As your City Council, we are unified in supporting Measures F, G, and H, which represent a lasting investment in Benicia’s future—strengthening our roads, enhancing infrastructure, and preserving essential services that safeguard our quality of life.
These measures weren’t proposed lightly. They reflect thoughtful planning and a vision to secure a stable, vibrant Benicia for generations to come.
While new taxes can be challenging, they’re a pathway to achieving a resilient city that thrives.
The strength of this vision is reflected in the broad support we’ve received from the Benicia Police Officers Association, Benicia Dispatchers Association, Benicia Fire Association, Solano County Association of Realtors, Napa-Solano Labor Council, California Democratic Party, and many other organizations. With these measures, we’re building a legacy of excellence and reliability that our city deserves.
Let’s come together and Believe in Benicia’s bright future.
Here’s what each measure will accomplish:
Measure F – Street Repair Sales Tax
A citizen-initiative 0.5% (half-cent) sales tax
Dedicated exclusively to street repair
Includes oversight by an independent citizens committee
Revenue cannot be used for any other purpose
Measure G – Limited Charter City Status
Establishes Benicia as a Limited Charter City
Limited and Sole purpose is to enable implementation of the Real Property Transfer Tax (Measure H).
Measure H – Real Property Transfer Tax (RPTT)
Applies to residential and commercial property sales
Includes important exemptions:
Family transfers (spouse, children, parents, grandparents)
Property transfers into trusts
Mortgage refinancing
Creates a sustainable revenue source as Benicia grows with new housing development.
RPTT is a one-time tax (closing cost) only affecting sale of residential and commercial property and can be paid by either party or negotiated.
We strongly believe these Measures will significantly improve Benicia’s future.
While we encourage your support, we most appreciate your thoughtful consideration of both supporting and opposing arguments. Your engagement in this process ensures that the outcome truly reflects our community’s will.
Thank you for your participation in this crucial decision-making process.
Sincerely,
The Benicia City Council
Mayor Steve Young
Vice Mayor Terry Scott
Council Member Trevor Macenski
Council Member Kari Birdseye
Council Member Tom Campbell
SAN FRANCISCO – The Bay Area Air Quality Management District and California Air Resources Board are announcing today a nearly $82 million penalty in a joint case to address significant air pollution violations by Valero Refining Co. at its Benicia refinery. This penalty is the largest ever assessed in the Air District’s history.
Over $64 million of these funds will be returned to the local community to finance projects aimed at reducing air pollution exposure, mitigating air pollution impacts and improving public health in areas surrounding the refinery. These projects will be selected through a public process with input from residents, community organizations, elected officials and advocates representing the impacted area. The remainder of the penalty will be used to fund beneficial clean air projects in overburdened communities throughout the Bay Area, as well as to offset the costs of investigating and prosecuting the case. In total, nearly $80 million of this historic penalty will be returned to Bay Area communities.
“Today’s historic penalty against Valero Refining Co. for its egregious emissions violations underscores the Air District’s unwavering commitment to holding polluters accountable and safeguarding the health of those living in refinery communities,” said Dr. Philip Fine, executive officer of the Air District. “Investing these funds back into the community will empower local residents to drive air quality projects that benefit the surrounding neighborhoods, advancing our mission of cleaner air for all.”
“CARB is pleased to have supported the Air District in investigating and settling this important case that helps remediate the harms Valero’s operations caused to surrounding communities,” said CARB Executive Officer Dr. Steven Cliff. “The Air District’s new community fund provides critical funding for projects that improve air quality and public health for impacted local communities. CARB is proud to direct the majority of its share of the penalties from this settlement to the community fund to expand the reach of its projects.”
“This penalty sends a strong message; adherence to air quality standards is both necessary and expected, and failure to do so can lead to significant fines,” said Steve Young, Benicia Mayor and a member of the Air District Board of Directors. “Benicia residents need to know that air quality violations are taken seriously. The use of these funds will help us address local air quality issues going forward. I am grateful for the work of the Air District, CARB and the California Department of Justice in helping bring this long-standing issue to conclusion.”
The penalty stems from a 2019 inspection that found unreported emissions from the facility’s hydrogen system containing harmful organic compounds in violation of Air District regulations. These organic compounds contributed to the Bay Area’s regional smog and particulate pollution problems, and they contained benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene, or BTEX, compounds, which cause cancer, reproductive harm and other toxic health effects. Air District inspectors discovered that refinery management had known since at least 2003 that emissions from the hydrogen systemcontained these harmful and toxic air contaminants but did not report them or take any steps to prevent them. The refinery emitted an estimated 8,400 tons of these organic compounds in total over this period in violation of Air District regulations – an average of more than 2.7 tons for each day on which a violation occurred, over 360 times the legal limit.
