BENICIA – Solar Energy versus Open Space – pros and cons…

By Roger Straw, July 6, 2020

BENICIA CA – The arguments for and against a proposed Lake Herman Road Solar Project are persuasive.  The good and the bad have caused an unusual divide, if not an ugly one.

Actually, the debate has been civil and constructive.

It all comes to a head tomorrow.  Benicia City Council will hear the case and take a vote at it’s virtual meeting Tuesday, July 7.  Our Planning Commission denied the project in May, but that decision was appealed to the City Council by the project sponsor, Renewable Properties.

Here are two well reasoned opinions.  You decide, and let the City Council know what you think.

Support, by Larnie Fox

Proposed Lake Herman Road Solar Project

Council Members ~

I’m writing to ask you to vote to approve the proposed 35 acre solar array on Lake Herman Road.

As you all know, climate change is a serious and growing threat to all people, so we all have a responsibility to help counter it. When people say “think globally, act locally” this is exactly the sort of action they are talking about. While no one wants to lose open space, obtaining enough clean energy for 1,700 Benicia households is a big step in the right direction.

My wife and I walked to the area in question. It is not useful for recreation. The livestock currently grazing there will still have access to 54 acres of the 89 acre parcel after the solar panels are installed. We were glad to see that the plans call for planting native trees and plants that will mostly screen the site from view. They also call for creating a pollinator plant meadow which will increase local biodiversity. Personally, I like seeing solar panels because I know the good they are doing.

It would be preferable to install solar panels on homes and businesses, over parking lots and even over roads. However – we are clearly not there yet, and we need to take action now. Waiting a year or two is not acceptable.

There is a concern that approval of this project will create an open door for other, less desirable, development in our designated open space areas ~ so I hope Council will take care to ensure that no such loopholes are created as you approve this important project.

I’d like the City to take a more proactive and visionary leadership approach to opportunities like this. For example, could the City identify asphalt-covered terrain, roofs in the Industrial Park, or other possible mixed-use sites where responsible companies like Renewable Properties could install solar arrays? Could the City actively facilitate partnerships between solar or wind energy providers and local businesses to encourage clean energy development?

For now, I feel that the imperative to address the climate crisis and lower our carbon footprint needs to take precedence over protecting this small parcel of open space.

Let’s not make the perfect be the enemy of the good.

Larnie Fox
Benicia resident

Opposition, by Don Dean

I see that the Lake Herman solar project is on the agenda for next week’s City Council meeting.  I haven’t changed my stance on the project; I still think it’s a good project in the wrong location, and that the Planning Commission did the right thing in denying it.  I’m all for solar power and fighting climate change, and so is everybody I know. But that doesn’t mean that every solar project is a good one.  There are three issues here.

The first issue is designated Open Space and how we value it–or we don’t.  Notice I capitalized Open Space.  This is an official City designation.  The solar project is proposed on City-designated Open Space land.  So it’s not just undeveloped land waiting for an acceptable use to come along; in this case it’s specifically designated in Benicia’s General Plan to remain open for agricultural or recreational uses. The State of California considers Open Space important enough that it mandates an Open Space element be included in each city’s General Plan. With the pandemic we’re all involved in, open space has become more important than ever for our exercise, recreation, and sanity.   With options for travel limited now, I find I drive Lake Herman Road more than ever and appreciate the vistas more than ever.

Second, this is about more than just one project on Lake Herman Road. The proposed zoning change necessary for the project would apply to about 159 parcels (2,000+acres) spread throughout Benicia.  There has been no real analysis of how many other solar facilities could be constructed or where those might occur.  The City has relied on a study by the applicant that asserts the number of solar-developable parcels would be very small. But that analysis doesn’t seem to have been independently verified.  If the City is serious about solar development in Open Space areas, let’s have a community discussion about how and where solar is appropriate rather than make the decision based on approving one project.

