NCISD Land Deal: Binding Contract or Term Sheet?

**New Caney ISD Land Dispute Reaches Appeals Court, Tests Governmental Immunity and Pandemic-Era Contracts**

**BEAUMONT, TX –** A contentious legal battle, simmering in Montgomery County since the initial days of the COVID-19 pandemic, has escalated to the 9th Court of Appeals in Beaumont, where New Caney Independent School District (NCISD) is fighting to avoid a land purchase it claims was never a binding agreement. At the core of the dispute is a March 2020 accord between NCISD and a private property owner for a parcel of land intended for a new school near the burgeoning intersection of Loop 494 and FM 1314 in Porter.

The district’s legal team, spearheaded by prominent attorney Marc Tabolsky, argued before a three-justice appellate panel that the March 2020 document was merely a “term sheet” or “letter of intent,” not a fully executed contract. Tabolsky asserted that the agreement required several subsequent, more formal steps – including a detailed property survey, final environmental assessments, and definitive board approval – none of which were fully realized before the unforeseen economic turmoil unleashed by the pandemic.

“This was always understood as an initial step, a framework for future negotiations,” Tabolsky told the court, emphasizing that the document included an “escape clause” allowing for reconsideration under “unforeseen circumstances.” He detailed that while the NCISD Board of Trustees did approve the land purchase in May 2020, just two months later, by July, market conditions had shifted so dramatically that the district moved to withdraw. Tabolsky further contended that forcing NCISD to purchase land now considered significantly overpriced, especially with taxpayer funds, would amount to an unconstitutional “taking” without due process, imposing an undue burden on the community.

However, the property owner’s attorney, Clay Britton, countered forcefully, maintaining that the March 2020 agreement was absolutely a binding contract, made in good faith by his client. Britton told the appellate court justices that prior to the agreement, New Caney ISD had utilized threats of eminent domain – the government’s power to take private property for public use – to pressure the landowner into the deal. He accused the district of then reneging on its commitment once the real estate market began to experience a slight dip later that year, portraying NCISD’s actions as “bad faith.”

“The district had ample opportunity to back out before signing this document,” Britton stated, “which was explicitly understood by both parties as a definitive purchase agreement for a critical community need.” He pointed to the district’s initial board approval as evidence of their commitment.

This specific parcel of land, located in a rapidly growing segment of Montgomery County, was identified as crucial for NCISD to address its burgeoning student enrollment, likely intended for an elementary or middle school as part of a voter-approved bond program designed to accommodate thousands of new students migrating to the area.

The core legal question now before the 9th Court of Appeals is whether New Caney ISD is entitled to governmental immunity in this context. Governmental immunity, a legal doctrine protecting state and local entities from lawsuits unless specifically waived, is often a crucial defense for school districts. If immunity is granted, the case would likely be dismissed, potentially leaving the property owner to pursue other avenues or damages in a different legal framework. If immunity is denied, the case would be sent back to a lower district court in Montgomery County for a full trial, where the merits of the contract dispute and claims of bad faith and eminent domain threats would be thoroughly litigated.

The financial implications for both parties are substantial. For NCISD, the case could impact its long-range financial planning, its ability to secure land for future schools, and potentially set a precedent for how public entities navigate volatile real estate markets. For the property owner, the outcome will determine whether they can compel the district to fulfill the agreement or recover damages for the alleged breach of contract.

The 9th Court of Appeals, which hears appeals from trial courts in 10 counties including Montgomery, is expected to deliver its ruling in the coming months. The decision will not only shape the future of a key school development in Porter but also provide significant clarity on the enforceability of interlocal agreements between governmental entities and private landowners amidst unforeseen economic shifts.

New Caney ISD officials declined to comment on ongoing litigation when reached for this story.