Back in September we wrote our blog All in The Family which was about Nepotism which is the practice among those with power or influence to favor, show bias, or give preferential treatment to relatives, friends, and close associates. Most companies have rules or policies about Nepotism in the workplace, including the City of Frisco.
The Employee Code of Conduct policy regarding Nepotism in the city has been the same since 2006. That is why we were intrigued in 2023 when we noticed the city made changes to the policy two times in a matter of months. Why did they change it? The reason for the change can be found in a memo from Lauren Safranek, Director of Human Resources. After reading the reason for the change it led us start investigating recent new hires and the possible relationships they had to someone in the city which you can read about in our September blog.
Several commented that we were making something out of nothing when in fact it was exactly what we suspected. The city was changing the Nepotism Policy in order to hire Interim Fire Chief, Lee Glover. On September 14, 2023, we filed PIR that stated we wanted all communications via email between city officials (for example HR, city manager’s office, and city council) regarding the change to the Nepotism Policy from 1/1/2022 to Present. Also, any emails regarding Lee Glover and Nepotism. We received a note back from the city saying they have released a few documents but that some of them were confidential and therefore they sent it to the Attorney General for an opinion.
What could be that confidential about a Nepotism Policy that a city would need to send to the AG? If you are willing to go on record and change the policy then why not be open and share why you want to change the policy? According to the letter the city sent to the AG they claimed a portion of the info contains confidential attorney-client information which was not intended to be disclosed to 3rd parties. Furthermore, a portion of the info involves interagency or intraagency communications which were intended to remain confidential.
This is where we have a huge problem with the city’s explanation and AG request. How can the city get a request or for an item, then go to a council meeting, have a discussion in executive session, come out and vote to release confidential HR documents on a retired employee who is under a gag order and is actively running as a political opponent against Mayor Cheney? Please note while Cheney recused himself from the vote 4 of the city council members who participated in the vote had already publicly endorsed Mayor Jeff Cheney. How is this is okay, but we can’t release documents about a Nepotism Policy? Why can’t the council vote to release the documents we requested? Are you telling me there is something SO CONFIDENTIAL in a discussion about policy change that it must be hidden from the public?
We went through the items the city “released” to us and the most exciting thing we found was the alert Dana Baird, Director of Communications received from our Twitter Post on September 13, 2023. However, the rest of it is just copies of the memos and policy changes. All we could do at that point was wait patiently for the AG to give their opinion to see if they would release the rest of the documents. We learned on 12/29/23 via an email from the city that the AG had ruled that the city may withhold the information they claimed to be confidential.
I am sure the city was very excited to learn they could withhold the rest of the Nepotism documents. That’s okay, because as you know we file many PIRs and early this year we filed one on Lee Glover which included an interesting email. We were sitting on a chain of emails waiting to see the AG’s response to the Nepotism PIR. The email subject line read “NEPOTISM” dated March 8,, 2023, that was from Lauren Safranek, HR Director sent to Wes Pierson, City Manager.
The initial email to Wes simply has a link to the Nepotism Policy. Wes Pierson replied to her a short time later asking her to clarify the following: 1) Interim Fire Chief Lee Glover has learned that he now has (as of when) a second cousin working in Frisco’s planning department. 2) Your understanding of our nepotism policy is that Lee would be ineligible to apply for the open Fire Chief position because of his relative who is now employed by the City (regardless of the fact that the relative works in another department and there is no reporting relationship). He ends with, am I correct?
Lauren replies that evening to Wes and said: Wes, As of October 2022, Lee Glover’s second cousin has worked for the City of Frisco as a Planner I in Development Services. Currently, as interim Chief, I would not consider this a violation of the nepotism policy. However, regarding your second question, the policy states: The hiring, transfer, and/or promotion, of Identified Employees shall not be allowed, even in different departments, if that action results in a violation of this Policy and/or creates a conflict of interest, or the appearance of a conflict of interest for the City as determined by the City Manager and/or his/her designee. When any relationship prohibited under this Policy and/or that constitutes a conflict of interest exists, the City reserves the right to take appropriate action to eliminate the violation, which may result in action being taken up to, and including termination.
Therefore, while Lee can apply for the Fire Chief position, the policy indicates he cannot be promoted because it would create a violation of the policy since the policy states that No Identified Employees of a Department Director may be employed by the City of Frisco after the effective date of this policy. We could enact Section V. Procedures which would allow 30 days for a resolution or the City terminates the employees with the least seniority. Identified employees are employees related within the prohibited level of consanguinity and/or affinity, a cohabitant or a roommate, as specified in the policy. I hope this answers your question. Please let me know if you have any questions.
After the communication on March 8, 2023, Lauren Safranek requested a change to the Nepotism Policy at the April 4, 2023 city council meeting which you can read about in this memo here. In a nutshell Lauren requested the Nepotism policy be revised to remove the Third Degree of consanguinity (blood). Her reason, “In today’s job market, by going as far as the Third Degree of consanguinity, we may lose the opportunity to consider some possible dedicated employees.” What she means is “if we don’t change it we cannot hire LEE GLOVER.” Obviously, this is probably what the city intended to hide from us went they sent it to the Attorney General!
It was clear in March and April 2023; the city had every intention to change the policy to hire Lee Glover! So, why did they spend money to hire an agency to do a search for a new fire chief? Also why did they do the dog and pony show of “MEET THE CANDIDATES” for the Frisco Fire Chief position, on June 1st? Does the city really think it is fair to these candidates to let them believe they even had an opportunity. These dedicated first responders took time out of their schedule and away from their job to interview, travel, and meet the public. The reality they were never going to get the job, the decision had already been made.
For all of those saying we are grasping at straws we have proven again that the city is
1) Breaking The Law because they did not include this email in our original PIR which clearly asked for emails regarding Nepotism & Lee Glover.
2) We said the city changed the policy to hire Lee Glover and the response from many is “oh the city would never do that” … BUT THEY DID EXACTLY THAT AND THE EMAIL BETWEEN LAUREN AND WES PROVES IT!
3) The fact the request to change the Nepotism came just 2 ½ weeks after their email communication and basically solved their problem, it only doubles down the confirmation we were correct.
4) The city changed the policy to hire someone and they have used the same policy to disqualify others in the past. It is not fair to change the policy at whim or when it suits you. That is not why polices are in place.
