Category Archives: Bay Area Air District

Stephen Golub: Life After Valero

A “Bridge to the Future Fund” for Benicia

 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, May 11, 2025

The May 5 fire at Valero’s Benicia refinery was yet another reminder of the price Benicia has paid for a facility that, despite the fine work of its personnel, can loom like an accident (or explosion) waiting to happen. The refinery’s presence has often seemed like a trade-off between health and safety on the one hand and employment and economic conditions on the other. Many  of us have  deep concerns (which I share) about what its planned closure will mean for Valero workers and local businesses.

Many of us have also told ourselves that we’re stuck between a financial rock and a health-and-safety hard place: If Valero somehow stays, we face the ongoing threat of toxic emissions, fires and even huge blasts at a facility that processes roughly 20,000 tons of flammable fuel per day and that may reduce costly investments in upkeep as its presence sooner or later comes to an end. If Valero goes, we lose perhaps $10 million of Valero-generated revenue from our annual $60 million budget.

But we’re not stuck. We’re not powerless. Right now, the Bay Area Air District (BAAD)  is starting to consider how to spend the $56 million Benicia-specific portion of the $82 million fine it negotiated with Valero because, as former Benicia Vice Mayor Dirk Fulton astutely puts it, “For at least 16 years, the Valero refinery secretly polluted us with cancer-causing toxins such as benzene, toluene, and xylene—all known to cause cancer, reproductive harm and other negative health effects.” We can help influence the Air District’s decision if we act fast – as I explain at the end of this essay.

Here’s one possibility that helps Benicia build a bridge to a clean, prosperous future: Negotiate with BAAD (what an acronym!) to establish a fund that allows the City to allocate the fine  to help close the looming $10 million annual budget gap over the next eight years. Unless we can address that gap properly, it could devastate City police, fire or other services. (Note: The fine isn’t simply handed over to Benicia; the decision on how to spend it rests with the Air District.) This Bridge to the Future Fund – or Transition Fund, Sustainability Fund, Clean Air Fund, or whatever we might call it – could narrow or close the gap.

Presumably, in order to be consistent with the Air District’s mission, the Fund would focus on those parts of the City budget that fall under the rubrics of clean air or  public health – or perhaps even sustainability or related priorities.

Here’s how the admittedly crude and very preliminary math for the Fund would work out in what, at this point, is but a rudimentary sketch rather than an actual  plan:

In Year One, Benicia begins to prepare for Life After Valero but doesn’t yet draw extensively on the Fund, as revenues should remain relatively steady. In Years Two through Eight, it devotes $8 million annually toward closing the budget gap (totaling $56 million over that seven-year period), while either cutting $2 million per year or raising part of that through new fees or taxes. Obviously, the figures and time period could be adjusted due to various circumstances.

During those eight years, the City would move toward replacing the Valero revenue gap with new sources of income. The oil giant itself could conceivably help in this regard, via its current arrangement with the Signature Development Group, a major Bay Area real estate firm, to explore alternative uses of the land. Those uses could include residential, commercial and industrial developments. (Bear in mind here that portions of Valero’s 900 acres of land could host residential development without extensive clean-up, in that much of that land is open space beyond where the refinery operates.)

Now, there’s the possibility that contracting with the developer is just a temporary tactic Valero is using to negotiate with California to extract concessions favorable to keeping the refinery open. But we can’t operate on that assumption.

A few questions flow from the Bridge to the Future Fund idea:

First, is there even $8 million in the annual City budget that could be devoted to regular expenditures relevant to the Air District’s clean air and public health priorities? I’d guess the answer is yes. Recreational expenses, for starters. In addition, the  Air District’s recent public survey asking how to spend fines (not just Valero’s) – unfortunately, the survey was underpublicized and is now closed to comment – contemplated fire services as one potential use. So, there may well be considerable flexibility in using the Fund as a source for 13 percent ($8 million) of our $60 million annual budget.

Next, would the Air District even go for this? Well, why not? I understand that it is sounding flexible. And whatever policies it currently has in place – and remember, BAAD is in the process of defining or refining them – could be interpreted or revised to allow the Fund as a recipient of the $56 million fine. Benicia Mayor Steve Young sits on the BAAD board. And while he’s just one voice among many in that large body, it could well be that other Bay Area officials belonging to the Board would favor a flexible policy for the use of other fines benefiting their own localities.

