Tag Archives: Stephen Golub

[Editor: Friend and colleague Stephen Golub wrote this awhile back (7/26/25) and I missed it. I’m posting now because it’s still timely, but also becuase I have a personal connection to Canada. My big sister is a longtime Canadian citizen and resides on Prince Edward Island. Our US president’s abysmal treatment of our northern neighbor is so incredibly shameful. – R.S.]

‘Canadians are the among the nicest and most polite people on the planet. Americans are blessed to have them as neighbors.’

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

Strolling several years ago in Vancouver, Canada, I inadvertently crossed the street in front of a car after my light turned red but before the vehicle began moving. If you do this in San Francisco, the driver might toot and shout at you. In my native New York, you’d hear a loud honk and an even louder expletive.

The Vancouver motorist instead said, “Excuse me, did you know that you’re crossing against the light?”

Canadians are the among the nicest and most polite people on the planet. Americans are blessed to have them as neighbors.

Yet Donald Trump has been spitting in these wonderful folks’ faces, on everything from fentanyl to immigration to tariffs to statehood. His barbs portend long-term damage to what once seemed our two nations’ unbreakable goodwill. This potential funeral for a friendship says much about America’s shrinking place in the world.

The insults reach back to Trump’s first term, when he called Canada’s then-Prime Minister Justin Trudeau “very dishonest and weak,” as well as “two-faced.”

Who in the world says that to a steadfast friend? To a country whose long border with ours has been peaceful for well over a century? To a nation that helps protect ours through its partnership in the North American Aerospace Defense Command? To a people whose armed forces sent over 40,000 troops to fight in our Afghanistan war, with 158 dying and thousands more injured (In contrast, Trump reportedly dodged the Vietnam-era draft due to a dodgy medical deferment facilitated by a doctor who was his father’s tenant.).

Typhoon Trump has proven even more catastrophic to the Canada relationship today, in his second term. Thankfully, he and Canada recently stepped back from the trade war brink, eliminating tariffs on most products – with certain major exceptions.

Nonetheless, could you blame Canadians for still distrusting Trump, given that he justified large tariffs back in January based on (bogus) claims of allegedly huge fentanyl imports and illegal immigration from north of the border:

“They’ve [Canada and Mexico] allowed, both of them, Canada very much so, they’ve allowed millions and millions of people to come into our country that shouldn’t be here. They could’ve stopped them and they didn’t. And they’ve killed 300,000 people last year, my opinion, have been destroyed by drugs, by fentanyl. The fentanyl coming through Canada is massive. The fentanyl coming through Mexico is massive.”

So how many tons of fentanyl and millions of people have actually entered America illegally from Canada?

Seizures and arrests provide some sense of scale: From October 2023 through September 2024, 43 pounds (not tons) of fentanyl were seized at the Canadian border, in contrast with over 10 tons from Mexico. During that same period, fewer than 28,000 people were apprehended entering illegally from Canada, compared with over 1.5 million down south.

Putting aside the complex calculation of America’s relationship with our neighbor and friend Mexico, those figures clearly don’t justify such Trumpian lies, hostility and trade barriers against Canada.

Adding national insult to economic injury, Trump has notoriously declared that this proud country should be our 51^st state:

“We’re taking care of their military. We’re taking care of every aspect of their lives… We don’t need anything from Canada. And I say the only way this thing really works is for Canada to become a state.”

During a visit to Canada’s Nova Scotia province this summer, I got a glimpse of the damage he’s quickly done to our two nations’ bonds. The first hint was alcoholic – by which I mean the disappearance of U.S. beer, wine and spirits from many restaurant menus and liquor stores. Another sign was the plethora of Canada’s national maple leaf flags flying everywhere – a rejection of Trump’s 51^st state slap and other insults.

As usual, Canadians were unfailingly friendly and polite during my visit, blaming neither my friends nor me for Trump’s affronts. But their perspective on our country has changed – as have their visits to America, down by 22 to 40 percent since last year, depending on which category of travel we count.

