The Billionaire Bypass: When Tech Titans Hire Politicians to Sideline Democracy and Environment

The Core Facts: A New City and a New Tactic

The article from CalMatters details the latest maneuver in a protracted effort by a consortium of tech billionaires operating as ‘California Forever.’ Their goal is to transform a vast, underdeveloped tract of Solano County into a new city comparable in scale to Cleveland. Having faced obstacles for a decade, the group has now adopted a new strategy: deploying political heavyweights to grease the legislative wheels. They have enlisted former California Senate President Darrell Steinberg and former Senate Majority Leader Bob Hertzberg, both Democrats with extensive backgrounds in environmental law, to advocate on their behalf in the state legislature. Their specific aim is to secure expedited environmental reviews for their ambitious plans.

The current proposal focuses on initially establishing a manufacturing hub near Suisun City, with the intention of having that community annex the land California Forever has already acquired. This approach seeks to leverage Suisun City’s existing industrial zoning and infrastructure plans, a move proponents argue could dramatically accelerate development and unlock ‘billions of dollars of investments and tens of thousands of jobs.’ Steinberg’s justification for bypassing standard environmental scrutiny is framed as a matter of economic urgency: ‘The state and county need the ability to say yes now to these numerous opportunities.‘

The Context: A Clash of Visions for California’s Future

This proposal does not exist in a vacuum. It sits at the volatile intersection of California’s chronic housing and economic needs and its hard-won environmental protections. The targeted area is part of the Bay Area’s outer greenbelt, lands long eyed for preservation by environmental advocates who are now mobilizing against what they perceive as a direct threat. The political context is equally charged. The article juxtaposes this development story with other critical California issues: a federal push to restrict mail-in voting, the underfunding of programs to revitalize aging mobile home parks, and the ongoing homelessness crisis. This contrast highlights a state grappling with foundational questions of equity, access, and who gets to decide its future.

The individuals named—Steinberg, Hertzberg, and Suisun City Councilmember Princess Washington—represent the poles of this debate. The former senators embody the influence of entrenched political capital now deployed for a private venture. Councilmember Washington voices the practical, local government skepticism, noting the unprecedented speed sought is ‘unheard of.’ This dynamic sets the stage for a profound conflict over process, power, and principle.

Opinion: A Subversion of Process and a Betrayal of Public Trust

The hiring of Steinberg and Hertzberg is not merely savvy lobbying; it is a deeply cynical act that corrodes the foundations of democratic governance and environmental justice. These are not just any lobbyists; they are architects of California’s legislative environment, men who helped craft the very laws they are now paid to circumvent. Their argument—that the state must say ‘yes now’—is a classic trope of coercive urgency, one used throughout history to justify short-circuiting public deliberation for private gain. It suggests that democratic process, environmental review, and community input are luxuries we cannot afford, rather than the essential safeguards of a free society.

This effort represents a fundamental assault on the rule of law. California’s Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and related statutes were established through democratic struggle to ensure that development considers its full impact on ecosystems, traffic, water, and communities. They are tools of transparency and accountability. To hire former legislative leaders to engineer ‘expedited reviews’ is to treat these laws as mere bureaucratic hurdles to be dismantled by well-connected fixers, rather than as expressions of the public will. It creates a two-tiered system: one set of rules for ordinary citizens and developers, and a fast-track, politically-mediated process for the ultra-wealthy and well-connected. This is the antithesis of equal protection under the law.

The Dangerous Precedent: Wealth Purchasing Policy

Beyond the specific plot of land in Solano County, this case sets a horrifying precedent. It signals that in modern America, sufficiently concentrated wealth can literally rent the political legitimacy of former statesmen to alter the legal landscape in its favor. Steinberg and Hertzberg bring with them the aura of public service and environmental credentials, which California Forever is explicitly purchasing to greenwash a process aimed at minimizing green review. This commodification of political capital undermines public faith in all institutions. If the stewards of our environmental laws can be hired to argue against their full application for a client, what principle is inviolable?

The proponents’ promise of jobs and investment is a seductive but dangerous bargain. It is the same bargain offered by despots and oligarchs everywhere: trade your rights, your voice, and your environment for economic security. A free and democratic society must reject this false choice. We can have economic development and environmental stewardship and democratic process, but only if we insist that the process is fair, transparent, and applied equally. Expediting reviews for one project because its backers have hired the right people inherently disadvantages every other project, community, or citizen group that lacks such resources.

Upholding Institutions in the Face of Expediency

Councilmember Princess Washington’s simple observation cuts to the heart of the matter: the desired speed is ‘unheard of.’ It is unheard of because the rules were designed to prevent exactly this kind of rushed, politically-driven decision-making. The environmental advocates working to protect the greenbelt are not obstructionists; they are defenders of a system meant to ensure thoughtful, long-term planning.

The linked stories in the article provide a stark backdrop. While billionaires lobby to build a new city from scratch, the state’s program to repair dilapidated mobile home parks—a crucial source of affordable housing—is running out of money. While they seek special legislative treatment, the federal government is attempting to unilaterally restrict voting access. These parallels are not coincidental; they are symptoms of a broader crisis where concentrated power seeks to reshape society by bending or breaking the rules that govern everyone else.

In conclusion, the California Forever project, through its latest tactical pivot, has transcended a mere real estate dispute. It has become a case study in the threat posed to democratic republics when extreme wealth merges with insider political influence to override established law. The defense of our environmental protections and our democratic processes are one and the same fight. It is a fight for the principle that the law is supreme, not the bank account; that the public good is defined through open debate, not closed-door deals; and that the legacy we leave in our land and our institutions is more important than the speed with which we can pour concrete. The response must be a firm, principled, and vocal insistence that in California, and in America, the rules apply to everyone—even tech billionaires with former Senate presidents on retainer. Our liberty and our landscape depend on it.