In closing we find it very interesting what the city deems confidential and not confidential. They will vote to release confidential information on a political opponent but they won’t vote to release the documents regarding the decision to change the NEPOTSIM POLICY? This is our plea to Mayor Cheney and the council to vote to release the documents for all the PIRS we have. Stop hiding behind the AG because it is clear every time you have something to hide and that is why something smells like SHIT in Frisco!
To see the full documents of the snap shots included, click here!
Bond, Frisco Bond! Yes, we took a line from James Bond aka 007! Sean Connery, who played James Bond in 1962, was the first to deliver this iconic phrase that would be repeated in several of the 007 movies. One thing is certain, none of the Bonds following Connery delivered the phrase with the same magic as he did the first time around.Connery was my favorite Bond, and he starred in seven of the films from 1962 to 1983. If you are a Bond fan then you know not to mess with a Bond, even a Frisco Bond! After digging into the Battle of the Benjamins (Budgets) we decided to take a deep dive into the Frisco Bonds put before citizens. We made “A Martini. Shaken, Not Stirred” as Bond said in Goldfinger in 1964, and started researching. Now it is time for you to grab some popcorn and watch Frisco Bond unfold!
What if we told you that since 2006, residents have been asked to approve a whopping total of $1,285,225,000 in bond propositions? Would that get your attention? Many don’t understand bond elections so first we wanted to answer the simple question of what is a bond. Simply put, bonds are loans governments or government agencies use to fund day-to-day obligations and to finance capital projects such as buildings, city parks, and/or future developments. Most cities pass General Obligation Bonds which are backed by the “full faith and credit” of the issuer (aka city) which has the power to tax residents to pay bondholders.
Now ask yourself, out of general election bonds residents have been asked to vote for since 2006, how many were issued? What capital improvement projects were completed? How was the money used? When we heard about the 2023 bond we started to follow the progress. There was a big debate about having an animal shelter on the bond. To be honest, we thought the city already had one, so we were surprised to learn the city outsources it to Collin County.
We watched a YouTube video by Be The Change with Jesse Ringness where the council and city leaders discussed the animal shelter and 2023 bond. It is hard to hear everything but from what we can tell Mayor Cheney started to lament which he does often and for a long time (29:36 mark). He said, we have never put anything on the bond that was not supported by the staff or that we didn’t think would pass. Then he mentions it feels like a disingenuous proposal and that it is more of an item used for postcard election votes, which he would know about. Then he suggests that the bond committee consider putting that request or $5 million into the city facilities request instead. This way if the city determines it needs an animal shelter down the road the money is there for a “city facility” otherwise they have the money to use towards another project.
Then he proceeds to ask, what are we actually putting on the ballot? Are you putting $5 million on the ballot to somehow seek citizen approval? And if it happens, which I would expect it to, because right now, everything we have put on the ballot in Frisco has passed becausewe have a lot of public trust. Citizens know when they see a ballot for a bond election, it is only for items the city needs, we know it has been fully vetted, we know that staff fully supports it, and we know Frisco needs it.
Mayor Cheney’s statements left us with some questions. We were curious, if the city will only put items on the bond supported by staff then why have a citizen’s bond committee? If we look at past bonds would we find all the items brought to the ballot were VETTED or something we know FRISCO NEEDS? It is time to jump out of the plane and find out!
We went back to 2006 to look at the 12 Propositions approved by voters for a whopping $198 million dollars. We found two articles with conflicting information. The first was a Dallas Morning News article in January 2015 that reported that $33 million of 2006 bonds had not yet been issued. Just 4 months later, in May 2015, Community Impact reported that “$22.5 million in authorized bond funds remain.”
Confused, we went digging and searched city records where we found that at the June 2006 Frisco City Council meeting they authorized the sale of $143,560,000 million from the 2006 bond election. The ordinance states it is for road improvements, constructing, improving, and equipping public safety facilities consisting of the fire department facilities, parking for the police headquarters building, public safety training facility, acquisition and installation of warning sirens, fire trucks, and equipment, and the acquisition of land and interest in land for such projects (Public Safety Facilities), constructing and improving parks, trails and recreational facilities, and the land acquisition of “Park Projects.” Might be easier to look at this Voted Bond Authorization photo below from the June 6, 2016, council meeting agenda package. We will reference it later.
Confused, we decided to break it down by some of the big projects. Bond loves to make a grand entrance so let’s start with Grand Park. In 2006 voters approved $22.5 million dollars for Grand Park, then in 2015, they approved another $10 million dollars for Grand Park for a total of $32.5 million dollars. In the 2019 bond election, Parks, Trails, and Facilities asked for $53.5 million, and in the 2023 bond election $43 million. Neither the 2019 nor 2023 bond election state that any of the money will be used for Grand Park as they left it more generic.
In an article discussing the 2015 bond the DMN noted that the $10 million being asked in the 2015 Bond would be combined with the $10 million in bonds approved by voters in 2006 for PHASE ONE near the DNT and Cotton Gin Road. If you reference the 2006 bond photo you will see voters approved $22.5 million for the Grand Park Acquisition and Initial Development. Out of that amount, $12 million of those bonds were issued and we are curious what for? Work was delayed for years in Grand Park due to the Exide Technologies battery plant contamination. Dallas Morning News reported in June 2013 that a report listed various problems documented over the years with contamination to Stewart Creek which runs right through the future Grand Park. So, why did the city issue $12 million of the bonds, what was it used for?
In 2021 CBS News 11 ran a story that Frisco’s Grand Park is no longer an “Urban Legend” as the city can finally finish the Exide cleanup. The story notes that City officials said the cleanup process could take another five to seven years to complete but the city has funding and, for the first time, the control to do it. CBS quoted Mayor Cheney, “This park will actually be bigger than Central Park in New York.” However, while it all sounds like a grand idea, after years of talk and no development, Cheney understands why many residents have become skeptical. Mayor Cheney said he hopes the city can put a shovel in the ground to start Grand Park by the end of the year. According to Community Impact, Big Bluestem Trail was finally ready for its public debut on November 19, 2022. City officials held an inaugural trail walk and Shannon Coates, Parks Director said “This is PHASE ONE of a multiyear development.” I wonder if they mean the Phase One they talked about in 2006/2015.
