Bastrop City Council Retreat Raises Transparency Questions

Estimated Time to Read: 8 minutes

The Bastrop City Council's decision to hold a public workshop more than 100 miles away in Fredericksburg has sparked a debate that reaches beyond one city or one retreat. At issue is a basic question of representative government: How accessible should elected officials be to the people they represent while conducting public business?

On August 6, the Bastrop City Council convened an offsite workshop at the John Wm. Klein Meeting Room in Fredericksburg. The official agenda listed the meeting at 115 N. Crockett Street and specifically identified it as a "City Council Workshop – Offsite." The distance attracted immediate criticism, including from Texas State Rep. Stan Gerdes (R-Smithville), who announced plans to file legislation requiring city council meetings to be held within the cities they represent.

But the location becomes more significant when considered alongside what council members actually gathered to discuss.

Bastrop Retreat Covered Taxes, Spending, and Flock Cameras

This was not simply a team-building retreat or an educational trip to learn how another Texas city operates.

The agenda began its substantive presentations with a review of current projects and the city budget. The budget discussion specifically included items not funded, setting the tax rate, and a Hotel Occupancy Tax (HOT) contingency.

From there, council members were scheduled to discuss ongoing and future capital projects, the city's Master Transportation Plan, water and wastewater needs, and street projects. The agenda's "Future Goals" included a recreation center, expanded fire and police service, and data center policy. Legislative priorities included both legislative advocacy and Flock cameras.

These are consequential matters of public policy. A city budget determines how taxpayer money is spent. Setting the tax rate directly affects property owners. Data center policies can affect infrastructure, development, water, electricity, and property rights. Flock cameras raise questions about policing, surveillance, data collection, and privacy.

No final vote was necessary for these discussions to matter. Workshops are often where elected officials ask questions, hear presentations, explore alternatives, and develop positions before an issue eventually appears on an agenda for final action. That is why public access to representative government should mean more than being present for the final vote.

The meeting did include a citizen comment period. Residents who could not attend could submit written comments online at least two hours beforehand, but those comments would be provided to council members and entered into the public record rather than read aloud. Those who attended in person could address the council for up to three minutes.

For Bastrop residents, exercising that opportunity in person meant traveling to Fredericksburg.

Bastrop Mayor Defends the Offsite Retreat

Bastrop Mayor Ishmael Harris defended the decision after criticism of the retreat.

Harris said Fredericksburg was selected intentionally because the two historic communities face some similar challenges involving growth, tourism, and preservation. Bastrop officials used the trip to meet with Fredericksburg officials and tourism professionals and learn about subjects such as Hotel Occupancy Tax funds, Main Street programs, tourism, and marketing. That is a reasonable objective. Local elected officials should look outside their own jurisdictions for good ideas, visit successful communities, tour projects, meet other officials, and learn from their experiences.

The more difficult question is whether doing so required the Bastrop City Council itself to conduct a public workshop in Fredericksburg. Harris described the event as a working retreat and confirmed that officials spent hours discussing Bastrop's budget and tax rate, transportation, streets, water and wastewater, capital projects, public safety, economic development, data centers, Flock cameras, and other issues affecting residents.

He also emphasized that council members took no final action or votes during the retreat and that the meeting was publicly posted, open to anyone willing to attend, and livestreamed. Most significantly, Harris acknowledged the accessibility concern. He conceded that holding the retreat in Fredericksburg made in-person attendance less convenient for Bastrop residents and described that criticism as fair.

That concession identifies the real problem more clearly than arguments over whether the public technically had access.

A livestream is valuable. Online agendas are valuable. Electronic public comments are valuable. Technology can make government substantially more accessible. But those tools should expand public access, not become substitutes for keeping the government itself reasonably accessible to the governed.

Offsite City Council Retreats Are a Broader Texas Issue

Bastrop is almost certainly not alone.

City councils and other local governmental bodies have long used retreats and strategic planning sessions, and it would be surprising if Bastrop were the only Texas city to have conducted one outside its jurisdiction. Officials may prefer offsite meetings because they remove everyday distractions, provide more time for planning, or allow officials to study what another community is doing. That possibility should temper any attempt to portray Bastrop as uniquely responsible for the practice. It should not excuse the practice itself.

If offsite retreats involving substantive government deliberations are common, the appropriate conclusion is not that what happened in Bastrop is acceptable because everyone does it. It is that Texas may have a broader transparency issue worth examining. There is also an important distinction that should not get lost in that debate.

Bastrop officials did not need to remain within the city limits to learn from Fredericksburg. They could travel there, tour downtown, meet with its mayor, talk with tourism professionals, study its Main Street programs, and bring what they learned home. What deserves scrutiny is the separate decision to convene the Bastrop City Council as a governmental body there and discuss the public business of Bastrop.

The problem is not elected officials leaving town. It is representative government leaving with them.

Texas House Will Examine Offsite Government Meetings

The controversy surrounding Bastrop's retreat is no longer merely prompting calls for future legislation. Texas lawmakers are now preparing to examine the underlying issue directly.

The Texas House Select Committee on Governmental Oversight revised the notice for its August 26 interim hearing to add a charge concerning the Texas Open Meetings Act. Specifically, the committee will “evaluate the authority of political subdivisions to hold meetings subject to the Texas Open Meetings Act outside of the territory of the political subdivision.”

The timing is notable following the controversy in Bastrop and State Rep. Stan Gerdes' announcement that he intends to pursue legislation requiring city council meetings to occur within the cities those councils represent. The committee charge is broader than Bastrop and applies to political subdivisions generally, making the upcoming hearing an opportunity for lawmakers to examine whether existing Texas law provides sufficient safeguards for geographically accessible public meetings.

That broader scope is important. Bastrop is almost certainly not the only local government to have held an offsite retreat or planning session, and the Legislature should not approach the issue as though it were. The better question is whether Texas should establish clearer expectations for where political subdivisions may convene when a quorum gathers to deliberate official public business. Any reform should preserve legitimate travel by public officials. City council members should remain free to attend conferences, tour facilities, meet officials from other jurisdictions, and learn from successful communities. Joint meetings, emergencies, and other unusual circumstances may also warrant carefully defined exceptions.

But those circumstances are different from relocating the deliberative work of a governing body outside the community it represents.

The upcoming House hearing gives lawmakers an opportunity to draw that distinction and determine whether the Texas Open Meetings Act adequately protects not merely technical access to government, but meaningful access to representative government.

Bastrop Retreat Offers a Transparency Lesson for Texas

Nothing about the Bastrop controversy requires assuming bad motives by city officials. Mayor Ishmael Harris has explained why Fredericksburg was selected, acknowledged the accessibility concern, and said no final votes were taken. Nor is there reason to assume Bastrop is uniquely engaging in this practice. Other local governments almost certainly conduct retreats and planning sessions away from the communities they represent. If that practice is widespread, however, its prevalence should not become its justification.

The distinction is relatively simple. There is nothing wrong with elected officials traveling elsewhere to find better ideas. There is something fundamentally different about requiring residents to travel elsewhere to observe their own government deliberate.

Texas lawmakers will soon have an opportunity to examine that distinction. When the House Select Committee on Governmental Oversight convenes on August 26, it will specifically consider the authority of political subdivisions to conduct meetings subject to the Texas Open Meetings Act outside their own territory. That examination could determine whether the Bastrop controversy results in clearer statewide rules governing where local governments conduct the public's business.

Representative government works best when government remains close to the represented. Texas law should encourage local officials to learn wherever useful while maintaining a basic expectation that when they gather as a governing body to deliberate their community's public business, they do so among the people who sent them there.

---