Mayor Elizabeth Patterson will be a guest panelist for One Climate’s forum titled “How Cities Can Solve Climate Challenges on Thursday’s May 4 at San Francisco’s Commonwealth Club. (File photo)
Climate One, a branch of San Francisco’s Commonwealth Club of California, will be hosting a forum titled “How Cities Can Solve Climate Challenges” on Thursday, May 4. Among the guests on the panel are Benicia Mayor Elizabeth Patterson.
“I’m personally extremely flattered and find it very much of a privilege to be asked to be on a Commonwealth Club forum,” she said.
Climate One was founded by Greg Dalton in 2007 after Dalton traveled to the Russian Arctic as part of a global warming symposium and speaking to a native Chukchi girl and her father about how changes in the climate were impacting their lives. The goal of Climate One—which also hosts a podcast and weekly radio program that airs on broadcast stations— is to bring people of different disciplines together to discuss issues pertaining to energy, the environment and the economy. Past guests and speakers have included famed primatologist Jane Goodall, former California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, former Texas Gov. Rick Perry and former Chevron CEO David O’Reilly.
The May 4 forum will focus on what cities are doing to combat climate disruption and promote renewable energy, among other topics. The panel will consist of Rod Sinks, a Cupertino City Councilmember; Diane Doucette, the co-founder and executive director of Chambers for Innovation and Clean Energy; Carl Pope, the former executive member of the Sierra Club who also co-authored the book “Climate of Hope: How Cities, Businesses, and Citizens Can Save the Planet” with former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg; and Patterson, who was approached by Climate One’s staff to participate. In addition to being mayor, Patterson also serves on the Delta Conservancy Board, worked on the Delta Protection Commission and was executive director of the Partnership for Regional Livability, a White House Task Force project put together during Bill Clinton’s administration.
Patterson anticipates the questions will go over what cities are doing regarding climate and further work they can do. Other topics might discuss what cities have done to be successful and how cities like Benicia can reach greenhouse gas reduction goals and still permit refineries.
“(The first main area is) questions that are specific to the broad question of ‘What can cities do?’” Patterson said. “The second is ‘How do you get that to happen in your particular city?’ and the challenges that that presents, and ‘What are the reasons for success?’ and ‘What more can be done?’”
Dalton will ask questions of the four panelists, and Patterson said that he will often do a segment where he asks rapid “yes or no” questions of the participants, which Patterson said makes for fun listening.
“For the most part, it’s just a really good dialogue between people,” she said.
Patterson hopes the panel will inspire citizens to be more engaged in their communities.
“Success is because of grassroots efforts,” she said. “While leadership is important, it’s the support of the leadership that makes a difference.”
The forum will be held at 6:30 p.m., Thursday, May 4 at the Commonwealth Club, located at 555 Post St. in San Francisco. Check-in will begin at 6 p.m., and a networking reception will follow at 7:30. Tickets are $12 for club members, $20 for non-members and $7 for students with valid identification. To purchase tickets, call (415) 597-6705. For more information on Climate One, go to climateone.org.
Sharing is caring!
The most interesting comment was this one “how cities like Benicia can reach green house gas reduction goals and still permit refineries”. I find that comment very disingenuous. How would the Mayor answer that question? I believe she would say Benicia would be better of without Valero and do everything she could to run them off.. Mayor Patterson is no friend of smoke of any kind. That means primarily cars, trucks and buses most of which use refinery produced fossil fuel. Which also brings up another question. How will the Mayor vote on Cannabis retail store and manufacturing and distribution. She does not like smoke of any kind. Keep you eye on how she votes on Cannabis
I take it you are torn then.
I am not torn at all. I am against retail sales of Cannabis in Benicia. If the Industrial Park Business’ think it is ok for Mfg. and distribution I have no problem with that. I am against retails sales of Cannabis in the City of Benicia any where.
Thanks again for not using the filthy m word. Here is an interesting article on a UK pharmaceutical company that has a product showing positive results in the treatment of MS and in the war on cancer. It is not yet available in the US, but is doing quite well on the NASDAQ, selling well above US pharmaceutical companies. I believe medicine like this should be available at storefronts in our town, and by delivery to those who have limited mobility.