Well, if the 2006 bond was for PHASE 1 and we just completed Phase 1 in 2022 as Shannon Coates implied, then why did the city sell the bonds back in June 2006? Why would you ask citizens to vote for something that the city could not put a shovel in the ground for until 15 years later? The $12 Million issued by the city is that we paid for a contaminated future park. Did they use it to clean up Exide, if they did, voters should know that the money they voted for did not go to the park but to the clean-up of another issue that ultimately affected the park. Mayor Cheney, when the city asked residents in 2006 and 2015 to Vote Yes for the Grand Park propositions – WERE THEY FULLY VETTED AND SUPPORTED BY CITY STAFF? It sure does not sound like a plan was in place, maybe a dream, but definitely no fully vetted plan.
Next up is a place for Bond to park his sexy roadsters. In the 2015 Election Bond, Frisco asked citizens for $1.5 Million for a Police Department parking garage. A DMN article from January 2015, it noted the money would be combined with $1.5 Million from a previous bond election to fund the parking structure for police vehicles. Remember above, in June 2006 the council approved the sale of $143,560,000 million from the 2006 bond election. One of the items the ordinance stated it was for was parking for the police headquarters building.
Then, according to Community Impact in 2015, the city sold $59.8 million worth of bonds, the first from the $267.825 million from the voted approved bonds in the 2015 election. It noted the bonds sold would go to several items, one being the parking structure for the police facility.
Then in 2023, Frisco asked voters again for a parking garage for the Police Department. That means 3 times voters have been asked for a parking garage. Guess what? As of today, WE HAVE NO PARKING STRUCTURE! So again, we ask Mayor Cheney was this project FULLY VETTED?Was there a plan supported by staff? If yes, then why did we not build it after issuing the bonds back in 2006 and 2015, when it probably would have cost less? We all know that after the Pandemic, costs for construction have skyrocketed. Now we will be paying more for the parking garage that they approved the bond sale for back in 2006 & 2015.
Bond 007 likes a good Rembrandt, so let’s look at the Arts! In the 2006 bond election, the city asked for $5 Million. According to a Community Impact Article from January 2015, in 2006 voters approved $5 million and about $1 million contributed to the creation of the Frisco Discovery Center, which houses the Black Box Theater and art gallery. That is confirmed in the 2006 Bond photo above.
Then in 2015, bond committee member Tammy Meinershagen (currently a councilwoman) was pushing for $20 Million for the arts. The city ended up asking voters for $10 Million after a lengthy debate. The committee began discussing the performing arts center proposal because 6 out of 17 committee members did not recommend any money for the project.
Some members said a bond proposal for an arts facility should wait until a more specific plan, such as the square footage of the facility or the number of seats, is laid out. These members said they are not against an arts facility in Frisco but rather think the project can wait for a year or two. Tammy Meinershagen, the committee member who proposed $20 million for an arts facility, said she would like to provide specifics for a project, but she doesn’t want to wait to get the project started.
Purefoy said part of the reason city staff recommended $10 million for an arts center for this bond election is that the addition of the $4 million left over from the 2006 bond election, would bring the total close to the 2006 recommendation. The plot thickens, CITY STAFF RECOMMENDED? So the city staff supported and recommended money be put in front of voters that did not have a specific plan such as size, number of seats, location, etc.? Mayor Cheney, why did you allow or support $10 million to go through when the PROJECT WAS NOT FULLY VETTED?
Well, where is the $14 million today? As far as I can see we still have NO CULTURAL ARTS THEATER! Go figure! That is probably for the best since the Dallas Museum of Art just announced in October 2023 that they have executed a set of cutbacks including layoffs and reductions in hours they are open to the public.
Bond is known to scale a wall a time or two so let’s dive in the Fire Department (aka Public Safety). In the 2006 Bond, voters approved $20 Million for Fire Stations and Equipment. Then in the following bonds, they put Police and Fire together and called it Public Safety. So, in the 2015 Bond Election voters approved $41.5 Million, in 2019 voters approved $62.5 Million, and in 2023 voters approved $131.4 Million for Public Safety. Where did all the money go?
A June 2012 DMN Frisco Roundup reported that the Frisco City Council authorized staff to start the process of issuing $5.5 million in general obligation bonds from 2006 for fire engines, an ambulance, and other fire equipment to replace aging equipment. Then in July of 2013, the Dallas Morning News reported that the City Council approved issuing $20 million in general obligation bonds from the 2006 bond election for capital projects. The first $8 Million would be spent on Fire Station 8, the remaining $12 million would be spent on road projects.
If the 2006 bond was for Fire Station 8 as reported by the DMN, then that means the 2 new stations proposed by the bond committee in 2014 for the 2015 bond election would be for Station 9 and Station 10. On the citizens bond presentation on page 543, it says, “addition of 2 Fire Stations including new fire apparatus supporting those stations.”
WHERE IS FIRE STATION 10? There is NO FIRE STATION 10 which should be located near the new PGA. So, even though we are building the PGA Frisco, The Link, and Fields with multi-million-dollar homes as of today we have no fire station to support that. Why would a city allow developers to build out an area without first providing it services?
In 2019, voters passed another bond election for a total of $345 Million. Public Safety made up $62.5 Million of that. The pretty city flyer states that it is for Fire Station #11 and vehicles /equipment, a Public Safety Training Center (Phase 2), and a Police HQ remodel as stated in the city flyer. Guess what, as of today there IS NO FIRE STATION 11! Do you see the pattern?
Now in 2023, the voters passed another bond for $473.4 Million. Out of that total $131.4 Million were for Public Safety, Facilities, and Equipment. The 2023 Bond Flyer said the money was for Fire Station #11, Remodel Fire Station #4, and Fire Fleet Services Building. WAIT – DID YOU CATCH THAT? PLOT TWIST… Why are citizens being asked to PAY for Fire Station #11 TWICE? Remember in the 2019 Bond Election that money was for Fire Station 11 and the vehicles/equipment it needed. WHY ARE CITIZENS PAYING FOR IT TWICE?
What is the point of us looking into the Bond Elections? As we stated earlier, since 2006 voters have been asked to approve a whopping total of $1,285,225,000 in bond propositions. Most of us check our home accounts weekly and balance our budgets to know where our money is going so why not watch what the city is doing with our money? As Cheney said, whatever we put out in front of voters they will approve because they trust us. Should we trust them? His excuse for not wanting an animal shelter was there was no plan but it appears there were not a lot of plans for many of the items they asked for over the years. We still have no PD parking garage, no cultural arts facility or larger theater, no new FD fire stations, and we could go on. As TAXPAYERS, you should be asking yourself WHERE IS THE MONEY? HAVE THEY SOLD THE BONDS? HAVE WE PUT TO MUCH TRUST IN OUR CITY WITH NO OVERSIGHT? HOW MANY TIMES ARE WE GOING TO BE ASKED TO PAY FOR THE SAME PROJECTS?
