October 10, 2025
Attention: OEWD
Thank you … for sharing the draft Hayes Valley Entertainment Zone (EZ) Management Plan. After reviewing the document and reflecting on our conversation, we want to be transparent about the serious concerns we have and the conditions that must be met moving forward.
1. Structural Flaws and Conflicts of Interest
This plan is being framed as a community-led framework, yet it was developed by a narrow group (HVNA and select allies) who have been central to a contentious and exclusionary process from the start. This same group pushed for the EZ designation while actively sidelining residents, retailers, and small business stakeholders. More concerning, HVNA is cited as the anchor entity in managing and overseeing the EZ even though they are permit holders, political advocates, and direct beneficiaries of the legislation — a textbook and undeniably troubling conflict of interest. The fact that HVNA is now being handed greater authority under the guise of “management” is alarming and untenable.
2. Lack of Broad-Based Stakeholder Input
This plan was not developed through an inclusive or transparent process. The vast majority of impacted small businesses, residents, and neighborhood stakeholders including those most affected by past street closure decisions—were not invited to shape or review this document. Despite references to “coordination” and “outreach,” there is no evidence of structured engagement with the wider community. In fact, several merchants and residents we spoke to were unaware that a management plan even existed, and many remain opposed to the EZ altogether. Misrepresenting this process as community-driven only deepens mistrust.
3. No Oversight or Enforcement Pathway
The plan lacks any clear enforcement, accountability, or escalation mechanism. There are no outlined consequences for recurring issues like noise violations, public intoxication, unsafe vendor setups, or harm to neighboring residents and businesses (including measurable financial losses). This is a serious failure … especially in light of what’s already occurred under the current Shared Spaces permit. HVNA, the proposed anchor for this plan, has repeatedly operated the 400 block closure in violation of its terms (e.g., unattended barricades, unpermitted vendors) without consequence. That same entity now being handed even more authority, with no accountability structure, should alarm every agency involved. We are currently seeking guidance from the Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) regarding enforcement and oversight particularly since City departments have failed to intervene where serious public complaints have been made.
4. Legal Loopholes and Closure Coordination
As noted in the EZ ordinance itself, street closure permits are no longer required unless the event explicitly closes the street. That means events can occur without ISCOTT or SFMTA oversight — contradicting what Planning and the Mayor’s Office told us. This legal loophole is deeply troubling, especially given how the Hayes Street closure has already been abused. That situation is unresolved…and now, the same actors who benefited from lax enforcement are being empowered again under this plan.
5. Term Length & Accountability
We strongly object to the proposed two-year term outlined in the plan. Given the procedural failures already on record including lack of inclusive engagement, disproportionate influence by a single nonprofit, and ongoing public concern over transparency and fairness –granting a two-year term at this stage is both premature and inappropriate. If this is truly a collaborative framework still in formation, it should be treated as such. A two-year horizon implies confidence in a model that has yet to prove its legitimacy, governance structure, or public accountability. It also significantly reduces the incentive for those advancing this plan to correct course should further issues arise. We are therefore requesting that the initial term be limited to six months, with a formal mid-point review required before any extension is considered. This review must include structured input from affected residents, non-aligned merchants, and organizations who have not participated in the current planning process. It should also involve a public assessment of compliance, complaints received, impacts on businesses and residents, and the permitting outcomes under the new framework. Failing to build in this type of checkpoint puts the city at reputational and legal risk especially given the unresolved concerns surrounding the Hayes Street closure and the Entertainment Zone’s broader implications. A two-year blank check is not acceptable. A six-month conditional term is the minimum standard for establishing good-faith oversight moving forward. It would be irresponsible to green-light a two-year framework built on exclusion, noncompliance, and opaque governance.
What We’re Asking For:
We expect meaningful revisions and safeguards before this plan moves forward. At minimum:
- Independent Oversight
HVNA should not oversee or coordinate enforcement. The City must designate a neutral body and create a public reporting mechanism.
- Balanced Governance
A management committee must include diverse representation beyond HVNA and affiliated promoters. (HVS and HVSBA need to be included)
- Pilot Duration & Midpoint Review
Limit the term to 6 months with a formal review before any extension.
- Merchant & Resident Opt-Out
Allow businesses and residents to formally opt out of zone activities or marketing.
- Transparent Event Notification
Require advance notice and comment period for all events — including to affected neighbors and businesses.
- Permit & Programming Transparency
Require all permits and programming tied to the Hayes Valley Entertainment Zone to be published in a centralized, accessible location no fewer than 90 days in advance. This includes special events, recurring “activations”, vendor retail events and street closures. Notice must include event type, date/time, footprint, noise/amplification details, and responsible organizers (with contact info for direct feedback or objection).
- Meeting & Coordination Records
Disclose all planning records, meeting notes, and outreach efforts related to the plan’s formation.
Thanks again for sharing the draft plan and for taking the time to connect with us. We’ve outlined our concerns and proposed a set of conditions that we believe are necessary for any version of this framework to be taken seriously.
This correspondence has been edited for clarity and conciseness. Routine greetings, scheduling notes, and contact details have been omitted; the substance of the communication remains unchanged.