Solano supervisors get detailed briefing on targeted general plan update; Measure T, housing, ag protections and infrastructure top priorities

Solano County staff on Item 27 presented a framed scope for a targeted update of the county’s 2008 general plan and sought direction on key priorities including economic development in unincorporated areas, housing strategy, utility and infrastructure planning, and agricultural protections.

James Musick, director of the Department of Resource Management, said the general plan “is the comprehensive policy document” that serves as the county’s legal framework for growth, development and resource management and that staff is proposing a targeted update rather than a full rewrite. Musick asked the board to identify priorities staff should emphasize in the Request for Proposals (RFP) for consulting assistance and in early public outreach.

Why it matters: The general plan shapes land use, zoning consistency, and infrastructure decisions that affect housing, local jobs, farmland protection and the county’s fiscal position for decades. Board members and many speakers said they want updates that protect farmland while creating revenue‑generating economic opportunities and affordable housing, and they emphasized that public utilities and water/sewer capacity are central constraints.

What staff presented and board discussion

- Priorities and policy areas: Staff proposed concentrating on economic development (including targeted sites in Interstate‑80 corridor and northeast Dixon service area), housing (partnering with cities on a regional strategy and exploring workforce housing in unincorporated areas), utilities (a countywide infrastructure/utility master plan), parks and open space, and strengthened agricultural protections. The staff presentation tied these items back to the 2008 general plan goals and to Measure T (the county’s voter‑adopted orderly growth initiative).

- Measure T and agricultural protections: Staff and public commenters repeatedly referenced Measure T (the voter initiative that extends certain development limits on agricultural lands through Dec. 31, 2028) and the county’s right‑to‑farm provisions. Staff noted Measure T currently allows two residences per legal agricultural parcel and does not apply after annexation into a city. Several public speakers urged the board to place an extension of Measure T on a future ballot and to consider a short‑term administrative extension if necessary to avoid a lapse while the update proceeds.

- Spheres of influence and annexations: Staff showed that about 31,361 acres currently sit within adopted city spheres of influence and that pending city proposals (including Dixon and Suisun plans) could add roughly 28,000 additional acres to areas of interest; those expansions would increase pressure on agricultural lands if pursued. The presentation contrasted the county’s city‑center growth policy with recent annexations and asked the board whether to prioritize infill and city‑coordinated approaches or to identify targeted unincorporated sites for county‑led economic development.

- Housing and RHNA context: Staff summarized state housing obligations (RHNA) and local permit activity: roughly 13,000 housing units are approved for construction within the cities and about 26,210 units are in active applications — a combined pipeline that staff said could produce tens of thousands of units over the next decade if projects proceed. Board members emphasized the need for targeted strategies to produce housing affordable to lower‑income households and suggested developer incentives, accessory dwelling units (ADUs) policy changes and transit‑oriented density near hubs as tools.

- Utilities and infrastructure: Supervisors and staff said utilities — water, sewer and broadband — are central constraints. Staff recommended advancing a utility master plan and continuing studies started under the county’s SALT (Solano Agricultural Land and Technology) planning grant, and they identified package treatment plants and other non‑municipal systems as potential solutions for certain rural development types.

- SALT grant and agricultural economic development: Staff noted a $500,000 Department of Conservation SALT planning grant to study agricultural viability and recommended that the grant’s findings inform the general plan’s agricultural chapter, zoning revisions and ag‑economic development options.

Board direction and next steps

Board members and staff agreed on several procedural directions: staff will continue preparing an RFP for a targeted general‑plan update and public outreach, continue working with city managers to schedule a county‑city summit, and explore forming an ad hoc board committee to provide focused input on RFP language and outreach strategy. Supervisor Williams and others urged hiring or consulting with an economic‑development expert to help craft revenue‑generating and fiscally viable strategies.

Public comment and stakeholder input

Residents, ag stakeholders and public‑interest speakers urged preservation of prime farmland, incorporation of Measure T protections into any update, and expanded green‑belt or conservation‑easement strategies. The Farm Bureau and local vintners asked staff to consider agritourism and ag‑innovation uses that can coexist with working farmland. Multiple callers asked the board to place Measure T renewal before voters, noting the December 2028 expiration date.

Ending: Staff will return with an RFP and a proposed public‑engagement plan and expects to bring consultant recommendations and a detailed work plan to the board in subsequent meetings. The transcript records board consensus to advance a targeted update with additional technical studies (infrastructure, ag viability, housing tools) and further outreach to cities and stakeholders, but no formal motion or binding timetable for final adoption was recorded during this hearing.