Summer is over but the heat still has things percolating in Frisco. It is time to break down some events that happened over the summer.
Over the summer you may have seen the post from the Frisco Police Department regarding the Frisco Athletic Center Robbery. It was posted on July 1st and reads “On June 29, 2026, at approximately 8:00 p.m., Frisco Police responded to a robbery involving a firearm that occurred in the parking lot at the Frisco Athletic Center (FAC).”
The post detailed how the robbery occurred following a pre-arranged meeting at the FAC between two parties. One party apparently left in a blue and white Ford Bronco before officers arrived. Officers learned the Bronco belonged to a nearby resident and later located the Bronco at a fast-food restaurant a few miles from the FAC. Officers interviewed the people associated with the vehicle and learned the person with the handgun was not there.
The shocking part is when they announced that with the assistance of detectives and school resource officers, the preliminary investigation revealed that the individuals involved were juveniles enrolled in Frisco ISD. The post closed by saying, “All parties identified in the incident will be held accountable for their actions.”
You can imagine the community’s shock and concern when they learn JUVENILES ENROLLED IN FRISCO ISD were allegedly involved. In my gut something did not add up, and I had several questions.
What was the pre-arranged meeting for? Facebook Marketplace Sale? Drugs?
What fast-food restaurant did they find the Bronco at? There were no posts on social media asking why there is a police presence at a fast-food restaurant parking lot. Frisconians are nosey so there would be a post somewhere.
How did they immediately know it was juveniles and that they were enrolled in Frisco ISD?
We filed an open records request for all documents related to the case and agreed they could redact any information relating to the juveniles involved however they still sent out request to the Texas Attorney General to keep the info from the public. Why?
That was when I got an email from a parent who had several details on the incident because they were picking up someone nearby and when they saw the commotion they listened to the police scanner from 8pm to 8:36pm.
All of the following details are ALLEGED and have not been corroborated due to Frisco PD holding the incident documents from our Public Information Request.
Allegedly the 8PM MEET UP was a drug deal for Oxi! The Oxi dealer was supposedly driving a blue Bronco with a white top. The driver was a black male with an Afro, his passenger a black male with dreads in a red sweatshirt was carrying the oxi. The Bronco pulled up to the planned meeting spot, which happened to be right in front of the FAC which has cameras outside that supposedly captured the entire exchange.
Allegedly the BUYER walked up to the car (passenger seat side) and opened the backpack to pick up the goods and handed over a wad of cash. Supposedly the dealer counted the cash which was short of the agreed amount. A verbal exchange ensued, then the dealer pulls a gun and demands the backpack at gunpoint (ie. Armed robbery).
Supposedly the Bronco then drives off, and the kid (the buyer) goes inside and reports to the FAC staff he was robbed at gunpoint, and it was reported to the police. Duh!
According to the Frisco Chronicles tipster, based on the police scanner, Frisco PD immediately tracked the Bronco with FLOCK cameras and tracked it east on Wade, to south on Ohio, towards 121. It was announced on the police scanner the plates came back to a house on Lily Pad Lane (corner of 380 and 423).
These details made much more sense and are very different than the summary posted by Frisco Police Department. The questions are not going away simply because summer is over.
If the preliminary investigation truly established that juveniles enrolled in Frisco ISD were involved, then the public deserves to know what happened next. Were arrests made? Were charges referred to the Denton County District Attorney? Was the matter handled through the juvenile justice system? Or was this quietly turned over to Frisco ISD and left there?
And perhaps the bigger question is why the public version of the incident appears so thin when the alleged circumstances, if accurate, are anything but ordinary.
A reported armed robbery involving a firearm, alleged narcotics, juveniles, a pre-arranged meeting, surveillance cameras and FLOCK camera tracking is not exactly a minor parking-lot misunderstanding. Yet residents were given a carefully packaged summary and when Frisco Chronicles filed a PIR for the case file and underlying records, Frisco PD sought an Attorney General ruling rather than simply providing the releasable portions with juvenile information redacted.
That raises another question: What exactly is being protected?
To be clear, the allegations provided by our source remain allegations. We have not independently verified the alleged drug transaction, the identities of the people involved, the alleged weapon, or what was captured on surveillance video. That is precisely why public records matter. Journalism should not have to rely on a police scanner, a concerned parent and an anonymous tipster to piece together what happened during an alleged armed robbery in a public parking lot.
And this is where the phrase “all parties identified in the incident will be held accountable” deserves some follow-up. Accountable how? Accountability is not a slogan for a Facebook post. It is a process. It means determining what happened, identifying who was responsible, referring appropriate cases for prosecution, and allowing the public to understand the disposition of a serious incident without exposing protected information about juveniles.
Nobody is asking Frisco PD to publish the names of children. Nobody is asking for protected juvenile records. Frisco Chronicles is asking for the releasable facts.
