For Benicia’s kids and grandkids, for our present and future, please vote Yes on Measures X, Y and Z

“Benicia is doing its best…..”

By Stephen Golub, Benicia resident and author, “Benicia and Beyond” column in the Benicia Herald, September 6, 2026

Benicia resident and author Stephen Golub

Benicia is doing its best to close the at least $7.5 million annual resource gap left by the Valero Refinery closing. It’s doing so through budget cuts, operational reorganization and selective revenue generation. In addition, state housing mandates, the conversion of the Refinery property, inflation and emerging challenges (such as rising water levels due to climate change) will stretch police, fire, recreation, infrastructure and other city services.

Which is all a way of saying: Benicia needs additional annual revenues. Ballot Measures X, Y and Z, which we’re voting on this November 3 (or even sooner, if you wish), provide a way of raising such badly needed funds at no cost to most of us.

For a solid, relatively comprehensive explanation of why these measures are necessary, please go to the Building Benicia’s Future site, at beniciasfuture.org. In the meantime, I’ll take a shorter stab at that here.

The point of these items is not only about the present. It’s mainly to pave the way for the future: for  Benicia’s kids, grandkids and families to live in a surviving, thriving city, as fine as or even better than what we have now.

Here’s how these measures will help if passed, starting with the most significant one…

Measure Z: A Reasonable Real Property Transfer Tax

Measure Z proposes a real property transfer tax for residential, commercial and industrial sites. THE MEASURE Z TRANSFER TAX APPLIES TO ALMOST NO EXISTING HOMES AND RESIDENTS. NOW AND IN THE FUTURE, THERE WILL BE NO TRANSFER TAX ON ANY CURRENTLY EXISTING HOME UNDER MEASURE Z IF THE HOME IS SOLD FOR UNDER $2 MILLION. THE TAX  ALSO DOES NOT APPLY TO SALES OR OTHER TRANSFERS WITHIN FAMILIES, including between parents and children, grandparents and grandchildren, siblings, spouses and domestic partners. Certain affordable housing is also exempted.

So, what does Measure Z apply to? Well, for instance, if Measure Z were already in place late last year, Benicia would have pocketed a tax of $1,160,000 when commercial developers Blue Rise Ventures and DRA Advisors paid $145 million for a dozen buildings covering about 15 percent of Benicia’s industrial park. With the possibility that these or other investors could buy other parts of that area, such sales could benefit the city’s coffers considerably in the future if Measure Z is approved.

What’s more, in coming years much or all of the 900-acre Valero refinery site will be sold for industrial, commercial and housing development purposes, at a conceivable cumulative (though admittedly speculative) cost of $1 billion or more. That would mean many millions of dollars for the city. It’s noteworthy that Signature Development Group, the firm commissioned by Valero to sell the property, does not object to Measure Z (or associated Measure Y – more on that below).

Putting aside these huge projects, where does a typical Benician simply selling a private home figure in all this? Almost all of us are off the hook for any transfer tax. As I’ve emphasized, unless you sell a currently existing home for $2 million or more, you never pay the tax on that existing home.

In addition to commercial and industrial properties, the  tax mainly applies to new houses built in 2027 or later.  That is, if you or a developer sells a house that is built  in 2027 or later, the tax is $4, $6 or $8 per $1,000, depending on whether the price is under $2,000,000, from $2,000,000 to $9,999,999, or $10,000,000 or more.

Thus, with  several thousand houses due to be built in Benicia in coming years, the transfer taxes from residential sales would nicely complement the transfer taxes on commercial and industrial transfers.

Measure Y: A Necessary, Limited Charter City Status

Measure Y is the necessary companion to Measure Z. It allows Benicia to become a “limited Charter City,” which means a change in its legal status only for the purpose of increasing its real property transfer tax. Due to state law, that tax is currently capped at $0.55 per $1,000. We can’t increase that figure from $0.55 to the proposed $4-8 per $1,000 proposed under Measure Z unless Measure Y also passes and Benicia thus becomes a limited Charter City. Hence the necessity of voting “Yes” for both proposed measures.

The Opposition: Some Questionable Claims

Certain folks oppose Measures Y and Z. Perhaps you’ve noticed their signs in selected places around town. I’m sure they are sincere in their stance.

Furthermore, I dislike taxes as much as the next guy: As a self-employed person throughout my career, I did not relish the thought of having paid double social security taxes every year.

However, with all due respect, it seems to me that these opponents’ main anti-Y/Z arguments actually undercut their case. Their points are technically true but incomplete and to my mind misleading. That in turn makes me doubt the overall thrust of their contentions.

I’ll accordingly quote and briefly rebut a few of their officially stated claims (as found at the city’s Voting and Election Information site that presents arguments both for and against these two measures):

Opponents’ Claim: “If Measure Y passes, the City can seek to change the charter at any time.”