Third, this is an industrial-scale solar project. It will blanket 35 acres with wall-to-wall panels.  It belongs in an industrial area.  The Benicia Climate Action Plan calls for solar development at large parking lot sites belonging to Amports, Valero, and the City.  As far as I know, no one has approached Amports or Valero about adding solar arrays to their property. Not only would this generate power, but it would reduce the heat island effect from acres of asphalt.  Shouldn’t we be looking for solar in these already developed areas rather than converting our Open Space to industrial uses and building outside the Urban Growth Boundary? Isn’t planning about being proactive for the future and protecting our existing resources?

I understand the urgency some people feel about getting a major solar facility to combat climate change, but this issue of solar development versus Open Space is a false choice.  I don’t see why we need to sacrifice one to gain the other. Bottom line—I think this is a good project in the wrong place. I don’t think the project should be approved.

You already have my letter to the Planning Commission that lays out some of the more technical points of the discussion. Feel free to share this email.

Thanks,

Don Dean
Benicia resident

Vacaville opinion on local police reform – good questions for all Solano cities

[BenIndy editor: “Defunding” police can mean different things to different people.  I don’t necessarily agree with Mr. Hunt’s opening statement here, but he goes on to raise important questions that should be addressed here in Benicia.  – R.S.]

Solano Voices: Time to discuss police priorities

, by Curtis Hunt, July 5, 2020

But, we can and should have serious conversations about police reform, militarization and training of officers and the influence public safety unions have on local elections and city councils. We can and should have a discussion about the role of police in combating social issues.

First, we need to challenge the concept that “hiring more police will reduce crime.” Comprehensive crime reduction has three components: prevention, intervention and suppression. 

Second, we can and should have a discussion on the influence of public safety unions on local councils. The public safety unions are very powerful locally and in Sacramento. They offer local candidates campaign support both financially and more importantly with “boots on the ground.” I ran two successful campaigns, one with their support and one without. The one with their support was more enjoyable.

Third, we can and should have a conversation on skyrocketing costs. Some city budgets contribute up to 80% of their total revenue to police and fire departments. The Sacramento police chief recently commented, “We are down 100 cops.“ The follow up question then becomes, “Why is your budget two times higher than it was five years ago?”

Pension benefits, retired health care and incentive pays are exceeding the revenue-generation capacities of local governments. We are paying more and getting less. This is not sustainable.

Increased pension, health care and salaries prevent cities from hiring more personnel. It is time to ask some serious questions. We  need to have an open, respectful conversation.

Fourth, we should have a conversation about the local sales taxes. Promises made, promises broken. Measure M and Measure P pay salary and benefits for police and fire. When Measure M was passed, the first expense was to hire 11 more police officers at end of budget hearings. At this point cities really have no choice. Cites need to use the local sales tax revenue to fund the personnel. Vacaville will defer capital projects, but the results will be the same as these are all ongoing cost.

We can and should have a conversation about increasing the funding for the prevention and intervention aspect of public safety. We should consider a reduction of salary and benefits, and instead support prevention programs. We should consider supporting PAL, The Leaven, The Boys and Girls Club and other evidence-based after-school programs. We need to increase the Parks and Recreation budget to have affordable after-school programs for working parents. We should target gang prevention efforts, mentoring programs. We should look at job development job — training programs operated in challenging neighborhoods. Cities might explore incentives for local businesses to accept training positions.  

I know the police officers are empathetic and compassionate in their effort to address homelessness. But they are not selected, trained or educated in that area. We should have a multidisciplinary team with only one officer and the remaining positions filled with social workers, VA specialists, mental health workers and housing specialists. We should explore the increased use of family support workers for domestic violence. We should use community service officers for more routine calls.

I know this is not an easy conversation. When you bring this up, you get, “You are either with us, or you are  against us” as a response. Mere mention of any discussion would result in “Man, you don’t like cops.” That approach to the issue didn’t work. We need to heal and the only way to do that is start with an open and honest dialogue.

Don’t defund! Talk and make a plan for a more inclusive, comprehensive approach with prevention and intervention strategies.

Curtis Hunt worked for 15 years as a probation officer and provided counseling for delinquent offenders. He finished his career at Solano County managing a countywide prevention program. He severed six years on the Community Services Commission and 12 years on the Vacaville City Council.

Getting grandma out of the care facility… build her a backyard cottage?

