In our blog Legal Logo Woes, we told you how the city website clearly states you cannot use the City of Frisco logo in any way for campaigning purposes. Multiple residents complained to the city secretary regarding the obvious infractions by the candidates using the city logo while campaigning, we were shocked the response from the city was it is not their problem. Morrow said, the city does not own the logo, BNSF Railway does. She went on to say the license agreement the City of Frisco has does not address the use of the logo by candidates in city or other elections. Then she ended the city does not have any jurisdiction in the matter.
Makes you wonder why if the city has no jurisdiction and the license agreement the city has does not address the use of the logo by candidates, why would they put a rule on their website and in the candidate packs that clearly states the logo is not legally available for your use during the campaign. The city documents and website 1000% imply the use of the city logo is not allowed. If they can’t enforce the rule why have the rule?
We reached out to BNSF Railway for a comment regarding the complaints. On February 6 we received a note back from them that they had forwarded the issue to their legal department to see what the next steps were for them. Then on February 8, we received an email from Kendall Kirkham Sloan, Director of External Communications that said “BNSF does not endorse political candidates. We are working with the city on the use of the logo.”
We decided to check back to see if BNSF Railway, The City of Frisco, or Wes Pierson, the City Manager would make sure his current sitting council members followed the rules. Attending a city event is fine but “the purpose of campaigning” is when you cross into dangerous territory. For example, the Keating For Frisco website is being used FOR CAMPAIGNING and the point of the site is to get him reelected which is why it is on every campaign printed piece of material. “Learn more at Keating For Frisco” or just click the QR code which takes you to his website. Even though we pointed out the RULE VIOLATIONS back in early February, imagine our surprise to learn Keating still has the City Logo in two different places on his website as of today. Just another way Keating is giving the middle finger to the rules that apply while campaigning.
Then we learned about a Private Meet & Greet held by none other than our first family, Jeff and Dana Cheney. The invite states it is a Mix and Mingle Happy Hour, not the same as a Keg Party, for candidates John Keating, Angelia Pelham and the Safety-First Frisco Vote No PAC. To us, this is a campaigning invite since they are using the “Re-Election” logos that belong to the candidates and the logo telling citizens how to vote for propositions. Surely, we will not see the City of Frisco logo here, right? Wrong!
Several pictures have been posted across social media of the event and it is CLEAR, Angelia Pelham is breaking the rules of the use of the city logo while campaigning. She is wearing her City Council Member Badge with the city logo. Now many would say this is no big deal, but it is because if anyone knows ‘THE RULES’ it is our current city council members who have already been through a campaign in the past. We can prove Angelia knows the rules, just look at previous events like the Frisco Chamber Forum or SLAN Forum, she is wearing her Re-Elect Angelia Pelham badge.
We plan to reach out to BNSF Railway again because their last email to us said they were working with the city regarding the proper use of the logo, so either A) they endorse the candidates or B) they don’t, and they make them stop using a trademark logo that the city does not own while campaigning. It is simple folks, follow the rules, not sometimes, but all the time.
Is a logo important to your business? Yes, of course it is! Logos are a point of identification; they are a symbol that helps folks recognize your brand. Any smart business is going to trademark their logo so that it cannot be used without permission from its owner. Trademark Infringement is when someone uses another party’s registered trademark without permission. Using a logo without permission can open you up to being sued by the owner of the trademark.
Recently, after a resident reached out to us, with his concern about political signs and the use of the city logo we did some research. Right on the city website, it says: Political Campaign Sign Summary:
The city website is clear in our opinion about the “City of Frisco Logo” not being used in any way for campaigning. That is why we were surprised when a citizen forwarded us an email this morning after he made a complaint to the city secretary regarding his concerns. The email response from Kristi Morrow reads: The City of Frisco has received your sign/logo complaints. Please see the response below regarding the complaints filed.
The City of Frisco regulation states that Election signs may not be posted 90 days prior to the Election. While the word Election can have many different interpretations/timeframes, the City considers the Election to mean the beginning of early voting. This gives all candidates adequate time to properly advertise and get the word out regarding their candidacy.
The City of Frisco does not own the “Frisco” logo. The BNSF Railway Company owns the rights to the logo and has granted a license to the City for the right to use the logo under certain circumstances. The license agreement does not address use of the logo by candidates in City or other elections. Whether a candidate may use the logo or not is a matter of federal trademark and/or copyright law. The City does not have jurisdiction to enforce federal trademark or copyright law.
Interesting response! When it comes to the political signs maybe the city should clarify in the candidate pack what they determine the meaning to be of the word election, which is the beginning of early voting.