The Compassionate Use Act of 1996 had bi-partisan support. I believe the nearly two thirds of Benicia voters that supported Prop. 64 indicates that quite a bit more support medical use per Prop. 215. In this regard, the Benicia community appears to be very accepting of cannabis dispensaries as places to buy medicine, and patients should be able to acquire it at storefronts.
https://tinyurl.com/m4qdsq8
Very good points, Stan.
Stan I have no objection of Cannabis use for medical reasons. I get all my prescriptions by mail. Now I do understand shipping Cannabis by mail could be an issue. But certainly not if delivered. I am against storefront Cannabis operations in Benicia any place.
You might enjoy learning more about CA cannabis regs at this new web site. The public comment period for the draft regs under MCRSA is now open for 45 days. Draft regs under AUMA are not published yet. There appears to be an effort to merge the two with regard to point of sale rules.
https://cannabis.ca.gov/
Another local cannabis advocate sent me this link. It’s interesting reading.
https://tinyurl.com/musols6
This one should work.
https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/big-pharmas-dirtiest-dealer-insys?utm_source=mbtwitter
‘Regulating the Vallejo Cannabis Industry”:
https://www.voicesofvallejo.com/vallejo-cannabis-regulation
A very good biased article on cannabis. In following this article it is clear it is only about money. Lower taxes and sell more. If that is the case we should do away with the gasoline tax, cigarette tax etc. Every city will look at the economic side which simple means city revenue in the form of taxes. It will be a big part of each city’s planning. Then the unintended consequence come into play. Black market, crime etc. Which will simple mean who wants to live in the Pot Capitals of California. It will backfire on city’s that take that approach. I am against store front selling of cannabis in Benicia. Let other city’s destroy their already bad image. The city’s that need revenue badly will fall for the full fledge on-slaught of cannabis. From start to finish. Notice what the article says about who it will help. That is clue enough.
The black market? That is what you are worried about?The black market has existed for decades. Just where have you been?
That’s not all of the unintended consequences. The Black Market will soar with all the added tax. Way out of proportion to what it is now. With that comes crime of all sorts. Where have you been.
Sorry. Benicia will not become a gang land of black market buds. It will not change one iota from what it has been for many decades. The only difference to Benicia will be a clean new cafe on first street with a bud-tender. Anything further is just an agenda driven fear tactic.
I understand your stance on this Bob but I have one question. How do you feel about the sale of cigarettes in stores throughout Benicia? I used to be very much against the legalization of cannabis but had a slight change of heart when realized it is easier for anyone, including kids, to buy cannabis than it is to but cigarettes since one requires only money and the other required money and ID.
I do not smoke. I do not use Cannabis. Many stores are doing away with selling cigarettes. Tell me why we need another form of possible addiction. I am not trying to convince anyone of my stance. I have stated my opinion ,and it will not change. I have also seen a Black Market arrive because of the high price of cigarettes. Just ask NY. California is next.. The State of California is as we post already trying to figure how to control this whole Cannabis issue. Do you want an airline pilot flying your plane when traveling? I do not. O also think cigarettes are a nasty dirty habit and also a distraction just like cellphones and any other electronic devise. We do not control that very well. So now we want legal Cannabis. Would you encourage your children to smoke, eat etc Cannabis? I sure would not.
“Do you want an airline pilot flying your plane when traveling?’ Who would you prefer? I don’t think that is a very valid argument.
Not an airline pilot flying the plane on POT. Do you? Do you smoke cannabis?
What about a few cocktails or prescription pain killers? Do you drink?
Yet, but that is just one aspect.
Before the mayor asks “what can city’s do” to affect climate change, shouldn’t she be asked “what exactly is man’s affect on climate change, quantitatively?”
Unless one can specifically and quantitatively address man’s impact, one cannot ask cities to act.
This all pure emotion and politics. There is nothing scientific to be addressed. Grand standing.