The next president might restore some foreign faith in the United States if it we demonstrate renewed faith in friendship and alliances. But after being repeatedly burned, could we blame Canadians for remaining wary?

And it’s by no means just Canada. On a visit to Australia earlier this year, I heard rage about Trump’s tariffs; worry about American unreliability as China antagonizes our ally Down Under; and sympathy to the point that several Aussies said they feel sorry for us. Trump’s threats to take over Denmark’s territory, Greenland, is sparking similar ire by our loyal European partner (which, by the way, lost 52 soldiers fighting alongside U.S. troops in Afghanistan and Iraq).

With hundreds of thousands slaughtered by Russia’s invasion and bombardments, Ukraine endures Trump’s fickle promises of aid and his outrageous, dishonest Oval Office attack last February on President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Poland, Finland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia and other European nations wonder if they’re next in line for American abandonment and Russian aggression.

True, Trump very recently and surprisingly voiced renewed support for Ukraine. But Trump could quickly do an about-face (as in the past) if Vladimir Putin simply offers him a soothing gesture or if his advisors whisper pro-Putin advice in his ear.

Canada and other countries saw first-term Trump as maybe an anomaly, something America could rebound from. His far more adversarial second term actions suggest that our allies must plan for a future in which they can no longer count on us. All the while, he cozies up to corrupt autocrats like Russia’s Putin and Hungary’s Orban.

If I could make just one wish for Trump supporters who are friends and neighbors, as well as the many millions of other MAGA backers, it would be that they talk to Canadians about why so many are flying their maple leaf flags these days. In their polite way, our northern neighbors might help Americans grasp how Trump’s words and actions hurt both them and us.

Even examining the matter in a cold-hearted manner, the biggest winner in such a dialogue would be the United States. By alienating so many allies, we toss aside the “soft power” flowing from our influence, example and friendship. That power has protected, strengthened and enriched us for decades. We’d accordingly benefit if more Americans could see our nation through the eyes of foreigners.

Finally, just maybe, such chats might persuade some Americans of one more vital fact: What’s at stake in standing by our allies and shared values is not just friendship – it’s freedom, both here and abroad.

Benicia resident and author Stephen Golub, A Promised Land

Stephen Golub writes about democracy and politics, both in America and abroad, at A Promised Land: America as a Developing Country.

…and… here’s more Golub on the Benicia Independent

Charlie Kirk, Democracy under attack, Donald Trump, Freedom of speech, Gerrymandering, No Kings!, Stephen Golub

Stephen Golub: Democracy in Flames: Will Charlie Kirk’s Killing Be America’s Reichstag Fire?

September 23, 2025 Roger Straw

But…Hope, California and George W. Bush

*By Stephen Golub, Benicia resident and author. September 21, 2025. [First published in the Benicia Herald.]*

On the night of February 27, 1933, a massive fire – apparently set by a Dutch communist who confessed to the crime, though other accounts suspect other communists or even Nazis – severely damaged the German parliament building, the Reichstag. Arriving at the scene, German Chancellor Adolf Hitler declared, “If this fire, as I believe, is the work of the Communists, then we must crush out this murderous pest with an iron fist.”

Within a month, Hitler incinerated German democracy.

Step by Very Quick Step…

The short, catastrophic saga triggered by the fire featured German President Paul von Hindenburg, who had won re-election the previous year. Despite being 84 and in failing health, Hindenburg had run because he saw himself as the only candidate who could thwart Hitler, whose Nazi Party was then on the rise but not yet in power.

Nonetheless, on January 30, 1933 Hindenburg appointed Hitler chancellor – the head of day-to-day government, as opposed to the president’s more limited but still-pivotal oversight role. He did so out of an unfounded fear of a communist takeover and due to advisors’ assurances that the military and other institutions could keep the Nazis in line.

