California Forever's 2026 Sacramento push closes without a bill. The Suisun City stakes: EIR, LAFCO, and a 2027 retry.

In late May 2026, the Suisun City Council voted to sell seven downtown waterfront parcels to California Forever for approximately $1.14 million. California Forever is the Silicon Valley-backed development group that has accumulated more than 50,000 acres of eastern Solano County farmland over the past several years. The purchase covers a few blocks near the waterfront. The project behind it is a different scale entirely.

The bigger bet: 22,873 acres and a city of 400,000

California Forever is pursuing a proposal to annex approximately 22,873 acres of its eastern Solano land into Suisun City — land that sits adjacent to Travis Air Force Base. The plan envisions new neighborhoods, commercial areas, open space, and roughly 1,400 acres of industrial park, with a buffer zone protecting Travis AFB operations. About a quarter of the annexed acreage would be set aside for that buffer. The proposed population at full build-out: 400,000 people — which would make this one of the largest proposed city expansions in California’s modern history.

How the money works

Under the agreement the city has signed, California Forever pays an initial $400,000, with a $10 million payment contingent on LAFCO — the county’s Local Agency Formation Commission — ultimately approving the annexation. The downtown property purchase is a separate transaction, framed by California Forever as investment in the existing waterfront independent of the larger annexation talks.

When this actually becomes housing

An Environmental Impact Report is currently being prepared, with completion expected by end of 2026. After that, the LAFCO process takes an estimated six to 18 months. A best-case scenario puts the earliest construction start at late 2027 or 2028. This is not a near-term housing supply story for Solano County. It is a long-horizon land use story — the kind that moves land values slowly, then suddenly.

Community reaction: divided

The public opinion picture is contested — and two polls that ran simultaneously in early 2026 tell very different stories. An FM3 Research poll of 400 Suisun City residents, commissioned by the Greenbelt Alliance (which opposes the project), found 58 percent opposed to the expansion. A Fulcrum Strategy Group poll of 800 likely Solano County voters, commissioned by California Forever itself, found 51 percent initially in support, rising to 59 percent after a brief description of the project was provided. Both polls were reported in mid-April 2026 by the Press Democrat and the Daily Republic. The gap reflects different geographies (Suisun City voters versus the broader county electorate), different sample sizes, different question framing, and opposing commissioning parties. A poll that rises after "more information" is provided also raises questions about the framing of that information. Neither number should be taken at face value — but together they confirm that this project is genuinely contested. Activists have called for a direct public vote on the expansion plan, while some waterfront business owners see the California Forever investment as long-overdue economic activity in an underbuilt downtown.

What changed since May: LAFCO pumps the brakes

Two developments since the downtown parcel sale have complicated the road forward. Solano County's LAFCO — which must approve any annexation petition — has asked Suisun City to pause its process while the county updates its own General Plan. The county board is not supportive of the California Forever project, and LAFCO is composed of county-appointed members; a pause request at this stage signals the environmental and regulatory tracks are not running in parallel as smoothly as proponents hoped. Separately, Rio Vista's mayor publicly broke with Suisun City's approach in May 2026, arguing that California Forever's annexation should have been directed to Rio Vista instead. Inter-city politics are now a live variable in the LAFCO calculus. The draft EIR — which received 616 pages of public comment from 38 individuals and organizations raising concerns about water supply, traffic, and regional biodiversity — has not been released for final public review as of early June 2026.

One political question resolved: the recall didn't make the ballot

After the council voted to explore the California Forever annexation, opponents organized a recall campaign targeting all five Suisun City council members — Mayor Alma Hernandez and the four colleagues who backed the process. Recall notices were served in mid-2025, giving organizers 160 days to collect the signatures needed to force a ballot election. By the February 17, 2026 deadline, no signatures had been submitted. Organizers acknowledged they came up "a few hundred signatures short of our goal." The council remains intact as of mid-2026. Whatever one thinks of the project, that removes one near-term variable: the elected officials who entered the annexation agreement are the ones who will carry it — or kill it — through the rest of this process.

