All posts by pdm17

Our Next Meeting: Tuesday, November 13

Our next meeting is November 13th, 7:00 p.m., at the Benicia Library, Dona Benicia room

Members and Friends –

Our next meeting, and the last one for this year, is Nov. 13 at 7:00 pm, Benicia Library.   (Agenda)

Following the Club reports and related items, we’ll be discussing:

  • Elections: The Nov. 6 election results – local and national races. What happened, and what do we make of it all, in particular locally? (What’s it all about, Alfie?)
  • PDB in 2019: ideas and activities for PDB, beginning in January (then, to space and infinity, and beyond). Ok, enough song and movie references. Maybe we all needed a bit of brevity?

Both discussions are intended to be open with the audience. In fact, we hope to draw future meeting agendas from the comments and ideas provided by the members present. As well as hear any thoughts about how the Club did in 2018, suggestions, and especially anything we should be doing differently and better.

During the discussion of elections, we’ll also provide a summary of the Club’s process for election of its officers, which is scheduled for Jan. 2019 and is required by our bylaws.

As for what there is to say about the elections, we can at least vent some more – the PAC money intervention, the outrageous and nonstop and largely orchestrated comments on social media. But, that can help identify areas to address for the future – 2020, as is already started to happen. As a member recently expressed, “Heaven help us in 2020!” And, as I shared in a recent Benicia Resist! post, “If a progressive runs in 2020, you better have your own PAC.” Not to sling mud, but to counter the volume of stuff we saw on digital ads and through the postal mail. Counter, but remaining positive and on point.

This is an important meeting, as we’re talking about 2019 and how PDB should spend our time. We plan on continuing meetings every 4-5 weeks, maybe in the Library as we have mostly done of late, but maybe elsewhere (which would be less costly or even free). When you come, you can be part of the decision making as we plan out 2019, and ultimately get closer to 2020 races.

See you Tuesday, Nov. 13, Benicia Library, 7:00 pm. Be there or be square!

Ralph E. Dennis
Chair, Progressive Democrats of Benicia

“Final Word” forum, Saturday, Nov. 3

The Final Word Forum was challenged by the Valero/Labor PAC but went on as scheduled.  See the video here:  youtube.com/watch?v=9CB2Dd6qcS0  


[PREVIOUS NOTICE] – Mark your calendar and plan to attend this Saturday – this could be a VERY interesting forum, and your last chance before the election to ask questions and express your thoughts about recent negative campaigning by corporate giant Valero Services, Inc. and its affiliates.

Please show up WAY EARLY!!  We’ve learned that oil industry people will try to pack the house and dominate the debate. 

Details…

CITY TO HOST CANDIDATES FORUM TO ADDRESS NEGATIVE MISINFORMATION CAMPAIGN AND “HIT PIECES”

“The City of Benicia code(Sec 1.42.110) allows for a last minute candidate forum to allow candidates to address last minute “hit pieces” and to respond to inflammatory statements and misinformation.

This forum does not always happen but, given the amount of negative campaigning happening in the City Council race, the City’s Open Government Commission will sponsor such a session this Saturday, Nov. 3 from 9-11am at the City Council chambers.

The event will be televised live on Ch. 27, and rebroadcast at 7pm on Sunday and Monday nights, Nov. 4 and 5. It will also be streamed on the City website.

The forum will be moderated by Open Government Commission Chair Bonnie Silvera, with assistance from two other OGC members.  Questions from audience will be written on 3×5 cards and selected by OGC members. Questions will be addressed to all candidates.  Only questions that deal with the purpose of the forum will be addressed.  Candidates are asked to speak to the issues and not make personal comments about other candidates, especially in a negative manner.

KQED: Valero-Backed Group Spends Heavily to Sway Benicia City Council Election

Repost from KQED, The California Report

Valero-Backed Group Spends Heavily to Sway Benicia City Council Election

By Ted Goldberg, October 30, 2018
The Valero Benicia refinery. (Craig Miller/KQED)

The Valero Energy Corp. and several allies have spent more than $165,000 to influence the Benicia City Council election, an amount that’s close to three times as much as all of the candidates have raised combined.