Bill starts off by saying let’s get some facts straight and WE AGREE Bill – let’s get some facts straight!
Woodard claims: The blood transfusion program isn’t going away. In fact, it’s expanding with properly trained personnel. First, are you saying the personnel you have today are not properly trained? As of right now, the Squad Program is a highly technical advanced EMS critical care program and also provides additional manpower to critical incidents and structure fires and is also capable of doing blood transfusions.
Woodard claims: We use data to analyze the best use of resources. Right now, the squad sits almost all the time. We would love to see the metrics Bobblehead Bill is relying on to show its idol “almost all of the time.” We reached out to our sources, and they have in fact said that Squad is one of the busiest apparatuses in the FD. So, show us your data and metrics that you analyzed please to prove Squad sits idle. Yes as of today we filed a PIR for those metrics so we will soon have data from the city unless they again try to send it to the AG in hopes of delaying us more open records.
Woodard claims: Staffing is being divided up and assigned to the BC (Battalion Chief) vehicles, along with the blood transfusion program. This will double (from one to two) the availability of this program on every shift, and better utilize personnel and equipment. However, Bill, our sources have also confirmed that they will not be in service because the lieutenant on the squad is being turned into a captain / safety / FIT / drone pilot / chauffer for the BC’s. The squad vehicles will not be in service, and no personnel will be assigned to them. I wonder when the taxpayers paid for those specialized vehicles for us to not use them now. Well, we know the city doesn’t care what taxpayers are floating for things just look at all the trips they take! More importantly, according to the department policies an officer cannot be the acting paramedic on a fire apparatus. Is Bobblehead Bill trying to say that an officer or Battalion Chief is going to be better than a highly trained medic at giving blood?
Woodard claims: In 2024 we expect to add this program to every ambulance we have further expanding the program, which necessitates the training of everyone on those pieces of equipment. Hold up Bobblehead…do you have a written agreement with a blood bank/hospital that they are going to guarantee enough blood for us to put on every ambo at a minute’s notice? Also, how much will the training of everyone cost on those pieces of equipment and is that best use of tax dollars versus having a highly specialized Squad? We would love for Bill, Chief Lee Glover, or the city to show us the proof that this will be rolled out in every ambo in 2024. We would also love for them to show us how they plan to fund the expansion, the additional training of personnel, etc. According to our sources every Ambo will have warmers but not blood! Mr. Woodard said there was 13 calls for blood in 2023. It seems the FD Squad units did their job then just fine, so does 13 mean we should expand it to every single ambo? HERE IS THE QUESTION FOR RESIDENTS: Do you want the medic who maybe does the procedure once or twice every 3 years doing your blood transfusion? Do you want a highly skilled team who does it up to 13 times in one year to do the procedure? As Homer Simpson would say, DUH!
Woodard claims: There is a 12-page contract that he is happy to share with anyone who emails him (so we will be doing that as well as we already placed a PIR request 15 min ago for it). He then posted the “RELEVANT SECTION OF THE AGREEMENT” that he claims stands as proof that the Hospital will supply blood for the expansion. We just filed a PIR for the contract unless he wants to email it to us for free as he said he would. Our email Mr. Woodard is FriscoWhistleBlower@protonmail.com but we won’t get our hopes up you would send it.
The image reads, “Upon request by the City. Hospital shall supply to the City the Blood Products from time to time. in such quantities and types as maybe requested by the City; provided. however that due to the unpredictable nature of the demands for the Blood Products, Hospital cannot and will not guarantee the City the availability of all or any portion of the Blood Products to be supplied hereunder. Hospital does agree. however. that it will use its best efforts to supply all Blood Products ordered by the City in an expeditious fashion to the extent the Blood Products are available to the Hospital. Hospital has no reason to believe that in the absence of special circumstances it will be unable to provide any and all Blood Products required by the City during an emergency.
Well, we have a few questions about the image and wording of Woodard’s so-called proof he published. Let’s take a moment to point out the incorrect punctuation throughout the paragraph and the incorrect written sentences. For example, Upon request by the City. Hospital shall supply to the City the Blood Products from time to time. in such quantities and types as maybe requested by the City; If that is proof who the heck wrote it? Also, what does “TIME TO TIME” mean Mr. Woodard? Is it all the time? Is time to time on every ambo? What does it mean when it says, in quantities and types, “AS MAYBE REQUESTED BY THE CITY? You can say you’re expanding it but just not request the blood to actually have it on hand? It mentions the hospital CAN NOT GUARANTEE AVAILABILITY DUE TO THE UNPREDICTABLE NATURE OF THE DEMANDS FOR THE BLOOD BUT IT WILL USE BEST EFFORTS. That does not sound like a guarantee Bobblehead Bill that you will have this on every ambo in 2024 and why pay for additional training if we may not be able to get it? Lastly, it reads the hospital has no reason to believe that in the ABSENCE OF SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES it will be unable to provide any and all Blood Products required by the city during an emergency. Was COVID special circumstances? No one expected the world to shut down the last few years, but it did, is that a special circumstance? Mr. Woodard, this so-called image you posted first looks fake, second is not a guarantee as you said in your statements that it will be available for every ambo, and it is not dated so how do we know if this is a current or previous agreement signed by the city? You really expect citizens to be stupid don’t you?
Lastly Mr. Woodard claims if additional personnel are needed for a fire, we can send more apparatuses as necessary. I am quite certain we have the personnel and equipment to do that. Fires at this point represent less than 2% of total calls. He goes on to say this is not a shortage of personnel (okay sure). Any good organization will evaluate its operations and make changes when it makes sense. QUESTION FOR THE FRISCO FIREFIGHTERS ASSOCIATION: In response to Bobblehead Bill’s statement do you agree we have enough personnel to call out for more apparatuses and still provide the same level of service? Mr. Woodard did you read the firefighters’ survey that says they have no confidence in Chief Glover? Did you still think it made sense after your evaluation of operations to make him Fire Chief? Bad leadership has bad consequences and in this case sir it can be deadly! Robert Townsend once said, “A leader is not an administrator who loves to run others, but someone who carries water for his people so they can get on with their jobs.”
