A group of tech investors trying to build a new city on farmland at the edge of the San Francisco Bay Area is turning to Sacramento for help after years of resistance from Solano County residents.
California Forever, the billionaire-backed development company behind the proposal, is seeking state legislation that would speed environmental review for a large shipyard and manufacturing project it says could anchor the broader development. The company also wants a path for its land to be brought into Suisun City if county land-use rules block construction.
To press its case, California Forever has enlisted two prominent Democratic figures with deep experience in state environmental law: former Senate President Pro Tem Darrell Steinberg and former Senate Majority Leader Bob Hertzberg. The developers are arguing that California must move quickly to compete with Texas and other states for a potential shipbuilding tenant.
The company’s pitch now centers on Saronic Technologies Inc., a defense firm that makes autonomous vessels for national security uses and is considering whether to build its next factory in California or Texas. Supporters say a fast-track process is needed to keep the company, and the jobs it could bring, in California.
The latest proposal marks another shift for California Forever, which has spent nearly a decade advancing the idea of a new community in eastern Solano County. The initial vision emphasized a walkable city with homes, bike lanes and neighborhood amenities. Over time, the plan expanded to include a shipbuilding complex and a manufacturing district.
Backers include the state’s influential building trades unions, real estate interests, peace officers and pro-housing advocates. They argue the project could generate major economic growth and, according to a Bay Area economic analysis, eventually support hundreds of thousands of jobs statewide.
Steinberg and Hertzberg said the developers are seeking permission to rely on a 2008 environmental impact report for the shipyard site, cap legal challenges to the project at 270 days and allow Suisun City to annex California Forever-owned land if necessary.
In a letter to Gov. Gavin Newsom and legislative leaders, supporters warned that without action, California could lose billions of dollars in investment and tens of thousands of jobs to Texas and other states as soon as this summer.
But the proposal has drawn sharp criticism from local residents, environmental advocates and some lawmakers, who say the public has not been given enough information about a project that would transform large stretches of farmland and sensitive habitat.
State Sen. Christopher Cabaldon, a Napa Democrat whose district includes the area, said a project of this size and location is precisely the kind of development that should undergo a full review under the California Environmental Quality Act.
“A central question for the people of Solano County is: Is this going to be for the community or is this a conversion project that leaves them behind?” Cabaldon said.
Opponents also accuse California Forever of trying to bypass local voters by negotiating with state officials. Since 2018, the company and its affiliates have quietly acquired tens of thousands of acres in Solano County. The project’s backers were not publicly identified until 2023, when they were revealed to include wealthy venture capitalists and technology figures led by Jan Sramek, a former Goldman Sachs trader and real estate developer.
Among the investors is Marc Andreessen, co-founder of the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz. Andreessen also holds investments in Saronic, the defense company considering the Solano County location.
California Forever’s land-buying campaign began through a subsidiary, Flannery Associates, which eventually acquired about 62,000 acres. The secrecy surrounding those purchases created lasting distrust among farmers and residents, some of whom accused the company of using aggressive tactics to pressure landowners to sell.
The company’s original effort depended on winning local support because Solano County has an “orderly growth” policy, adopted by voters in 1984, that requires voter approval before development can occur on certain unincorporated agricultural lands.
In 2024, California Forever introduced the East Solano Plan, which proposed rezoning 17,500 acres for a dense new city that could house up to 400,000 people. The measure was expected to go before county voters, but the company withdrew it after organized opposition, weak polling and a county review that identified gaps in the proposal. Sramek later acknowledged the campaign had likely moved too quickly and said the plan would return to voters in 2026.
Since then, the company has reworked its strategy. The East Solano Plan has been reframed as the Suisun Expansion Plan and the Solano Shipyard. In January 2025, the Suisun City Council directed its city manager to explore annexing nearby land, a process that is now underway but could take years.
Critics say the annexation approach appears designed to avoid the countywide vote required under Solano’s growth rules.
“The annexation and the ship building have been a clear way to work around the need for voter support in Solano County,” said Nate Huntington, a member of Solano Together, a grassroots group formed in response to the land purchases.
Huntington noted that California Forever has not submitted a formal shipyard proposal to the county.
“All of this has been happening in backrooms of Sacramento, and it’s not been publicly available,” he said.
California Forever is now presenting the project to state leaders as a rare chance to attract advanced manufacturing and defense-related shipbuilding to California, along with new housing for workers.