What happened? What charges, if any, were filed? Was the case referred to the District Attorney? Was anyone arrested or detained? Was Frisco ISD involved? And what happened to the investigation after the initial police response?
Those are reasonable questions for a community to ask.
Frisco has spent years cultivating an image as one of the safest cities in America. There is nothing wrong with being proud of that reputation. But a “safest city” designation should never become a reason to avoid uncomfortable questions. If anything, a city that takes public safety seriously should welcome scrutiny and demonstrate that its system works even when the facts are embarrassing, complicated or inconvenient.
Transparency does not tarnish Frisco’s reputation. Hiding behind the reputation does.
So summer may be over, but this story isn’t. The public deserves the facts, not the polished version. And until those records are released or the appropriate authorities explain what happened to this case, there are still more questions than answers.
That is not accountability. That is unfinished business.
Disclaimer: This article is intended to report on matters of public record and public interest. If additional information becomes available, including the dismissal of charges, acquittal, or other developments, this article may be updated accordingly.
This article is written as opinion, commentary, and personal interpretation based on publicly available records, tipster information, meeting observations, agenda materials, and information we received from community sources. Nothing in this article should be interpreted as a final statement of fact about any person’s legal conduct, criminal behavior, or ethical violations. Reader discretion — and a sense of humor — are advised.
The City of Frisco loves to talk about transparency. Council members regularly tell residents they are committed to openness, accountability, and public engagement. But the city’s actions tell a very different story.
Today, there are at least nine active Public Information Requests (PIRs) tied to major public issues that have either been sent to the Texas Attorney General for a ruling or met with significant resistance, delays, clarifications, or excessive cost estimates.
That should concern every taxpayer in Frisco. Anyone has the right to request to see these documents. Below is a list of PIR’s we are currently waiting on because they have been sent to the Texas Attorney General.
04/10/26 PIR Request: I am requesting access to and copies of the following public information:
Communications Between Brian Livingston and David Ovard All communications, including but not limited to text messages, emails, and messages sent via any messaging applications (including but not limited to WhatsApp, Signal, iMessage, or similar platforms), conducted on both city-issued devices and personal devices, related to: • City business • Frisco Whistleblower • Frisco Chronicles • Frisco Elections
Communications Between Brian Livingston and Matt Sapp All communications, including text messages, emails, and messages sent via any messaging applications, conducted on both city-issued devices and personal devices, related to: • City business • The fire association Timeframe: Last four (4) months from the date of this request
Communications Between Brian Livingston and Sean Merrell All communications, including text messages, emails, and messages sent via any messaging applications, conducted on both city-issued devices and personal devices, related to: • City business • Frisco Whistleblower • Frisco Chronicles
Communications Between Brian Livingston and Jake Petras All communications, including text messages, emails, and messages sent via any messaging applications, conducted on both city-issued devices and personal devices, related to: • City business • Frisco Whistleblower • Frisco Chronicles
Communications Between Brian Livingston and Laura Rummell All communications, including text messages, emails, and messages sent via any messaging applications, conducted on both city-issued devices and personal devices, related to: • City business • Frisco Whistleblower • Frisco Chronicles • Frisco Elections Timeframe: Last three (3) months from the date of this request
04/25/26 PIR Request: Records related to the Utility Billing Department and Revenue Collections Division: Customer Account Policies & Enforcement Policies and procedures governing utility disconnections, payment plans, and account adjustments. Any internal audits, reviews, or reports evaluating how these policies are applied. Aggregate data (no personal identifiers needed) showing approval/denial rates for payment plans or disconnection decisions over the past 3 years.
04/05/26 PIR Request: Records related to the Utility Billing Department and Revenue Collections Division: Internal Investigations Any and all records, reports, findings, summaries, or communications related to investigations conducted within the Utility Billing / Revenue Collections Division within the past 3 years. This includes complaints, interview notes, conclusions, and any disciplinary recommendations or actions taken. Personnel Actions Records reflecting terminations, resignations, retirements, or reassignments of employees within the Utility Billing / Revenue Collections Division during the past 3 years, including but not limited to supervisors and management-level staff. Documents explaining the reasons for such personnel actions, where available.
02/25/26 Request: I respectfully request access to and copies of the following records: Feb 17th City Council Work session Agenda Item A complete copy of Ordinance No. 19-10-86, including all attachments, exhibits, amendments, and related backup materials.
All documents, memoranda, draft ordinances, redlines, agenda packets, briefing materials, notes, and internal communications relating to the adoption, interpretation, amendment, or enforcement of Ordinance No. 19-10-86.
All emails, text messages, correspondence, and communications between members of the City Council and City staff—including but not limited to the City Manager, Mayor, and administrative staff—regarding: Any changes, proposed changes, or discussions about procedures for public testimony, citizen input, or public comment at City Council meetings.
