You’ve probably seen the glowing headlines as the local media can’t stop wagging their tails. But behind the news reports that this is GRAND there are Animal Advocates who are growling. From questionable facility operations and designs to compliance and transparency concerns many are asking: Who’s this facility really serving — the animals, or the headlines?
Dana Baird, City of Frisco Communications Director, was right about one thing in her press release “its a first of its kind” but where she was wrong was “in North Texas.” After reading everything sent to us by animal advocates this type of facility with a “private partner” which really means “PRIVATE BUSINESS” has never been done anywhere from our research. Ms. Baird made sure WFAA, her former employer, only reported the “GOOD NEWS” like she usually does.
Yesterday we were cc/d on an email sent to everyone on the City Council, most of the folks in the City Manager’s Office, and almost every news outlet in town (including us). My guess, it won’t be published by any local news outlet because we never anything “bad” published against the city. The email also included several local animal advocates and rescue folks in Frisco.
What was the consensus? They animal welfare folks are growling at the new proposal, and one said to us off the record that “we feel this was thrown up in time for election season and to shut down animal advocates who have been working for years for a full-service animal hub / shelter (not a holding facility).” After reviewing the presentation, we tend to agree! Link for presentation is at the end of this blog!
We will publish the letter sent to the city and media in its entirety below. We don’t know much about animal welfare, but we can understand the concerns after reading it. In my opinion, this appears to be a $12 million facility funded by CDC taxpayer money to support a private business. If that is the case, why not fund downtown and #SAVEMAIN? The building will be a two-story structure with a floor plan of 18,987 square feet. How does that break down? The breakdown: 10,769 square feet will be used by the private business, 5,277 square feet belong to the City of Frisco, and 1,100 square feet will be for utility space for both, such as laundry, storage, electrical, and janitorial. The private partnership is with a for-profit business called Wiggle Butts, and they will rent out space to a tenant (veterinarian). The question we have is why they have not held any community sessions or input sessions like they did for Universal Kids or the Performing Arts Center. With to little information and what looks like rushed planning, this looks like a hot mess. After reading the letter, I agree with the Animal Advocates that this has too many potential risks.
Dear Council Members,
This email was put together by several animal advocates who have concerns over the new Animal Holding Facility. While I know this email will be long, I encourage you to read it thoroughly because the liability the city could potentially hold with this model could be costly.
There is a reason animal shelters across the country don’t mix owner owned dogs with stray or adoptable animals. Most public/private partnerships across the United States are done with groups like ASPCA, Humane Society, Best Friends where they run an entire operation for a municipal entity. Why? There is too much liability when you have a “privately owned for profit business operation” within the same facility. The current presented facility violates your own Frisco ordinance today for kennel operations and is a liability to taxpayers who will end up footing the bill in a lawsuit.
Here are the concerns and questions from local animal advocates across Frisco after the recent work session related to the facility operations & design, veterinary services & oversight, financial & contractual concerns, public safety & liability, animal intake & disposition, the relationship with CCAS, staffing & training, legal & regulatory compliance and transparency concerns.
Facility Operation & Design
Two key areas of design in shelters are functionality and public health and safety. Shelters (aka holding facilities) must meet Texas Administrative Code (TAC), Title 25, Part 1, Chapter 169, Subchapter A (Rabies Control) and Health & Safety Code Chapter 826. Functionality or Flow Efficiency is important. A one-way flow design that allows animals to move from intake à medical à adoption/release (or in this case transfer to CCAS) without backtracking to prevent contamination. The current design does not have a “one-way flow” at all!
If Frisco Animal Services drops off a dog via the sallyport it will be moved into the “dog intake” area and then transferred over to the quarantine kennels or general kennels. The hallway space is not self-contained meaning airborne zoonotic diseases can transfer to other animals in that hallway space. Now let’s say one of the stray dogs needs to see the vet and you walk it down the hallway to the “green area” for vet care, that dog could have potentially contaminated that main hallway.
Contagious Diseases (some deadly) such as Parvo, Distemper, Upper Respiratory are transferred by touch, clothes, shoes, or airborne. Even if you have separate HVAC systems in the kennel runs that does not protect “owner owned dogs” that are being paid to be boarded at a private business from contamination in these hallways or walkways. This is a serious liability to the city and the business. It can also have deadly consequences for owned dogs.
Now Wiggle Butt has a dog in boarding, and they move the dog out of the yellow kennels and over to the “daycare” space which is accessed off the same main hallway. What happens? If the stray that was in the hallway before the “owner owned dog” is unvaccinated, carrying a contagious disease it could potentially transfer that to that owner owned dog. Owner owned pets can have not contact AT ALL with strays which is why at shelters they have specific areas for meet and greets or pet introductions. The layout of this facility is a walking liability for taxpayers, residents, Frisco pets, the city and this business.
This leads to the following set of questions because the disease prevention and control aspects of this design are very worrisome.
Has the city conducted a FORMAL FEASIBLITY STUDY? No! Why not?
The city has done this for every other project, including the recent Performing Arts Center.
Why not use a legitimate company like Quorum to do a formal feasibility study because this presentation does not reference best practices in municipal animal care.
Quorum / Shelter Planners of America can give you better demand planning than using arbitrary numbers from Collin County that do not truly represent Frisco’s intake.
Who helped design this model? What professional input did you have?
How was the kennel count determined? No data sets were given, and did you consider the forecast for today vs 10 years from now?
What experts were consulted on the design and functionality of this building? (outside of those who have a vested interest)
While Councilwoman Laura Rummell has stated online that design will have different HVAC systems that does not matter in shared spaces. Please explain in more detail which areas will have separate systems with separate air zones?
Will the HVAC systems be in compliance with the Association of Shelter Veterinarian standards?
Which veterinarian’s (other than those with a vested interest) were consulted for input in this design? Did any of them specialize in shelter medicine?
Will the private partner and its staff be required to take the same certification classes on Zoonotic Disease control that Animal Control Officers are required to take?
