Category Archives: Stephen Golub

Benician Stephen Golub: Pardon Me

Stranger Than Fiction

A Promised Land, by Stephen Golub, December 6, 2025

The story could inspire a big-budget Hollywood political thriller. A cocaine kingpin – the corrupt president of a foreign country, no less – is convicted and jailed in the United States. But behind the scenes, right-wing tech billionaires persuade an equally corrupt American president to pardon the foreigner. In a violent side-story, the US president proudly orders illegal, lethal military attacks that kill scores of impoverished Venezuelan fishing villagers (some of whom may be small-scale traffickers) whose coke isn’t even destined for our shores and whose possible crimes pale in comparison with the kingpin’s.

In the hypothetical Hollywood version of this story, the truth comes out, the former president goes back to prison and his American counterpart resigns in shame.

In 2025, however, there is no shame and reality is stranger than fiction. Donald Trump publicly boasted of his planed pardon for former Honduran president Juan Orlando Hernández before then granting it. Lost in the swirl of Trump’s other transgressions, the story disappeared from the headlines soon after first surfacing.

The element of the hypothetical Hollywood version that hasn’t yet been proven in real life is the tech billionaires’ involvement. But, as reported in Mother Jones magazine,  their backing for both Trump and VP JD Vance on the one hand and their proposed, Hernandez-backed state-within-a-state in Honduras on the other surely looks suspicious.

Even though in normal times such a story would be the stuff of massive scandal, it’s now business as usual when it comes to Trump’s pardons (not to mention so much else). And given that we’re now almost a decade into Trump’s reign of political terror, we must ask what’s normal anymore.

But Wait! There’s Much More…

As horrid as it is, the Hernandez story is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to Trump’s abuse of the presidential pardon power. It’s true that certain of his predecessors have also milked that constitutionally granted capacity for personal or political benefit. Bill Clinton’s 2001 pardon of disgraced financier Marc Rich, apparently in return for donations to the Clinton Library and the Democratic Party, is a case in point. But neither Clinton nor anyone else comes close to the breadth and depth of what Trump has done.

Trump established his exploitation of pardons at the very start of his presidency. As summarized by an excellent post by attorney Kim Wehle at The Unpopulist site, “One of his first acts on returning to office was to issue pardons to hundreds of rioters from the Jan. 6, 2021, insurrection at the U.S. Capitol, including those who had viciously assaulted police officers.”  As Wehle further explains:

“It should be no surprise that some of these rioters, having been pardoned for one act of political violence, keep on plotting new acts of political violence. In February, Proud Boys leader Enrique Tarrio was arrested at the Capitol (again) for assaulting a protester. In July, Edward Kelley, who was “the fourth person to unlawfully enter the Capitol building at the forefront of the mob” and attack an officer, was convicted for a new plot to assassinate “36 individual federal, state, and local law enforcement personnel” whom he blamed for his arrest on the Capitol riot charges. Christopher Moynihan was arrested in October for planning to assassinate House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries.”

In an equally valuable post at the same site, author Robert Tracinski summarizes  some of Trump’s many egregious 2025 pardons:

“…from a corrupt sheriff convicted in a “cash for badges” scheme, to disgraced former Congressman George Santos, who may have diverted election funds to support his lavish lifestyle but “was 100% for Trump,” to the healthcare fraud conviction of the husband of Republican Congresswoman Diana Harshbarger, a Trump ally…

“Trump pardoned an executive convicted of tax fraud after the executive’s mother gave $1 million at a Trump fundraiser. The judge who sentenced him said: “there is not a ‘get out of jail free’ card for the rich.” Under Trump, there is…

“In October, he pardoned cryptocurrency fraudster Changpeng Zhao after Zhao’s company, Binance, made a deal to boost World Liberty Financial, the Trump family crypto venture.”

