Déjà Vu in New Towns: Irvine’s Past, California Forever’s Present

For Mike Stockstill, co-author with Pike Oliver of two books about the transformation of the Irvine Ranch in Orange County, CA, sharing a stage with California Forever CEO Jan Sramek at a recent Calmatters dinner event in Sacramento felt like a profound exercise in déjà vu. Listening to the modern, tech-backed ambitions for Solano County, CA, Stockstill couldn't help but reflect on the 21st-century planning debates and see the exact ghost of Irvine’s past.

Conceived sixty years apart, the two New Towns–one almost complete, the other working toward a groundbreaking–show striking parallels in regulatory and governance issues.

Irvine, in the center of Orange County, transformed from a plan into reality beginning in 1960, when environmental laws and regulations were still being established. Now a city of about 320,000 residents, Irvine has largely fulfilled the vision of William Pereira, Ray Watson, Donald Bren, and hundreds of citizens who have overseen its growth.

California Forever is the dream of an energetic CEO, working with a phalanx of engineers, planners, and development experts, and backed by high-tech investors. It holds nearly 70,000 acres of open land in Solano County at the northeast edge of the San Francisco Bay Area. Reflecting new technologies, the continuing quest for walkable communities, and a large dose of open space to balance higher housing densities and huge manufacturing and shipbuilding centers, California Forever seeks to become the second large-scale New Town in the state since Irvine.

It is the political history of Irvine’s birth that has Stockstill asking whether, as Yogi Berra said, “it is déjà vu all over again,” because some of the issues the Solano County project faces are eerily similar to what Irvine confronted more than half a century earlier.

County/City Issues

Irvine’s path to incorporation was first interrupted by the city of Santa Ana, the largest in Orange County at that time. Motivated by a desire to be recognized as the leading municipality, its leaders were concerned that a new city with a major economic engine (two major employment centers offering modern amenities and access to the county airport) would overshadow the aging county seat.

Santa Ana embarked on an audacious annexation proposal that would have sent a 300-foot strip of the city eight miles south to annex a retirement community, effectively bisecting the center of the Irvine Ranch. A bureaucratic rule stopped the proposal.

California Forever has proposed building adjacent to Suisun City and annexing its new city into the existing one as a major part of its strategy. And like Irvine’s experience, the County of Solano is attempting to delay, defer, or halt the California Forever/Suisun City alliance and annexation effort.

Back in the early 1970s, the Orange County Supervisors made a last-minute political maneuver intended to thwart the incorporation of the City of Irvine. On a Friday, the Board of Supervisors abruptly voted to replace a member of the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) with one expected to vote against Irvine's cityhood. Recognizing the imminent threat, attorneys backing the Irvine incorporation spent the entire weekend furiously drafting emergency legal filings to halt the tactical replacement. At 8:00 AM the following Monday, the legal team successfully served a lawsuit at the county administration building. The legal maneuver blocked the swap, preserving the commission's integrity and allowing the incorporation process to proceed.

Additionally, Irvine's history provides another striking parallel to modern events in Solano County. The City of Newport Beach once encroached on commercial properties intended to provide Irvine's foundational tax base. Similarly, the City of Rio Vista is now actively trying to block Suisun City from annexing the California Forever property—driven by concerns over regional infrastructure and perception of negative impacts on future tax revenues.

Not In My Back Yarders and Others

The area that became the City of Irvine had just 18,000 residents when a citizen committee sprang up to organize incorporation. While many residents supported the concept, a group called Irvine Tomorrow was opposed. Many of the Irvine Tomorrow members had come to the new town because of the University of California's new campus. Others were suspicious of the influence of the giant landowner that was developing the first homes and businesses in the area. Irvine Tomorrow split the difference in the incorporation election by opposing incorporation but endorsing candidates for the city council, two of whom were elected.

In Solano County, the opposition to California Forever is centered in two groups: California ForNever and Solano Together. Both groups focus on the same vocabulary of opposition, citing concerns about transportation, water quality, loss of open space, and potential taxpayer burdens. It has not helped that initial opposition from the city of Fairfield and some federal elected officials prompted California Forever to pivot from a countywide vote to a potential alliance with Suisun City.

Outcomes

The Irvine Company was the dominant landowner in Orange County in 1960. Although the county was rapidly evolving into a new political dynamic, the economic and social influence of the Irvine Company was significant and would grow as it expanded its business from agriculture to land development. California Forever enjoys a similar economic profile, with backers who command billions of dollars. Their challenge: how patient are they willing to be to overcome the political and environmental opposition they face?