A transparency update from Hayes Valley Safe
Over the past year, residents and small businesses in Hayes Valley have repeatedly asked basic, good-faith questions about the future of Hayes Street — including whether the current temporary closure was being evaluated neutrally, and whether public funds were being used to advance a predetermined outcome.
Those questions went largely unanswered.
In January 2026, in response to formal disclosure requests submitted in December 2025, Hayes Valley Safe received records that had not previously been available to the public. These documents provide important context about what was happening behind the scenes while community inquiries and public testimony remained unresolved.
This memo summarizes what the discoveries show, why it matters, and what questions remain unanswered.
1. These records are newly obtained
The documents referenced here were received in January 2026 following formal disclosure requests. They were not available at the time earlier correspondence, hearings, or public discussions took place. This distinction matters. The information summarized below could not have been raised earlier because it was not yet available to the public.
2. Planning and funding discussions were already underway
The records show that, while residents and business owners were still seeking clarity, multiple City agencies were actively coordinating around:
- Funding pathways tied to Proposition I / Central Freeway / Octavia funds
- A proposed Hayes Street Public Life / Transportation Study
- Timing considerations linked to advisory bodies and legislative actions
These discussions occurred during the same period when community questions about the closure and any proposed study were going unanswered.
3. The study was framed around the existing closure
The scope materials describe a study organized around the current street closure as the baseline condition, with open-street days treated as a comparison case.
In addition, the study framework includes:
- “Public life” and placemaking objectives
- Qualitative surveys and experiential measures
- Optional concept-development funding
This structure is meaningfully different from a neutral inquiry into whether a street should be open or closed. It raises legitimate questions about whether outcomes were being shaped before public engagement occurred.
4. Community engagement appears to follow internal alignment
The records suggest that inter-agency coordination and funding discussions preceded, rather than followed broad, inclusive community engagement. That sequencing matters for public trust. When public participation occurs after a direction has already been set internally, it risks becoming symbolic rather than substantive. This update focuses on process and transparency, not on assigning individual intent.
5. Why this matters for Hayes Valley
Hayes Street has long functioned as a local-serving corridor supporting small businesses, residents, and daily neighborhood life. Decisions about its future especially decisions involving public funds deserve:
- Clear disclosure
- Honest framing
- Inclusive participation
- Answers to written questions, not deflection
When those conditions are not met, trust erodes.
6. What remains unanswered
Based on these discoveries and current events, several basic questions remain unresolved:
- When and by whom the Hayes Street Public Life Study was initiated
- Which funding sources and approvals authorized its scope
- Whether restoring Hayes Street to normal operation was ever treated as a genuine option
These are threshold transparency questions. They are necessary for the public to understand how decisions affecting Hayes Street are being made.
Closing
Transparency is not an obstacle to good policy, it is a prerequisite. We are sharing this information so neighbors, businesses, and citywide stakeholders can understand how decisions affecting Hayes Valley are being made, and can participate meaningfully before outcomes are locked in. We will continue to pursue clarity through appropriate public channels.