Subsequent investigations uncovered a host of other problems involving the hydrogen system, including emissions in violation of applicable limits, failure to install required emissions abatement equipment, failure to inspect equipment for leaks and failure to report required information, among other violations.
The Air District sought abatement orders from its independent Hearing Board to require Valero to abate ongoing violations. In conjunction with CARB, the Air District has now assessed this monetary penalty to resolve all the violations. In addition to the penalty, Valero will be required to undertake several measures to prevent future violations. Valero will be required to reconfigure the facility’s main hydrogen vent and vents in its hydrogen production plants to prevent emissions from being released directly into the atmosphere. Valero will also be required to implement a training program to ensure that its staff are fully aware of all relevant Air District regulations.
In May 2024, the Bay Area Air Quality Management District Board of Directors adopted a groundbreaking policy that directs a significant portion of penalty funds to the communities most impacted by air quality violations. Under this policy, most of these penalty funds will be reinvested in local projects specifically designed to reduce pollution and enhance public health. To help improve regional air quality and advance the Air District’s environmental justice and equity goals, penalty funds will be allocated in accordance with this new policy. The policy will ensure that significant amounts of large penalties benefit the community where the violation occurred while also setting aside funds to address the needs of communities overburdened with air pollution that may not have industrial sources that could be subject to large penalties.
This penalty is the third major fine the Air District has assessed against Bay Area refineries this year. In February, the Air District announced a $20 million penalty against the Chevron refinery in Richmond, and earlier this month the Air District announced a $5 million penalty against the Marathon refinery in Martinez. “These significant penalties should put the refineries and other industrial operations on notice,” said Alexander Crockett, the Air District’s general counsel. “If you violate our regulations and pollute our air, we will hold you accountable to the maximum extent provided for by law.”
The joint prosecution with CARB is also indicative of a new level of cooperation among enforcement agencies for air quality violations. The Air District will look to partner with other agencies where appropriate to ensure that maximum enforcement resources are brought to bear for significant violations.
CARB is charged with protecting the public from the harmful effects of air pollution and developing programs and actions to fight climate change. From requirements for clean cars and fuels to adopting innovative solutions to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, California has pioneered a range of effective approaches that have set the standard for effective air and climate programs for the nation, and the world.
By Stephen Golub, first published in the Benicia Herald on October 13, 2024
When we think about courage, the kinds of things that come to mind are police taking on violent criminals or firefighters rushing into burning buildings. We don’t think of city officials poring over spreadsheets and budget documents.
But when it comes to this year’s mayoral and City Council elections, there’s an admirable element of courage at play. This is a central reason I’m endorsing Mayor Steve Young for reelection, as well as Christina Gilpin-Hayes and (current Council Member) Trevor Macenski for City Council.
They all also merit support for additional reasons that go beyond our budget crisis, including the initiative and energy they’ll bring to these (largely uncompensated) jobs. But with respect to that crisis, they’ve earned respect by biting the bullet and backing the three revenue-enhancing measures on the Benicia ballot, involving a small sales tax increase for road repair and introduction of a modest real estate transfer tax for more general purposes.
Regrettably, as demonstrated by retiring Council Member Tom Cambell in his October 9 letter to the Herald, the responsibility shown by Young, Gilpin-Hayes and Macenski sharply contrasts with an erroneous budgetary approach taken by a twice-defeated (and once victorious) current Council candidate, Republican Lionel Largaespada. Not one to mince words, Campbell describes Largaespada’s number-juggling in terms of “voodoo math.”
As ably analyzed by Campbell, Largaespada’s misleading approach includes incorrectly claiming that he’s “found” enough existing City money to cover road repair and identifying supposedly excessive spending on outside contracting services – even though such services in fact are essential or even crucial to Benicia (and, I’d add, would most likely be more expensive if carried out by City personnel).
Campbell further explains that “Largaespada never talked to anyone in the [City’s] finance department or the City Manager’s department about his plan.” Finally, demonstrating some fine institutional memory, Campbell points to the video of a specific Council meeting to assert that in 2019, while on the Council( before being defeated in 2022), Largaespada backed a higher sales tax than the one candidate Largaespada now opposes. He was apparently for that kind of tax before he was against it.
All this worries me in three ways.
