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?
What is the Public Information Act and what is a Public Information Request? Well, we told you all about the act in our previous blog which you can read by clicking here PIR’s. We continue to file PIR’s and we continue to wait and we are left questioning how the City of Frisco determines the cost for certain PIR’s and what qualifications must be met for a PIR to be sent to the Attorney General.
For example, I filed a PIR requesting the following: “We would like any emails regarding the flooding that took place on 7/3/23 near 2XXX Sleepy Hollow Trail. Emails from PD, streets department, city management and city council. We would like any pictures taken by the streets department at the scene since they were called out by PD. We would like to know what caused the flood?” The response was we have sent this to AG for a ruling.
WHY WOULD THE CITY SEND A SIMPLE REQUEST LIKE THIS TO THE TEXAS ATTORNEY GENERAL? Is the city going to try and say how we build streets is confidential? How a sewer system operates is considered confidential? What could they possibly claim should be confidential? We are just guessing but it is our opinion and our opinion only (we have no concrete proof since they have sent it to the AG) that the city drain was clogged causing a backup that flooded a resident’s home. Either way, we will wait it out with the city to see what the AG has to say.
Second example, I went head-to-head with Mr. Bobblehead Bill Woodard and my wife filed a PIR requesting the following information he discussed on line and presented the city with images of his exact comments. We asked for the email and documentation that supported his claims and we got back a letter that it will cost $90.00. What in the heck are they doing that costs $90.00 because Bill is quoted on Facebook as saying just email him and he will send it to you. So how does something Bill is willing to email out for free and the backup documentation to support it cost $90.00?
Then my wife did another request asking for the last 5 years of emergency call logs for Fire Squad. Guess what, they didn’t send it to the AG but they do want $100.80 for the information. That surprises us because in their CAD system or 911 system that should be easy to pull and save in a PDF. Is there something they don’t want us to know? Will the numbers match the numbers Bobblehead Bill put online recently? Maybe just maybe we catch him in one of those FIBS! WHAT COSTS $100????
Third example, I filed a PIR for the expense reports and all expenses related to the Tulsa Southern Hills PGA trip that several city members went on and I am being told some of it is confidential and only available for INSPECTION AT CITY HALL. WHAT COULD POSSIBLY BE CONFIDENTIAL ABOUT EXPENSES REPORTS? WE HAVE ALWAYS RECEIVED THEM NO ISSUE SO WHY NOW IS SOMETHING CONFIDENTIAL AND ONLY AVAILABLE FOR INSPECTION AT THE CITY?
Last example is we filed a PIR for information on the Nepotism Policy because we were curious why the city change it 2 times in less than 4 months. They provided us a few documents and sent the rest to the Texas Attorney General. WHAT COULD BE CONFIDENTIAL ABOUT THE NEPOTISM POLICY THAT IS IN THE CITY CHARTER AND ONLINE? What could Sassy Safranek in HR our the city claim is confidential about a policy that determines how city employees operate.
The Texas Public Information Act assures that government entities give citizens access to information about what the public servants are doing on their behalf. It is a way for citizens to hold their public officials accountable. It is our opinion that the city is trying to keep us from public information by continually sending it to the AG and by charging asinine prices for it. THEY DON’T WANT TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE!!!
I guess the BEST CITY IN THE WORLD does not have an IT department that can do a simple network search of emails and documents. Maybe it is because many of these folks use their personal email accounts to keep things away from the public. Either way we will pay for the PIR’s and we will get our information. I can assure you we have filed PIR’s with other cities and within a few days received a response and paid $10 to $15 for a whole lot of information. Just Frisco – only Frisco seems to take 10 years and PIRs cost as much as Mayor Jeff Cheney’s self driving tesla or fancy house. Ask yourself, should 2 PIR’s cost $190.00+?
After reading our blogs you have probably figured out that movies and music are two of my biggest passions. Little Lies by Fleetwood Mac had a catchy chorus that you could sing over and over that went tell me lies, tell me sweet little lies, oh-no-no, you can’t disguise. I often find myself singing that song in my head when the time comes to write another blog. We have talked about PIRs (Public Information Requests) in our previous blog but nothing wrong with a reminder. What is the Public Information Act and what is a Public Information Request? Well, the Texas Public Information Act assures that government entities give citizens access to information about what the public servants are doing on their behalf. It is a way for citizens to hold their public officials accountable. The Public Information Act Handbook can be found on the Texas Attorney General’s website and lays out the “how-to” to do open record requests.