Mr. Woodard likes to talk and hear himself talk, which is why he just can’t stop responding to us once he gets started. We are going to return the accusation and call Mr. Bill Woodard, Place 4 for the Frisco City Council a liar and if he is not a liar then he is misguided by facts! He asks us for proof but what proof has he published that contradicts our last blog Another One Bites The Dust? The fact is the City Manager and Council are going to double down to protect Fire Chief Lee Glover, they can’t stop now. They also are in a pissing match with the Fire Fighters Association and don’t want to give in or admit they may have been wrong so again the city will double down over and over. God forbid they just do the right thing!
The city FD is understaffed, and the Fire Fighters Association has repeatedly requested the need to hire more staff. Hell, the FFA went as far as to go to the city council meeting during citizens input and beg for them to hire more staff. The response, nothing you could hear a cricket if it chirped. While Mayor Cheney likes to break the rules of citizens input and respond to concerns when it comes to development or to defend his reputation, he can’t even crack a smile for the firefighters. Mr. Veteran John Keating won’t even fight for them! He should be ashamed of himself because if there is anyone on that council who knows what it means to serve it is Mr. Veteran Cheating Keating who sits there like a dumb puppet!
Mr. Woodard, if we are not hiring more personnel then how are we expanding the program? Can you honestly say it makes sense to consolidate Squad and the Safety Program? If you can then I hope your family never needs them and they don’t have the personnel to get to you because they have called out more apparatuses to other scenes.
In 1952, one of the most popular shows on tv was I Love Lucy and one of the best episodes was Vitameatavegamin. Lucy meets with the director of the commercial and he explains that Vitameatavegamin is a health tonic and gives her the lines to learn. What none of them knew was the health tonic was 23% alcohol. During the first practice set, Lucy reads her lines and then takes a spoon full of the health tonic and begins to make funny faces because it tasted so bad. Take after take Lucy got a little more drunk, and by the time it was over Ricky had to take her off the stage. The episode is a perfect example of truth in advertising.
Mirror, Mirror, on the wall, it’s time to spill the secrets once and for all! If you live in Frisco then you hear city leaders reflecting on how Money Magazine voted Frisco the #1 Best Place to Live in America. The truth is Frisco is a great city to live in, but it has not been ranked #1 since 2018 which is 5 years ago. In fact, in the 2021/22 Money Magazine, The City of Frisco was ranked #19 for the Best Places to Live. That means in 5 years we fell 18 spots so why do they continue to talk about a ranking from 2018? Shouldn’t we be asking ourselves; how did we drop 18 spots? Is this truthful advertising?
The City of Frisco puts together a series of video messages called Progress In Motion to talk about the change and growth happening in our town. The series is truly one the city’s greatest forms of advertising. These videos are so professional, and they cover an array of different topics. Wes Pierson recently stated in a July 2023 article in Frisco Enterprise that there is a powerful message behind the idea of “Progress In Motion.” For Frisco’s city manager, the city tagline inspires a focus on the concept of “growth” rather than “change. Sometimes when people talk about change, there can be a negative connotation related to change, but if you talk about progress, it really emphasizes, in my opinion, a focus on growth,” he said.
Even our own Mayor puts out a series of videos on his Cheney for Frisco Mayor YouTube page. When we saw his campaign video this year announcing his re-election we were impressed because it was truly a professional video with amazing footage. Then my wife said, “I could swear I have seen this footage before” and I replied, yeah probably in another video he has done running for office. She was adamant that was not it and night after night as we sat watching tv she played on her iPad until I heard, “See, I told you I have seen this footage before,” and with a big grin on her face, she played me one of the city’s Progress in Motion videos. Then she played a portion of Cheney’s campaign video and sure as shady shit it was a match. We decided to do a little research to see how much of his election video matched up with the Progress in Motion videos put out by the city. We decided to do a little research to see how much of his election video matched up to the Progress in Motion videos put out by the city.
In Cheney’s election video at the 24 second mark you see the drone footage coming into the Cowboy Star which is from the NFLs HBO’s Hard Knocks: The Dallas Cowboys at the 07-second mark. Did he get approval from HBO, NFL and Jerry Jones to use that footage? Would any of them give him authorization to use that for a political campaign ad? Should we consider this and endorsement?
Now compare Cheney’s election video to the Progress in Motion – Public Safety Training Center video. On Cheney’s election video at the 1:17 mark you see footage of the fireman from the back in a training which is an exact match to the PIM at the 1:39 video mark. Then at the 1:18 mark on Cheney’s election video you see footage of a burning car which matches the 1:09 video mark in the PIM video. Then at the 1:22 mark on the election video you see a Frisco Police Car which matches the footage at the 1:22 video mark in the PIM. Lastly, at the 1:24 mark on Cheney’s election video you see footage of the FD training center which matches the 1:28 video mark on the PIM video.
On Cheney’s election video at the 1:43 mark he talks about The Rail District and the future of outdoor entertainment. Interestingly the renderings were produced by Kimley Horn and are on the city’s site and labeled with the Frisco logo. The renderings are show in an article on Frisco Enterprise and they note the renderings which match Cheneys election video were the courtesy of The City of Frisco.
On Cheney’s election video at the 2:16 mark he shows the ground-breaking of the Dr. Pepper Keurig office complex with Jerry Jones which is an exact match to the start of the city’s PIM – Keurig Dr Pepper Groundbreaking video.
On Cheney’s election video at the 2:23 mark he shows the ribbon cutting of Texas Health which is an exact match to the PIM – Texas Health Hospital Frisco video.
Cheney was even bold enough to use ESPN or PGA footage of Tiger Woods in his election video at the 2:25 mark. We found a few city videos and it appears as if the PGA may have given the city some footage to use for advertising videos. The question is did they give Cheney permission to use footage in a political campaign video? Did he have permission to use the professional golfer and their likeness in his video? Did he have permission from ESPN or the PGA to use this footage in a political campaign video? Do ESPN or the PGA endorse Mayor Cheney? Is Tigers appearance an endorsement? At the 2:30 mark he uses Universal’s Theme Park rendering given to the city for press releases. So, did he have NBC Universal’s permission to use their rendering in a political campaign video? Does that mean NBC Universal endorsed the mayor? Lastly at the 2:50 mark in his election video he shows aerial views of the new PGA which look very similar to the PIM PGA videos.