The San Antonio-based oil company, which operates a refinery that’s one of the city’s largest employers, has joined with five state and local labor organizations to donate to a political action committee formed to oppose an environmentalist candidate and back two others the group sees as friendly to the company.

The committee has funded ads and an aggressive telephone campaign to influence the city’s 19,000-plus registered voters.

Experts say the magnitude of the spending in a small municipal election is unusual but that the Benicia campaign is part of a trend.

“We’re going to see a lot more of this spending,” Jessica Levinson, a professor at Loyola Law School specializing in money in politics, said about corporate political contributions in local elections.

“Even though they are closer to constituents than a gubernatorial or Senate race, voters tend to know less about them. A little bit of spending … can make a difference,” Levinson said.

Valero’s actions are reminiscent of an effort several years ago by Chevron to sway voters in Richmond, where it operates a massive refinery. In 2014 the company spent millions in an unsuccessful attempt to elect a slate of its allies to the City Council.

Some of the PAC’s activities have led Benicia officials to call on the state’s political watchdog to investigate claims that the committee has violated some of California’s laws regulating campaign contributions.

The company’s political activities, first reported by the Vallejo Times-Herald and Roger Straw, an activist and blogger with the Benicia Independent, come 18 months after a major release of toxic sulfur dioxide caused by a power outage at the Valero refinery.

The incident prompted calls for city regulation of the refinery and deepened a divide between the city’s mayor and the company.

The Candidates

The election involves four candidates vying for two open spots on the council.

The 34-word name of the independent expenditure Valero is helping to fund explains clearly who it wants to win. It’s called “Working Families for a Strong Benicia, A Coalition of Labor, Industrial Services Companies, Public Safety and Local Leaders Supporting Christina Strawbridge and Lionel Largaespada and Opposing Kari Birdseye for Benicia City Council 2018.”

The Valero-backed committee calls Birdseye “a yes man” for Mayor Patterson.

“Birdseye is bad for Benicia,” one of its ads says. “We don’t need another job killer.”

Birdseye is a spokeswoman for the Natural Resources Defense Council, an environmental advocacy organization.

She refers to the company’s executives as “the suits from San Antonio” who “sully our election” and are engaged in a “smear campaign” involving “dirty ads with lies.”

“Benicia deserves better than to be bullied and bamboozled by big money like this,” she said in an interview.

As a member of the city’s Planning Commission in 2016, Birdseye was among those who helped defeat a company plan to expand refinery operations to include crude oil shipped by rail. Birdseye is also a supporter of Mayor Elizabeth Patterson’s failed 2017 proposal to create new local regulations for the refinery.

She said with the Trump administration pulling back from regulating the oil industry and California’s goal of sharply reducing its dependence on carbon-based energy sources in the coming decades, local governments need to take action.

“It’s up to the counties, cities and towns to plan for a clean energy future,” Birdseye said.

“I don’t want Valero to shut down tomorrow,” she said. “I drive a gas-powered car, and our economy still needs Valero in our community, but I do see the need for more transparency with our largest industrial neighbor.”

Birdseye has raised about $20,000 for her campaign, nearly all from individual donors in Benicia and other Solano County communities, and none from businesses.

Pair Supported by Valero-Backed Group

Strawbridge and Largaespada, the two candidates supported by the Valero-backed coalition, emphasize that they have no ties to the independent expenditure group and have worked hard to keep their campaigns positive.

Largaespada chairs the city’s economic development board and works as director of marketing and business development at F3 and Associates, a firm providing advanced surveying and visualization services to a wide variety of customers — including some in the oil and gas industry. Among its clients is Valero.

Largaespada said Valero’s involvement in the election has more to do with the company’s frustration and its deteriorating relationship with Mayor Patterson.

“But that doesn’t give Valero and its various associates permission to launch a negative campaign,” Largaespada said.

“When this all started to come out I went on record, rejecting all of it,” he said. “It’s not the kind of campaign I support at all.”

Largaespada said Valero has a responsibility to keep Benicia safe and that the city and the refinery need to improve communication.