Any discussion of modifying time limits, speaker rules, sign-up procedures, decorum rules, or restrictions on topics during citizen input. Any policies, internal guidelines, or training materials concerning procedures for public testimony or citizen participation at City Council meetings. The time frame for this request is January 1, 2025, through the present.
02/25/26 PIR Request: Specifically, this request concerns the executive session held on February 17, 2026, as reflected on the published agenda.
Attendance & Authority Documentation Please provide: Any sign-in sheets, attendance logs, notes, security logs, or internal records reflecting who attended the executive session. Any documentation reflecting the authority for attendance by any individual who was not formally sworn in as a member of the City Council at the time of the meeting. Any legal opinions, memoranda, emails, or communications discussing whether attendance by Ann Anderson—who had not yet been formally sworn in due to a pending election contest and recount—was permissible under the Texas Open Meetings Act. Any communication between City staff, the City Attorney, Council members, or outside counsel regarding her participation or presence in the closed session.
Executive Session Materials Because a private citizen (i.e., an individual not yet sworn into office) was reportedly permitted to attend the executive session, we request: The certified agenda or recording of the executive session as required by Texas Government Code §551.103. All briefing materials, packets, memoranda, presentations, or documents provided to any attendee for use during executive session. Any communications summarizing, describing, or recapping what was discussed in executive session. Any communications following the meeting that reference what occurred during the closed session.
Waiver / Public Disclosure Issue This request includes all communications discussing whether the presence of a non-sworn individual in executive session: Constituted a waiver of confidentiality; Converted discussions into public information; Triggered potential Texas Open Meetings Act implications; Required disclosure obligations under Chapter 552 or 551 of the Texas Government Code. Please provide any internal analysis or discussion regarding these issues.
02/25/26 PIR Request: During discussions surrounding the new animal shelter and the Collin County Animal Services ILA, council member Laura Rummel publicly promised residents there would be full transparency throughout the process. Residents were told the public would be informed and included. So two months ago, I filed a PIR for the following which the city submitted to the Texas Attorney General claiming “Attorney-Client Privilege” that is confidential.
Communications Between Identified Individuals Please produce any and all communications related City of Frisco Animal Holding Facility, CCAS ILA, CCAS Expansion — including but not limited to emails (including attachments), text messages (SMS, iMessage), encrypted or third-party messaging platforms (Signal, WhatsApp, Teams, Slack, etc.), memoranda, handwritten notes, meeting notes, calendar invitations, call logs, draft documents, correspondence, and internal communications — sent or received: Between any single individual listed below and any other listed individual; Between any combination of the listed individuals; Or between any listed individual and any staff member acting on their behalf. This request applies to communications conducted on official government devices/accounts and personal devices/accounts if used for public business. Collin County Officials & Staff: Chris Hill – County Judge, Susan Fletcher – Commissioner, Precinct 1, Cheryl Williams – Commissioner, Precinct 2, Darrell Hale – Commissioner, Precinct 3, Duncan Webb – Commissioner, Precinct 4 Lacy DeHorney – Animal Services Manager Misty Brown – Animal Services Division Manager Russell Schaffner, Yoon Kim, Bill Bilyeu City of Frisco Officials & Staff: Wes Pierson – City Manager, E.A. Hoppe – Deputy City Manager, Ben Brezina – Assistant City Manager, Henry Hill, Rob Millar – Assistant City Manager, Ken Schmidt – Director of Special Projects, Wes Hicks – Facilities Project Manager, Micki Johnson, Karla Munoz-Horton Elected Officials: Jeff Cheney – Mayor, Angelia Pelham, Laura Rummel, John Keating, Burt Thakur, Jared Elad, Brian Livingston, Ann Anderson
Subject Matter Scope This request specifically includes communications referencing or relating to: Collin County Animal Services (CCAS) The Interlocal Agreement (ILA) between Collin County and the City of Frisco Negotiation, drafting, execution, amendment, or renewal of the CCAS ILA The CCAS expansion project (one-story, ~10,000 square foot addition) The November 2023 voter-approved bond funding for CCAS Any delay in the CCAS expansion project Reasons for the delay, Responsibility for the delay, Any documents or communications related to the cost escalation, change orders, financial impact analyses, or construction cost increases resulting from delay of the ILA or Expansion. Discussions of liability, intergovernmental coordination issues, staffing issues, permitting, procurement, or compliance concerns tied to the project
Project Documentation Please also provide: All versions (final and draft) of the CCAS ILA and related amendments Redlines, negotiation notes, briefing materials, and executive summaries Contracts, RFPs/RFQs, architectural/engineering plans Project schedules and revised schedules Budget projections, cost comparisons, and bond allocation tracking Internal memoranda explaining timeline changes Any document identifying who is responsible for delay and why Date Range Requested: January 1, 2023 – Present (for ILA and communications) November 1, 2023 – Present (for expansion/bond-related records)
02/04/26 PIR Request: Copy of any emails with all attachments or text messages between Collin County and Frisco Management (Ben Brezina, Wes Peirson, City Manager’s Office, Henry Hill) or city council members including Mayor Cheney related to the Collin County ILA for Animal Services. Date: 8/1/2025 to Present 2/5/2026
Inspection Only Results
On top of these PIR’s several others requested were sent to the Texas Attorney General. One was for the copies of the RFP, RFQ, Contracts, Awards and Agreements related to the downtown main street construction. Along with records relating to the Employee Health Clinic. The outcome was “Inspection Only” meaning I have to go to city hall to view the information.