You are probably wondering, why is this important? Well, in 2021 a local resident filed an ethics complaint against the mayor for using his city email to solicit feedback from department heads which he later used in a personal Facebook post to endorse and support Angelia Pelham for council. In the complaint she cited it was a violation per the Code of Conduct Section 7. According to Section 7: Public Property and Resources it states a city official shall not use, request, or permit the use of city facilities, personnel, equipment and supplies for private purposes (including political purposes). Now his fellow council members voted against moving forward with the ethics complaint in 2001 but in our own opinion it was clear as day he violated it then. SO, DID HE VIOLATE THE CODE OF CONDUCT WITH HIS ELECTION VIDEO?
We are estimating about 75% of the election video is made from city footage. Are political candidates allowed to use city footage paid for by taxpayers? Does the city not have any copyright rules? Is it fair for anyone to use city footage? If so, then I could make a video and use some of the footage that includes Cheney speaking? Can a realtor in Frisco make videos using city footage to advertise their business? What about small businesses, can they use city footage to make social media commercials for their business? Can a local realtor use local renderings from P&Z documents to advertise their business and talk about new things coming to Frisco? Were all the candidates aware they could use city footage to make political campaign videos? If they were allowed to use the video footage was it disclosed to them or was that something the Mayor knew as an “inside tip” that he used for his advantage. A video of this nature could and probably does cost thousands of dollars if he had to film all this footage himself. Filming is not cheap or inexpensive. So, did the mayor pay the city for the use of the footage? Is this another example of Jeff Cheney taking Mayoral Privilege for his personal use and benefit?
We are thinking that someone needs to look in the mirror and decide if he is the FAIRest of them all.
What is Privilege? Privilege is a right or immunity granted as a benefit, advantage, or favor. In America, many believe privilege is often associated with wealth, opportunity, and powerful connections. However, in today’s America, privilege has been skewed or bent to be associated with race and racial injustice. For a foreigner who came to America and went through the process to become a citizen, I can tell you many foreigners look at privilege very differently. Most of those who have struggled to come here will tell you applying for citizenship was not easy, not cheap, and not quick. If you ask most immigrants they will tell you if you were born here in America (regardless of race/color, religion, or sexuality) you were born with an innate privilege that most Americans cannot comprehend and see right in front of their eyes. Growing up my dad always said, “If you rascals would have been lucky enough to be born in America, then inherently you would have had more freedoms, privileges, and opportunity than any other country in the entire world. It is the reason people die trying to come here.”
If you remember in Anatomy of a Friendship we talked about how Mayor Cheney announced he was going to take Mayors Privilege to make some comments at the December 4, 2018 special meeting to authorize and execute the proposed Master Development Agreement for the PGA Frisco. I have always wondered since that meeting what other “Privilege” does Cheney take using his position as Mayor for the City of Frisco. Powerful people have powerful privileges or at least opportunities to call in “favors.”
Well one citizen who walks the Cottonwood Creek trail every morning noticed several years ago that the area belonging to the city behind the mayor’s new Shaddock custom home was getting a little “spruced up” and was curious about it. After reviewing a copy of the citizens PIR submitted to us from 2021, we noticed it started with a response from Mayor Jeff Cheney. We will come back to a little later after we talk about the timeline of emails that escalated our interest.
May 24, 2019 (11:28am): First email, Jeff Cheney from his business email (Cheney Group) sent a note to Shannon Keleher with the city parks department stating they decided to build on a Shaddock lot, but they were not in love with the proximity of the trail and all the eyeballs in their backyard and he points out his lot is one of the few that intrude on this amazing park. He asked Shannon to look and see if more screening in this area makes sense as he does not think park users want to be staring at the mayor in his backyard. He continues it’s a unique situation and won’t happen in the future with the new policy but hopes there is something that can be planned now for the benefit of all. Cheney continues he plans to put some personal money and time into this park because they love it so much but would like to meet Shannon out there and get his blessing first. Lastly he notes that Shannon had mentioned the ponds might be combined and would love an update and how he would like to see a walking trail that completed the loop around the water. He ended it with his signed business signature from the Cheney Group.
Question: How many citizens can directly email the Director of Parks and Recreation asking for consideration on an issue they believe is concerning or that affects their home?
Question: At the time Cheney picked this lot, was the walking trail in question already there? Yes. Therefore, he knew before every buying or building there that his home would back up in close proximity to the trail so why is he complaining about it? Can any Frisco resident whose homes back up to the same type of walking trails and ponds get the same post consideration for privacy screening provided by the city?
May 28, 2019 (10:09AM) Shannon Keleher responds to Hi Mayor, hope you had a great weekend. Thank you for sending this, I understand your concerns and will get with our staff to see what “options” are available. It is such an amazing park, and the new policies will help moving forward. He will ask Holly (assistant) to set up a meeting for them in the next month for them to also discuss the ponds and ways Cheney might be able to help.
October 5, 2019 (3:13PM) Mayor Cheney from his personal business email account for the Cheney Group sends an email to Shannon again and points out that he cc’d Josh Sandler owner of Gold Medal Pools who has purchased two lots on the same street down from Cheney. He notes Josh has access to landscapers and trees through his business and they have been talking about improvements to the public space behind their homes that the park can benefit from. Cheney asks who would be the best person for them to talk to about being a part of the process as well as discussing perhaps additional items at their own personal expense?
Question: Since when did the City of Frisco start considering or allowing citizens to spend their own personal money to spruce up city areas that back up to their homes? Cheney said this consideration was to benefit all, but was it really just for the benefit of Cheney and Sandler’s privacy? I am curious how the city handles and responds to regular citizens who want to be a part of the process of development directly behind their homes?
October 5, 2019 (4:34PM) Shannon responds that met with the CIP team (all landscape architects) who design all the parks and trails. They came up with some ideas of things that could be placed there. Shannon asks to set up a meeting with Cheney and one of the CIP team leaders, and of course Josh Sandler (the neighbor) is welcome to come too.
Question: Would the same opportunity, time and cost be given to any citizen who just emailed the Director of Parks and Rec about their concern of looky-loos? What if a citizen had concern about the view of a park or trail from their home, would they be told how to follow a process to go about asking the city for change? Lastly, how much did Parks and Rec spend in on the landscape architects to come up with “ideas of things” that could be placed there?
