Tag Archives: Benicia City Council

Benicia City Council to appoint four task groups to look into possible Valero closure

Benicia City Council Agenda, Tues. May 20, 2025

Item 15.B – Staff Report

TO : City Council
FROM : City Manager
SUBJECT : APPOINTMENT OF CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO AD HOC “ACT” TASK FORCE GROUPS IN RESPONSE TO POTENTIAL BENICIA VALERO REFINARY CLOSURE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
With the recent news by the Valero Energy Company to potentially cease operation at the Valero Benicia Refinery in April 2026, the City believes it is worthwhile for the City Council to spearhead task force groups to work with various stakeholders to understand potential economic impacts, develop strategies to mitigate those impacts and plan for the future. To that end, Mayor Young is proposing four (4) separate City Council Task Force Groups to understand the impacts of any closure will have on the community.

RECOMMENDATION:
Move to adopt by motion the nomination of the respective members of the City Council to the proposed Ad Hoc Task Force Groups.

BUDGET INFORMATION:
Staff does not anticipate any direct impact on the City’s budget due to the action of creating the proposed Task Force Groups.

BACKGROUND:
To help facilitate engagement and information with impacted stakeholder groups, advocate for the protection of Benicia’s economy and imagine the possible transition of redeveloping 930 acres of the Valero Benicia Refinery, Mayor Young is proposing four (4) ad hoc City Council “ACT” Task Force Groups: Advocacy, Collaboration & Transition.

These proposed groups will be ad hoc in nature and not subject to the Brown Act or Open Government Ordinance. The respective member(s) of Council may solicit feedback and participation from stakeholders as they deem helpful to gather information germane to their purpose, including business owners, employees, labor leaders, community members and governmental and non-governmental organizations. The second City Council meeting of each month will serve as an opportunity for the members of Council to report on the progress of each ad hoc group.

Task Force 1: ADVOCATE for Benicia’s Economy: Mayor Young
It is proposed that Mayor Young will serve as a point of contact and lead efforts to work with State Officials such as the Governor’s Office of Economic Development, The California Energy Commission, elected leaders, labor and business representatives to advocate on behalf of Benicia relating to the potential shutdown of the refinery. The purpose is to gather information and reports on the economic value of the refining operations to Benicia’s economy, county employment, the States economy as well as the importance the Benicia refinery is to Travis Air Force Base.

Task Force 2: COLLABORATE with Community: Non-Profit Organizations, Sports Groups, Benicia Unified School District, Restaurants & HotelsCouncil Member Largaespada
The focus of this Task Force is to coordinate between the various community groups that receive contributions and support from Valero. Understand the economic impact to these groups and facilitate collaboration between groups to maximize resources where possible and generate plans on how to proceed with either less funding or new means of revenue. Similarly, with sports groups, the intent is to quantify the financial contribution made to sports groups and how reduced support from Valero could impact users. Additionally, this Task Force will coordinate with Benicia Unified School District to analyze the impact on property tax revenue to the District and any other direct revenue loss from Valero’s cessation of operations. Finally, this Task Force will seek to quantify the economic impact on hotels and restaurants with Valero’s exit. The work of Councilmember Largaespada is to coordinate information, facilitate cooperation of resources between groups where feasible, and develop a plan of action on how to overcome the loss of revenue with Valero’s departure.

Task Force 3: COLLABORATE with Benicia Industrial Park (BIP): Existing industrial park businesses, Rose Estates and Port of BeniciaCouncil Member Birdseye
This Task Force is designed to work with impacted BIP businesses; understanding the impact on jobs, lost revenue and impacts on the stream of commerce. Additionally, this Task Force shall coordinate the plans and actions of Rose Estates, the Priority Production Area plan of the Port with redevelopment efforts of the 930 acres of Valero’s property with any interested developers. There may be an opportunity to synchronize development activity and/or work to incentivize new business development into the BIP including offshore wind manufacturing.

Task Force 4: TRANSITION Prepare for Transition and Redevelopment of Valero’s 930 acres: Valero & Signature Development GroupVice Mayor Macenski & Council Member Scott
This Task Force is to collaborate with Valero and Signature Development Group to imagine the possible reuse opportunities for the 930 acres of Valero’s property. This Task Force would help to facilitate stakeholder involvement to solicit public feedback and visioning. Identify the types of uses, be it residential commercial or industrial and those uses can be best incorporated into Benicia. Identify reports and information that would be helpful to forecast highest and best use for Benicia’s economic viability and environmental sustainability.

NEXT STEPS:
If approved, the various Task Force groups can meet at their convenience with stakeholders of their choosing to help facilitate their mission.

ALTERNATIVE ACTIONS:
None.

