The Corporate Siege of Solano County: How 'California Forever' Threatens Democratic Governance

The Facts: A Pressure Campaign Against Local Government

The story unfolding in Solano County, California, is a stark case study in how concentrated corporate power, wrapped in the banner of economic development, can wage a sustained assault on local democratic institutions. According to detailed reporting by CalMatters, California Forever—a company founded by Czech-born entrepreneur Jan Sramek and backed by Silicon Valley billionaires—has spent years and over $1 billion acquiring nearly 70,000 acres in the county. Its vision has evolved from a new city of 400,000 to include a major manufacturing hub and a state-of-the-art shipyard.

However, the pursuit of this vision has been characterized not by collaboration, but by coercion. Newly obtained public records reveal a pattern of aggressive, high-pressure tactics aimed at county officials. The core narrative centers on September 2025, when California Forever, citing an imminent opportunity with defense contractor Saronic Technologies, demanded that the Solano County Board of Supervisors endorse special state legislation to fast-track environmental review for a shipyard. Company representatives, led by Director of Partnerships Michael Fortney, gave county staff an ultimatum: support unseen legislation immediately or be responsible for losing “10,000+ jobs” and a “$3bn investment.”

Emails show county staff, including then-Administrator Bill Emlen and Assistant Administrator Ian Goldberg, pushed back, stating “this is not the way to make public policy” and refusing to meet on three hours’ notice to review a first-ever draft. Despite this, after a whirlwind of lobbying, polls, and accusations of “slowwalking,” supervisors were presented with amended legislation just hours before a critical vote. Supervisor Mitch Mashburn captured the essence of the forced choice, stating he had to “throw up in my mouth a little bit and swallow that” to vote yes, believing it was the only way to retain a semblance of a voice in a process Sacramento might otherwise force upon them. The board reluctantly approved a bill they had barely read.

Now, in the final weeks of the current legislative session, the pressure campaign has resumed. Governor Gavin Newsom’s office is circulating a new proposal to streamline the shipyard, and California Forever is pushing to expand that fast-tracking to its advanced manufacturing hub and new city. The company has hired former Democratic legislative leaders Darrell Steinberg and Bob Hertzberg as counsel and reported significant lobbying spending. Local governments are divided, with Suisun City Manager Bret Prebula seeing annexation as a financial lifeline, while Rio Vista Mayor Edwin Okamura feels sidelined and concerned. The underlying dynamic remains: a well-funded private entity creating artificial urgency to bypass standard regulatory and democratic checks.

The Context: A Familiar Playbook of Coercive “Opportunity”

The context here is critical. Solano County has the Bay Area’s highest unemployment rate and has lost major employers. This economic vulnerability is the lever California Forever consistently pulls. Their argument is simple and potent: delay equals denial, and denial equals betrayal of the community’s economic future. They frame any request for due process, careful review, or public dialogue as bureaucratic foot-dragging that kills jobs. As Fortney wrote in an email, “when 10,000 jobs are at stake, I think everyone in this community should give 150% until the clock runs out.”

This creates a perverse incentive structure for elected officials. Opposing a rushed process can be politically framed as opposing jobs and investment. California Forever amplified this pressure with a text poll showing early support for the shipyard, which Fortney then cited in communications with supervisors as “overwhelming support.” The strategy, as noted by critics like former Supervisor Duane Kromm and Suisun City Councilmember Princess Washington, is to force a binary, immediate choice, giving the rushing party a decisive advantage. It is governance by ultimatum.

Opinion: This is an Affront to Democratic Principles and the Rule of Law

The events in Solano County are not merely a contentious development dispute; they represent a fundamental challenge to the principles of democratic governance, local autonomy, and the rule of law. The tactics employed by California Forever are corrosive and unacceptable in a society that values liberty and accountable government.

First, the deliberate creation of false urgency to truncate democratic deliberation is an authoritarian tactic. Democratic processes are inherently deliberative. They require time for analysis, public input, and reasoned debate. By tying a massive, complex project to a fleeting legislative deadline and a specific contractor’s timeline, California Forever seeks to replace deliberation with diktat. As Supervisor Monica Brown admonished the company, “There is a process.” That process exists for a reason: to prevent costly mistakes, to incorporate community wisdom, to assess environmental impacts, and to ensure development serves the public good, not just private profit. Dismantling that process under threat is a surrender of sovereignty.

Second, the campaign of public blame and intimidation against non-partisan county staff is a direct attack on the professional civil service that underpins effective government. Accusing staff of presenting “excuse after excuse,” being “the sole party… delaying this,” and bearing “responsibility” for lost jobs is not advocacy; it is bullying. It seeks to politicize and undermine the experts tasked with impartially evaluating proposals for the Board’s consideration. When staff cannot perform their duties without fear of being publicly scapegoated by a deep-pocketed corporation, the integrity of the entire system crumbles.

Third, the entire episode exposes the dangerous fallacy of “economic development at any cost.” California Forever’s vision promises jobs and revenue—goals any community desires. But a commitment to liberty and democracy demands we ask: at what cost? The cost here is the systematic devaluation of local voice, environmental stewardship, and transparent governance. The company’s own statement admits that the amendments supervisors painstakingly secured—amendments that preserved some local control and environmental review—would have rendered the project unattractive to shipbuilders. This reveals the true objective: not a collaborative project that meets California’s standards, but a project that requires California’s standards to be waived.

The involvement of the Governor’s office and the deployment of former legislative heavyweights like Steinberg and Hertzberg deepen the concern. It suggests a state-level end-run around local opposition, where corporate access can shape legislation in private meetings. While Governor Newsom’s spokesperson casts this as being “pro-jobs and pro-building housing,” true leadership must also be pro-process, pro-community, and pro-law. Expediting permits is one thing; creating special legal zones with truncated judicial review for a single, connected developer is another.

Conclusion: A Line Must Be Drawn for the Soul of Our Communities

The saga of California Forever is a warning siren for every community in America. It is a blueprint for how wealthy, determined interests can leverage economic anxiety to short-circuit democracy. Solano County supervisors, in a moment of profound discomfort, voted to maintain a shred of influence. But the pressure has only intensified.

To stand for democracy is to stand for the messy, slow, and sometimes frustrating processes that protect the minority from the majority and the public from the powerful. It is to believe that the people of Solano County, through their elected representatives and established planning procedures, are capable of deciding their own future without corporate countdown clocks ticking in their ears.

The individuals involved—Jan Sramek, Michael Fortney, the county staff who resisted, the supervisors who felt cornered—are actors in a larger drama about who governs. The principles at stake are eternal: consent of the governed, accountability of power, and the supremacy of law over money. California Forever’s vision of a city on a hill will be forever tainted if its foundation is built on the bulldozed rubble of democratic norms. The time for deliberate, unpressured, and transparent decision-making is not “next year”; it is now. Any project that cannot withstand the light of full public scrutiny and the test of time does not deserve to shape California’s future.