Category Archives: Benicia city staff

Speak Up, Benicia: How to Defend Public Participation before Tuesday, May 7

[Note from BenIndy: For information on how to register your support or opposition to the changes described below, scroll to the end.]

BenIndy Editorial, Thursday, May 2, 2024

This Tuesday, May 7, at 6 pm, Benicia City Council will vote on revisions to the city’s campaign ordinances and public engagement policies that were proposed by council and city staff in late 2023.

While community members have supported some of the proposed changes, especially those that tighten loopholes in fair political practices, other proposed revisions – including some from city staff– have faced criticism for their potential to limit meaningful public engagement in governance.

Now, Benicia residents are calling on the community to write, call and show up to oppose to two revisions proposed by staff but not supported by Benicia’s Open Government Commission (OGC):

    • Amend the City’s Municipal Code to align with state law pertaining to the time to respond to public records act request; and
    • Decrease the amount of time public speakers may address a City public body in open session from 5 minutes to 3 minutes.

City Council requested Open Government Commission review in late 2023

Benicia’s Open Government Commission was created in 2005 to enhance openness, accountability, and public participation in local government after community complaints and external investigations exposed deficiencies in those areas. At the time, the charges laid against City Council included unreasonable delays or outright refusal to provide public records upon request, failures to appropriately notice the public on meeting content and scheduling, agenda misinformation, and more. By establishing the ordinance, the city sought to foster a stronger connection between government officials and residents, promoting a more informed and engaged community. 

Prompted by growing concerns about fairness, false statements and digital image manipulation in local elections, City Council tasked the OGC in late 2023 to review and develop recommendations for providing Benicia’s political landscape with guardrails to defend against such misleading tactics. The OGC was also charged to consider several changes proposed by city staff, including updating public records requests and public comment policies to reduce strain on staff.

Some changes to fair political practices code in Benicia elections

After deliberations were stalled several months by quorum and staffing issues, the OGC opted to introduce a few of its recommendations through suggested updates to Benicia’s Voluntary Code of Fair Campaign Practices. 

The OGC’s first recommendation to address false and manipulated media via the Voluntary Code would simply align Benicia with California state law, and not much more, but the impulse was welcomed by some city residents.

However, the OGC did not address important questions about enforcement functionality or meaningful remedy for violations, instead punting the responsibility back to the City Clerk, who could immediately inform any candidate and/or political action committee (PAC) about complaints and post said complaint(s) and any rebuttal(s) on the City’s website. 

An example of a 2020 campaign ad that some residents claim includes digitally manipulated images and misleading statements.

Additionally, although the OGC discussed how to make campaign regulations in Benicia more “objective” and enforceable, the commission asserted that the complexity of navigating First Amendment privileges or procuring third-party fact-checking services was beyond its scope.

Finally, the OGC considered whether to maintain or discontinue its mandated Candidate Forum before local elections, ultimately voting to keep the forum but adjusting which day it may fall on during the week.

Concerns about public access to information

Benicia city staff also had an opportunity to suggest changes to Benicia’s open government regulations through the OGC’s review process. These revisions were met with more pushback from the OGC than City Council’s requests. 

To boost public participation, city staff proposed refining a rule that allows a presiding officer at public meetings to request groups with similar views to appoint a spokesperson and adjust their speaking times for efficiency. However, the OGC suggested that for items with many speakers, a presiding officer should simply encourage groups to appoint a spokesperson by referencing the relevant section of the ordinance.

Staff also requested Benicia’s deadline for response to public records requests be adjusted to the state-mandated 10-day requirement instead of the current 3-day or 5-day requirement, depending on the type of records sought.  The OGC concurred with city staff’s suggestion, recommending that the city’s response time to public records act be changed to 10 days.

However, some Benicia residents disagree with extending the deadline.

“Rapid response to public information request is essential for local democracy, because local government operates faster than county or state,” one Benicia resident pointed out. “If Benicia City Council meets twice a month and a decision is dependent on a public records request, responsive documents should be available to the public as quickly as possible so decision makers can meet important deadlines, if necessary. Ten days doesn’t allow for that.”

Public speaking time under threat, confusion about recommendations

Perhaps most controversially, city staff has pushed for a reduction in public comment speaking time at meetings from 5 minutes to 3, claiming it would make meetings more efficient and likely increase public participation. The OGC declined to recommend city staff’s proposed speaking time reduction, citing public pushback and no compelling evidence that shorter speaking times could improve meeting outcomes. 

