California Forever’s pivot
From stealth assemblage to Suisun City annexation submission — and the road ahead
For five years, California Forever operated in near-total secrecy, quietly assembling over 60,000 acres of mostly marginal agricultural land in southeastern Solano County. By car, the center of the assemblage lies about 60 miles northeast of downtown San Francisco and 43 miles southwest of downtown Sacramento.¹
The effort remained opaque until August 25, 2023, when the New York Times revealed that a group of Silicon Valley billionaires—including Marc Andreessen, Reid Hoffman, and Laurene Powell Jobs—had quietly backed the acquisitions through a shell company called Flannery Associates.² Days later, California Forever launched its public-facing website and unveiled its vision: a new walkable city for 400,000 residents on the edge of the greater Bay Area.³
In January 2024, the company submitted a countywide ballot initiative to amend Solano County’s general plan and allow urban development on agricultural land.⁴ But after months of mounting opposition, California Forever withdrew the measure on July 22, 2024, opting instead to pursue a formal application and environmental review process through Suisun City.⁵
Now, after an abandoned ballot initiative and a strategic pivot, the project has landed in Suisun City’s lap — and there is much work to be done to turn this vision into reality.
The land gambit
Between 2018 and 2023, Flannery Associates became the largest private landowner in Solano County. The purchases, concentrated near Travis Air Force Base, triggered alarm bells in Washington and Sacramento. A federal investigation into national security risks followed. Local officials were blindsided. Residents were furious.⁶
Yet the secrecy had a strategic rationale. Had the effort been public from the outset, land prices would likely have surged, making large-scale acquisition more expensive. By operating quietly, California Forever avoided speculative inflation and assembled a contiguous land base that might have been impossible to secure otherwise.⁷
The ballot initiative that wasn’t
In October 2023, California Forever unveiled the East Solano Plan: a new city on 17,500 acres, promising affordable housing, clean energy, and walkable neighborhoods.⁸ To make it happen, the company launched a ballot initiative to amend Solano County’s general plan.
Public officials felt blindsided. Environmental groups warned of allegedly uncontrolled sprawl. Ultimately, polling showed the initiative could be headed for defeat. In July 2024, California Forever withdrew the iniiative measure.⁹
A strategic recalibration
After months of relatively quiet negotiations, California Forever submitted on October 14, 2025, a formal annexation application and revised development plans to the City of Suisun City. The submittal was for 22,873 acres.¹⁰
The submittal outlines a phased buildout:
Phase 1 (2031–2045): 65,000 homes, 150,000 residents, 53,000 permanent jobs
Phase 2 (2045–2065): expansion to 400,000 residents, full transit and infrastructure integration
The plan includes a 5,700-acre buffer zone around Travis AFB, water recycling and treatment infrastructure, over 4,000 acres of parks and ecological preserves, and a transit-first internal design with internal shuttles and mixed-use zoning.¹¹
Source: California Forever
Stakeholder reactions
Suisun City officials: Welcoming but wary. The annexation could triple the city’s footprint and transform its economy — but also strain services and political capital.
Solano County supervisors: Some see opportunity; others fear loss of control and precedent-setting urban sprawl.
Travis Air Force Base: Initially alarmed, now appearing cautiously supportive. The buffer zone and revised land use plan address key Air Force concerns.
Environmental groups: Still skeptical. The scale, water use, and traffic impacts remain flashpoints.
Local residents: Mixed. Some welcome jobs and housing; others resent the secrecy and scale.¹²
Solano County —not so rural
While California Forever’s proposal targets a sparsely populated stretch of eastern Solano, the county itself is not one of California’s most rural:
Population density: ~547 people per square mile — higher than many truly rural counties like Modoc or Sierra
Urban centers: Fairfield, Vallejo, Vacaville, and Benicia anchor the county with substantial populations and infrastructure
Regional integration: Solano is part of the San Francisco Bay Area Combined Statistical Area, with strong commuting ties to Contra Costa, Alameda, and Sacramento counties¹³
The eastern edge may feel rural, but the county’s overall profile is suburban and regionally connected.
A creative and detailed proposal — with gaps
The current submittal to Suisun City is remarkably detailed in its internal planning: land use, phasing, ecological buffers, and walkable design are all carefully mapped. But one conspicuous gap remains — regional transportation infrastructure.
Source: California Forever
There is, as yet, little detail on how California Forever intends to address regional connectivity:
No clear plan for Highway 12 upgrades or I-80 interchange improvements
No commitments on funding for regional rail, BART integration, or express bus service
No modeling of cumulative traffic impacts on neighboring cities or county roads
No mention of improvements to State Route 113 (CA-113), a critical north-south corridor that will face increased demand as the project expands eastward toward Dixon and Rio Vista
And critically, there is no funding strategy for improvements that extend beyond the project’s footprint. While developers typically bear the cost of internal infrastructure, regional upgrades often require state, federal, or multi-jurisdictional funding — along the lines of what has been accomplished via the Transportation Corridor Agencies of Orange County in Southern California.¹⁴
What comes next
1. Environmental Impact Report (EIR) — sequential, foundational, and slow Led by Suisun City under CEQA, the EIR will include transportation modeling, water supply, ecological impacts, air quality, noise, and public services. Transportation modeling is the linchpin, requiring regional coordination and phased demand forecasting. The public comment period will likely generate extensive feedback requiring formal responses and revisions. Realistic timeline: at least 36 months, and possibly longer depending on scope, staffing, and public response.¹⁵
2. Joint CEQA/NEPA review likely — sequential, adds complexity Federal permits may be triggered by wetlands, endangered species, federal transportation infrastructure, or airspace impacts near Travis AFB. A joint EIR/EIS would require a Notice of Intent, draft and final EIS documents, a Record of Decision, and interagency coordination. This process could add 12–24 months to the environmental review timeline.¹⁶
3. Public engagement and hearings — parallel with EIR Listening sessions, town halls, and stakeholder workshops will shape zoning, phasing, and mitigation strategies.