Mr. Petersen yes I do drink as I think you do also. Am I wrong?. Do not try to put your personal crap on me. I do not do cannabis and will only take a prescription that is prescribed. They are very few. Again do you smoke POT? That should be a simple question. Does your wife or children know that you smoke if you do. I do not know that. You will have to tell us. You will not ? You should be able to answer that very simple question. By the way I do not think anyone will care.. By the way not when I am flying an airplane or driving a car. That is a no no.
Yes, you are wrong. Alcohol is really a terrible poison. Damages your body in more ways than one. Responsible for car accidents, unwanted pregnancies, assaults, and just generally millions of bad decisions. I’d be all for getting rid of hootch and replacing it with the much safer green plant.
“Do not try to put your personal crap on me.”? I don’t know what this means.
Please explain.
Here is a simple question, why do you drink? Do you promote this type of behavior around your grandchildren or do you go for a walk down the street to a bar as not to send them the wrong message? Does your wife know that you like to throw them back? What time of day do you start drinking? By the way, I do not think anyone will care.
Mr. Petersen you clearly answered my question on your assault on Alcohol.. My answer to your question is very simple. When you answer my questions. All you have done so far is copy my comment. First by your crap on me, it is very simple. You are replying to me with your opinion and I do consider it a sales presentation full of crap.. That just being a descriptive point nothing personal. By the way you did answer on alcohol. I assume that means you do not drink and I assume never have. That is good and it is your choice.
The point he’s trying to make is that you whine that cannabis is so awful, and use pointless examples like pilots using before flight, which has nothing to do with legallity, and at the same time premote damaging behavior yourself. If you believe in the safety of children and others from dangerous substance, you would never drink, and advocate to ban alcohol. The fact that you are a drug user who wants to control stuff you dont use is just shows an embarrassing lack of moral conviction.
Good comment B.B.
Wrong. I believe we do not need another problem. I do not promote alcohol use.
So, a hypocrite, then? The “we don’t need another problem” stance is a joke. It shows a total lack of conviction of morals. Also, no. You are a drug user, and thus advocate the use of your drug. If you do not want to be an advocate, stop using drugs.
And for that matter, if you are okay with a degree of substance, how about this: We outlaw alcohol, and allow cannabis to the same degree of availability alcohol used to have.
Something tells me that, even though this arrangement would fall under what you said was appropriate, you wouldn’t be okay with it. We would have cannabis, but not alcohol, because “we don’t need another problem”. Sound good to you?
LOL! I think you just about got this wrapped up.
I hope, but I imagine there will be some sort of deflection from the point. I just want people to make decisions by logic and moral consistancy, not simply because someone benefits from something or not. We’d all be a lot happier if we didn’t let personal benefit influence how we shape communities.
I agree. I am glad to hear from a voice of reason.
B B Just where do you stand on alcohol? Where do you stand on Cannabis. Do you use Both? I admit I do drink but do not smoke Cannabis. You and Petersen do not like the fact that I do not want Cannabis sold in Benicia. No problem with manufacturing or distribution. You seem to like free enterprise. So lets bring back porno shops, card rooms and the houses of prostitution. Regardless of the unintended consequences does your free market thinking except bring those business’ back? Do you want gun shops in Benicia. After all those are all free enterprise business’; to your thinking. Lets bring them all back. Tell why not. I am the voice of reason. Believe me B B your attack on my morals supported by Petersen are pure anti my comments and make no sense. You lose big time on the moral co0mments. Your open business comments says it all. Think about that.
Dissapointing, boring deflection. I consume alcohol. I have used cannabis in the past, but not anymore. I think both are totally up to an individual to use, and other people should not be able to imprese that because they don’t like it.
I think, so long as reasonable regulation is met, yes, if a pornography store were to wish to open in Benicia, that is their right. I also believe that if a firearms store wanted to open in Benicia, they should have the right as well.
There’s very little for me to “think about” here, Bob. Your inability to hold any sort of consistant belief isn’t my problem. You can’t seem to descide if you support capitalism and free market, or of you support a government regulated socialist style economy. You can call my comments “anti-you” as much as you want, but it does appear very childish.
Should I assume, based on you lumping them all together, you see those who sell firearms as the same as those who sell cannabis, pornography, and prostitutes? I didn’t think you’d be so strongly against 2nd Amendment Rights.
