350 Bay Area, Air Quality, Climate Reality Project, EPA

Police oversight, clean energy & clean air in 3 clicks

Signing the petition, making the call or writing the email has never been and will never be pointless

By Nathalie Christian, May 8, 2023

Sometimes signing petitions and writing emails or calls like those suggested below can feel . . . pointless at best, and performative at worst.  But these actions – even as insignificant as they may feel – are neither.

Research, experience and most importantly results prove time and again that policymakers absolutely consider petitions, phone calls, emails and yet more petitions when making decisions. While your pebble may feel small, adding it to a pile and encouraging others in your networks to add their pebbles as well are the first steps in triggering a landslide.

In full disclosure, you may need a few more than three clicks to complete the three proposed actions laid out here today, but you can still make a big difference in the time it takes for your tea or coffee to brew. And the minutes you take today can influence years of decision-making and legislation, and ultimately the lifetimes of many.

[Note: I am ordering these by urgency, not importance. For example, while the EPA is accepting public comment on proposed regulations through July 5, there are important hearings May 9, 10 and 11 that you may want to know about.]

1. Call or Email: Tell your Assembly Members to OPPOSE Assembly Bill 538, which threatens California’s clean energy goals and autonomy

A picture of a power pole.
Major environmental organizations including 350 Bay Area Action, the Sierra Club and Indivisible advise that AB 538 could prevent California from meeting essential clean energy goals. | Uncredited image from 350 Bay Area Action.

Anyone can participate in this important action, but if you’re living Bay Area Assembly Districts 11 (Lori Wilson), 21 (Diane Papan) and 28 (Gail Pellerin), your voice is especially needed. (Find out which district you live in here. If you live in Solano County, Lori Wilson is your assembly representative.)

These three members of the Assembly Appropriations Committee are voting on a grid-related bill that 350 Bay Area Action, the Sierra Club and Indivisible will lump California in with a multistate regional transmission organization, potentially throwing a pretty big wrench in CA’s efforts to meet its clean energy goals. The phone numbers, email addresses and script below provide a quick way you can help oppose this bill.

If you’re a constituent of AD 11, 21 or 28:  Please use the following message for calling or emailing . . .

Suggested message: 

I am your constituent and a member of 350 Bay Area Action, a 20,000-member strong climate justice organization.  After long consideration, we have taken an OPPOSE position on AB 538.

AB 538 creates a new multi-Western state electricity market that would threaten California’s clean energy goals and autonomy without significantly improving access to regional energy markets.  Proposed amendments cannot fix this bill.

    • If the bill is on the Consent Calendar, please request that it be it taken off.
    • Once it’s off Consent, please don’t vote for it. Either vote against it, or don’t vote.

Thank you for your consideration!

Sincerely yours,

[Name / City]

Non-constituents:  Use the above message and simply start by saying you’re a member of 350 Bay Area Action.

2. Petition or public comment: Support the most ambitious vehicle emissions regulations ever proposed.

EPA logo

The EPA has just proposed what the Climate Reality Project is calling “the strongest regulations on vehicle emissions ever.” Despite improved regulations for heavy-duty vehicles, light- and medium-duty vehicles (like passenger cars and delivery trucks) still produce a tremendous amount of toxic tailpipe pollutants. According to Climate Reality, the regulations the EPA proposed could prevent nearly 10 billion tons of CO2 emissions through 2055.

Naturally, the proposed regulations are under attack by the usual suspects. While the EPA is still taking public comments, they need to hear from us. It’s up to average citizens like you and me to balance the histrionics from the conservatives and corporations who desperately want to keep fossil fuels-guzzling cars on the road.