The day after the blaze (February 28), urged on by Hitler’s insistence that the fire reflected an imminent communist threat, Hindenburg issued a sweeping, repressive emergency decree. Hitler, aided by 50,000 Nazi paramilitary stormtroopers whom he had appointed as official auxiliary police a week earlier, viciously enforced the edict, which “abolished freedom of speech, assembly, privacy and the press; legalized phone tapping and interception of correspondence,” suspended any autonomy for the 17 states constituting the country and led to the arrest, imprisonment and torture of thousands.

Finally, on March 23, with many parliamentary members detained, imprisoned or intimidated from attending that day’s session, and with others sufficiently cowed, the legislature passed the Enabling Act. The new law “assigned all legislative power to Hitler and his ministers, thus securing their ability to control the political apparatus.” This completed the consolidation of his dictatorship.

Then There’s Trump

Which brings us to America, today. Shortly after the assassination of Trumpist political leader Charlier Kirk – which, like any other such act, was a heinous crime – Utah Governor Spencer Cox issued a call for civility and unity in the nation’s response. Some other Republican leaders have also pushed back against whole-hog retribution.

Then there is Donald Trump. His Oval Office video address hours after the assassination began in a moderate manner. But after two minutes (and many hours before the murder suspect had even been identified) he quickly segued into blaming “radical left” rhetoric for the death and vowed to go after “those who contributed to this atrocity and to other political violence, including the organizations that fund it and support it, as well as those who go after our judges, law enforcement officials and everyone else who brings order to our country.”

In the days since then, the Trump Administration has doubled, tripled and quadrupled down on this tack and tone, including via attacks on actual and perceived opponents. The most prominent target so far has been late night host Jimmy Kimmel, suspended by ABC just hours after Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr pressured it do so with his Sopranos-like “We can do this the easy way or the hard way” suggestion. Asserting that he would “go after the NGO network that foments, facilitates and engages in violence,” Vice President JD Vance has singled out the Ford and Open Societies Foundations and The Nation magazine as examples of nonprofit, media and other outlets under threat.

Then There Are the Facts

These attacks come from a president whose inaugural address promised to “immediately stop all government censorship and bring back free speech to America.” A president who, speaking of attacks on democracy and on national legislative chambers like the Reichstag, praised and pardoned the January 6 insurrectionists who had violently ransacked the Capitol, injured dozens of police officers guarding it and arguably contributed to the deaths of several more. A president who has endorsed or tolerated violence on numerous other occasions.

Trump’s solely blaming the Left for political violence sorely conflicts with the facts. The Department of Justice’s own National Institute of Justice in fact produced a 2024 study – oddly (or perhaps not) removed from its site within three days of Kirk’s death – finding far higher degrees of far-right violence:

“Since 1990, far-right extremists have committed far more ideologically motivated homicides than far-left or radical Islamist extremists…” [though this calculation evidently excludes 9/11], “…including 227 events that took more than 520 lives…In this same period, far-left extremists committed 42 ideologically motivated attacks that took 78 lives.”

The study was consistent with other expert research and opinion on the preponderance of right-wing violence.

Follow the Leader

In ignorance or denial of such realities, many of Trump’s leading followers have followed his lead in rabidly threatening ways, starting with Vance blaming “left-wing extremism” for Kirk’s death. White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller similarly claims that left-leaning political organizations constitute “a vast domestic terror movement. He vows that “With God as my witness, we are going to use every resource we have at the Department of Justice, Homeland Security and throughout this government to identify, disrupt, dismantle and destroy these networks and make America safe again for the American people.”

Countless others have piled on. For Elon Musk, “The Left is the party of murder.” Top Trump loyalist Laura Loomer, whose influence on the president apparently extends to his firing national security staff, claims that “The Left are terrorists” and that “We must shut these lunatic leftists down. Once and for all. The Left is a national security threat.” Many more MAGA types see the assassination as a declaration of war and vow retribution.

