Councilman Accused of Demanding $5 Million for Housing Project Land

Developers in Buckeye, Arizona, aiming to construct 375 affordable housing units, are encountering an obstacle presented by City Councilman Tony Youngker, whose family homestead is situated within the proposed project's footprint. Dominium, the developer behind the project, alleges that Youngker is demanding $5 million for a small portion of his 2.25-acre property. This specific parcel of land, approximately 30 feet wide, is required by Dominium to establish a right-of-way for access into the development. According to Mark Lambing, vice president and project partner at Dominium, the city theoretically has a right to this land for free based on a prior development agreement, but it has not exercised this option. Instead of negotiating for this necessary strip, Youngker has reportedly demanded that Dominium purchase his entire homestead for the $5 million sum. The estimated market value of Youngker's 2.25-acre property, according to Realtor.com, is $587,524. Dominium's own appraisal placed the property's value at approximately $650,000, which is about 13% of Youngker's alleged asking price. Lambing has expressed a willingness to negotiate but considers the $5 million demand to be an "outrageous leap." Adding a layer of complexity to the dispute, Councilman Youngker is being represented by another City Council member and attorney, Patrick HagEstad. This arrangement has led Lambing to question the neutrality and fairness of the process, stating, "It just really makes you question how neutral and fair this whole process is." Despite both Youngker and HagEstad serving on the City Council, the City of Buckeye has characterized the situation as a private land dispute. In a statement, the city affirmed its commitment to working with developers and landowners for responsible growth, emphasizing that "This is a private party land discussion that does not include the city, and it respects the rights of both parties." The proposed housing development by Dominium is intended to provide much-needed affordable housing units within the city, and the resolution of this land acquisition issue is critical for its progression. The situation highlights potential conflicts of interest when public officials are involved in private real estate transactions that intersect with public development projects. The developer's reliance on a right-of-way, a common element in land development, underscores the importance of access and the potential for disputes when private property ownership impedes public interest projects. The city's stance that it is a private matter suggests a reluctance to intervene directly, placing the onus on the parties involved to reach a private agreement or pursue legal avenues.