The Brief

In 2018, a company began quietly buying up some $900 million worth of land from farmers in Solano County, California, an area just north of the Bay Area. As the parcel ballooned to more than 60,000 acres, their motivations remained a mystery — stoking unease and speculation. Then, last year, the news broke: The land was to become a brand-new eco-friendly city, backed by a roster of Silicon Valley billionaires, and built from the top-down by a company called California Forever.

The plan was launched by Jan Sramek, a former Goldman Sachs trader and California Forever’s CEO. He said the project has three main goals: “Help solve the California housing crisis”; create a walkable metropolitan area with a high quality of life and low carbon footprint; and build a new “economic engine” for Solano County. “There’s no playbook here,” Sramek said. “What we are trying to do is really, really different.”

Before California Forever could break ground, their proposal, the East Solano Plan, needed approval from the people who already live in Solano County. Where Sramek envisioned growth, however, others warned of irreversible ecological damage. Despite launching a multimillion-dollar campaign to persuade the public to vote for the proposal in the upcoming November election, concerns continued to grow as elected officials began speaking out in opposition, and a coalition against the project formed. Local mistrust was further deepened by the company’s ongoing lawsuit against landowners who resisted their offers. In April, a poll showed that 70 percent of Solano’s voters would likely reject the measure.

On July 22, the day before the Solano County Board of Supervisors was set to decide whether to put the initiative on the November ballot, Sramek and the board agreed to retract the proposal. According to a joint statement announcing the decision, Sramek said that California Forever will try to get it on the ballot again in two years, after a report assessing the environmental impacts of the project is finished.

Other similarly minded and deep-pocketed projects have been springing up around the world. Masdar, a $20 billion planned zero-carbon city in the United Arab Emirates, has been delayed for decades and scaled back beyond recognition. Neom, the futuristic $500 billion renewable energy dream of Saudi Arabian royals, now anticipates less than a fifth of the 1.5 million residents they originally planned on. Malaysia’s Forest City, which won design awards for sustainability, has been called a ghost town. And the billionaire behind Diapers.com has big plans for Telosa somewhere in the deserts of the American West, a sprawling green energy metropolis.

These projects all seek to fulfill urban dreams of a better, environmentally friendly life by building a city from scratch. But even when the buildings exist, they fail to draw residents and, despite plans that emphasize sustainability, projects struggle to win the support of environmentalists. California Forever hopes to eventually house 400,000 people — goals comparable to those of Masdar or Neom.

“I have not seen one of this size which has been successful so far,” said Alain Bertaud, an urban planning researcher at the Marron Institute, part of New York University. “But that doesn’t mean that they will not be — there are so many in the pipeline now.”

Though Bertaud said he’s normally skeptical of proposals for these new cities, he thought California Forever’s plans looked well designed. One aspect that could help the project find success is its proximity to other Bay Area cities, he said, as the lure of the region’s job market might encourage people to move there.

But when it comes to the project’s environmental promises, he’s unconvinced — if only because it’s difficult to measure benchmarks, like carbon emissions, until a project is up and running. “I don’t doubt the dedication of people who are fighting for sustainability,” he said, “but unless you define it in a very clear way, I’m afraid that ‘sustainability’ is a self-satisfying slogan to put on whatever idea you have.”

The question of sustainability is at the heart of California Forever’s ambition and problems alike. Both backers and skeptics want to tackle the area’s housing crisis. Eye-popping rents and home prices far exceed national averages, with single-family homes going for a median price of $1.4 million. It’s one reason why the region has the third-highest homeless population behind New York City and Los Angeles.

Instead of solving these problems with a new city, California Forever’s critics would like to see more housing built in the seven cities that already exist in Solano County. “Building housing in existing communities is one of our best climate solutions, and paving over 17,000 acres of non-irrigated farmland is not,” said Sadie Wilson, director of planning and research at the Greenbelt Alliance. The nonprofit, along with the Center for Biological Diversity and the California Sierra Club, is one of the 16 groups in Solano Together, the coalition that opposes the project.

