All posts by Nathalie Christian

Benicia City Council, Big Oil, Negative campaigning, Nielsen Merksamer, Valero Benicia Refinery, Valero Services Inc.

SF Chron: Attorney associated with Valero-funded PAC connected to ‘faux-ilition’ scheme targeting oil refinery regulations and penalties

[Note from BenIndy Contributor Nathalie Christian: An attorney associated with the firm a Valero-funded PAC has used throughout allegedly misleading campaign efforts in Benicia elections has been exposed as a key figure behind a ‘phony coalition’ some say was manufactured to oppose refinery regulations and penalties. Watchdog and advocacy organizations describe the coalition – dubbed a ‘faux-ilition’ by Calpeek – as a Big Oil–funded scheme to make industry opposition to a proposal to cap oil company profits appear grassroots-driven. (Industry leaders deny the allegation.) Benicians may recognize the name of the firm – Nielsen Merksamer – as well as the name of the attorney in question from Roger Straw’s reporting on the Valero-funded PAC’s efforts to influence local elections. (This PAC was previously known as ‘Working Families’ and more recently as ‘Progress for Benicia.’) Nielsen Merksamer was also behind a letter threatening litigation over a Benicia Open Government Commission’s candidate forum in 2018. Nielsen Merksamer’s clients include Valero Energy Corporation of course, as well as other Big Oil giants BP, Chevron, ConocoPhillips and Exxon.]

How a network of ‘phony’ groups sprung up to fight Newsom’s oil regulations

San Francisco Chronicle, by Dustin Gardiner, June 19, 2023 (Updated June 20)

Groups with names like Californians Against Higher Taxes sprung up to oppose Gov. Gavin Newsom’s plan to penalize oil companies. Advocates say one man is behind three of them.

California lawmakers were on the verge of passing Gov. Gavin Newsom’s proposal to allow the state to cap the profits of oil companies when a trio of advocacy groups with innocuous-sounding names went on an advertising blitz.

The groups — nonprofits that call themselves Californians Against Higher Taxes, Californians for Affordable and Reliable Energy and Californians for Energy Independence — campaigned against Newsom’s measure in a blizzard of social media posts and television ads. The groups said that further regulation of oil refineries would make the state more dependent on foreign crude oil imports or would raise the cost of gas for consumers, dubbing the proposal “Gavin’s gas tax.”

Those groups also billed themselves as coalitions of thousands of concerned taxpayers or small-business owners. Their ads and websites are rife with stock images of everyday-looking people.

But the organizations, according to corporate and lobbyist filings, weren’t created by average Californians or small businesses. One attorney from the North Bay, who has a long history of working with oil companies and trade associations, was central in organizing all three groups.

Steven Lucas, a San Rafael attorney who specializes in political law, is listed as the CFO and secretary for two of the groups, Californians for Affordable and Reliable Energy and Californians for Energy Independence. He also held the same roles with Californians Against Higher Taxes until last year.

Lucas did not respond to emails and voicemails requesting comment. The groups he operated were heavily funded by oil refineries and the Western States Petroleum Association, an industry trade group.

Environmentalists and consumer advocates said the advertising campaign is an example of how the oil industry used “astroturf” or “front” groups to try to kill Newsom’s proposal using misleading tactics.

It’s designed to create the perception that there’s a grassroots movement that’s against oil industry accountability. These are not real groups; these are phony groups created for the purpose of preventing the oil industry from facing accountability for its high prices and environmental crimes.” Jamie Court, president of Consumer Watchdog

“It’s designed to create the perception that there’s a grassroots movement that’s against oil industry accountability,” said Jamie Court, president of Consumer Watchdog, an advocacy group that pushed to cap soaring gas profits. “These are not real groups; these are phony groups created for the purpose of preventing the oil industry from facing accountability for its high prices and environmental crimes.”

Lawmakers ultimately passed Newsom’s proposal, though it was significantly scaled back after he got a lukewarm response from some moderate Democrats amid the oil industry’s ad push.

