Quality Jobs: Frisco vs Plano

Over the past 15–20 years, bringing “quality jobs” or corporate headquarters to Frisco has been a common campaign theme across many city council and mayoral candidates. As Frisco transitioned from a bedroom suburb into a regional employment center, candidates across political factions have run on platforms tied to economic development, corporate relocations, and high-wage job growth.

For communities like Frisco, smart corporate development isn’t just about landing big company logos—it’s about long-term financial health, balanced growth, and protecting taxpayers. Cities like Frisco have to think carefully about what kind of development they pursue and where it goes.

Mayor Cheney and other city leaders have frequently said Frisco “must pursue” major employers so the city becomes a regional job center instead of a commuter suburb.  Cheney has emphasized pursuing large corporations and creating office districts where employees can live, work, and socialize.

Lifestyle Frisco wrote an article in October 2019 titled “Mayor Jeff Cheney Announces Re-Election Campaign” which centered around Mayor Cheney’s own words.  Cheney continues, he was seeking residents votes on May 2, 2020, so he can continue to bring more jobs, expand the tax base, create beautiful neighborhoods, and provide top tier entertainment. He notes that Frisco won our FIRST-EVER Fortune 500 relocation with Keurig Dr Pepper.  He continues, the goal is to deepen our Sports City USA brand by adding the National Soccer Hall of Fame, professional lacrosse, and an esports team. His political mailer in 2020 listed his so-called wins. It still does not compare to Plano’s wins that will bring more high paying quality jobs that have a better economic impact to the city.

For years we have listened to candidates and current Council Members talk and campaign about bringing “high-paying primary jobs” to reduce commutes for residents, diversify the city’s tax base, and to support the city’s financial stability.   In the most recent special election, we were shocked to learn our newly elected council woman, Ann Anderson stated she was glad that AT&T chose to relocate to Plano.  Wait what?

Frisco Chronicles began to question have our city leaders fulfilled their obligations and promises to Frisco residents?   Shockingly, no!  Residents need to pay attention.

Frisco vs Plano Comparison

Who is the largest employer in each city?

Frisco: Frisco Indepenent School District – 8,800 employees vs Plano: JP Morgan Chase – 11,261 employees

Frisco vs Plano Economic & Corporate Landscape

Which city has added the most corporate jobs?

Frisco: 5000 to 7000 vs City of Plano: 25,000+

Which city has had the greatest Economic Impact?

Frisco Annual Payroll Impact: Roughly $500M to $1Billion vs Plano Annual Payroll Impact: Roughly $2 to $3 Billion

Frisco Property Tax Impact: Tens of millions annually vs Plano Property Tax Impact: Hundreds of Millions over time

Frisco

  • Major employers are a mix of private and public sector.  Frisco has attracted some high-profile corporate offices, but its largest employers tend to be public sector or regional service-focused, rather than Fortune 500 headquarters.
  • The focus has been on building a diversified but smaller-scale corporate base rather than creating a dense Fortune 500 corridor.
  • There’s evidence of success in certain sectors, but less concentration of high-paying corporate headquarters jobs compared to Plano.

Plano

  • Plano has built a robust corporate ecosystem, especially along Legacy West/Legacy Business Park, attracting Toyota Financial Services, JPMorgan Chase, NTT Data, Fujitsu/Ericsson, and Capital One.
  • The city has successfully attracted major Fortune 500 companies which created tens of thousands of corporate jobs and generated billions in annual payroll and hundreds of millions in property taxes.
  • Plano’s strategy has emphasized large-scale corporate relocation and campus development, which creates a strong economic multiplier effect.

Community Impact Comparison:

Frisco’s Potential Issue: With a large portion of the top employers in the public sector, Frisco’s economic growth may be more sensitive to government budgets, policy changes, and public funding cycles, rather than the stable expansion seen in private corporate headquarters. This could limit long-term job growth and tax base expansion.

Resident Impact Comparison

Plano: Residents benefit from high-paying corporate jobs, a strong tax base that funds public services, and a built-in ecosystem that encourages additional businesses and amenities.

Frisco: While still attracting quality employers and offering amenities, the job base may be narrower in sectors that generate higher wages and broader economic spillover. Public sector dominance among top employers may limit diversity in employment opportunities.

WHO WINS: FRISCO OR PLANO

  • Plano emerges as the city with a more aggressive, high-impact corporate strategy that directly benefits residents through employment opportunities, payroll tax revenues, and large-scale infrastructure support.
  • Frisco has been moderately successful in attracting employers but may face long-term challenges due to the nature of its largest employers and a less concentrated corporate corridor.