Wilson says that the development threatens both the area’s potential for storing carbon in the soil and local biodiversity, and also risks leading to more pollution from people driving to work in nearby cities. And although California Forever holds water rights that could support the first 40,000 residents, Solano Together says that these don’t accurately reflect water availability. Securing a reliable supply, they argue, would be challenging in a region so prone to drought.

By starting from scratch, however, California Forever says their plans could avoid the baggage of urban problems like car-centric design and gas utilities, making it easier to support dense housing and run on renewable power. “Our plan will be the lowest per capita carbon emissions anywhere on the planet. It’s going to be pretty transformational,” said Bronson Johnson, the company’s head of infrastructure and sustainability, who added that he’s spent years grappling with barriers to retrofit existing cities. “I think when we look at the greater good of this project, that far outweighs local impacts,” Johnson said.

But the voters need convincing. After The New York Times named many of the investors behind the project — including Reid Hoffman, a LinkedIn cofounder, and Michael Moritz, a prominent venture capitalist — in August 2023, California Forever began working to bring residents over to their side in time for the 2024 election. By May, the company had spent some $2 million on its campaign and gathered enough signatures to qualify their initiative for the ballot.

Cows graze on a parcel of land near Rio Vista located in Solano County.

(

Justin Sullivan

/

Getty Images

)

In weeks leading up to the Solano County board meeting in July, an economic report by the business-backed Bay Area Council touted the potential jobs and housing benefits, saying that the county could increase employment in high-earning sectors by 53 percent. Meanwhile, the company proposed putting a lagoon right in the middle of the new town, “open to everyone from Solano County.”

Five days before the meeting, the county released its own assessment that said the initiative lacked details on key issues, such as infrastructure funding, traffic impacts, and water supply. Many of these unknowns would be clarified by an environmental impact report required under California law, which the company had said it planned to conduct after residents voted. According to county officials, it was this omission, and the lack of a binding development agreement, that ultimately tanked the proposal.

“This politicized the entire project, made it difficult for us and our staff to work with them, and forced everyone in our community to take sides,” said Mitch Mashburn, chair of the Solano County Board of Supervisors, in the statement announcing that the plan would be put on hold. According to the statement, Sramek and Mashburn came to the decision together after agreeing that the timing of the proposal had become unrealistic.

“I want to acknowledge that many Solano residents are excited about Mr. Sramek’s optimism about a California that builds again. He is also right that we cannot solve our jobs, housing, and energy challenges if every project takes a decade or more to break ground,” Mashburn said in the statement.

Solano Together heralded the news as a win. Wilson said that even though an environmental impact report would clear up many of the coalition’s questions, especially around water supply, the location of the development still poses what she considers an intractable environmental problem. “It is a vibrant landscape that supports our food systems, our environment, our water systems,” she said.
Sarah Moser, an urban geography researcher at the University of McGill in Montreal, said it makes sense that sparsely populated agricultural lands and deserts are appealing for mega developments like the proposed East Solano Plan because they’ll encounter less opposition. But by building on undeveloped land, “by definition, you’re going to incur a carbon debt that you may never be able to pay off,” she said.

Although Moser thinks it’s logistically possible to build a city from scratch, she says that such projects are increasingly high risk, with unattainable goals. “You can make affordable housing, or you can make money, but you can’t do both,” Moser said, adding that California Forever’s for-profit model fits into a broader pattern of “rich people getting richer” in the urban mega developments she has studied.

And perhaps the most important ingredient necessary to successfully build a new city is the very thing that stands in the way: people.

The promise of a city built on ideals isn’t enough to fill it with people, Bertaud said. There has to be an existing community of people, culture, entertainment, and jobs that draw people there. It’s a chicken-or-egg problem unique to starting from scratch. “Why would you go to a city where there is nobody?” he said.

Facing growing public backlash and a pivot from his own past vetoes, Gov. Gavin Newsom signed a sweeping package of seven bills on Monday that aim to force the data center industry to pay its own way in California.

Three of the new laws shift electric infrastructure costs away from residential customers and toward data center operators, three more mandate disclosures of water usage and other resources, and the last one makes data centers ineligible for environmental review exemptions.