What it means for Solano real estate right now

For buyers and owners in Solano County, there are two timescales to track. In the near term, this project has no direct effect on supply or prices — the EIR isn’t finished, LAFCO hasn’t acted, and no home will be framed for years. But for investors evaluating land or long-hold properties in eastern Solano — especially near the proposed annexation area or Travis AFB — the context has shifted. Land pricing eventually catches up to approved development expectations. The time to understand that geography is before the LAFCO vote, not after.

One more Solano data point: in late May, the Vallejo City Council unanimously approved increasing the unit count at the Fairview at Northgate mixed-use development — anchored by an incoming Costco at Admiral Callaghan Lane — from 178 to 245 homes. The Costco ribbon-cutting is expected this fall; home construction starts 2027.

The EIR isn’t done. LAFCO hasn’t voted. But money is already moving — and now so are lobbyists.

June 2026: California Forever takes the fight to Sacramento

The most significant new development in this story has nothing to do with Suisun City’s planning department or the LAFCO review track. According to the Sierra Club Redwood Chapter — which opposes the project — and a June 2026 opinion column in the Daily Republic, California Forever’s lobbyists are working in Sacramento to secure a CEQA exemption covering an estimated 19,000 of the 22,873 acres in the Suisun City annexation footprint. The most likely mechanism, critics say: a last-minute budget rider bill, using the same approach that created CEQA exemptions for advanced manufacturing projects in 2025. Opposition groups also warn the proposed legislation could remove both Solano County’s and LAFCO’s authority to make decisions on the annexation.

Both reporting sources are organized opponents of the project — read their framing accordingly. But the fact that California Forever’s lobbyists are active in Sacramento is documented, and the structural logic is real: a March 2026 analysis by California City News, headlined "Did Suisun City Just Create a Loophole for the ‘California Forever’ Project?", traced how the Suisun City annexation path already moves the project from county jurisdiction to city jurisdiction — bypassing the Solano County voter approval that current county law would otherwise require. If the Sacramento legislation passes, the multi-year EIR timeline and the LAFCO opposition-controlled board become irrelevant. If it fails before the state budget deadline, the existing track is still the path — with all the same obstacles.

Meanwhile, the project itself advanced earlier in 2026. California Forever filed a final, more-than-250-page annexation application to Suisun City on October 3, 2025 — including a fire protection plan and proposed amendments to Suisun City’s general plan — and the Suisun City Council approved a further reimbursement agreement with California Forever in early 2026, despite explicit pushback from Solano County officials. Activists separately filed to place an advisory vote on the November 2026 ballot asking Solano County voters to weigh in on the expansion plan.

Late June 2026: California Forever hires Democratic power brokers — and the specific ask is on the record

On June 25, 2026, CalMatters and Capital Radio / PBS KVIE reported that California Forever has placed two of Sacramento’s most prominent Democratic dealmakers on its payroll as special counsel: Darrell Steinberg, the former Senate President Pro Tem, close Newsom ally, and former Sacramento mayor — and Bob Hertzberg, the former Assembly Speaker. Both had been involved informally before being officially brought onto the payroll.

For the first time, California Forever’s specific legislative requests are publicly on the record, stated directly by Steinberg and Hertzberg to CalMatters. The company wants Sacramento to do three specific things: (1) allow the project to use an existing 18-year-old environmental impact report for the Mare Island shipyard area, rather than completing a new full CEQA review; (2) cap any legal challenges to the project at 270 days, via a designation as an "environmental leadership development project" — a mechanism Steinberg himself wrote into state law in 2013; and (3) authorize Suisun City to proceed with annexing California Forever’s land if the city approves it. The budget-rider theory floated by opposition groups does not appear to be the primary mechanism: the Steinberg 2013 statute can be invoked independently of the budget process.

The project’s pitch has continued to evolve. What began as a proposal for a walkable residential city with cottages and bike lanes has expanded to include large-scale shipbuilding — timed to federal investment in American maritime capacity and Congressman Garamendi’s SHIPS Act — and now includes a significant manufacturing hub component as well. The shipbuilding angle appears central to the Sacramento strategy: connecting the project to federal economic priorities provides political cover that a residential development alone never could.