Several months ago during the election a mayday report was talked about and the DMN did a long article smearing a candidate running for mayor. We were curious about the report and had a friend put in a PIR request that reads: Full copy of 500 to 600-page report for Mayday Report DMN quoted Adams Lynch and Loftin found evidence – would like a copy of the evidence. DMN quotes Adams Lynch and Loftin interviewed 42 people – would like the list of the names of those interviewed? Would like a copy of the documents, photographs, audio, and video files analyzed by Adams Lynch and Loftin Based on the DMN article it is clear that the reporter received more than the 12-page report released to the public. I would like a copy of everything provided to the reporter. We received several items back from the city except the full report mayday report.
On May 25th, we received a letter stating that one of the files contains personal health information and the city would prefer to keep it confidential. They asked if we agreed to the redaction request however we did not see the response. Then on June 5th we received another letter asking us to clarify if we agreed to the redaction and to clarify which documents we were seeking. We wrote back on June 9th we would not agree to any redactions and they could send the request to the AG and for the second questions we responded with several items on the evidence list plus the following:
1. Full Final Mayday Report 2. During the investigation of the individuals involved in the Circa / Mayday the attorneys meet and interviewed city staff. There should be audio files/recordings, notes, or video footage of the individual interviews to document the investigation. We want the audio files/recordings/notes or video recordings of the individuals interviewed by Adams, Lynch, and Loftin PC 3. Docs from Gillette listed on the evidence list 4. Hinkel Emails listed on the evidence list
On July 3, we received another email that read “After further review of the requested information to ensure the City has located all the records responsive to your request, please note that one file responsive is considered to be a proprietary record and will be available in the City Secretary’s Office for viewing only.” In the items we were provided there is NO FULL MAYDAY REPORT so is that the proprietary record they want us to come view?
Summer happened and we were waiting on the AG response in regards to the request and still to this day (4 MONTHS LATER) the request status reads sent to AG for a ruling. We were curious why it was taking the AG office so long to review a request so we called them. Imagine our surprise when they said a ruling was issued on August 30th and lead us to a link on the website where we could read the ruling. It is now September 28th almost a month later and we have no response from the city that a ruling was even made yet and we still don’t have the FULL MAYDAY REPORT.
The city argued some information was considered to be confidential by law. Section 552.101 encompasses the doctrine of common-law privacy, which protects information that is (1) highly intimate or embarrassing, the publication of which would be highly objectionable to a reasonable person, and (2) not of legitimate concern to the public. The finding by the AG’s office read “Accordingly, the city must withhold the public citizen’s date of birth and the information we marked under section 552.101 of the Government Code in conjunction with common-law privacy. However, we find you have failed to demonstrate the remaining information is highly intimate or embarrassing and not of legitimate public interest. Thus, the city may not withhold the remaining information under section 552.101 in conjunction with common-law privacy.
What we find ironic is that the city council voted to release some of these documents or related documents at a city council meeting that benefited the mayor and his cronies during an election in order to smear a candidates reputation but now they are arguing something is intimate or highly embarrassing? The citizens date of birth or an insurance policy number is confidential? What would be really humorous is if the person they are referring to has their birthday on their Facebook page. If so, they can’t be to worried about their privacy.
SO WHERE IS IT? Where is the redacted file? Where is the complete MAYDAY report (500 to 600 pages)? Asking a senior citizen to come to city hall to review a document is ridiculous and it is there way of keeping us from the information that can simply be uploaded to the portal. Why is the city with holding the information after a ruling on August 30th? We are also waiting on the AG to tell us where they are on a ruling for the Universal document request which is now 8 months old.
We also had a friend submit a PIR inquiring about to to payments in the city expenditure list which is online. Two payments, to New Reunion Title for $555,706.44 and $817,956.83. What are the payments for, and what type of services would a city pay a title company that much for? It reads they sent it to the attorney. We are guessing they mean the city attorney but he may have a conflict of interest since the title company is located in his law office. My guess they will fight us on this one too.
We filed PIRs with multiple other city’s in the last month and had them all back in under 20 days, so WHAT IS FRISCO HIDING? RELEASE THE DOCUMENTS!
“Oh, what a tangled web we weave…when first we practice to deceive.”
