[ad_1]
A bar owner is standing up to the city to forcefully sell his property to the Alamo Museum, awaiting a final offer from city officials and beginning the process to have the appraiser determine the value of the business.
Vince Cantu owns Moses Rose’s Hideout, a bar near Alamo Plaza that the Texas General Land Office (GLO) and the Alamo Trust want to acquire for the proposed Alamo Visitor Center and Museum.
As negotiations over the sale price stalled last year, the city of San Antonio, acting on behalf of the GLO, approved an ordinance in January that would allow for the seizure of the Canton property by eminent domain.
Cantu rejected a recent offer of $4 million and relocation assistance funds from the city of San Antonio, and responded with $6 million and $4 million in business losses. That’s less than half the asking price three years ago.
Cantu met with business appraisal appraisers RSI & Associates on Tuesday to begin determining how much the business is worth based on the projected revenue it would lose if sold — and hopes to reach an agreement with the city and state.
The property has been hampered by a joint effort by the city, state and the Alamo Trust to build a $150 million Alamo Visitor Center and Museum as part of a $388 million plan to redevelop Alamo Plaza.
If the two sides can’t agree on a price, Cantu said the city plans to file a lawsuit for illegal threats of eminent domain.
If it’s not an offer we accept – they’re all on the low-ball side – then we’ll have to start some lawsuits and challenge whether they’re using popular domains legitimately. We don’t think they are,” Kantu said.
He said there are several reasons he believes the city and Global are breaking the law when they try to take the property.
GLO’s plan to turn the Woolworths building — next to the Cantu Bar — into an Alamo museum, with a 4-D theater on the bar’s site, is not a direct municipal project, he contends.
So in the year The city, which entered into a cooperative agreement with GLO in 2019 to develop Alamo Plaza, believes it does not have the authority to use eminent domain under state law.
And while the GLO could go to the state legislature for that authority, Cantu and his attorney believe there will be no political support for it.
Land Commissioner Dawn Buckingham was elected last November and has not publicly commented on the Moses Rose Hideout controversy. Global officials are “trying to protect their private property promotion profile from all this messy business because of Texas Independence,” Cantu said.
In addition to the $4 million for the Cantu property, the initial offer letter from the city said it would give $100,000 to relocate the bar business to another property down the street, at 517 E. Houston St.
That property, a 10,000-square-foot storefront in the 1920 Sol Frank Building, is owned by Michael Litofsky, according to county tax records.
If Cantu agrees to the move, GLO will attempt to purchase the property and become Cantu’s landlord, charging fair market value for the lease. If not, the city will consider paying the canton for the estimated lost revenue based on a third-party assessment.
Attorney Dan Eldredge, who represents Kantu, said his client is working with the business appraiser in the hope that it will lead to “good faith” in the negotiation process.
But the threat of eminent domain still hangs over them like “a big wet, sticky blanket,” Eldredge said.
“My hope is … they realize they’ve gone too far, they can’t legally exercise eminent domain to buy this property, and they’re standing up,” Eldredge said.
City Attorney Andy Segovia said eminent domain is a longstanding legal principle and is authorized by state law.
“The city is working through the established condemnation process,” he said in an email to the San Antonio Report. We will continue to work toward a resolution, whether through a negotiated settlement or a legal condemnation proceeding.
Alamo officials said Tuesday they would release a statement on the status of the negotiations, but did not send one to press.
The San Antonio Report filed an open records request in late January seeking copies of correspondence involving city officials, the Alamo Trust, GLO and Cantu to trace the history of the negotiations.
In response, the city recently wrote to the state attorney general’s office to deny its request for review and review, citing “pending litigation.”
If the city and the GLO move forward with the popular background process, which takes the case to trial court as is customary in such cases, Cantu will fight his own lawsuit, Eldredge said.
In addition to arguing that the city can’t legally take the property on Global’s behalf, Eldredge plans to show that the proposed theater is a money-making tool for the state-run museum. He can live without it.
Museums are one type of development that can be taken as private property under Chapter 2206 of Title 10 Subtitle E of the Constitution.
But state law says a government entity can’t take private property using eminent domain “unless the taking is for the purpose of economic development.” [it] It is a secondary objective achieved through municipal community development or municipal urban renewal activities to remove the positive impact on the community from poor areas or affected areas.
Segovia said the museum’s purpose is not economic development. “The goal is to build a museum and visitor center for the most historic place in Texas,” he said.
The bar owner and his attorney are confident they will win a battle that began five years ago when the Alamo Trust first approached the property and later suggested it could be taken by eminent domain.
“The problem is it’s a long battle to fight,” Eldredge said.
[ad_2]
Source link