Legitimizing the Rule of Lawlessness

Ironically, however, the most significant pardon we’ve seen recently has not been issued by Trump, but in effect  for Trump, by the Supreme Court. Though not literally a pardon, Wehle addresses the Court’s action quite well:

“Since the U.S. Supreme Court’s unconscionable [2024] decision in Trump v. United States, the so-called immunity ruling that essentially sanctioned American presidents using official power to commit crimes without any penalty, the legal perversions coming out of the White House have been legion. So far, Donald Trump’s actions, along with the Supreme Court’s endorsement of them, have effectively kneecapped the FirstFourth, and Fifth Amendments, the AppointmentsSpending, and Emoluments Clauses, the 14th Amendment’s ban on holding office after having engaged in insurrection, Article I’s vesting of legislative power in Congress, and Congress’s power to lay and collect tariffs. Trump is acting this way because he no longer has any incentive not to.

“In that immunity ruling, a 6-3 majority held that the exercise of “core” powers under Article II of the Constitution is absolutely immune from legal oversight, even if used criminally, and that lesser “official actions” are presumptively immune unless prosecutors can show that criminally confining a presidential act would pose no “dangers on the authority and functions of the Executive Branch.”

In other words, this was Trump’s own get-out-of-jail-free card, including for corruptly influenced pardons since they’re within the presidency’s “core” powers.

We’re accustomed to thinking that no one is above the law, at least in principle and hopefully in fact. The Supreme Court decided the opposite.

Of course, the immediate and history-shattering  benefit of the Court’s egregious ruling wasn’t for President Trump in 2025 but for Indicted Trump in 2024: the decision so delayed and constrained Special Counsel Jack Smith’s prosecution of Trump for his attempts to overturn the 2020 election that Smith dropped the charges after Trump’s 2024 electoral victory.

A Larger Problem

An even larger problem we face, however, isn’t Trump’s legal transgressions but the fact that they apparently don’t dent his political and moral standing for large parts of the public. Yes, his approval numbers are dropping to about 40 percent  or less in most surveys. And yes, the prospects of his suffering more political reversals are rising. This is evinced by everything from far-right-wing Majorie Taylor Greene’s declarations of independence to the Democrats’ increasing prospects for retaking the House of Representatives next year to  the possibility of yet more sordid Jeffery Epstein revelations soiling Trump’s brand even among supporters.

But whatever happened to someone simply paying a penalty for  cheating and lying, not least by blatantly exploiting a presidential power to pardon political and financial allies? Like so many of Trump’s disruptions, this is all going on in plain sight and is in effect pardoned, so to speak, by much of the public.

And while we certainly can understand folks prioritizing the damages he’s doing to our pocketbooks in assessing him, it doesn’t seem like his consistently egregious self-dealing makes much  of a difference in his standing. It’s just another day at the Oval Office.

So, with great respect for everyone who’s fighting for democracy, national security and the rule of law, or who dread the crisis even as they simply try to get by during these tough times, certain words may sum up how history will judge many other Americans who condone or endorse what Trump is doing:

Really regrettable.

Perhaps understandable.

Or, just maybe, unpardonable.


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

Back to top

Stephen Golub: Wed. Nov 25 deadline to comment on $millions for Benicia

Benicia resident and author Stephen Golub

November 25 is the deadline to submit to the Bay Area Air District comments on its Draft Guidelines that will govern use of $60 million in Valero fines for the benefit of Benicia and surrounding communities.  (Valero was penalized because of its refinery’s over 15 years of undisclosed, massive toxic emissions.)

More specifically, now’s the time to back Mayor Steve Young’s proposal to the Air District: $25 million over five years from that $60 million should go for budget support to help Benicia through the imminent loss of Valero revenues (at about $10 million per year, so totaling $50 million over five years), now that it’s closing the refinery.

Or, if you prefer, you may simply argue for a flexible approach, suggest that more than $25 million is necessary or of course otherwise comment in any way you wish on the Draft Guidelines by the November 25 deadline.

