SF Recreation and Parks formally requests expedited approval to remove the Vaillancourt Fountain
Using an artificially created sense of public threat, SF Recreation and Park Department (SFRPD) has formally requested that the SF Arts Commission (SFAC) approve its plan to modify, dismantle, and remove the Vaillancourt Fountain.
The request, similar to prior reports, renderings, and materials, was made available to the press but not members of the public.
SFRPD shared the following message with Docomomo US/NOCA on October 31, 2025:
On Monday, November 3, at 2:00 pm, the Arts Commission Meeting will hear a discussion and a possible action item to remove the Embarcadero’s Vaillancourt Fountain and place it in storage due to serious structural issues that pose safety risks. The city will notify the artist and public as required by law, and will later decide whether to restore, relocate, or repurpose the fountain.
This attempt to create an artificial sense of public threat is something we called out in our August news post.
SFRPD’s descriptions of the fountain’s state, such as “alarming” and “no longer viable as a functional or safe public asset”, are editorial commentary not present in the independent report and are intended to artificially create a sense of public threat.
As an article from SFist notes, SFRPD is “appear[ing] to make end run to get rid of Vaillancourt Fountain in a hurry”. Docomomo US/NOCA and the coalition of local, national, and international groups object to this attempt to minimize debate, manufacture consent, and revise history.
Key facts
This move contradicts the findings from SF Planning earlier this week that give automatic protection to the Vaillancourt Fountain. We've posted about those findings, along with an explainer of how it relates to CEQA.
This contradicts the independently produced Vaillancourt Fountain Conditions Assessment and disassembly and removal could even pose greater risk to workers.
This request for removal was premeditated, as shown by many public records.
The California Art Preservation Act (CAPA) has no provision for removal due to (artificial) emergencies.
The conditions for emergency or immediate removal under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) are very narrow and do not apply. Examples: a flood just happened, or a building is definitely about to collapse. Notably, this “does not include long-term projects undertaken for the purpose of preventing or mitigating a situation that has a low probability of occurrence in the short-term…”.