The Reality: The city government can’t change the charter on its own. Any expansion of the limited charter would require a whole new measure and a whole new vote by Benicians. This would simply be democracy in action.

What’s more, the city has indicated no intention at all to seek to change the proposed limited charter down the line. Measure Y is only for the purposes of instituting a real property transfer tax. Period. It involves nothing else.

The only thing Measure Y  opens the door to, then, is badly needed revenues.

Opponents’ Claim: Once Measure Z passes, City Hall can seek to reduce or eliminate that exemption [for homes selling for up to $2 million].”

The Reality: Again, any reduction or elimination in the $2 million floor for the tax would have to be via a future ballot measure that all of us could vote on.

In addition, any city council member who even proposed such a change could lose their next race and otherwise be ostracized, plus the measure could and almost certainly would be voted down. Again, this is all subject to democracy in action.

Opponents’ Claim: “All three California cities that filed bankruptcy — San Bernardino, Stockton, and Vallejo — were charter cities.”

The Reality: There are 25 cities in the Bay Area alone that are charter cities; only one of them (Vallejo) went bankrupt – due to reasons other than its charter status. And as of 2024, roughly a quarter of California cities are Charter Cities. Many have transfer taxes higher than Measure Z proposes for Benicia. This tax is not the kiss of financial death by any means.

Again, Benicia is not even seeking full charter status. Instead, Measure Y proposes just limited status for the sole purpose of transfer tax revenues.

Opponents’ Claim: “Measure Z would raise [only] $230,000 a year.”

The Reality: The point about Measure Z is not what it yields in the next few years (though it could well be higher than $230,000 per year), but that it sets up Benicia for raising millions of dollars down the line, as various housing, commercial and industrial developments take place that in turn trigger increasing transfer taxes.

Measures Z (and Y) are mainly about fueling a future in which Benicia survives and thrives, not about the past or even the present. Let’s also bear in mind the $1,160,000 that Benicia in effect forfeited from the industrial park sale by virtue of not having the Measure Z transfer tax in place a year ago.

Measure X: Modernizing Our Antiquated Business Tax

Measure X modernizes Benicia’s antiquated business licenses tax structure by, among other things, eliminating taxes for any business (be it a home, office or commercial establishment) making less than $100,000 annually. It also helps the city catch up with many years of inflation. The city council approved it unanimously as a ballot measure.

The upshot is that about 1,900 local businesses will no longer be subject to the tax, with over an additional 2,200 either paying less or no tax during the first year after Measure X is enacted.

For larger enterprises, the tax will be capped at $1,500 per year initially (with the rates of $0.25 to $1.25 per $1,000 in gross receipts, depending on the nature of the business). The rates then increase 10 percent per year up to a maximum of $25,000 annually.

Bear in mind, too, that the maximum would apply only to businesses far larger than the typical Benicia establishment.

A significant additional source of revenue under Measure X will be a separate tax of $3 per $100 on receipts for the Benicia Marine Terminal’s (largely auto-based) business.

The Bottom Line: Vote Yes on X, Y and Z

Benicia faces a big fiscal hole of at least $7.5 million per year, which it is addressing through a combination of budget cuts, operational reorganization and enhanced revenues. In addition, as new residential, commercial and industrial developments are built, police, fire, recreational and infrastructure needs will expand.

We accordingly need to approve additional revenue streams, not just for today but for many tomorrows down the line. Some such streams (as in Measures Y and Z) will impose no cost on the vast majority of us. Others (as in Measure X) are simply reasonable attempts to catch up with inflation and replace an antiquated business tax structure; they even eliminate or decrease taxes on some of us.

In a sense, then, the case for these steps is as simple as a, b, c. So…

PLEASE VOTE YES ON MEASURES X, Y AND Z.


Benicia resident and author Stephen Golub, A Promised Land

Stephen Golub writes about democracy and politics, both in America and abroad, at A Promised Land: America as a Developing Country.

…and… here’s more Golub on the Benicia Independent

Back to top

You’re Invited! In-Person Benicia CCS Film Screening – TODAY, Tues 9/29 @ 6:30PM

In-person screening of
The Sacrifice Zone
at the Benicia Public Library
on Tuesday 9/29 6:30-8:30 PM
.
The documentary unpacks Big Oil’s latest climate scam: carbon capture and storage (CCS).

The short film by Physicians for Social Responsibility LA, will be followed by a panel discussion and Q&A. Hear first-hand from experts featured in the film and from communities already being impacted by carbon dumping projects in the Bay Area and Central Valley.

Sacrifice zones are heavily polluted areas — often fence-line communities in low-income, Black and Brown neighborhoods — that disproportionately bear the brunt of industrial toxins and systemic environmental racism.