You may submit comments to the Air District by emailing the following: communityinvestments@baaqmd.govmhiratzka@baaqmd.gov and vjohnson@baaqmd.gov. Please request that the comments be forwarded to the Air District Board of Directors (and retain your emails because they could come in handy down the line).

If unclear on what you’d put in the subject line, you could write something like:

Comments on the Draft Guidelines for the Local Community Benefits Fund: in favor of a flexible approach.

For additional background and information, including the link to the Draft Guidelines themselves, you may go to the Benicia Independent, at https://beniciaindependent.com/, and scroll down at left to Steve Golub’s detailed November 11 post. Particularly in a subheading titled “Arguments for a flexible approach,” he makes a case for flexibility in this Air District grantmaking.

If you wish, you could cc or bcc Mayor Young , Vice Mayor Scott, City Manager Giuliani (syoung@ci.benicia.ca.us, Terry Scott tscott@ci.benicia.ca.us, Mario Giuliani MGiuliani@ci.benicia.ca.us) and/or other City Council members.


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

 

Back to top

Stephen Golub: Up to $60 million for Benicia at Stake

Super Important public meeting Wed. 11/12 at Benicia City Hall or in San Francisco or online. Please attend!

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

By Stephen Golub, Benicia, Nov 11, 2025 [First published in the Benicia Herald on 11/09/25.]

An upcoming November 12 Bay Area Air District meeting is vitally important for Benicia … and the City has made participation easy.

At 1 pm that day, the Bay Area Air District Community Equity, Health, and Justice Committee will meet  to consider and recommend whether the Air District should adopt guidelines and a call for projects that, if not revised from their current draft forms, could severely hamper or even block the city’s access to up to $60 million in funds that could alleviate our imminent, post-Valero budget crunch. (As you may recall, that sum is part of the $82 million fine/settlement that Valero paid the Air District a year ago in the wake of its Benicia refinery’s over 15 years of undisclosed toxic emissions hundreds of times the legal limits.)

As I understand it, on November 12 the  Committee will consider (among other items on its agenda that day) draft guidelines for the use of these funds and a proposal to adopt a flexible approach that could permit Benicia access to a good chunk of that $60 million, to support our cash-strapped city budget for several years. The Committee’s important, influential  recommendations will be considered for approval by the full Air District Board at a January meeting.

Benicians have several ways to back a flexible approach in general and any Benicia-specific proposal in particular:

  1. Though the Committee meeting is in San Francisco, you can go to the Benicia City Hall Commission Room (not the Council Chambers) on Nov. 12 to observe and (if you wish) offer comments by Zoom. The City Hall address is 250 East L Street. As noted, the meeting starts at 1 pm. We will each have up to two minutes to comment.
    The camera in the Commission Room will be set up in a wide-angle such that it should show the Committee how many people are in attendance. So, even if you don’t plan to comment, it would be a great show of support.
  2. You can Zoom in from your home or office to observe the meeting and offer comments, at bayareametro.zoom.us/j/81106820134
    You can also access the Zoom by: a) first going to baaqmd.gov/bodagendas; b) scrolling down to the 11/12/2025 Community Equity Health and Justice Committee slot; c) clicking on the Agenda; and d) clicking on the Zoom link (same as the lengthy, multi-number one I just provided) on the first page of the agenda.
  3. In addition to Zooming (but please, if possible, not instead of it), you can email comments to the Air District Community Investments Office (CIO), which will administer these funds, at communityinvestments@baaqmd.gov. The deadline for submission is November 25.
  4. In addition to the CIO, you can also try emailing or ccing  the Air District Board members (including those belonging to the Community Equity, Health, and Justice Committee) via two Air District staff officials (Marcy Hiratzka and  Vanessa Johnson) at mhiratzka@baaqmd.gov and vjohnson@baaqmd.gov, requesting that the comments be shared with the Board (though hopefully and presumably the CIO is doing so).
  5. For those interested in attending in person, the meeting will take place at the Air District Headquarters, 375 Beale Street in San Francisco.

