A San Francisco judge has ruled that Proposition K is valid under state law, rejecting a legal challenge to the 2024 ballot measure that closed part of the Great Highway to vehicle traffic.
Judge Jeffrey Ross issued his initial ruling in the case last week, detailing his reasoning for why Prop. K likely complies with state law. But he invited attorneys from both sides to present arguments at a hearing Monday. At the end of the hearing, he made the decision to deny the lawsuit.
About 50 people packed the courthouse Monday. City Attorney David Chiu’s office defended Prop. K’s legality in court.
Chiu’s spokesperson Jen Kwart said that the office is glad the court affirmed the will of the voters in passing Prop. K and closing the Upper Great Highway to private vehicles.
Lucas Lux, president of the group Friends of Sunset Dunes, applauded the ruling.
“While our volunteers are giving their time to bring a coastal park to life, the anti-park zealots continue to waste more public resources in their attempt to overturn the will of the people and close a coastal park,” Lux said. “Now that they’ve lost two lawsuits and two elections, we invite them to accept the will of San Franciscans and work with us to make the most of our collective coastal park.”
Prop. K passed with 55% of the vote after being placed on the ballot by five supervisors. About 64% of Sunset residents voted against the measure. Sunset Supervisor Joel Engardio was recalled over his support for Prop. K. But on Monday night, Engardio relished what was, for him, a moral victory. “It’s time to consider Sunset Dunes settled,” he said. “Too many people have seen how the park is good for the environment, local businesses, and the physical and mental health of every visitor.”
The lawsuit challenging the measure’s legality was filed in March. The plaintiffs include Matthew Boschetto, a leader of the “No on K” campaign and a former supervisor candidate; Lisa Arjes, a Sunset resident and top donor to the recall effort; Albert Chow, a candidate for Sunset supervisor; and Livable SF, a new nonprofit led by Vin Budhai, another leader of the Engardio recall campaign.
The lawsuit, filed by attorney Jim Sutton, argues that local voters did not have the authority to close the roadway; that the city should not have partially closed a road that remained in active use; that the measure improperly bypassed the California Environmental Quality Act; and that the closure conflicted with the city’s General Plan (opens in new tab), which designates the Great Highway for “slow pleasure traffic.”
A contentious issue was whether the five supervisors who placed the measure on the ballot constituted a “public agency.” The city attorney’s office argued that because the supervisors represented a minority of the 11-member board, they did not meet the definition of a public agency, and the action was therefore exempt from the CEQA.
The judge is expected to issue a written ruling within days.
Boschetto said the plaintiffs plan to appeal to a higher court and accused Ross of bowing to political pressure from the city.
“It is clear that Judge Ross is trying to justify the city’s action so that he does not have to make a politically difficult choice,” Boschetto said. “We believe that our arguments held. We think there was, at best, a misunderstanding from Judge Ross, or he disregarded an objective process to do what is politically expedient.”
Separately, newly appointed Sunset Supervisor Alan Wong, who attended Monday’s hearing, last month announced his support for a ballot measure to undo Prop. K.