UPDATE: No Deal Reached Between Morning View & Dixon Landowners, Says Carissa Carpenter

Morning View is now negotiating with the county to split the film studio project between two swaths of land.


UPDATE: Thursday has passed and no agreement was reached between Morning View and the remaining Dixon landowners, according to Chairperson Carissa Carpenter. As we explain below, Morning View says they will now pursue Solano County, which means the studio would be built on two separate sites. 

ORIGINAL STORY: Morning View has agreed to terms for the purchase of 265 acres worth of land in Dixon, but they need 300 acres to begin making purchases and starting construction, and now they've reached a snag. 

That's according to the company's chairperson, Carissa Carpenter, who left a voice message with Dixon Patch Monday evening. 

"We have not come to terms" with the other three landowners, said Carpenter. "We can't keep raising the price (of the land). We've put a deadline for Thursday for them to accept." 

Carpenter said that if no agreements are reached before Thursday, Morning View will move on to Plan B. 

"Plan B is to take down some county property and move half the project to the county," she said. "That's where we're at." 

"Carpenter said she and her team are now in the middle of negotiating land in Solano County that would give Morning View, with the 246 acres in Southwest, more than enough acreage to construct its project," writes the Dixon Tribune. "This other piece of land is not connected to, but is near the acreage included in the Letters of Intent to Purchase Agreement with the Southwest landowners." 

Read Brianna Boyd's full story on the Dixon Tribune's Facebook page

All property owners are signing non-disclosure agreements, meaning we can't specify which of the property owners have or have not signed the letters of intent. The prices are not known, either. 