4. Zoning and infrastructure agreements — parallel, contingent on EIR findings Suisun City must approve zoning changes and negotiate infrastructure phasing, including water, sewer, roads, schools, and emergency services.
5. Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) review — sequential and formidable LAFCO will not act until the EIR is certified. It reviews fiscal sustainability, service delivery, and regional impacts. While not expected to serve as lead agency, LAFCO may request supplemental analysis, particularly on municipal fiscal impacts — including long-term service costs, tax revenue projections, and interagency funding responsibilities.¹⁷
6. Litigation risk — sequential, potentially overlapping CEQA lawsuits are common for projects of this scale. Delay could range from 18 months to 5 years, or even longer, depending on scope, venue, and appeals. Likely plaintiffs include environmental groups, slow-growth advocates, and neighboring jurisdictions.¹⁸
7. Final City Council vote — sequential, post-EIR and LAFCO Suisun City Council must vote to approve the annexation and development agreement.
The path forward
California Forever’s pivot to Suisun City is bold — and risky. The company has traded a countywide ballot fight for a municipal partnership, but the hurdles remain steep. The EIR will be exhaustive. LAFCO could be a dealbreaker. Litigation is likely. Federal permitting may trigger NEPA. Regional transportation funding remains undefined. CA-113 and other key corridors are unaddressed. Public trust must be built.
Even under favorable conditions, construction is unlikely to begin before 2031, with first occupancy at least several years later—earliest would be 2033–2035. If litigation or permitting delays mount, that timeline could easily slip further. Until then, California Forever remains a creative vision on digital images and text— and a test of California’s capacity to reimagine large-scale master-planned community development.
Endnotes
¹ Google Maps driving estimate from San Francisco and Sacramento to the center of the California Forever development proposal, accessed October 20, 2025.
² Conor Dougherty and Erin Griffith, “Silicon Valley Billionaires Reveal Their Secret Plan to Build a City,” New York Times, August 25, 2023, https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/25/technology/silicon-valley-billionaires-city.html.
³ California Forever, “Our Vision,” accessed October 20, 2025, https://www.californiaforever.com.
⁴ Solano County Registrar of Voters, Initiative Filing Records, January 2024.
⁵ California Forever, “Statement on Withdrawal of Ballot Initiative,” July 22, 2024, https://www.californiaforever.com/updates.
⁶ U.S. Department of the Treasury, “CFIUS Statement on Flannery Associates Investigation,” September 2023. https://home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/international/the-committee-on-foreign-investment-in-the-united-states-cfius/cfius-enforcement.
⁷ California Forever, “Land Acquisition Strategy,” accessed October 20, 2025, https://www.californiaforever.com/land.
⁸ California Forever, “East Solano Plan Overview,” accessed October 20, 2025. https://californiaforever.com/plan-overview/.
⁹ Solano County Board of Supervisors, Meeting Minutes, April–June 2024. http://cacwaz02.solanocounty.com/depts/bos/meetings/videos.asp
¹⁰ Suisun City Planning Department, “California Forever Annexation Application,” October 14, 2025. https://www.suisun.com/Departments/Development-Services/Suisun-Expansion-Project-Application.
¹¹ California Forever, “Annexation Proposal Summary,” accessed October 20, 2025. https://californiaforever.com/plan-overview/.
¹² Public comment transcripts, Suisun City Town Hall, September 2025. https://www.suisun.com/Government/City-Council/Agendas.
¹³ U.S. Census Bureau, “Solano County Demographic Profile,” 2020 Census.
¹⁴ Transportation Corridor Agencies (TCA), “Funding and Governance Model,” accessed October 20, 2025, https://www.thetollroads.com/about.
¹⁵ California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, §15120–15132. https://resources.ca.gov/CNRP/CEQA-Guidelines/Article-9.
¹⁶ Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ), “NEPA Review Process,” accessed October 20, 2025. https://www.whitehouse.gov/ceq/.
¹⁷ Solano Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), “Annexation Review Criteria,” accessed October 20, 2025. https://www.solanolafco.com/documents/city-annexation-checklist/
¹⁸ California Planning & Development Report, “CEQA Litigation Trends,” July 2025. https://www.cp-dr.com/
Artificial intelligence disclosure
This article was drafted with the assistance of Microsoft Copilot based on prompts provided by H. Pike Oliver, who reviewed, edited, and revised the artificial intelligence work product.
