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.
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:
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.”
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.
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.]
By Stephen Golub, Benicia resident and author, “Benicia and Beyond” column in the Benicia Herald, April 6, 2025
The waves of national bad news just keep on coming. But there are certain islands of sanity and hope in our political seas.
Some of it started on April 1 – no fooling! In Wisconsin, Democrat Susan Crawford beat her conservative opponent for the swing seat on the state’s Supreme Court by 10 points, despite Elon Musk and his minions pouring over $21 million into trying to defeat her. Also consider that day’s congressional special election results in Florida: In two deep Red districts, the Republican margin of victory collapsed compared to November – from over 30 percent to less than half of that.
Then there’s the island of waterside sanity and beauty otherwise known as Benicia. Capping a struggle that stretches back nearly a decade and most recently entailed eighteen months of arduous efforts by Council Members Kari Birdseye and Terry Scott and Fire Chief Josh Chadwick, on April 1 the City Council unanimously approved an industrial safety ordinance (ISO).
By seeking greater accountability and transparency from the Valero Refinery and other local facilities handling hazardous materials, the ISO helps protect the health and safety of our kids, our seniors and all of us. It also ends Benicia’s odd situation as the only Bay Area refinery-hosting community that lacked such an ordinance.
The April 1 Council meeting featured dozens of ISO supporters in attendance and salient points highlighted by several of them. For instance, a Benicia-based doctor/medical professor noted the relatively high cancer and childhood asthma rates in Benicia and refinery-hosting communities elsewhere. He was careful to avoid blaming Valero in the absence of conclusive data, but voiced hope that an effective ISO could help protect Benicians’ health.
In addition, Birdseye passionately and persuasively pushed back on Mayor Steve Young’s suggestion that the Fire Chief’s examination of potential ISO fees for Valero and other covered facilities focus on recovering just 85 percent of costs. For his part, Scott eloquently articulated the reality that, even with the passage of the ISO, the fight isn’t necessarily over.
But for now, our small city’s struggle for an ISO – a fight that it once seemed we could not win – provides an invaluable lesson: Yes We Can.
So thanks to Birdseye, Scott, Young and in fact the entire Council for that unanimous pro-ISO vote. And thanks to current and former Valero employees, even if we disagree with them, for being good friends and neighbors; once again, the ISO fight is not with you, but with the Texas-based oil giant.
But speaking of that fight…
What is Valero Afraid of?
Over the past decade or so, Valero has dumped millions of dollars into political action committees and public relations efforts seeking to defeat City Council candidates who might support an ISO or otherwise stymy that kind of City oversight. Ironically, that same money could have instead more constructively covered years of the refinery’s costs for abiding by an ISO, had one been adopted earlier.
Most recently, and to put the point mildly, Valero failed to constructively engage with the City’s efforts to seek its cooperation in crafting the ordinance. And it reportedly may pursue a lawsuit seeking to block the new law.
Why such strong opposition to such a modest measure?
After all, the ISO simply seeks to ensure that the City has the necessary information about Valero’s (and other covered facilities’) operations, incidents, violations and accidents, in order to help protect Benicians’ health and safety. This would be a distinct departure from the recent 15-year period during which the refinery spewed toxic emissions hundreds of times the legal limits into our air without notifying us.
Furthermore, over the past year the original draft ISO was modified in ways making it more amenable to Valero, so that the planned Oversight Commission facilitating the law’s implementation and public information does not have enforcement powers. And again, every other Bay Area refinery operates under the rubric of such an ordinance. So why can’t Valero?
I hope that Texas-based Valero will see fit to forego a lawsuit against the City, and instead strive to be a good neighbor rather than in effect imposing punitive legal fees as we defend ourselves. But if it does launch litigation, I hope and expect that its current and former officials, managers and workers will be required to testify under oath about its operations, incidents, accidents and violations, not just in Benicia but across America. If it’s going to fight this common-sense measure so strenuously, we need to better understand what’s going on in the refinery to spark such ferocity and further necessitate the ISO.
I also hope that there’s no need to try to make Goliath suing David a national story, and that Benicia need not engage with other community, legal and environmental groups concerned about Valero’s violations and accidents across the country. In the absence of a lawsuit, I’d assume no one wants to pick such a fight.
As I’ve previously pointed out, even the very conservative Attorney General of Texas, one of the most oil-friendly states in the nation, saw fit to sue Valero in 2019 for years of serious, repeated violations – transgressions that had continued despite previous enforcement actions by Texas and federal authorities.
Though it would be naïve to consider the Texas AG a potential ally, even a quick perusal of the company’s track record turns up alarming Valero accidents spanning several U.S. locales. For instance, an environmental/personal injury law firm is looking into fires at twoseparate Valero Texas refineries earlier this year. Similarly, in 2021 a massive fire at its Memphis refinery spewed oil onto the ground and into a stream, as well as thousands of pounds of toxic gas into the air. There could thus be ample room for joining forces with other concerned communities if necessary.
Though I’m a lawyer, I’m neither a litigator nor PR expert. But people who understand those fields far better than I do have explained that there are strong cases to be made in courtrooms and the court of public information if necessary.
Let’s hope it doesn’t come to that.
Instead of suing, be a good neighbor, Valero. That’s basically all that Benicia’s new ISO asks.
Please note, the April 3 Benicia protest is on a THURSDAY (not Wednesday). And on EVERY Thursday, 5PM. Sorry for previous error.
The Orange Guy and his minions aren’t the only ones who can pour it on with a gazillion acts in every direction almost daily. Resisters all over the U.S. are organizing, showing up, using our individual and collective voices, and creatively calling attention to the crisis that is tearing down our government and attacking our friends and neighbors.
Let’s all find a time this week to join in saying no to injustice, no to corruption, no to authoritarian rule, no to Kings! See below:
Here’s a list of protests and important events for the week of March 29 – April 6.
Tues., April 1, 2025, 6 PM NOT-A-PROTEST! – SHOW UP TO SUPPORT Benicia City Council – on passage of Industrial Safety & Health Ordinance https://www.bisho.org April 1 Council agenda
Over the past decade or so, Valero has dumped millions of dollars into political action committees and public relations efforts seeking to defeat City Council candidates who might support an ISO or otherwise stymy that kind of City oversight. Ironically, that same money could have instead more constructively covered years of the refinery’s costs for abiding by an ISO, had one been adopted earlier.
Thurs
Sat., April 5, 2025 11 AM – NOON (and every Saturday)
You must be logged in to post a comment.