When Matthew Desmond’s “Evicted” brought a national spotlight to Milwaukee’s rental market in 2016, about 50% of Milwaukee’s homes were renter-occupied. By 2023, that number had risen to 59%, as out-of-state private equity-funded real estate investment companies moved into the city.
According to data from the City of Milwaukee, 45% of white households are renters compared to 72% of Black households.
Highgrove Holdings Management LLC, one of Milwaukee’s biggest corporate landlords, is currently fighting lawsuits from lenders and the city seeking to take property management out of its hands. The city’s lawsuit alleges Highgrove’s properties, and its business model, are a public nuisance. Highgrove’s portfolio of over 200 Milwaukee properties are in predominantly Black areas of the city, often in federally-designated Opportunity Zones, or "economically distressed communities."
One of those Opportunity Zones is Lindsay Heights, where 90% of residents are Black. It's where Larry and Sharon Adams are pursuing a much different type of development.
Larry and Sharon met in 1997, when Larry was doing electrical work in Sharon’s home. In a 2019 StoryCorps interview, Larry said he was eager to move on to more important matters.
"I wanted to finish the job, so that I could fire myself from the job. Then I would engage in dealing with [Sharon],” he said in 2019.
A month later, the two started dating. In 2000, they started Walnut Way, a community development organization dedicated to investing in Lindsay Heights. Since its founding, Walnut Way has rehabbed over 100 homes, revitalized commercial development, and helped retrofit solar panels to homes in the area.
“Our approach has been being good concerned citizens, using the talents we have in the area of community development,” Sharon says today.
But the Adams are not the only developer in Lindsay Heights, and the effects of differing development strategies are playing out in Milwaukee’s housing market and its courtrooms.
The Adams’ latest venture is Adams Garden Park, which includes an art walk and sculpture garden — a paved walkway with arches, which contain poetry written by Milwaukee’s young people etched into the metalwork. The Adams say the sculpture garden is meant to lead to future development in the area. The only problem? The home next door.
“Next to that you’ll see a dilapidated property that is boarded up, and shameful as far as its stewardship,” Larry says.
That “dilapidated property” is a vacant home owned by Highgrove. Its windows are boarded up, its roof sags, and the backyard is overgrown. According to court documents, Highgrove says about 37% of its Milwaukee homes are vacant.
The Adams say they have offered to buy the property, but Highgrove would not sell. It left questions as to why Highgrove was so interested in keeping a vacant property.
“For years we could not figure out who are these investors? Who would do something like this?” Sharon says. “To have no accountability, other than to gain profit.”
Founded by David Tomblin in 2012, Highgrove was created “specifically for acquiring value added distressed real estate within the United States of America for investment purposes.” Between 2017-2022, Highgrove bought over 260 Milwaukee properties, including 135 in just three deals with other corporate landlords. On its now-defunct website, Highgrove claimed to be “woman/minority owned” and promised investors a “12-18%” annual return on its Milwaukee properties.
Now, that real estate empire is under threat, facing multiple lawsuits and collective action from many of its tenants.
In part one of this series, WUWM examined Highgrove’s property management strategy and why it was interested in Milwaukee real estate. Part two examined how Highgrove tenants united under the community organization Common Ground to “evict” Tomblin from Milwaukee.
This article examines how Highgrove’s properties and management style may constitute a public nuisance under Wisconsin law, and the extent to which receivership can be a solution to hold negligent landlords accountable.
What is a public nuisance, and what is the case against Highgrove?
Highgrove is battling different lawsuits that together threaten to put up to 224 properties into receivership — meaning Highgrove would still legally own the properties but would lose the right to manage them or collect rent.
One lawsuit is from an affiliate of U.S. Bank, which lent Highgrove about $6.8 million in 2023 but says it has not received payment from Highgrove since January 2025. If successful, the court would appoint a receiver to manage and collect rent for 86 properties. The City of Milwaukee is also suing Highgrove. Its case seeks a separate receiver for an additional 138 properties.
The receiver in either case would not be U.S. Bank or the City of Milwaukee. Instead, the court would appoint a third party to oversee the properties, which could be a lawyer, a separate real estate development company, a nonprofit or some other entity.
The city’s lawsuit aims to declare Highgrove’s properties and business model a public nuisance, to trigger receivership.
