Bay Area/ North SF Bay Area/ Real Estate & Development
AI Assisted Icon
Published on February 17, 2024
Rep. Garamendi Amplifies Opposition to 'California Forever' Plan Over Local and National Security ConcernsSource: California Forever

The contentious "California Forever" development plan is hitting more and more opposition as it plows ahead in Solano County. Despite the allure of a new city promising affordable housing and quaint plazas, federal lawmakers Reps. John Garamendi and Mike Thompson, both Democrats, are voicing strong objections. Their concerns include Potential adverse effects on local infrastructure, water supplies, and national security via nearby Travis Air Force Base.

Amidst these growing tensions, California Forever submitted an 88-page filing to the county registrar hoping to sway voters to sign off on their controversial proposal, SFist reports. They aim to gather at least 13,500 voter signatures to bypass a local ordinance preserving agricultural land, the foundation upon which the new city would be constructed. The development team, backed by Silicon Valley billionaires, has been amassing property over the years to this end. Still, resistance arises from concerns including water resources, strain on public services, and compatibility with military operations.

According to a KQED interview with Rep. Garamendi, "All of these issues remain in place, and my opposition to this is even stronger today," referring to the project's apparent shortcomings. Rep. Thompson echoes similar sentiments, emphasizing security and community concerns, expressing that the project "violated the trust of the public."

California Forever's response comes via spokesperson Brian Brokaw who stands by the initiative's transparency and community pledges, telling SFist, "The initiative spells out very clearly what the proposal is — and what it is not — and includes ten voter guarantees to ensure accountability." The plan also details a commitment to an Environmental Impact Report and a Development Agreement to address concerns before breaking ground. Yet, doubts linger on governance and the consequences of eroding local control over development, with no city council or local government structures proposed to manage the new city of potentially 400,000 inhabitants.

As the debate intensifies, California Forever exhibits flexibility, adjusting its plans to create a "Travis Security Zone" and relocating parts of the city to mitigate light pollution and preserve the operational integrity of the Air Force base. Despite these revisions, officials like Garamendi remain skeptical and was quoted in KQED expressing ongoing apprehension about the nature of infrastructure and fiscal accountability, "There are enormous issues of who is going to pay the cost of infrastructure," and added, "Guaranteed, the rest of Solano County will be picking up a huge tax bill here."

Whether this “city of yesterday” will come to fruition remains contingent on the red tape of local politics and the will of the voters, as California Forever forges ahead toward the ballot box in November. Meanwhile, public officials marshal their efforts to preserve the current state of Solano County amidst a turbulent clash over its future.