Sgt. Joe Friday is a no-nonsense, by the book kind of cop. He can be calm at times and other times he is viewed as a little rigid, cold, and a fast talker. Imagine Sgt. Friday’s dismay when he is partnered with a lively, unscrupulous, irresponsible and foot loose partner named Pep Streebeck. At their first meeting Friday says his new partner “I don’t care what undercover rock you crawled out from, there’s a dress code for detectives in Robbery-Homicide under section 3-605. 10. 20. 22. 24. 26. 50. 70. 80. It specifies a clean shirt, short hair, tie, pressed trousers, sports jacket or suit, and leather shoes, preferably with a high shine on them.” Their first assignment is to investigate Jerry Caesar a criminal who traffics pornographic magazines. Strait-laced Sgt. Friday said to Streebeck, “There are two things that clearly differentiate the human species from animals. One, we use cutlery. Two, we’re capable of controlling our sexual urges. Now, you might be an exception Streebeck, but don’t drag me down into your private Hell.” Their investigation into Ceaser has a connection to a series of random crimes by a P.A.G.A.N., a criminal cult. Friday and Streebeck realize they must go undercover to rescue the Virgin Connie Swail, a woman who is about to be sacrificed. Swail agrees to testify against the leader corrupt Reverend Whirley. Shortly thereafter Friday begins a romance with Virgin Connie Swail which could hinder his police work. Want to know the rest of the story then you need to watch the 1987 hit movie Dragnet that topped the box office.
There is a general theme in most cop movies which is it is important that police departments have the staff and resources needed to protect and serve residents. During the recent 2023 mayoral election, “staffing” of our public safety departments was a topic raised over and over. In fact, Matt Sapp, President of the Frisco Fire Fighters Association stood in front of our city council in January 2023 and asked a simple question, “Will we as a city add firefighters to the budget this year?” You can read more about how our FD falls below the national staffing standard by reading Where There Is Smoke (part 1), and There is Fire (part 2). The city has repeatedly denied our Fire Department is understaffed and very own Mayor, Jeff Cheney, said he is happy with the staffing levels, and the departments have everything they need. At one of the debates Mayoral Candidate Mark Piland mentioned a “police study” the city had done sometime in 2020 / 2021 and how it stated our police department is understaffed. My wife and I looked at each other and said is it possible that both of our public safety departments are currently understaffed?
A PIR was filed for a copy of the study, but we were told it was only available for viewing at city hall because the documents are subject to copyright. That is truly the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard as an excuse. Whether or not something is copyrighted should not matter or be a reason you withhold it from the public. If you go to Barnes and Noble most, if not all, the items in the store are copyrighted by the authors. Shockingly they are on the shelves, available for viewing and for you to buy. In fact, a simple google search of the organization who did the study pulls up several other studies they have done for other nearby local agencies for example Sachse PD. Imagine our SURPRISE to discover most of those studies are available for full view online. Where is the copyright issue? We also found that Collin County Sherriff’s Office contracted a study for a 5-year plan in February 2022 and Murphy Police Department 2020 Racial Profiling Analysis online. Why does Frisco act like they are special or have the right to withhold information? Why would they tell us we have to come in to view the study – what makes it any different than any other study in other cities? What is in the study that the city does not want us to know? No worries, we have the staffing study in full because Shady Shit does not give up that easily.
Who conducted the study? In 2020, Frisco PD with the help of federal grant money contracted with Justice Research Consultants, LLC, and its principal researcher Mr. Fritsch for the development of a three-year strategic staffing study. Fritsch has done studies both nationally and internationally and is considered a leading expert on police staffing, patrol allocation and deployment strategies. He has conducted staffing assessments in several Texas cities including Allen, Prosper, and Richardson. Fritsch also developed a propriety software called Model for the Allocation of Patrol Personnel (MAPP) which is one of the only models in existence today and the only one that has been stringently validated. Lastly, he has taught graduate level research methods for over 20 years at a university and is a published author. He appears to be more than qualified to conduct the study and to produce accurate results.
The study which was done in 2020 pulled most the of the baseline from 2019 due to covid and how that affected certain indicators. It started with interviews with Frisco PD personnel and the research team conducted a comprehensive analysis of several different factors to validate and project patrol staffing needs. The report is structured into six primary sections and the summary had 27 recommendations for staffing improvements which are listed below:
Recommendation #1: Based on the results, it is recommended by the end of FY 24 that 42additional patrol officers be added above the current authorized patrol officer and corporal allocation. Implementation Timeframe of Officers: FY 22 – Add 14 patrol officers, FY 23 – Add 14 patrol officers and FY 24 – Add 14 patrol officers.
