The Galveston County Daily News

FRIENDSWOOD — Alvin officials have declined to let Friendswood annex land it had planned to buy for ball parks.

The refusal ruins Friendswood’s best chance to buy the land and avoid all the legal questions that still remain about whether a judge prohibited a city from buying 60 acres of land outside its corporate limits.

The mayor and city manager of Alvin told Friendswood Mayor David Smith they didn’t think there was enough support in Alvin to give the land to Friendswood, Smith said.

Friendswood officials contracted to buy 60 acres off FM 528 in Alvin last year before a judge ruled the city could not buy the land using certificates of obligation. They agreed in September 2008 to buy the land for $2.6 million.

Some believe the judge’s ruling prohibits the city from buying the Alvin land at all.

The judge’s order, which rules in favor of five Friendswood residents opposing the city’s plan to issue $11 million in certificates of obligation in part to buy park land, states Friendswood “takes nothing” as a result of the lawsuit.

Others believe the judge ruled that the city could not buy the land with certificates of obligation but could finance the purchase using other sources of revenue.

Judge Scott Jenkins of the 53rd District Court in Travis County cannot comment on his ruling, his staff attorney Jennifer Kracht said.

Friendswood officials asked Alvin to de-annex the land so that Friendswood could buy it and avoid any legal problems with buying land outside its city limits. But Alvin was not interested, despite Friendswood’s offer to build a regional animal shelter on the property to serve both cities.

Alvin Mayor Gary Appelt has said Alvin would lose money on water and sewer revenues it needs to finance infrastructure improvements if Alvin de-annexed the land.

Smith said he was disappointed but not surprised.

“If we hadn’t had the politics involved, I think it might have been more palatable for Alvin,” he said.

Now that annexation seems to be off the table, Friendswood has few options on the contract. The city could:

• Pay penalties, which could top $1 million, associated with terminating a contract with landowner David Wight. The city’s attorney recommended against that. Attorney Bobby Gervais warned council members that if they pay the penalties and the contract is found to be illegal, they face personal liability and may have to forfeit their seats on council because of violation of the city charter.

• Assume the judge’s ruling means the contract is void and refuse to pay the penalties. Wight, however, could sue the city for default of contract, Gervais said. Defaulting on the contract might scare away other contractors who wish to do business with the city, Councilman Jim Hill said.

• Assume the judge’s ruling means the city can buy the land and pay for the purchase through other sources of revenue, including calling a bond referendum. City council members may face personal liability, and may have to forfeit their seats, if a court finds the contract illegal.

Council members may discuss the land further at a meeting Monday.