June 29: Newsom signs the budget — no California Forever provision included

Governor Newsom signed the 2026-27 California state budget on June 29, 2026 — one day after the CalMatters story broke about the lobbyist hiring. No California Forever provision appeared in the signed budget or its trailer bills. The specific legislative vehicles the team was working toward — a governor designation as an ‘environmental leadership development project,’ authorization for Suisun City’s annexation, and reuse of an 18-year-old EIR — were not attached to the budget. The immediate Sacramento window closed without a deal.

July 2026: The condition, the Texas threat, and what’s next

As of July 2, 2026, the Sacramento push continues — but with a significant condition. Steinberg and Hertzberg have stated they will push for legislation only after California Forever first secures a signed lease with a manufacturer or shipbuilder. That lease has not been announced publicly. On June 25, California Forever also added two former Newsom administration aides to its team, deepening its Sacramento influence network beyond Steinberg and Hertzberg.

The urgency behind the push has sharpened with a concrete competitive threat. Saronic Technologies — a drone-ship defense company with more than $400 million in Navy contracts, backed in part by Marc Andreessen (whose firm also invested in California Forever) — is reportedly being offered $3.2 billion in Texas incentives to build its shipyard in Brownsville rather than Solano County. A trades and labor coalition has written to Newsom and legislative leaders requesting state tax incentives to compete with Texas. California Forever’s pitch has now explicitly reframed: this is less about a residential city and more about not losing strategic manufacturing capacity to another state.

Saronic has formally named the California site ’Port Alpha’ — a facility the company envisions producing autonomous vessels more than 1,000 feet long, with production potentially beginning as early as 2028. The company’s engagement with the California location goes beyond lobbying: Bay Nature reported in June 2026 that Saronic brought Suisun City’s mayor and city manager to tour its Louisiana facilities — and had both officials sign non-disclosure agreements about the trip before it took place. The NDA requirement signals that Saronic treats its site-selection deliberations as commercially sensitive. An in-person trip by top Suisun City officials, under NDA, to Saronic’s existing facilities is the most concrete evidence to date that California is a live option for the company — not merely a negotiating chip against Texas.

Meanwhile, Solano County’s LAFCO — still controlled by county appointees who have opposed the project — has invited Suisun City to participate in a county General Plan summit scheduled for August 2026. Whether Suisun City participates, and what that summit produces, is the next local milestone to watch. The EIR and LAFCO tracks are running on a very different timeline than the Sacramento lobbying effort.

July 8, 2026: Suisun City receives EIR briefing — public comment window approaching

At the July 8, 2026 Suisun City Council meeting, officials received a status update on the environmental impact report for California Forever’s proposed annexation. The Press Democrat reported the EIR is nearing completion. California Forever CEO Jan Sramek had previously said the document would exceed 12,000 pages — one of the largest EIRs ever prepared for a California annexation. Once the draft EIR is released, it enters a mandatory 60-day public comment period, after which Suisun City will respond to comments and schedule public hearings before the LAFCO process can formally advance. No public release date has been announced.

My read for clients: the Sacramento team is now larger, the urgency is real, and the Texas threat gives California Forever a political argument that residential development alone could never make. But the condition — sign a lease first, legislation follows — means the next catalyst is a Saronic-or-equivalent deal announcement, not a Sacramento vote. Nothing about that changes the near-term Solano County real estate picture for buyers and sellers today. For anyone evaluating land or a long-hold position in eastern Solano — especially near Travis AFB or within the annexation footprint — this is still the conversation to have before the outcome is known, not after. Call me and I’ll walk through what each scenario means for the specific property you’re looking at.

July 16, 2026: Saronic picks Texas — the shipbuilding anchor is gone

On July 16, 2026, Saronic Technologies formally announced the Port of Brownsville, Texas as the site for its $3.2 billion Port Alpha shipyard — ending its California site evaluation after a 17-state search. Cameron County approved $211 million in tax abatements (a 95% abatement over 20 years), and the deal is projected to create more than 10,000 direct jobs. Construction at Port Alpha is slated to begin in 2026, with operations starting in 2028.