Recommendation #2: It is recommended that four new patrol Sergeants should be assigned to serve as supervisors for special shifts. Implementation Timeframe: FY 22 – Add 2 patrol sergeants and FY 23 – Add 2 patrol sergeants.
Recommendation #3: It is recommended that a deployment team of one Sergeant and three officers be added for each of the next three years. Implementation Timeframe: FY 22 – Add 1 sergeant and 3 officers, FY 23 – Add 1 sergeant and 3 officers, FY 24 – Add 1 sergeant and 3 officers.
Recommendation #4: It is recommended that one new Sergeant should be assigned to the Traffic Unit. Implementation Timeframe: FY 22 – Add 1 traffic sergeant.
Recommendation #5: It is recommended that two new traffic officers should be assigned to the Traffic Unit. Based on the needs of the unit, it is expected these additional traffic officers will be deployed in vehicles. Implementation Timeframe: FY 23 – Add 1 traffic officer, FY 24 – Add 1 traffic officer.
Recommendation #6: Add 3 school resource officers to the School Resource Officer Unit. Implementation Timeframe: FY 23 – Add 1 school resource officer and FY 24 – Add 2 school resource officers.
Recommendation #7: Add 2 criminalists to the Crime Scene Unit. Implementation Timeframe: FY 23 – Add 1 criminalist and FY 24 – Add 1 criminalist.
Recommendation #8: Add 1 property & evidence technician to the Property & Evidence Unit. Implementation Timeframe: FY 24 – Add 1 property & evidence technician.
Recommendation #9: Add 2 digital media technicians to the Investigations Division. Implementation Timeframe: FY 22 – Add 2 digital media technicians.
Recommendation #10: Add 3 civilian investigative assistants to the Investigations Division. Implementation Timeframe: FY 23 – Add 2 civilian investigative assistants and FY 24 – Add 1 civilian investigative assistant.
Recommendation #11: Add 1 Office Manager to the Investigations Division. Implementation Timeframe: FY 23 – Add 1 office manager.
Recommendation #12:Within the Crimes Against Children Unit, add 1 internet crimes against children investigator, 1 digital forensic analyst (non-sworn), and 1 crimes against children investigator. Implementation Timeframe: FY 22 – Add 1 internet crimes against children investigator and FY 23 – Add 1 digital forensic analyst (non-sworn) and 1 crimes against children investigator.
Recommendation #13: Add 2 investigators to the Crimes Against Persons Unit. Implementation Timeframe: FY 23 – Add 1 investigator and FY 24 – Add 1 investigator.
Recommendation #14: Add 1 investigator to the Property Crimes Unit to investigate economic/white collar crimes. Implementation Timeframe: FY 24 – Add 1 investigator to investigate economic/white collar crimes.
Recommendation #15: Add 2 Community Service Officers to the Community Services Division. One of the officers should have the primary responsibility of working with businesses while the other officer should primarily work with hotels/motels. Implementation Timeframe: FY 22 – Add 1 Community Service Officer and FY 24 – Add 1 Community Service Officer
Recommendation #16: Add 4 Detention Officers to the Detention Division. One Detention Officer should be assigned to each of the four shifts. Implementation Timeframe: FY 24 – Add 4 Detention Officers
Recommendation #17: Add 2 Records Clerks to the Records Division. One Records Clerk should focus on open record requests while the other Records Clerk should focus on digital media requests. Implementation Timeframe: FY 23 – Add 1 Records Clerk and FY 24 – Add 1 Records Clerk
Recommendation #18: Add 3 Communications Officers to the Communications Division. These officers can be utilized to provide coverage of the new second Frisco PD radio channel which is expected to be operational in FY 22. Implementation Timeframe: FY 23– Add 3 Communications Officers.
Recommendation #19: Add 1 Communications Supervisor to the Communications Division and develop a fourth shift in communications. Implementation Timeframe: FY 23 – Add 1 Communications Supervisor.
Recommendation #20: Add 2 Radio Technicians to the Radio System Division. Implementation Timeframe: FY 22 – Add 2 Radio Technicians.
Recommendation #21: Add 1 Public Service Officer to the Radio System Division to assist with fleet maintenance. Implementation Timeframe: FY 23 – Add 1 Public Service Officer.
Recommendation #22: Add 1 Office Manager to the Radio System Division. Implementation Timeframe: FY 22 – Add 1 Office Manager.
Recommendation #23: Add 1 Deputy Chief of Police to supervise the Services Bureau. Implementation Timeframe: FY 22 – Add 1 Deputy Chief of Police.