“Cutting the public’s time to be heard by a whopping 40%, especially without any data backing that decision, is a bad look,” one resident said, commending the OGC for not recommending the cutback. “Benicia should consider itself lucky to have engaged citizens, not be looking for ways to get them to pipe down.”

But despite the OGC explicitly declining to change the speaking time limits, the recommendation from city staff still appears in the City Council meeting packet for May 7 under the headline, “OPEN GOVERNMENT COMMISSION’S RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL (City Attorney’s Office),” causing confusion about which recommendations are coming from city staff and which are coming from the OGC, causing opponents to the change to cry foul.

Residents complained that the relevant agenda item, titled “OPEN GOVERNMENT COMMISSION’S RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL,” does not clearly and explicitly indicate which recommendations are from staff and which are not in the final presentation of proposed revisions

“It needs to be clearer,” a resident said. “The way it is written, it is very unclear who is recommending what, and why, and I find that very troubling in an already very complicated discussion about open government.”

Benicia resident Mike Caplan announced the opening of the Benicia Farmer’s Market at the April 16 City Council meeting, leaving the podium after speaking for 40 seconds. Some Benicia residents say the city would be wrong to limit speaking time, especially when most speakers don’t use the full 5 minutes. | Still from April 16, 2024 Benicia City meeting recording.

Open government norms in review

Although the OGC’s proposed revisions to Benicia’s Voluntary Code of Fair Campaign Practices are fine and welcome, the commission fell short of not just devising, but also envisioning a better system to fend off repeat offenders who use misleading or otherwise unfair campaign tactics to exercise outsized influence in our small town elections. Some cities work with their open government commissions to produce mailers and email blasts warning voters of deceptive campaign practices, for just one example of an effective city commission–led response to unfair campaign practices.

Meanwhile, City Council’s decisions on these recommendations this Tuesday will be another signal of how City Council will balance which burdens on city staff are necessary for open, local governance, and which can be dropped to save resources. What shakes out of this meeting will, in essence, show us how City Council will weigh the necessity of economy (Benicia is, after all, experiencing a budget crisis) against the necessity of providing services, including meaningful public participation opportunities, to its community. 

This meeting therefore merits careful watching, and perhaps active participation, on the part of Benicia citizens. More information about how to support or oppose these changes is below.

Call to action

The full list of what appear to be staff recommendations under the OGC banner is below and available here:

This document is titled “OPEN GOVERNMENT COMMISSION’S RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL,” but several of the recommendations in this list do not reflect OGC direction.  | From page 9 of the City of Benicia Full Agenda Packet for May 7 meeting.

Benicia activists are asking the community to call, write or show up on Tuesday to oppose changes to:

(2) Amend the City’s Municipal Code to align with state law pertaining to the time to respond to public records act request; and
(3) Decrease the amount of time public speakers may address a City public body in open session form 5 minutes to 3 minutes.

If you care about public participation in Benicia one way or the other, there are several ways to get involved, and most of them are quick and easy. Learn more below.


How to write and email a public comment

If you would like to make your opinion on the topic of the proposed revisions known to City Council, members of the public may provide public comment via email to the City Clerk by email at lwolfe@ci.benicia.ca.us. Any comment submitted to the City Clerk should indicate to which item of the agenda the comment relates. (THE PROPOSED REVISIONS ARE IN AGENDA ITEM 22.C – OPEN GOVERNMENT COMMISSION’S RECOMMENDATIONS TO COUNCIL (City Attorney’s Office).)

– Comments received by 2:00 pm on the day of the meeting will be electronically forwarded to the City Council and posted on the City’s website.

– Comments received after 2:00 pm, but before the start time of the meeting will be electronically forwarded to the City Council but will not be posted on the City’s website.

In your email, put the item number in your subject line (e.g., “Public comment re. Item 22.C”).

In your email body, share why you support or oppose the changes.

How to view the meeting and/or make a live public comment

You can participate in the meeting in one of four ways: 

1) Attend in person at Council Chambers
2) Cable T.V. Broadcast – Check with your cable provider for your local government broadcast channel.
3) Livestream online at www.ci.benicia.ca.us/agendas
4) Zoom Meeting (link below)

The public may view and participate (via computer or phone) link: https://us02web.zoom.us/j/88508047557?pwd=cHRsZlBrYlphU3pkODcycytmcFR2UT09
  • If prompted for a password, enter 449303.
  • Use participant option to “raise hand” during the public comment period for the item you wish to speak on. Please note, your electronic device must have microphone capability. Once unmuted, you will have up to 5 minutes to speak.
  • Dial in with phone:
    Before the start of the item you wish to comment on, call any of the numbers below. If one is busy, try the next one.