California Forever and the trades and labor coalition issued a joint statement that read in part: ’Out of 17 states, California had easily the best site and was one of two finalists for the 10,000 job opportunity, but local and state government leaders did not pass the legislation in time.’ The coalition is calling for Sacramento to pass a summer legislative trailer bill.

Easily the best site. One of two finalists. Still lost — because the legislation wasn’t ready.

The residential annexation track — EIR, LAFCO, Suisun City council — continues on its own timeline. Saronic’s Texas announcement doesn’t directly change where that process stands. But the political argument that made Sacramento pay attention (lose this to Texas) is harder to make without a named tenant. California Forever says it is continuing to pursue other shipbuilding and manufacturing tenants for the industrial acreage.

My read for clients: Saronic choosing Texas is a done fact, not a threat anymore. The near-term Solano County market — buying, selling, pricing — is not changed by this. But for anyone evaluating land or a long-hold position in eastern Solano, the scenario analysis is different today than it was a week ago. The next catalyst for the Sacramento track is either a new signed-tenant announcement or a trailer bill — neither runs on a real estate calendar. Call me and I’ll give you a straight read on what it means for the specific parcel you’re looking at.

July 23, 2026: Newsom’s economic office formally backs the Solano Shipyard and Foundry

On July 23, 2026, California’s Governor’s Office of Business and Economic Development (GO-Biz) sent a formal memo to the Solano County Board of Supervisors and state elected officials backing two California Forever projects by name: the Solano Shipyard and a newly named proposal, the Solano Foundry Manufacturing Park. GO-Biz Director Dee Dee Myers described both as "projects of statewide significance and the kind of transformational opportunity California should fight for and win." The memo was reported by the Press Democrat and the Daily Republic on July 27, 2026.

The GO-Biz memo is significant because it is the closest the Newsom administration has come to a direct endorsement — GO-Biz is the governor’s economic development arm. But Governor Newsom himself has not issued a personal endorsement of the project. Myers’ framing emphasized interagency cooperation: "Winning this competition will require collaboration among state and local government, labor, business, educational institutions, community organizations, and private investors." That language pointedly includes the Solano County Board of Supervisors, whose opposition has been one of the primary obstacles to the project’s LAFCO path. Whether the memo changes the county board’s posture — or simply signals that Sacramento is prepared to act around it — is the open question.

The introduction of a second named project — the Solano Foundry Manufacturing Park — is the other new data point. California Forever lost Saronic as a potential shipbuilding anchor on July 16. Publicly naming a separate manufacturing park component, alongside the shipyard, suggests the company is actively rebranding the industrial acreage for a broader range of heavy manufacturers rather than treating the Saronic loss as a dead end.

My read for clients: The GO-Biz memo shifts the political signal one step closer to a state endorsement — but it isn’t one yet, and it doesn’t change the EIR or LAFCO timeline. The near-term Solano County market for buyers and sellers is unchanged. For anyone evaluating land or a long-hold position in eastern Solano, the scenario set is broader than it was a month ago: the shipbuilding anchor is gone, a foundry park is named, and the governor’s economic office is publicly in the conversation. Call me and I’ll give you a straight read on what it means for the specific parcel you’re looking at.

August 4, 2026: California Forever links Solano Shipyard jobs to housing streamlining

On August 4, 2026, California Forever published a blog post titled "Solano Shipyard and Solano Foundry will not work without homes" — covered the same day by both the Press Democrat and the Daily Republic. The company made explicit what had been implicit since the Saronic loss: it will not commit to bringing large-scale industrial jobs to the region without the residential elements of the Suisun Expansion Specific Plan being streamlined and approved alongside them. California Forever stated that "no company will site a large shipbuilding or manufacturing facility in a region" without long-term workforce housing nearby.