Recommendation #24: Add 2 background investigators to the Professional Standards Unit. One of the background investigators can be a non-sworn employee who handles the background investigations for non-sworn applicants. Implementation Timeframe: FY 22 – Add 2 background investigators (one sworn and one non-sworn).
Recommendation #25: Add 3 training officers to the Training Unit. Implementation Timeframe: FY 22 – Add 2 training officers and FY 24 – Add 1 training officer.
Recommendation #26: Add 1 administrative assistant to the Training Unit. Implementation Timeframe: FY 23 – Add 1 administrative assistant.
Recommendation #27: Add 2 intelligence analysts to the Crime Analysis Unit. Implementation Timeframe: FY 23 – Add 1 intelligence analyst and FY 24 – Add 1 intelligence analyst.
Iris Murdoch once said, “We live in a fantasy world, a world of illusion. The great task in life is to find reality.” Every day that I live in Frisco I feel like we live in a fantasy world. The illusion is whatever the city wants to buy or has shoved down our throats. Based on the way the city tried to deny us the staffing report it is clear they did not want us to learn the study had a total of 27…yes 27 recommendations for more staff. Ask yourself, why does the city want to withhold a study that several other cities have published online? The studies recommendations were to be completed by 2023 or 24 so how many of the 27 recommendations has the city followed through on? During the Universal council meetings, it was Chief Shilson who said he has no concerns about what potential crime Universal could or would bring. The city loves to tout here and there Frisco is the SAFEST CITY, but I am wondering if those that determined that would have the same opinion if they read the staffing study and how “UNDERSTAFFED” we are. Why are we understaffed with life-saving personnel? In my opinion our growth rate is out of control. We have a current population of 227,446 residents and we are growing rapidly with more residents moving here every day. We are growing so fast the city can’t keep up with its own infrastructure. As residents we see it every day with traffic, our roadways, parks and more. However, we don’t see behind the red curtains of city hall every day to realize that our growth is happening faster than we can hire and train more police officers and fire fighters. That means we are now being reactive instead of being proactive years ago, which could have helped us avoid the current situation. Secondly, we have city leaders and management who don’t want to slow growth. They refuse to say no to anything development related so as we continue to bring in big events like PGA golf tournaments, the ACM Awards, and don’t forget a theme park all while we are putting at risk our understaffed departments and residents. It begs the question, why is Frisco and our City Manager Wes Pierson hiring two more Assistant City Managers (and what are their salaries) but we are not working towards hiring more life-saving personnel in the Fire Department or Police Department? Instead, we have a new city manager with a GOD complex and a clear disdain for First Responders.
In our next blog we will dive into some interesting points in the study but for now we leave you to ponder a simple question. Now that we are in 2023 how many of the 27 recommendations can the city mark off the list as completed?
Imagine it is the early 80’s and your family is about to embark on their summer vacation. The day before you leave your dad is packing up the sports wagon, aka Wagon Queen Family Truckster, trying to figure out how each suitcase needed to be positioned on the roof, so nothing got lost along Route 66. You see your parents sitting at the kitchen table looking at the map one last time planning the ultimate route with amazing pit stops and fun things to do. Morning comes and it is time to hit the road. As you pull out of the drive all you can think about it is your destination…Walley World. Okay yes I am talking about Clark Griswold and the hit movie National Lampoon’s Vacation. It is a classic, timeless, and hilarious comedy and in my opinion one of the best movies of all time. Well soon families with small kids across the nation will pack up for that summer trip right here to Frisco, Texas. If you are wondering why then you have been living under a rock or in a cave for way too long. Universal Studios will be the Walley World of Frisco!
In January 2023 when residents learned Universal would be coming to town, they did not receive the Griswold welcome by locals. Instead, residents had a lot of questions and concerns about the project and its impact on the city. The biggest question still to this day is when did the city first hear about Universals interest in Frisco for this project? The answer is not as easy as one may think, and it varies depending on who you ask. In a council meeting Mayor Cheney said they first learned about the project at the end of August or September 2022. Then in an interview with local reporter Brett Shipp back in late January, Mayor Cheney said council had been thoroughly vetting the project the last 4 to 5 months. When announced in January several council members and P&Z board members admitted to not having the so-called traffic study, economic impact study, or crime study. In fact, several admit to having very few details on the project other than the colorful rendering seen by the world.
