New city to rise next to San Francisco

Apparently several Big Tech billionaires in Northern California have decided to build a new city next to San Francisco. To do this, they secretly bought 52,000 acres of land in Solano County, California, through a shadow company.

Build a new city…

The latest allegations surfaced in The Post Millennial, which has been tracking a mysterious land buying spree for two months. On July 8, they noticed that a firm called Flannery Associates bought 300 parcels of land in Solano County. The Wall Street Journal reported that Flannery spent nearly $1 billion over five years buying 52,000 acres in all. A County Supervisor describes this land, near Travis Air Force Base, as “mostly dry farmland.” Which means it’s zoned for farming but doesn’t have enough water for conventional farming.

Techniques for “dry farming,” or farming without irrigation, do exist. But apparently the landowners didn’t know about them – or else simply sold out when Flannery came calling with offers many times the fair market value of their land. Why anyone would pay such exorbitant sums, was totally unclear.

But now The Post Millennial claims to have the answers. They cite The New York Times as quoting one Michael Moritz, a “venture capitalist,” as stating the purpose. Which is: to build a new city on the land, entirely from scratch. They plan to make their new city “walkable,” which probably means they would forbid automobiles downtown. They also suggest their new city could provide jobs for “thousands of people.”

Jan Sramek, 36, a former Goldman Sachs trader, is reportedly the mastermind behind Flannery Associates and has sought out investors from some of the largest names in the tech industry.

The investors are some of Silicon Valley’s most notable names, according to The Times, which include Mr. Moritz; Reid Hoffman, co-founder of LinkedIn, venture capitalist, and Democratic donor; Chris Dixon and Marc Andreessen, investors at the venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz; John and Patrick Collison, brothers who founded Stripe, a payments company; Laurene Powell Jobs, creator of the Emerson Collective; Nat Friedman, a former entrepreneur turned investor; and Laurene Powell Jobs. Another investor is Andreessen Horowitz. The amount invested by each party has not been disclosed.

Flannery Associates has taken definite steps to hide their principals. They are a Delaware LLC, and have a registered agent that is very likely an empty shell.

… and let the old one rot?

The obvious next question becomes: what is to become of San Francisco? Mick Farthing at Patriot Journal suggests San Francisco could become a ghost town. He points out that building a brand new city is “a huge risk.” That these Big Tech personalities would take it, suggests they have no interest in trying to straighten out San Francisco.

Farthing frostily speculates on the features of the charter for the new city:

Chances are, this new city will be nothing like San Francisco. These investors will not waste money building this place, just for SF’s problems to migrate over. You better believe the city’s charter will include things like punishment for crime, strict drug restrictions, and measures to prevent homelessness.

That begs the question of why those people feel they have no recourse but to build a new city on the outskirts of an old one. But it also begs the question of why they have supported policies that made San Francisco what it is today. And also whether that new charter, if they have thought that far, would be enforceable under State and federal law.

Mike Shellenberger discussed the failed status of San Francisco five months ago. In addition, Supervisor Matt Dorsey proposed amending the city charter to provide full funding for the San Francisco Police Department. Evidently his proposal fell on deaf ears. But even so, the Flannery group has been working on their new city project for five years. How different might history be, had they invested in positive change in the existing city? Or is their new city project more than meets the eye?