The comment that takes the rhetorical cake comes from right-wing agitator Matt Forney. In an X post that has garnered at least three million views, he actually casts the Reichstag fire’s aftermath as a favorable historical precedent:

“Charlie Kirk being assassinated is the American Reichstag fire. It is time for a complete crackdown on the left. Every Democratic politician must be arrested and the party banned…”

I’m not equating Trump or his followers with Hitler or Nazi Germany here. I’m not saying that America could fall prey to such a degree of tyranny. But I am suggesting that similar political tactics may well be at play, echoing those of 90 years ago and featuring the exploitation of a repulsive, traumatic event.

Harking Back to 9/11

Contrast today’s Trump-fueled outrage with President George W. Bush’s words in the wake of 9/11. Visting the Islamic Center of Washington, DC, he directed his remarks to all of America:

“These acts of violence [the 9/11 attacks] against innocents violate the fundamental tenets of the Islamic faith. And it’s important for my fellow Americans to understand that…America counts millions of Muslims amongst our citizens, and Muslims make an incredibly valuable contribution to our country… And they need to be treated with respect. In our anger and emotion, our fellow Americans must treat each other with respect.”

To my mind, W got a lot more wrong than right in his presidency. But the important things he got right certainly included those vitally important remarks. At an intensely inflamatory point, prone to bitterness and bigotry, they sought to bring out the best in us.

It Starts with Hope…and Includes Redistricting…

Which brings us back to the state of American democracy today, how to save it and how to restore it. There’s painfully, obviously no comprehensive solution. But there is an assortment of partial approaches, only a few of which I’ll touch on right now.

It all starts with retaining, sharing and voicing hope, such as through the upcoming October 18 No Kings rallies across the country. Or participating in local events, such as the weekly, sign-carrying democracy vigils held in the City Park of my hometown, Benicia, California.

It similarly features doing what we can, where we can. With Election Day looming on November 4, those of us in California can campaign and vote for Proposition 50, aka the Election Rigging Response Act. An amendment to the California constitution, Prop 50 allows the Democratic-controlled California legislature to redraw its U.S. congressional districts in response to a similar step recently taken by Republican Texas. The California changes take effect from 2026 to 2030, after which such redistricting power returns to California’s independent, nonpartisan Citizens Redistricting Commission (CRC).

Why is this so crucial? To help save democracy. One the few powerful ways of undercutting Trump’s multipronged attacks on our freedoms and institutions, attacks that have only accelerated in his Reichstag-like exploitation of Kirk’s assassination, is for the Democrats to take back control of the House of Representatives next year.

If they do so, they gain the power to block regressive, repressive legislation and influence the budget. Maybe even more importantly in the current context, control over the House also grants the Democrats the power to investigate and publicize his abuses.

But that’s all less likely to happen if Texas and other Republican-controlled states redraw congressional district lines so as to increase Republican representation in the House. Though the national redistricting fight may be stacked in Republican states’ favor, Prop 50 seeks to partly counterbalance that.

Not Normal Times…And No Alternative

In normal times, there would be no need for Prop 50. But, as you may have noticed, these are not normal times. Whether Charlie Kirk’s horrific assassination ultimately proves to be America’s own horrific Reichstag fire, as Trump’s exploitation of his death seemingly intends, is on the line.

Which is why it is so urgent that Californians enact Prop 50. And why those of us based elsewhere do whatever you can to support analogous local or state actions.

These are all just pieces of the puzzle in striving to save our democracy. But sufficient pieces can come together to stave off the darkness and just maybe build a brighter future. There’s no alternative to trying.

CHECK OUT STEPHEN GOLUB’S BLOG, A PROMISED LAND

…and… here’s more Golub on the Benicia Independent

Benicia, Benicia parks, Stephen Golub

Stephen Golub: Psssst! Here’s a Great Way to Increase Your Property Value in Benicia: Vote for Parks

September 7, 2025 BenIndy

By Stephen Golub, Benicia resident and author. September 7, 2025. [First published in the Benicia Herald on 9/7/25.]