That is where we thought the story would end until one day I checked our email and there was a letter with a copy of two PIR’s by two different residents and I will admit I was a little verklempt and excited. The requests were for all communications regarding P117 / Universal, travel plans and expenses and more. Buried in one of the requests we found a picture of a timeline titled “Genesis of Universal Project” and after reading it we were very confused and perplexed.
Hold up! If the timeline provided by the city is correct then we have a lot of questions. It does not match the verbal statements/timelines given by the mayor and some council members and it does not match the emails received in the PIR. Who wrote the timeline? Who put the timeline in the PIR? Why are there no emails supporting this time frame? Are we to believe not one email went back and forth from May to the end of August regarding this big project that was in discussion?
According to this timeline the city officials supposedly had 3 meetings in June. The first was June 7, the second June 14, and the third June 21, 2022. However, when you get to July 13 it notes the June board meeting was canceled so the EDC board did not get a briefing until July. Let’s pretend we have a multiple-choice test question: Which June meeting was canceled? A) June 7, B) June 14, C) June 21, D) All of them or E) None of them. May, June and July? That is very different than September or October, which were the city officials statements given at city council meetings and meet and greets. I find it hard to believe my wife and I are the only ones asking why the timeline keeps changing. Why do I feel like we are being lied to and if they are lying, why? If the city council was briefed on a regular monthly basis since July 2022 then why is it when confronted after the big grand announcement most of the city officials and members of P&Z had little to no information about the project? When asked most looked like “deer in the headlights” and could not try to exit the conversation fast enough. What they did have were the same talking points that we later learned were lies and part of a bait-and-switch to what was really in the development agreement.
Confused we decided to go through the emails sent to us and we found the first email dated 8/22/2022 at 1:57 PM from Laura Cuzman (Sr. Admin Asst at the Frisco EDC) to Holly McCall and Sharon Perry (City Mgr. Admin Asst) is regarding a “High Priority Meeting.” It goes on to say Jason Ford (President of the Frisco EDC) would like to coordinate an “important meeting” with a “prospect” at the Frisco EDC office to be held 8/31/2022. It notes that city staff should include Wes Pierson, Ben Brezina and John Lettellier. Laura asks Holly to confirm if Mayor Cheney and/or Angelia Pelham from the council could attend and what 2-hour window would work so they could coordinate a meeting. Immediately Sharon Perry responds and asks, “Is this for Project US?” If it is Wes can be available all day. Laura responds that she believes so but will confirm with Jason Ford. Then an email is sent from Jason Ford to Ben Brazina (Asst. City Manager) and he states Cheney can be available, Angelia is on vacation and then he asks if Ben and Wes have suggestions of other council member(s) they should include. He specifically says, “ Mayor Pro Tem perhaps as part of protocol?” Then Jason asks Ben to make a call to Richard the next day to discuss any potential issues with the other member we discussed with related experience.
In my best Beyoncé I want to scream, ring the alarm, ring the alarm! Why would you not invite all the council members? Why exclude any of them from important conversations regarding such a big project? Is this typically how the city conducts business? What member could be a potential issue due to their related experience?
In the next series of emails that started on August 29, Emily Pollard (Marketing & Special Events – Frisco EDC) sends an email to Jason Ford and Leigh Lyons with a draft of the P117 Site Visit Presentation for August 31. Then Jason Ford sends an email to Wes Pierson, Ben Brezina and a cc to Marla Row (Visit Frisco) where he shares the first working draft of pitch decks for Wednesday’s meeting. That evening, Ben Brezina responded back they should highlight the month of May 2023 and talk about how many people are coming to Frisco with the PGA Frisco opening, Dallas Cowboys Training Camp Kick Off Party, ACM Music Awards and KitchenAid PGA Senior Championship. His point “inertia is moving…time for Project US to join us as our Partner. The next morning Marla Row sent 2 emails, the first talked about what statistics they should use for economic impact and the second email adds they should reference the meeting they had with all the venues to discuss them activating events around the ACM which further shows partnership beyond developments. Ben Brezina replies he likes that angle, it’s not just deal making, site development, construction, and grand opening but a partnership that extends far beyond the doors opening. Later that day Jason Ford sends out a revised “pitch deck” and working draft agenda for the August 31, 2023 meeting, along with a note to Jeff Cheney, Brian Livingston, Tammy Meinershagen, Wes Pierson, Ben Brezina, Marlo Roe, and John Lettellier with the subject line: Please sign NDA ASAP for meeting tomorrow. He goes on to say the meeting will be at the Frisco EDC office and the client has asked every participant to sign an NDA, which was drafted by Richard Abernathy.