The Great Libertarian March 10, 2013 at 05:40 AM
Ahhh ... now you have found the "real" problem with Morning View's project which has nothing to do with Morning View itself. Ever heard of a "company" town or the "company" store? "I owe my soul to the company store". Before I continue, I think you mean real estate "apparitions" as in ghosts. I agree with your concern over Carissa's statements, but I must warn you that she is not the problem. Mike Smith is the problem. Those statements are his parroted by her. She has chosen to believe Smith, a self serving phony and self described incompetent (after all it is Smith who has publicly stated he has been working on this project in various forms for four or five years) rather than the person who actually got her to reconsider and choose Dixon. As much as I like the project, except for the control they will be able to exert, this project is smelling worse as it goes along simply because of the bad advice she continues to embrace.
The Great Libertarian March 10, 2013 at 05:43 AM
roflmao ... glad to see you have a sense of humor, Dave, despite Gary's penchant for exposing everyone's name while insisting on anonymity when posting under his old pseudonym ...
Catherine March 10, 2013 at 05:45 AM
I am not in favor of eminent domain for private enterprise. I disagreed with the Supreme Court decision in Kelo v. New London (2005). I do understand why eminent domain is necessary for building roads, power lines, public projects, etc. Obviously the film studio is a private enterprise, so the land owners are really the gateway to the realization of this project. It's sad, because, if genuine, the studio would do a lot of good for the citizens of Dixon. Still, it should be up to the individual landowners whether or not they wish to sell. I had hoped that the landowners would see what a great opportunity this could be, not only for them to get a good price for their land, but also to benefit from the impact such a development would have on the city in the future. If they are business owners, how could they not see this as a boon to their business? I hope that something comes of this opportunity, even though the landowners have killed the original plan. If not, I'm afraid Dixon is now doomed to more housing without employment, and more urban sprawl. It will not be the thriving community that most of us hope with be there for us and for our kids.
The Great Libertarian March 10, 2013 at 05:48 AM
why don't you just have the City outlaw the grocery stores and "force" everyone to purchase fresh vegetables and "real eggs"? You are off the deep end, bud ... and yes I will join you and DD for a brewski ...
The Great Libertarian March 10, 2013 at 05:52 AM
According to the school district, whose meeting you missed on Thursday, residential growth is exactly what is needed. I thought you represented these guys, wearing your union hat? All kidding aside, we do need to bring jobs to town to balance out the residential growth which has already occurred. And we are already a bedroom community. Where have you been that you missed that tidbit?
The Great Libertarian March 10, 2013 at 06:00 AM
Sounds like you are talking about the "pack and stack" housing that Councilman Dane Besneatte doesn't believe "he just sold his soul for" in accepting a $500,000 grant from One Bay Area Government. OBAG is the disburser of funds for the Agenda 21 plans of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). What you described around BART is what they have planned for the area around our train station and also 130 acres encompassing the old downtown. As for your question, large plots of land and their purchase is out of the purview of city governments. When the land owner wants to develop, then the city becomes involved. Take Dixon Downs for example. The land was purchased without city participation. Frank Stronach himself came to a council meeting to describe his project after the land was all in his hands.
The Great Libertarian March 10, 2013 at 06:07 AM
Well that, the three comments, explains it. I was wondering where you will find "a piece of your mind". Might I suggest you keep what you have as you don't seem to have much to spare. George's Orange is the last of its kind. While traveling up and down the old highway 99, through central valley agricultural towns, there were a number of these round "Oranges" selling fresh squeezed Valencia orange juice. This was done here also and run by a well known family who has been in Dixon for years. I would hope it would be preserved simply for its historical interest despite your hysterical interest in condemning it. Now go back on your meds and leave the heavy work to the rest of us ...
The Great Libertarian March 10, 2013 at 06:13 AM
Well said. But this town voted for the wrong people as leaders, including a mayor who attempted to kill this project in the location now being considered. Your two new councilmen couldn't put a brain together between the two of them. "Still, it should be up to the individual landowners whether or not they wish to sell." Brilliant ... and let's leave it at that. That is the American way of doing business. Instead we are told by union thugs that we must cajole landowners into selling despite your identification of their private property rights. Perhaps the Agenda 21 people, the United Nations people, are correct: "private property is not 'sustainable' in the United States". Read Karl Marx. I believe that was one of his tenets in his "manifesto" of the communist variety ...
The Great Libertarian March 10, 2013 at 06:33 AM