Each year my wife and I pay thousands of dollars in property taxes that support Benicia schools, even though we’ve never had kids or grandkids attend them. People pay such taxes without reaping direct benefits partly because it’s required, but also because it’s part of being a good citizen: It’s what people do in and for a community.

But hey, I’m by no means presenting myself as a paragon of virtue here. Paying such taxes is very much in my self-interest.

How’s that? Great schools are part of what keeps Benicia such a great place to live, which in turn fuels our property values that rise over time.

Similarly, I don’t drive around town much – maybe a few times per week – but good roads benefit my investment in my home. So yeah, it’s in my self-interest to pay for schools and roads even as I, like many of you, don’t directly benefit much or at all from them. We willingly (though perhaps not gladly) pay such levies because we each benefit.

The same goes for parks. And for the proposed Citywide Parks, Landscape, and Lighting Assessment District (PLLAD). Property owners can vote for or against the measure by October 14 via mail-in ballot (which must be received by the City, and not simply postmarked, by that date), by submitting it at the City Council meeting that day or by returning it to the City Clerk’s Office at City Hall by then.

(FYI: The City is convening a community meeting this Tuesday, September 9, from 6 to 8 pm, at the Fitzgerald Field Grandstand, 249 East H Street, at which City staff will share information, welcome feedback and answer questions about the PLLAD. You can also find additional details at a City site: BelieveInBenicia.org.)

I hardly use Benicia’s parks. But I do recall that years ago when my wife and I were checking Benicia out as a place to move to, we visited the Community Park, passed by several other parks and were impressed by now nice they all were.

Now, what if the Community Park’s ballfields were completely run-down? What if the others were weed-filled lots? What if broken lighting makes the facilities less usable or safe for early evening use? What if our trails are heavily littered or less accessible? I don’t know if we would have made this wonderful town our own or if future prospective residents would do the same. Maybe some young families who are potential Benicians would move elsewhere after seeing a disrepaired state of affairs here.

I do know that other attractive Bay Area cities – our neighbors in some respects, competitors for residents and businesses in others – appreciate and invest in the appeal of pleasant parks, trails, lighting and the like.

Parks are similarly part of what makes Benicia such a pleasant locale in which to live and a home here such a sound investment – even for those of us who don’t live near a park or use them much. They’re a face of this fantastic place. Together with our waterfront setting and First Street, they’re the first things many visitors see as they stroll or drive through town.

I realize and respect that some Benicians have trouble with specific aspects of the PLLAD. I might even agree with one or two such criticisms.

But let’s not lose the forest for the trees in deciding whether we’re going to maintain and improve our parks and related facilities, including gradually dealing with $55 million of deferred maintenance and repairing our 19 (out of 21) playgrounds that are over 20 years old. The value of private property flows partly from the appeal of an area’s public places.

The benefits are not just financial. Good parks are good for public health in all sorts of ways. In line with “broken windows” data on crime (which indicates that crime can rise in communities that appear broken-down) and research indicating that well-maintained parks and lighting deter unsavory conduct, they contribute to public safety.

And of course, while public health and public safety are highly desirable in and of themselves, they in turn contribute to property values.

Furthermore, while some out-of-towners may simply come and go in using these facilities – a benefit we shouldn’t begrudge them – others aid Benicia businesses and employment by coupling park and beach use here with visits to our supermarkets, restaurants, shops or galleries.

I’d add that we’ve recently been down a similar road and unfortunately decided to forego financial benefits. Last year, before Valero announced its plans to shutter the refinery, Benicians voted to reject a property transfer tax. If that measure had passed, the eventual sale of the refinery could have netted Benicia $10 million or more. Now we’ll net nada.

Some may say that the parks will be fine even without the proposed PLLAD. But the closure of the Valero refinery sooner or later will put a big burden on the City budget. Cuts will have to come somewhere. Without the PLLAD, parks will seriously suffer if we want to try to maintain police and fire protection – or do folks wish to cut those services instead?