Bay Area backyard cottages boom as elderly parents and college students flee coronavirus

San Francisco Chronicle, by J.K. Dineen, July 4, 2020
Omar Abi-Chachine (right), son of the homeowner, stands next to the foundation for the Abodu accessory dwelling unit before it was installed in Millbrae.
Omar Abi-Chachine (right), son of the homeowner, stands next to the foundation for the Abodu accessory dwelling unit before it was installed in Millbrae. Photo: Lea Suzuki / The Chronicle

Bay Area companies that specialize in backyard cottages are seeing a surge in interest from homeowners who suddenly need to create additional living space for elderly parents or adult children displaced because of the coronavirus.

Some families are scrambling to move their parents out of assisted-living facilities, where the risks of contracting the coronavirus are high. Other erstwhile empty-nesters find themselves crowded as their young adult kids return from shuttered college campuses or look to escape small apartments in expensive cities like San Francisco or New York.

After California lawmakers embraced a series of statewide bills in 2017 to streamline building backyard cottages — also called accessory dwelling units or ADUs — the number of new units approved exploded to more than 7,000 in 2018, 50% higher than 2017. For many suburban residents, the backyard homes were seen as a more palatable answer to the housing crisis than large apartment buildings. But in a state that should build millions of homes to keep up with demand, critics said the cottages are a distraction from the need to build multiunit buildings at scale.

Abodu, a San Jose firm that makes ADUs, estimates that 10,000 will be permitted in California in 2020, based on a survey of city permits.

Adobu has seen orders for modular cottages more than double since the pandemic began, according to CEO John Geary. The units start at about $199,000, and with finishes, most come in at about $220,000.

Omar Abi-Chachine (center), son of the homeowner, stands next to the foundation for the Abodu accessory dwelling unit before it was installed in Millbrae.
Omar Abi-Chachine (center), son of the homeowner, stands next to the foundation for the Abodu accessory dwelling unit before it was installed in Millbrae. Photo: Lea Suzuki / The Chronicle

Another manufacturer, Sonderpods of Novato, had 3,000 visits to its website in the 90 days before the shelter-in-place order in March, but has seen that number jump to 25,000 over the last 90 days. Within a few weeks of the health order, the company had signed seven contracts to deliver backyard cottages and was negotiating an additional 92 deals. Sonderpods average about $139,000.

“We are sprinting to keep up with things,” said Edward Stevenson, CEO of Sonderpods.

Hank Hernandez, who owns Alameda Tiny Homes, said he has been flooded with inquiries.

“I get calls all day, every day,” he said. “The basic request is, ‘I want to put my parents in my backyard as quickly as possible.’”

Before coronavirus, Redwood City resident Jen Parsons was exploring options for her widowed mom, who was looking to downsize from her longtime home. She was exploring nearby retirement communities and possibly buying a bigger house that could accommodate three generations when the pandemic hit. Suddenly there was a pressing need. With two young kids, Parsons didn’t feel safe moving to an unfamiliar neighborhood in the middle of a pandemic and was not keen on moving her mom to a senior housing complex.

“You hear all these stories about retirement communities being on lockdown — you can’t even take your elderly parent to lunch or dinner, only to doctors appointments,” she said.

Instead, they decided to purchase an Abodu AD unit, which will arrive in August or September.

“Having an ADU unit back there for my mom will feel like a safe and peaceful environment at a time when there is a lot of stress because of COVID-19,” she said. “We can meet her in the patio and have snacks.”

Eric McInerney (left), Abodu co-founder, talks with Omar Abi-Chachine, the son of the homeowner, inside the accessory dwelling unit after it was installed in Millbrae.
Eric McInerney (left), Abodu co-founder, talks with Omar Abi-Chachine, the son of the homeowner, inside the accessory dwelling unit after it was installed in Millbrae. Photo: Lea Suzuki / The Chronicle

Faysal Abi, a retired police officer and yoga teacher in Redwood City, also ordered an Abodu. He said that the unit will provide housing for a friend who needs a place to live.