First, with 44 percent of the City budget going to fire and police protection, there seems no way to adopt Largaespada’s apparent voodoo math without cutting that essential protection. It could also mean deteriorating roads and other City services, as well as a failure to repair City buildings and facilities, such as the Police headquarters, the Senior Center, the Swim Center, the library and a host of other structures.
Second, Campbell does not stand alone in his refutation of Largaespada’s math. His critique is part of a broad consensus of criticism that I’ve heard from responsible Benicians across the political spectrum, ranging from business-centric to progressive circles.
Finally, if Largaespada brings this questionable approach to the budget, one must wonder about his judgment in handling other pressing issues Benicia faces – not least safety and health challenges presented by Texas-based Valero, who’s dangerous crude-by-rail “bomb train” plan he backed several years ago and which has massively, indirectly supported him through political action committee spending over the years – often through misleading ads that unfairly attack his opponents.
I don’t like criticizing Largaespada in these pages. He is a good, bright person. But I don’t like the possibility of gutting City services hanging over our heads either, especially when Campbell and many other experts refute his calculations.
Back to courage and judgment: It’s hard to tell people we need additional taxes. It’s harder still to put one’s political career on the line to do so. But Mayor Young has led the way in dedicating much of his campaign to that, in order to right the City’s fiscal ship for now and into the future.
Thus, he’s backing Ballot Measure F, the product of a citizen initiative that gathered over 2,000 signatures, which will increase the sales tax on non-grocery items by a small amount (to still less than a number of other Bay Area communities) in order to ensure that road repair is fully funded.
He’s similarly backing Measures G and H, which together will allow the City to raise funds to help close our looming budget deficits via a modest transfer tax on real estate sales – with key exceptions such as no tax in the case of inheritance or divorce.
A real value of G and H is that with state-mandated additions of housing to Benicia, other possible housing developments on the horizon and the possibility of Valero selling its refinery down the line, large chunks of revenue could be generated by the transfer tax without imposing any costs on current Benicia residents.
I won’t delve into the pros and cons of these three measures beyond very briefly addressing certain frequently heard counter-arguments.
For instance, aren’t City employees overpaid or isn’t the City overstaffed? No. In fact, sometimes Benicia does not even match the going rate for some jobs in other municipalities, which has meant losing valuable staff to them and the resulting expense of recruiting and hiring replacements. And Benicia has made staff consolidations to streamline its operations.
Or, why can’t we renegotiate employee pensions? Because we’re bound by law to honor them.
For these reasons and many more, all three measures have the support of Benicia’s public safety unions, the Solano County Association of Realtors, the County’s Democratic Party and many other organizations and individuals across the political spectrum.
The budget crisis isn’t at all the only reason I’m backing Steve Young for Mayor. He displays an even keel in leading the City, as evidenced by the calm stewardship he showed during the pandemic. He offers various sensible plans and projects to enhance our business climate and quality of life. Such initiatives will yield additional revenues down the line without imposing additional taxes.
I have not addressed Macenski’s candidacy much because, as a popular incumbent, he does not seem to need the same level of discussion as newcomer Gilpin-Hayes, whom I’ve previously, enthusiastically endorsed. Suffice to say that he is a very sharp individual who brings great knowledge to consideration of many city issues.
There is, however, one regard in which I wish Gilpin-Hayes, Macenski and especially Young were stronger: the proposed Industrial Safety Ordinance (ISO) that Vice Mayor Scott, Council Member Birdseye and several other individuals have labored over for the past year. All three have cautiously endorsed aspects of it in principle, which is understandable. But as a matter of leadership and legacy, and of safety and health, stronger and clearer support would be welcome in the lead-up to the election – especially in contrast with the eventual unsupportive stance we might expect from Largaespada in view of his past backing by Texas-based Valero.
I have not addressed the candidacies of Kevin Kirby for Mayor and (former Valero and Exxon Mobil employee) Franz Rosenthal for City Council because, while they both came across as nice folks in a recent forum organized by the Benicia High School debate team, neither have matched the focus or knowledge of Young, Gilpin-Hayes, Macenski or Largaespada– whether at that forum or online – regarding the crucial issues confronting Benicia. The one exception is former Valero and Exxon Mobil employee Rosenthal’s clear opposition to the ISO.
In addition, given Rosenthal’s apparent extremely late entry into the race, one wonders whether, as the other new face in the Council contest, he’ll counterproductively take votes away from the energetic and well-qualified newcomer Gilpin-Hayes.