Learn how carbon capture and storage is creating a new wave of fossil-fueled sacrifice zones in California. There are already five proposed carbon dumping projects in the Bay Area Delta region.

This event is free and all ages are welcome! Light refreshments will be served. 

This event is hosted by members of Communities Against Carbon Transport & Injection (CACTI), Food & Water Watch, and Physicians for Social Responsibility Los Angeles.

Elizabeth Patterson on CEQA, etc… ‘Look Before You Leap’

Look before you leap

By Elizabeth Patterson, first appearing in The Benicia Herald, September 13, 2026

Elizabeth Patterson, Benicia Mayor 2007 – 2020

“Look before you leap” describes the reason for California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).  Before a project is built it is wise and thoughtful to determine impacts to air and water quality, wildlife habitats including terrestrial and aquatic species.  And for many what are the impacts from traffic, water supply, noise – a public health issue often ignored by decision makers.

California Forever pounded the hallways of California legislature in August to get Solano County Senator and Assembly member to sponsor CF’s proposed bill aided and abetted by the Governor’s Go Biz office.  The proposed bill would use  2008 Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the County General Plan.  Why wait until August to introduce this so-called trailer bill?  The answer is to avoid public review through the appropriate legislative committees and to use the power of the Governor’s office to wield their billionaire influence.  Sound familiar?

Senator Cabaldon noted that the 2008 General Plan EIR spelled out clearly that any “water related industrial project” would require a full CEQA assessment for potential impacts.  This is why the Senator among other concerns never endorsed the proposed legislation.

Assembly Member Wilson would not support the legislation without the Solano County Board of Supervisors signing on.  They didn’t.  And they didn’t because of multiple reasons including the last-minute California Forever steamrolling approach.  “I am not afraid of the Governor” said Supervisor Mitch Mashburn.  Board Chair Brown said “just say no”.

Mashburn’s motion to consider Solano County Maritime and Manufacturing  Act (Solano County Maritime) was “no” this year but next year consider Benicia’s deep water port and revitalizing Mare Island and its dry docks.  Will the billionaires do that?

Investing in existing communities such as Benicia and Vallejo means fewer new roads, water pipes, electrical power systems and so on versus the proposed shipbuilding near Collinsville.  It means investing private and public resources efficiently and effectively.  The ill-conceived Solano County Maritime “shipbuilding” project would take massive amounts of new roads, miles of new water supply pipes, and miles of new electrical power lines.  As a note, unless the Investor Owned Utilities and Public Utilities Commission change the rules, these new transmission lines will be part of your electricity energy bill.  That is how new development pays for utilities.  It is not just the developer or project.  The costs are spread around to all of us.

Roads.  The Solano Transportation Authority plans projects decades in advance because it must line up resources to pay for the improvements.  STA has a list.  It has projected funding sources.  What California Forever proposes with the shipbuilding project would require limited funds to be redirected and the approved projects list delayed by a decade or so.  Read STA’s comments on the notice of preparation for the EIR for the Suisun City Expansion project.  Legislative rumors have it that CF suggested diverting available funding from SR 37 to apply to SR 12.  It is hard to believe such rumors.

Investing in existing communities means where people live and work.  And it means avoiding significant impacts to tidal marshlands of the Sacramento River in the Delta.  Some of those impacts include harm from dredging especially if the existing ship channel is dug deeper.  The Army Corps of Engineers through numerous studies  identify that dredging the channel deeper could result in the channel walls collapsing because the sediment from hydraulic mining is weak.  Furthermore, the ACOE identified that a deeper channel would enable more salt water into the Delta where farmers pump to irrigate their crops.

The Bay-Delta is the heart of California’s water system. It supports some of the state’s most iconic and threatened fish and wildlife, sustains tribes and other local communities, and provides water for nearly 30 million Californians and 4 million acres of farmland. These benefits are essential to the economy and environment.

It would be helpful to understand all of this which is what a full CEQA review would provide.

Some have said that the proposed legislation to by-pass CEQA and local government adopted policies would still allow County discretionary decision making.  Nope.  Read the draft legislation to note that after the project is designed, the county would issue permits – permits which are ministerial – meaning adhering to adopted standards.  There would be no mitigation measures because there would be no identified impact because there is no CEQA.

Furthermore, all the important decisions of project design are made by the developer and the proposed development agreement is meaningless because there is nothing to negotiate.  And even with a development agreement, things happen such as bankruptcy leaving government holding the empty promises.

Imbedded in the failed CF legislation was a device to solve issues between agencies.  For instance, if STA disagreed with CalTrans, there was a proposed “master” who would decide.  This proposed master would be appointed by Land Use and Climate Innovation whose members are appointed by the Governor.  Want to guess how that decision would go?