“A friend fell on hard times, and the Bay Area isn’t exactly cheap,” he said. “I feel like community is something we are lacking, especially since coronavirus. There is more isolation. One way to heal the world right now is through more community and knowing your neighbors and staying connected. I feel this will help accomplish that.”

Abi also persuaded his mother, Rabina Abi-Chahine, a 62-year-old social worker, to buy her own backyard cottage for her home in Millbrae. Abi-Chahine said she was motivated both by a desire to create some income as she approaches retirement and having a spot for her own father some day.

Geary said another client, a Palo Alto woman, had two children away at college suddenly return, joining two other teenagers at home, which immediately made the house feel crowded.

Stevenson, the CEO of Sonderpods, said that 70% of customers are older than 55 and 70% are women building units on their kids’ properties.

“A lot of it is Baby Boomers selling the family home and moving in into their kids’ backyards. People are re-evaluating what is important and trying to bring the family closer together,” he said. “We are not seeing a lot of people who are straight-up looking to make income.”

Thanks to a series of state and local bills, ADUs can be built relatively quickly with limited bureaucratic hassle in some cities. San Jose, which has been aggressive in encouraging the tiny homes, has seen permitted ADUs jump to 691 last year from 24 in 2014. So far this year, 321 applications have been filed.

The Abodu was the first ADU manufacturer preapproved by the city of San Jose — which cut multiple inspections and red tape. From the day the permit is pulled, Abodu can have the unit installed within 12 weeks.

Hernandez of Alameda Tiny Homes said that while his business has been steady for the past few years, clients’ motivation has changed. It used to be that most homeowners were looking for extra income. Now it’s to meet family needs.

Nextdoor working to remove racism in posts – Black Lives Matter is a local topic

It’s ‘Our Fault’: Nextdoor CEO Takes Blame For Deleting Of Black Lives Matter Posts

NPR All Things Considered, by Bobby Allyn, July 1, 2020
Nextdoor CEO Sarah Friar, here in July 2019, tells NPR the popular neighborhood app is taking steps to address reports of racial profiling and censorship on the platform. Patrick T. Fallon / Bloomberg via Getty Images

As protests swept the nation following the police killing of George Floyd, there was a surge of reports that Nextdoor, the hyperlocal social media app, was censoring posts about Black Lives Matter and racial injustice.

In an interview with NPR, Nextdoor CEO Sarah Friar said the company should have moved more quickly to protect posts related to Black Lives Matter by providing clearer guidance.

It “was really our fault” that moderators on forums across the country were deleting those posts, she said.

People of color have long accused Nextdoor, which serves as a community bulletin board in more than 265,000 neighborhoods across the U.S., of doing nothing about users’ racist comments and complaints. But Nextdoor came under especially heavy criticism in May after the company voiced public support for the Black Lives Matter movement.

Unpaid volunteers, known as leads, moderate posts on Nextdoor. Friar said they were deleting posts about Black Lives Matter because they were following outdated rules stating that national conversations have no place in neighborhood forums. Those guidelines have now been revised to state that conversations about racial inequality and Black Lives Matter are allowed on Nextdoor.

“We did not move quickly enough to tell our leads that topics like Black Lives Matter were local in terms of their relevance,” Friar said. “A lot of our leads viewed Black Lives Matter as a national issue that was happening. And so, they removed that content, thinking it was consistent with our guidelines.”

She added that the new rules make one thing clear: “Black Lives Matter is a local topic.”

Friar said that Nextdoor is taking several more steps to improve the moderation of comments. It will soon offer unconscious bias training to all moderators. It will also launch a campaign to enlist more Black moderators. And it is ramping up efforts to detect and remove instances of racial profiling.

Apologizing, then asking for help from Black users

Neighbors take to Nextdoor to search for a local plumber, find a babysitter or sell a piece of furniture. But the app also has gained notoriety for spreading panicked messages that carry racist overtones.

In recent weeks, as the national conversation has centered on racial injustice, Black users have shared their stories of abandoning Nextdoor. One person wrote on Twitter that they stopped using it after reading repeated complaints about “large groups of black teens walking in their neighborhood.” Another tweeted that their neighbors would write messages such as “Saw a black youth hanging out next door. Calling the cops.”

