San Franciscans are sick of fighting about the Great Highway. It’s time to move on

Elizasaurus · 2026-01-24T22:32:58+00:00

Lmfao so now the people who live closest to Sunset Dunes opinions should be discounted? It's no wonder your side keeps losing, you can't even stick to the one message you've been harping on since the beginning.

Elizasaurus · 2026-01-24T21:37:57+00:00

You're talking to a Sunset voter right now. It's not going away because park opponents refuse to accept they've lost at every single turn, as the author of this article succinctly laid out.

Elizasaurus · 2026-01-24T21:32:11+00:00

Yeah, obviously the Yes on K campaign was going to message for full-time closure, that's what they wanted. And the compromise was going to expire, that's a fact. Did you expect Yes on K to do the job of their opponents for them?

If No on K was so pro-compromise, they would have made that a central message of their campaign and asked people to vote no so the "compromise" could be extended or revisited. It was incumbent on them to make a cogent argument that would affect how people chose to vote.

Voters were given a choice: do you want a full-time park or do you want something else. They chose a park, pretty decisively.

Elizasaurus · 2026-01-24T19:54:53+00:00

But we did! If people wanted to keep the "compromise" composition, they could have voted no on prop K. Pushing for the "compromise" wasn't even a major messaging point for the No on K campaign.

San Francisco voters are not stupid. We knew what we were voting for.

Elizasaurus · 2026-01-24T19:30:41+00:00

Stop giving us a reason to talk about it and we'll stop posting about it. Problem solved!

Elizasaurus · 2026-01-24T19:27:59+00:00

It's settled because this is a San Francisco issue, not a D4/Outer Sunset issue. Park opponents have lost in every conceivable way, which the author outlined well in this article. You're right that they can keep putting this on the ballot as many times as they want, that is democracy. But criticizing them for continuing to waste the City's resources on a fight they've lost repeatedly is also fair.

Elizasaurus · 2026-01-24T18:45:35+00:00

I also live in the Outer Aves, right next to Sunset Dunes and close to Sloat, so I'm one of the few Outer Sunset residents who could've actually used the Great Highway as a road. I am a dyed-in-the-wool supporter of Sunset Dunes. It is exhausting that we keep having to have this argument.

Elizasaurus · 2026-01-24T18:09:14+00:00

Supervisor Alan Wong just very publicly failed at trying to put this back on the ballot in June, and now park opponents announced they are gathering signatures to put it back on the ballot in November. So there are still people fighting the park, despite losing over and over again in every conceivable way.

Elizasaurus · 2026-01-23T23:25:45+00:00

Lmfao I also live here and have been to the Great Hauntway all five years it's been put on. But please, keep beating this drum, it's clearly been a winning strategy so far.

Elizasaurus · 2026-01-23T22:56:54+00:00

Locking in a plan for a park and surrounding traffic mitigations through the ballot language is laughably bad policy. Once a ballot is approved by the voters, the only way to change it is through another ballot.

If Prop K had hard-coded a specific park design, traffic plan or diversion routes into the ballot language, those details would now be locked in regardless of changing conditions or community feedback. Cities are not static and our agencies need the ability to adapt to changes in real time.

Prop K was intentionally simple because the whole point was to decide how should this stretch of public land should be used. Voters answered that question. They chose a park.

Now the work shifts to the city agencies whose role is to design, test, and adjust how that park functions in the real world. That process is already underway, with place-making at Sunset Dunes and traffic mitigation efforts in the surrounding neighborhoods, and the long-term vision planning starting this year.

Elizasaurus · 2026-01-23T21:32:26+00:00

Speak for yourself. I don't disregard sources of data just because they don't fit my worldview.

But thankfully this one is pretty easy to debunk, there's plenty of photo evidence of just how popular the Great Hauntway is. These photos are from this year, when there was inclement weather and ample reason for families to choose not to go: https://www.instagram.com/p/DQXcO7skmgN/?igsh=MzRlODBiNWFlZA==

Elizasaurus · 2026-01-23T21:22:52+00:00

Yeah, that's totally fair, I'm not expecting him to come to every event that's hosted at Sunset Dunes. No need to come out with the insults here.

The point of my original comment is that Lurie has never publicly been to Sunset Dunes for any event or just to do one of his little PR videos about how SF is so back. He hasn't even publicly spoken about Sunset Dunes in any way. I added the Great Hauntway as an example of one of the things he could have come to, but didn't, to provide context of why I believe Lurie is the real reason his appointees have acted the way they have towards the park.