Finally, my own comment on this subject. How is it that Carissa Carpenter was on Mare Island with this identical project, the "footprint" was taken directly from their plans there, and there was only 180 acres involved? Why is it that no one has made it clear that this project ballooned to 800 plus acres including 400 acres in the county and that the "county property" Carpenter is looking at is the same property already identified to her? Why is it that offers made to land owners when countered do not engender responses from either Carpenter or her negotiator? Why are property owners "greedy" when they have had offers for residential development of $125,000 and Carpenter is offering $50,000 which is only double the agricultural value of prime Dixon Ridge farming land? Once again, emotion rather than logic is dictating our direction toward a problem rather than a solution. Self serving interests, whether it be from the same IBEW group who attempted to force Dixon Downs down your throat, or from those few in our town with ties to this industry, should not be considered above common sense and good values. As much as we examined Dixon Downs for its impact on our quality of life due to its gambling basis, should we not be waiting until after the land negotiations are finalized before even considering its impacts on day to day life in Dixon? If this project is "real", why are its proponents instigating divisive behavior on the part of Dixon residents?
AnOutsideRealist March 10, 2013 at 06:47 AM
Well said. This whole thing is about as real as Manti Te'O's fiancée! People dream at the movies--and there is nothing wrong with that, with dreaming, with wondering what others lives are like, etc. But sometimes people, for whatever reason, sell dreams that have no chance of being achieved. For instance, I would like to play center field for the Giants, but no matter how many times I listen to Jon Fogarty's Centerfield, it'll never happen. But I can be really good at say driving a long haul truck. And so it is with this project. It will never happen. There are many in town who know that but to oppose it is to oppose people's dreams, and that is never politically palatable (at least on the surface). In the long run though, the skeptics of this project--and of the City's involvement in it--will be proven correct.
The Realist March 10, 2013 at 08:25 AM
What happened to the 2,500 acre movie studio project that Carissa reportedly was involved in in the 90's? Did she also have a proposed project in El Dorado? And Mare Island? And Fairfield? And - was it Crows Landing? Why did they all fall apart? Did the projects promoters ever performed when it came to put up the money? At $2.8 Billion, even at just 5% interest, the project needs to bring in $140 million a year just to cover that low interest. That works out to about $17 a square foot per month - for every square foot of the "foot print" - not just the buidlings and outdoors lots. Investors will want at least the same in return - about $280 million per year - that's a rate of about $34 per square foot per month. How is that even possible. The project would build 3.3 Donald Trump mid-town skyscrapers, and some people think that shows how great this project will be? Ever think it proves it is unfeasible economically? I really was excited when the idea was announced. Even did what I could to promote it and push it along. But actions - or lack of actions - speak loudly. Just asking
Catherine March 10, 2013 at 05:51 PM
You bring up a lot of good points, and questions. Why so much acreage when only 180 acres were needed in the past? If it's true that the land price offered was a flat $50,000, and there were no price negotiations, then that is puzzling. And is it true that the property owners can get $125,000 an acre for residential development? Is that what owners were offered for the previous proposed housing development? If MV only needs a few more acres to get their 300, then why not pay the extra money? After all, this is lauded as a huge 2+ billion dollar enterprise. The extra money for land is small in comparison. How was the IBEW involved in Dixon Downs? I have only been in Dixon since 2009, so the race track was well before that. I have always been a little concerned that so many of the past effort's to procure land for this project failed. Why? There is a shortage of studio/sound stage space and land in L.A., so a studio here makes some sense. As far as I have heard, the movie business is not making as much money as the video game industry, so will this studio encompass both? Lots of questions, no answers, but I still hope that this company is on the up and up, and that the studio ends up here. It would be so much better than more houses.
Gary Erwin March 10, 2013 at 06:34 PM
Realist, In all of your one sided research did you come across articles about the “Dirty Dozen” did you read about the changes in the industry? Did you read any of the trade rags about producers and directors breaking away from the establishment and wanting to do their own thing? I would suggest that you turn the coin over and look at the other side. Do some research on why this is possible and then get back to us with something a bit more real.
Gary Erwin March 10, 2013 at 06:40 PM
Mr. Davis, It would be my honor to buy you a beer Tuesday after the meeting. Michael C, there were times that I might have bought you a beer, but now you are on your own. Sometimes you go too far and you have done it again.
Gary Erwin March 10, 2013 at 06:48 PM
Michael C. "I would hope that you would just let negotiations occur" so it is okay for you to inject yourself but it is not okay for others to do the same? To your point of only speaking to the positive...not so..go back and read. Come to me with a credible negative and we can discuss it. I have done much reading on the subject and I did live near a studio in Marin. My experience was all positive there.
Gary Erwin March 10, 2013 at 07:08 PM
Michael C. not off the deep end. Think for a moment...I'm from a farming family that still has an interest in it...and if you read, another poster sells eggs. I would never outlaw grocery stores...come on Mike...jeez
Gary Erwin March 10, 2013 at 07:13 PM