Mayisha Fruge, 42, a black mother of two in San Diego, Calif., who is active on Nextdoor, said those kinds of post sound familiar.

About 90% of her neighbors come across as good, decent people on the app, she said.

“That other 10 percent? They must be hiding behind the computer. I never would have thought that my neighborhood had those types of people, racist people in it,” she told NPR.

In one post, a neighbor was suspicious about a black person who was simply taking a stroll. Another asked: do the Black Lives Matter protesters have jobs?

“I said, what does this have to do with equality and justice?” Fruge said.

Friar has apologized to Black users who have said they do not feel welcomed or respected on the app, vowing that racism has no place on Nextdoor.

She also announced that Nextdoor was cutting off a tie to law enforcement by ending a “forward to police” feature that allowed users to report observed activity to authorities.

But Friar told NPR that Nextdoor’s efforts to combat racism on the app will go even further.

Nextdoor has enlisted Stanford University psychology professor Jennifer Eberhardt to help slow down the speed of comments to tamp down on racial profiling, and it’s working with her to make unconscious bias training available to hundreds of thousands of moderators.

It is a change that some Nextdoor users have demanded. In an online petition, they criticized the app’s “murky” guidelines for content moderation, which users said led to abuse and the silencing of Black voices.

In response to Nextdoor’s commitments, the Atlanta-based group Neighbors for More Neighbors, which helped organize the petition, applauded the news but remained cautious.

“This is a positive step towards creating a true community forum where all people in our neighborhoods feel safe to participate,” said activist Andrea Cervone with the group. “We will be keeping an eye on the company to make sure they continue forward and fulfill these public commitments.”

In Northwest Indiana, Jennifer Jackson-Outlaw had a lukewarm reception to the company’s announcements. Jackson, a black woman who became fed up with Nextdoor and deleted the app, said Nextdoor’s mostly white executive suite needs a shakeup in order to effect real cultural change at the company.

“It’s important to not only have representation as far as those who are the moderator, but also those who are in the leadership of the company who may be more be well-versed on some of the issues,” she said.

At Nextdoor, Friar has kicked off an effort to recruit more Black leads. This includes inviting especially active Black users to become moderators and starting outreach campaigns to encourage Black users to join the app.

“We recognize that is an underrepresented group on Nextdoor,” Friar said of Black users. “There are others of course, but we want to start there because we really feel that the Black Lives Matter movement is so critical and important right now just to the health of our country.”

Friar described Nextdoor’s content moderation as “a layered cake,” saying it involves local moderators, artificial intelligence tools and the company’s human reviewers.

She said that the app’s AI programs are being fine-tuned to better detect both explicit racism and posts that engage in racial profiling, or what she called “coded racist content.” Nextdoor is now dedicating more staff to focus on attempting to ferret out racist content on the app.

“We’re really working hard to make sure racist statements don’t end up in the main news feed, making sure that users that don’t act out the guidelines aren’t on the platform anymore,” Friar said. “It is our No. 1 priority at the company to make sure Nextdoor is not a platform where racism survives.”

Confronting the ‘Karen problem’

Though anecdotal evidence suggests Nextdoor’s user base is largely white, Friar said the company has no internal metrics about the race of its users.

The app does not ask about race when users sign up, a decision that Friar said may soon change as the company examines how best to hold itself accountable in its push to diversify the platform.

“We are debating that,” she said. “Because if we want to measure our success of being a diverse platform, perhaps that’s something we do need to ask.”

Critics of Nextdoor, including U.S. Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-N.Y., have drawn attention to the app’s so-called Karen problem. It’s a term that has come to describe a middle-aged, privileged white woman with racist habits, whether overt or subtle.

When asked if Nextdoor has a Karen problem, Friar deflected by saying any intolerance or racism on the app is a snapshot of issues plaguing the entire country, not problems confined to the neighborhood platform.

“Does the U.S. have that problem? Yes, it’s out there,” Friar said. “But I think we’re working as hard as we can to make sure neighbors are doing right by each other, that they’re being civil, being respectful and that they’re not falling back to calling each other names but rather trying to deeply understand.”

For safe and healthy communities…