What if Valero decides to stay? Even if that’s the case, we can’t remain dependent on the calculations, whims and winds emanating from its San Antonio headquarters. It could still close the facility whenever it wants. For example, if the country and world sink into a recession this year, as many economists predict, that itself could lead Valero to leave.

Finally, do we want Valero to stay? That’s a much larger discussion. But, briefly for now: Bear in mind that Benicia must  prepare for Valero to depart because it’s inevitable, whether next year or whether five or ten years down the line. And if we establish the Fund, it will not only sustain crucial City services; it will prevent the layoffs of numerous City employees who contribute to our town through their hard work and spending here.

Furthermore, if Valero goes, and Benicia employs the Fund to maintain the services that make this such a wonderful place to live, real estate values could climb: Many folks who would never consider moving here because of the refinery could well reconsider this as an excellent option. Tourism could also flourish as we transition to a post-Valero economy.

More broadly, we must start to build a more diversified economy now, rather than simply wish for Valero to remain here. For a thoughtful deeper dive on how Benicia can manage the financial transition, check out Dirk Fulton’s Benicia Independent piece that I previously mentioned.

The fire has affected my thinking about whether we want Valero to stay. Apparently, it occurred in a furnace related to a Fluid Catalytic Cracking Unit, which has had repeated problems over the years. (Very useful information on the fire and the unit can also be found here, at The Benicia Independent.) When I contemplate the words “fire” and “repeated problems” together, I don’t feel  confident about our community’s health and safety – especially in view of the refinery’s myriad issues.

Moreover, this incident had a number of worrisome ramifications: It put “elevated levels of pollutants, including fine particulate matter, hydrogen sulfide, sulfur dioxide, and alkanes” into our air, according to news outlets; prompted a shelter-in-place announcement by the City; resulted in social media reports of negative health effects as well as numerous complaints of delays in folks finding out about the danger; and triggered several BAAD violation notices to Valero.

In any event, the point here is that we’re not powerless. We have a possible way of reducing or eliminating cuts to vital services even as we emerge from Valero’s lucrative but hazardous shadow. Ironically, the very facility that has put our health and safety at risk has also provided a potential bridge to a brighter future, via the $56 million fine.

I’m not saying that a Bridge to the Future Fund is necessarily the best or only way of spending that money. Maybe portions of the Valero fine could be used to help affected employees, businesses and nonprofits, for instance. Moreover, there are many other, worthwhile ideas afloat to help the City address the budget gap. There will be community-wide discussions about utilizing the fine and closing the gap in coming months.

In the meantime, you can still weigh in to urge BAAD to allow Benicia flexible use of the Valero fine funds by contacting the Air Districts’ Community Investments Office at communityinvestments@baaqmd.gov – preferably as soon as possible. And you can offer your thoughts on the proposed Fund or other uses of the Valero fine by contacting Mayor Young and the other City Council members via their emails at the City website.

Again, the notion of a Fund is only a sketch, not yet a plan. But we should  consider it as we contemplate the inevitability, the potential and the promise of Life After Valero.


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

BIG CHANCE TO WEIGH IN BY MAY 10 ON HOW $56 MILLION IN VALERO FINES CAN BENEFIT BENICIA

Steve Golub: There is a MAY 10 DEADLINE to weigh in, via a Bay Area Air District (BAAD) survey, on guidelines that will determine how Benicia and other communities could benefit from fines imposed on/negotiated with air quality violators in the region.
Smoke from the Valero Benicia refinery during a 2017 incident. | Bay Area Air Quality Management District.
By Stephen Golub, email of May 7, 2025

Hi folks,

Forgive the shouting conveyed by the all-caps subject line, but there is a MAY 10 DEADLINE to weigh in, via a Bay Area Air District (BAAD) survey, on guidelines that will determine how Benicia and other communities could benefit from fines imposed on/negotiated with air quality violators in the region. Benicia has by far the most to gain from this, by virtue of the $82 million fine (which I’m informed translates into $56 million that can actually be used here) paid by Valero for its 15 years of illegal, undisclosed toxic emissions. 
Here’s the link to the survey:
I found the survey useful in some regards and too narrow in others. Most of all, I feel that the BAAD Community Investments Office (which controls the monies – it does not automatically hand them over to Benicia or other localities) should allow maximum flexibility for affected communities to benefit from use of the relevant funds. 
 