What will the cleaning workflow be? Where will cleaning supplies be stored? In the storage room on the main hallway? Will the supplies be used on both sides of the facility?
Will you have separate cleaning equipment and facilities for the “Frisco side” versus the “private business side” to prevent complete contamination by staff from one area to another? For example, will use the same floor mops throughout the facility?
Where will the food bowls be washed and cleaned?
How will the private business / city prevent airborne zoonotic diseases being transferred by clothes, shoes, hands, etc., around the facility to different areas of when they are crossing over areas where you have owner owned dogs?
If you must take a dog from the “Frisco” side to the medical area to see the vet (in green) how will you prevent diseases from being transferred to the staff kennels, daycare and grooming area. They must walk right into it to get the medical portion of the building.
Will used food and water bowls be transported back and forth in the main hallway to the feed storage room after the dogs have used them allowing potential airborne diseases to be released in the main hallway?
For liability reasons we are curious why privately (owner-owned) boarded animals are located directly next to quarantine and adoptable animals that have the risk of disease?
Who was the architect for this project? Do they have any experience in animal shelter designs?
What SOP will be in place and has it been written with the help of experts to confirm sick/healthy animals will be physically separated? Especially from “owner owned dogs” that are in the care of the private business housed in the same facility.
2. Animal Intake & Disposition
What isolation set up will you have for the first 24 hours an animal is in the facility to watch for illness before putting a dog in the “Frisco kennels”?
What types of oversight and reporting methods will this private business have (subject to PIR’s)?
Will the facility spay or neuter these animals before they are transferred to CCAS?
Will animals be vaccinated upon intake or while at Frisco’s facility?
What medical services will be offered to these stray’s before being transferred to CCAS?
What shelter management system will be used for keeping track of records?
How will we prevent non-residents from using the facility and dropping of strays? What will be the method to get those animals back to the proper facilities? What is the method to monitor this?
Will the public be able to drop off strays? At the presentation it was said yes, however WFAA is reporting the public cannot drop off animals to the facility?
Will Frisco Animal Services be the only ones with access to drop off at this facility?
If it must go through Frisco Animal Services, how will after hours strays be handled? Will residents still be able to drop off found dogs after hours at Frisco Emergency ER?
The proposal mentions that animals will be transferred to rescues within 3–5 days. Is it 3 days or 5 days?
Will Collin County count that stray hold period towards the number of days in their stay hold period?
It was mentioned that the private partner will be transferring the animals to Collin County, how is this being accomplished?
If the private partner transfers animals to Collin County will the partner also use the same vehicle to transport owner owned animals to clients? If yes, this allows for the increased potential of cross contamination (without separate vehicles)
Is CCAS on board with private business dropping off strays after the hold periods? Who will be doing the paperwork?
It was mentioned by the private partner they have connections with rescues and plan to move some of the dogs after a stray hold to a rescue. Which Rescue? Have any Rescues committed to that in writing?
Considering that rescues across Texas and the country are already at or beyond capacity and other shelters can’t get them to pull animals we are curious what magic element this private entity must make that happen.
Is the proposed director suggesting these animals be transferred to her own rescue? If so, that raises significant questions about transparency and potential conflicts of interest.
According to the press release you’ll be doing adoptions at the facility (which is fantastic). Why do you need to transfer dogs to CCAS?
After the stray hold is complete, and a dog is kept there for adoption, who will the adoption be through? The City of Frisco, from Wiggle Butt?
Which legal entity will be responsible for the animals while in custody? Does the liability fall on Wiggle Butts or City of Frisco?
If the facility is full and a stray comes in, what is the plan? With no space where will the pet go? Frisco ER, CCAS? Who will you make those decisions with?
Who will be responsible for managing clear intake & stray-hold policies: Exact stray hold period, owner notification plan, microchip scanning, and how/when animals are declared property of shelter/rescue. (Statute requires microchip scanning and gives cities duties.) Is the hold time / stray time the same for microchipped vs. non-microchipped pets?
3. Staffing & Training
Will the training for the staff be different for the private business versus the staff overseeing the “Frisco Animals”
Will there be SOPs for staffing & training standards
Will there be a requirement for minimum staffing ratios and animal-control training? Will the staff working with “Frisco Pet” have to complete the same required Animal Control Officer Certifications as a standard ACO? Who will pay for that training?
Will the Animal Advisory board help oversee this process required by Chapter 823 including independent vets and animal welfare members.
Regarding the proposed facility, what experience does the proposed veterinarian and director have working in or managing municipal shelters?
Has the city talked with any local municipal shelters for feedback?
Have they handled large-scale animal intake and the complex decision making that comes with public shelter operations?
Do either of the operators have certifications and relevant courses taken from the National Animal Care & Control Association?
Without the proper training and knowledge, the facility risks noncompliance and liability issues so who will be responsible for that, the private entity, the city, or both?
4. Veterinary Oversight & Public Services
What kind of veterinary services by law can you offer while a dog is on stray hold?
Who will have that Euthanasia authority? What will the decision matrix be? If no, then will the animals be sent to Collin County for euthanasia?
If EU is conducted, who decides euthanasia, under what standards, and what review/appeal rights exist? How will triage be done during capacity crises? Will the facility have humane euthanasia if needed for an injured animal?
We assume the vet will also be allowed to continue their private practice in the facility (same as Wiggle Butts). Will there be any restrictions to whom they can service in the facility through private practice clients?
Who will be writing the biosecurity & infection control SOPs: Daily cleaning, PPE, isolation protocols, vaccination requirements for boarding clients, staff vaccination/training, disease reporting.
Veterinary oversight and VCPR: Is there a written VCPR for boarding clients (if clients will receive vet care on site)? Who pays for emergency vet care for customers vs strays?
Zoonotic diseases are transmitted through direct contact, aerosol transmission (airborne), and ingestion via food or water bowls. If a stray animal comes out of the kennel and is walked down the hallway to the clinical area of the vet and it has a medical issue that is contagious, are you aware the hallway is not contaminated? Who will clean the whole hallway before any other animal could potentially walk on it in order not to transfer a zoonotic disease or contagious virus from the floor.