Acceptance of Charges
On 4/5/26 I filed for access to and/or copies of the following records related to the Utility Billing Department and Revenue Collections Division: Employee Complaints / Workplace Environment Records of formal employee complaints, grievances, or HR reports related to workplace conduct, management practices, or department leadership within the Utility Billing / Revenue Collections Division. Any employee climate surveys or internal assessments conducted in the past 3 years. Lastly, the communication emails or internal communications among department leadership, HR, and executive staff referencing: Department performance Employee concerns Investigations or complaints (Limit to the past 2 years to reduce scope if needed.)
How much is the city charging for this? $154.62
On 4/5/25 we filed for records related to the Utility Billing Department and Revenue Collections Division: Organizational Structure & Hiring Current and past organizational charts for the Utility Billing / Revenue Collections Division. Job descriptions, qualifications, and hiring criteria for management positions within the division. Records related to recent hiring decisions for supervisory or management roles (last 3 years).
How much is the city charging for this? $122.58
The Fight For Transparency
When it comes to the animal PIR’s you can bet the city sent it to the AG so they did not have to release the information before the election. Why did the city send it to the Attorney General when Laura Rummel sat on the dais and promised transparency through the whole process (which is on record). I also would like to know why she requested conversations regarding an animal facility be moved to “closed session”, so they remain off the record. That is what Rummel considers transparency.
If the process was truly transparent, why are citizens having to fight for basic records? Residents are repeatedly told public records are available under the Texas Public Information Act. Yet Frisco citizens are now facing charges exceeding $120 to $150 simply to obtain information from their own government.
Citizens should ask themselves: Is the pricing intended to recover reasonable costs — or discourage scrutiny?
Transparency is not a campaign slogan. It is a governing principle. That is a principle our city leadership, city council and mayor fail to uphold. That is why we need change because we “the residents of Frisco” should have the right to review and question decisions being made by with taxpayer dollars.
When elected officials promise openness but residents encounter delays, legal reviews, redactions, and triple-digit invoices for public documents, trust in local government erodes. Then they wonder why every resident calls for change and does not trust them.
Frisco residents deserve answers. More importantly, they deserve a city government willing to practice the transparency it so often preaches.
Have you ever heard of the RIM Division inside the City of Frisco? Yeah. Neither had we.
That is… until someone slid us a picture like it was a manila envelope in a 1970s conspiracy thriller. 📸 Cue the ominous music.
Turns out, RIM doesn’t stand for “Really Inconvenient Memories,” though judging by recent events, it might as well. Officially, RIM is the Records and Information Management Division, the quiet little corner of City Hall tasked with managing the City’s records in compliance with local, state, and federal laws. You know—paper trails, transparency, history, accountability. Small stuff.
According to a PDF we found tucked away on the City’s website (because of course it’s a PDF), the RIM Division is one of two divisions within the City Secretary’s Office, which oversees:
City Elections
Boards and Commissions
Council Legislation
Public Information Requests
Records and Information Management
Alcohol Permitting
Lien Collections
That’s quite the grab bag. Democracy, booze, liens, and now—apparently—the great paper shredder of destiny.
What Does RIM Say It Does?
Straight from the City’s own description (translated from Bureaucratese to English): The RIM Division establishes and implements policies, procedures, and systems to manage city records. It trains city employees, manages records software, and oversees legal discovery. In other words: they decide what lives, what dies, and what mysteriously vanishes between fiscal years.
But Wait—Isn’t This Stuff Public?
Glad you asked. According to the Texas Municipal League (TML), public information includes any information that is:
Written, produced, collected, assembled, or maintained
By a governmental body
For a governmental body
Or by a government employee acting in their official capacity
And yes—this includes emails, electronic communications, documents on personal devices, and anything created “in connection with the transaction of official business.” Translation: If taxpayers paid for it, touched it, or breathed near it—it’s probably public.
