All posts by BenIndy

Progressive Dems of Benicia Urge Solano Voters to Oppose East Solano Plan / California Forever

[Note from BenIndy: The Progressive Dems were not the first and will likely not be the last Democratic club in Solano County to urge opposition to this project, but it was actually the Solano County Republicans who came out against the project first, and they aren’t holding back. Gil Duran’s post Miracle in Solano: California Forever unites Democrats and Republicans is a great exploration of a nascent bipartisan coalition and the issues in Solano that appear to be uniting conservatives and liberals, for the time being.]

JUNE 20, 2024

BENICIA – The Progressive Democrats of Benicia (“PDB”) stand with the Solano Together coalition of individuals and organizations, including the Greenbelt Alliance, Solano County Orderly Growth Committee, Center for Biological Diversity, Sierra Club California, and others, in opposing the California Forever’s East Solano Plan.

PDB’s mission is to promote equity, justice, and environmental stewardship in our community. We advocate for democratically determined, sustainable, and inclusive solutions that honor both the needs of Benicia and Solano County residents and the preservation of our natural environment. 

The proposed development by California Forever contradicts these core principles. The project’s glossy marketing and recent rebranding cannot hide the reality that its leaders have failed to fully answer questions about how to provide for the Solano County community’s present and future needs. PDB must therefore urge a “NO” vote on the initiative, should it qualify to appear on the November ballot.

PDB acknowledges the urgent need for affordable housing for Californians; however, California Forever has provided no clear commitment to addressing this issue, referring to home prices in the millions. The East Solano Plan also risks vital water and land resources, our air quality, and the future of Solano County’s agricultural economy without adequately addressing serious infrastructural concerns around the city’s accessibility or impacts to neighboring cities. Moreover, California Forever’s East Solano Plan ballot measure threatens to cause irreversible damage to Solano County’s unique conservation areas and jeopardize the future of some of California’s most resilient farms and rangelands. Finally, the nature of the proposed city’s governance is unclear, generating real concerns about whether residents in this new city will have the ability to participate democratically in their governance.

The Progressive Democrats of Benicia urge voters to support the development of genuinely affordable housing, safeguard our environment, and protect Solano County’s democratic values and future by voting NO on the California Forever/East Solano Plan measure in November.

To download a PDF copy of this release, click this link: Progressive Democrats of Benicia News Release re. California Forever’s East Solano Plan (6.20.24)

progressivedemocratsofbenicia.com


MORE . . .

>> ACTION ALERT for June 25 from Solano Together! 

>>Get involved… Solano Together is local organization opposing California Forever. Between now and November, you can get a yard sign from Solano Together and send Solano Together a much needed donation.

>> Read more… BenIndy coverage of the billionaire land grab, California Forever / East Solano Plan.

Mayor Steve Young on CA Forever: “They don’t want to necessarily follow the rules”

A road sign is posted near a parcel of land purchased by Flannery Associates near Rio Vista, California. | Josh Edelson / AFP via Getty.

CBS News Sacramento, by Ashley Sharp, June 19, 2024

SOLANO COUNTY — California Forever released a report Tuesday addressing one of the biggest questions surrounding its billionaire-backed push to build a new city on Solano County farmland: where exactly they are getting the water to sustain a community of up to 400,000 people?

Leaders say this initial review found they have secured enough water for the first stage of buildout at 100,000 residents and laid out the company’s plan for how they say they will scale their water usage for when the community grows by four times.

“As a guiding principle over our entire water plan, everything we do, we want it to be protective of other municipalities in Solano and we want to make sure we are not negatively impacting them now or looking into the future,” said Bronson Johnson, head of infrastructure and sustainability for California Forever.

Water plan unpacked

California Forever has promised its proposed new development will not use any water from the Solano Irrigation District or Lake Berryessa, which supplies the county’s water.

So where is it coming from?

Solano Together Action Alert: On June 25, Voice Your California Forever Concerns – In Person or By Email

From Solano Together message, sent June 18, 2024

Next Tuesday, June 25, at 2 p.m., the Solano County Board of Supervisors will convene to discuss California Forever’s East Solano Plan. 

Our coalition will show up strong and we urge you to do the same and voice your concerns and opposition to the California Forever/East Solano Plan. Here is how you can do it.

Show up for an in-person comment:

  • The meeting will take place at the Solano County Administration Center (675 Texas Street in Fairfield) at 2 p.m.
  • Arrive early: we recommend arriving as early as noon to save your seat. We anticipate a big turnout and the space has limited capacity.
  • Bring water, food, and snacks for the line.
  • More than anything, we hope the County Supervisors will call for the study of the impacts of this initiative.
  • Remarks will probably be limited to 1 minute. Please keep it to the point and be respectful.

Submit your online comment:

If you can’t attend the meeting in person, send your comments online. Click here to access the agenda.

According to the Board of Supervisors website: If you wish to address any item listed on the Agenda in advance of the meeting, please submit comments in writing to the Clerk of the Board by U.S. Mail or by email. Written comments should be received no later than 5:00 P.M. on the Monday prior to the Board meeting to ensure distribution in advance of the meeting. The email address for the Clerk is: clerk@solanocounty.com. Copies of comments received will be provided to the Board and will become a part of the official record but will not be read aloud at the meeting. 

Feel free to use our resources, such as the FAQ, for your talking points.

Why It’s Important

Last week, the Solano County Registrar of Voters verified that the East Solano Plan had enough signatures to move forward.

At this Board of Supervisors meeting, the Board can adopt the Initiative, order a 30-day study, or put the Initiative on the ballot. We expect the Board to order a study. If so, at the July 23 Board meeting, the County will release its findings and put the Initiative on the ballot.