Newsom, in a written statement, contrasted the new regulations with President Donald Trump’s hands-off approach to data centers and artificial intelligence.

“We know that we don’t have to sell out Californians or sacrifice our well-being to innovate and succeed,” the statement read. “California has proven that time and time again. With these laws, we are ensuring that Californians remain in the driver’s seat — and that those profiting from data centers aren’t doing so at our expense.”

Trump has aggressively pushed to accelerate data center development nationwide, arguing that they represent a significant economic opportunity for states that embrace them. He said last week at the All-In Summit, an invite-only conference for business leaders, that the industry is the “oil of the next 20, 25 years.”

Newsom’s signature on the new laws represents a significant departure from his actions on data centers last year, when he vetoed a water disclosure bill over concerns that regulation could stifle AI growth and signed into law only a single stripped-down environmental study bill.

Environmental advocates and the lawmakers behind this year’s bills previously told CalMatters that intensifying public backlash to data center construction propelled the legislation this year, despite a flood of lobbying funds from Big Tech and other business interests that aimed to soften the proposals.

“When you’re looking down the barrel of public outcry that says we don’t want [data centers] at all, and you’ve got localities that are saying they’re going to ban them, then you know the atmosphere has changed,” Assemblymember Diane Papan, a San Mateo Democrat who authored two of the bills which were signed into law on Monday, previously told CalMatters.

Other state legislatures as well as Congress are also advancing new measures to regulate the industry. In May, a Gallup poll found seven in 10 Americans oppose data center construction in their communities, while a July Public Policy Institute of California poll found similar opposition statewide. Hundreds of cities nationwide — including Monterey Park and Bay Area cities like Pittsburg — have either passed data center bans or walked back approvals following public outcry.

Arnab Pal, the executive director of Deploy Action, a nonprofit that promotes clean energy, told CalMatters the new laws are a good step toward preventing data centers from harming consumers through utility rate increases or environmental damage. Still, Pal said, more can be done to ensure such projects actually benefit everyday people through advancements to the electrical grid and the acceleration of clean energy infrastructure.

“I don't think these bills are the end of this fight; I think we're gonna have to do a lot of implementation on the back end and, as other states roll out their policies next year, I think California is going to look back and be like, ‘maybe we should have done more,’” Pal said. “I'm interested to see what we do next year on this.”

Business interests that oppose the measures, like the Data Center Coalition — which counts companies like Google, Microsoft and OpenAI among its members — warn that further regulation could push the data center industry out of California. According to the latest figures from the Data Center Coalition, the industry contributed 665,500 jobs, more than $159 billion in economic activity, and $14.1 billion in federal, state, and local taxes in California in 2024.

Khara Boender, the director of government affairs west for the Data Center Coalition, told CalMatters that “the data center industry shares the goal of ensuring growth of this critical infrastructure is responsible and well managed,” but more work needs to be done “to promote responsible data center growth while maintaining California as a key, competitive market in the global economy.”

Newsom signed the following bills:

• Senate Bill 1168, SB 886 and Assembly Bill 2383, which shift electric infrastructure costs away from residential customers and toward data center operators
• AB 2469, AB 1577 and AB 2619, which mandate disclosures or estimates of water usage and other resources
• SB 887, which makes data centers ineligible for blanket environmental review exemptions, and offers fast-tracked approval for facilities that meet state standards for water and energy conservation

This article was originally published on CalMatters and was republished under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives license.

Gov. Gavin Newsom has signed a pair of bills that will create a new system for approving community college bachelor’s degrees.

Senate Bill 960 and Assembly Bill 2694, which were sent to Newsom as a two-bill package, will let community college districts create between two and 12 new bachelor’s degrees to fill local workforce needs.

The bills take effect Jan. 1, 2028, and will create a five-tiered system determining how many bachelor’s degrees each district can offer. Districts will be placed into tiers based on the percentage of students who complete a degree or certificate or transfer to a four-year university. Districts with higher graduation and transfer rates will be allowed to create more bachelor’s degrees — up to the maximum of 12.