That same hallway will be used to walk owner owned animals from their kennels to a boarding / training room along that hallway without it being cleaned they could transfer zoonotic viruses
Public Services
Since the beginning of these discussions, it has been mentioned several times that this facility “may have” services for the public. What services will be available? What cost?
Low-Cost Access for spay & neuter, dental care, set of yearly vaccines including rabies for dogs and cats of all ages, microchipping, parasite prevention, and heartworm testing?
Heartworm Prevention medications?
Wellness Subscription Plans for low-cost annual services over 12 months for budget affordability?
In the presentation the owner of Wiggle Butts mentioned the facility will try to offer services to those who need to surrender in hopes that it will help them be able to keep their dog instead. Some of the suggestions were a food pantry, training, behavioral, etc. Who will be providing the training? What is the cost for this? Will it be low cost or at her current prices of $250 per session (which most people can’t afford).
5. Relationship with Collin County Animal Services (CCAS)
Will Frisco continue its contract with CCAS?
Will the current contract remain in place, or will there be a new contract?
How much is that costing taxpayers on top of the new facility?
What changes will be made to the contract now that Frisco has its own holding facility?
Will it change to a price per animal drop off?
How much will the city of Friso have to contribute to the building of CCAS expansion if we have our own facility? Will that be on top of the $12 million cost for our own facility?
Currently when an animal arrives at Collin County, they have a 7-day stray hold policy.
Will the time an animal spent at the Frisco facility count towards the CCAS stray hold period?
If no, will CCAS then hold the dog another 5 to 7 days under their stray hold policy? (in addition to the Frisco hold time)
Will the dogs or cats that are transferred to CCAS, after the stray hold period at the Frisco facility, be at the top of the list for potential euthanasia since they have already been held for a stray period?
How will CCAS determine what animals are adoptable when transferred over to them since they will have no contact with the animals while in Frisco’s care?
The hold period allows staff at shelters to determine how adoptable a pet can be.
How many animals currently housed at the Collin County Animal Shelter originate from the City of Frisco in a weekly or monthly period?
How many dogs are being dropped off at Frisco emergency clinics or veterinary offices?
Is there a way to determine how many of those animals dropped off are from outside city limits?
According to the presentation No owner surrenders will be accepted at the Frisco Facility and Frisco residents will still have to contact either Animal Services or schedule to take them to Collin County Animal Services, correct?
Do you feel this is a confusing message to residents?
Reality Check: That is a very confusing mixed message to residents. “Go here for A but go here for B or maybe C call Animal Services” The end result will be the same as every other city Residents will dump their dogs in a nice neighborhood hoping they are found and taken to the shelter as a stray. What will it take for the Frisco facility to allow surrenders?
Has Collin County been informed of the future changes and their role in the new set up? How does Collin County feel about this plan? Have they agreed to these changes to be your euthanasia headquarters and surrender headquarters?
Has CCAS agreed to have a private entity transport strays to them (instead of Frisco Animal Services) and do you have a signed agreement on that?
6. Public Safety & Liability
Bite Quarantine
Will you have a designated isolation area for “official quarantine dogs” or will you handle that process through your CCAS relationship?
Who will properly train staff in safe handling techniques and the use of appropriate equipment such as catch poles, muzzles, and protective gear.
What will happen when an animal comes in that is human-aggressive, or a dog or cat with a confirmed bite history?
Volunteers
At the presentation the owner of Wiggle Butts said they hope to have a volunteer program put together soon. Generally, people cannot “volunteer” for a private, for-profit business without pay under federal and Texas labor law, so how will volunteers fit into the equation?
If this facility is run by a private business such as a private kennel, trainer, or boarding business and has unpaid people walking dogs, cleaning kennels, feeding animals, or helping customers — that’s work that generates profit and violates the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Legally, they must be paid employees or independent contractors (rarely fits).
What is the plan to handle aggressive or dangerous animals that may pose a risk to staff, volunteers, and the public?
If a volunteer is bitten by a stray who will be liable? The City? Wiggle Butt? The animal’s owner since it is on stray hold?
What will the behavioral assessment and process be for strays? Potentially Adoptable Pets? Bite Quarantine Animals?
How does a “fear-free” training approach align with public safety and the legal responsibilities of a municipal facility?
While the “fear free” approach is a positive and compassionate philosophy, it must be applied realistically. Not every animal entering a municipal shelter can be safely rehabilitated or rehomed, and public safety must take precedence over idealism. It can lead to inadequate space, staffing, or resources, often leads to overcrowding, increased stress, and higher disease risk.
Therefore, what will be the balanced approach—combining humane care with practical decision-making to ensure that the shelter fulfills its mission responsibly and sustainably?
This is a complicated, high-risk setup (owner owned animals vs strays) unless the contract and operations are written and run with rock-solid public-health, veterinary, procurement, and liability protections. Who will be responsible for this?
Does this model currently create a substantial liability risk for the City of Frisco and its taxpayers?
7. Legal & Regulatory Compliance
Which legal entity will own the animals while in custody? City or private operator? (This impacts who is allowed to provide medical care under the owner-exemption.)
Which statute will govern each function since you have a private kennel with a city facility?
Shelters operate under the Texas Health & Safety Code Chapter 823 while “Kennels” defined as a facility that boards, trains or handles dogs or cats owned by others for compensation operates under THSC Chapter 824.
Will shelter animals be run under Chapter 823 and boarding clients or under Chapter 824 — and how will conflicts be resolved?
Records & Public Information: Who will maintain the records, where will they be kept, and how will public-records requests be handled? Owners have a right to privacy and now you have a private business with access to resident information which is usually considered confidential.
Consumer protections for paying customers: Will the operator and vet be required to provide written informed consent to private paying customers of the business that the facility will be holding strays that could be unvaccinated, possibly be carrying an infection disease, maybe there on an aggressive quarantine hold, etc.?