Now the Mayor wrote a response to the PIR where he notes 3 streets in the neighborhood back up to Cottonwood Creek. He wrote that the city planted trees at all 3 locations with no preferential treatment to his home. He notes the existing trail does not meet our current distance requirements for trails behind homes. When he was evaluating how to solve that issue he reached out to city staff to see if they could install screening on the city side at his expense. He said city staff told him there were already plans which Cheney shared with his neighbors. Cheney notes the owner of the 2 lots next to him (we are assuming at the time that was Mr. Sandler) asked for the city to delete the plans behind his home which the city accommodated. He notes the last home provided feedback to staff as well and made additional requests, was that Councilman Jon Keatings home? He was unsure if the staff would have met with other Shaddock residents.
Question: Cheney noted the neighbor (Sandler who ultimately sold his lots) asked for nothing be done behind his house and the city accommodated the request. So were the citizens who live on this street provided a menu board of services that could be provided to order off what each lot wanted? Maybe it is just those with privilege “the handpicked” who get to say what they want and do not want behind their houses?
Question: Cheney pointed out that the existing trail does not meet current distance requirements. As a real estate mastermind, he knows that means the existing trail is grandfathered and it does not have to be updated to new standards or policies the city may have adopted. So why then did the city accommodate these specific requests? Was it because who requested it? Does it set a precedent so that any resident in the city who has a trail that does not meet current standards can now ask the city to update it at their expense and give them the same “courtesy” that Mayor Cheney received?
Question: Did the mayor buy his specific lot because it was the best one in the development that had privacy on two sides, expansive greenbelt views of nature and waterways knowing the trail was there? Yes, he did! Cottonwood Creek Greenbelt spans 77 acres through Shaddock Creek and Heather Creek Estates and it is one of the city’s most beautiful spaces. In April of 2017, the Star Local Media published an article where Shaddock said, “envisioned an area where kids could play, explore nature in a somewhat wild setting like he experienced as a boy growing up.” Honestly it sounds fabulous to me!
Question: Why did the mayor even feel the need to write a response to what seems like such a trivial PIR at first glance? It is the fact that he took the time to respond that made my wife and I say, hmm something is a rye! It is clear he knows it looks bad, like he used his position or privilege to ask for special treatment which is why he made it sound like it was no big deal.
Of all the questions we have, we go back to what if a citizen had concern about the view of a park or trail from their home, would they know what to do or be told how to follow a process to go about asking the city for change? Well on June 20th, residents from Starwood came before the council during Citizens Input to talk about Starwood Park and how it has deteriorated and is unsafe. They note the picture of the park on the city website looks nothing like how the park actually appears. The city website notes it is a 2-acre park that was completed in 1996. They want to know why the city has not done anything to maintain the park and to keep it up. The residents noted it is listed on the city website as a city park and it connects to all the other Frisco city parks. One resident made record of the fact that originally Blue Star (Jerry Jones) owned the land, and they transferred it to SHBT, LLC in Denton, Texas. Wait if the city does not own it, then why is it listed as a city park on the city website?
Mayor Cheney was out of town so acting Mayor Keating noted they are not supposed to interact, but he was going to take mayoral liberty to respond, and Bill Woodard also noted he had a comment. Bill went first and noted he received their email, he did reach out to Henry (Hill?) but did not have a chance to go over their concerns in detail with Henry at this point. He then noted that they are not supposed to interact during citizens input (but he continues) and that he will circle back with them after he talks Henry about the legal challenges they are facing there. What? Legal Challenges?
We have community parks that have legal challenges. Apparently there is an issue of who owns the land. Then Brian Livingston steps up noted he received a text and had made some inquiries too, and then asked Ben Brezina to get back with all the council on the issue. Then one of the residents responded it is a city park, it’s on the city website and SHBT, LLC should pay to keep it up and if they don’t the city should. She then said she was told since the land belonged to Jerry Jones and good luck getting him to pay, as well as the city does not want to bother good ole Jerry since he brings so much money to the city regarding the upkeep of this little darn park. Then stand in mayor Keating made a few comments and thanked them for coming.
Again, we go back to what has been our burning question of all, if a citizen had concern about the view of a park or trail from their home, would they be told how to follow a process to go about asking the city for change? Someone should tell them to just email Shannon the Director or Parks and Rec. Not one person on the council told them to contact Shannon so that he could investigate and come up with some ideas. The red carpet is not being laid out for Starwood residents like it was for Mayor Cheney. In a city with so much money, if we are not making the owners of the land maintain it then I agree with the residents we should make the city take care of it. Legal Challenges have never stopped the City of Frisco before!
In closing, it is clear the mayor received special treatment. You have residents all over the city who back up to the trails, greenbelt and waterways that don’t meet current standards and we did not give them all the option to have the city update their areas. Did residents along Beacon Hill Dr and Midnight Moon Drive who back up to walking trails and waterways get the same opportunity? If you have ever walked there then you would know from the walking trails you can see straight into every backyard, heck if the blinds were open you could probably see them changing into the nude.
Did residents in Phillips Creek Ranch who just built million-dollar homes, then learn a Walmart was coming in get the same opportunity to have one-on-one service from Parks about the very open views behind their homes that back up to very busy walking trails and waterways?
The one reason he didn’t like his lot is probably because of the concern regarding neighbors or trail walkers seeing him hosting underage drinking parties at his home for kids. It is a clear case of abuse of power, privilege, and using his position on council AGAIN for his personal advantage.
It is good to be back from our month long sabbatical otherwise known as a holiday in my country and we have been eager to check the tip line for some new Shade. While visiting my country last month, I got to take part in the Gentleman’s Club (it is not what you think). It is a monthly tradition where the village gentleman holds a club night, enjoys some bottles of vino on the terrace, and tell wild tales. Meanwhile, the women go inside to also enjoy the vino and a couple hands of cards. We began to share jolly chatter when Paulo looked at me and said, “since you live in Texas, tell me about LAJITAS?” I politely asked if that was the name of a cocktail and he said “no, it is the name of a small famous town in far west Texas that feels like it sits on the edge of the world.” Shocked, I said tell me more as laughter abound from the men on the terrace. Paulo said, “Clay Henry is a delinquent politician full of tricks who ran for mayor of Lajitas. He was known for consuming up to 40 beers a day and he had a penchant for headbutting constituents without any warning. He was Lajitas most “FAMOUS CITIZEN” and he was the only mayor in the US with hooves.” All of looked at Paulo not sure if we should laugh or think he lost his mind, when he blurted out yep, Clay Henry was a goat! We all began to google and of course there are many stories and/or legends around Lajitas and Clay Henry. So many that it is hard to know what is true or false. One story goes that Clay Henry was killed by his son Clay Henry Jr. for being a ladies’ man and his love rival. Another story said in in 1992 when the Goat Mayor died he was stuffed chugging a beer and mounted in the general store for all the visitors to see. The craziest story of all is the one where Clay Henry was castrated by a local name Bob Hargrove after he became jealous of Henry drinking the last beer in town on a Sunday. According to the ABC News report the goat was found lying in the streets with his testicles cut off. With that all the men stood up and it was time to call it a night. The fun stops when it comes a goat losing his testis’s. I said goodbye to all my local friends and their wives then stumbled just down the steps to my room where my wife was already in bed reading a book. I said, “DAMN HUN, be glad we live in Frisco, Texas and not Lajitas with a testicleless goat!” My wife looked at me with the usual disappointment and like I was an idiot and said turn off the lights.