Enter the Brochure of Doom
Here’s where things get… interesting. We were surprised (and that’s putting it mildly) to receive a photo of a brochure sent out by the RIM Division cheerfully titled something along the lines of: “4 Types of Records Eligible for Destruction in 2026!” Wait, what? It is a “How To” or a casting call for a low-budget disaster movie. The brochure lists records approved for destruction, including:
Policies
Procedures
Speeches
Papers
Presentations
Surveys
You know—the stuff residents might actually want to see.
Naturally, we went hunting for a clear list in the Texas Public Information Act that says, “Yes, thou shalt shred speeches and policies before citizens ask questions.” We couldn’t find one. Maybe it’s invisible ink. Maybe it’s stored in the same place as City transparency.
Transparent… Like a Brick Wall
Here’s the irony thick enough to clog the shredder: City leaders regularly remind us how transparent they are. Glass walls. Open government. Sunshine laws. The whole civic sermon. Yet somehow, at the same time, policies, procedures, presentations, and surveys—documents that explain how decisions are made—are being quietly greenlit for destruction.
Nothing says “trust us” quite like tossing records into the bureaucratic bonfire. To be clear, records retention laws exist for a reason. But when the City that prides itself on transparency starts asking, “What can we get rid of?” instead of “What should the public see?”—well, that raises more red flags than a Soviet parade.
So, here’s the real question for Frisco residents: If there’s nothing to hide, why is there such a rush to shred? Because in Frisco, it seems the motto might not be “Open for Business” anymore. It might be: “Approved for Destruction — 2026.”
Stay tuned. We’re not done digging through the recycling bin just yet.
Disclaimer: This blog includes satire, parody, and comic relief. It contains summarized accounts created solely for humor and commentary. Any resemblance to real events is either coincidental or intentionally satirical. Reader discretion — and a sense of humor — are advised.
Wouldn’t the world be such a simple place if someone’s nose really grew when they told a lie? Think about it for a moment, we wouldn’t have to spend so much time trying to determine if someone is telling the truth or a lie. It is much easier in person through verbal and non-verbal ques to tell if someone is lying or withholding the truth from you than it is through filing a Public Information Request. However, PIR’s are all we have here at Frisco Chronicles to get to the truth.
Recently we filed several PIR’s based on leads we received from “whistleblowers” to see if the city would disclose “The Truth” to us through PIR requests. One of the PIR requests read, “We would like the list of the complaints made about political signs to code enforcement or the city secretary for the period of 1/1/2024 to present. We would like a copy of any complaint made about electioneering at the election polls from April 20th to May 5th.” It is a very simple request and after we paid the $6.30 we thought we would get a handful of responses. Instead, we found that the city left a lot of complaints out of our request. We know this because many folks sent us copies of their complaints to the city and they are not in the disclosed information given to us even though it fits the criteria of the request.
The first email we received a copy of was from Councilman John Keating, sent to Kristi Morrow on May 4th, Election Day. It states “poll greeters are playing loud music at FS 8 (they turn it down, then turn it back up). Also, this truck passed through the parking lot several times. Within 30 minutes of receiving the email Kristi Morrow forwarded it to Amy Moore in Code Enforcement who made her way out to Fire Station 8. This is the incident we reported about in our blog Election Playbook: Code Enforcement.
The interesting thing about this email is that John Keating failed to mention to the City Secretary his own team including himself, The Cheney’s, and his friends were electioneering in the parking lot for almost four hours that morning. It is documented with pictures in our blog and proves our point that it is okay for John Keating to break the rules, but others can’t. Just “PAR FOR THE COURSE” in the city council world.
The next email we received in our PIR was about “Illegal Signs” that was sent by Judy Adams on May 3 to City Secretary, Kristi Morrow. It states, “These signs are placed by polling stations all over the city. It is in violation since there are no disclaimers. Very sad that ‘these people’ are claiming to uphold the law and order but are breaking the law by doing the things they accuse others of. I believe they should be removed immediately.” The picture just barely shows the corner of a sign, but we did recognize it.
Why did we recognize the sign? It is a Frisco Chronicles sign! Now to be clear we did not buy these signs, we did not put them out, and we have no clue who did. With that said we do love them, and they gave us a good laugh! We received an anonymous email from a whistleblower that they put them out to spread the word of our site. They did confirm they were all placed on private property and none of them were placed on city property or at any fire station. Lastly, it is not a political action committee, it does not support a candidate, so it does not need a disclaimer.
Judy, think about carpet cleaner signs or we buy ugly houses signs, do they need disclaimers? We suggest Judy Adams focus on what she does best which is blowing people aka blo me! Now get your mind out of the gutter! We are referring to her focusing on her new Blo Bar she just opened for those who need a good blow, or maybe her real estate career, or her closed coffee bar instead of silly illegal signs on private property. Better yet maybe she should make her own BLO ME signs with a phone number to make an appointment, if she does, we will make sure to have readers call them in for being illegal signs.
