Category Archives: Corporate influence

Benicia City Council, Corporate influence, Local elections, Valero

Benicia election – a flood of letters for Kari and Terry, and blasting Valero’s corrupt influence

Letters for Kari in the media and on this website have taken a huge turn – see below.

By Roger Straw, November 4, 2022

RECENT LETTERS OF SUPPORT & CONCERN
EARLIER LETTERS OF SUPPORT

More letters, news & links about the 2022 election, Kari Birdseye and Terry Scott here on the BenIndy

And best of all – Kari’s website!

Benicia City Council, Corporate influence, Local elections, Valero

Jan Cox Golovich: Many thanks to those exposing Valero’s corrupt influence

The overwhelming response from the community when Valero’s campaign contributions and deceptive practices are exposed is one of outrage.

By Jan Cox Golovich, November 1, 2022

Jan Cox Golovich, Benicia CA

I would like to express my appreciation to the many community people who have worked diligently to expose the corruption of our local city council elections with Valero’s efforts to buy council seats for Strawbridge and Largaespada during the last three election cycles (2018,2020,2022) Specifically, I would like to thank Lawrence Dutch with his Letters to the Editor, Andres Soto via his radio show on KPFA, leaders of the newly formed group Benicians for Clean Elections and Roger Straw, Editor and Publisher of the Benicia Independent.

Valero has poured massive amounts of money to secure these seats for their hand-picked candidates Strawbridge and Largaespada. In 2018 and 2020, they spent $445,000 buying ads, bombarding us with endless phone calls and smearing good, honest candidates. As far as I can tell in my research, this is an unprecedented amount for a small town of 28,000 people. Presently, Valero has a war chest of over $225,000 for the 2022 election. They have sent out deceptive mailers and conducted phone banks promoting their candidates disguised as a neutral “poll” These last minute maneuvers are difficult to counter, as they hide many of their expenditures until AFTER the election.

The overwhelming response from the community when Valero’s campaign contributions and deceptive practices are exposed is one of outrage. We cannot tolerate or accept this as the status quo in our town. The community displayed its intolerance in 2020 when Strawbridge was trounced in her bid for the Mayor’s seat, despite the massive financial backing of Valero. Yet, Valero has persisted in building its campaign coffers and coming up with even dirtier tactics.

Sadly, our elected officials have displayed an astonishing disconnect from its outraged electorate and rather than criticize Valero for corrupting our elections, they have turned on the very community people who have exposed it. The two beneficiaries of Valero’s campaign funds feign ignorance as to why Valero would support them with these massive amounts of money and complain that those exposing these “facts” are engaging in “negative campaigning”. Another elected official writes a letter to the editor calling the attacks on Valero “over-the-top”, ignoring the fact that the money Valero pours into our elections to buy council seats is much more egregious. Yet another councilmember writes a tone-deaf letter to the editor saying that Strawbridge and Largaespada would make good council members and calls for their detractors to “stop talking trash.” Strawbridge and Largaespada may make great council members for Valero, but their ability to do good for the community is completely compromised by Valero’s sponsorship.

I have lived in this town close to forty years and have always been proud of the strong voice of the community that comes together and stands up for what is right. Whether it’s preserving open space, cleaning up toxic waste, blocking petroleum coke domes on the waterfront or fighting against exploding Bakken oil trains, this community has ALWAYS won the fight; we have done this despite opposition from City Hall and powerful monied interests. I have no doubt that we will go back to having clean and honest elections one day very soon. Thanks to all that are making this happen.

Jan Cox-Golovich
Former Benicia City Councilmember

More letters, news & links about the 2022 election, Kari Birdseye and Terry Scott here on the BenIndy

And best of all – Kari’s website!

Benicia City Council, Benicia elections, Benicia Mayor Steve Young, Big Oil, Corporate influence, Local elections, Valero PAC, Valero Services Inc.

Benicia’s mayor calls out Valero’s big war chest ahead of election

The Vallejo Sun, By John Glidden, Feb 15, 2022

The Valero Benicia refinery

BENICIA – Mayor Steve Young says he’s displeased that Valero Benicia Refinery is poised once again to spend a large sum of money during the upcoming city council election.

The refinery dumped $200,000 into its Working Families for a Strong Benicia PAC last December, giving the PAC more than $232,000 ahead of the November 2022 election, according to campaign forms submitted to the Benicia City Clerk’s Office.

Benicia Mayor Steve Young.
Benicia Mayor Steve Young

Typically, a Benicia council candidate can expect to receive more than $20,000 in contributions over the span of an election or about 10% of what Valero has available.

The move has revitalized conversation in town between environmentalists seeking more regulations, the company, and local unions that are concerned that city officials want to shut down the plant.

Valero couldn’t be immediately reached for comment.

Young — who said he issued his statement over the weekend only as a Benicia resident and not as mayor — admitted that what Valero was doing was legal but argued “it is wrong-and extremely harmful to our community.”

“There is only one purpose in making such a huge expenditure nine months before the election: to scare off any potential City Council candidate who would consider running without first getting Valero’s stamp of approval,” Young’s statement read. “What candidate is willing to go up against that kind of war chest?”

Valero opened its PAC ahead of the 2018 city council elections, ultimately backing Lionel Largaespada and Christina Strawbridge. Both were elected. The PAC publicly opposed Benicia Planning Commissioner Kari Birdseye. Two years later, the PAC once again backed Strawbridge, this time as she made a mayoral bid, while opposing Young. Despite the PAC spending $250,000 during that election, Young was elected.

