Foreign LLC continues to acquire land in California critical to energy and national defense.

FAIRFIELD, Calif. (KGO) – The United States Air Force is investigating a company that’s purchased $800 million of land near Travis Air Force Base, one of the most critical military bases in the U.S. But after eight months of investigation, government officials have been unable to identify who’s behind it nor rule out any threat to national security.

Flannery LLC was founded 4 and 1/2 years ago and was registered to a Washington DC-based law firm.

There is no information about the actual ownership of this LLC. The previous Reddit thread from 4 years ago has some interesting tidbits of information that you may be interested in reading in addition to the new article.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Sacramento/comments/c96bkb/a_mysterious_corporation_has_quietly_bought/

What’s additionally interesting is that the land that they acquired around Travis Air Force Base will be bayfront property with future sea level increases of between 3 to 5 ft. NOAA has predicted the sea level increase will blow by that with a 7.2 ft average global sea level rise by 2100.

So either we have a secretive Chinese back shell company acquiring critical infrastructure and land for spying on American military assets, or a very optimistic wealthy investor with way too much money and is getting creative in what kind of investment schemes they park their money in.

  • Chetzemoka@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    1 year ago

    Oh, so NOW the feds have a problem with secret corporate ownership.

    Maybe let’s do something to limit the onshore tax havens in Delaware, Wyoming, Nevada…

    • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      I used to work near the Davis-Montham Air Force Base down in Tucson. Worked with a couple of guys who were Air Force maintenance tax during the weekends and they worked with me during the weekdays. I used to drive right through the boneyard on my way to work.

      Anyways, they used to black out the Air Base on a regular basis when they were landing various top secret or black project aircraft. These included drones as well as maybe stealth aircraft. So, even though this was visible from the highway they were still operating secretive aircraft into and out of that base.

      My favorite aircraft that they landed that I saw while driving by one day was watching an x-47 Pegasus land. That was a surreal experience and I only figured out what aircraft it was a few months ago! I saw one of those land back in 2002.

    • marmo7ade@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, this is sheer and utter bullshit motivated by “special interests” who want to buy the land for themselves at pennies on the dollar.

      The buyer is paying 2x the market rate for this land.

  • Mic_Check_One_Two@reddthat.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    If Travis AFB is truly that concerned about it, why haven’t they simply bought the land instead? It’s the military; We all know they have literal billions of dollars to waste. Instead of complaining about some mystery investor purchasing the land, why not purchase it yourselves and incorporate it into the AFB?

    • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      The military isn’t just allowed to buy up land willy nilly without oversight and direction from civilian officials. Do you remember when Clinton closed hundreds and thousands of military sites back in the '90s?

      So they don’t really get to decide on basic expansions solely within the military. And generally speaking, the military doesn’t spend unnecessary money to expand military bases and provide a buffer zone around land that isn’t used for bombing ranges and whatnot. Travis appears to be just a typical Air Force air base with a couple of runways.

      However, these articles point toward other very shady acts going on including the proposed 400 ft tall observation Tower to oversee the airbase. Why would a farming operation or a land investor want an observation tower to overlook an Air Force Base?

      Last year 300 acres of farmland were purchased near Minot Air Force Base in North Dakota. Garamendi called it a '“spy base.”

      “That base is where we launch our airplanes to figure out what’s going on across the world,” he said. “A company in China was acquiring land around that base and wanted to build a 400-foot silo that could look directly into the base… and we were like ‘whoa, whoa, whoa, what’s going on there?’”

      So this company is not just buying up land around one military base, they’re doing it at several. As well as land along energy distribution corridors for the Pacific Northwest to California which is very strange. None of this land is very valuable, so why are they spending 10 times market value to acquire it?

      • stinky613@lemmy.sdf.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        The 400ft tall silo was near Minot Air Force Base in North Dakota and was known to be owned by a company from China

        None of that has any tie to the company that bought land near Travis AFB

        • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.eeOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I see, thank you for correcting me. It does look like these two entities purchasing land are separate, although it is not impossible for them to both be funded by China.

        • Entropywins@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah I’d be a bit concerned of something around minot afb myself… used to be stationed there back in the early 2000’s

          • stinky613@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yeah a 400ft tall silo overlooking Minot AFB is concerning. It also has nothing to do with OPs article about Travis AFB

            China does enough shady shit that we don’t need baseless accusations being thrown around

      • Overzeetop@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I suppose the best option would be to decide to expand the fan, condemn the land, and take it over using eminent domain for assessed value on the tax records.

  • Can_you_change_your_username@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Quick somebody find a way to link this to China so we can get the GOP to start yelling about limiting foreign investment in US real estate. With a little luck we might can wrangle this into something that will lower the cost of housing.