Why are you equating cannabis with “card rooms and the houses of prostitution”? It is a false equivalency. I really do think you are out of your realm here.
You and Petersen know exactly where I stand. Stop making up nonsense.
Not nonsense. It’s called a thought experiment. You claim that your argument against cannabis is it’s “Another problem”, compunded with alcohol. I postulate that, if we were to ban alcohol, your “another problem” wouldn’t exist. Therefore, cannabis would be fine. Is this true? Or could it be that “we don’t need another problem” is a fallacious argument hiding a lack of concrete reasoning?
What would you do if beer was made illegal tomorrow? Would you be happy with that? Or, would you just throw up your hands and say, “Oh, well!”?
Where you “stand” will be of little consequence when the cafe opens of First Street.
“First by your crap on me…….”. I’m still not clear on the “crap” comments. But, that is OK. In general, I’m really quite indifferent to what has been said, as it is just way to much to try and decipher. Have a good day!
There will be no cannabis Café on first Street. I now know what you and B B think of the free market. There are such things as image. You seem to not care about that. I fully support the 1st amendment. I am not sure what you or Petersen support. You both are all over the place with no sound reasons. Only that you both seem to like cannabis and its is a personal thing. Smoke it or back and love it. I do not want store front cannabis store any where in Benicia. That is my choice and I will stick to it. Attack my choice all you want it still does not solve the issue one way or the other. You most certainly do not agree with me. Who wins does not matter. Petersen I am not out of my realm you are just very stubborn. That is fine not an issue but you do not understand my stance.
Wrong Amendment. Try number 2. Why are you object to firearms being sold legally in Benicia?
Image
Um… okay. I’m gonna assume that was a technical error.
NO! IMAGE
Image? That’s not a full thought or sentence. You’ll need to use more than one word to get your point across.
I think what he means, and I’m probably opening myself up to an unwarranted attack here, is that locales with gun stores/ranges have poor images. However, there are plenty of examples that would negate that assumption. Napa, Pleasant Hill, Corte Madera, Petaluma, San Mateo, San Carlos, Los Gatos, North San Jose, Saratoga, Los Altos, etc. These are all locales that, in all fairness, have better images than Benicia,
No attack. Just question some of the city’s image that you say are better than Benicia. That’s all.
Name one.
By the way, meant south SJ.
Does not matter what city I name you will disagree. You must remember I lived in San Mateo County, Marin County and Contra Costa County. Know them all very well.
I didn’t think you would be able to.
“You must remember I lived in San Mateo County………”. Besides not knowing where you have lived; I’ve lived in Santa Clara, San Mateo, Alameda, Solano, San Francisco, Santa Cruz, and Napa counties, and know them all very well; what is your point?
no
I believe what we are talking about in most cases is what will the City Council do on the Cannabis issue. At present it appears to be a 4/1 or 3/2 vote in favor of Manufacturing, distribution and store fronts anywhere. Now the big issue is how are the tenants in the Industrial park and all commercial area business’ going to react. There will be open discussion and plenty of feed back on this issue. There will be a very big vocal response form those in favor. Now the big issue is what will the Industrial Park tenants say along with First Street and other Commercial areas say.. Their response either way could sway the council vote. If all respond favorably it is a done deal. From there they go to license fees. If higher than other fees it will have to have a positive legal opinion to charge those higher fees. Additional taxes of any amount will have to go to the voters. That will not happen before the June election. If approved then they will go into effect. There also could be a land use issue. So as we see this is not as easy as it sounds. So all the banter back and forth only solved what we all think on this Cannabis issue and nothing will change our minds/opinions.. As I see it now it could go either way but I give odds on to the favor side.
I am stubborn? Interesting. I do understand your position. It is one that is antiquated and ill-informed. That is not an insult, just an identification.
You are wrong.
I am correct.
My point is simple. Even you should be able to understand that. Repeat: It does not matter to you what I say. You just want to carry on for no reason at all. It does not matter. I do not try to out zip code me. You lose every time. I also have lived in San Francisco and Westlake Village. HGayward State, huh
“It does not matter to you what I say. You just want to carry on for no reason at all.” Project much?
Hayward State
What about it?