You are probably wondering why the hell did I tell you this story. Well, because I was thinking we probably didn’t miss anything while we were gone and yet we missed everything! We quickly learned that the City of Frisco hired a new, but old, yet still unwanted Fire Chief named Lee Glover, who has a 90+ percent no confidence vote from the Frisco Fire Fighters. Then we learned the Frisco Fire Fighters have started a petition to become a civil service organization and to have collective bargaining. The cherry on top was a Frisco PD Resource Officer, Kendal Augustus was fired then arrested and charged with sexual assault of a child, indecency with a child and sexual performance of a child and yet his bond was only set at $55,000? Jackie from the TV Series, The Marvelous Mrs. Maisel said it best, “Life is a basically an all-you-can-eat shit show!”
Jackie is right that life is basically a shit show and sometimes it can also be the gift that keeps on giving. After unpacking I went to water my roses and my neighbor was outside, so he walked over and said I have something to show you. He pulled out his phone and said, yesterday we were on the lake, and you won’t believe the photos we captured. I quickly realized it was photos of Mayor Cheney and his wife Dana on their boat. He pointed out Zach Cheney, the mayor’s oldest son (still under 21), who was doing shots off the back of the boat with some friends while the Cheney’s watched from the head of the boat like the kings of the world!
Obviously, the Cheney’s didn’t learn anything after hosting the viral keg party at their house for Zach’s graduation in May 2021 in which their son later posted to his snap chat account. Now they will quickly deny this happened, but boat registrations do not lie! In Texas, every watercraft must be registered just like a car and that is the number you see on the side of the boat. In this case the pictures show a black Bennington 25 ft Pontoon with the registration of TX 5306 KL. To look up the current ownership of a boat is simple, and a matter of public record at the State of Texas Open Data Portal. When we ran the registration it shows the original registration date of 09/07/2022 and is due for renewal on 09/30/2024. The owner is listed as Thomas J Cheney Jr. and it is registered to his home in Frisco. We won’t give out his address, but you can look it up just clicking on the Open Data Portal link yourself.
Just because it is okay for a Mayoral Goat to get drunk does not mean the same rules apply to humans. What are the laws in Texas when it comes to minors drinking? Drinking when you’re under 21 or providing alcohol to a minor comes with consequences. If a minor attempts to buy, possesses or drink alcoholic beverages, or if a minor is intoxicated in public or misrepresents their age to buy alcohol they could be in trouble. They could face a $500 fine, attend a boring alcohol awareness class, do up to 40 hours of community service and could potentially lose their driver’s license up to 180 days.
On the other hand, adults who give minors alcohol could also face stiff penalties. Making alcoholic beverages available to a minor is a class A misdemeanor, punishable by a fine up to $4,000, confinement in jail for up to a year or both. Your driver´s license would also be automatically suspended for 180 days when they are convicted. Texas also has a “Zero Tolerance Law” which states, it is illegal for a person under 21 to operate a motor vehicle or watercraft in a public place while having any detectable amount of alcohol in their system.
Most interesting is that in Texas, a person may purchase an alcoholic beverage for or give an alcoholic beverage to a minor if he is the minor’s adult parent, guardian, or spouse and they must be visibly present when the minor possesses or consumes the alcoholic beverage. However, Texas Social Host Laws state it is illegal for a parent to provide alcohol to other minors who are not their children, and they could be responsible should that minor cause injury to themselves or cause property damage.
Rick Riordan, The Last Olympian once said, “patterns repeat themselves in history.” If that is true then one could say intentions are often hidden inside patterns of behavior and a good indicator of patterns is TIME! In this case history is repeating itself and just as publicly as it did last time. After watching the video which includes photos from the lake and Zach Cheney’s own open Instagram page it leaves us with a few questions.
How old are the young adults in the boat chugging shots like Clay Henry the Goat?
If they are under 21, then who purchased the alcohol for their consumption?
If the Mayor purchased the alcohol and provided it to his son that is fine, but if he provided it to his son’s friends (who are underage) that is ILLEGAL!
When the pontoon docked back at the marina – who drove the car or cars home?
Lastly, Mr. Cheney is not a secretary for the city he is the Mayor! The BUCK STOPS WITH HIM! He should be leading by example. How do you say this is okay, then say how important the Shattered Dreams program is at the high schools to stop underage drinking. As for Zach Cheney you would think his parents would have sat him down in 2021 and said “Son, you are an extension of us meaning what you do reflects on us and so you can not publish photos of you on social media platforms partying and drinking when you are clearly underage. Surely they told him to lock down his accounts so only his friends can see his debauchery. No, his Instagram clearly shows him drinking on bid day in 2022 when he was 19, as well as other times. It also shows him at AT&T Stadium tailgating – how did they get home after? It appears the Mayor and his wife were also attending the game and the Mayor clearly had on his City of Frisco Polo. Truthfully, old grouches like us are lucky – we did not have social media to get us in trouble. It is called common sense, if you are going to drink underage (most young adults do) and you are from a notable family then don’t post about it on an open social feed, and don’t take your kid out in the open to a cove on the Lake known for a good time!
I don't know, Patrick, and I'm not familiar with SREC, so I'm unable to answer your questions.
Hi Patrick—when is your SREC30 meeting. Missed the one and want to together before Sept.
We hope to write about it all soon. Most of the content in question - was from 3rd Party comments…
Shining a light in the dark here to just get this out of the way and moved past—who started the…
Bunch of Nepotism, buddy system promotion. If you ain’t white you ain’t right