As we continue tracking candidate positions on Open Air, today’s post features Dhaval Prajapati’s pivot from neutrality to endorsing closed streets.

When I originally shared Prajapati’s response to my inquiry here on the blog back in June, he took a very safe, middle-of-the-road reply. He claimed to be completely neutral, publicly telling us that it was important to “take the time to review the facts before forming a position.”

However, his campaign platform has since taken a completely different direction. After maintaining that public stance of neutrality for nearly three months, Prajapati posted an official “WHERE I STAND” declaration on his Facebook page on September 18, explicitly stating: “I like Open Air” and “I support Open Air.”

The Candidate’s Position: The Business Model and Superficial Inclusions

In his new public policy statement, Prajapati shifts entirely away from his previous “fact-finding” persona and lays out a clear plan to entrench the event by turning it into a self-sustaining business model.

Key takeaways from his updated position include:

• Definitive Support for the Footprint: Prajapati openly praises the festival, writing: “From June to September, we close part of downtown on weekends and turn it into a pedestrian area… I like Open Air.”
• The Fiscal Focus: His primary goal for the event is financial sustainability. He wants a full accounting of staff hours, expenses, and revenues, with the objective of securing more vendors and corporate sponsorships so that the event stops relying on taxpayer subsidies.
• An Afterthought on Accessibility: After dedicating the majority of his platform to revenue generation, sponsorships, and vendor opportunities, he closes with a brief, single-sentence about accessibility: “I want to make it better… while also making sure accessibility, including accessible parking and access to downtown businesses, is part of the planning.”

---

The Reality: A Complete Reversal of Platform Promises

Prajapati’s swift pivot exposes a frustrating trend in campaigning. When a candidate tells an accessibility community publicly that they are “still learning” and “haven’t formed a position,” only to turn around months later and fully endorse the event, it breaks the trust established with voters who are looking for genuine consultation.

Furthermore, his updated platform reveals exactly where his priorities lie. Accessibility is treated as an optional checkbox to be tossed into the “future planning” phase, while the structural decision to lock down the street grid is treated as a done deal.

As a candidate, Prajapati claims he wants to ensure “access to downtown businesses,” yet he openly supports a pedestrian-only footprint that completely eliminates vehicle navigation. For residents who use their vehicles as non-negotiable assistive mobility devices, you cannot “plan” accessibility into a closed street. The closed street is the barrier. By declaring his unyielding support for a four-month vehicle ban after previously claiming he needed to study the facts, Prajapati proves that able-bodied entertainment and revenue generation remain his true priorities.

---

What Do You Think?

Dhaval Prajapati started his campaign by publicly stating he was neutral and looking at the facts, then turned around on September 18 and told the public he firmly supports Open Air.

How do you feel about a candidate changing their core position mid-campaign after previously committing to neutrality? Let me know your thoughts in the comments below, and stay tuned as we continue to put candidate positions on the record.