I’d suggest bearing in mind the following if commenting by email or Zoom:

  1. Above all, please be respectful and diplomatic for any number of reasons. First and foremost, the Air District Board and staff, including the CIO, are dedicated public servants working hard for cleaner air and public health in the Bay Area. In addition, Benicia needs the Air District’s help and cooperation not just in making grants from the $60 million but in years to come, as the extensive clean-up of the Valero property takes place and regarding other issues that could well crop up.
  2. In writing to the CIO and the Board, please reference the Draft Guidelines for the Local Community Benefits Fund (LCBF), as these guidelines will govern the use of the $60 million Valero fine money for which a flexible, budget-supporting approach is sought.
  3. For further information, including the draft guidelines, you can go to the CIO’s site, baaqmd.gov/en/community-health/community-investments-office. Once there, scroll down to the Meetings and Events section to access the Draft LCBF Guidelines (though the term used in the link is Investment rather than Benefits), a “Draft Call for Projects: Benicia and Surrounding Communities” and other information – including  a “Watch Archives” link to the October 29 CIO webinar at which Mayor Steve Young and Council Member Terry Scott articulated strong arguments for a flexible approach. (Yours Truly offered my two cents’ worth as well.)
  4. FYI, Benicia is by no means guaranteed the $60 million. As a matter of procedure, the money is not simply handed over to us; like other potential recipients of the LCBF and other Air District grants, we must apply for it. Also, quite understandably, the Guidelines  provide that surrounding communities arguably affected by Valero’s transgressions can also apply for LCBF funds. Nor is anyone contending that the entire $60 million simply go for Benicia budget support. Some can, should and will be set aside for specific projects in Benicia  and in those surrounding communities, above and beyond budget support.
  5. At the same time, Benicia has been the main community bearing the brunt of these particular Valero-generated problems, while lacking the resources of larger communities to address such issues. With the subtraction of roughly $10 million in annual revenue previously provided by Valero, we’re the  only Air District  city facing such a crushing loss of economic resilience, which is bad in and of itself but also has potentially dire implications for air quality, public health and a proper transition to a post-Valero economy. Perhaps at least partly due to Valero’s violations, our cancer rates are well above state and Solano County levels; they’re nearly twice as high as California for breast cancer.
  6. I plan to argue for $45-50 million over five years for Benicia budget support, so $9-10 million per year to help out our annual $60 million in general budgetary expenditures. But clearly opinions can vary on whether this is an appropriate sum and how much it should be (as well as on everything else!).

In the end, then: Please show up if you can at City Hall or via your own Zoom link on November 12 at 1 pm. I know it’s a bad time for many, but those of us who can attend can help make a big difference, including simply by showing support even if you don’t want to comment.

Regardless, sending comments to the Air District email addresses I’ve provided can also prove useful.

Let’s do what we can to help secure Beautiful Benicia’s financial future.

EDITOR – IMPORTANT: Below is a very helpful post previously published by Steve Golub…

Arguments for a flexible approach:

To Help Prevent a Benicia Budgetary Crisis, Please Circle Nov. 12 on Your Calendar

Benicia’s financial future could well  be determined over the course of the next month. On November 12, the Bay Area Air District Community Equity Health and Justice Committee will meet to consider and recommend whether the Air District should adopt guidelines and a call for projects that, if not revised from their current draft forms, could severely hamper or even block the city’s access to up to $60 million in funds that could alleviate our imminent, post-Valero budget crunch. The Air District Board of Directors could act on that recommendation as soon as its December 3 meeting.