Steinberg and Hertzberg said legislation is being considered but would move forward only after California Forever signs a lease with a manufacturer or shipbuilder. Their proposal would allow the governor to designate construction on the company’s land as an “environmental leadership development project,” a category that accelerates court review of legal challenges. Steinberg authored the 2013 law that created that streamlined process.
California law generally requires public agencies to prepare environmental studies for projects that may significantly affect land, air, water, wildlife or surrounding communities. Rather than initiating a new environmental review for the shipyard, Steinberg and Hertzberg’s approach would rely on a 2008 Solano County report that identified part of the area for water-dependent industrial use. Most of California Forever’s planned 7,500-acre shipyard footprint does not carry that designation.
Steinberg said the older report remains adequate because the site has not substantially changed. Requiring a new report, he said, would add years of delay and could cost California major economic opportunities.
Cabaldon disagreed, saying the current proposal is significantly different from what was considered nearly two decades ago.
“Just the notion that you would just say, ‘We are not going to do any assessments at all and we’ll just rely on this old one’ — that is not consistent with what the public interest is,” he said.
The proposal also calls for housing tied to the jobs that supporters say the shipyard and manufacturing projects would create. Steinberg and Hertzberg said nearby cities and Solano County would have the first opportunity to approve housing. If local governments could not meet the timeline sought by employers, Suisun City could annex adjacent California Forever land as a last resort.
That provision is one of the most controversial pieces of the plan because it could allow development to proceed outside the county’s voter-approved growth process.
“The shipbuilders and manufacturers need certainty on a much faster timeline,” Steinberg said.
Cabaldon questioned whether the housing argument is grounded in realistic job projections, noting that Saronic works in automation. He said there has been no evidence that the project would generate enough ongoing jobs to require housing on the scale California Forever has proposed.
The company gained a major political ally in January when it announced a 40-year agreement with the Napa/Solano Building Trades Council and the Northern California Carpenters Union to use union labor on the development. The deal brought powerful labor organizations into the campaign for state action.
Labor support intensified after a county court in Texas approved substantial tax incentives aimed at attracting Saronic to Brownsville. Saronic has said its search for a new site remains active.
The California Alliance for Jobs, a coalition of construction companies and workers, recently sent letters urging legislative leaders to accelerate approval of the California Forever expansion and shipyard.
“We champed at the bit to go all in to get this project moving, and to get legislation through Sacramento this session,” said Joshua Arce, the alliance’s chief executive.
Suisun City Councilmember Princess Washington, who has consistently opposed the annexation effort, said she believes labor support is being used to pressure officials into approving the project quickly.
“Processes are slow, but they’re done that way through government to ensure that it’s being done correctly, that all parties of interest are being treated fairly, and there’s checks and balances,” Washington said.
California Forever spokesperson Jim Wunderman said in a statement that any shipyard project would follow California environmental and land-use laws. He said county supervisors already approved use of the 2008 environmental document and that legislation would help the project meet prospective employers’ timelines.
Wunderman also said that directing growth through Suisun City is consistent with local preferences for placing new development within existing cities.
California Forever has maintained a steady presence in Sacramento. Since 2024, the company has spent at least $330,000 lobbying the Legislature and governor’s office on bills and related government actions, according to campaign finance records.
Steinberg and Hertzberg said they were hired in April as special counsel rather than lobbyists, meaning they spend less than one-third of their time communicating with public officials.
Jordan Grimes, legislative director for Greenbelt Alliance, said he was disappointed to see Steinberg advocating for the project. The environmental group has supported streamlining reviews for housing but has opposed California Forever’s proposal.
California Forever reported spending $90,000 last year lobbying the governor’s office and the Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development, known as GO-Biz, on federal shipbuilding activity and business attraction efforts in California.
GO-Biz spokesperson Willie Rudman said the agency has discussed state incentive programs with Saronic and explained how they work, but does not offer incentive packages to individual companies.
Last fall, GO-Biz helped organize a bid to bring Saronic to Solano County. County staff said during a Board of Supervisors meeting that the agency supported a legislative effort that would override the county’s orderly growth law. Supervisors moved quickly to adjust boundaries for the proposed Solano Shipyard, but Assemblymember Lori Wilson, a Democrat from Suisun City, said there was not enough time left in the legislative session to introduce a bill.
Wilson said the proposal has remained under discussion since then, but that California Forever has not requested action from her office.
Cabaldon said warnings that California could lose the shipyard to Texas are a familiar negotiating tactic in economic development. He said Saronic’s final decision is more likely to be driven by national defense needs than state incentives.
“We have to negotiate with our eyes open,” he said.
Original source: CalMatters
