Let's talk about the nonsense that is Prop K, closing the Upper Great Highway ("UGH") 1. Prop K only closes the UGH to private cars, but doesn't eliminate the road. 2. There is no budget for a park in Prop K. 3. There is no budget for traffic diversion upgrades. 4. Tunnel Top park cost $100 million for 14 acres. UGH is LARGER & @SFGov has a deficit >$1 billion. 5. There are no cost savings. The road will remain open for emergency access & any park requires maintenance. 6. Proponents are trying to sell you a park next to one of the largest parks in the City called the Beach. 7. There is already a wide median (park?) with a walking path between UGH & the Lower Great Highway (LGH). 8. There is already a nice promenade between the UGH and the Beach. And then there is the Beach, open now. 9. 15,000+ cars use the UGH daily. Diversion to Sunset, 19th Ave & side streets will be the "Onslaught." 10. The Onslaught will be so bad at drive-time, side streets will get heavy, idling/polluting, dangerous traffic. 11. The Onslaught and UGH closure will slow access North to the Veterans Hospital. 12. The Onslaught and UGH closure will slow commute times for workers, North and South. 13. The Onslaught will worsen with 7-10,000 new housing units slated for construction in the Sunset. 14. The Onslaught will worsen with scheduled repaving/construction on 19th Ave in the next 2 years. 15. Prop K stole the 3rd way (closed on weekends only), a compromise that is working. 16. Prop K is premature: the compromise pilot still had a year to go for proper evaluation. 17. Prop K has no environmental benefit--it just moves smog inland & increases with more side-street idling. 18. Cars as an environmental problem become moot over time, with CA electric car mandates on tap. 19. Seniors and young families don't all bicycle, reducing ease-of-access to 2 miles of beach. 20. Prop K is a political, neutron bomb, splitting voters over ONE issue, when SF has critical issues to solve. 21. Prop K involved NO community process. It was launched w/o notice, marketing plans already teed-up. 22. Prop K abuses the tyranny of the majority by submitting to citywide vote a Westside concern. 23. If SF is looking to spend hundreds of millions for parks it cannot afford, why here, in the most "parked" region of the City? Why now? Why not build parks/greenspace where they are lacking and needed, like the Tenderloin, Bayview, Hunters Point, SOMA, etc? 24. Last, a dirty little secret: Prop K hardens the closure of the southern, currently closed UGH "extension," until now just a @SFBos command, not voters' choice. Vote NO on K--and take a second look at ANY candidates for their positions on K, because the autocracy behind the proposition indicates a broader mindset of ideology over constituency representation. These are not the people you want making decisions for you. You want to be heard, you want your community to have input, you want San Francisco to work for all. And Prop K is just another ideological canary in the coal mine among a long-list of other autocratic projects in the offing. Don't scratch your head too hard over this ridiculous ballot proposition. This is not about a prospective, undefined, unfunded, unaffordable park between two parks, in the most "parked" region of the City. This is an anti-car proposition and about housing. This is a YIMBY long-game. Read the thread below👇 xitter.cf/whentoletgo/status/183…