Will there be a written notice about how refund/compensation terms if a paying customer dog gets exposed or injured to protect taxpayers from a potential lawsuit.
Who will be responsible for Performance metrics & termination rights: Return-to-owner rate targets, disease outbreak thresholds, audit rights, corrective action, and termination for failure to meet standards.
Will the private partner be subject to PIR’s for city data or details?
Will the city carry its own insurance to protect us from potential lawsuits from this setup? (outside the private contractor’s insurance)
CURRENT CITY OF FRISCO’S ORDINANCE: Defines a kennel as “Any premises wherein any person engages in providing pet care services (except veterinary) for four (4) or more animals, such as boarding, grooming, sitting and training pets, except as prohibited by the City of Frisco’s Comprehensive Zoning Ordinance, as it currently exists or may be amended.”
Veterinary services are excluded from that definition (i.e. if you’re a vet you may have other rules).
The current ordinance requires kennel clients to provide “Proof of current rabies, parvo, distemper and Bordetella vaccinations must be maintained for all dogs, cats and ferrets four (4) months of age” so will the for profit Kennel portion of the business have to disclose to potential paying clients that unvaccinated, pets potentially carrying a zoonotic virus will be contained inside the building?
8. Financial & Contractual Concerns
Does operator have a 10-year history of financial and business credentials?
Does the current business currently have a history that shows they can cover the potential monthly cost of over $50k +15% of profits (2nd year)
What is the back up plan if the operator cannot fulfill its obligations?
Will, or has, the city publicly advertised for operators now that they have a business model?
Has there been a Proforma (of Financial Forecast) of Income & Expenses for City
Has there been a Proforma (projection) for services, policy and operational costs and expenses?
Is the private entity positioned to benefit financially or professionally from this proposal through their private businesses? If yes, how?
Furthermore, what is the clear contingency plan if the operation proves unsustainable?
If the director is unable to meet intake demands or financial goals, there must be a backup strategy—such as returning management to municipal control, restructuring the program, or appointing new leadership—to protect both the animals and the community?
What type of Contract language will there be: indemnity / insurance / risk allocation: Minimum insurance amounts, municipality indemnity carve-outs, who pays defense costs, and whether municipal immunity applies. Will the city require the private operator as an additional insured (and vice versa as appropriate).
Procurement transparency: Show how the city selected the vendor, RFQ/RFP documents, competing bids, and legal justification under Local Government Code. Confirm the contract was pro-cured properly.
Will, or has, the city publicly advertised for operators now that they have a business model?
9. Transparency
With the private partner announcement, did the “private partner” have any input or say on this while in her role on the city’s Animal Advisory Board? Is that a conflict of interest?
Will she remain on the Animal Advisory Board in the future? Is this a conflict of interest?
Will employees of the business have access to information on strays and how does this potentially violate privacy issues of residents. What about paying owners privacy?
Procurement transparency: Show how the city selected the vendor, RFQ/RFP documents, competing bids, and legal justification under Local Government Code. Confirm the contract was procured properly.
In conclusion, this Animal Facility Presented is a liability issue all around. Too many variables have not been considered. This puts the city, the business owner, residents and Frisco pets at risk. There is a reason this has not been done before, so what makes Frisco think they can do it better?
For this to move forward it would need to have strict SOP Clauses in the Contract (to protect taxpayer dollars from potential suits)
Customer consumer protections: “Contractor must obtain written informed consent per Chapter 824 for boarding clients, disclose co-location with municipal shelter, fire-safety systems, and emergency plans; refunds/credit policy for exposure incidents.”
Strict physical separation clause: The contractor shall maintain distinct, walled, separately ventilated areas for municipal-custody animals and boarding/training clientele. No shared runs, HVAC, food/water bowls, or grooming equipment. The floor plan should be reworked to have strays nowhere near a potential owner-owned animal.
Biosecurity & outbreak clause: “Contractor will implement DSHS-recommended isolation, cleaning, and cohorting plans; immediate notification to city and mandatory temporary suspension of boarding if an outbreak is suspected.”
VCPR & veterinary authority clause: “All veterinary care for paid clients must be provided under a documented VCPR; shelter animal care will be under the shelter VCPR as required by law. Contractor will not offer paid medical services to owners of boarded animals without expressed written authorization and compliance with TBVME rules
Insurance & indemnity: “Minimum commercial general liability (specify high limits), professional liability for vet services if provided on site, and contractor named as additional insured on city policy. Contractor indemnifies city for contractor negligence; city indemnifies contractors for actions taken under city directives.”
Records & transparency: “Contractor will maintain intake, medical, and disposition records on premises; microchip scans on intake; monthly reporting to city; records available for audit and subject to public information requests.
Frisco is one of the oldest cities in the metroplex and over the years we have not stopped growing! Every day you see more modern buildings going up and more new developments along the Tollway. From the PGA to The Star there is always something to do! BUT, WHAT ABOUT MAIN? WHAT ABOUT THE HEART OF OUR CITY?
Just beyond the glamour and stadium lights of Toyota Stadium sits a unique and historic downtown. The downtown Rail District is home to an eclectic group of independent, locally owned restaurants and businesses. The district boasts unique street murals and one-of-a-kind shops. This historically preserved area offers visitors a glimpse into the “Real Frisco,” not the Touristy Frisco. The Rail district is surrounded by residents who enjoy living in the area and is home to locally owned small-town businesses that have invested in our community for YEARS. Now, they need the CITY TO INVEST IN THEM!
Yes, downtown needed to be REVITALIZED, that we can all agree on. It has taken the city DECADES to come up with a plan, and now they are moving right along! HOWEVER, residents and local business owners are asking COULD THE CITY HAVE GONE ABOUT IT A DIFFERENT WAY? The impact on these small businesses has been devastating! These are locals who have invested in Frisco for years, paid taxes, and now they are in trouble because of REVITALIZATION. It is time for them to realize the impact on downtown businesses and that it is NOT NATURAL. It HAS BEEN CREATED by OUR CITY! KEY POINT: The trouble they are in is not because of the economy; it is the IMPACT OF THE CONSTRUCTION that is #DestoryingMain!
