Councilors on Nov. 25 pressed city staff and asked for more financial disclosure before deciding whether to join a new Cleveland County Economic Development Coalition (CCEDC), a regional expansion of the long‑running Norman Economic Development Coalition (NEDC).

City staff described the history of NEDC — formed in 1996 by the city, chamber and the University of Oklahoma — and said the city has contributed "just over $3,000,000" to the coalition since its founding. The staff presentation said the proposed CCEDC agreement would begin July 1, 2025, automatically renew subject to appropriation and include a 90‑day early termination right for the city.

Council members repeatedly raised three central concerns: (1) whether the coalition will provide the city with annual audits or at least clear financial summaries of how Norman funds are spent; (2) whether the revised contract’s narrower political‑activity prohibition (it bars support/opposition of candidates or parties but is silent on other advocacy) is sufficient; and (3) whether a $1‑per‑resident contribution (approximately $130,046 for Norman) fairly reflects Norman’s historic investments and gives the city adequate influence on decision‑making.

"We contributed $1,000,000 in ARPA funds" to an incubator project and "I want to see a true layout — what did you specifically contribute?" one council member said, asking the coalition to show returns tied to city dollars. Staff noted that the ARPA subrecipient agreement triggered single‑audit requirements and that audits have been done; other council members said they had been unable to obtain recent audit documents and wanted the coalition to file or provide those reports directly to the city.

On the question of political activity, staff warned about legal limits. "We don't take a position even on a water rate increase that council sends to the voters," staff said, citing an Attorney General opinion and guidance that public agencies should provide factual information rather than advocacy. The proposed CCEDC contract, staff said, would explicitly prohibit using city funds to support or oppose a candidate or party but would not add broader advocacy limits.

Supporters of participation argued that a $1 per resident investment is modest compared with other municipal spending and can leverage real estate assets and statewide site‑selector relationships to attract higher‑paying jobs. One councilor said the coalition owns about $12,000,000 in real estate inside Norman city limits that can be used to land industry and make deals that the city alone cannot.

There was no vote or formal action at the meeting. Staff told council the session was for discussion and that council could direct staff to return with an action item; several councilors requested a follow‑up study session and asked staff to obtain and circulate audits, an updated list of participating municipalities, and clearer documentation of historic outcomes and ROI.

Next steps: staff will arrange further study sessions and follow up on requests for audits and membership lists before council considers any contract approval.