The bill Newsom signed into law gives state energy regulators the authority to place a cap on oil refiners’ profits in California — and to set the amount. They also now have the authority to fine companies that exceed the cap and require them to disclose information about their operations and prices.

The Democratic governor’s original proposal would have gone further by requiring legislators to set the amount of the profit cap. Still, the bill that passed was a major victory for environmentalists and consumer advocates who had failed, for decades, to pass measures designed to combat California’s highest-in-the-nation gas prices.

As lawmakers considered Newsom’s measure, the oil industry spent more than $9.4 million in the first quarter of 2023 on lobbying and public-influence campaigning, largely centered on Newsom’s oil profit proposal. About $5.2 million of that money was funneled into the three advocacy groups with ties to Lucas.

Combined, the oil-industry affiliated groups have run 568 social media ads on Facebook and Instagram since December, according to data from parent company Meta.

The ad tsunami started in late 2022, quickly after Newsom called a special session for lawmakers to consider measures to combat skyrocketing gas prices consumers were paying at the pump. He accused the oil refiners of “price gouging” Californians as the price of a gallon of regular gasoline soared to a statewide average of $6.42 last fall.

But opponents of the measure said the accusation that they used “astroturf” or deceptive tactics to stoke a perception of opposition is unfair and negates the concerns of a broad coalition of groups.

They said many business interests, including the California Chamber of Commerce and agricultural companies, also had concerns that Newsom’s approach, including the proposal that lawmakers ultimately adopted and his more aggressive earlier pitch, could have the unintended consequence of driving prices up if it causes oil companies to produce less gas in California.

In addition to Lucas, the three advocacy groups are headed by business association executives. Californians for Energy Independence listed Allan Zaremberg, the former leader of the state Chamber of Commerce who died this year, as its CEO. Californians for Affordable and Reliable Energy lists its CEO as Robert Lapsley, president of the California Business Roundtable, another association of business groups that includes oil companies.

Californians Against Higher Taxes, which was organized by Lucas and the law firm where he works, is now led by Jennifer Barrera, CEO of the Chamber of Commerce; and Thomas Hiltachk, a political attorney. Hiltachk did not respond to a request for comment.

Kevin Slagle, a spokesperson for the Western States Petroleum Association, said the notion that the opposition campaign cloaked its efforts is laughable. He said the groups had to report their spending, and that the effort through third-party groups was combined with ads directly funded and managed by oil companies and WSPA.

“It’s disingenuous to call these efforts fake. They’re very real and they’re based on legitimate policy concerns,” Slagle said. “Our political system has so much transparency built into it.”

Of the two dozen oil companies and trade associations that poured more than $9.4 million into California lobbying and influence campaigns, Chevron contributed more than half of that total. The company, the largest oil refiner in California, spent $4.9 million, including $3.63 million it contributed to Californians for Energy Independence.

Ross Allen, a Chevron spokesperson, defended the company’s lobbying efforts and suggested “attacks” on oil refining in the state are putting the supply at risk. He said California has volatile energy markets, in part, due to its clean-fuel standards that cut off its gas supply from the rest of the country.

“Chevron works hard to educate policymakers and the public about how fragile California’s energy markets really are,” Allen wrote in an email.

But Melissa Aronczyk, an associate professor at Rutgers University in New Jersey who studies the impact of public-relations campaigns on climate change policy, said the playbook that oil companies used by deploying “astroturf” groups in California is hardly new. She said the difference is that environmentalists have become more adept at uncloaking such tactics.

“People have much more awareness about greenwashing than they did ever before,” she said, using a term for marketing that’s intended to mislead the public about environmental impacts.

“[…] the tactic of using outside groups with seemingly innocuous names is designed to trick voters who might be more skeptical of advertising if they could see it’s paid for by oil companies.”