As you may know, Benicia faces a loss of roughly $10 million in Valero-related annual revenue starting next year. At the same time, the Air District’s $82 million fine/settlement with Valero for its over 15 years of undisclosed toxic emissions (hundreds of times the legal limits) – from which $60 million is available to Benicia and surrounding communities – represents a chance to address our budget crunch. It would seem that the fine for the Valero-sparked environmental and public health harms could help cover the hit that Benicia’s budget is taking due to Valero’s departure.

Ah, if only it if were so simple. At an October 29 webinar convened by the Air District’s Community Investments Office (LCBF), the CIO’s friendly, newly hired representative welcomed questions about the mechanism for awarding grants under the new Local Community Benefits Fund (LCBF). But her well-intentioned answers reflected a possible  reluctance to provide budget support for our transition to a post-Valero economy. I hope I prove incorrect in that assessment.

The irony here is that, despite her apparent perspective, many Benicia budget categories and expenditures should seem to qualify under the four LCBF priorities provided at the CIO website: “Funding will support community-driven solutions that reduce or mitigate air pollution, improve public health, and build economic resilience for a just transition.”

If the CIO were open to it, such budget support could accordingly cover a variety of current expenditures as well as several new ones under the rubric of one or more of those four priorities.

For instance, many Fire Department services, under public health; air monitoring, under air pollution control and public health; economic development, tourism promotion, permitting, attracting green business to the industrial park and other business-oriented services, under economic resilience and just transition; electric vehicles for police and other services, under public health and just transition; solar power for street lighting and other services, under public health and just transition; water treatment improvements, under public health and just transition; port enhancements, under all four priorities; relief for Benicia residents who are Valero employees, under just transition and economic resilience; aid for our most vulnerable populations as federal cutbacks threaten their well-being, under public health, economic resilience and just transition; and support for our many wonderful community groups cut off from Valero grants, under those same three categories.

I’m sure many readers could name and categorize many other appropriate services and expenditures as meeting the CIO’s basic criteria. I hope and expect that Benicia city staff are doing the same, in preparation for efforts to persuade the Air District to take a flexible approach to LCBF grant-making.

In contrast, at least at the moment it seems that the CIO may take a very restrictive approach that anticipates arrays of relatively small projects rather than the considerable budget support that Benicia needs.

Now, please don’t get me wrong here: The CIO and Air District as a whole are staffed by many dedicated, competent, well-intentioned individuals. In recent years, the Air District has brought on vigorous, well-qualified leadership. We’re dealing with different visions, rather than any ill intent.

Be that as it may, the flexible approach is necessary for Benicia and for many other Bay Area communities that stand to benefit from the LCBF. As Mayor Steve Young, Council Member Terry Scott and others (including me) pointed out in their comments during the October 27 webinar:

  1. Mayor Young in particular emphasized that the highly restrictive approach anticipated by the LCBF draft guidelines and call for projects does not work for Benicia (and I’d argue, for most or all Bay Area cities and nonprofits) in view of our budgetary needs and staffing realities.
    Those CIO documents impose very burdensome requirements involving application preparation, grant administration, results measurement and other matters – possibly the most burdensome I’ve seen in my many years of working with grant-making organizations. These might be manageable for large cities like San Francisco (though I’d even doubt that) but would swamp Benicia at the very point where the lack of more general budget support would force staff cutbacks.
  2. As Council Member Scott pointed out, the restrictive LCBF documents ignore the key regards in which Benicia has been disproportionately affected by the history of air pollution violations, threatening incidents and potentially catastrophic consequences associated with the Valero refinery. (Though, as always, I’d emphasize that the responsibility rests with the corporation’s San Antonio headquarters rather than with our good neighbors and other workers at the facility.)

More specifically, we’ve been the main community bearing the brunt of these particular Valero-generated problems, while lacking the resources of larger communities to address them. With the subtraction of $10 million in annual revenue, we’re the  only Air District  city facing such a crushing loss of economic resilience. Though not at all the fault of the Air District’s current, vigorous leadership and personnel, we experienced over 15 years of egregious, undisclosed Valero violations that the District did not detect, plus remained in the dark for over another three years after the District learned of them. Our cancer rates are well above state and Solano County levels; they’re nearly twice as high as California for breast cancer.