It is true that there are many governmental agencies with decision making : air quality districts, water quality and water supply agencies, federal, state, regional and local transportation agencies, PUC, fish and wildlife, Delta Protection Commission, Delta Stewardship Council, NOAA, and Department of Defense – it is a long list.  Because things are complicated, expertise, knowledge and oversight are needed to secure public health, safety and welfare and the Public Trust Doctrine.

It is said that CEQA and the complications of getting approval are ruinous for California.  Really?  CEQA has been law since 1970.  More than 50 years.  And California is the 4th largest economy in the world.  Something must be working.  I suggest it is the “looking before you leap” that has had a net positive benefit.  Other benefits are cleaner air, better water quality, many habits protected, better transportation planning and less reliance on fossil fuels.

Right here in the river City of Benicia are opportunities for ship repair and maritime activities, expanding  tourism and visitors as a perfect place to explore the Delta National Heritage Area of which we are a part.  Invest in Benicia. Reduce our carbon footprint. Restore our fisheries.  And do it with the public.  Perhaps the billionaires will reflect on their attempts to get favorable treatment and remember Winston Churchill’s “Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all the other forms that have been tried”.  The billionaires “cram it down our throats” approach didn’t work.  Try public participation and democratic principles.

Elizabeth Patterson, Mayor 2007-2020
State staff environmental scientist, retired


Previously here on this subject:

Walking Back CEQA Protections Will Leave Californians Paying the Price for Ignoring Impacts, by Elizabeth Patterson, July 30, 2024

Tom Campbell: Jing Di Zhi Wa – on Benicia’s 2026 City Council election

Jing Di Zhi Wa

Former Benicia City Council Member Tom Campbell

By Tom Campbell, The Benicia Herald, September 18, 2026

Jing di zhi wa is a Chinese idiom that means you know as little about the real world as a frog at the bottom of a well. I think this might well describe Justin Zollars. From what I’ve been reading from his posts, candidate debate, and candidate’s statement, he seems to be a one trick pony focused on Flock cameras. I haven’t seen him post anything on how he’ll address what are monumental generational issues that are in front of the City Council right now. Issues like, “What are we going to do with the Seeno property” where a billionaire developer does not seem to be on the same page as the City Council. Or “What are we going to do with the port which after 62 years Benicia finally gets back in four years.”

A port that due to poor judgement in 1964 by a Benicia City Council the City has not gotten a penny in port operations for 62 years and counting, even though Benicia owns the wharf and all land accessing the water. Or how about the closed refinery that looks more and more like the State wants to keep as a gasoline tank farm even if it means Benicia will have to forsake any future development. The State seems to want Benicia to fall on its sword and ignore its future for the sake of keeping the rest of California’s drivers happy with a large supply of cheaper gas. Am I wrong? Then show me a time line for the clean-up and development of the refinery land. Afterall it’s been a year and a half since the announcement of the refinery closure and still nothing.

Those three big issues in front of the City Council right now are going to decide what the lives of the next generations in Benicia will be. Same as the decisions of the 1964 City Council decided the lives of the last three generations of Benicians after the Arsenal closed. There are very big issues at stake in this election. When you would rather talk about Flock cameras instead, it’s no different than if your house was on fire and you’re running around and you stop in the dining room and go “that silverware on the table just doesn’t go with the dishes’ floral pattern.” There’s a lot bigger issue staring you in the face at that particular moment than floral patterns. The same holds true for the generational challenges facing Benicia at this very moment.

So given the gravity of the challenges Benicia faces right now there is no time for an untested rookie with no civic history to navigate a steep learning curve immediately. I was on the City Council for 21 years and before that the Planning Commission, over 30 years total in Benicia City government. In that entire time, I can say the best Council I was ever on was the last City Council I was on. That Council had both Terry Scott and Kari Birdseye on it. What they showed me was that they could look at what had to be done and do it even if it meant a huge blowback. You have to put what’s best for the community ahead of your own ambitions. Not every Council could do that.

Kicking the can down the road is just a nice way of saying you don’t have the backbone to face unpopular but necessary votes. I never saw Kari or Terry back away from what had to be done. This is important because in the next few years the next City Council will have to deal with the State of California and billion dollar corporations that are going to try and throw Benicia a bone and say “Hey what’s the problem, we’re doing you a favor.” This Council is going to have to have the backbone to tell these corporations and the State what they can do with that bone.

I want someone on the City Council who knows and understands these generational issues and will protect our future. That’s why I’ m voting for Terry Scott and Kari Birdseye. I’m sure in that burning house that I mentioned above they would have been looking for a fire extinguisher and not a useless floral dish pattern.

Tom Campbell


More on the candidates:
Benicia city council candidates Terry Scott, Kari Birdseye, & Justin Zollars. Photo: The Vallejo Sun