Aronczyk said the tactic of using outside groups with seemingly innocuous names is designed to trick voters who might be more skeptical of advertising if they could see it’s paid for by oil companies. In California, candidates and ballot measure campaigns must disclose their major donors in fine print at the bottom of ads. But that same disclosure requirement doesn’t apply to ads for issue-based campaigns that aren’t tied to an election.

She likened the “puppet campaign” strategy to the marketing tactics employed by other embattled industries, including tobacco companies and prescription drug firms, which bankrolled third-party advocacy groups to fight regulations targeting cigarettes and the proliferation of opioid drugs, respectively.

“They really are running scared, and that’s why they’re resorting to these tactics,” Aronczyk said. “It is a very short playbook, and it has been used for many decades.”

Indeed, Lucas, the attorney behind oil-industry-funded advocacy groups, is a partner at a law firm, Nielsen Merksamer, which also has a long history of working with tobacco companies to fight restrictions in California.

In 2017, two other attorneys from the firm were the treasurers of an advocacy group dubbed “Let’s Be Real” that worked with the tobacco industry in an unsuccessful attempt to overturn San Francisco’s law banning the sale of flavored tobacco and vaping products. Similarly, the firm played a major role in coordinating a failed referendum to repeal a 2020 statewide law that banned most flavored tobacco products.

READ MORE:

Clean Air Act, EPA, Federal investigation, Martinez Refining Company

Martinez refinery’s chemical release may not have long-term effects, but residents’ sense of safety is ‘shattered’

[Note from BenIndy contributor Nathalie Christian: It’s mostly good news – soil tests suggest that the Martinez Refinery Company’s (MCR) 50,000-pound chemical release last November will have no long-term effects on our safety.  However, these same soil tests showed arsenic and lead levels either close to or in excess of state health limits at some sites. Toxicologists say that these concentrations were not related to the November release, so now my questions are: Which sites are showing unsafe lead and arsenic levels, exactly? Where did the toxic compounds come from if not the MRC release? And of course there’s the matter of MRC not disclosing the incident and associated impacts until its hand was forced. A report with more information is due in the next few weeks, stay tuned.]

Martinez Refinery’s Chemical Release Poses No Long-Term Hazard, Tests Find

A picture of Martinez Refining Company in the distance with residences in the foreground.
Martinez Refinery. | Anda Chu/Bay Area News Group.

KQED, by Ted Goldberg and Dan Brekke, June 8, 2023

Contra Costa County health officials announced Thursday that soil testing conducted in the months after a Martinez oil refinery released nearly 50,000 pounds of powdered industrial chemicals last November has found no long-term health risks to residents in the area.

Contra Costa Health Officer Dr. Ori Tzvieli said the county is immediately lifting a March 7 advisory (PDF) that recommended residents refrain from consuming fruits and vegetables grown in soil that had received fallout from the Martinez Refining Company’s release. The refinery company is owned and operated by PBF Energy, based in Parsippany, New Jersey.

Tzvieli said the soil testing and an associated risk assessment “confirms that the primary health risk from the spent catalyst release occurred in the initial hours and days after the refinery release.”

The soil-testing results were released to a community oversight committee formed after the releases, which occurred last Nov. 24–25, on Thanksgiving and the following day.

Tzvieli added during a media briefing that followed the committee meeting that because PBF failed to immediately notify officials about the release, questions remain about what health effects residents might experience because of their exposure to the toxic dust immediately after it settled on their neighborhoods.

“We weren’t able to do measurement in real time because we didn’t know this was going on until several days later,” Tzvieli said. “So had we been able to do measurement in real time, we would have been able to look at concentrations — what was in the air.”

Some of the heavy metals in the dust, such as nickel, pose health concerns, he said.

“Some of those can have effects on the immune system, some of these metals can be carcinogenic. So it is a concerning incident,” he said.

At the same time, he added, the inability to measure the November release as it was occurring makes it hard to distinguish the hazard the incident posed from the impact of ongoing refinery emissions.

“So that’s why it’s hard to give people specific information about the risks that stemmed from this particular release,” Tzvieli said.

