But Specific Performance is (or was) available

In Hays Street Bridge Restoration Group v. City of San Antonio, Chief Justice Hecht found that specific performance was an available remedy in a suit under Chapter 271 of the Local Government Code. The City of San Antonio had contracted with the group for the group to raise money and donate the money, the bridge, and an adjacent tract of land for a park. The contract provided that all of the funds raised would be used on the Bridge project. The City changed course, and sold the tract of land to a local microbrewery. The Group sued.

After disposing of the City's mootness agrument, and finding that the contract was subject to Chapter 271, the Court found that the limits on remedies in the statute were limited to the damages that could be recovered, and the statute did not say anything about equitable remedies.

Notably, the recent amendment to Chapter 271, where specific performance was listed as a remedy available for certain types of contracts, was not applicable to the contract signed in 2002, because the amendment provided that it only applied to contracts signed after the effective date of the amendment. So it is an open question whether specific performance is a remedy available on contracts executed after 2013.

The opinion can be found at http://www.txcourts.gov/media/1443743/170423.pdf.