        • agitatedpotato@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          If you allow land to be turned into an investment opportunity why would anyone whos got that kind of money put a regular house there and sell it when they could just make it a permanent investment at the cost of other people not being able to buy houses to live in.

        • KaiReeve@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          This is the real issue right here. It’s more than just Airbnb’s, though, it’s all ‘investment real estate’.

          The solution would be to exponentially increase taxes for those who own multiple properties, but property tax is typically handled on the county level, so this would be tricky. Also, the people who could implement such a tax all own multiple properties, so there’s a conflict of interest there.

      • OminousOrange@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Canada is struggling with this at the moment. It’s a great idea on paper, but our development style is unsustainable and we simply can’t keep up with demand. Not to mention that build costs are up 50% since 2020.

        Affordable, efficient housing that is close to amenities is what is needed, but supplying that is quite unlikely given build costs and North America’s infatuation with the suburb.

        • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yeah none of that is true. We are nowhere near the limit of how fast we can build and build cost go up when mother fucking office workers are “working” remotely. My company caught one of our reps lying about doing a site walk. Also burbs are everywhere. Might as well call rice Japanese Grain while you are at it, but what do I know. Not like I was quite literally in Frankfurt Germany this month and saw them.

  • LordOfTheChia@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    9
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Others have pointed out that the purchased land is predicted to remain farmable when other regions in California become too dry to farm.

    However, them suing landowners for not selling points to either extreme greed or a project that may necessitate having a contiguous portion of land.

    • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Really? Most of this land looks like it is marginal land that is not very productive for anything. It’s very low lying, around 0 to 1 ft above sea level and much of that area is actually tidal flats protected by dikes from the bay.

      I’ve driven around the bay before, and there’s a lot of shitty land around it that’s basically not used for anything. I wouldn’t even want to own a house along that area because it will be underwater within 20 or 30 years anyways.

    • LordOfTheChia@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      The company isn’t a mystery, however the ownership, leadership, and investors of the company are unknown.

      Only the lawyers are known so far.

  • Duder167@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I always hear the old lady from Beavis and butthead do America when I hear the name Travis

  • chaogomu@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Travis isn’t even the best base in California to spy on. Beale AFB is just up the road and has more interesting shit.

  • Butters@lemmywinks.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    Even with 7.2 ft of sea level rise, is that really going to make something as far inland as Travis AFB beachfront property? I assume it’s elevation is greater than 8 ft.

    • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.eeOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      It’s not actually. It’s practically at sea level right now, the whole area is protected by dikes. The whole Sacramento Delta is basically at sea level.

      • Ech@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Oooh, time to bring up a weird CA history thing I know - Sacramento and most of central CA is in what’s essentially a giant flood basin, and it’s flooded before! In 1862, there was a massive deluge in the state that more or less turned the center of CA into another Great Lake of the US. It also happened even worse in 1605 apparently, so everyone’s mostly wondering at what point will it happen again. Or maybe the sea will just swoop in and claim the great bowl of CA for itself.

    • redtea@lemmygrad.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not if Cuba bought the land to blast out “Havana Laugh Tracks: Top 100 Havana Syndrome Beats”.

        • dogslayeggs@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          A) If another country is sponsoring the buying of property surrounding a military base of another country, that is world news in my mind.

          B) If you are just complaining about this being US specific, then what news would in your mind be “world” news? Would news about India count, or is that India specific?

  • markr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    So the only options are Bad China Bad! or somebody anticipating ocean front real estate in 80 years?

    See false dichotomies for Your Fallacy.

    • Zron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ah yes. The mystery company buying land right next to Air Force bases and key electrical infrastructure should definitely just be ignored.

      Surely they could have no other motivation besides farming on their incredibly overpriced land that they purchased in extremely specific areas.

      • laylawashere44@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        False Dichotomy again. The options aren’t to ignore or not ignore. OP is simply suggesting that there might be a much simpler less sinister reason.

          • markr@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Why does one require an advantage? An advantage over what?

            Uttering fallacies, if intentional, is an effort to persuade with deliberate disregard for the truth. Why would one do that?

            • Zron@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Its basic logic.

              The US has political and economic competition in the globe, and, for some reason, allows those competitors to purchase land in the US.

              An unidentified entity is purchasing huge amounts of land for well above market price near important military and civilian infrastructure.

              Which is more practical, to assume an enemy is doing enemy things and attempting to spy on/sabotage you, or to assume everything is 100% innocent.

              I would much rather myself and my government assume the former until proven otherwise, as assuming the latter only has negative outcomes.