Consultants hired by the county analyzed soil samples from 14 sites stretching from El Sobrante to Benicia for more than a dozen metals that may have been associated with the release of 24 tons of refinery dust — material described as “spent catalyst” used in the refining process.

The results for most of the heavy metals the samples were analyzed for, including aluminum, copper, nickel, zinc and chromium, all came back both within an expected regional background range and below residential health limits set by the state Department of Toxic Substances Control.

Jenny Phillips, a toxicologist employed by consultant TRC, reported that samples of arsenic and lead were close to or exceeded state health limits at a handful of sites. But she added that the higher levels of those two toxic metals were probably unrelated to last November’s refinery release. [Emphasis added.] TRC’s report will be made available to the public sometime in the next two weeks, and it will be open for comment for 45 days.

‘One hundred ninety-four days after the release, we are now at the point where we’re telling people it’s OK to eat the fresh fruits and vegetables. The process is flawed.’Tony Semenza, Martinez resident and member of the oversight committee

Matt Kaufmann, Contra Costa County’s deputy health director, emphasized that the investigation of the Martinez incident is far from over. The county has hired a consultant to perform an independent root cause analysis of the release, and county prosecutors are weighing potential charges against the refinery.

Kaufmann criticized the refining company for failing to immediately notify local officials when the incident occurred.

The test results released Thursday “do not excuse the Martinez Refining Company for the lack of notification at the onset of this incident,” he said. “The lack of timely notification negated our ability as health officials to protect our community, including those most vulnerable, namely the medically compromised, the elderly and the children within our community.”

In a statement, PBF Energy spokesperson Brandon Matson said the company was “pleased” the county had released the soil-testing analysis and lifted its health advisory.

“The results are in line with our initial statements about the material,” Matson said. He also offered the latest in a string of apologies the company has offered to Martinez residents, saying the company has investigated the release, has identified corrective actions and is committed to implementing them.

Tony Semenza, a Martinez resident serving on the oversight committee, expressed frustration that it has taken so long to assess the hazard posed by the releases.

“One hundred ninety-four days after the release, we are now at the point where we’re telling people it’s OK to eat the fresh fruits and vegetables,” Semenza said. “The process is flawed. This should have been done much quicker, a while ago. … I’m upset with the way the process works.”

The test results come less than two weeks after the FBI confirmed it has launched a joint investigation with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency into the Martinez plant’s spent catalyst release.

Members of the refinery accountability group Healthy Martinez welcomed the largely reassuring test results, but expressed continuing misgivings about PBF and the refinery.

“I’m grateful that the Thanksgiving release no longer poses serious danger and that Contra Costa Health has demonstrated leadership in this process, but I still don’t trust the refinery that didn’t report it,” said Martinez resident group member Jillian Elliott.

“Today’s results are only one piece of the larger issue,” said Heidi Taylor, a longtime Martinez resident and Healthy Martinez member. “It doesn’t change the fact that this oil refinery dumped toxic metals on our community (and) didn’t report it to county health.”

Healthy Martinez has also called on PBF to install improved emissions control and air monitoring equipment at the refinery.

FBI agents and EPA personnel have gone door to door asking residents about their experience during and after the incident. The probe also has included circulation of an online survey.

Martinez resident Wendy Ke said representatives from both federal agencies approached her late last month and asked a series of questions.

“It was primarily, ‘Do you have photos, do you have videos, do you have factual documentation? Did you touch the spent catalyst? Did you see it?’” Ke said.

She said the morning after Thanksgiving, her neighborhood was coated with what looked like ash, as if there had been a major wildfire nearby.

“But it did look a little bit different,” she said. “It didn’t have a light-weight ash to it, like flaky ash. It seemed a little more sticky.”

The same morning, resident Zachary Taylor found his neighborhood covered in dust.

“Just a consistent coating across everything, almost like a snowfall, like a light dusting, but then we go out across the street and absolutely everything is covered with it,” Taylor said.