The tiered system, which was among several last-minute amendments to the legislation, has drawn backlash from community college presidents and chancellors, who say the system will pit colleges against one another.

However, the legislation does make at least one significant change supported by the community colleges: It only prohibits degrees that duplicate CSU programs offered in the same local service area as the community college proposing the degree. In the past, duplication wasn’t tied to location, and community colleges sometimes faced duplication objections from CSU campuses located in different regions of the state.

The legislation also allows for certain circumstances when community colleges can create bachelor’s degrees even if a nearby CSU campus has a similar program. That will be permitted if the CSU program has had a transfer acceptance rate of less than 75% for three consecutive years.

It’s back!

Pasadena Humane’s popular “poorly drawn pets” fundraiser is returning for another year, and the artists are already deep into drawing as of Monday.

Here’s how it works: you’ll be asked to make a donation through this Facebook post, comment on the post with a photo of your pet, and volunteers will respond in about a day with their best attempt at your four-legged friend. If you don’t have a Facebook account, you can also participate here via email.

“There’s just one tiny disclaimer: we’re much better at caring for animals than drawing them,” Pasadena Humane shared on social media. “Some of our artists are genuinely talented. Others… well, let’s just say your pet may come out looking artistically interpreted.”

Last year, officials said the fundraiser exceeded expectations, raising around $11,000 for the shelter from more than 450 submissions. Dogs and cats are most common, but people have also sent in photos of their birds, turtles, hamsters and horses in years past.

LAist takes you inside the artists’ studio at Pasadena Humane.

Both volunteers and staff signed up to draw the pets people are submitting - for good and for bad.

(

Makenna Cramer

/

LAist

)

The table was fully stocked with markers, colored pencils, pens and sharpies to choose from.

(

Makenna Cramer

/

LAist

)

Meet the people behind the 'poorly drawn pets'

Volunteers and staff filed in and out of what’s been turned into the official drawing room Monday morning. Pens, colored pencils, markers and Sharpies were scattered all over the table in between pieces of paper and small printed photos of pets.

I asked Julie Nakahara, Pasadena Humane’s director of partnerships and events, how she would describe her artistic ability as she sketched out a lounging cat.

“That of a toddler,” Nakahara replied. “All right, maybe fourth grade.”

Her strategy was to outline the pet first in pencil before thickening the lines with a Sharpie, adding pops of color through the small details in the photo.

“[The cat’s] enjoying the sunshine, and so I tried to reflect it in my drawing,” she said. “Not sure if that's a true reflection, but I did the best I can.”

Julie Nakahara, Pasadena Humane’s director of partnerships and events, sketches out submission #49.

(

Makenna Cramer

/

LAist

)

Robbin Huntingdale, a Pasadena resident and volunteer, had a colorful, Lisa Frank-style approach to her picture of two pups.

“I kind of felt like the more I add, the more interesting it'll be, and the less you'll notice that it doesn't look like the photo,” she said to a roar of laughter in the room.

But markers seemed to be a bold choice among the artists. As Mia Dunn, chief philanthropy officer, put it: “I'm a colored pencil girl, because they can be erased.”

Some of the portraits have been turned into tattoos in years past.

(

Makenna Cramer

/

LAist

)

The artists would often share their work with the room when they were done.

(

Makenna Cramer

/

LAist

)

Some artists focused on nailing the vibe, while others narrowed in on the details.

(

Makenna Cramer

/

LAist

)

Kevin McManus, PR and communications director, was trying to do justice to the two dogs he was drawing. He said he came up with a story as he sketched, describing one dog as the older brother and the other as its young punk with a look of “what did I do wrong?”

“It's a really fun way for us to raise money for the shelter,” McManus said. “Ultimately, that's what we're here for. To raise money for the pets in our care, for the programs that we do year-round.”

The fundraiser raises money to support the shelter's work and the animals in their care.

(

Makenna Cramer

/

LAist

)

Volunteers and staff said it's a great way to give back to Pasadena Humane.

(

Makenna Cramer

/

LAist

)

This LAist reporter was also invited to get in on the artistic action.

