The Express-News has an article about the different sites that are being discussed for the new Texas A&M campus on the South Side.
While I think Mayor Hardberger and Judge Wolff have a point about preferring a site that doesn't cost the city money, the main issue shouldn't be money.
Free land is how UTSA ended up where it is, which was the middle of nowhere until about 10 years ago. UTSA has been derisively called "UT-Boerne" for as long as I can remember. Years later, UTSA ended up having to build a downtown campus to better serve the city. Now, UTSA is even buying more land as the original 600 acres have proven to be insufficient.
Why make the same mistake twice? Put TAMU-SA in the best site, regardless of cost. I'm not privy to all the details but the Terramark site near the SA river seems to be the best choice. It will have visibility from 410, will include Cassin Lake and abut the river. It's right next door to Mission Espada. And it would yield 800 acres for long-term growth.
That site represents the best that the South Side has to offer and that should be what matters when building a university meant to serve the South Side.