So, what can we do?

  1. Personally, here and in other forums, I aim to push for $50 million in LCBF budget support, spread over seven transitional years, to help Benicia weather its financial storm.
  2. Please circle November 12 to weigh in at that crucial Air District Community Equity Health and Justice Committee. It’s planned 1-5 pm schedule isn’t ideal for many of us. But as information becomes available on Zoom links and whether there are particular times best to participate, the city should be posting them. I will try as well.
  3. For those interested in attending in person, the event takes place at the Air District Headquarters, 375 Beale Street in San Francisco. Again, I don’t yet have information on whether and how participation in person will be possible, but will try to share that down the line.
  4. You can email comments, concerns and questions about the LCBF draft guidelines to the Community Investments Office at communityinvestments@baaqmd.gov. If you do email the CIO, I’d strongly suggest that you retain the note, as you may want to draw on it in contacting other Air District officials in coming weeks. I’ll try to provide relevant email addresses should that prove advisable.
  5. You can also consult the CIO’s site, at baaqmd.gov/en/community-health/community-investments-office, for further information. Among other things, in view of a few recent glitches this would be the best place for any updated contact information should that email address change. And if you scroll down the site, you’ll find a link to subscribe for CIO updates.

Hope to see  or hear you, whether in person or online, on November 12!


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

Stephen Golub: This October 29 Meeting is Vital for Benicia’s Future

‘The devil is in the details of how the  Air District’s new Local Community Investment Fund’s (LCIF) grants will be awarded’

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

By Stephen Golub, Benicia resident and author. October 26, 2025. [First published in the Benicia Herald on 10/26/25.]

This really is important: On Wednesday, October 29, the Bay Area Air District is holding a 5:30-7 pm Zoom meeting (Webinar) to discuss draft guidelines for use of penalty/settlement funds for air pollution violations. As a result of the $82 million Air District fine for Valero’s 15 years of undisclosed toxic emissions, Benicia is by far the greatest potential beneficiary so far: $54 million (plus possible interest) is supposed to be set aside for Benicia-specific projects.

But there’s potentially big trouble in paradise, which is why Benicians’ Zoom participation in the October 29 meeting is crucial. The devil is in the details of how the  Air District’s new Local Community Investment Fund’s (LCIF) grants will be awarded for Benicia and other communities, starting next year. If the guidelines impose a bureaucratic, restrictive process, Benicia will have considerable trouble weathering the financial storm that will lash us (also starting next year) as Valero’s contributions to the city coffers come to an end.

I don’t want to jump to conclusions or urge others to do so. But I fear that the restrictive approach could be the direction the Air District takes. I hope that I’m wrong.

We’re talking about $54 million or more that could and should mainly be decided on by Benicia, rather than the staff of the Community Investments Office (CIO), which administers the Fund.

A restrictive, top-down approach dominated by CIO staff  rather than driven by Benicia and other communities may also limit our ability to best grapple with the very challenges the CIO’s site says the Fund aims to address: “Funding will support community-driven solutions that reduce or mitigate air pollution, improve public health, and build economic resilience for a just transition.”

Along with serving other purposes, the Fund  can and should contribute to budget support that will help close the city’s post-Valero financial gap for a number of years. This will  strengthen Benicia’s “economic resilience for a just transition.”

I emphasize this because there’s  another Benicia-specific factor at play here. The Air District failed to uncover Valero’s egregious toxic emissions for over 15 years. It certainly fell short by waiting over three additional years to inform Benicia after it found out.

Had this information come to light far sooner, might it have helped cut down on Benicia cancer rates that are far higher than state and county levels (including nearly double California’s breast cancer incidence)? That’s hard to say.

