(This is Part 1 of a 2-part article. For Part 2, go here.)

Candidates for mayor and city council had an opportunity to answer questions on important issues Tuesday night at the Benicia Chamber of Commerce’s Candidates’ Night.

The forum was held in the Council Chambers of City Hall and moderated by Peter Friesen. All the prospective candidates in both races were present, including incumbent Mayor Elizabeth Patterson and Vice Mayor Mark Hughes for the mayoral race, and incumbent councilmembers Tom Campbell and Christina Strawbridge, Economic Development Board Vice Chair Lionel Largaespada and Planning Commissioners George Oakes and Steve Young for the City Council race. Prior to the forum, audience members wrote down questions on cards, which Friesen read to all the candidates. Seven questions were asked in total, sandwiched by opening and closing statements from each of the candidates. Below is a sample of the candidates’ answers.

Opening statements

Hughes discussed having the skills and experience needed to move the city forward and cited a goal of “getting into politics without being a politician,” Patterson talked about her leadership skills, Campbell talked about his long-time goal of protecting Benicians’ quality of life, Oakes echoed Campbell’s sentiments, Largaespada stressed a need for new leadership, Strawbridge cited experience in business and Young talked about his 30-plus years of experience in local government.

Long and short-term goals

Hughes said his short-term goal was to unite the City Council.

“All too often over the years, I think we’ve been divided on a number of issues,” he said. “I don’t mean just the way we vote because I think it’s healthy that we disagree on things, but I think there has been not the level of teamwork and respect that I’d like to see, so I think in the short term, I would do my best to pull that group together.”

Hughes’ long-term goal is budget sustainability and financial health for Benicia.

Patterson cited continuing goals of bringing high-speed Internet to the Industrial Park, transitioning businesses from being dependent on fossil fuels and fixing roads.

Campbell’s goal was to control the budget and Measure C funds.

“We promised the voters what we would use Measure C for,” he said. “It’s $4 million annually, which in the beginning were roads, infrastructure improvements, parks, rec and also for sidewalks. That should be the only thing we’d use it for. That wouldn’t be the first time the City Council said they were gonna do something and then gone a different direction.”

Largaespada noted that the Industrial Park was in need of a renaissance.

“We should be printing money up on that hill,” he said. “Instead it’s completely falling apart. My long-term goal would be to find the right partner to help us reinvest in that so we can attract new businesses to Benicia.”

Oakes said the quality of drinking water needs to improve, and the city will have to deal with the fallout of Valero’s Crude-By Rail Project, no matter how the Council votes next Tuesday.

Strawbridge referred to the Industrial Park as Benicia’s “golden cattle” and talked about continuing to invest money in the business district, and Young discussed the desire to look at how to pay for such city services as the police and fire departments.

Crude by rail

Candidates were asked about their position on Valero’s Crude-By-Rail Project, which would construct railroad tracks to deliver crude oil barrels to the Valero Benicia Refinery by train rather than by boat. In February, the Planning Commission— which Oakes and Young serve on— voted unanimously to deny Valero a permit. Valero appealed and brought the issue to the City Council, in which Hughes and Strawbridge voted to delay a decision until more information on federal preemption was obtained by the Surface Transportation Board. Patterson and Campbell voted against the delay.

Campbell reaffirmed his lack of support for the project at the forum but stated that he did not like seeing Valero employees vilified.

“They’re like the rest of us,” he said. “They’re trying to do their job the best they can.”

However, Campbell cited an oil train derailment in Mosier, Ore. which resulted in 42,000 gallons of oil being spilled, much of it being consumed by fire.

“I like to think about these things logically,” he said.

Oakes described the project as “a social issue for our nation” and noted that he does not support the project but does support Valero.

“The fossil fuels that they process we use in every aspect of our lives,” he said. “We’re not gonna get away from that. This one project is not gonna make or break Valero or the quality of the product that they do or the safety that they demonstrate.”

Young cited the multiple examples of oil train explosions and derailments across North America as one of his reasons for opposing the project and believed Valero would continue to conduct business as usual without the use of trains.

“Overall, I don’t think it’s a project that serves the community,” he said. “It’s too much risk for too little reward.”

Strawbridge said she voted to delay the project because she wanted to keep an open mind and believed the project was a federal and state issue, not a Benicia issue.

“I don’t think the five of us should be responsible for the epicenter of climate change in Benicia,” she said, citing Benicia’s label as the epicenter of the crude by rail issue in the press.

However, she said the Oregon train derailment had given her pause.

“To me, it was a game changer because of the situation,” she said. “It’s going to be very difficult for me to approve this project based on the safety.”

Likewise, Hughes noted that he wanted to be more informed before he cast his vote and that health and safety have always been top priorities for him. He expressed his discomfort with being labeled “pro-Valero” by opponents of the project.

“I am very neutral and there is not a decision until I get more information,” he said.

Largaespada expressed support for the project and felt that environmental protection and economic growth can coexist.

“The revenue generated from projects such as this can provide the fees and money and so forth to pay for the people, resources and policies that protect our environment, community and residents,” he said.

He also believes the project would be good for business in Benicia.

“If you do business in this community and pay your taxes, you are in good standing,” he said. “You come to us with a project that pencils out to be safe and successful, and you want to expand and hire more Benicians, we’re going to find a way to make it work. That is our obligation here on the City Council.”

He also believes the project would be safe and the chance of a derailment happening in Benicia is very unlikely, especially with rail regulation by the government, particularly with Rep. Mike Thompson’s push for a Crude-By-Rail Safety Act.

“Rail and safety are the two most regulated industries,” he said.

Patterson noted that although the Valero Benicia Refinery is considered one of the safest refineries in California, the issue is less about safety than it is about operation and environmental concerns.

“These train cars will be coming across our water supply,” she said. “I am concerned about what could happen to our water supply. I agree with the regional air district that there isn’t adequate air pollution discussion and mitigations in the Final Environmental Impact Report.”

In regards to Rep. Thompson’s legislation, Patterson was not optimistic it would be passed.

“I don’t know if you’ve noticed, but the U.S. Congress doesn’t do very much,” she said. “I don’t take very much comfort in that legislation.”

The candidates’ positions on the proposed Northern Gateway property and promoting historic preservation will be discussed in Part 2. The televised broadcast of the forum will be shown again at 7 p.m., Monday, Sept. 19 and Wednesday, Sept. 28 on Comcast Channel 27.