        • 1 669 900 9128
        • 1 346 248 7799
        • 1 253 215 8782
        • 1 646 558 8656
        • 1 301 715 8592
        • 1 312 626 6799

•  Enter the meeting ID number: 885 0804 7557 (*please note this is an updated ID number*.)

Say the item you wish to speak on. (AGAIN, THE PROPOSED CHANGES ARE IN ITEM 22.C.)

Once unmuted, you will have up to 5 minutes to speak.

Enter password: 449303

When prompted for a Participant ID, press #.

Press *9 on your phone to “raise your hand” when the Mayor calls for public comment.

Any member of the public who needs accommodations should email City Clerk Lisa Wolfe at lwolfe@ci.benicia.ca.us, who will use her best efforts to provide as much accessibility as possible while also maintaining public safety.

Benicia City Council Initiates Draft Industrial Safety Ordinance Process

Benicia Industrial Health and Safety Ordinance (BISHO) spokesperson Terry Mollica spoke passionately in favor of adopting an ISO in Benicia, calling existing agreements with Valero “toothless.” | Image still from City of Benicia Dec. 19, 2023 City Council meeting.

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

December 21, 2023 – Benicia, CA – On Tuesday, the Benicia City Council unanimously approved a proposal by Vice Mayor Terry Scott and Councilwoman Kari Birdseye to instruct staff, under the direction of a Council subcommittee led by the two, to conduct research, solicit substantial expert and public input and produce a resulting draft Industrial Safety Ordinance (ISO) for the city. If the Council then adopts the ISO, it will cover Valero Benicia Refinery as well as other industrial sites in Benicia that meet the determined criteria. 

“City Council’s primary responsibility is to safeguard the health, safety and well-being of our residents, businesses and visitors,” said Vice Mayor Scott. “That includes policing, fire protection, clean water, and now we have the opportunity to create an Industrial Safety Ordinance that provides common-sense legislation to transparently monitor and protect the air we breathe.”

“Benicia deserves a ‘state of the art’ industrial safety and health ordinance that will best protect our community,” said Councilwoman Birdseye. “We will take the lessons learned in other refinery towns, from county experts, and local community members who have been impacted by refinery pollution for decades.”

Benicia is the only Bay Area refinery city without an ISO, as other communities have realized the importance and value of strengthening their relationships with and oversight of their resident refineries. In lieu of an ISO, Benicia currently has a Cooperation Agreement (CA) with Valero, initiated in 2019 and due to expire in 2025. Many citizens and city leaders believe the CA has not been strong enough, given Valero’s continued lack of transparency in reporting numerous violations of federal and state law.

Well over a dozen Benicians testified about the issue at the Council meeting, almost all in favor of a strong ISO, providing both scientific data and personal experiences. One resident of Benicia’s East Side, the area most affected by Valero emissions and fumes, spoke movingly about his family’s and neighbors’ experiences in which his son’s elementary school was evacuated because of an air spill of toxic oil pollution from the Valero Asphalt plant. “The county gave us an emergency order to lock down. A teacher went to the hospital. Valero denied all responsibility. The City and state appeared powerless to do anything substantial to protect against another incident,” he said. 

Benicia Vice Mayor Terry Scott

“We can’t protect public health without knowing what is in the air we breathe,” Scott said. “Moving forward with an ISO gives the city an effective tool for providing our community with an additional level of enforcement and trust.” 

Earlier this year, a call for the passage of an ISO was launched by a group of concerned citizens who believe that Benicia needs ways of monitoring, obtaining information about and taking enforcement actions regarding Valero emissions. Called the Benicia Industrial Safey and Health Ordinance (BISHO) working group, the initiative has more than 150 supporters in the community. 

Benicia City Council Member Kari Birdseye.

“We are grateful to Vice Mayor Scott and Councilwoman Birdseye for bringing this critical concern to City Council and for the entire Council for their support,” said Terry Mollica, a leader of BISHO.  “We need to make sure our community is notified immediately of refinery and other industrial emergencies or failures to meet state and federal regulations. We also need strong, enforceable penalties for the failure to do so.”

“It is our hope that everyone involved, the City, Valero, and the community, will have a seat at the table,” continued Mollica. “It is in all our best interest that we work together to make Benicia a safer, healthier place for all of us.” 

To find out more about the issue, BISHO, and how to get involved, go to the organization’s website, www.bisho.org.

