All posts by BenIndy

Stephen Golub: This October 29 Meeting is Vital for Benicia’s Future

‘The devil is in the details of how the  Air District’s new Local Community Investment Fund’s (LCIF) grants will be awarded’

 Stephen Golub, A Promised Land – America as a Developing Country

By Stephen Golub, Benicia resident and author. October 26, 2025. [First published in the Benicia Herald on 10/26/25.]

This really is important: On Wednesday, October 29, the Bay Area Air District is holding a 5:30-7 pm Zoom meeting (Webinar) to discuss draft guidelines for use of penalty/settlement funds for air pollution violations. As a result of the $82 million Air District fine for Valero’s 15 years of undisclosed toxic emissions, Benicia is by far the greatest potential beneficiary so far: $54 million (plus possible interest) is supposed to be set aside for Benicia-specific projects.

But there’s potentially big trouble in paradise, which is why Benicians’ Zoom participation in the October 29 meeting is crucial. The devil is in the details of how the  Air District’s new Local Community Investment Fund’s (LCIF) grants will be awarded for Benicia and other communities, starting next year. If the guidelines impose a bureaucratic, restrictive process, Benicia will have considerable trouble weathering the financial storm that will lash us (also starting next year) as Valero’s contributions to the city coffers come to an end.

I don’t want to jump to conclusions or urge others to do so. But I fear that the restrictive approach could be the direction the Air District takes. I hope that I’m wrong.

We’re talking about $54 million or more that could and should mainly be decided on by Benicia, rather than the staff of the Community Investments Office (CIO), which administers the Fund.

A restrictive, top-down approach dominated by CIO staff  rather than driven by Benicia and other communities may also limit our ability to best grapple with the very challenges the CIO’s site says the Fund aims to address: “Funding will support community-driven solutions that reduce or mitigate air pollution, improve public health, and build economic resilience for a just transition.”

Along with serving other purposes, the Fund  can and should contribute to budget support that will help close the city’s post-Valero financial gap for a number of years. This will  strengthen Benicia’s “economic resilience for a just transition.”

I emphasize this because there’s  another Benicia-specific factor at play here. The Air District failed to uncover Valero’s egregious toxic emissions for over 15 years. It certainly fell short by waiting over three additional years to inform Benicia after it found out.

Had this information come to light far sooner, might it have helped cut down on Benicia cancer rates that are far higher than state and county levels (including nearly double California’s breast cancer incidence)? That’s hard to say.

Furthermore, it might be counterproductive to press this point on the Air District, or to do so in any but the most diplomatic ways.

Finally,  to the Air District’s great credit, it installed new, vigorous leadership after this fiasco came to light in 2022. But this all weighs in favor of the Air District awarding the LCIF grants flexibly to Benicia.

Another factor that weighs in terms of the flexible approach is Benicia’s nearly unprecedented situation: Refineries don’t close every day, to put it mildly. From financial recovery to environmental clean-up (complicated by Valero land previously being used for military ordinance testing), our challenges are daunting – even as the opportunities for our community’s quality of life, public health and economic prosperity (such as through tourism development) are inspiring. A just transition requires that the Air District take a just  approach to partnership with Benicia.

Thus, if the CIO finalizes the guidelines in ways that allow our city appropriate flexibility in the use of the funds, it will be a boon to Benicia. But the benefits extend beyond Benicia; similar flexibility will be best for other Bay Area communities regarding other Air District fines.

The 90-minute October 29 Webinar is our only chance to hear about and weigh in on the draft guidelines via a public forum (with perhaps two minutes per public comment). Let’s not let it slide by. Even if you don’t want to comment during the meeting, simply showing up (albeit via Zoom) can show that we care.

There’s already cause for concern, in that the draft guidelines won’t be released until tomorrow, October 27, just two days before the meeting. That’s precious little time for the public to review them. But let’s try.

So, what can you do?