Under Wisconsin law, a building can be legally declared a “public nuisance” if it violates building code in a manner that threatens health and safety. Wisconsin law also allows for a receiver to be appointed to abate the public nuisance, though only certain entities like redevelopment corporation or a nonprofit, “the primary purpose of which is the improvement of housing conditions,” can receive the property under this statute.
This differs slightly from the type of receiver U.S. Bank is seeking. This receiver is governed by a separate statute, and its goal is to protect the value of the asset. In practice, this goal can overlap with type of receiver the city is seeking, if, for example, code violations need to be fixed to protect market value.
If appointed by the court, the receiver would take over property management and rent collection duties but not technically own the building. Once the nuisance is abated, property management and rent collection duties return to the owner.
Milwaukee City Attorney Evan Goyke says the city’s argument is that both the 138 individual properties and Highgrove’s business model itself are public nuisances. Regarding individual properties, the city’s complaint alleges that Highgrove has generated over 4,000 inspections since 2021 from the 138 properties in the lawsuit, while only filing 32 permits for repair.
“Highgrove’s lack of proactive inspections or repairs and frequent building code violations require excessive inspections of Defendants’ properties,” the City of Milwaukee says in its complaint. This “effectively makes the City a de facto property management service benefitting Defendants at taxpayer expense.”
In an interview with WUWM, Goyke added that chronic disrepair and a vacancy rate of about 37% among Highgrove properties also constitute a public nuisance.
“We don’t often file lawsuits over property conditions,” Goyke says. “With Highgrove you have issues of scale, conditions are entrenched and long-lasting [...] and a very high rate of vacancy, properties boarded up, and the appearance of not being managed which presents a public safety and public health risk.”
According to court documents, Highgrove says it planned to rehab its vacant homes but repair costs were higher than expected, citing “COVID-19 and a period of unusually high inflation.”
The city’s complaint also argues Highgrove’s business model itself is a public nuisance. As recently as 2024, Highgrove’s now-defunct website said Highgrove’s Milwaukee homes cost an average of $35,000, including rehabilitation, while receiving a net income of over $6,000 per year. Highgrove also promised investors a “12-18%” annual return.
In its lawsuit, the city alleges that Highgrove prioritized investor returns over maintaining livable conditions. Goyke says this business practice is a nuisance to the city.
“What has not been prioritized is the property’s conditions, building code, property taxes, those recurring problems that are a public nuisance,” Goyke says. “The way they operate is a choice to not invest the type of resources necessary to purchase, rehab and maintain a property in good working order for the tenants who are paying rent,” Goyke says.
Tomblin told WUWM that Highgrove had initially operated as an “all-cash fund,” but had to take out loans which put it further in debt. One of these loans was from an affiliate of U.S. Bank, the other entity seeking a receiver for a portion of Highgrove’s portfolio.
“We stopped raising money, and we stopped giving distributions [to partners in 2022.] We took on debt, that was the big mistake,” Tomblin says, adding that “officers have not taken any draws since 2024.”
But Tomblin later said “we were able to able to give distributions to our partners in those higher amounts” in April 2026. WUWM was unable to verify if or when Highgrove stopped giving payments to its partners.
Tomblin said Highgrove has worked to fix all code violations at his properties, prioritizing health and safety inspections. He said Highgrove had entered the city’s special enforcement program to streamline code violation documentation and abatement.
“I worked with the city [...] we have an assigned inspector,” Tomblin says.
If a receiver is appointed, Highgrove will still legally own the properties but not be able to manage them or collect rent until the nuisance is abated. This would cut Highgrove off from rental income at a time when lenders, such as U.S. Bank, are suing it for nonpayment on loans. The receiver’s timeline for abating the public nuisance would be indefinite, meaning it is unclear when Highgrove could expect to resume property management and rent collection.
“The goal is an interruption of the current property owner’s ‘business as usual,’” Goyke says.
Tomblin says he is surprised at the city’s lawsuit against him.
“I am surprised with the city attorney, as a fellow Eagle Scout,” Tomblin says. “I don’t understand it, to be honest with you.”
Does receivership “evict” a landlord?
This is not the first time the City of Milwaukee has used similar logic to successfully place a large landlord’s properties into receivership.
About a decade ago, the City of Milwaukee brought separate actions against landlords Mohammad Choudry and Elijah Mohammad Rashaed. In both cases, the city successfully argued that Choudry’s and Rashaed’s business models involved neglecting properties and letting city government pick up the tab.
