound of crashing waves.

But with the post-pandemic return to school and work, resentment grew among neighborhood residents who relied on the artery to get around. Some blamed the district city supervisor who helped make the change permanent by placing on a citywide ballot a measure to turn the 2-mile (3.2-kilometer) stretch into a new park.

On Tuesday, district voters will decide whether to recall Supervisor Joel Engardio.

The recall of a local supervisor who represents one-tenth of a city of 800,000 might seem like minor politics. But the election highlights a San Francisco in flux and a still cranky, even emboldened electorate as leaders prepare to make tough decisions about the city’s future.

The recall election will be the city’s third in four years. It’s fueled by many of the same people who tossed out three liberal school board members in February 2022 followed by the ouster of politically progressive San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin in June of that year.

“This recall is really about the future of our city,” said Engardio in an interview with The Associated Press. “Do we want to be a city that just preserves itself in amber and goes back in time? Or do we want to be a city that innovates, thinks ahead, is forward-looking and welcomes new people?”

  • DrunkEngineer@lemmy.worldEnglish
    4·
    4 days ago

    Keeping the highway open would have been very expensive. There is major coastal erosion, and just the routine sand clearing. Closing the highway is consistent with official long-term plans that have gone through decades of meetings. Unless this very small number of voters wants to foot those costs all on their own, then I see no reason to give them veto power.

    • stabby_cicada@slrpnk.netEnglish
      2·
      4 days ago

      Unless this very small number of voters wants to foot those costs all on their own, then I see no reason to give them veto power.

      It’s not about veto power. It’s about consensus building. Or the lack thereof.

      The community around that stretch of the Great Highway felt unheard and disrespected. They felt the rest of SF had imposed a decision on them without their consent. And they used the power they did have to punish one of the people they blamed for it.

      You’re absolutely right about the highway - it was routinely closed for sand and flooding and climate change was just going to make it worse. It’s on its way out.

      And yet the city failed to convince the people who live around the highway of that, and went ahead by force, imposing the will of the majority on the minority, creating anger and hard feelings that could have been avoided had they put in the work to convince the community they were right.

      I don’t think the city or its voters had bad intentions. I just think it exemplifies one of the worst flaws of democracy.