“We want as many people as possible to read the materials, recognize how important this issue is to our community and become supporters of a strong Industrial Safety and Health Ordinance,” Mollica said. 

BISHO Working Group Contact:
Terry Mollica, beniciaisho@gmail.com, (707) 385-9972

 

Benicia to move forward with regulation of Valero refinery

The Valero Benicia refinery | Scott Morris / Vallejo Sun.

Residents felt that state and regional regulatory agencies had not followed through on enforcement.

Vallejo Sun, by Ryan Gellar, December 20, 2023

BENICIA – The Benicia City Council voted unanimously on Tuesday to begin a community engagement process to create stronger regulations of the Valero refinery and other industries in the city through an industrial safety ordinance.

At Tuesday’s meeting, the council chambers were filled with community members who expressed concerns about deficiencies in Valero’s fence line monitoring, accident reporting and the company’s dismissal of community input.

Many felt that state and regional regulatory agencies have allowed delays in monitoring programs and had not followed through on key avenues of enforcement. Mistrust was also fueled by a revelation in 2022 that the Bay Area Air Quality Management District had discovered that Valero illegally released toxic emissions for 16 years but the agency failed to notify Benicia residents until three years after the discovery.

In 2018, the city council considered adopting an ordinance to regulate the refinery similar to legislation in Contra Costa County and Richmond, but instead formed a cooperative agreement with Valero which is set to expire in 2025. After four years of the cooperative agreement, residents said that it has not provided sufficient oversight of industrial practices in the city.

Mayor Steve Young encouraged residents to define the areas where the current agreement falls short to indicate a direction for provisions that could be included in an ordinance.

Benicia resident Terry Mollica, who was involved in the drafting 2018 ordinance proposal and spoke on behalf of the Benicia Industrial Safety and Health Ordinance working group, said that the deficiencies are too numerous to list at the meeting. But he highlighted a key issue that the working group found to be particularly problematic.“It has absolutely no enforcement mechanism,” Mollica said. “In fact it includes a provision that allows Valero to unilaterally terminate the entire cooperative agreement at any time if it thinks it is being over-regulated.”

Click here to finish reading . . .

(You will be redirected to the Vallejo Sun’s website. There is no paywall.)


Click here to sign up free for independent local journalism from the Vallejo Sun.

TODAY! – Ask City Council to protect Benicia’s health and safety at the Dec. 19 Council Meeting

A Message from the Benicia ISO Working Group:

The crucial City Council meeting on whether Benicia should consider an Industrial Safety Ordinance will take place on TODAY, Tuesday, Dec. 19 at 6 pm at the City Council Chambers at City Hall, 230 East L Street. It is vital that supporters of a strong ISO attend and voice our support. Valero is gearing up to oppose this and may bring personnel to the meeting to voice opposition.

By attending and offering comments, you can offer support for the proposal by Vice Mayor Terry Scott and Councilmember Kari Birdseye, to be voted on by the Council on Dec. 19, instructing City staff to look into the possibility of Benicia adopting an ISO.

In addition, please voice support for not just the Scott-Birdseye proposal but for a strong ISO. This has become all-the-more important because of a problematic Benicia City staff report that, perhaps unintentionally, repeatedly presents incomplete and potentially misleading information that paints Valero’s refinery in a favorable light compared to Contra Costa County refineries covered by ISOs. The report neglects to mention evidence and experience to the contrary.

For instance, the report lists accidents that have occurred only at Contra Costa refineries. Yet it makes no mention of the many instances of severe violations by Valero, including the 2022 revelation about its Benicia refinery’s over fifteen years of unreported toxic emissions, hundreds of times regulatory limits.

In fairness, however, the report briefly notes, “In the years following [the Contra Costa County ISO’s implementation], it is believed to have contributed to a decline in accidents and releases at refineries in Contra Costa.”

The point is that voices for a strong ISO can help counteract any misimpressions that staff report might leave to the contrary.

If at all possible, your showing up early can help ensure that supporters of a strong ISO are near the front of the audience. But even if you can’t make it by 6 pm, that will be ok as the discussion of this matter probably won’t start until close to 6:30 pm (or possibly even later if the Council does not move this priority item to early in the agenda).

Also, participation by Zoom is an option. You can find the link that explains how to access the meeting here: https://granicus_production_attachments.s3.amazonaws.com/benicia/5f807fdd4c4cce692977198f6f31acd30.pdf. 

Thanks very much for considering all this and for any support you can show for making Benicia safer and healthier for our kids, our older adults and all of us.

See www.bisho.org for more information.