  1. To participate in the Zoom, you must pre-register. Here’s the link: https://www.baaqmd.gov/en/community-health/community-investments-office. You might also be able to find it by searching online for something like Air District Community Investments Office.
  2. When you reach that link, please scroll down to the “Meetings and Events” section. Click the “Pre-register” box there and fill in the required information.
  3. Once you get the CIO confirmation email, scroll down to a blue box that says, “Join Webinar.” (While that link is functional, of course it won’t actually become active until the October 29 meeting.)
  4. If you wish to weigh in before or after the meeting – and perhaps to receive the guidelines as soon as they are issued on October 27 – you can email you comments, questions and guidelines request to communityinvestments@baaqmd.gov. (The comments deadline is less than a month later, on November 25.)
  5. If you do decide to participate, be it via Zoom or email, I’m sure you’ll have your own ideas on what to prioritize. But for what it’s worth, to my mind the most basic message is that Benicia and other beneficiary communities standing to benefit from the Local Community Investment Fund should have as much leeway as possible in utilizing the settlements/penalties they each receive, as long as they broadly fit within the Air District funding parameters I’ve flagged: “support community-driven solutions that reduce or mitigate air pollution, improve public health, and build economic resilience for a just transition.” This is consistent with and in fact mandated by the Air District’s emphasis on partnering with rather than dictating to Bay Area communities.

I’m harping on all this not just because of the impact on Benicia, but because most of my career involved advising funding agencies on the best foci and approaches for awarding grants for community-oriented, environmental and other projects. I worked for and with the Asia, Ford and Open Societies Foundations, as well as the American, British and Danish aid agencies and numerous other funders.

The single biggest lesson I took away from those 35+ years of work was this: Grants work best when they are as simple as possible and provide as much leeway as possible to responsible local governments or community groups that receive them, as long as sensible financial auditing is in place.

If the CIO goes down this flexible road, it will be best for Benicia (and the Bay Area) in terms of advancing  clean air, public health, economic resilience and the post-Valero transition. It also will ensure the most efficient use of funds.

To be clear, I’m not saying that the Air District, via the CIO, should simply turn over the $54 million or more to Benicia; though that might make sense, I don’t believe that Air District rules allow this. I also don’t doubt the sincerity and dedication of the CIO staff who will administer the Fund.

But the finalized guidelines should provide the necessary flexibility for Benicia and other communities to decide how to use the funds within the broad parameters the CIO has already set. It’s our future that’s on the line.


Benicia resident and author Stephen Golub, A Promised Land

CHECK OUT STEPHEN GOLUB’S BLOG, A PROMISED LAND

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

Neighbor to Neighbor: How to help pass Prop 50

INDIVISIBLE: NEIGHBOR2NEIGHBOR

Friends –

Every king needs his lackeys, and our wannabe king wants to redraw congressional district lines to install his loyal subjects in Congress — giving Republicans permanent control of the House. But Californians are fighting back with Proposition 50.

A protestor in California holds up a handmade NO KINGS sign while two women rollerblade past in the foreground and dozens of other No Kings protestors march in the background -- photo courtesy of zimmagery.com
A protestor in California holds up a handmade NO KINGS sign while two women rollerblade past in the foreground and dozens of other No Kings protestors march in the background — photo courtesy of zimmagery.com

On Saturday, millions of Californians showed up to say NO to kings. Now, we need to harness similar grassroots energy to make sure our neighbors turn out to VOTE YES ON 50!

Will you sign up for Neighbor2Neighbor to get out the vote for Prop 50? We’ll send you a list of 10 like-minded neighbors’ doors that you can knock on your own time.

Our Neighbor2Neighbor program is proven to be one of the most powerful get out the vote tools we have. Check out our earlier email if you need more info, and then take a moment to plug in right now.

—– ORIGINAL MESSAGE —–

Hello California Indivisibles!

Hundreds of you joined our state-wide call this week where we launched our revolutionary voter contact tool in support of Proposition 50.

But now, we need thousands of folks signing up to use our Neighbor2Neighbor tool to get out the vote and ensure Prop 50 passes.

If you’re on our list, you probably understand the stakes here — Donald Trump and his allies are attempting to rig the 2026 midterms using an unprecedented power grab to redraw district lines in red states and hand Republicans more congressional seats.

Their goal is permanent Republican control of the House of Representatives so Trump and his cronies can continue hollowing out our government (and our healthcare system) to pay for tax breaks for billionaires and a lawless secret police force with the resources of a national military. Proposition 50 levels the playing field without an unfair advantage for Republicans in the 2026 midterms.

But some of your neighbors might not know the stakes. Some of them might not even be planning to vote. YOU can change that — by volunteering to canvass your own neighborhood, on your own time, using Neighbor2Neighbor.

Sign up here to knock 10 doors using Neighbor2Neighbor >>


What is Neighbor2Neighbor?