Pictures of the P-117 Meeting Agenda show a list of participants and notes topics from prior meetings which may be revisited or carried over (site specific).
Discussion on workforce (i.e., how far would employees need to travel in from): A primary benefit mentioned over and over promoting this project was the jobs it will create for Frisco residents. If this was about local jobs then why are we talking about how far employees will have to travel.
Would the community be receptive to this project / land use?If not, why? Let’s just do a quick look at the City of Frisco’s social media Facebook page. On average daily posts can generate anywhere from 1 to 50 comments and maybe 3 to 4 shares. When you see posts with 100, 500, 1000 comments you can bet it is something citizens are paying attention to. Just look at the City’s Facebook page when it comes to Universal posts. On 1/11/23 the first post “The Announcement” had 1.9k comments and 4.8k shares and was one of the highest responded to posts on the city’s page in two years. It is important to note that most of the comments were against the project. Then a second post on 1/11/23 had 161 comments and 42 shares, 1/13/23 third post had 50 comments and 73 shares and the fourth post on 1/16/23 had 30 comments and 60 shares. February was not much different, on 2/10/23 the fifth post had 213 comments and 11 shares, and the final post announcing it had been approved on 3/7/23 had 349 comments and 76 shares (the majority saying it was a big mistake to approve it).
What sort of upgrades would be needed to facilitate the park (infrastructure)? I would be curious what the discussion was they had on this one.
What are the public approval hurdles we’d need to prepare for? Under what circumstances? They obviously were clueless to the opposition this project would face because they were not ready for the public hurdles that came after the announcement.
How might State/Local Economic Development help us (expedite permitting, political help, incentives, etc.)? I bet they didn’t expect the citizen opposition to incentives.
How hard is it to get a definitive answer to one simple question…When did the city first learn about Universal? Two months ago, at the council meeting, which was packed with residents, Fehmi Karahan spoke and said he was approached 10 months ago which means that would have been April 2022.
Depending on the timeline you believe, are we supposed to buy that for two months, Fehmi didn’t tell the city about the inquiry from Universal? If the city first started discussing this in May or even August 2022, and the project was thoroughly vetted as Mayor Cheney said, then why were some citizens told in January 2023 by council members and P&Z staff members that they really didn’t know too many details about the project? Why had the council or P&Z members not seen a crime study, traffic study, economic impact study from May/August 2022 to January 2023? Mayor Cheney besides using resident tax dollars (in excess of $10,000+) for a trip to vet Universal Orlando in person, what else was vetted?
At the climax of the Griswold’s Road Trip to Walley World in National Lampoons Vacation, everything had gone wrong that could go wrong and Clark’s wife and kids announce they vacation is not worth it and want to just go home. At his wits end, sitting in the sports wagon you can see the whites of Clarks wide eyes and the grinding of his teeth, and his meltdown begins. He launches into a foul-mouthed tirade: “I think you’re all f**ked in the head! […] This is no longer a vacation! It’s a quest! It’s a quest for fun! […] You’ll be whistling ‘Zip-A-Dee-Doo-Dah’ out of your a**holes!”
We agree with Clark this is a quest but ours is for something so simple called “THE TRUTH.” I was one of those residents in January sitting at home watching the announcement live stream on Facebook and thinking to myself what in the nuclear detonation, I mean tarnation is going on in Frisco. All I could picture was the final scene in National Lampoon’s Vacation when the Griswold’s gleefully race to the entrance of Walley World, “America’s Favorite Family Fun Park,” in slow motion only to find the park is closed for two weeks for repairs and cleaning.
After doing all this research we are left with more questions than answers and we can say the inaccuracies in the timeline are very questionable, glaringly obvious, and truthfully alarming. A smart person once said, “Trust the timeline of yourself.” And with that Walley says, until next time…
“We The People” is one of the best-known phrases in the American political lexicon. They are the first three words of the Preamble to the Constitution of the United States and propose that the “people” should be the driving force behind government and what is does and does not do. These words should hold great significance because of the implication and meaning behind them but sadly many Americans today could not even tell you what the Constitution says and what it stands for.
We The People have the right to question our elected officials and our government which is why The Freedom of Information Act was passed in 1967. It requires the full or partial disclosure of documents controlled by the government, state or other public authorities. My entire life I have enjoyed putting in FOIA requests because it creates a checks and balance system so to speak. It is an easy and simple reminder to our elected officials that they work for us, they are responsible at the end of the day to “We The People” and they need to remember that.