Refinery dust known as ‘spent catalyst’ from the PBF Energy plant sits on a car windshield in Martinez in late November 2022.

Refinery catalyst is a powdered chemical compound used in the process of breaking down crude petroleum into products like gasoline. Spent catalyst is the material left over after the high-temperature refining process and contains a mix of potentially hazardous components.

Before Thursday’s test results were released, county health officials told Martinez residents that the dust that coated homes, vehicles, lawns, gardens and a nearby schoolyard included heavy metals (PDF), including aluminum, chromium, nickel, vanadium and zinc. The county health department said there could have been short-term respiratory problems from breathing in the dust right after the incident, and that potential long-term health impacts would depend on each person’s exposure.

Contra Costa County hired TRC, a Connecticut-based consulting and engineering firm, to take soil samples in 14 locations (PDF) from El Sobrante to Martinez to Benicia. Those locations were chosen after local air regulators mapped fallout from the release (PDF). Crews began collecting samples in May. Health officials say the samples were taken to a lab to see which health risks they might pose through touching, inhaling or consuming food.

In March, months after the refinery accident, the health department urged residents to refrain from eating food grown in soil that might contain the refinery dust (PDF).

The department also asked local prosecutors to file charges against PBF Energy. That request is under review, according to Ted Asregadoo, a Contra Costa County District Attorney spokesperson.

Asregadoo said the office is investigating whether PBF violated the law by failing to report an actual or threatened hazardous material release to county officials and whether the company made illegal discharges into the county stormwater system.

County officials have emphasized that they learned about the releases not from the refinery but instead from residents. The refinery initially told residents that its testing suggested the release consisted of only nontoxic material. The company also offered free carwash vouchers to Martinez residents.

The Bay Area Air Quality Management District has said the release was caused by a malfunction (PDF) within the refinery’s fluid catalytic cracking unit. The air district has issued 21 notices of violation against PBF in connection with the November release and continues to investigate the incident, according to district spokesperson Ralph Borrmann.

PBF representatives have apologized for the releases, noting the company has cooperated with regulators and made changes to prevent a repeat of the Thanksgiving incident.

Nevertheless, some refinery neighbors say their sense of safety has been shattered.

“At this point I feel very uncertain about what I’m breathing, knowing what the potential is for release on a daily basis,” said Ke, who has lived in Martinez for more than a decade.

READ MORE:

And don’t forget to check out the amazing ISO Archives on BenIndy. 

Children & Teens, Mass shootings, Schools

19 mass shootings injure more than 100, kill 12 over holiday weekend

More than 825 children and teens have been killed by guns in 2023

Signs from a gun reform protest.
In 2020 and 2021, gun violence was the leading cause of death for kids aged 2 to 17. Data from 2022 and 2023 are unavailable. | Photo by Natalie Chaney on Unsplash

CBS/AP, with Elise Preston contributing, June 19, 2023

Mass shootings in communities across the U.S. have killed at least 12 people since Friday and injured more than 100, CBS Chicago’s Charlie De Mar reported.

The shootings follow a rise in homicides and other violence over the past several years that experts say accelerated during the coronavirus pandemic. Shootings with multiple people killed or wounded happened in suburban Chicago, Washington state, central Pennsylvania, St. Louis, Idaho, Southern California and Baltimore, among other places.

“There’s no question there’s been a spike in violence,” said Daniel Nagin, a professor of public policy and statistics at Carnegie Mellon University. “Some of these cases seem to be just disputes, often among adolescents, and those disputes are played out with firearms, not with fists.”

So far this year, more than 800 children and teenagers have been killed by guns, which includes homicides and suicides, according to the Gun Violence Archive. Looking at CDC data, a report this month by the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Solutions found 2021 set a record for the most deaths ever: 48,830 gun-related deaths. Of those, 20,958 were homicides, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. [Note from BenIndy Contributor Nathalie Christian: The number of fatalities was updated to 825 after the publication of this article.]