The third email we received was from April 22 from Jeff Cheney to City Secretary, Kristi Morrow. It is important to note the email was sent from JCheney@friscotexas.gov so clearly, he wrote this as the “Mayor of Frisco” and not as an individual resident. It states, “Pretty clear this is not in compliance with the maximum size of 10×10” referring to the Firefighters tent at Station 7. Kristi Morrow sent the email to Amy Moore in Code Enforcement and Amy replied Justin was on his way to the station. Then Kristi Morrow replied and asked Amy to call her when she gets a chance. Wonder what they talked about?
The next email we received was on April 25th, from Councilman John Keating (JKeating@friscotexas.gov) to City Secretary Kristi Morrow and Assistant City Manager, Henry Hill. He questions if “these are allowed as they are showing up at polling stations. He specifically notes the one at Fire Station 7 in the picture he submitted. He is referring to a Voter Guide Stand that is put out at every election by a political conservative group called Red Wave. You can see at the bottom of the voter guide it says Pol Ad Paid For Red Wave Texas.
Why does Keating not like the voter guide stand? Oh, that is because it has listed for Place 1 Mark Piland and for Place 3 John Redmond. We want to know how often John Keating votes in elections. These have been at polling sites during several election cycles. If he is just now seeing it, then we are curious if he has been doing his civic duty to vote? Maybe he just didn’t like it because it was not his name on the guide!
Lastly, we received an excel spreadsheet of complaints. Not sure what to make of it!
Here is the problem, our request was very simple and straightforward which states, “We would like the list of the complaints made about political signs to code enforcement or the city secretary for the period of 1/1/2024 to present. We would like a copy of any complaint made about electioneering at the election polls from April 20th to May 5th.” We have several emails sent to us which reported about in our blog, Breaking All The Rules related to John Keating, Angelia Pelham and the Safety-First Frisco PAC putting up signs at 9am on Sunday April 21st which was 6 to 9+ hours earlier than they were allowed. We have several emails about the 4 x 4 political signs at Station 7 and questioning if they are on city property that were sent to us.
We also have several emails sent to the city secretary regarding electioneering occurring at the polls, some even documented with videos and pictures.
Yet none of these emails and others we have were given to us in our Public Information Request. They fit the issue, time frame and criteria of the request we made so why don’t we have them from the city. What other emails have they withheld that we don’t know about? Readers and have sent them in but our own city will not be forthcoming and turn them over in a Public Information Request. We have proof the city HAS WITHELD PUBLIC RECORDS…AGAIN! The city claims TRANSPARENCY, yet they can’t even be honest with a public information request and fulfill it as they should. WHY DOES THE CITY LIE AND HIDE INFORMATION FROM TAXPAYERS?
We have a PIR out right now for the body cam footage from the Code Enforcement cameras worn during the election, but they have sent that to the Attorney General. Why do they not want us to hear the conversations they had at the polls with the political candidates or the firefighters regarding code enforcement complaints called in?
Most concerning is how our Mayor and Councilman Keating act like winey children when it is something they don’t like so they use their city emails and position to make complaints which are acted upon immediately by the city. However, the numerous complaints about the signs being put out early at the fire stations by these same folks had no action or fines taken against them for clearly violating the rules. Rules that they should know as they are sitting active council members. Remember John Keating has 16 years on council so if he does not know the rules by now, then he truly is dumber than a bag of rocks. In fact, those complaints are not even documented apparently, or they would have been in our public information request. This is Frisco folks! Rules for thee but not for me!
While the election may be over, the desire to learn more about it, is not. The Safety First Frisco PAC Facebook page has been deleted and the website removed, literally overnight. However our curiosity about a few things has not faded and over 2 months ago we filed two PIR’s that today “have been sent to the AG for a ruling”. We would love to say the City of Frisco surprises us, but truly they don’t.
The first PIR was filed on 2/26/2024 and was very simple in nature. We asked for a copy of any PIR requests and the corresponding documents made from the following: Bill Woodard, Mike Simpson, Dick Peasley, and the Safety-First Frisco PAC from 1/1/2022 to Present.
The second PIR was filed on the same day. We asked for emails, texts, or handwritten correspondence between city officials, including the city manager’s office, assistant city managers, deputy city managers, city council, and department directors regarding the Frisco Fire Association Prop A & B regarding Civil Service and Collective Bargaining. Including emails or communications marked as confidential or with a code name for Prop A & B from 1/1/2022 to Present.
The response to both The City of Frisco has reviewed its files and has located documents responsive to your request. However, due to issues of confidentiality, the City has chosen to seek a ruling from the Office of the Attorney General regarding the release of the responsive documents. You will be receiving a letter from Abernathy, Roeder, Boyd & Hullett, PC, attorneys for the City of Frisco, informing you of the City’s decision to seek a ruling from the Office of the Attorney General. The Office of the Attorney General has up to 45 business days in which to make a ruling regarding your request.