The people finally had enough. And no, not the “enough” where you write a passive-aggressive Facebook comment while sipping your venti latte—this was real, in-the-flesh frustration. Residents and small business owners lined up one after another at Tuesday night’s City Council meeting. Stepping up to the microphone, voices cracking between anger and heartbreak, to say what everyone driving down Main Street already knows: Main is broken, Businesses are broken, and it is time for the Council to stop pretending it’s fine.
Citizens Input: Main Street, or Main Mess?
FACT: Main is supposed to be the beating heart of Frisco. Instead, it’s looking more like endless traffic, crumbling infrastructure, and the ever-growing list of businesses just barely hanging on. Main isn’t thriving—it’s BARELY surviving.
The people who spoke didn’t come armed with consultants, shiny renderings, or buzzwords like “synergy corridors.” They came with lived experience: the store owner whose sales have dropped because customers don’t want to fight the chaos to park or try to cross the street without a Frogger-level survival plan. Main used to be a place you wanted to stroll on a Friday night.
LIMIT THE TIME
It started with Jeff Cheney looking for a motion to limit the time to speak from 5 minutes to 3 minutes (because there were more than 10 people). Keating, who hopes to be your next Mayor (remember that) was the first to motion to “CUT THE TIME,” which was seconded by Livingston. These are local businesses, and you can’t take 5 minutes to hear each one of them?
Next, Mayor Jeff Cheney did exactly what Mayor Jeff Cheney always does (side note: we are reaching out to the Texas Municipal League to see if our mayor may have violated the open meetings act), talking before anyone had taken the microphone to discuss an item NOT ON THE AGENDA! Why? He announced the city planned to allocate $500,000 towards Main, and they will hold a public discussion sometime around October 7th.
The Voices of Frisco Business Owners & Residents:
First Up: Erik Colberg spoke as a resident who lives in the Rail District
Lee Gonzales – Owner of La Finca Coffee & Bakery located at 7511 Main Street #150
Randy’s plea brought tears to the eyes of many sitting in the council chambers. Randy’s started his businesses here in 1993 and today Randy’s Steakhouse sits in the Old Victorian Style Home along Main Street that used to belong to Frisco native Vivian McCallum. The impact has devastated his business.
Steve Anderson – Music Services located at 6726 West Main St
Jason Taylor – Owner of Endur3Bikes located at 6699 Main St
Rich Vana– Chef/Owner of Heritage Table located at 7110 Main St
Samar & Luna Binat – Owner of La Suprema Market located at 6726 Main St, Ste 100
Taylor Lattery: Frisco Music Store
Scott Hoffner – Owner of Didi’s Downtown located at 7210 W. Main St
Local Frisco Resident: Paul Jessen
Local Rail District Resident: Brittnay Colberg
Council’s Response: Insert Shrug Emoji
Mayor Cheney (as usual) took his time to respond. The Texas Open Meetings Act states: The city council shall not deliberate on any item that is not on the agenda, and for such an item, members of council may either: (1) make a statement of fact regarding the item; (2) make a statement concerning the policy regarding the item; or (3) propose that the item be placed on a future agenda. As we have said before, we believe Cheney continually violates this during citizen input because he is not making a statement of fact, he is not talking about a policy he is pontificating his opinion.
As for the rest of the council, well, Keating wants a T-shirt! That will be good clickbait for his Mayoral Campaign website (once he announces his BIG secret)! As for the rest, the reaction was predictable. Council sat nodding politely, practicing their best “I’m listening” faces while probably drafting their next campaign slogans in their heads. Because what’s the use of listening if it is not a billion-dollar developer!
The Hashtag Heard Around Frisco
The people weren’t asking for magic. They weren’t asking for a monorail or a Disneyland Main Street redo. They were asking for action—basic, common-sense fixes, leadership, and accountability. Instead, what they’ve gotten so far is a year of excuses, construction delays, and much of the time businesses have been non-accessible.
#SAVEMAIN is more than a social media slogan—it’s a rallying cry. It’s the people saying: stop patting yourselves on the back for “economic development wins” when you can’t fix the most visible, most essential street in the city. If the Council won’t act now, when?
Frisco, the people have spoken. They showed up. They demanded better. Now the ball’s in Council’s court. They can either lead—or they can keep ignoring the obvious while the rest of us tweet #SAVEMAIN until our thumbs cramp. Because here’s the truth: the citizens already told you the answer. You just must stop pretending not to hear it.
Residents Should Be Asking…
Why now? For years, the councils have gone back and forth about the redevelopment of downtown Frisco. Why not do this during the Covid shutdown so businesses did not suffer twice?
When this started in June 2024 – what was the expectation for the future?
The businesses who are struggling from this construction – who is knocking on their door to “Buy or Save” their business?
What is a revitalized downtown without the heart of downtown – the businesses?
Stay Tuned for Part 2
Disclaimer: This blog includes satire, parody, and comic relief. It contains summarized accounts created solely for humor and commentary. Any resemblance to real events is either coincidental or intentionally satirical. Reader discretion — and a sense of humor — are advised.
When we dropped Part 1 about John Keating’s not-so-secret bid for Mayor, the inbox lit up like a Christmas tree in July. “Finally!” people said. “Someone’s talking about it!” Well, after a little digging, a little late-night reading of Texas law (because apparently someone has to), we have a few follow-up questions that deserve a big, neon spotlight:
Did our council members just break the law?
Let’s talk about the dreaded “Walking Quorum.” According to the Texas Open Meetings Act (TOMA), Section E, a quorum isn’t just when everyone’s packed into City Hall pretending to listen. Nope. TOMA makes it crystal clear that you can’t have a series of backroom, back-to-back, whisper-to-whisper communications about city business that add up to a quorum. Doesn’t matter if it’s by text, email, smoke signals, or gossip in the golf cart.