As for the city logo, if the city has no jurisdiction over the right to use the logo, they don’t own the right to the logo, then why do they put it on their website that the use of the logo is not allowed? Why do they repeat saying it inside the candidate pack that is given to every candidate to fill out? Yes the candidate pack read, “that the “City Logo is a licensed product and isNOT LEGALLY AVAILABLE FOR YOUR USE.”
After reading the city’s email response that said, BNSF Railway Company owns the rights to the logo and has granted a license to the City for the right to use the logo under certain circumstances, we are curious what are those circumstances? Did John Keating or Angelia Pelham reach out to BNSF Railway for permitted use of the logo in their campaigns? Don’t worry, we did reach out to BNSF Railway. We also filed a complaint regarding the use of the logo in political campaigns with them along with asking if they are endorsing either candidate and if the candidates requested use of the trademarked logo.
Clearly a sitting city council member, especially one’s holding the title Mayor, Deputy Mayor Pro Tem, and Mayor Pro Tem should know the rules. because playing the “oh I am stupid card” just does not work here. If they seriously don’t know the rules after how long they have served on the city council then maybe they shouldn’t be on council.
Jeff Cheney: Council Member 2007 – 2016 and Mayor from 2017 to Present
John Keating: Council Member 2010 to 2016 in Place 4 and 2017 to Present Place 1
Bill Woodard: Council Member 2016 – Present
Brian Livingston: Council Member 2017 – Present
Angelia Pelham: Council Member 2021 – Present
Tammy Meinershagen: Council Member 2022 to Present
Laura Rummell: Council Member 2022 to Present
What is clear, over, and over is that the RULES FOR ME ARE DIFFERENT THAN THE RULES FOR THEE in the City of Frisco. It is such a blatant disregard and nose up at the rules and the residents they supposedly serve. We would think the city would not want to get in to trouble with BNSF so they would make sure to tell a sitting council member to make the needed corrections. The City of Frisco’s policy is clearly stated on their website and in the candidate pack, but if they have no control or enforcement then why is it listed in either place to begin with? We also know that in the past other individuals, political candidates, and some organizations have been told by the city (not BNSF), to stop using the city logo. Why is it okay now and why now are they saying well we can’t tell them what to do? Well, YOU KNOW THEM…it is the city, John Keating and Angelia Pelham!
Campaigning has begun and we are excited to see how the next few months play out. We thought we should educate ourselves on the rules, so we read city’s Political Campaign Sign policy listed on the city website.
Rules 1 & 4 are pretty clear so we decided to look at the candidates social media pages and election websites.
Rule 1: Political signs cannot be placed on any City of Frisco, Community Development Corporation (CDC), or Economic Development Corporation (EDC) property or in a City of Frisco easement.
Rule 4: The City of Frisco logo cannot be used in any way for campaigning including on political signs.
John Redmond website appears to only be one page and has a short intro to who he is and his campaign logo. We could not find any social media pages for him. – Passed Inspection
Mark Piland website does not include pictures of political signs on city property, and it does not contain the official city logo. In a review of his social media, we did not see any violations either. – Passed Inspection
Angelia Pelham currently holds Place 3 and serves as Deputy Mayor Pro Tem. Her website passed inspection. However, her social media did not! On January 17th she held a filing party at city hall. She had several supporters come join her and there are numerous pictures of her and supporters holding Pelham campaign signs on city property and more so in the rotunda of city hall! That is a clear violation of Rule 1 even if it was temporary. The photos also violate Rule 4 regarding the city logo not being used for campaigning because clearly in several photos the official city logo can be spotted. It became campaigning when she turned into a filing party, had her political signs and several supporters wearing t-shirts. The photos appear on her political Facebook page as well as personal page and on Instagram.
We liked her campaign video, she looks good in red and has a catchy slogan. We are a little curious about one portion of the video which shows her standing at the back of the room with Frisco Public Safety officers from both the PD and FD. The video is tagged in the corner with her campaign logo which could give people the impression she is endorsed by either public safety group, which she is not. The picture includes Mark Piland who has announced he is running for Place 1 which made us curious how he feels his likeness in her video? Lastly, when the photo was taken we were pretty sure none of them knew down the road it would be used for campaign video. We are not sure if there is any violation here according to campaign rules or city rules, however one would think before using someone’s likeness, out of respect, you might want to ask them if they are okay with it. Many police departments have rules about offices being photographed and for the purposes they can be used for.