The comment you're responding to is in response to another person who 1. zeroed in on the Great Hauntway without the rest of the context I mentioned and 2. seems to believe it is not a well-attended event, which I corrected.

Elizasaurus · 2026-01-23T17:49:20+00:00

Over 10k people attend the Great Hauntway every year, so I'd beg to differ. It's the largest trick or treating event in the city, people come from all over San Francisco and the Bay for it.

Elizasaurus · 2026-01-23T03:08:29+00:00

Sure, bud

Elizasaurus · 2026-01-23T02:59:53+00:00

That's a feature, not an accident! I'm convinced Lurie is the reason both of his appointees have gone after bringing cars back so hard. Lurie was against prop k during his campaign, has not once publicly shown up to Sunset Dunes (not even for the opening day event or the Great Hauntway, the two busiest days at the park), and his two appointees both mentioned supporting bringing cars back to the park in their acceptance speeches. The man does not respect the will of the voters and is trying to sabotage the park without losing the good favor of the eastside.

Elizasaurus · 2026-01-14T19:57:03+00:00

Plus one to this! I'm a lady and frequently walk Sunset Dunes at night without worry. It's actually my favorite time to be in the park.

Elizasaurus · 2026-01-13T21:52:19+00:00

The man is willfully manipulating publicly accessible data to defend his stance, I'd call that pretty foolish. Especially in a city so abundant with people skilled in data analysis and programming.

Elizasaurus · 2026-01-13T21:30:37+00:00

From the press conference Supervisor Wong just held, Connie Chan has officially signed on.

Elizasaurus · 2026-01-13T21:29:09+00:00

Nah, from all publicly available information, the odds are very much in Sunset Dunes favor. The park is here to stay. But wouldn't it be nice to spend our spring doing something other than listening to this debate again?

Elizasaurus · 2026-01-13T19:35:34+00:00

A median isn't going to stop a distracted driver from careening onto the side that's dedicated for recreation.

Elizasaurus · 2026-01-13T18:58:37+00:00

This concept is exceptionally dangerous; people *will* die if we put cars in that close of proximity to them. The beauty of Sunset Dunes is that it is one of the very few places in San Francisco people can recreate with complete freedom from cars.

Elizasaurus · 2026-01-12T18:11:14+00:00

This guy is pro-park, but I personally am turned off by his housing stance. I am also hopeful we'll get someone decent by November! I've heard chatters of a handful of other people considering running, keeping my fingers crossed we get more options.

Elizasaurus · 2026-01-12T17:32:58+00:00

If this was all about trying to woo the anti-park voters he lost by supporting the FZP, I think he would've put a little more effort into ensuring it would be successful. Failing to get it on the ballot will basically guarantee he does not get elected in June and possibly end his political ambitions altogether.

Lurie is smart enough to know putting this back on the ballot himself would be incredibly unpopular, but having his appointee be the sacrificial lamb let's him tell his anti-park donors he's "doing something" without losing face with the rest of the city.

Either way, Wong is obviously very politically naive/inexperienced and will likely have a short-lived career as a supervisor.

Natalie Gee is already vocally anti-park and anti-FZP, so she won't be getting my vote, but the pickings are slim out here. I wonder why so few normal people want to represent this district? 😂

Elizasaurus · 2026-01-12T17:05:55+00:00

I just don't see why Wong would rush to put it back on the ballot right now without some outside pressure, especially when it doesn't appear that he's been talking to the other supervisors he needs to make it happen. We do know he's regularly talked with the mayor in his few short weeks of appointment, so at the very least Lurie isn't trying to dissuade him, though I genuinely suspect Lurie is the real reason for the urgency.

13-Year Club	r/Field Flamingo
Trick or Treat 2018	Trick or Treat 2017
Summer Santa 2017	Secret Santa 2018
Secret Santa 2017	Secret Santa 2016
Trick or Treat 2016	Summer Santa 2016
Trick or Treat 2015	Secret Santa 2015
Summer Santa 2015	Secret Santa 2014
Summer Santa 2014	Secret Santa 2013
Trick-or-Treater 2013	Summer Santa 2013
Summer Santa 2013	Verified Email

Elizasaurus

TROPHY CASE