(

Makenna Cramer

/

LAist

)

You have until 12 p.m. Wednesday to submit your pets for the fundraiser.

This story first appeared on The LA Local.

Cynthia remembers the sound of her 1-year-old daughter’s cries as she tried to desperately explain to a caseworker over the phone how the Lineage warehouse fire had affected her family financially. 

She had stopped working as a sidewalk vendor because of the unhealthy air, and her family was unsure how they would pay rent that month. 

“I felt like, I don’t know, I was going insane,” said Cynthia, who chose not to share her last name due to immigration concerns.

When the 32-year-old mother reached out to Lineage for assistance, she was told she didn’t qualify for relief, even though her East L.A. home was less than 1.5 miles away. The company said its relief was only intended “for those closest to the warehouse.” 

“We were close enough to receive the smoke and ash but not to receive aid,” she told Boyle Heights Beat. 

Cynthia is among many residents who say they were left out of assistance from Lineage because of where they live. Residents outside the established boundary say they breathed the same smoke, smelled the same stench and suffered through headaches, nausea and high utility bills as their neighbors who qualified for help.

Their question has been simple: If the air has no border, why did we? 

Cynthia holds her daughter while cooking next to her air purifier and air monitor.

(

J.W. Hendricks

/

The LA Local

)

Who qualified for Lineage assistance?

Nearly 800 homes inside a designated area were eligible for assistance from Lineage during its recovery operations, according to the company. The support included free air purifiers, masks, air conditioners, temporary housing, grocery vouchers, utility assistance and cash assistance that were often delivered door-to-door by the company. 

Earlier this month, Lineage said it had provided support to 90% of the 797 households within the designated area and spent over $3.3 million on the recovery and relief effort. Lineage CEO Greg Lehmkuhl told Boyle Heights Beat that the company had made multiple attempts to reach the remaining households.  

“Our bilingual hotline remains open,” said Lehmkuhl. “We remain committed to supporting the community.”

Lineage first presented a map outlining the area closest to the warehouse as it announced a new wave of assistance at a community town hall on July 9. 

The map was later expanded to include all 797 homes and a larger part of East L.A. after L.A. County Supervisor Hilda Solis pushed for more support, according to her office. 

Now, the map covers households located between Union Pacific Avenue and the 5 Freeway, Los Palos Street and Herbert Avenue, all less than one mile from the Lineage warehouse. 

The map with the outlined resources was presented by Lineage at an AQMD hearing on Aug. 6.

(

Courtesy of Lineage

)

Why the boundary matters

The expanded map still left out residents like Cynthia, who lives with her husband and baby just one block north of the 5 Freeway. 

But it meant residents like Joaquin Angeles, who lives near Eastman Avenue Elementary School, would qualify. 

Angeles, however, said the support has been lackluster. 

“We haven’t been given what we really need,” Angeles said.

Angeles said his family received an air purifier with no filters and a faulty air conditioner that turns off after just five minutes. He has not yet received the $200 Southern California Edison credit Lineage promised. 

On Aug. 25, more than two months after the warehouse caught fire, his family was able to move into an Airbnb for nearly three weeks. While it allowed them a chance to finally breathe and not worry about what chemicals may be lingering in the air, the support came far too late, Angeles said. 

By then, his wife and son had already racked up medical bills of more than $1,300 each for emergency room visits for shortness of breath, respiratory infections and painful skin rashes. 

“We don’t have money to spare. We’re renting and living paycheck to paycheck,” Angeles said. “Aside from the illness itself, it’s a psychological blow. You feel discriminated against; you feel like they don’t care.”

Joaquin Angeles’s wife, Aurora , shows scarring from a rash on her arm after being exposed to smoke coming from the Lineage fire at her home in East Los Angeles.

(

Isaac Ceja

/

Boyle Heights Beat

)

Who created the boundary? 

It remains unclear who initially identified the 797 homes. 

Lineage said it did not create the map. A company spokesperson said the map originated with the Boyle Heights Unified Recovery Command, a centralized body made up of city departments established to coordinate updates during the remediation process. 