This means the “East Solano Homes, Jobs, and Clean Energy Initiative” would go before voters for authorization to modify the land use designation of 17,500 acres of agricultural land in eastern Solano County to a “New Community” designation that would allow for the development of up to 400,000 new residents and up to 90 million square feet of non-residential development.

Solano Together is a group of concerned residents, leaders, and organizations who united to form a coalition that envisions a better future for Solano County, focusing development into existing cities and strengthening our agricultural industry.

We strongly oppose this harmful development proposal and urge you to vote NO on the ballot in November.

Here are a few things we will share with the Board of Supervisors at the upcoming meeting:

  • Threats to Travis Airforce Base
  • Increased traffic, commute gridlock
  • Negative impact on water and food production resources
  • Less investment in existing cities
  • No binding guarantees until a development agreement

Read more about each item on our FAQs and Resources pages.

[This post was updated to remove information about making public comment by phone. Apparently there is no option to make a comment by phone.]


MORE . . .

>> Get involved… Solano Together is another local organization opposing California Forever. Between now and November, you can get a yard sign from Solano Together and send Solano Together a much needed donation.

>> Read more… BenIndy coverage of the billionaire land grab, California Forever / East Solano Plan.

Stephen Golub: Kudos to the Council on the Potential Transfer Tax

Benicia resident and author Stephen Golub, A Promised Land

By Stephen Golub,  June 18, 2024

On June 11, the City Council took the first step in a multi-stage process to put on the November ballot a vote on whether Benicia should adopt a Real Property Transfer Tax (RPTT) for the sale of real estate, be it residential, commercial or industrial.

Kudos to the Council for both biting the bullet on this significant step to close the City’s budget gap and conducting its discussion and initial community input in a collegial way. Thanks too to City Manager Mario Giuliani and the City staff for undertaking the grunt work to date (as summarized by a “Policy Direction” memo from Mr. Giuliani to the Council in preparation for the June 11 meeting, and for further figuring out over the next several weeks optimal options for the Council to consider regarding this potential tax.

If adopted, the transfer tax will levy a fee on the sale of real estate. Among the many matters the City staff and Council need to address are how high the fee should be. One figure being considered is one percent (i.e., $10 for every $1,000 in sales price, or $8,000 on an $800,000 house). As per the Policy Direction memo I mentioned, that $10 rate – which is actually lower than the $12  mean for many other Bay Area cities – would generate an additional $2.1million for the City annually at this point. Presumably, that figure would rise over the years as housing prices escalate.

Some initial thoughts on the matter:

  1. Pardon the cliché, but there’s still no such thing as a free lunch. As Mayor Steve Young, City Manager Giuliani and others have consistently pointed out, the City is taking multiple cost-saving and revenue enhancing steps toward putting our finances on stable footing going forward. But there’s still much to do if we want to keep Benicia the pretty, pleasant, enjoyable, safe, special place we love. With the building of new housing mandated by state law, a potential generational turnover in housing ownership due to our aging population and other conceivable developments coming down the pike, the transfer tax makes sense as big way of closing our budget gap.
  1. This need not affect most or any current Benicia residents at all in the near or medium terms or even permanently. For one thing, most of us won’t be selling our homes in the foreseeable future. Even more importantly, the City could mandate or at least strongly push for the tax to be paid by property buyers – rather than by sellers or by the two splitting the cost. (Admittedly, whether it could mandate who’d pay the tax was not clear from Tuesday’s discussion, but some sort of “Sense of the Council” suggestion might at least nudge realtors’ arrangements in the right direction.)
  1. This approach would ensure that buyers enjoying the pleasure of moving into our wonderful town would pay the additional price for doing so, rather than sellers – who may need to maximize their finances on the way out – bearing that burden. Plus, it’s an investment of sorts by the buyers: In paying that price, they would help ensure a balanced Benicia budget that enables it to provide services that in turn increase their property values over the years.
  1. The additional cost is relatively manageable. While I don’t want to dismiss the significance of a buyer taking on, say, an additional $8,000 of debt due to the RPTT, that works out to less than $50 per month for a 30-year, six percent loan. It’s not a deal-breaker, in other words, particularly given the overbidding that has come to characterize parts of Benicia’s housing market.
  1. I’m also plugging for the Council and realtors alike to push for the buyers to pay the tax because, frankly, it’s more politically palatable (as well as substantively sustainable) to point out to current residents that they won’t bear the burden of the RPTT.
  1. The Council discussed, and the staff will explore varying the transfer tax rates according to the size or nature of the transaction. Thus, hypothetically, the tax might be only $5 per $10,000 sale for lower-priced homes and $15 or more for more expensive houses, commercial properties and/or industrial concerns. This approach seems fairest in that it burdens lower priced transactions less. I want to emphasize the “hypothetical” here, however – this all remains to be sorted out in the process that will unfold.
  1. So what is that process? As I mentioned, in the next several weeks the staff will get back to the Council (and public) with further reporting on options for moving forward. On July 16, there will be another Council meeting on the transfer tax and on the crucial related matter of the City amending its Charter so as to allow the tax. On August 6, the Council may vote on whether to put the two related measures – the Charter change and the RPTT – on the November ballot; the deadline for ballot submissions is August 9.

I’m seeking to summarize a lot here; I’m unavoidably leaving out even more. For instance, there may well be all sorts of exceptions to the potential RPPT rule, including intra-family transfers, division of property in case of divorce, etc. For more on this matter, keep track of future messages from Mayor Young and City Manager Giuliani, as well as postings at the City site.

And spice up your summer by circling the July 16 and August 6 Council meetings on your calendar!

[Steve Golub also blogs about U.S. politics, international developments and lessons America can learn from other countries at his site, A Promised Land, apromisedland.org]


For safe and healthy communities…