Here are three ways you can support this ambitious new set of regulations:

3. Petition: Boost Vallejo residents demanding independent police oversight

Police officers stand in a loose formation, holding firearms. In the center of the formation is a man in a red shirt with a badge but no firearm.
The Vallejo Police Department continues to resist reform despite historic levels of community distrust. This behavior is ultimately abetted by scant acknowledgment and nearly no action made by Vallejo leaders on behalf of their constituents, who are demanding change, transparency and accountability in this petition. | Uncredited image from petition.
Members of the Solano County ACLU Chapter started this petition to demand independent, external oversight over the very troubled Vallejo Police Department. The case the petition makes is clear, compelling and actionable. Anyone can sign (even if you don’t live in Vallejo), so please take a quick minute to do so and then to share it with your networks. 

From the petition: “Vallejo Police Department (VPD) is the most troubled police department in northern California. This is clear to residents of Vallejo, potential VPD applicants, local and national media, and police professionals in the Bay Area. But this has never been directly acknowledged by our leaders, nor has there been a substantive attempt to make amends to the families who have lost loved ones, to those who have been subjected to police abuse, or to the community. Past attempts at reform have been completely ineffective.”

Read more and sign the petition at change.org . . . 

 

[P. S. I am sorry for shoving three important actions in a single post, possibly reducing the chances that you will complete any of them. The Benicia Independent has a backlog of articles and posts I want to publish and, in the interest of time and space, I am compromising. I encourage you to share these actions with your networks and really highlight the need and the urgency to ensure we have the best chance of being heard on these important topics. –N.C.]

Read more! While we’re talking about Air Quality,  check out these resources:
Opioid Epidemic, Solano County Board of Supervisors

Open Letter – Public voice in Solano under threat

Public voice in Solano policymaking under threat

by Ramón Castellblanch, May 6, 2023

A crowd of people in an auditorium raise their hands.
Ramón Castellblanch: Moving key meetings to business hours will stifle the public’s voice in policymaking. | Photo by Edwin Andrade on Unsplash

Over the years, Solano County has set up a number of advisory boards comprised of volunteers from the community. Underlying these boards’ establishment is the fact that County staff and its Board of Supervisors can’t know everything that they need to know to fairly administer County government. To promote sustainable agriculture, an agricultural advisory board was set up; to protect Solano’s unique historical documents, an historical records board was set up; to help plan the County response to its rising drug use disorder crisis, an alcohol and drug board was set up.

. . . the main factor in recommending continuation [of these boards] didn’t appear to be usefulness; it appeared to be whether or not advisory boards were state-mandated. [The supervisors] didn’t seem to consider their value to Solano; but to County administrators.

This year, a committee led by Supervisors John Vasquez and Monica Brown reviewed the value and continuation of these committees. In that review, the main factor in recommending continuation didn’t appear to be usefulness; it appeared to be whether or not advisory boards were state-mandated. They didn’t seem to consider their value to Solano; but to County administrators.

The Brown-Vasquez ad hoc committee met with none of the advisory boards that it was evaluating. Still at the Board of Supervisors’ May 2 meeting they recommended a blanket termination of all those that were not state mandated with one exception: the Nut Tree Airport committee. Why they that committee was spared may be indicated by its agenda: it actively works to help businesses at the airport.

The particular rationale for terminating the Alcohol & Drug Advisory Board (ADAB) was that the Mental Health Advisory Board could do its work fighting Solano’s opioid epidemic. But, a check of MHAB minutes over the past months shows nothing in them about fighting the epidemic. Further, the MHAB meets during business hours, cutting down public voice. At the hearing, Supervisor Wanda Williams asked if current ADAB members would then be on the MHAB.  Despite asking several times, she couldn’t get a straight answer to her question, implying that the answer was, “no”.

While discussion of the Brown-Vasquez report implied that there was a state law requiring merger of MHAB and ADAB; there is no such law. State law does mandate counties to have a MHAB which would help explain why the MHAB wasn’t mentioned in Brown-Vasquez report. Another factor in the omission may be that Brown is a MHAB member.

The ADAB and Historical Records Commission were able to muster vigorous political defenses at the May 2 meeting and were given reprieves. A rationale for the ADAB’s retrieve was that it would give it time to merge with the MHAB, even though that merger was not assured nor justified.

