Taking on the Cedar Park Center - Heb Center

[ATXGolfGuy]

I was on here years ago, but couldn't remember my username, so I had to create a new account. Anyway, I think I've finally provided the state with all the necessary information to pursue them intervening with the Cedar Park Center and their illegal 30.06 signs. To be honest, the process is long, and a mess, but at least it's started.

[sixer-sxt-3.7]

Would like to see updates when available. I had a brief email exchange with them, asking them who owned the property. They quickly told me the city, etc. But when I pointed out that they cannot enforce 30.06 postings, things got quiet.

[ATXGolfGuy]

Sixer, I will keep the board updated.

I had already sent him the return receipt from the signed for certified mail I sent them. This morning, I provided him the letter that I sent to the center and that should complete everything.

[Image removed because it revealed personal contact information of a captain in the Attorney General's office]

[ATXGolfGuy]

The image with contact information removed:

[locke_n_load]

The OAG will rule (probably a year from now, by the way) that since a private company operates the park, and that the city did not put up the signs (the private company did), therefore they are not in violation of the fines for signs law. The signs will remain. Sorry the only thing you may have helped with is statistics of this type of occurrence.

See similar instance here, and there are other examples as well.
https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/fi ... istory.pdf

[ATXGolfGuy]

Locke, that's not going to fly for this situation. First, it's not leased to a non-profit. It's ran by the city, and only has HEB in the new name because they paid for the naming rights. HEB doesn't control the building, and even if they did, they allow concealed carry in their stores.

[sixer-sxt-3.7]

I think odds are Locke is more right than not - "Fines for Signs" is really more about making the government follow the law, not private entities that chose to not follow the law on government property.

Time and time again, Paxton has ruled that because it's the private party that is posting signs, the government isn't the actual posting party, so they don't have to remove signs that private party posted. Convoluted enough?

And Cedar Park actually runs the facility? Usually they'd contract that out.

We need another "Fines for Signs" for private parties, as well.

[ATXGolfGuy]

It's actually managed by Texas Stars, LP. I've made both the city and the arena/management team aware of the violation. We'll see what the state does.

[locke_n_load]

It's actually managed by Texas Stars, LP. I've made both the city and the arena/management team aware of the violation. We'll see what the state does.

Yes a private entity is running the place? Then the political subdivision will not be held accountable by the OAG. Trust me. Time and time again his office opinion letters have said this. Doesn't matter if it's non-profit or not. His office has stated that the signs may not apply to a license holder because they are on public property, but the city/county that owns the land cannot be fined under the law because they are not the ones posting the signs.

Some reading material for you:

https://texasattorneygeneral.gov/3006/3 ... ng-letters

[ATXGolfGuy]

Locke, I've read just about all of those in the past. The rulings you're talking about usually happens when the city owns the land and leases the land to the non-profit or company. In most of the outcomes you're referring to, the city doesn't actually own the buildings. In the case of the Cedar Park Center -- they own the building and are just using contract management.

[ninjabread]

using contract management.

If contract management posted, the AG says "Signs are Fine!"

[locke_n_load]

Well, let us know what they say when you get a reply next year.

In the meantime, I'm going to agree with ninja.

using contract management.

If contract management posted, the AG says "Signs are Fine!"

[ralewis]

I've had a few threads here over the years about the Cedar Park/HEB Center. The problem now IMO, is there are metal detectors. Years ago, I ignored the signs when going to a non-prohibited event. But now with the metal detectors I think it's just not going to happen absent some sort of legislation compelling publicly owned facilities to explicitly allow valid license holders.

[Kalrog]

Well, I managed to go to the HEB Center this morning and saw the information listed above - so I had to renew my participation with this forum after it was apparently the best source of news (again) on topics like this. So - after apparently about a 7 year absence, I'm back!

If I have absorbed the information here and elsewhere correctly, what I understand is the following:

• The city of Cedar Park owns the property and the building (per WCAD)
• 30.06 is not enforceable because the city does own the building
• The 30.06 sign was likely put up by the management company - not directly by the city
• The OAG will likely not find that the city is violating 411.209 if they didn't put the signs in place

So we have a situation where you can legally carry, but the state will not enforce that right, and good luck getting past the metal detectors. Have I missed anything? I'm wondering what CPPD and/or WilCo DA would say about prosecuting. Do you have an update from the OAG on this, ATXGolfGuy? I'm about to fire off an email to the city folks and then escalate to the state rep if the laws need updating (and it appears that they do - for clarity if nothing else).

[Kalrog]

Well, the City of Cedar Park responded (the city attorney specifically) to my inquiry within about an hour on a Sunday evening. I'll call that good service even if I didn't like the contents of the answer. He pointed to the OAG opinion here: https://www.texasattorneygeneral.gov/op ... kp0108.pdf

That basically confirms what I was expecting his position to be - the city isn't liable for the signs. I was glad to see that the OAG opinion took it a bit further in this case and is of the opinion that you cannot be prosecuted for carrying past a 30.06 sign in this situation. Anyone want to chance the ride even if you win in court? I'll be taking this up with my state elected officials.