For Benicia, that could include the possibility of what I’d call a Bridge to the Future Fund that would allow the City to utilize all or part of the $56 million fine to compensate for the revenue reductions resulting from Valero’s closure, as long as the spending went to current or potential services or projects relevant to air quality, public health, community resilience or just transitions to more environmentally friendly policies and industries. That Fund would ease the severe budget crunch we face by supporting spending that, broadly interpreted, could fall within those categories.
 
The survey may already provide some wiggle room for such flexibility. For instance, one option includes support for firefighting services. But we can weigh in to try to maximize options.
 
Whether you agree with this perspective or not, I hope you’ll consider filling out the survey, otherwise contacting the CIO (email below) and/or favoring a very flexible approach to utilizing the funds.
A bit more background from the BAAD (what an acronym!) site: 
Community Investments Survey

This anonymous survey is designed to gather input from the Bay Area community on how funds from enforcement actions should be allocated. The Air District collects penalties from industry and businesses that violate its regulations. These funds will be managed by the newly established Community Investments Office, which will create the strategy to distribute over $124 million in local and regional funds. Your feedback will help shape the Community Investments Office’s strategy to ensure that investments address local and regional priorities and promote environmental justice. Your responses are confidential and will directly influence the use of funds. The survey will take approximately 5 minutes to complete.
 
Here’s  a link for more extensive background:
And here’s the email for the Community Investments Office, if you want to weigh in beyond or instead of the survey: communityinvestments@baaqmd.gov
 
Cheers,
Steve Golub

Valero refinery fire – smoke traveling southward over Benicia and into Contra Costa

Bay Area Air District issues Advisory for smoke and fire at Valero

DATE: May 5, 2025

CONTACT: communications@baaqmd.gov

Air quality advisory for smoke from fire at Valero

Potential localized smoke impacts in Southern Solano and parts of Contra Costa counties

SAN FRANCISCO – The Bay Area Air District is issuing an air quality advisory for smoke in Southern Solano, northern Contra Costa, “and northwestern Alameda counties”, specifically communities between I-80 and I-680 bridges (Martinez, Pacheco, Concord and Port Chicago), but with some impact possible southward to Oakland, due to a fire at Valero.

Localized impacts near the fire and in downwind neighborhoods are possible, including smoky skies, the smell of smoke and elevated levels of particulate pollution and other harmful pollutants. This is based on current meteorological conditions which can change depending on the duration of the fire. The Air District will be closely monitoring air quality throughout the region for smoke impacts from this incident.

Residents should follow instructions from local health officials.

The Air District is working with first responders to advise them on meteorology and air quality issues relating to the incident. Inspectors are on site investigating the incident, responding to public complaints and documenting any violations of air quality regulations. Once the investigation is complete, an incident report will be posted on this webpage: https://www.baaqmd.gov/about-air-quality/incidents-and-advisories.

Smoke from the fire contains fine particulate matter and other harmful pollutants. Exposure to smoke is unhealthy, even for short periods of time. It is important that Bay Area residents protect their health by avoiding exposure. If possible, and temperatures allow, stay inside with windows and doors closed until smoke levels subside. Set car vent systems to re-circulate to prevent outside air from moving inside. The use of indoor air filtration can also help reduce smoke exposure.

Smoke can irritate the eyes and airways, causing coughing, a dry scratchy throat and irritated sinuses. Elevated particulate matter in the air can trigger wheezing in those who suffer from asthma, emphysema or COPD. Elderly persons, children and individuals with respiratory illnesses are particularly susceptible to elevated air pollution levels and should take extra precautions to avoid exposure.


Check the U.S. EPA’s Fire and Smoke Map to see if smoke is affecting your area at: https://fire.airnow.gov/.

The Bay Area Air  District is the regional agency responsible for protecting air quality in the nine-county Bay Area. Connect with the Air District via Facebook, X, Instagram and YouTube.