So why is it the City of Frisco delays turning over PIR requests? Based on what some citizens have sent us they get the same responses over and over such as we need you to clarify, or it has been sent the attorney, and so on. Our team has filed PIR request in cities across Texas for years and generally they are prompt (within 15 days) to provide the required details. So why does it take the City of Frisco 30, 60, 90 days to respond? Why do they constantly find excuses to delay turning over information? How can the city operate on an honor code since many of our elected officials use their personal devices and email for communication? They also think very highly of themselves because they charge more than any other city we have dealt with which is probably there way of trying to stop the public from making requests.
One example, a resident requested “All electronic communication via email for Project P117/Universal from 1/1/22 to 2/27/23 between all city council members, Wes Pierson, Maria Row, Ben Brezina, and Jason Ford. The city released a few details after 45 days but the guts they have delayed for over 2 months now. Recently the resident sent us the email that city has now sent it to the Attorney General which allows another 45 days of delays. WHAT ARE YOU HIDING FRISCO WHEN IT COMES TO THE UNIVERSAL PROJECT?
Based on the recent city council meeting where the city set a precedent to release information protected by an NDA (which the city insisted on) that included human resource records we decided to have a citizen ask for a copy of George Purefoy’s Severance Package, copy of any signed contracts between George Purefoy for Mac Borchardt, any monies paid by the city to lawyers, investigators, outside organizations, and associations to conduct internal investigations, and if Ben Brezina had any write up or complaints. The request was made April 10, 2023, and we assumed we would receive this one rather quickly but instead the city sent back the following message on April 25: Please clarify whether you consent to Frisco redacting any and all information it believes is confidential in accordance with the TPIA without the necessity of a request to the Texas Attorney General. Confidential information may include, but is not limited to, attorney-client privilege, attorney-work product, confidential personnel information and/or witness informer information.
On April 28, the citizen responded the request was clear and it should not be an issue to release it based on current actions taken by the city and city council. If it was an issue the resident suggested they hold another city council meeting and vote to release it. They also noted they have no issue with the city redacting it. The citizen sent us an email today they are still waiting and now the request shows “sent to attorney.” WHAT IS THE CITY OF FRISCO HIDING? THEY ARE THE ONES THAT SET THE WHEELS IN MOTION AND NOW DENY THIS REQUEST? If they don’t release this request it will be clear the reason for the previous release was solely as a POLITICAL HIT JOB!
Another example is a PIR that requested “All electronic communication including emails and text messages between John Keating and Veton Krasniqi from 2020 to the present and Angelia Pelham and Veton Krasniqi from 2020 to the present.” Within 11 days of filing the response received was there are no documents responsive to your request. It seems weird that not one email exists with Veton when he donated $10,000 to John Keating’s campaign on March 10, 2021 and $5000 to Angelia Pelham on May 15, 2021. Surely there would be at least one email that details the relationship between these two sitting council members and a mystery man. What we did find is several cases in Collin County regarding debts with the name Veton Krasniqi attached to it. Things that make you go, hmmm!
Lastly a PIR request was made for a copy of the “Public Safety Study regarding the Police Department Staffing funded by federal grants.” The response was it would only be available to be viewed at city hall. They won’t actually give anyone a copy of it which has me curious. Maybe because it tells us that staffing is an issue just like we have been hearing. What we can tell you, is that you can bet Susan McFarland with the DMN won’t report on it because that would be a real news story with real truth.
My wife said she had this crazy dream, and my first mistake was asking her what it was about. She said I was White Goodman from the movie Dodgeball and I was strutting and striding on up to the City Secretary’s Office at city hall. Magically the song Apache by The Sugar Hill Gang began playing, “Ho, ho, ho, Tonto, jump on it, jump on it, jump on it, Kemosabe, jump on it, jump on it, jump on it.” When I walked into the office, I was greeted by the public records militant who said, “White, what are you doing here?” I responded, “it is called FOIA, The Freedom of Information Act. The hippies finally got something right. Just Kiddin’, not really!” I learned an important lesson – don’t ask my wife about her dreams and if I am White Goodman then I think I am damn sexy!
The questions we are left with are simple, why does it take the City of Frisco so long to respond to PIR requests? Why do they play games and delay releasing information that “we the people” have the right to ask for and receive? What is the city hiding?
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…