Furthermore, it might be counterproductive to press this point on the Air District, or to do so in any but the most diplomatic ways.

Finally,  to the Air District’s great credit, it installed new, vigorous leadership after this fiasco came to light in 2022. But this all weighs in favor of the Air District awarding the LCIF grants flexibly to Benicia.

Another factor that weighs in terms of the flexible approach is Benicia’s nearly unprecedented situation: Refineries don’t close every day, to put it mildly. From financial recovery to environmental clean-up (complicated by Valero land previously being used for military ordinance testing), our challenges are daunting – even as the opportunities for our community’s quality of life, public health and economic prosperity (such as through tourism development) are inspiring. A just transition requires that the Air District take a just  approach to partnership with Benicia.

Thus, if the CIO finalizes the guidelines in ways that allow our city appropriate flexibility in the use of the funds, it will be a boon to Benicia. But the benefits extend beyond Benicia; similar flexibility will be best for other Bay Area communities regarding other Air District fines.

The 90-minute October 29 Webinar is our only chance to hear about and weigh in on the draft guidelines via a public forum (with perhaps two minutes per public comment). Let’s not let it slide by. Even if you don’t want to comment during the meeting, simply showing up (albeit via Zoom) can show that we care.

There’s already cause for concern, in that the draft guidelines won’t be released until tomorrow, October 27, just two days before the meeting. That’s precious little time for the public to review them. But let’s try.

So, what can you do?

  1. To participate in the Zoom, you must pre-register. Here’s the link: https://www.baaqmd.gov/en/community-health/community-investments-office. You might also be able to find it by searching online for something like Air District Community Investments Office.
  2. When you reach that link, please scroll down to the “Meetings and Events” section. Click the “Pre-register” box there and fill in the required information.
  3. Once you get the CIO confirmation email, scroll down to a blue box that says, “Join Webinar.” (While that link is functional, of course it won’t actually become active until the October 29 meeting.)
  4. If you wish to weigh in before or after the meeting – and perhaps to receive the guidelines as soon as they are issued on October 27 – you can email you comments, questions and guidelines request to communityinvestments@baaqmd.gov. (The comments deadline is less than a month later, on November 25.)
  5. If you do decide to participate, be it via Zoom or email, I’m sure you’ll have your own ideas on what to prioritize. But for what it’s worth, to my mind the most basic message is that Benicia and other beneficiary communities standing to benefit from the Local Community Investment Fund should have as much leeway as possible in utilizing the settlements/penalties they each receive, as long as they broadly fit within the Air District funding parameters I’ve flagged: “support community-driven solutions that reduce or mitigate air pollution, improve public health, and build economic resilience for a just transition.” This is consistent with and in fact mandated by the Air District’s emphasis on partnering with rather than dictating to Bay Area communities.

I’m harping on all this not just because of the impact on Benicia, but because most of my career involved advising funding agencies on the best foci and approaches for awarding grants for community-oriented, environmental and other projects. I worked for and with the Asia, Ford and Open Societies Foundations, as well as the American, British and Danish aid agencies and numerous other funders.

The single biggest lesson I took away from those 35+ years of work was this: Grants work best when they are as simple as possible and provide as much leeway as possible to responsible local governments or community groups that receive them, as long as sensible financial auditing is in place.

If the CIO goes down this flexible road, it will be best for Benicia (and the Bay Area) in terms of advancing  clean air, public health, economic resilience and the post-Valero transition. It also will ensure the most efficient use of funds.

To be clear, I’m not saying that the Air District, via the CIO, should simply turn over the $54 million or more to Benicia; though that might make sense, I don’t believe that Air District rules allow this. I also don’t doubt the sincerity and dedication of the CIO staff who will administer the Fund.

But the finalized guidelines should provide the necessary flexibility for Benicia and other communities to decide how to use the funds within the broad parameters the CIO has already set. It’s our future that’s on the line.


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