City attorney reviews open-government rules, conflicts of interest for Cedar Park EDC board

Jill Hoffman, senior assistant city attorney, gave the Cedar Park Type A Economic Development Sales Tax Corporation its annual briefing on open-government obligations, records retention and conflict-of-interest rules at the Sept. 8, 2025 special-call meeting.

Hoffman reviewed state law and local rules that govern the corporation, including the Open Meetings Act, the Public Information Act, and referenced what the transcript called the “Texas Development Act of 1979” as the statutory basis for the nonprofit corporation that oversees the Type A sales-tax-funded economic development activities. She described how a 1999 local option election created the Type A and Type B boards, noted a 2006 change authorizing use of funds for the HEB Center, and said a 2018 voter action allocated one-eighth of a cent of Type A sales tax to the stormwater drainage fund.

On public records, Hoffman emphasized that government-held information is presumptively public and noted that records relating to EDC business are subject to the Public Information Act regardless of where they are stored, including on personal devices. She said the city has a records-retention schedule and offered to provide it to board members. “Public information, the default is in government in Texas, it everything should be transparent,” Hoffman said, explaining disclosure obligations and limited statutory exceptions for attorney-client privileged material and sensitive economic-development negotiations.

Hoffman also warned the board about walking quorums and off-agenda deliberations. She explained that a deliberation by a quorum concerning public business that is not on a posted agenda can violate the Open Meetings Act and gave examples of how serial one-on-one conversations can produce an effective quorum. She noted a recent change to agenda-posting requirements from a 72-hour rule to a three-business-day standard under state law, which affects scheduling and the city’s practice for posting Type A agendas.

On conflicts of interest Hoffman outlined relevant statutes and local rules discussed in the meeting transcript: penal code provisions prohibiting bribery and restrictions on gifts (including a cited $50 threshold for certain exceptions), Local Government Code chapter 171 requirements to recuse when a board member has a business or real-property interest, and City Charter provisions referenced as articles 11.08 and 11.09 that prohibit solicitation of political contributions from city employees and require officers to avoid conflicts between personal and city interests.

Hoffman also pointed to the board’s rules of procedure—specifically Rule 3.8—prohibiting board members from meeting with applicants outside a properly posted meeting, and she reminded members of an attendance rule that triggers automatic resignation after missing three consecutive meetings or more than 40% of meetings in a 12-month period. She encouraged members to contact the city attorney’s office or the city secretary for questions about disclosures, recusal and records retention.

The guidance was delivered as an annual refresher; no formal action was taken on these items at the meeting.