Ask yourself, why would the city be holding this information from the public? If the city had correspondence with the PAC in any way, would that be considered electioneering? It is interesting to us that two separate PIRs are being held back but the Mayor hosted a Sheryl Sculley who spoke against the measure. Councilman Bill Woodard went on the news and did a full interview with Channel 11 as his title in that broadcast was not Bill Woodard (citizen) it reads “Councilman Bill Woodard” and he specifically talked about how the measures could hurt the city. Technically if you ask us, he was speaking on from his experience on the council and using his knowledge acquired as a councilman so therefore he was representing the city talking against measures on the ballot. Is that against the city’s own Code of Conduct?
The city and the council want to claim they are transparent, and residents can trust them, but if they expect us to believe that then they need to release the PIRs sent to the Texas Attorney General. Better yet vote on it at a council meeting to release it like you did a in 2023. We strongly feel something underhanded has happened here and we are considering filing our own complaint with the AG. They can’t use city information to fight propositions then say its confidential later when the citizens ask to see it.
When I was a kid, my dad used to say “listen to your 5 senses” because they will protect you. As a kid, I had no idea what he meant but as an adult, I understand the information collected by our five primary senses helps detect danger and allows our brains to understand and react to our surroundings. Personally, I always thought it was my bull shit meter, you know the internal gauge for detecting deception, insincerity, or exaggerated claims that made me smart. I think my wife got it right because she tells me the reason, I am such a good detective is due to the marriage of my “spidey senses” and my bull shit meter. She hit the nail on the head!
When we first heard in May 2023 that the City of Frisco fired 27-year veteran, Cameron Kraemer from the Fire Department over a work-related illness, we knew there had to be more to the story. Immediately our team started reaching out to sources within the city and it was a game of silence from all sides. Then we heard Mr. Kraemer might speak at citizens’ input, and we wanted to make sure we watched the meeting. First person to speak was Matt Sapp, President of the Firefighters Assoc and watching it today, it explains so much why our FD is fighting for Prop A & B during this election cycle.
Then we watched Mr. Kraemer speak at the city council meeting and it was enough to break anyone’s heart. A man poured out his soul and admitted to the public he had PTSD, a mental health issue, and the city should be ashamed of how they have treated him and the response from the council…nothing. We have a video with some highlights, but you can see the full video by clicking the link.
At the end of citizens’ input, we were caught off guard when Mr. Wes Pierson, our new city manager leaned forward and announced he had something to say regarding Cameron Kraemer. This is the man who through the whole meeting sits back with a smug look on his face, swaying in his chair with an overall arrogance about him. We listened to him, and his words were so cold, so impersonal, and then we thought how did he have this whole speech prepared and ready to go that night? Had he heard that Kraemer maybe attending the meeting, or did he write it on the fly? Either way, alarm bells were ringing in my head.
My spidey sense bull shit meter went through the roof, and I was sure we were on to something, but what? Time went by and we followed the case. Kraemer and the Fire Association fought the city on whether his illness (PTSD) was work related and he won. Simply put, the city should hire him back or offer him a path back to work. However, the city is choosing to dig in their heels and skirt responsibility so Kraemer will likely end up suing the city which will cost the taxpayers. Because it is under wraps it is hard to follow the case and we thought our research was over.
Then fast forward to election time, where a new PAC is created called Safety Frisco First. We told you about this PAC in our blog The Secret PAC. We quickly noticed that Bill Woodard and City Shady Bunch running the PAC were putting out a lot of details and documents and none of them went to fighting the purpose. This raised our curiosity because the documents seemed more personal in nature and directed at a few specific individuals to malign and attack their character. It felt like the page was being used by the city to say the things they want to say but cannot say.
We filed two PIRs with the City. The first was for copies of any PIR requests and the corresponding documents made from Bill Woodard, Mike Simpson, Dick or Richard Peasley, Safety First Frisco PAC from 1/1/22 to Present. As you can guess the city has sent that to Texas AG in order to delay releasing the documents. What do you think they are hiding?
Then we filed another PIR for any emails, text, or handwritten correspondence between city officials regarding the Frisco Fire Association Prop A & B. Guess what…they sent it to the Texas AG to delay releasing the documents. What do you think they are trying to hide until after the election is over?
The PAC website has a document called “Letter from Weston Fire Chief regarding Asst Chief Kraemer,” but what does that have to do with fighting civil service or collective bargaining? The letter was a clear attack on a 27-year First Responder who worked for the City of Frisco, to discredit him. We kept asking ourselves, what does this letter have to do with the PACs purpose? Time to find some answers.