Neighbor2Neighbor is an opportunity to make sure Californians are talking to each other about Proposition 50 — and about how California is leading the charge to stand up to the MAGA bullies who ignore what American voters want.

People who hear from a trusted neighbor are up to two times more likely to vote than those who do not. The key to success is connecting on a personal level with those we have the most influence with: our community.

Here’s how to get going:

  1. You sign up online. Simply sign up at this link. No app to download, no fancy tech. Just a signup form and we’ll get you what you need.
  2. We send you a list of 10 like-minded neighbors, a simple script, and an optional printout to leave behind! N2N focuses on folks who largely agree with us but might need an extra push or reminder to vote.
  3. You knock on their doors and have a brief conversation about voting. Choose when to get out there on your own time!
  4. You mark your “Neighbors” page once you talk to them, so we know what voters you’ve connected with.

That’s it!

No complex training. No complicated application. Just an opportunity to get out and meet the person you see while walking your dog, the friendly parents whose kids go to school with yours, or the neighbors with the fun Halloween decor — and increase the probability that they all show up to vote.

GET YOUR 10 DOORS >>

Together, we can make sure Prop 50 passes and our democracy stays strong. We hope to see you out there soon!

In solidarity,
Indivisible Team

P.S. Please feel free to forward this email to other Californians who may want to get out there and knock doors! Each person you help sign up doubles your impact and helps us reach 10 or more like-minded Californians.

Elizabeth Patterson: Great questions for Valero bailout

The city and other regional agencies should have a seat at the stakeholder table

By Elizabeth Patterson, September 11, 2025 [posted belatedly here on 9/17/25]

Brenden Chavez is a graduate student in Urban Planning at San José State University with roots in Benicia, studying refinery closures, land use & environmental planning, and community health.”

Brenden and I have been discussing the role of the community in decisions about Valero decommissioning and future land uses. He contacted me because of my work as Mayor and using the public process for major issues. Collaborative planning involves empowering the public and not being led by top down process. I will share his paper on this when it is ready. Meanwhile I thought you’d like to see his great questions, as follows:

I saw the recent news about the state possibly giving Valero a bailout of $80 to $200 million to keep them operating. This is a huge development, and honestly, a bit unexpected. My thought is that Sac politicians are motivated by fear of gas going to $8/gallon. If this goes through, it’s a setback to the state’s goal to be carbon neutral by 2045. Unfortunately, there is no concrete ‘just transition’ strategy to help cities like Benicia, which are economically dependent on the fossil fuel industry. I’m trying to wrap my head around what this means for Benicia. A few questions come to mind:

    • If Sacramento is willing to spend $80 billion to save Valero, why can’t they do the same for the city/county? Backfilling the general fund, remediation seed money, retraining programs, etc.
    • Is there any way for the city or other regional agencies to have a seat at the stakeholder table, since the state is essentially repaying them their $82 million settlement with taxpayer money?
    • If Valero gets bailed out, does that give other refineries like Phillips 66 the power to lobby for the same treatment? How does that shift the state’s long-term sustainability goals?

Elizabeth Patterson

Stephen Golub: Psssst! Here’s a Great Way to Increase Your Property Value in Benicia: Vote for Parks

By Stephen Golub, Benicia resident and author. September 7, 2025. [First published in the Benicia Herald on 9/7/25.]

 Stephen Golub, A Promised Land – America as a Developing Country

Each year my wife and I pay thousands of dollars in property taxes that support Benicia schools, even though we’ve never had kids or grandkids attend them. People pay such taxes without reaping direct benefits partly because it’s required, but also because it’s part of being a good citizen: It’s what people do in and for a community.

But hey, I’m by no means presenting myself as a paragon of virtue here. Paying such taxes is very much in my self-interest.

How’s that? Great schools are part of what keeps Benicia such a great place to live, which in turn fuels our property values that rise over time.

Similarly, I don’t drive around town much – maybe a few times per week – but good roads benefit my investment in my home. So yeah, it’s in my self-interest to pay for schools and roads even as I, like many of you, don’t directly benefit much or at all from them. We willingly (though perhaps not gladly) pay such levies because we each benefit.

The same goes for parks. And for the proposed Citywide Parks, Landscape, and Lighting Assessment District (PLLAD). Property owners can vote for or against the measure by October 14 via mail-in ballot (which must be received by the City, and not simply postmarked, by that date), by submitting it at the City Council meeting that day or by returning it to the City Clerk’s Office at City Hall by then.

