posted at 11 am

Our team has reviewed SFMTA’s staff report and slide deck released ahead of next week’s SFMTA Board hearing. What is being shown publicly and what is being left out raises serious concerns about transparency, data integrity, and decision-making during one of the worst financial crises in the agency’s history.

SFMTA now faces a $322 million budget deficit, has already cut $120 million in service and operations, and warns that its finances will worsen without major changes.

Yet staff recommended continuing a closure that requires Muni to spend $75,000 a year detouring the 6-Hayes around one block.

Below is a clear summary of the major gaps, contradictions, and red flags in the materials presented.

1. The closure costs the public $75,000/year — during a $322M deficit

For the first time, SFMTA acknowledged in writing that:

The 6-Hayes must switch from trolley to motor coaches due to the closure
The detour costs $1,500 per week → $75,000 per year
The permit holder pays just $1,280

In a $322 million deficit, this is indefensible.

The public is subsidizing a private street closure.

2. Enforcement failures were erased — despite 48 consecutive weeks of documented violations

The staff deck stated “no major enforcement issues,” while the written report acknowledged:

repeated barricade breaches
vehicle access failures
compliance monitoring gaps
transit impacts

Weekly photographic evidence submitted by residents and small business operators never appeared in the slide deck presentation.

3. Sales tax data was manipulated

Instead of comparing the closed 400 block with open blocks, SFMTA combined the 300 block (open, reopened after program failure), the 400 block (closed), and the 500 block (open, reopened after program failure) into a single aggregated metric. This blending obscures the documented downturn on the closed 400 block.

4. Activation data was cherry-picked

Slides highlighted “March–October activations,” skipping the rest of the year when:

activity is minimal
many weekends have zero programming
the street sits empty 90%+ of closure hours

This artificially inflates the appearance of success.

5. COVID-era photos were used to imply legitimacy

The final slide shows the 500 block closed during COVID to create the illusion of:

historical continuity
community acceptance
a “promenade” legacy

But the 500 block was reopened due to lack of merchant support and poor performance.

This is revisionist framing.

6. UC Berkeley student testimony was presented as “objective study work”

Students conducting the Public Life Study testified in favor of permanent closure at the ISCOTT hearing — the same position SFMTA is now advancing. This is a clear conflict of interest and contradicts SFMTA’s framing of their work as neutral or objective analysis.

7. Outreach claims were false

SFMTA cited “merchant associations” and “stakeholders,” but:

HVSBA was not contacted
HVS was not contacted
FairSF was not contacted
Merchants on the block were not contacted
Residents were not contacted

Only HVNA — the permit holder’s ally — was engaged. A formal complaint is being prepared. Despite this, the slide deck presents these outreach claims as broad community engagement.

8. The legal justification is extreme

Staff asked the Board to declare:

Hayes Street is “no longer needed for vehicular traffic”
The closure is “necessary for public safety”

Despite:

no collision data
no safety analysis
no ADA review
no traffic engineering study

This language mirrors permanent street closure statutes — raising significant legal questions. This is an extraordinary overreach for a temporary COVID-era closure.

9. A closed-session meeting is scheduled directly afterward

This is the first time a Hayes Street Closure permit renewal is scheduled to be followed by a private attorney-client closed session.

This suggests SFMTA anticipates legal or procedural challenges.

10.“Temporary program” language contradicts the requested entrenchment

SFMTA describes Shared Spaces as temporary, yet:

requested a full-year renewal
provided no exit plan
offered no metrics
sought declarations that support future permanence

This is entrenched policy presented as a ‘temporary’ extension.

Bottom Line

SFMTA is facing a historic $322 million deficit, yet the agency is recommending that the public continue paying $75,000 a year for a politically driven street closure that lacks metrics, transparency, safety justification, merchant support, and community input. What is being presented to the Board confirms widespread concerns about a predetermined outcome, selective data use, and the sidelining of residents and small businesses.