Lastly, we looked a John Keating’s website. He currently serves Place 1 and is the Mayor Pro Tem. We could not view his social media because has blocked us across all channels. Keating’s website is in clear violation of Rule 4. As soon as the page loads you see a picture of Keating with the slogan Promises Made Promises Kept and behind it is a watermark of the official City of Frisco Flag. Then if you scroll down, right after he asks you for your money, you can clearly see the official city logo.
On the “About John” page it shows him standing in the Frisco City Council Chamber up on the dais. This picture was taken on December 4, 2018, the night the council approved a plan for the PGA of America. The picture appears in an article for the Dallas Morning News.
The last page titled “The Mission” has a picture of Keating with the official city of Frisco Logo right behind him, which is again, a clear violation of Rule 4. Then under Public Safety he has a picture with Chief Shilson, Frisco PD which mislead residents of an endorsement that he does not have. Now the picture with Shilson may not be a violation but is misleading.
When it comes to campaigning, rules should be taken very seriously. We could understand how first-time candidates can make mistakes, but if they are running it is their responsibility to know the rules. As for the Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Angelia Pelham, and Mayor Pro Tem John Keating, they have no excuse. If they are serving in the Deputy Mayor Pro Tem and Mayor Pro Tem positions then clearly they should know the rules. Keating has been around since 2011, off and on and if he doesn’t know the rules by now then we may have bigger issues. We go back to why are there rules for thee but not for me? I can guarantee if some of the previous candidates who ran for office committed these violations we would not hear the end of it. The city should also be accountable to uphold their own rules! Email the city council and ask them to uphold to the city rules now and in the future.
Back in November you may have read our blog, Frisco – The City That Burns Bodies where we told you about local residents taking to Citizens Input at the November 21st city council meeting to discuss their concerns about the new Ridgeview West Memorial Park Crematory owned by Turrentine-Jackson-Morrow, Inc.
Even though the Texas Open Meeting Act states “the governmental body (AKA City of Frisco) MAY NOT DELIBERATE on any item from public comment that is not on the agenda the city continues to break the rule, meeting after meeting. The Act clearly states what they can do which is (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.
At the city council meeting that night Cheney opens Citizens Input by acknowledging the large number of citizens who are there to speak. Then he continues, “so the speakers have the benefit of understanding all the facts the staff has a prepared a presentation,” followed by Jonathan Hubbard, Assistant Director of Development Services who took to the podium. Then RICHARD ABERNATHY, THE CITY ATTORNEY speaks about the regulation and omissions from a crematorium, and this is where the problem begins, but we will get back to that.
Next Cheney asks Jonathan to confirm that this crematory was approved before the neighborhood was ever contemplated and that all this information has been available to the public on the city’s website since it had been approved. STOP, JEFF CHENEY! REGULAR PEOPLE who are considering buying a home don’t go research the city’s planning and development that has been approved nearby over the last 10 years. As far as the city website, it is NOT USER FRIENDLY for the REGULAR PEOPLE to find information and most are not going to pay $90 for a PIR. Hell Sir, most people don’t even know what key words to look for in the search tools to find such information.
All in all, after opening citizens input at 40:09, the city held the floor over 10 minutes to “school residents’ which ended at 51:13. FYI, that is not a statement that is called a full presentation to pre-empt citizens at public input. Then NOT SHOCKINGLY, Bobblehead Bill Woodard mentions they have over 10 cards for public input and in response to the city’s policies and to be respectful of everyone’s time, he proposed citizens input should be cut from 5 min per person to 3 min per person.
THAT’S RIGHT FOLKS, they don’t want to hear from you the CITIZEN who Cheney says is at the top of theCITY’S ORGANIZATIONAL CHART! They can use up 10+ minutes of Citizens Input, EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE BREAKING THE OPEN MEETING ACT BY HAVING A DISCUSSION ABOUT AN ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA, but you SIR/MADAM need to hurry up and get it done in 3 minutes or less.
At Frisco Chronicles we have told you over and over about how the city likes to school or educate us stupid citizens, we have told you about how they are breaking the open meeting act, we have told you how they are withholding PIR requests and delaying PIR requests. Just last week we told you how the city HR Department forged documents and spent $88,000 to do a needless investigation.