The post drew a sharp line between two positions. Some elected officials, California Forever acknowledged, have voiced support for a faster permitting pathway for the Solano Shipyard and the existing Lambie Industrial Park — but not for the Suisun Expansion residential component. California Forever’s public answer: those cannot be separated. "Approving a bigger project allows private capital to step in and fund the infrastructure that makes an employment-generating industrial site viable." The residential plan, in other words, is not an add-on to the industrial pitch — it is the financial foundation the company says makes the industrial pitch viable.

The timing is notable. California Forever’s blog post arrived during the window when Solano County’s LAFCO had scheduled a General Plan summit with Suisun City — a summit where the county board, which has opposed the California Forever project, is the convening authority. Whether the county’s LAFCO members read this post as a principled argument or as leverage will shape what comes out of that summit. The EIR and LAFCO tracks are unchanged; this is a political argument, not a permitting event.

My read for clients: The GO-Biz memo (July 23) and this California Forever blog post (August 4) together define the political moment: the governor’s economic arm and the developer are both publicly arguing that the housing and industrial sites are one package. That argument will be stress-tested at the LAFCO General Plan summit and in any remaining window for a summer legislative trailer bill. The near-term Solano County market for buyers and sellers is unchanged by this. For anyone evaluating land or a long-hold position in eastern Solano, the next catalysts to watch are the LAFCO summit outcome, any new industrial tenant announcement, and Sacramento’s fall session. Call me if you want a straight read on what this means for the specific property you’re looking at.

August 2026: LAFCO summit postponed; 55-org coalition letter; Sacramento clock runs to August 31

Three developments arrived in the first week of August that together define where this fight stands as the legislature’s summer session enters its final weeks.

First: the Solano County LAFCO General Plan summit — which California Forever’s August 4 blog post had anticipated as an upcoming milestone — was postponed. According to California Local, the county’s Chief Administrative Officer agreed to the postponement at the request of Solano County city managers. No new date has been set. The summit was the primary formal venue where Suisun City would have engaged with the county board on planning alignment; its postponement extends the standoff between city and county leadership.

Second: on August 5, 2026, the Suisun City Council and Planning Commission held a joint session. The Press Democrat reported the meeting was routine in nature — the city is still awaiting California Forever’s promised Main Street infill proposal, which the company had committed to as a show of good faith investment in the existing downtown before the larger annexation moves forward.

Third: Solano Together — a coalition of 55 organizations including environmental groups, farm advocates, and civic organizations — sent a formal letter to Sacramento legislators opposing trailer bill provisions that would bypass LAFCO authority or streamline environmental review for the California Forever project. The letter targets the specific legislative mechanisms Steinberg and Hertzberg have been seeking. CalMatters identified the California Forever trailer bill push as one of five key items to watch in the legislature’s remaining days before the August 31 adjournment deadline.

The lobbying context: California Forever has reported spending approximately $455,000 on California lobbying since the start of 2025, per state disclosure filings. As of August 9, 2026, no trailer bill language has been introduced. The legislature’s clock runs out on August 31.

My read for clients: The summer legislative window is now measured in weeks, not months. Whether a trailer bill appears before August 31 — or doesn’t — is the most immediate catalyst for this story. The LAFCO and EIR tracks continue unchanged. For buyers and sellers in Solano County today, nothing on the ground has shifted. For anyone holding or evaluating a long-position in eastern Solano, August 31 is the next hard date to watch. Call me if you want a straight read on what any specific outcome means for the property you’re looking at.

Late July 2026: Governor's office convenes Solano stakeholders; no bill introduced yet

California Forever's Sacramento push received a significant signal in late July: Dee Dee Myers, who heads the Governor's Office of Business and Economic Development (GO-Biz), convened a meeting with California Forever representatives, a pair of Solano County supervisors, and the two state legislators who represent the region — Assemblymember Lori Wilson and Sen. Christopher Cabaldon. The meeting was reported by CalMatters and Capital Radio on August 3, 2026, as part of coverage identifying the California Forever trailer bill push as one of five key legislative deals to watch before the August 31 deadline.

