Rio Vista council directs staff to explore annexation talks over California Forever land

Rio Vista’s City Council voted unanimously on March 4 to direct staff to explore annexation discussions over a portion of land owned by California Forever, following a lengthy presentation from City Manager Christina Miller and extended public comment.

City Manager Christina Miller told the council the East Solano plan proposed by California Forever would be a 17,500-acre new community adjacent to Rio Vista and could eventually include as many as 400,000 residents at full build-out. Miller said staff is not asking the council to approve annexation tonight but requested direction on whether the city wants to pursue a position that would allow it to negotiate terms, protect sales tax and water supplies, and seek mitigation for traffic and other impacts.

Miller outlined two options: actively explore annexation and conduct a municipal services review, environmental review and negotiation process (which would require consultant support and potential reimbursement agreements); or refrain from engaging directly, which she said would limit staff workload but risk loss of local control and potential impacts without corresponding revenue.

The presentation prompted detailed council questions about the general plan, the sphere-of-influence and LAFCO standards, the timing and likely cost of the first-phase studies, and whether developer-funded reimbursement agreements were practical. Miller and staff said the process would be lengthy, require third-party consultants, and include multiple public hearings and LAFCO review.

Public speakers were deeply divided. Dozens of residents and local business owners urged the council to pursue discussions and protect Rio Vista’s interests, citing potential jobs, housing and infrastructure improvements. Several speakers — including members of the Dutra family, local business owners and younger residents — emphasized keeping the city’s North Waterfront zoned for industrial uses and said being part of negotiations could secure community benefits. Other residents, environmental advocates and longtime ranching families urged caution or opposed annexation, warning of loss of farmland, impacts to vernal-pool habitat and water-supply concerns.

After hearing public comment, the councilors debated defensive and proactive rationales for participation. Council members said they preferred to retain negotiation leverage rather than cede influence to neighboring cities. Mayor Edwin Okamura moved and the council seconded a motion to direct staff to explore annexation of an undefined portion of California Forever–owned land; the motion also asked staff to consider protections for buffers such as the Montezuma Hills. The motion passed unanimously.

Next steps, as described by Miller, include scoping and budgeting for a municipal services review, consideration of consultant contracts and potential development-reimbursement agreements to offset staff costs. Any future annexation would require LAFCO approval, updates to Rio Vista’s general plan and extensive environmental review under CEQA.

The council’s action is procedural direction to staff to begin evaluations and negotiations; it does not itself annex land or alter zoning. Council members and staff emphasized that further steps would return to the council for formal approval and that residents would have multiple opportunities for input during the process.