Josh Horwitz, the center’s co-director, said states and the federal government need to redouble their efforts to stop gun violence.

“We also think limiting access to firearms in public is important,” he said. “And of course, investing in community violence intervention programs will pay dividends and save lives.”

“We know that there’s a correlation between amounts and levels of guns in the community and gun death,” Horwitz told CBS News.
But researchers disagree over the cause of the increase. Theories include the possibility that violence is driven by the prevalence of guns in America, or by less aggressive police tactics or a decline in prosecutions for misdemeanor weapon offenses, Nagin said.

One of the weekend’s shootings took place in Willowbrook, Illinois, where at least 23 people were shot, one fatally, early Sunday in a suburban Chicago parking lot where hundreds of people had gathered to celebrate Juneteenth, authorities said. The DuPage County sheriff’s office described a “peaceful gathering” that suddenly turned violent as a number of people fired multiple shots into the crowd.

Mariah Dixon, 23, was shot in the knee and hid under a car. She told CBS News that her life has been changed forever.

“I don’t know if I will ever be able to attend parties again,” she said.

A motive for the attack wasn’t immediately known. Sheriff’s spokesman Robert Carroll said authorities were interviewing “persons of interest” in the shooting, the Daily Herald reported. Governor JB Pritzker said investigators were also reviewing camera footage from the area, including cellphone video from attendees, CBS Chicago reported.

In Washington state, two people were killed and two others were injured when a shooter began firing “randomly” into a crowd at a campground where many people were staying to attend a nearby music festival on Saturday night, police said.

The suspect was shot in a confrontation with law enforcement officers and taken into custody, several hundred yards from the Beyond Wonderland electronic dance music festival.

In central Pennsylvania, a state trooper was killed and a second critically wounded just hours apart on Saturday after a gunman attacked a state police barracks. The suspect drove his truck into the parking lot of the Lewistown barracks and opened fire with a large-caliber rifle on marked patrol cars before fleeing, authorities said Sunday.

Lt. James Wagner, 45, was critically wounded when he was shot after encountering the suspect several miles away in Mifflintown. Later, Trooper Jacques Rougeau Jr., 29, was ambushed and killed by a gunshot through the windshield of his patrol car as he drove down a road in nearby Walker Township, authorities said.

The suspect was shot and killed after a fierce gunbattle, said Lt. Col. George Bivens, who went up in a helicopter to coordinate the search for the 38-year-old suspect.

Another shooting unfolded in a downtown St. Louis office building where a social gathering was being held early Sunday, killing a 17-year-old and wounding 11 other teenagers, the city’s police commissioner said. St. Louis Metropolitan Police Commissioner Robert Tracy identified the victim who was killed as Makao Moore. A spokesman said a minor who had a handgun was in police custody as a person of interest.

Teenagers were having a party in an office space when the shooting broke out around 1 a.m. Sunday.

The victims ranged from 15 to 19 years old and had injuries including multiple gunshot wounds. A 17-year-old girl was trampled as she fled, seriously injuring her spine, Tracy said. Shell casings from AR-style rifles and other firearms were scattered on the ground.

In all, 19 mass shootings were reported in the U.S. between Friday and Monday evening, according to the Gun Violence Archive.

RELATED: Fact Check: Gun violence surpasses car accidents as the leading cause of death for children

RELATED: Claim suggests billions should go to SWAT in schools. But there’s more to consider

RELATED: Gavin Newsom is mostly right, the US gun homicide rate is 26 times higher than ‘peers’

RELATED: All of our fact-checks about guns

Benicia Black Lives Matter, Juneteenth

A Quick Guide to Celebrating Juneteenth in Solano County

Juneteenth takes off in Solano County with more events than ever before

By Nathalie Christian, June 16, 2023

It’s time to celebrate Juneteenth, and what better way than with this list of events taking place in Solano County. We are tremendously fortunate to bear witness to a long-overdue rise of awareness of and popularity for this once lesser-known, often mischaracterized holiday, which embraces the resilience, vibrancy, joy, artistry, and innovation of African and Black Americans in both our shared and unique histories and cultures.