As of August 16, no trailer bill language has been publicly introduced. The 55-organization Solano Together coalition, which sent a formal letter to Sacramento legislators opposing any bypass of LAFCO authority or environmental review, continues to oppose the legislation. California Forever is publicly urging lawmakers to act before the session ends. The legislature's fiscal committees completed their last meeting on August 14; any remaining path for California Forever legislation now runs through floor session only, which began August 17. The clock: 13 days.

My read for clients: the governor's economic development office is now directly convening the parties — that's a meaningful escalation beyond GO-Biz memos. Whether it produces legislation before August 31 is still unknown. What is not changing: the near-term Solano County real estate market for buyers and sellers today. For anyone evaluating land or a long-hold position in eastern Solano, August 31 is the hard date to watch. Call me if you want a straight read on what any specific outcome means for the property you're looking at.

August 19, 2026: Newsom's office circulates a draft EIR proposal

With 11 days remaining before the legislature's August 31 adjournment deadline, CalMatters reported on August 19, 2026 that Newsom's office has circulated a draft legislative proposal that would allow California Forever to rely on a 2008 environmental impact report for its proposed shipyard. That 2008 EIR designated approximately 1,305 acres along the Delta shore for water-dependent industrial usage — the footprint where the shipyard would sit. Most of California Forever's broader planned development area does not carry that designation. The draft proposal also includes a 270-day environmental review process — a faster timeline than standard CEQA review, and consistent with the Steinberg-authored 'environmental leadership development project' mechanism that has been part of the company's Sacramento ask since June 2026.

This is the closest thing to a Newsom office legislative proposal that has been publicly reported. As of August 23, no bill has been formally introduced and the governor has not personally endorsed the project. The draft represents a live proposal in circulation among legislators — not a law, and not yet a bill number. The 55-organization Solano Together coalition continues to oppose any legislation that would bypass CEQA review or LAFCO authority. California Forever reported spending $150,000 on California lobbying between January and July 2026 in state disclosure filings — a figure that does not include the fees for Steinberg, Hertzberg, and other outside consultants.

My read for clients: a Newsom office draft is the furthest this story has moved in Sacramento — but a draft isn't a bill, a bill isn't a vote, and a vote before August 31 is far from certain. The clock is at 8 days. For the near-term Solano County real estate market, nothing on the ground has changed. For anyone evaluating land or a long-hold position in eastern Solano: if the legislature adjourns without acting, the EIR and LAFCO tracks continue as before; if legislation passes, the scenario set changes significantly. Call me and I'll give you a straight read on what any outcome means for the specific property you're looking at.

August 24, 2026: Wilson and Cabaldon announce the Solano Maritime and Manufacturing Act

With six days left before the legislature's August 31 adjournment, The Real Deal reported on August 24 that California state legislators are poised to advance a shipyard bill. Assemblymember Lori Wilson (D-Suisun City) and Sen. Christopher Cabaldon (D-West Sacramento) — the two legislators who represent the region and who participated in the GO-Biz stakeholder meeting in July — announced plans to introduce the Solano Maritime and Manufacturing Act. The legislation would designate a 1,350-acre waterfront site in the Collinsville area of Solano County as a maritime industrial zone with the intent of building a major shipyard, citing the national urgency of reviving domestic naval and commercial shipbuilding capacity. No bill number has been publicly assigned as of August 25.

The scope of the legislation is significant — and limited. Multiple outlets reporting on the announcement confirm the bill would cover only the Collinsville shipyard site and would not advance the residential component of California Forever's larger Suisun Expansion plan, nor the proposed 2,100-acre Solano Foundry manufacturing park. California Forever has repeatedly stated that the housing and industrial components are inseparable — that no major employer will site a facility in a region without workforce housing. Whether the company treats a shipyard-only bill as sufficient progress to support, or views it as an insufficient half-measure, is not yet clear. The 55-organization Solano Together coalition, which has opposed any legislation bypassing LAFCO or environmental review, continues to oppose the California Forever legislative push.