(FYI: The City is convening a community meeting this Tuesday, September 9, from 6 to 8 pm, at the Fitzgerald Field Grandstand, 249 East H Street, at which City staff will share information, welcome feedback and answer questions about the PLLAD. You can also find additional details at a City site: BelieveInBenicia.org.)

I hardly use Benicia’s parks. But I do recall that years ago when my wife and I were checking Benicia out as a place to move to, we visited the Community Park, passed by several other parks and were impressed by now nice they all were.

Now, what if the Community Park’s ballfields were completely run-down? What if the others were weed-filled lots? What if broken lighting makes the facilities less usable or safe for early evening use? What if our trails are heavily littered or less accessible? I don’t know if we would have made this wonderful town our own or if future prospective residents would do the same. Maybe some young families who are potential Benicians would move elsewhere after seeing a disrepaired state of affairs here.

I do know that other attractive Bay Area cities – our neighbors in some respects, competitors for residents and businesses in others – appreciate and invest in the appeal of pleasant parks, trails, lighting and the like.

Parks are similarly part of what makes Benicia such a pleasant locale in which to live and a home here such a sound investment – even for those of us who don’t live near a park or use them much. They’re a face of this fantastic place. Together with our  waterfront setting and First Street, they’re the first things many visitors see as they stroll or drive through town.

I realize and respect that some Benicians have trouble with specific aspects of the PLLAD. I might even agree with one or two such criticisms.

But let’s not lose the forest for the trees in deciding whether we’re going to maintain and improve our parks and related facilities, including gradually dealing with $55 million of deferred maintenance and repairing our 19 (out of 21) playgrounds that are over 20 years old. The value of private property flows partly from the appeal of an area’s public places.

The benefits are not just financial. Good parks are good for public health in all sorts of ways. In line with “broken windows” data  on crime (which indicates that crime can rise in communities that appear broken-down) and research indicating that well-maintained parks and lighting deter unsavory conduct, they contribute to public safety.

And of course, while public health and public safety are highly desirable in and of themselves, they in turn contribute to property values.

Furthermore, while some out-of-towners may simply come and go in using these facilities – a benefit we shouldn’t begrudge them – others aid Benicia businesses and employment by coupling park and beach use here with visits to our supermarkets, restaurants, shops or galleries.

I’d add that we’ve recently been down a similar road and unfortunately decided to forego financial benefits. Last year, before Valero announced its plans to shutter the refinery, Benicians voted to reject a property transfer tax. If that measure had passed, the eventual sale of the refinery could have netted Benicia $10 million or more. Now we’ll net nada.

Some may say that the parks will be fine even without the proposed PLLAD. But  the closure of the Valero refinery sooner or later will put a big burden on the City budget. Cuts will have to come somewhere. Without the PLLAD, parks will seriously suffer if we want to try to maintain police and fire protection – or do folks wish to cut those services instead?

Even if the refinery closes later rather than sooner, Benicia’s still dealing with resource challenges that undercut our capacity to maintain the parks, trails and related facilities.

Some understandably object to yet another fee for city services. I know that the maximum assessment of $208 per parcel is nothing to sneeze at. But that 57 cents per day (and far less for many property owners) is still a small price to pay for many thousands of dollars in annually increasing property value. It’s an investment in our own homes and businesses.

If you could spend a relatively tiny bit more to ensure that your home’s worth rises rather than falls, that you profit by thousands or tens of thousands of dollars more when you eventually sell it, that your kids inherit a better property down the line or that you can rent it out for more, you might decide it makes sense to shell out those 10 or 25 or 57 cents per day for your home.

Well, Benicia is our home. The parks are our living room and front yard.

Finally, let’s face it: We know of other Bay Area communities where public service breakdowns have damaged property values, as well as public safety and health. It can happen all too easily if things start to slip. We can’t let the same fate befall Benicia.

So let’s not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Please  vote for the PLLAD not just because it benefits this lovely community we call home, but because – even if we don’t use the parks or we dislike elements of the proposal – it’s good for each of us and our pocketbooks.


Benicia resident and author Stephen Golub, A Promised Land

CHECK OUT STEPHEN GOLUB’S BLOG, A PROMISED LAND

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