Even if the refinery closes later rather than sooner, Benicia’s still dealing with resource challenges that undercut our capacity to maintain the parks, trails and related facilities.

Some understandably object to yet another fee for city services. I know that the maximum assessment of $208 per parcel is nothing to sneeze at. But that 57 cents per day (and far less for many property owners) is still a small price to pay for many thousands of dollars in annually increasing property value. It’s an investment in our own homes and businesses.

If you could spend a relatively tiny bit more to ensure that your home’s worth rises rather than falls, that you profit by thousands or tens of thousands of dollars more when you eventually sell it, that your kids inherit a better property down the line or that you can rent it out for more, you might decide it makes sense to shell out those 10 or 25 or 57 cents per day for your home.

Well, Benicia is our home. The parks are our living room and front yard.

Finally, let’s face it: We know of other Bay Area communities where public service breakdowns have damaged property values, as well as public safety and health. It can happen all too easily if things start to slip. We can’t let the same fate befall Benicia.

So let’s not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. Please vote for the PLLAD not just because it benefits this lovely community we call home, but because – even if we don’t use the parks or we dislike elements of the proposal – it’s good for each of us and our pocketbooks.

CHECK OUT STEPHEN GOLUB’S BLOG, A PROMISED LAND

…and… here’s more Golub on the Benicia Independent

Bay Area Air District, Benicia, California legislature, Cancer, Stephen Golub, Valero Benicia Refinery

Stephen Golub: URGENT – The State Likely Decides Benicia’s Fate Within a Week

September 2, 2025 BenIndy

Please Contact Lori Wilson and Other Officials Regarding Valero

By Stephen Golub, Benicia resident and author. September 2, 2025. [First published in the Benicia Herald on 8/31/25.]

Before the California State Legislature session ends on September 12, the legislators and other State officials may well make crucial decisions on bills and policies regarding the Valero Benicia Refinery’s future. Benicians have barely any time to weigh in on this matter so essential to our health, safety and future, particularly by contacting State Assemblywoman Lori Wilson. She represents Benicia and plays a significant role in this process.

While there’s still a chance that Valero might depart by its self-proclaimed April 2026 deadline, it seems at least as likely that the company and the State will extend its stay by at least a few years.

I’d favor pressing for Valero to stick to that 2026 date. My main concern is that a few years could turn into many, blocking us from biting the bullet to diversify our economy and realize potential benefits such as clean air and enhanced property values in a refinery-free community. A continued presence poses demonstrated risks, including polluting our politics as well as our air. Valero’s harmful operational and advocacy track record is a testament to those risks.

For instance (and as for the most part described in far greater detail in my May 25 Benicia Independent post):

For at least 16 years, the Valero Benicia Refinery spewed toxic emissions hundreds of times the regulatory limits into the City’s air, spurring an $82 million Bay Area Air District fine. According to the Air District, from at least 2003 to 2019 the Benicia refinery committed “egregious emissions violations,” pouring into the city’s air “harmful organic compounds” containing “benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene…which cause cancer, reproductive harm and other toxic health effects.”

Valero knowingly committed these violations, yet did not inform governmental authorities. In the same statement just cited, the Air District explained that “refinery management had known since at least 2003 that emissions from the hydrogen system contained these harmful and toxic air contaminants but did not report them or take any steps to prevent them.”

These 16 years of violations and toxic emissions are but one example of Valero’s hazardous track record in Benicia and across America, including Arkansas, Louisiana, New Jersy, New York, Tennessee and Texas. Even the arguably oil industry-friendly Texas Attorney General sued Valero in 2019 for refinery violations there, in effect citing it as an egregious repeat offender.

Benicia’s cancer rates are far higher than those of the State and Solano County. For example, the city’s breast cancer rate is 93.7 percent higher than California’s and 35.9 percent higher than the County’s. The possible connection to the Benicia refinery is buttressed by research from around the country and world indicating elevated cancer, leukemia and asthma disease rates in refinery communities.