My read for clients: the announcement of shipyard-specific legislation six days before adjournment is the most concrete legislative move yet — but it covers only the industrial site, leaving the residential question California Forever says is non-negotiable unresolved. Watch for whether the bill clears the floor before August 31 and, if so, what California Forever's response to a shipyard-only outcome turns out to be. For near-term Solano County buyers and sellers, nothing on the ground has changed today. For anyone evaluating land or a long-hold position in eastern Solano, August 31 remains the hard date to watch — and the scenario set is now materially different than it was a week ago. Call me if you want a straight read on what any outcome means for the property you're looking at.

August 25, 2026: Solano County Board votes 3-2 to oppose — the bill is dead for this year

One day after the Solano Maritime and Manufacturing Act was announced, the Solano County Board of Supervisors voted 3-2 to formally oppose it — a surprise reversal reported by CalMatters and Capital Radio as effectively killing the legislation for this year. County staff acknowledged the effort had originated from the governor's office.

Supervisor Mitch Mashburn cast one of the deciding votes against the proposal, saying the legislation was "being pushed through too quickly" and left too many unresolved concerns — particularly around environmental oversight and outreach to labor unions and tribal nations. Two supervisors — Cassandra James and Wanda Williams — voted in support and said they want to revisit the legislation in 2027.

The proposed legislation would have exempted approximately 1,350 acres along the Sacramento-San Joaquin River Delta from California's environmental quality law for maritime and manufacturing uses — the framework Steinberg and Hertzberg had been pursuing in Sacramento since June. Without county support and with the legislature's August 31 adjournment deadline days away, the bill's Sacramento path has closed for 2026. The governor's office, which led summer discussions on the legislation, took a direct blow.

The Sacramento window closed. The EIR and LAFCO tracks continue — on their own timeline.

August 29, 2026: Sramek keeps pushing — new job and revenue claims to county staff

Four days after the Solano County Board's 3-2 vote, California Forever CEO Jan Sramek sent an August 29 email to Solano County staff arguing that special legislation was still needed before the legislative session adjourns. In the email, Sramek claimed the combined shipyard and advanced manufacturing projects would create 530,000 jobs statewide and contribute $4 billion annually in state revenue and $3 billion annually to local governments — California Forever's own projections, not independently verified estimates. CalMatters reported the email as part of a multi-front pressure campaign that included emails, phone calls, and texts to county officials. California Forever has reported spending $455,000 on California lobbying since the start of 2025, with $120,000 devoted specifically to shipbuilding. The legislature adjourns August 31 — tomorrow. No bill has been formally introduced.

My read for clients: Sramek's email keeping the push alive tells you the company is not treating the county vote as final — but the legislative calendar is. The California Legislature adjourned August 31, 2026, with no bill number ever publicly assigned to the Solano Maritime and Manufacturing Act. The EIR and LAFCO tracks — the local permitting path that was always running in parallel — continue on their own timeline, unaffected by what happened in Sacramento this summer. For buyers and sellers in Solano County today, nothing on the ground has changed. For anyone holding or evaluating a long position in eastern Solano, the next catalysts to watch are a new industrial tenant announcement, the release of the 12,000-page draft EIR once it's complete, and whether the legislature revisits shipyard legislation in 2027. Call me if you want a straight read on what any of this means for the specific property you're looking at.

August 31, 2026: Legislature adjourns — no bill, no bill number, the 2026 window is closed

The California Legislature adjourned on August 31, 2026 without passing the Solano Maritime and Manufacturing Act or any legislation related to California Forever. No bill number was ever publicly assigned. The 2026 Sacramento window — which California Forever opened in June with the hiring of Darrell Steinberg and Bob Hertzberg, pushed through summer with a Newsom office draft proposal circulating in August, and came closest to the floor when Wilson and Cabaldon announced the Solano Maritime and Manufacturing Act on August 24 — closed without a vote. The Solano County Board's 3-2 opposition vote on August 25 was the decisive blow; it removed the county support that Sacramento needed to advance the legislation in its final days.