Kail Decker was an assistant Milwaukee city attorney who worked on the cases. (Decker is now the city attorney for West Allis.) He says Milwaukee’s current complaint against Tomblin echoes those cases.
“When I read the complaint against Highgrove Holdings, a lot of the language on the complaint appeared to be something I might’ve written a couple years ago,” Decker says. “Seems to me the City of Milwaukee is building on something I did, which I feel good about because it was a lot of work at the time.”
The overall goal of the Rashaed and Choudry complaints was similar to the current complaint against Highgrove: get as many properties declared a public nuisance as possible, place those properties into receivership, and force the landlord to go without rental income for an uncertain amount of time. In both cases, the city argued that Choudry and Rashaed’s business models were a nuisance, similar to its argument against Highgrove.
The exact methods of Choudry and Rashaed’s business models differed slightly. Choudry’s business included buying properties at sheriff sales for as little as $100 and forfeiting them for delinquent taxes years later, while profiting from rent in the meantime. Rashaed’s business practice centered on not repairing code violations until ordered by the city, “effectively making the city his property manager,” Decker said.
Goyke says Highgrove’s business practices contain some elements similar to Choudry, some similar to Rashaed, and some entirely Highgrove-specific.
“It’s a mile wide and an inch deep. He owes less taxes than Choudry, and some code violations were less egregious than Rashaed. But he has a whole lot of code violations and still owes us a whole lot of taxes,” Goyke says, regarding the complaint against Tomblin and Highgrove. “It is indiscriminate and it is exemplifying every kind of nuisance and degree of nuisance.”
Both the Choudry and Rashaed cases ended with a receiver being appointed for their properties. For Choudry, the court appointed a receiver weeks after the city filed the lawsuit. Rashaed’s receiver was appointed as a consequence for not repairing properties in a timely manner after his case was settled in court.
Whether receivership led to permanently “evicting” either landlord is mixed. Records indicate Choudry currently owns one property in Milwaukee, compared to 57 at the time of his lawsuit. He owes over $25,000 in property taxes on that address since 2021, when he got the property back from receivership.
But Rashaed may still be involved as a landlord in Milwaukee. Ownership of his buildings was transferred to family members since they were put into receivership. An LLC previously associated with him, and now registered to Michele Rashaed, owns 14 Milwaukee properties according to city data. An additional 36 properties are owned by LLCs registered to relatives of Rashaed.
But Decker notes that receivership is primarily a tool to abate nuisances, not necessarily kick a given landlord out of the city. Cutting a landlord off from rent revenue can put them out of business, but even if they remain in business during and after the nuisance is abated, Decker says it’s still a success.
“The measurement of success from my take is, after all this is done, that those properties become part of the other category of landlords in which the city almost forgets they exist,” Decker says. “They just do things the right way and operate like many of the viable and excellent landlords in the city operate.”
Decker also notes that receivership is meant to be used as a last resort, when other methods of nuisance abatement have already been tried. Litigation is time-consuming, but threatening a property owner’s ability to collect rent is likely to get their attention when nothing else will.
“They need a revenue stream, and receivership cuts that revenue stream to zero,” Decker says. “That’s why it’s the most impactful, but also the most work, and used the least for that reason.”
'It seemed invisible, isolated and hopeless’
Much about the future of Highgrove, its Milwaukee properties and its tenants is unknown. But what is certain is that Larry and Sharon Adams will continue building the Lindsay Heights of their dreams.
On one of the metal archways over the art walk, a poem reads: “If you live someplace, and you’re creating beauty, then it helps / You know you’re emanating or projecting that into the universe.”
It’s a glimpse into what the Adams have planned for Lindsay Heights’ future. After stepping away from full-time work at Walnut Way, they’ve focused on development that incorporates art and local young people.
It signifies a blooming of Lindsay Heights.
“It seemed invisible, isolated and hopeless when you looked at the block 10-15 years ago,” Sharon said. “So community development matters. Real estate management that is done with community engagement and community respect matters.”
The Adams are planning new developments to build on the sculpture garden next to Highgrove’s property, continuing its themes of art and nature. They see it as an addition to new restaurants in the area that provide a place to gather. It's all part of a development strategy that helps neighbors see themselves as part of a bigger picture.
“It’s really important for us, especially if you lived in disinvestment, to tell your own story and to explore and find out your rich culture,” Sharon says.
“Now who wouldn’t want to build on that kind of foundation?” Larry adds.