Our first question is, how did the PAC get these documents? Well of course they would have to go through the formal process like us and file a PIR, right? On 2/26/24 we filed a PIR that reads, “We recently visited the Safety-First Frisco PAC website, and we noticed a section called Resources that has the following documents which we listed out. All of these documents would have to have been obtained through a PIR or a series of PIRs so we would like to see the specific PIR(s) requests for the following information above.”
We got an email back on 3/8/24 and a few things piqued our interest in the city’s response. It said the Presentation to City Council regarding Salary Adjustments was NOT a PIR release. The document was released at the November 21, 2023, Budget and Audit Committee Meeting. Then they said the Letter from Western Fire Chief re Asst Chief Kraemer was NOT a PIR release. Lastly the Report on Residential Fire – 4 on a Truck was NOT a PIR release. HELLO, how did SFF get three documents, one appearing to being related to an HR file without filing a PIR and how would they know such a letter exists like that if it is in an HR file? Councilman Bill Woodard must have known about these documents due to his position which he is now using for political purposes for a PAC that he heads up. Ethical?
Next, we filed PIRs with the City of Weston and asked for a copy of any PIRs, and corresponding documents made by Bill Woodard or representatives from the City of Frisco. The response, “The City of Weston has not received any PIR request from Bill Woodard or any requests from the City of Frisco.” We also did a search of Weston’s agendas for the last few years, and you won’t believe what we found.
Guess who the City Attorney is for the City of Weston? Richard Abernathy (same as the City of Frisco)
Guess who the City of Weston hired as a city manager consultant? George Purefoy (former city manager for the City of Frisco)
Guess who the City of Weston hired as a fire consultant? Mack Borchardt, who CURRENTLY WORKS FOR THE CITY OF FRISCO AS SPECIAL CONSULTANT FOR THE CITY MANAGER. Wait, so we taxpayers are paying Borchardt, and he is allowed to work for other cities and make money at the same time?
Next, we went to Weston Fire and Rescue and filed a PIR and we asked for four things, response from Weston F&R are in bold;
I would like a copy of any PIR request and the corresponding documents returned in the PIR request from the City of Frisco relating to Cameron Kraemer and his time volunteering, serving as Captain, or working in the last three years. The PIR or request could have been done by text, email, or handwritten (formal or informal). WFR has no documentation.
I would like a copy of any PIR or request (formal or informal) from consultants named Mack Borchardt and/or George Purefoy (who are also consultants for The City of Weston) relating to Cameron Kraemer and his time volunteering, consulting, or working with the Weston FD in the last three years. WFR has no documentation.
I would like a copy of the letter from Kevin Deal (Former Fire Chief) supplied to the City of Frisco regarding Cameron Kraemer and the time he spent with Weston FD, and I would like to know if anyone else has requested this letter in the last two years. Attached and only you requested it
We could not believe our eyes! They attached the letter and right there in front of us we started to compare the letter supplied to the City of Frisco. We about fell over because the letters don’t MATCH!
What are the differences:
Weston F&R: No Date vs The Safety-First Frisco PAC: The letter is dated
Weston F&R: To Whom It May Concern vs The Safety-First Frisco PAC: addressed to whom it may concern and Attn: Wes Pierson
Weston F&R: Signature vs The Safety-First Frisco PAC: Signature = TWO TOTALLY DIFFERENT SIGNATURES!
We would love it if the City of Frisco and/or The Safety-First Frisco PAC tell us how we have 2 totally different letters. While the body is the same nothing else is and that is alarming. It very clearly looks like the letter was forged or is a fake. Now we have so much more to this investigation to come but ask yourself, why does the City of Frisco want you to believe former Fire Chief Mark Piland was this horrible Fire Chief but according to his EVAL and his employment history he has NEVER been written up in 40-year career. Yet when he comes to work for Frisco, they want us to believe with perfect EVALS that he was such a bad leader? Now we have the Assistant Fire Chief whom they want us to believe is this horrible person even though he was only written up once in 27 years for bringing a smoker trailer on the property. They provide a letter that looks nothing like the original sent to the city and somehow the PAC gets it to post on their website. This letter just happens to show up to help the city’s case and they have 3 people contracting with the city with ties to The City of Frisco. We would think that this letter would be a part of someone’s personal or HR file, so how did the PAC get it? If you released it to the PAC, then does that mean we can go back to the Texas AG to review previous requests of HR files to reopen where you made a claim, they were confidential?
We have so much more on this to peel apart and will blog again soon. Ask yourself does this look like a targeted campaign to destroy two men’s lives and reputations? It does to us, and the question is for what? It all goes back to Sassy Lauren Safranek the HR DIRECTOR who falsified records. Also ask yourself if The VOTE NO PAC is willing to post a forged letter what else have they lied to you about? Lastly, did any of our current council including the two running for re-election know the letter had been modified before posted to the PAC site? What we do know for sure, is something smells like Shit in Frisco, and we are curious what part Bobblehead Bill Woodard is involved in?
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…