It seems to make a big mess even bigger.  So if they city excepts the streets and takes them they can be sued by the current "owners", in which case the state and city increase their liability, and if a restraining order is obtained in court to stop the city and state from "annexing" it, the case works its way up and down the appellate process and that'll be longer than the eminent domain process.  I don't get why they don't use eminent domain.  If they think the eminent domain process could take longer than this "annexation" they could be very mistaken.  But I'm having trouble following the details of this case, so I could be wrong.