Attending a local Juneteenth event is your opportunity to engage with true American history – both its traumas and triumphs – through live performances, educational exhibits, kids activities, and more. It’s also an opportunity to learn more about and support local Black-owned businesses as well as artists, poets, historians, performers, educators, nonprofits, faith-based organizations – wait, wait.

Y’know, the list of reasons to attend is too long to get into here, so let’s skip on ahead to the list. We are ridiculously lucky to have so events many to choose from, so get to choosing! And if you can attend more than one event, even better.

(Note: This list is mostly presented by date, then alphabetically by city, so no one can accuse me of favoritism.)

Saturday, June 17

Fairfield
The Solano County Black Chamber of Commerce presents the 2nd Annual Fairfield Juneteenth Celebration, a free event at Solano Annex (601 Texas Street, Fairfield, next to the old courthouse) from 11 am to 7 pm. It looks like the organizers waived the usual vendor fees so 100 vendors could be on hand to sell locally produced artisanal crafts, cosmetics, art, and more — and they ran out of room! So you can expect a lot of great opportunities to check out Black-owned businesses in Solano as well as live music, speakers, kids activities, and dancing. For more information, check out solanoblackchamber.com/event/2023-fairfield-juneteenth-celebration.

Vallejo
The African American Family Reunion Committee presents the 33rd Annual Vallejo Juneteenth Festival and Parade. The parade will start at 9 am on Broadway & Tennessee Street in Vallejo and last until 10:30 am, then you can head over to the festival at Barbara Kondylis Waterfront Green (301 Mare Island Way, Vallejo) from 11 am to 5 pm. This event attracts more than 75 to 100 vendors and exhibitors selling merchandise and food as well as live music to serve about 2,000 visitors. This is the longest-running Juneteenth celebrations in Solano County, and it benefits health care organizations that provide free services. For more information, check out vallejojuneteenth.com.

Suisun City
The Suisun City Family Block Party will host “Honoring the Past, Celebrating the Future: Juneteenth, The Pursuit of the American Dream,” and I’m putting it last in this list despite a promise of alphabetical order because the event is weekend long, happening on both Saturday, June 17 AND Sunday, June 19! Taking place from 10 am to 6 pm right on the Suisun Waterfront (520 Solano Street, Suisun City), the celebration includes live music performances, food and drinks, local artisans and vendors, as well as family-friendly activities. This event supports key initiatives in Suisun City including the Suisun City Youth Commission’s Youth Projects, Economic Development Events (through R.E.A.L. Fairfield) and NAACP Youth Scholarships. Check out juneteenth-suisun.com for more information.

Sunday, June 18

Benicia
Benicia Black Lives Matter presents the 3rd Annual Juneteenth Festival in Benicia, taking place from 12 to 5 pm at Benicia’s Veterans Hall (1150 First Street, Benicia).  It looks like there will be live music, food and drinks, kids activities, and vendors on hand to help Benicia celebrate. BBLM has always managed to strike the right balance of age-appropriate education and truth-telling with fun and activities, so this event would be a wonderful way to spend your Father’s Day and support BBLM’s community outreach and support efforts, which include backpack, food, and clothing giveaways. Check out beniciablacklivesmatter.com or their Facebook page for more information.

Monday, June 19

Benicia (again)
This one is a shout-out to my buddies in Benicia who may be able to join Benicia City Council Members, City staff, and community members in a flag-raising ceremony scheduled for 9:30 am on Monday and taking place in front of Benicia City Hall (250 East L Street, Benicia). It’s a short ceremony, and probably one of many flag-raising ceremonies scheduled around the county, but it’s really nice seeing that flag fly over the city I call home.

Note: This list was compiled using Google searches and a heavy lean on the grapevine. If I missed your event, please let me know ASAP and I will update this list to help promote it. I apologize in advance if I missed you and hope to include you as soon as you send me your information.