He said he opposed the mayor’s proposal for city oversight of the company, noting that the ordinance was similar to regulations the state has already adopted.

Largaespada has raised close to $21,000, mostly from individuals. He said he returned more than $1,000 he had received from a local labor PAC.

Candidate Christina Strawbridge served on the council from 2011 to 2016, owns a clothing boutique in downtown Benicia and has been involved with community groups for 30 years.

Like Largaespada, she said she’s wary of the support she’s getting from the Valero-backed group.

“I think they think they’re helping me,” Strawbridge said, stressing that she’s not aligned with any group or other candidate. “I’m an independent person, as I proved when I was on the City Council for five years.”

Strawbridge notes that Valero’s taxes account for a large part of Benicia’s budget and have attracted businesses that support refinery operations to the city’s Industrial Park. She said the company “has always stepped up” to help community groups and to do volunteer work in the city.

“That said, I believe there needs to be better communication between Valero and the city of Benicia. It has gotten to be at an all-time low in our relationship,” Strawbridge said.

While she likes certain parts of the mayor’s Industrial Safety Ordinance proposal, including its push for more air monitors, she said Patterson brought it to the council without gathering enough input from others.

“The public didn’t get a chance to review it when it was introduced. Nor did city staff. They had less than a week,” Strawbridge said.

Strawbridge has received close to $24,000 in donations from a mix of individuals, businesses and political action committees. She said she returned more than $1,000 from political action committees associated with Valero’s independent expenditure.

Also in the Running

The fourth candidate running, William Emes, is a retired carpenter who has received no donations or endorsements.

“The only endorsement that counts is your vote,” his website states.

Emes said he has worked in refineries and has a direct understanding of “what safety means.”

In an email he emphasized that he wants to be on a team that “gets things done” and that he places great value in being transparent and objective.

“The manner in which the unions and Valero involved themselves in our election was completely unprincipled and contrary to any meaningful public discussion,” Emes said.

Valero’s Stance and Labor Allies

A Valero spokeswoman did not answer questions about the committee’s involvement in the council election but instead pointed out the company’s viewsin an Oct. 16 letter to the Vallejo Times-Herald.

The letter, signed by refinery general manager Don Wilson, emphasized the refinery’s long-standing presence in Benicia and its strong safety record. It also directly criticized Patterson.

“Unfortunately, at City Hall, the mayor has decided to make our operations, employees’ jobs and the city’s tax revenue her target,” Wilson wrote.

The five unions that have donated to the super PAC are the Heat and Frost Insulators and Allied Workers Local 16, the International Brotherhood of Boilermakers Local 549, the State Building and Construction Trades Council of California, the California State Pipe Trades Council and the District Council of Iron Workers.

The groups who have contributed to the committee represent workers at various refineries, among other industries.

Donald Zampa, president of the Iron Workers District Council, which contributed $30,000 to the committee, said his organization’s involvement in Benicia is aimed at saving jobs.

Zampa said he was not familiar with Patterson’s safety ordinance but believes she is putting the city’s economic health at risk.

“If it was up to her, she would close down the number one job provider in Benicia,” Zampa said.

Push for Investigation into Valero-Backed Group

Mayor Patterson, who supports Birdseye, calls the oil refining sector “a fading industry” that Benicia should pivot away from.

“Valero is trying to bully and buy its way into politics in Benicia,” Patterson said. “I had not seen it so vicious and ugly as it has been this year.”

Heather McLaughlin, Benicia’s city attorney, has filed a complaint with the Fair Political Practices Commission against the Valero refinery in connection with a series of phone calls made to Benicia residents about the election.

The so-called push poll involved a questioner laying out negative statements about Birdseye and positive ones about Largaespada and Strawbridge.

In September McLaughlin emailed the firm believed to be behind the phone calls, Research America, warning them that the calls may appear to violate Benicia’s municipal code requiring certain disclosures for campaign communications funded by independent expenditures.

On Oct. 18, McLaughlin requested an FPPC investigation, alleging that Valero sponsored the poll and “did not disclose they were behind the poll during the telephone calls.”

FPPC spokesman Jay Wierenga said the commission is in the process of deciding whether to open an inquiry.