What hazardous plans might the Texas-based corporation push next? Valero’s potentially threatening plans are exemplified by its dangerous “crude by rail” proposal, thankfully defeated by the Benicia City Council several years ago. The project would have brought through town on a daily basis the kinds of petroleum-carrying trains that have frequently derailed, exploded, caught fire and in one incident killed dozens in a small Quebec city.

Valero’s contributions to climate change threaten Benicia. Above and beyond its facilities’ direct environmental impact, the Texas-based corporation has played a major role in the Western States Petroleum Association (WSPA), which has sought to stymie policies and legislation that would limit rising sea levels and other climate changes that challenge our town. Have you noticed the First Street Green parking lot’s winter flooding? Thank Valero and the WSPA if that kind of climate change damage increasingly bedevils Benicia in years to come.

Having said all this…

If the corporation and California nonetheless decide to extend the refinery’s stay despite these and other concerns, let’s press for ironclad Valero guarantees that it will: 1) close the refinery by 2029; 2) assure severance pay and other appropriate benefits for its workers, especially our Benicia-based friends and neighbors, who bear no responsibility for the Texas-based corporation’s track record; 3) abide by all legal and moral clean-up requirements for the property, rather than pursuing bankruptcy or other options to evade its responsibilities; and 4) not sell the property to another petrochemical industry operator, which might have as bad or worse an environmental record.

We should similarly seek State guarantees that it will 1) support Benicia’s existing Industrial Safety Ordinance; 2) not block any other local measures to protect or enhance our community’s well-being; 3) not undertake any joint venture with the firm, as that could undercut both our refinery oversight and refinery-linked revenues; and 4) not water down or overturn State, regional and local environmental regulations.

How to advocate for these and other priorities? One way is to call, email or write (via their online contact forms) to Governor Newsom (https://www.gov.ca.gov/contact/), our State Senator Christopher Cabaldon (https://sd03.senate.ca.gov/contact), and, most crucially, our State Assemblywoman Lori Wilson (https://a11.asmdc.org/contact-me).

I emphasize Wilson because, as Chair of the Assembly’s Transportation Committee, she plays a central role regarding any Valero-related legislation and policies – which, again, may well be determined in the days to come.

We can also email Benicia’s City Council members, pressing them to lobby state officials on our behalf if they’re not already doing so.

Time is growing very short. Now’s the time to act.

A few more noteworthy Benicia notes:

First, property owners should please vote for the Parks, Landscape and Lighting Assessment District (PLLAD ) plan on the ballot recently mailed to you. Funds to provide for vital services for our parks and related facilities are inadequate, not having been updated since 1989. The PLLAD will help keep Beautiful Benicia moving forward, as well as enhancing our property values regardless of whether we use those facilities.

Big kudos for City Manager Mario Giuliani for the “Mondays with Mario” session he hosted at Lucca’s Bar and Grill on August 25. For the 20 or so folks present, it was an illuminating discussion of why we need PLAAD, what’s happening with Valero and several other topics. Councilmembers Trevor Macenski and Terry Scott, and former Councilmember Tom Campbell, also usefully chipped in to the discussion. The next Monday with Mario will be on September 15 at Roundtable Pizza, 878 Southampton Rd, at 6-7 pm.

Equally big kudos to the Benicia Police for all that they do, but particularly (as reported in the Herald) for the August 21 arrest near the Lake Herman Road reservoir of an escaped fugitive wanted for ten counts of arson in Washington State. I don’t want to rush to judgment: As far as I know, we don’t know whether he was associated with recent blazes near Benicia or other details of his background. But if in fact he’s guilty of such acts, it’s good to get him off the streets – especially our streets.

CHECK OUT STEPHEN GOLUB’S BLOG, A PROMISED LAND

…and… here’s more Golub on the Benicia Independent