Section 551.143 spells it out: if you, as a public official, knowingly join even one of those off-the-books conversations, and the chain adds up to a quorum discussing city business? Congratulations—you’ve just committed a criminal offense.
ALL COUNCIL DECISIONS (LIKE MPT / DMPT) HAVE TO BE POSTED AND DISCUSSED IN PUBLIC. To be honest, I am not even sure if it is allowed in executive session – we are researching that further! Maybe the city puts it on the agenda under “Employee Deliberations” and the slip in the conversation that they should be having openly in the council meeting for the public to see. Who knows!
Have you ever wondered why when the council comes out of “Closed Executive Session” which seems to take a long time now how they never have any discussions on some key decisions. There was hardly any talk on the Dias about MPT/DMPT – they just went to a vote. Why? Because they had already discussed it! We believe our city council could be using “Executive Session” to hide important conversations that should be PUBLIC. It needs to be investigated by the authorities because right now it looks bad, very bad!
Now, what does that mean in real life?
Official #1 chats with Official #2.
Official #2 slips it over to Official #3. Boom. Illegal. That’s how the law reads.
And here in Frisco? We’ve got text messages. We’ve got John Keating saying he’ll “talk to Angelia.” Funny thing: we never saw those texts. Where’s the paper trail? Did they hop on a quick phone call instead? Did someone “forget” to turn over their emails?
Then we have Keating chatting up Laura Rummel about votes for Mayor Pro Tem and Deputy Mayor Pro Tem. We know this because Rummel submitted her text message in response to the PIR Request.
Question 1: Why didn’t John Keating turn over a copy of the communication with Laura Rummel. It clearly meets the PIR request. Laura Rummel turned it in!
Question 2: Where are the conversations between Keating and Pelham? Clearly, they were talking about Mayor Pro Tem and Deputy Mayor Pro Tem but neither of them turned in any copies of their messages or emails.
Now add Livingston to the mix, and suddenly we’re not playing with hypotheticals anymore—we’re at four. Livingston, Keating, Pelham, and Rummel. Keating led the charge, talking to Angelia and Rummel, and told Livingston he would talk to them. So, it was clear conversations were happening with Keating being the one bouncing around to the other three. That’s a quorum, folks.
And according to TOMA, that’s not just bad optics—it’s a violation.
Which leads us to a very simple question: How can someone who wants to run for Mayor not know the rules of the Texas Open Meetings Act? And honestly, how can any of them sit on the council and not know this?
If you’re going to lead Frisco, maybe start with knowing what you legally can and can’t do. Just a thought. But hey, we’re just the ones asking the questions.
Hopefully someone reading this knows the Texas Attorney General or Collin County DA because it should be investigated. Stay tuned—because something tells us this story is only starting to unravel.
Disclaimer: This blog includes satire, parody, and comic relief. It contains summarized accounts created solely for humor and commentary. Any resemblance to real events is either coincidental or intentionally satirical. Reader discretion — and a sense of humor — are advised.
Frisco Chronicles: What Lies Beneath … in the Agenda?
Every other week, like clockwork, the Frisco City Council releases an agenda packed with the usual suspects: zoning changes, budget adjustments, proclamations for pickleball appreciation month—nothing to see here, folks. Move along.
You ever hear that old saying, “The devil’s in the details?” Sometimes, here in Frisco, the devil doesn’t just visit the details—he rents a room in the city council agenda. But this week is a little DIFFERENT! Let’s Dive In!
First Up: Executive Session: The Vault
This is where transparency goes to die. Behind closed doors, council members discuss land deals, lawsuits, and personnel matters—away from public ears and cameras. Yes, some of it needs to be private. But some of it? Let’s just say if the public heard the full audio, they’d be polishing pitchforks by sunrise. So, what is happening during The Vault this week? Agenda Item 2(C) is about Personal Matters, and it says they will “DELIBERATE THE APPOINTMENT OF MAYOR PRO-TEM, DEPUTY MAYOR PRO-TEM AND CITY COUNCIL COMMITTEES.”
The actual vote will happen under the “Individual Items” and our vote is for Brian Livingston for Mayor Pro-Tem and we encourage everyone to email you council members today and tell them to vote for Livingston for Mayor Pro-Tem for the last year of his term.
Second: Individual Items – Special Events
We expect the council chambers to be packed with supporters of Burt Thakur and Jared Elad on Tuesday night as they will be sworn in. There has been a buzz in the air since the election night of the runoff race. Seat will be filled, cameras will be rolling, and the room will be electric with that rarest of municipal emotions: hope.
Because Tuesday is not just another city council meeting it is changing of the guard! With right hands raised and left hands resting on the city charter, Burt Thakur and Jared Elad will be officially sworn in as the newest members of the Frisco City Council.
Why is this important, because they were not appointed to the seat, they were elected by you! By the small business owners tired of red tape. By the residents who want Frisco to thrive, not just survive. And they came in not to blend, but to stand.
The room will be electric, and you will be able to feel the shift in the room. Smiles from supporters. Side-eyes from the establishment. A few city staffers quietly clutching their blood pressure meds. It will end with applause. Loud. Sustained.
Welcome to the table, Burt and Jared. Frisco’s watching!
Next up, The Consent Agenda: Where Democracy Goes to Nap
We have said it before, and we will say it again, the most exciting thing most Frisco residents glance over is the “DETAILS” in the CONSENT AGENDA. If you stop, squint, and scroll past the “Consent Agenda” (which is code for “let’s pass this all without discussion”), you’ll find the real story. Because what lies beneath those bland agenda titles are buried treasures—or more often, ticking time bombs.
This is where the “Devil Is in the Details!” Basically, the Consent Agenda is where they stash the stuff they want to hide. Think of it like the junk drawer of city government—contracts, appointments, expenditures, land swaps, and sometimes even lawsuits—all passed with a single vote and zero debate.
