After Ballot Measure for New City Is Delayed, Solano Residents Breathe a Sigh of Relief

When California Forever pitched residents on its ambitious plan to build a new city on eastern Bay Area farmland at a town hall meeting last December, Sam Houston was on the fence. He assumed it would result in a sleepy suburb where, much like other cities in Solano County, residents would commute toward Silicon Valley for work.

Then, his wife gave birth to their first child, and his perspective shifted.

“Especially having a son, [I think about] 20 years from now — is my son, Jasper, going to find a place here?” he asked. “Jasper being born definitely makes me think about the future and take it more to heart.”

The proposal from California Forever had been set to go before Solano County voters in November, but after months of controversy, testy debates between residents and millions of dollars spent on campaigning, the company announced on Monday that it was pulling its initiative from the ballot. Company representatives plan to try again in two years after working with county officials to publish an environmental impact report and development agreement.

Many of the project’s opponents, as well as supporters who spoke to KQED, including Houston, said they welcomed the decision.

“I think it was the right move,” Houston said. “I think it’s a way to take in the community’s feedback, their concerns, and their input and incorporate that into the plans. I think it’s the best way to address the community’s concerns and answer their questions.”

Last week, the county released a damning preliminary report about the project’s impacts on the environment and cost to taxpayers, despite company representatives’ promises that it would not cost Solano residents anything. California Forever CEO Jan Sramek told KQED that he has repeatedly heard from residents who want a full environmental impact report before voting on the project.

Brian Hanlon, president of the housing advocacy organization California YIMBY, said that although his organization still supports the project and its vision to bring dense housing to the state, any project should have an environmental impact report and detailed planning done before asking voters to weigh in.

“Conducting environmental assessments for big, new projects that could have real environmental impacts is good and appropriate,” Hanlon said. “It sounds like county leaders and California Forever are working collaboratively, in good faith, to solve the challenges. It strikes me as a positive sign.”

Monique Lopez Feybesse, owner of Vallejo-based patisserie Tarts de Feybesse, said she was looking forward to the new city and the business opportunities that could have come with it. Pushing the ballot measure back to 2026 could delay the new city, she said, though California Forever has asserted it would have spent the next two years working on reports and developer agreements anyway.

“I detest the idea of taking polar sides,” she said. “The people who I have spoken to who oppose the project are mostly of an older generation who are reluctant for change and have valid questions about the impact. On the other side, the younger generation is hopeful for changes here and looking for opportunities.”

Those who remain skeptical about the project hope the ballot measure’s delay gives the company a chance to prove itself.

Anthony Summers, a pastor at Healthy Vallejo Community Support Services, said he wants to stay involved with the community discussions that California Forever pledged to hold over the next two years.

“It gives them time to show the character of who they are by partnering with the cities,” he said. “I want some of the relationships to show that they really are serious about investing in the city.”

Solano Together, the biggest organization opposing the project, said the company’s decision was a “win” for the people of Solano. Nate Huntington, a spokesperson for the organization, said that while they are still determining their next steps, they plan to stay involved with discussions.

“I think one key … is demanding transparency and accountability from California Forever and decision-makers,” he said. “We’ll want to continue to educate the public about what is happening.”