To sum up: For their courage, judgement and many more reasons, I hope that Benicians will work for, donate to and above all vote for Young, Gilpin-Hayes and Macenski for Mayor and City Council Members. Benicia needs the sound, responsible, energetic approaches they bring to the table.
[Note: I have donated to the Young and Gilpin-Hayes campaigns.]
The BenIndy has also endorsed Christina Gilpin-Hayes for City Council. Learn more about her campaign by clicking the image below and visiting her website
By Mayor Steve Young, originally published in the Benicia Herald on October 6, 2024
Over the past four years of serving as your Mayor, I’ve been immensely proud of our Council’s achievements. We’ve made tough decisions, some of them unpopular.
However, these decisions have significantly streamlined and improved our City’s processes, finances, and safety services.
As we continue to build on the progress we’ve made, it’s crucial to address our City’s ongoing needs to ensure a thriving future for Benicia. We have proposed Measures G and H for your consideration, which are designed to enhance Benicia’s future financial stability and infrastructure.
Together, these measures will empower Benicia to better manage its resources and address the critical needs of our community. By supporting Measures G and H, we can continue to build a stronger, more resilient Benicia for all residents.
However, I’ve become aware that there’s significant misinformation circulating about these measures. Given that, I would like to dispel some of the misleading, falsehoods and rumors surrounding them.
First, the Sept. 22 op-ed by the Committee against G and H included the following statement:
“Measure G will give City Hall the green light to increase permit fees, license taxes, parking fees, usage fees and special assessments beyond the caps.”
This is misleading:
As a General Law City we already have the power and the authority to raise fees such as parking and building permits without a vote of the people. Switching to a Charter City would not affect this in any way. Raising Water rates and fees for Lighting and Landscaping Districts requires a vote by ratepayers through a voting process governed by proposition 218. Our proposed Charter City Measure does nothing to change this.
Other concerns I have heard include:
“Measure H will rob my kids of their inheritance if I pass my house on to them.”
False: The tax only applies if the property is sold. There is not tax if the property is transferred to family members through inheritance or divorce.
“Measure H will raise taxes for renters.”
False: If an owner of a rental complex sells a property, it is possible the new owner may raise rents. But a current or future owner can already do so within the limits of California law, and it would not be due to this proposed, minimal increase to one-time closing costs.
“If the measures pass, the money will just go into the black hole of the General Fund where it will be spent on salaries for city workers who are backing the measures.”
False: Earlier this year, this City Council passed a policy stating that any surplus funds (including any from Measure H) would be placed into the capital reserve fund. To spend any funds from the capital reserve now requires a super-majority 4/5 vote.
The larger impact of Measure H is being missed.
While residential sales only average 250-300 houses per year (and are on track to be less than 200 this year), we need to look into the future.
The Seeno property (Northern Gateway) will likely be developed in the next few years. That proposal calls for the construction of 1,100 homes. If sold at the current average Benicia single family sales price of $880,000, these transfers could generate nearly $4 million for Benicia —if tax Measures G and H were approved.
Importantly, the tax would be paid by either the developer or the home buyers, not Benicians.
There is also the possibility that Valero may, at some point, decide to sell the refinery. At its current value of around $2 billion, a sale would generate $16 million for Benicia…paid either by Valero or another oil company, not Benicians.
Additionally, the number of commercial properties listed for sale in Benicia represents another potential revenue source.
For example, the Economic Development Board reported this month that there are 18 active commercial properties in Benicia that are listed for sale which total over $30 million– taxes on those sales would be taxes paid by the commercial buyer– if tax measures G and H were approved.
At $4/6/8 dollars per $1,000 (depending on purchase price), there’s a significant amount of money that would be left on the table that Measures G and H would provide.
All the above represents real money for our future which would dwarf the amount paid by Benicians on the sale of their homes.
I understand that people don’t like paying taxes. I don’t like paying taxes either. But the City has, over the course of months and years of careful planning under City staff and our leadership, developed a comprehensive plan to address our looming infrastructure challenges. A crucial part of the plan rests on the passage of these tax Measures.
Voting against the passage of these Measures is a vote to do nothing.
It is a vote to kick the can down the road yet again, and not face our future with open eyes.
It is a vote to watch as our roads and other facilities continue to fall further into disrepair.
It is a vote for a future of higher costs and diminished quality of life for Benicia.
Please join me and the rest of City Council, labor and citizens groups and vote for Measures F, G and H.
Let’s stop kicking the can down the road. Let’s work together to make hard decisions today that will provide for a stronger, vibrant, more fiscally sound Benicia tomorrow.
You must be logged in to post a comment.