CEQA Analysis
The requested action is exempt from CEQA because it will not result in a direct or indirect physical change in the environment and therefore it is not a project as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15378.

ATTACHMENT:
None.

For more information contact: Mario Giuliani, City Manager
Phone: 707-746- 4289
E-mail: mgiuliani@ci.benicia.ca.us 

Cathy Bennett: Valero’s “current intent” is anyone’s guess

If Valero closes, or not … Benicia can hold them accountable. This is not the end of the world.

By Cathy Bennett, April 24, 2025

Cathy Bennett, Benicia

My thanks go to Steve Golub in his recent article outlining the broader perspective and potential reasons for Valero’s “possible” closer. As always, Steve is clear and concise in explaining a very complicated situation. In the wake of Valero’s sudden announcement there is a lot of finger-pointing going on, and his article wisely advises a mindful step back to see the bigger picture.

I for one, do not believe that Valero is actually going to close. I think Valero is stacking up its options in a strategic move to give itself as much wiggle room as possible for the tough decisions it must now make, due to a variety of reasons, the least of which is the
watered-down ISO. I also believe Valero benefits tremendously by these scare tactics to the public (and Benicia City Council) at the very time when decisions are forthcoming regarding fees and fines for the ISO.

The timing of Valero’s announcement, and the reckless manner it threw its employees and the city of Benicia under the bus, strikes me as a crude thumb to the nose. Another example that Valero has never been “a good neighbor”. That said I would urge everyone to resist panic. There are many layers to this onion. We must peal back each layer one at a time to expose the true underbelly of what is before us. By staying focused and examining each step, Benicia will develop a solid strategy to move forward. Benicia must hold Valero accountable for what ever decision it ultimately makes. That includes clean up of the 400 acres of potentially toxic contamination of waterfront property if it plans to close.

This is not the end of the world, nor the demise of our beloved Benicia. I trust our city council to think this through carefully, not over-react, and not capitulate to Valero’s threats. This is one more piece of evidence of the bully behavior we have been dealing with for decades.

Cathy Bennett
Benicia resident for 25 years

Larnie Fox: Open letter to our Benicia City Council and staff

Thank you for placing the health and safety of Benicians above other concerns

By Larnie Fox, April 23, 2025

Benicia resident and artist, Larnie Fox

Dear Mayor, City Council members, and Chief Chadwick,

I am so proud of our City Council and staff!

In light of the recent announcement by Valero to “idle, restructure or cease refining operations”, it is more important than ever to have an Industrial Safety Ordinance in place. In spite of significant pressure and threats from Valero, and at great political cost, you placed the health and safety of Benicians above other concerns. Bravo! And thank you.

I think that Valero’s decision had little to do with our new ISO, but probably did affect the timing of their announcement.

It looks like what made them decide to change their operations next year was the regulatory atmosphere in California, the expense of fixing their hydrogen leak, and the $82M fine from the Air District. California is moving away from fossil fuels, and the company could see the writing on the wall.

What made them announce their decision now? My guess is it was a desire to blame you and your constituents’ measured effort to finally monitor and regulate the refinery’s ongoing release of toxins, and to stir up community resentments.

If they sell or restructure, the ISO will be important to monitor and regulate whatever activities occur on their site. If they shut it down, then we will need a plan in place to assure a “just transition” ~ aka a good clean-up of a very toxic site. With some long-term and visionary thinking, something good may yet come out of this.

The ISO will also be important to regulate the dozen or so other industries that work with dangerous chemicals in town, especially Valero’s other little refinery, the asphalt plant.

It took courage to lead our little town to stand up against big oil, but you did it, and we did it.

Thank you!

Larnie Fox, Benicia

Stephen Golub: Benicia Strong: Understanding and Rising to the Challenge of Valero’s Decision

Valero Benicia Refinery to “idle, restructure, or cease refining operations” by next year

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

By Stephen Golub, Benicia resident and author, “Benicia and Beyond” column in the Benicia Herald, April 20, 2025

Valero’s Wednesday notification to the California Energy Commission “of its current intent to idle, restructure, or cease refining operations” at its Benicia refinery by the end of April 2026 hit the City and California like a ton of oil-laden bricks.

My heart goes out to the Valero workers and Benicia businesses whose livelihoods are at risk as a result of this decision. As Benicia Council Member Kari Birdseye put it so well in my interview with her, with sentiments echoed by Mayor Steve Young and Council Member Terry Scott,  “If people are going to lose their jobs and businesses their incomes as a result of this move, addressing this has  got to be a priority for the City’s leadership.”  All also strongly sympathize with the nonprofits who may be denied future Valero funding.

This is an unfolding story, to put it mildly. In an attempt to pierce the haze generated by the Valero statement, here is a very initial attempt at some questions and answers – subject to change down the line as all parties clear the air on this development.

