Mystery company has methodically spent $1B to purchase all the land surround Travis AFB (Sacramento: house, buyers)

[WouldLoveTo]

I just looked up the Vermont one from a few years ago - sounds similar but a different guy.

Can anyone fill out that survey?

https://savingplaces.org/stories/sto...-vermont-towns

[Vision67]

A California Land Mystery Is Solved. Now the Political Fight Begins.

Tech industry investors spent roughly $900 million buying land to build a dream city in a rural part of the Bay Area. It could be years, though, before they can do anything with it.

free link:

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/29/b...smid=url-share

"In a state where land politics are so difficult it can take years to build a duplex, it could be a decade of process before a shovel is even lifted for the project.

That kind of timeline will most likely test the patience of investors — including the venture capitalists Michael Moritz, Marc Andreessen and Chris Dixon, as well as Reid Hoffman, the LinkedIn co-founder, venture capitalist and Democratic donor, and Laurene Powell Jobs, founder of the Emerson Collective — who are used to the fast and lightly regulated world of technology.

First up, in all likelihood, is an election. Solano County has a longstanding slow-growth ordinance that county voters would probably have to override before any major building could begin."

[DiffuseGlow]

Originally Posted by Vision67

That kind of timeline will most likely test the patience of investors — including the venture capitalists Michael Moritz, Marc Andreessen and Chris Dixon, as well as Reid Hoffman, the LinkedIn co-founder, venture capitalist and Democratic donor, and Laurene Powell Jobs, founder of the Emerson Collective — who are used to the fast and lightly regulated world of technology.

So, these are the individuals attempting to bankrupt citizens who sold them their land, by suing them after the fact and alleging they "colluded" to lowball them on pricing? Unbelievable.

[MechAndy]

Just the extreme left elites doing what they do.

[2sleepy]

It doesn't make much sense. I'm very familiar with that area, it's not very attractive or popular. There are some ugly tract homes there, mostly built in the 80's. Housing prices are lower in that part of Solano County than in places like Green Valley which are very desirable. I'm baffled.

[18Montclair]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

It doesn't make much sense. I'm very familiar with that area, it's not very attractive or popular. There are some ugly tract homes there, mostly built in the 80's. Housing prices are lower in that part of Solano County than in places like Green Valley which are very desirable. I'm baffled.

Well, apparently they arent trying to duplicate what's already there, but in fact, build an entirely new city(?)

I am extremely interested to see if this is actually going to help the current housing crisis, or if it is nothing more than a new office park with a bunch of expensive condos.

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by joosoon

There's nothing that indicates the purchasers intend to "surround a military base". Nor is it true farmers are being threatened. On the contrary, as that NYT article points out, this project is making millionaires out of them. But I do agree that it's funny that anyone who assumed the worst when this first became a story, is somehow relieved by the revelation that 'benevolent techies' are behind the corporation.

Of course some of the farmers are being threatened. The firm doing the buying decided they paid too much for the land and are suing them to recover the money

...Garamendi said he’s been in contact with the families of farmers who handed over their land to Flannery. He said they didn’t want to sell in the first place. Since no California laws require them to sell, the land was bargained for by both parties at a much higher price. But now, Flannery is suing those families for $510 million, accusing them of conspiring together to inflate the value of the land. It’s a suit designed to force the farmers to lawyer up, spend tens of thousands of dollars on lawyering and maybe at the end of the day, bankrupt themselves,” Garamendi said. “In fact, that has happened to at least one family that I know of and I’ve heard rumors that another family simply said we can’t afford the lawyers.” https://www.kron4.com/news/national/...gressman-says/

[2sleepy]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

Well, apparently they arent trying to duplicate what's already there, but in fact, build an entirely new city(?)

I am extremely interested to see if this is actually going to help the current housing crisis, or if it is nothing more than a new office park with a bunch of expensive condos.

I have no idea, it makes no sense, there is a lot of open land in Solano County where they could have bought land cheaper and in a better area.

[joosoon]

Originally Posted by 2sleepy

Of course some of the farmers are being threatened. The firm doing the buying decided they paid too much for the land and are suing them to recover the money

I'm well aware of the lawsuits since I'm the one who first mentioned them here. Lawsuits aren't equivalent to threats though.
And these so-called "threats" are literally based on rumor. Read that quote from Giaramendi again: "In fact, that has happened to at least one family that I know of and I’ve heard rumors that another family...". That's hardly "in fact" at all --quite the opposite.


I can find no links to the actual complaints though, can you? It's easy to dismiss the lawsuits as trivial without actually seeing the details. What we do know based on reporting, is the already inflated $5k/acre price ballooned to $20k/acre as things progressed. Based on nothing else, I'd wager that the buyers wouldn't have sued if they didn't think the complaint wasn't at least superficially valid.

[joosoon]

Originally Posted by 18Montclair

I am extremely interested to see if this is actually going to help the current housing crisis, or if it is nothing more than a new office park with a bunch of expensive condos.

Given the scant details of the land deals mentioned in that NYT piece, it doesn't sound like the intention is to build out every square inch of the property.



For instance:
"In November 2018, the company sent offers to “most landowners in this area,” the lawsuit said, and included incentives such as allowing sellers to retain income from wind turbines, as well as stay on the properties rent-free under long-term lease-back agreements. Over the five years, the company purchased some 140 properties from 400 owners, the lawsuit said."