The particular rationale for terminating the Alcohol & Drug Advisory Board (ADAB) was that the Mental Health Advisory Board could do its work fighting Solano’s opioid epidemic. But, a check of MHAB minutes over the past months shows nothing in them about fighting the epidemic. Further, the MHAB meets during business hours, cutting down public voice.

So, after the County behavioral health director had shut it down citing the recommendation of the ad hoc review committee, the ADAB is back in business. Its next regular meeting will be May 10 at 6 p.m.  As the County has discontinued facilitating online access to advisory board meetings (while maintaining online access to Board of Supervisors meetings), the in-person meeting will be held in Conference Room A of the classic County Events Center, 601 Texas St., Fairfield.  As the room seats over a hundred, there should be ample ventilation and space for attendees, providing some protection against COVID.

The top item on its new business agenda is BOS action re: ADAB.  As the County has also discontinued providing inexpensive meals to dinner-time advisory board meetings, ADAB members will provide them on a one-time basis.

Ramón Castellblanch (he/ him/ él) 
Professor Emeritus, Public Health
San Francisco State
SEE ALSO:
Clean Air Act, EPA, Martinez Refining Company

Toxicologists descend on Martinez after chemical dump

[BenIndy contributor Nathalie Christian: Wow. I didn’t know that the Martinez Refining Company had initially insisted that the white powder that drifted from their facilities into residential neighborhoods was non-toxic, only for Contra Costa County to have to hit back that, no, that powder was very toxic, actually. (Benicia got a taste of that toxic powder too, by the way.) It’s wonderful that Contra Costa has the departments, agencies and mechanisms in place to ensure residents have access to answers – and remediation – after events like this. I’m linking Roger Straw’s fabulous archives regarding the ongoing saga of residents seeking oversight support for similar transgressions in Benicia just below this article. Please take a look.]

Toxicologists to determine if residents were poisoned

East Bay Times, by Katie Lauer, May 5, 2023

A picture of Martinez Refining Company in the distance with residences in the foreground.
People living near the Martinez Refining Company in Martinez are under a health advisory from the Contra Costa Health Services to not eat food grown in their gardens until they have tested or replaced their soil due to a refinery accidentally release of dust containing heavy metals in November | Anda Chu/Bay Area News Group

 

Tens of thousands of people living in and around the Martinez Refinery Company still don’t know for certain if — or to what extent — they were poisoned last November.

But five months after 24 tons of toxic, dusty residue from gasoline, diesel and jet fuel flowing through the refinery first showered down on its next-door neighbors, new soil samples collected this week may finally confirm what dangers still linger there by late May or early June, county health officials announced Thursday.

People living nearby were told in March to discard any food grown in gardens and fruit trees, just to be safe.

Last Thanksgiving, the company posted on Facebook that the fine white substance that blanketed cars, porches and plants over the holiday was from a “non-toxic”, “non-hazardous” and “naturally occurring” catalyst dust expelled from its facility on the edge of town.

But within a few days, the Contra Costa County Health Department alerted residents that the ashy grit actually contained aluminum, barium, chromium and other hazardous metals — chemicals that are linked to nausea, vomiting, respiratory issues, immune system dysfunction, cancer and even death.

People living nearby were told in March to discard any food grown in gardens and fruit trees, just to be safe.

On Thursday, TRC, a Concord-based environmental consulting firm, started collecting soil samples from 14 different sites neighboring the refinery, which is located at 3485 Pacheco Blvd. Toxicologists will now evaluate the extent of contamination that residents were exposed to through skin contact, inhalation or consumption of food grown in the ground, according to Laura Trozzolo, a senior human health risk assessor with TRC.

She said the soil sample locations were chosen based on a map of where the plume of particles likely landed, using models from the Bay Area Air Quality Management District created using residents’ observations and wind simulations.

Trozzolo said that neither the five-month delay in data collection — due to the county’s lengthy contracting procedures — nor the recent historic storms that drenched the area should negatively impact lab findings.