The EIR and LAFCO tracks continue on their own timeline. The draft environmental impact report for the 22,873-acre Suisun City annexation — expected to exceed 12,000 pages — has not yet been publicly released as of September 1, 2026. Once released, it enters a mandatory 60-day public comment period before hearings and the LAFCO process can advance. Two supervisors who voted in favor of the Solano Maritime and Manufacturing Act — Cassandra James and Wanda Williams — said publicly they want to revisit the legislation in 2027. California Forever has said it continues to pursue other industrial tenants for the shipyard and Solano Foundry sites. For buyers and sellers in Solano County today, nothing on the ground has changed from last week. For anyone holding or evaluating a long position in eastern Solano, the next hard dates to watch are the draft EIR release and whether California Forever can name a new industrial tenant before the 2027 legislative session opens. Call me if you want a straight read on what the closed Sacramento window means for the specific property you're looking at.

September 1, 2026: California Forever acquires 701 Main Street and Suisun City landmarks for $1.5 million

While the Sacramento legislative window was closing, California Forever completed a separate concrete step in Suisun City: on September 1, 2026, Suisun City officially closed the first phase of its downtown property sale to California Forever, transferring ownership of the long-vacant 701 Main Street building — originally a bank, most recently a restaurant — along with two adjacent parking lots, the historic Lawler House, and the shuttered Suisun Harbor Theatre (both dark since the 2010s) for a total of $1.5 million. As part of the deal, Suisun City leases the two parking lots back from California Forever for $1 per year, continuing to operate them for public use. The transaction is a direct real estate purchase, a separate track from both the 22,873-acre annexation petition and the now-closed Sacramento legislative push — it puts California Forever in control of prominent historic downtown Suisun City buildings regardless of how the LAFCO process ultimately resolves.

My read for clients: California Forever continues to invest in Suisun City's actual real estate even after the Sacramento window closed. The 701 Main Street acquisition signals the company is not waiting for regulatory victories to plant its flag in downtown. What California Forever does with these historic buildings will be one of the earliest visible signs of what its presence actually looks like on the ground in Suisun City. Nothing about this changes the near-term Solano County market for buyers and sellers. For anyone tracking the broader California Forever story — and what it means for your property in eastern Solano — this is one more thread to watch. Call me.

September 17, 2026: EIR still unreleased — the waiting game continues

As of September 17, 2026, the draft environmental impact report for California Forever's proposed 22,873-acre Suisun City annexation has not been publicly released. The EIR was projected to be completed by the end of 2026; once released, it will enter a mandatory 60-day public comment period before hearings and the LAFCO process can formally advance. Two supervisors who voted in support of the Solano Maritime and Manufacturing Act in August — Cassandra James and Wanda Williams — have said publicly they want to revisit shipyard-enabling legislation in 2027. The 2026 Sacramento window is closed. The EIR and LAFCO tracks remain the only active path forward.

My read for clients: the story is in a quiet phase — no new bill, no EIR release, no named industrial tenant. Buyers and sellers in Solano County today are transacting on today's fundamentals, not California Forever's future scenarios. For anyone with a long-horizon interest in eastern Solano — whether that's a development parcel, a farmhouse in the annexation footprint, or a rental near Travis AFB — the next hard catalysts are the EIR public release and the 2027 legislative calendar. When either arrives, the conversation will move fast. I stay current on this so you don't have to. Call me when you're ready to run the numbers.

October 15, 2026: EIR still unreleased — no California Forever measure on the November 3 ballot

As of October 15, 2026, the draft environmental impact report for California Forever's proposed 22,873-acre Suisun City annexation has not been publicly released. The November 3, 2026 Solano County general election is 19 days away. No California Forever advisory measure appears on the November 3 Solano County ballot. (In spring 2026, residents urged the Board of Supervisors to place an advisory question before countywide voters; no such measure was placed.) The November 3 ballot in Solano County includes local tax and bond measures — Fairfield Measure P, Vacaville Measure V, Rio Vista Measure O, county Measures E and H, Benicia Measures X, Y and Z, and the District 4 Board of Supervisors race between Mike Silva and John Carli — but not a vote on the California Forever expansion. The EIR completion remains projected for end of 2026. Once released, it enters a mandatory 60-day public comment period before the LAFCO formal process can advance. The next hard catalysts remain the same: EIR public release and whether California Forever can name a new industrial tenant ahead of the 2027 legislative session.