After our blog “City Halls Troubled Sea’s” everyone was quiet about the mysterious disappearance of the HR Director and several others in her department. In fact we have had PIR’s in for over a month a now and they are delaying them and going to the Attorney General. According to item 24 in the consent agenda they will approve a settlement agreement and release between the City and Sassy Safranek. We will file a PIR for that settlement agreement.
Yes, this is the same Lauren Safranek who led the witch hunt against Former Fire Chief Mark Piland and continues to oversee the court case against Assistant Fire Chief Cameron Kraemer. She has spent hundreds of thousands of taxpayer dollars on unnecessary investigations to cover up her flagrant forgeries and other mistakes!
What we find interesting is that the city could have settled with Cameron Kraemer, who WON his PTSD Injury Claim by the TDI Workers Compensation Division in Dallas. You can read more about in The Local Profile, but instead, Safranek and the city pushed forward, continuing to spend taxpayer dollars on a losing case. Something in the Council Chambers smells like the crap in Exide. Why will the City settle with Lauren Safranek and not Former Asst. Fire Chief Cameron Kraemer? Demand answers, Frisco!
Learn more about Lauren Safranek in a few of our old blogs:
Last Up for The Night, The Regular Agenda – aka The Cryptic Language 101
Usually, items here are often worded in such vague terms that only a decoder ring or a PhD in municipal bureaucracy could translate it! Most of the time this section can be pretty boring but NOT TONIGHT!
Remember when Brian Livingston supported Mark Piland two years ago against Mayor Cheney – well he was removed from all the committees he served on and so were many of his supporters. Why? They didn’t play Cabal Ball. In the past, you didn’t walk away from that, like nothing happened. No, instead you were punished! Well tonight Livingston and hopefully our new council members will take their rightful place on these committees again!
It’s time to speak up and demand changes not with our council representatives but what happens deep down in the city on these committees. It is time for us to make our voices heard! There are more Cabal Busters than Cabal God Fathers.
What Can You Do? Read the agenda. Seriously, someone must. Ask questions. Email your council members. Show up. Be annoying. Speak out at Citizens’ Input, have your message included in the record. Demand clarity. If an item sounds vague, ask why. If they dodge, follow the money. Watch for patterns. When the same developer keeps getting breaks or the same contractor keeps winning bids, take note.
Help us! Share what you find. That’s what we’re here for. To shine a flashlight into the shadows and say, “Hey… what the hell is this?” Frisco isn’t just growing—it’s morphing. And what gets decided in those meetings shapes the city we live in, the traffic we sit in, and the taxes we pay.
Lastly, tomorrow you can bet some Cabal Godfathers will be upset. Maybe one will write another HAIKU on her page full of hidden meaning and endless blah, blah, blah. The Cabal will all respond to it on queue for sure as they are supposed to do. Don’t worry, we know they are butt hurt but we are moving forward with change while they wallow on yesterday. Most of all remember, the next time someone tells you the council meeting was boring, just smile and say: “Sure… until you read what lies beneath.”
It’s a new dawn It’s a new day It’s a new life for Frisco Taxpayers Woo-woo-woo-woo-woo And they’re feeling good
Today I was thinking, it is the start of a new beginning and soon two new city council members will join the Dias. Burt Thakur and Jared Elad will be sworn into office at the July 1st City Council Meeting. We hope their supporters come out and support them during the swearing in at the start of the meeting.
But what is happening before the meeting? Well, apparently there is a City Council Work Session on June 26th. They just posted the agenda and it appears under the Regular Agenda they are going to do a traditional welcome, agenda overview and set the theme for the session. Then they are going to discuss a book called Great by Choice. Lastly they will talk about the traits of successful teams.
Then they will convene back into the “Regular Agenda” and finish with a Review of Councils 2025 Progress Goals, have a discussion regarding the FY2025-26 Initial Budget Considerations and closed with a “Ted Talk” regarding 5 Bold Steps to a Bright Future. Interesting! This is where we have questions.
Outgoing council members Tammy Meinershagen and Bill Woodard will be there as they still hold the seats for city council until July 1st. and then Burt Thakur and Jared Elad are sworn in. Because of the runoff Thakur and Elad’s swearing falls after the meeting, but “THE BUDGET” is a big discussion that the new council members may have questions or input on. Here is what we are interested in;
1. Did the city extend an invitation to the two newest council members to participate and learn at this work session like they have done in the past.
2. Will they host the meeting live on Frisco TV so residents can watch and learn and be more transparent for Frisco Residents?
3. What is the social event they are going to afterwords at Perry’s Steakhouse and is that on taxpayer dollars?
Now many may say, they are not sworn in yet so they can’t participate but exceptions have been made in the past. In our article No Business Like Show Business we told you about how in March of 2022, our newly “APPOINTED” council woman Tammy Meinershagen went on the Frisco Chamber of Commerce Leadership Exchange Trip to Cary, North Carolina. Why was that interesting to us at the time? Well, Tammy Meinershagen had NOT YET BEEN SWORN IN as a council member yet.
In that article, we asked the question of how Meinershagens’ trip was paid for. Did she pay for it – remember she was not a SWORN IN council member or did TAXPAYERS pay for it? Then we laid out the emails showing that on March 3, 2022, Mayor Jeff Cheney sent an email to Holly McCall, and said Tammy has expressed an interest in going on the LEX trip. Cheney thinks it would be good for her to join to get a head start on her development and start building relationships. He specifically notes, I know she will still be a council member elect as the time so not sure what hoops we need to jump through. McCall, the Sr. Administrative Asst. to the Mayor & Council responds, “I’m sure it will be fine to pay for Tammy. We’re just waiting on confirmation/advisement from the attorney’s office before proceeding.”
Then on March 7, 2022, in an email from Tammy Meinershagen to Tony Felker, President/CEO for the Frisco Chamber she states it looks like she will be able to join “representing the city council” so can you let me know what you need from me.
