Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Infrastructure Eminent Domain topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Highland Park council approves ordinance authorizing temporary construction easements for Judson Avenue bridge despite resident objections
Summary
The City Council voted 7–0 to authorize temporary construction easements and potential condemnation for the Judson Avenue bridge project after residents testified that negotiations with the city's consultant were adversarial and appraisal methods were unclear.
The Highland Park City Council on May 27 approved an ordinance authorizing the acquisition of temporary construction easements for the Judson Avenue bridge project, including use of condemnation if agreements cannot be reached.
City Manager Newkirk told the council staff has been negotiating easements since December 2025 and described the ordinance as a proactive measure to keep the project on schedule. "This action ... is really just a formality," Newkirk said, adding that the city has given a 60-day notice to impacted property owners and remains hopeful agreements can be reached.
Several nearby residents urged the council to delay or alter the approach. Larry Sarat, who identified himself as owner of 835 Judson, said the process "is deeply flawed, unnecessarily adversarial" and that three of the four affected property owners had not agreed as of that morning. Sarat criticized the appraisal process and said Santa Cruz, the city's land acquisition consultant, had been nonresponsive to written questions about compensations and replacement details.
Laura Sarrett, speaking for herself and other neighbors, said the consultant repeatedly rejected counteroffers and that the negotiation style had forced property owners to consider litigation. A prepared statement from another owner faulted the appraisal comparables and asked for longer timelines for tree and plant replacement.
Newkirk and staff said they have sought to negotiate in good faith and that condemnation would be a last resort only if agreements cannot be reached; the staff representative noted some easements are already agreed and that the measure maintains the city's project schedule.
The ordinance passed by roll-call vote with seven ayes and no nays. After the vote, the council announced it would enter closed session later in the meeting to discuss litigation matters.
What happens next: With the ordinance approved, staff may continue negotiations; if staff cannot secure easements, the city may proceed with condemnation under the ordinance. Residents in opposition said they will continue negotiating and may pursue litigation.