Young and Birdseye served on the planning commission together when the body rejected the company’s crude-by-rail proposal in early 2016. The Benicia City Council went on to reject the project later that year.

Young wrote that Valero should have a say in the election but “they should also play by the same rules that apply to everyone else under our campaign finance regulations.”

Young said the city’s campaign laws allow a candidate to spend no more than $35,000 on a campaign. He argued Valero should be held to the same rule.

“But Valero’s size and wealth gives them the belief that they can pick and choose who should be our elected representatives,” Young added.

Young said that to stop Valero every council candidate should reject support it receives from the company.

“In addition, voters should demand that any candidate take a public and ongoing stand that Valero should not support their campaign in any way,” Young added. “I call on all prospective candidates in the November election to make this pledge. If no candidate is willing to be supported by this PAC, where will they spend all of their money?”

Young’s statement comes as the Valero refinery has been receiving some negative attention.

The Bay Area Air Quality Management District announced in January that it was seeking a legally binding order against the refinery to correct “significant excess emissions violations.” The district alleges that Valero didn’t report that more than 8,000 tons of excess emissions came from the plant over a 16-year period.

Last November, a contractor was found dead hanging from a scaffolding ladder by his safety harness over a piece of refinery equipment.

Valero is the largest employer in Benicia, employing more than 400 people. The plant processed 165,000 barrels of oil each day, according to its website.

Campaign records show that from July 1 through Dec. 31, 2021, the PAC spent more than $5,000 with Sacramento-based Nielsen Merksamer Parrinello Gross & Leonli LLP for campaign services.

Young, who has opened a 2024 re-election campaign, reported raising no contributions and only spending $29 during the second half of 2021. The campaign reported having about $900.

Meanwhile, both Largaespada and Strawbridge, who are up for re-election this November, reported no activity during the same period.

Benicia City Council, Benicia elections, Corporate influence, Local elections, Steve Young, Valero PAC, Valero Services Inc.

Here We Go Again – Benicia candidates and voters must reject Valero’s big money

Here We Go Again

On social media, by Steve Young, Benicia

Steve Young, Benicia resident (and Mayor)

I want to emphasize that I am writing today not as the Mayor, but rather an interested Benicia resident and voter. I also want to state that I understand the importance of Valero to our local economy as a major employer and taxpayer and an important contributor to local causes. Since the last election, I have initiated meetings with the Valero General Manager on a monthly basis, and feel that we have developed a respectful relationship. I have also told him directly that I will be writing this article.

Last week, it was revealed [here on the Benicia Independent] that Valero, through the oddly named Working Families for a Strong Benicia Political Action Committee (PAC), had deposited another $200,000 in anticipation of this year’s City Council elections. They are currently sitting on $235,000.

There is only one purpose in making such a huge expenditure nine months before the election: to scare off any potential City Council candidate who would consider running without first getting Valero’s stamp of approval. What candidate is willing to go up against that kind of war chest?

In 2018, Valero and their construction trade union allies, ran a big-dollar, negative campaign against Planning Commission Chair Kari Birdseye (“Birdseye Bad for Benicia”) and in favor of Christina Strawbridge and Lionel Largaespada. The PAC attack was successful, and Strawbridge and Largaespada were elected. The presumed reason for opposing Ms. Birdseye is that she (and I) had led the Planning Commission denial of Valero’s Crude by Rail proposal (a denial that ultimately was upheld by the City Council).

In 2020, the same Valero-funded PAC decided to run the same type of negative campaign against me in my race for Mayor. Over $250,000 was spent attacking me, and in favor of Ms. Strawbridge. Unlike in 2018, however, Benicia voters saw through this effort and I was elected by a 20 point margin.

The argument has been made that, as Benicia’s largest employer and a significant taxpayer, Valero should have a say in the selection of Council candidates and the Mayor. And I agree. They should have the same right as any other company or individual to support the candidate(s) of their choice.

But they should also play by the same rules that apply to everyone else under Benicia’s campaign finance regulations. They, and any of their employees, are able to donate $540 to the candidate of their choice. But, in Benicia, candidates are limited by our campaign finance ordinance to spending no more than $35,000 on a campaign (assuming they can raise that much). By contrast, the PAC spending more than $250,000 on our local campaigns shows how uneven (and undemocratic) their influence buying campaign has become.

[Editor – see Benicia Municipal Code…
– Chapter 1.36: Voluntary Code of Fair Campaign Practices
– Chapter 1.40:  Disclosure Of Contributions and Expenditures
– Chapter 1.42: Contribution and Voluntary Spending Limits]

The disastrous “Citizens United” Supreme Court decision opened the door for this by declaring that “money is speech”, and allowing for unlimited spending by corporations and unions. Usually, this level of over the top spending is confined to national and statewide elections, not in small towns like Benicia. But Valero’s size and wealth gives them the belief that they can pick and choose who should be our elected representatives.

What they are doing is legal, but it is wrong-and extremely harmful to our community. This is what is truly “Bad for Benicia”.

The only way to stop it is if EVERY candidate for City Council publicly, vociferously, and repeatedly rejects support from the Valero PAC, and denounces this type of negative campaigning and excessive spending. In addition, voters should demand that any candidate take a public and ongoing stand that Valero should not support their campaign in any way. I call on all prospective candidates in the November election to make this pledge. If no candidate is willing to be supported by this PAC, where will they spend all of their money?

Leave Benicia elections to Benicia voters.