Call me silly, I like it when people use their real names and are accountable for what they write. Seems to me they are then more likely to think a bit before writing a response. I started using my name when I came to the conclusion that it was the right thing to do....step up to the challenge Mike.
Gary Erwin March 10, 2013 at 07:17 PM
In fact there are other Giant Oranges, a bit of research would reveal that. This one is unique in that it was built in Vacaville at the Nut Tree Shop. Carissa is interested in preserving it, she understands its importance.
Mike Smith March 10, 2013 at 11:24 PM
Did she also have a proposed project in El Dorado? Land was presented as able to be developed but found not to be. And Mare Island? City changed requirements for the infrastructure at the last minute And Fairfield? Infrastructure cost and timing too far out for their time-line. And - was it Crows Landing? People in the area did not support the project, Infrastructure cost and timing too far out for their time-line. Why did they all fall apart?
David A. Davis March 11, 2013 at 01:22 AM
@The Great Libertarian.......Thank you for using the key word in all of this very important discussion. "Why", is the key to understanding the overwhelming idea of bringing a 2.8 billion dollar project to any city. If all of your basic why questions were answered along with those of many other concerned intelligent citizens this entire issue would cease to spiral into such an absract realm. I really am a fan of George's Orange as well. It is much easier on the eyes than the colosal WALMART sign. Thanks also for correcting my miserable atempt to spell " apparition". One last comment for you. I too had the thought of 'The Company Store' effect on Dixon by this project. Pretty scary! That line is from an old Merle Travis tune from 1946, covered by Tennessee Ernie Ford in 1955. The song is called 16 Tons (of coal). good stuff......................chow dave
The Realist March 11, 2013 at 01:37 AM
Gary, I'd love to have it all be true - but a 20 year track record of the same "project" over and over - and always someone else's fault that it fails -produces credibility problems. To be economically feasible, a $2.8 billion project would have to produce revenue of about $400 to $500 million per year - just to break even. How much do independent voices today cost to produce? You're the expert, but isn't it around $25 million? Include ALL movie costs - cast, crew, production - not just facilities. Seems just to break even there would have to be at least 40 movies produced. Combine that with failure to reply to property owners counter-offers. Speaking of research - there's another credibility problem with someone who leaves anonymous phone messages on business message machines claiming property owners are asking four times more than was offered. How could that person have "known" that - not true - amount if there are "confidentiality agreements"? Rumors and castigating property owners does NOT build the good-will necessary for success.
Therese March 11, 2013 at 01:53 AM
@The Great Libertarian - thank you for clarifying my question re: large land purchases...I do appreciate it. The area I was referring to is Dublin - 'Pack & Stack' describes Dublin's demise perfectly! So glad we moved here to Dixon!
Therese March 11, 2013 at 02:07 AM
I believe in freedom of speech, but do you have to attack someone's name? I read your bio and really wonder if you 'flowered' it with a few tall tales. I normally would not openly express a criticism like I just did, but I personally KNOW David A. Davis and besides having a great sense of humor, he has a big heart and open mind...your comment was insulting.
Bil Paul March 11, 2013 at 05:47 AM
This project sure does keep things interesting in this small town. The less we're told, the more guessing there will be, that's guaranteed.
AnOutsideRealist March 11, 2013 at 06:34 AM
The project sucked up a lot of oxygen and resources and other positive things got left behind. It's clear now--as it really was from the beginning--that this project will not happen. Here's a basic math question, if this is really a $2.8 billion project and the difference in price between the land owners asking orices and what she wanted to pay was $800,000 (and I think it is far less than that, but let's just say that is the number), you're telling me that the alleged major players behind this project couldn't come up with an amount equal to 0.02% of the total project costs, and that this entire fabuosly profitable deal will sink because it came in at 0.02% over budget? The math doesn't balance. It never balanced. Math is real. Dreams are not.
Greg Coppes March 11, 2013 at 04:31 PM
OutsideRealist You know these figures how? Seems to me you have a lot of inside information for someone who is on the outside lol.
J.r. Hesseltine March 12, 2013 at 01:22 AM
This is better then Jerry SPRINGER !!! LOVE IT and can someone tell me/us who is the The Great Libertarian because i'm not sure but thinking it is that guy who didnt win reelection ? If it is why would he wonder why ?
Mike Smith March 12, 2013 at 04:49 PM
Mike Ceremello.
Laurie Pederson March 13, 2013 at 06:38 AM
Sacramento welcomes Morningview LLC and the region already has the talent and resources to ensure the health of a film studio with serious aspirations. Mayor Kevin Johnson should be courting this corporation while the farmers fight it out and lose out on the economic opportunity here.
J.r. Hesseltine March 13, 2013 at 07:26 AM
Laurie , Farmers lmao ? dont be hateing just cause you cant get your mayor to look at other opportunities he has been betting on one thing for how long ? 4 yrs if not more now as you have watched west sac and surrounding areas growing i think that is what has made dixon pass the test because we have been open minded and do talk to eachother !!!


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something