Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Carbon Capture topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council member seeks resolution opposing Montezuma carbon‑injection well; colleagues ask for draft language
Summary
A council member urged Benicia to oppose a proposed Montezuma carbon capture injection well and associated pipelines, arguing the technology is unproven and risky; the council discussed process and the city's appropriate role given the county planning commission's jurisdiction and state carbon policy.
A council member (speaker 3) asked council to consider a resolution opposing the proposed Montezuma NorCal carbon capture injection well and associated CO2 pipelines, citing concerns about injecting CO2 near wetlands and populated areas. The member told council she would circulate proposed language and asked colleagues to consider bringing the item back for a formal vote.
"This proposed project would involve compressing and transporting of c o 2 through 45 miles of pipeline... and it would involve drilling a c o 2 injection well near critical wetland habitat," the council member said, urging a stand against technology she described as unproven and potentially dangerous. Other council members noted the application before the county currently concerns the injection well, that pipeline approvals may be separate, and that city advocacy would be a first step with a possible official resolution to follow.
Staff explained that such advocacy normally follows a two‑step approach and would return as a resolution for adoption if a majority wishes to proceed; councilors discussed transparency about who signs letters and whether a city resolution should make clear which members support it. Several council members indicated preliminary support to draft language and return for formal consideration.
Why it matters: although the county is the lead decision‑maker for the well permit, a city resolution could influence regional discourse, inform the public and be used by supervisors and regulators in subsequent hearings. Council asked staff to circulate draft language and return the item as a resolution if enough council members want to pursue advocacy.