Is the refinery closing?

Not necessarily. Again, the Valero notification offers three options:  “to idle, restructure, or cease refining operations.”  Only one of these is closure, though that could involve Valero taking on immense clean-up cost. “Idle” is inherently temporary. “Restructure” can potentially mean all sorts of things, including  sale to another company or  focusing on biofuels or plastics production. Note too that Valero frames the statement in terms of its “current intent,” which gives the Texas-based corporation  some wiggle room.

Why is Valero doing this?

It could be a negotiating tactic, aiming to extract concessions from California regarding regulations, legislation,  policies or costs that the corporation finds unduly burdensome. In a related vein, it could be geared toward avoiding expensive upgrades necessitated by environmental, health or safety requirements that would have protected Benicians. As UC Berkeley energy economist Severin Bornstein put it in a KQED interview:

“California is phasing out its gasoline consumption and refiners see that coming,” Borenstein said, noting that the Benicia refinery’s many production and emissions problems would likely require significant, costly upgrades to address.

“So I think they looked at that and said, ‘Is it worth making that investment?’ and decided it probably isn’t,” he said.

Ironically, the rationale could even include increasing profits in certain respects. As per that KQED interview:

“Borenstein suggested that the company, which owns another refinery in Southern California, may also have calculated that shuttering production at its Benicia facility would raise gasoline prices statewide, helping its other refinery make more money.”

Did Benicia’s recently adopted Industrial Safety Ordinance play a role in this move?

Not according to Valero’s own statement on its decision, which attributes the move to far broader concerns, such as “years of regulatory pressure, significant fines for air quality violations, and a recent lawsuit settlement related to environmental concerns.

Recall, too, that the ISO would cost Valero a few hundred thousand dollars per year, in contrast with the company making $11.6 billion in profits in 2023 and 2024, a good chunk of that from its Benicia refinery. For Valero to quit Benicia because of the ISO would be very roughly equivalent to someone quitting a $50,000 per year job because of, at most, a $10 annual tax, or a business clearing $250,000 per year deciding to close down because of a $50 fee.

There’s one alternative though hopefully unlikely explanation that would partly attribute Valero’s decision to the ISO: The corporation has something to hide from the slightly increased scrutiny the ISO would spur of its emissions, operations, incidents and accidents. Again, hopefully this is not the case, but if Valero is seeking to avoid such scrutiny because it would reveal health, safety or environmental threats to Benicians, that in and of itself should be of great concern to us.

Let’s also bear in mind that the ISO  is a necessary response to a plethora of Valero violations, incidents and accidents dating back over 20 years, both in Benicia and beyond. These include but are by no means limited to Valero pouring toxic emissions hundreds of times the legal limits into Benicia’s air for 15 years without informing us, as well as repeated violations in Texas that were so severe that even the very conservative Attorney General in that very oil-friendly state saw fit to sue the corporation several years ago.

Finally, note that in preparing the ordinance Benicia bent over backwards to try to compromise and address Valero’s legal and operational concerns, resulting in an ISO in some regards more accommodating than other Bay Area refinery-hosting communities have and that other Bay Area refineries manage to live with. It’s hard to believe that a Benicia move so mild could trigger a Valero decision so massive, particularly in view of the far larger California forces and policies at play. In any event, the Benicia City Council twice voted unanimously for  the ISO.

Where do we go from here?

A few tentative thoughts:

  1. As Council Member Scott, who has extensive experience and expertise with corporate transitions and planning explains, “We can’t just look in the rearview mirror toward what Valero’s done; we need to peer through the windshield toward current and emerging opportunities.”
  2. More specifically, for instance, Benicia has about $64 million coming to it by virtue of the Bay Area Air District’s settlement with Valero over those 15-plus years of pouring poisons into Benicia’s air. These extraordinary circumstances could call for extraordinary solutions, involving interpreting Air District rules broadly or amending them to allow Benicia to adapt to this situation by, for instance, allowing aid to affected individuals and businesses, budgetary support or planning for the inevitable post-refinery economy.
  3. As Mayor Young emphasizes, in moving forward we need to address “the real world impacts on Valero employees and Benicia residents and businesses…even as we realize that this Valero move is in response to state decisions and policies rather than Benicia’s ISO.”

Benicia is strong, smart and resilient. Over the past several years, we made it through Covid and earlier budget challenges together. There’s no sugar-coating the fact that the current challenge could well impose pain. But if we pull together rather than point fingers, and pay special heed to the needs of the persons and businesses most affected, we can emerge stronger than ever.

More on this next week.

[Note: As a member of the Benicia Industrial Safety and Health Ordinance working group, I was involved in efforts to get the ISO adopted.]


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