The command operates under the city’s Emergency Management Department and was created at the direction of L.A. Mayor Karen Bass’ executive orders to speed up the Lineage cleanup and recovery. The Emergency Management Department did not respond to multiple inquiries about the map’s origin. 

Supervisor Solis’ office told The Beat it had no say in the original map but advocated for the area to be expanded. 

Navigating help hasn’t been easy

Residents outside the boundary have had to find alternative resources on their own. 

“The wind doesn’t have a boundary, why would you make a map?” Cynthia recalls asking herself as she navigated long lines at city and county resource centers.

City and county agencies initially offered temporary shelters, air purifiers and masks, and later added mobile health clinics, grocery gift cards and resource centers in Boyle Heights and East L.A. But residents also reported being turned away at distribution sites depending on whether they lived in Boyle Heights or unincorporated East L.A. 

A resident picks up air purifiers from a pop-up resource center in Boyle Heights on July 13, 2026.

(

Isaac Ceja

/

Boyle Heights Beat

)

Many often turned to nonprofit organizations already working in the community.

In her search, Cynthia managed to secure an air purifier from InnerCity Struggle, a $500 prepaid Visa card from El Centro de Ayuda and had her July rent covered by Proyecto Pastoral. She bought a $250 air conditioner to manage the unbearable summer heat and a $300 personal air monitor to track the air quality outside her home. 

Others haven’t been so lucky. 

Maria Duran, a Boyle Heights resident who lives outside Lineage’s assistance boundary, said she called 311 to receive an air purifier but was told they had run out. She later learned Proyecto Pastoral had stopped accepting applications for rent and utility assistance because of a waitlist of more than 1,500 people. 

“We are all being harmed. I feel frustrated. I feel down,” Duran said. 

Three months after the fire, Duran is struggling to pay a utility bill that nearly tripled over the summer. She continues to deal with stubborn eye irritation that has disrupted her daily life. 

Cynthia bought an air purifier following the Lineage fire.

(

J.W. Hendricks

/

The LA Local

)

Nonprofits have been unable to keep up with the demand

Angela Gutierrez, a community organizing coordinator at Proyecto Pastoral, says the demand for relief reflects the scale of the disaster. 

Gutierrez lives about one mile from Lineage and said she was also frustrated that she didn’t qualify for assistance from the company. 

“To me, it was like we were abandoned because of our ZIP codes,” Gutierrez said. “But for Proyecto — for me — there is no ZIP code. To me, everyone is equal. The help is the same.”

Proyecto Pastoral received about 1,500 requests for assistance before closing its application in the wake of the fire. The organization helped cover rent and utility bills for residents living primarily within a 3-mile radius of Lineage, with emergency funds extending to families living as far as Monterey Park. Its fire relief funds were exhausted last week.

“It makes me sad and angry, because people were affected by the fire — and it wasn’t just in the immediate area,” Gutierrez said. 

Cynthia holds her daughter’s hand in her home.

(

J.W. Hendricks

/

The LA Local

)

Is more help on its way?

Lineage said it remains committed to providing resources to the roughly 80 households that have not yet received assistance. 

“We’ve been working for weeks to make sure that we support everybody in this area that the county and city determined were impacted,” Lehmkuhl said. 

The company did not indicate whether it planned to expand its assistance boundary. 

District 14 Councilmember Ysabel Jurado is pushing for additional funding for the Lineage fire recovery. On Wednesday, the L.A. City Council approved a motion to explore creating a fund of up to $10 million to support the affected community. 

For residents like Cynthia, the need is urgent. She is already behind on rent and is using a credit card to pay for basic necessities.

In unincorporated East L.A., Angeles said more should be done to help the families affected. 

“It is not asking for a favor; it is simply asking for justice,” he said. 

Correction, Sep. 21, 2026 4:49 pm: This story was updated at 4:48 p.m. on Sept. 21, 2026, to clarify that Proyecto Pastoral received about 1,500 requests for fire assistance. An earlier version incorrectly stated that the organization had helped cover rent and utility bills to 1,500 people