Tony responded with an email asking Jeff Cheney what the best way for her is to register and then Jeff responds Holly McCall, the Sr. Administrative Assistant to the Mayor & Council, can book it.
McCall responds again that she believes it will be fine to pay for her to go but she is waiting for the official city approval. Fast forward to the April 19th, council meeting, Item #20 under the Consent Agenda (remember that is where they hide things) there is an action to consider and act upon approval of the attached reimbursement request presented to the Mayor and Council. The memo reads that the $3000 request was the cost for Tammy Meinershagen to travel to Cary, North Carolina for the LEX trip hosted by the Frisco Chamber. It states she is a ‘CANDIDATE FOR CITY COUNCIL RUNNING UNOPPOSED.” It then reads, Minershagen will begin her term in May, but members of the council believe the trip provided knowledge and experience that serves the public purpose of the city and was beneficial to the duties of a city council member.
Guess what, THE COST WAS APPROVED!
At the time we wrote this article in October of 2023, we said we were alarmed that she would be going representing herself as a councilmember – when she had NOT YET BEEN SWORN IN and taken her OFFICIAL OATH. We were adamant that running unopposed or not should not matter – what should matter is she was not sworn in to uphold her official duties as a city council woman. We still believe that today! However, what we think about the situation and what happened back in 2022/23, is irrelevant! The City of Frisco, The Chamber of Commerce and our City Council “SET A PRESCENDENT” that you do not have to be SWORN IN to present yourself as a council member and have the bills paid for by the city if you are appointed to your seat.
Fast Forward to 2025
How does that change when two council members, who have officially been ELECTED, and are less than 7 days away from being sworn in, when it comes to them participating in the Summer Work session, in meetings that affect their upcoming term, etc.? The session clearly says it is Councils Goals for the remaining time of 2025 and the future Budget for 2025-26! I am guessing if you ask the two future elected council members what they think, they will agree with us!
That is the problem when you set a PRESCENDENT like they did in 2022 with Meinershagen, because now to be fair to the newly ELECTED COUNCIL MEMBERS – the city needs to invite them, allows them to participate, talk to leaders and city management, for the “experience it gives them, for educational reasons and benefits it presents them,” as it will help them grow in their council positions the same way they did for Meinershagen in 2022.
Now, we wait and see – what happens? Better get the city attorney on the phone and make allowances for the same concessions –
at least allowing them to attend s work session, doesn’t cost taxpayers $3000 this time!
Politics is nasty. No surprise there. It attracts the best and the worst in people—but mostly the worst when election season heats up like a June sidewalk in Texas. And while anonymous commentary has long been a staple of free speech (hey, Frisco Whistleblower isn’t exactly sending selfies), there’s a wide, dusty canyon between anonymity and outright impersonation.
Let’s make this clear: creating an anonymous account to voice your opinion is one thing. Creating a fake account using someone else’s real photo, name, and identity? That’s a whole other universe of dirty. And in that universe, you’re not just trolling your political enemies—you’re potentially slandering innocent people and opening them up to have their reputational ruined, legal jeopardy, or worse.
Case in point: a local keyboard warrior operating under the name Bryan Bridges III (sometimes known as Ezra Bridges) has been bouncing around social media like a pinball, slapping his name on some big accusations and slinging insults like confetti at a cheap parade. The problem? The smiling face on Bryan’s profile pic? That’s not Bryan. That’s James Bridges—a real man who lives near the Oklahoma border, works with the Fellowship of Christian Athletes, and whose wife of 36 years is a Texas schoolteacher. He is a father of two sons and a grandfather of four grandchildren. He leads Bible studies and hosts weekly FCA huddles.
We are guessing James Bridges is not the Frisco flamethrower or political hatchet man. We are guessing he is just a man, living his life, who probably has no idea his photo is being used to publicly drag elected officials, political candidates, and constituents through the digital mud.
We like to fact check, so we have reached out to James Bridges via email and will be reaching out to his wife as well. We will of course let you know how he responds. If he responds the way we think he might, it’s going to be a doozy. We’ve taken all the screenshots sent to us of Bryan Bridges III comments and archived them as evidence. And if Mr. Bridges didn’t give consent for his image to be used in this toxic identity-theft theater, then “Bryan Bridges III” might be facing more than a few angry replies. He might be facing a libel suit.
Let’s stop and think about this: what if James’s employer stumbles across these posts and assumes he’s the one spouting off? What if someone at his wife’s school district mistakes him for the venomous ghostwriter behind the name? This is the sort of stunt that doesn’t just smear political opponents—it scorches innocent bystanders, too.
There’s a word for people who do this kind of thing: cowards. Cowards with no moral compass, hiding behind stolen faces because they know that if they showed their own, they’d have to answer for the mess they’re making. Maybe if they showed their face then we would know if they were the spouse of a council member, or a town bully, or maybe the sister of a political candidate.
Frisco deserves better than this kind of clown show. Say what you want, stand for what you believe—but do it under your own name or be completely anonymous. But don’t put real people on the line who don’t even live in our town to carry out your devious acts. Frisco Whistleblower has never claimed to be anyone but a resident of Frisco. We are not portraying ourselves as anyone we are not, we are just not disclosing who we are. Very different!
Because when you steal someone else’s identity just to hurl insults in a local election? That’s not speech. That’s sabotage. And we’re not letting it slide.
Let us know what you think:
Should the Frisco Police investigate this?
Should our city council members demand an investigation into this, the same way they did into the so-called “illegal recordings per Laura Woodward and Bryan Bridges III?” If they would like James Bridges information, we are happy to supply it to them.
At last count, there are 3 different "spa/massage" businesses in the small office park at the northeast corner of John…
I literally just saw this. Yeah, she used to forward everybody’s emails behind their backs.
You're dropping truth bombs! These mom and pop shops are what should be the least of Karen's worries. If they…
Interesting Article
I don't know, Patrick, and I'm not familiar with SREC, so I'm unable to answer your questions.