“If we’ve had any deposition that might have landed on the surface over time, we’re still going to be capturing that within that top six-inch soil layer,” Trozzolo said during a press conference Thursday afternoon. “We do believe that we’re still characterizing and capturing conditions that occurred during that November event.”

“We’re responsible, as the oversight committee, for holding the facility accountable.” — Nicole Heath, Director Contra Costa County’s Hazardous Materials Program

Nicole Heath, director of the county’s hazardous materials program, said a 1990s-era industrial safety ordinance allows them to initiate an independent investigation and community risk assessment any time there’s a “major chemical accident or release,” such as the Martinez Refinery Co. event.

She said that ordinance allows the county to form an oversight committee, which brings together elected officials, county staff and community members with representatives from the refinery and its labor force.

“An independent incident investigation will look at root cause analyses, which would then determine exactly what happened, why it happened and what can we do to prevent things like this from happening again,” Heath said, later adding that similar chemical releases happened twice before at the refinery in the early 2000s, which was owned by Shell at the time. “We’re responsible, as the oversight committee, for holding the facility accountable.”

Meanwhile, the Contra Costa District Attorney’s office opened up a case in January on the refinery’s failure to notify hazmat officials about the hazardous release, according to Matthew Kaufmann, the county’s deputy health director.

Kaufmann said that while the health department can invoice the refinery to reimburse expenses during their investigation, the DA will be in charge of deciding whether or not the Martinez Refining Company should be responsible for financially compensating residents who lost food and soil.

Physical remediation efforts are also stalled until the upcoming lab results are complete, Heath said.

In the meantime, the county is still recommending that residents impacted by the toxic dust avoid eating any produce planted in the soil. However, gardeners are also encouraged to plant new seeds, in the event that soil samples don’t uncover any hazards.

“We are waiting to have the information from the soil sampling and risk assessment from TRC so that we can provide the answers that we know the community is so desperately, desperately seeking,” Heath said. “These corrective actions are in such a nature that they are intended to prevent something similar from happening again.”

Check out the amazing ISO Archives on BenIndy. 

 

SEE ALSO:

Public Comment, Solano County Board of Supervisors, Vallejo Sun

Solano boards dissolved, restructured with little notice

Solano County board dissolves agriculture and anti-violence advisory committees

Screenshot with portraits of Solano County Board of Supervisors
On May 2, 2023, the Solano County Board of Supervisors voted to dissolve two advisory committees and restructure several others.

Vallejo Sun, by Ryan Geller, May 5, 2023

FAIRFIELD — The Solano County Board of Supervisors this week dissolved two advisory committees and restructured several others in an effort to transform how the board receives input from residents.

At Tuesday’s meeting in a close vote, the board disbanded the Agriculture Advisory Committee and unanimously dissolved a domestic abuse advisory committee known as the Solano Partnership Against Violence.

“It’s very disappointing that on a 3-2 vote they dissolved an important voice of agriculture. It’s just kind of sad,” said Ian Anderson, a member of the Agricultural Advisory Board and a fourth-generation farmer in Solano County.

The move is part of an annual evaluation the county conducts of advisory bodies and reports to voting members of the county board, who determine if there is an ongoing need for each board, commission or committee. An ad-hoc committee made up of supervisor John Vasquez and Monica Brown reviewed the evaluation and made recommendations to the full board to maintain, restructure or dissolve the advisory bodies.

Read the rest of this article at the Vallejo Sun site . . . 

[Note from BenIndy contributor Nathalie Christian: That’s right, I’m asking you to visit the Vallejo Sun to read the article in full. There is no paywall. While you’re there, please support local independent journalism by subscribing for or donating to the Sun. We’re a few days into the Sun‘s spring subscription drive and they’re looking to add at least 100 subscribers by the end of May. Subscribe today. You’ll be supporting independent journalism in Solano County, which truly needs the illumination the Sun and independent news publications like it provide. —N.C.]

SEE ALSO:

For safe and healthy communities…