Well now, let’s get back to earlier where we mentioned a problem with the City Attorney, Richard Abernathy speaking. Why is it a problem? The City Attorney is DOUBLE DIPPING and has a major conflict-of-interest. What could that CONFLICT-OF-INTEREST BE? Well, did you know his firm represents THE CREMATORY! Yep, HOLD YOUR TOUPEE’S FOLKS, the city attorney’s law firm Abernathy, Roeder, Boyd & Hullett located on Redbud Blvd in McKinney represented Turrentine-Jackson-Morrow, Inc., A Texas Corporation in a lawsuit against The State of Texas in 2021. While the case is closed today, the fact that they represented the corporation in which the citizens are there to speak against probably means HE SHOULD HAVE RECUSED HIMSELF! Whose interest is he looking out for? Not the citizens! His job is to protect his clients, which in this case are the City of Frisco and Turrentine-Jackson-Morrow, Inc.
Frisco Residents should be beyond angry at this point, they should be done right pissed off! The city continues to waste tax dollars, put developers before residents, break rules and treat citizens as if they are stupid. When will it stop?
Other References
NBCDFW: Controversy over new crematorium in Frisco
Every country has different traditions when it comes to celebrating New Years. I remember as a kid when I spent some time in Denmark with my family they would go door to door and smash plates on doorsteps of friends and family. The more shards there are in front of your home the luckier and more well liked were. One year we celebrated New Years in the Philippines and there everyone just wears Polka dots because they believe it increases their chances of good luck. Our tradition in the winery, you keep the windows and doors open on the front and back of your home. The idea was you welcome the new year in and in turn blow out the old year, so you have a clean slate so to speak.
What does 2024 bring for the Whistleblower Family? We will continue to work on the leads sent to us by our followers, file more PIR’s, and work to uncover the happenings behind the scenes at city hall. The one thing from 2023 that we are perplexed by is why the city chose to fight so hard to keep certain things a secret and what they were willing to release.
For example, Nepotism, yes that is right, Nepotism. Ask yourself, why would a city fight so hard to keep documents from the public related to the Nepotism Policy. The policy is published on the city website for anyone to see. Any changes to the policy must go before the council and are listed in the Agenda and Minutes. That is why we were surprised and perplexed they sent our PIR request to the Attorney General who issued a response on December 15 and the city notified us on December 29th.
We asked for communications between city officials pertaining to changes of the Nepotism policy. We wanted to understand why they were changing it, who they were changing it for, and how it would impact the city. However, the city asserted attorney-client privilege that was made for the purpose of facilitating the rendition of professional legal services to the city and the communications have remained confidential. They also submitted that the documents consist of advice, opinions and recommendations of city employees and officials regarding policymaking matters of the city. The attorney general agreed the city could withhold it.
We know from an March 8th email they had already made up their mind to hire Interim Fire Chief Lee Glover but to do so they had to change the policy in April 2023. So why then did they host a meet the candidate night in May 2023? The decision was final, they had no intention to hire any of those candidates. It was for POMP & CIRCUMSTANCE, so it appeared they were doing their due diligence.
Then we know they changed the policy again just a month or so later to hire the IT Director whose husband works in the Frisco Police Department. Our issue is that the same policy was used in the past and recently to disqualify candidates for jobs. So they want their peanut butter and jelly when it suits them, but they want to whistle and swing the policy around as an excuse when they did not want to hire someone. It is not fair practice, and it does not give everyone an equal playing field.
If the city had nothing to hide and everything they did when it comes to changing the Nepotism policy was above board, then why not release the email communications? We also can’t understand why they sent to the AG a PIR request for a street flood. What are you hiding about a street flood that affected tax paying citizens homes? We just can’t wrap our head around the fact the city would fight to keep a few emails private and claim policy making as the reason, but they will go to a city council meeting and vote to release a confidential document about a retired employee running for Mayor.
Traditions are important in this world, and like we said at the beginning we all have our New Year traditions that are the kick start of good luck for the future. The city’s tradition is to delay PIRs by sending them to the AG and covering their tracks by claiming attorney client privilege which they have done with almost every PIR in 2023 that they wanted to bury. We assume the tradition will continue in 2024. For all those saying we’re reaching or trying to make something out of nothing, the truth is we are realists and what is happening is so obvious to anyone if they just clean the lenses of their glasses. The other tradition we know the city will continue in 2024 is to waste our taxpayer dollars and operate the “Frisco Way!”
Our tradition is to continue to watch the city very closely and each person in this city. It is easier now that moles are coming out of the word work to help and join the team. The city continues to lose amazing talent to other cities which will dramatically change how Frisco operates and develops. As my dad would say one step, two step, you step, we step meaning “we are watching you.” If you have something you would like to share with us, just drop us an email at FriscoWhistleBlower@protonmail.com
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!
I went to her to ask for help with an issue my child that was getting nowhere with the school,…
So whatever became of the $17 million dollars that the city council gave the Mayor to beautify a drainage ditch?
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…