Former owner urges delay; commission approves sale of Monterey parcel after legal review
June 28, 2026 | Transportation Commission, Agencies under Office of the Governor, Executive, California
This article was created by AI summarizing key points discussed. AI makes mistakes, so for full details and context, please refer to the video of the full meeting. Please report any errors so we can fix them. Report an error »
The California Transportation Commission on day two of its June 2026 meeting approved the execution of 12 director's deeds that will transfer excess state property, including a 104‑acre parcel in Monterey County, after staff concluded the sales comply with applicable state and federal law.
John, a CALTRANS staff presenter, told commissioners the state will receive $4,148,911 from the sale of the 12 parcels and summarized legal review of one contested parcel. "This act shall apply prospectively and shall apply to property acquired after January 1st, 2007," John said when explaining why a section of the Code of Civil Procedure added by Senate Bill 1650 did not apply to land acquired in 1983.
Jonathan Ingraham, who identified himself as representing Rivas and Williams, told the commission he believes his company has buyback rights to an 80‑acre portion of the parcel because the property was taken under the threat of eminent domain in the 1980s and the original project was later rescinded. "I'm asking to postpone the approval for 30 days," Ingraham said, asking the commission to allow time for outstanding public‑records requests and to require the department to provide a single, consistent legal position.
CALTRANS legal staff (Caroline) told the panel that the Robe(r)ti (Roberti) Act and the cited section of eminent domain law do not apply to the 1983 acquisition and that Federal Highway Administration approval is not required for a public auction conducted at fair market value. Caroline also said Ingraham had not produced documentation showing that his company inherited the interest of the original partnership that sold the land to Monterey County.
Several commissioners expressed sympathy for Ingraham's circumstances but said the legal review and the accepted bid left the commission little choice. Commissioner Tiffany, who spoke at length about local context and the challenges of older property records, moved to approve the sales; Commissioner Bradshaw seconded. The motion passed by voice vote.
What happens next: the commission approved the deeds and authorized staff to proceed with the public sales as presented; the record shows no roll‑call tally for the vote. Ingraham asked for a narrow postponement for records review; commissioners declined to delay, citing staff legal findings and the accepted auction bid.
Attribution: quotes and attributions in this story come from CALTRANS staff (John and Caroline) and public commenter Jonathan Ingraham, as recorded in the meeting transcript.
John, a CALTRANS staff presenter, told commissioners the state will receive $4,148,911 from the sale of the 12 parcels and summarized legal review of one contested parcel. "This act shall apply prospectively and shall apply to property acquired after January 1st, 2007," John said when explaining why a section of the Code of Civil Procedure added by Senate Bill 1650 did not apply to land acquired in 1983.
Jonathan Ingraham, who identified himself as representing Rivas and Williams, told the commission he believes his company has buyback rights to an 80‑acre portion of the parcel because the property was taken under the threat of eminent domain in the 1980s and the original project was later rescinded. "I'm asking to postpone the approval for 30 days," Ingraham said, asking the commission to allow time for outstanding public‑records requests and to require the department to provide a single, consistent legal position.
CALTRANS legal staff (Caroline) told the panel that the Robe(r)ti (Roberti) Act and the cited section of eminent domain law do not apply to the 1983 acquisition and that Federal Highway Administration approval is not required for a public auction conducted at fair market value. Caroline also said Ingraham had not produced documentation showing that his company inherited the interest of the original partnership that sold the land to Monterey County.
Several commissioners expressed sympathy for Ingraham's circumstances but said the legal review and the accepted bid left the commission little choice. Commissioner Tiffany, who spoke at length about local context and the challenges of older property records, moved to approve the sales; Commissioner Bradshaw seconded. The motion passed by voice vote.
What happens next: the commission approved the deeds and authorized staff to proceed with the public sales as presented; the record shows no roll‑call tally for the vote. Ingraham asked for a narrow postponement for records review; commissioners declined to delay, citing staff legal findings and the accepted auction bid.
Attribution: quotes and attributions in this story come from CALTRANS staff (John and Caroline) and public commenter Jonathan Ingraham, as recorded in the meeting transcript.
View the Full Meeting & All Its Details
This article offers just a summary. Unlock complete video, transcripts, and insights as a Founder Member.
✓
Watch full, unedited meeting videos
✓
Search every word spoken in unlimited transcripts
✓
AI summaries & real-time alerts (all government levels)
✓
Permanent access to expanding government content
30-day money-back guarantee
