Benicia fee hikes
The Benicia mayor and City Council are preparing to vote on fee increases and new permits that are estimated to raise $1.5 million as our elected officials attempt to balance the city budget. This increase would be in addition to the water and sewer rate increases passed by the city council last November (with additional hikes taking place every July 1 through 2020-2021). It’s all part of the plan to lift Benicia out of an anticipated budget shortfall.
This means Benicians and its businesses will be paying more for things like applications, inspections, licenses, permits, appeals, and reviews.
There is no denying the city of Benicia is desperately in need of revenue-generating measures, but the decision to raise fees must be made very carefully, and not with the idea that this burden will only affect big-time developers and corporate-backed franchises.
Are you remodeling a bathroom, putting in a retaining wall or making space to seat more customers? The fee increases will affect a range of us. Here’s a look at some of the hikes:
• In the Planning Division, fees will increase an average of 249 percent
•In the Public Works Division, fees will increase of 358 percent
• In the Building Division, fees will increase an average of 358 percent
The rationale for having user fees is the “benefits” principle. This is the idea that he or she who benefits should pay. At a glance, the premise appears valid. However, home improvements improve curb appeal and re-investing in a business attracts more customers which respectively boost home sale prices and property taxes and increases revenue derived from more sales. These are benefits to the city of Benicia.
If the proposed fee increases pass, it could discourage the alterations, additions and repairs to homes and local businesses that help to produce jobs and economic development in Benicia. It could inhibit economic growth, and we should all be concerned about that.
In Benicia, we need an environment that promotes stronger investments via lower burdens and burdens that are competitive from a county standpoint. We want to promote spending. We want to encourage home and business improvements and economic development by lowering the hurdles and barriers that stifle growth. Let’s continue to promote a balance between revenue generation and the cost of improving our homes and retaining and expanding our businesses.
Lionel Largaespada,
Benicia
Important meeting on emission caps
On June 21 at 9:45 a.m., the Bay Area Air Quality Management District Board of Directors is set to make a historic vote and limit greenhouse gas emissions– and thereby other pollutants that go with them– of refineries. Refineries are the biggest stationary source of air pollution in the Bay Area, and they are set to start bringing in dirtier crude oil, especially tar sands from Canada, which will increase air pollution that could lead to the premature deaths of up to 3,000 people in the Bay Area.
Rule 12-16 puts a cap on this extra pollution, and the board seems about to adopt it. But wait – at the last minute the staff is proposing that they can issue exemptions from the cap. This would gut the rule and open the door to greater air pollution and refining of dirtier crude. Tar sands from Canada cannot be cleaned up if it spills, use more energy to mine and refine, and emit much more dangerous air pollution. Its high sulfur content also corrodes equipment and lead to the Chevron accident a few years back that sent thousands to seek medical care.
Please let your Solano county board members (Supervisor Jim Spering, jimzspering@sbcglobal.net, and Suisun Mayor Pete Sanchez, psanchez@suisun.com) to support the caps, but oppose the exemption. Come show your support at the meeting, which will be held on the first floor of the Board Hearing Room on 375 Beale St. in San Francisco. Our health depends on it.
Kathy Kerridge,
Benicia
Bob "The Owl" Livesay says
I would ask Kathy Kerridge where she got the 3,000 number. That may be true but the info is very important to verify that number. If no very strong data then it is pure scare tactics. Also how much of the oil coming to the five refineries is Canada Tar Sands crude. What percentage is it of all crude used to refine. Also how much was coming in in the last five years. A graph would help. Both of those statements must be verified.
Bob "The Owl" Livesay says
Kathy you cleverly use the word “stationary”. But in reality it is the motor vehicle at 41% that is the big polluter. Are you now going to go after the drivers of these cars and put restrictions on them. You cannot legislate personal behavior.