ELECTION TIME: VOTE WISELY

You constantly here residents in Frisco complain they are tired of growth without infrastructure.  Why is that?  Because our city leaders have done nothing to reduce our commute to local jobs or bring quality paying jobs to our community.  By putting a heavy emphasis on “TOURISM” and “HOSPITALITY” they have created more traffic issues and attracted less quality paying jobs. 

A recent big win the city likes to talk about is Universal Kids Resort, which is bound to add to Frisco’s traffic congestion.  City leaders are hoping that over the years tourist attractions will bring in enough tax revenue to offset what the corporate relocations could have brought to our community. 

A search of the internet for jobs at Universal Kids Resort displays the following available jobs: Lobby Attendant, Quick Service Associate, Dispatcher, Full Time Lead Technician, Lifeguard, Ride Operator Attendant, Wardrobe and Costume Supervisor, and many more.  The requirement a HS Diploma or GED, Customer Service Experience.  No pay scale offered for any of the positions.  Universal offers very few highly paid management positions. 

We did find one job for a Senior External Affairs & Corporate Communications Manager which states a bachelor’s degree in political science, Public Relations, Communications, Business Administration or related field is required.   It also says at least 7+ years of corporate communications, legislative, government or external affairs experience is required, or equivalent combination of education and experience. 

Why is all this important? 

Every election the same people stand before us and ask for our vote, and Frisco Residents who are none the wiser continue to just elect the same regime.  The result is our leaders have failed to bring quality paying CAREERS to our community.  This will affect us down the road when it comes time to paying the big bonds they have asked us to pass over the years.

John Keating’s website brags he has served on the council “FOR MORE THAN A DECADE.” Frisco Chronicles is curious if he can name one Corporate Relocation (besides the PGA) that he pushed hard to win that brought high paying quality jobs to Frisco? Keating’s website lists his priorities as Mayor and not one of them directly states the goal to bring high quality CAREERS AND CORPORATIONS that protect taxpayers.  He offers the same priorities just re-written that he has failed to complete before in his decade on the dais.  Keating’s time is up!

Laura Rummel is back to also ask for your vote!  Her website states her priorities include Frisco’s infrastructure, smart growth by asking developers to offer smaller format housing options such as condos, townhomes, zero lot line home alternatives and fuel innovation and entrepreneurship.  Her website states, “Start-ups typically provide slow and steady organic growth for the city, as well as bringing high-paying jobs, two attributes I would like to see us continue to recruit here to Frisco.   

How will Laura Rummel help Frisco compete with Plano and the economic windfall they are having with corporate relocations?  Rummel has had 5+ years on council now and she has no win to call her own! It takes a long time for startups to grow into a Capital One or AT&T and provide an economic impact to residents that we need here. 

In closing, when will Frisco Residents say WE HAVE HAD ENOUGH AND WE WANT HIGH PAYING QUALITY JOBS THAT CREATE AN ECONOMIC IMPACT like other surrounding cities.  The big wins Frisco claims are great, but they are nothing compared to our neighbor the City of Plano which has built one of the largest corporation corridors in North Texas.  Plano employers include major financial institutions, corporate headquarters, tech firms, and large service centers that anchor Plano’s economy and make up a significant share of local jobs. A linear “corporate corridor” lined with major employer logos, emphasizing Plano’s role as a corporate hub

Frisco residents need to ask, “How will we repay the $1 Billion in debt we have?” Frisco leaders have dropped the ball and if you look down the road none of the “WINS” our current leaders like to claim will bring in the billions that major corporate relocations could have. At the last city council meeting you saw them approve a warehouse along the 121 roadway – is that the best use of that land or could it have gone to something else that would have brought in more high-quality paying jobs.  Frisco’s future is not as bright as residents would think when it comes to financial stability.  The One Billion in debt has to come from somewhere so where will it come from?   Get Wise Frisco!

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.

Largest Employers in Frisco

EmployerSectorEmployees
Frisco ISDEducation~8,800
Dallas CowboysSports & Entertainment~2,000
City of FriscoGovernment~1,800
HCL TechnologiesCorporate~1,500
T-MobileCorporate~1,300
Keurig Dr PepperCorporate~1,200
AmerisourceBergenHealthcare700+
Baylor Scott & White HealthHealthcare600+
Collin CollegeEducation500
Mario Sinacola & SonsConstruction500
OracleCorporate400
Baylor Medical Center of FriscoHealthcare450
LexipolCorporate420

Top Employers in Plano, TX

Plano’s largest employers based on the most recent city and economic data (2025–2026 estimates):

  1. JPMorgan Chase – ~11,261 employees (regional/corporate operations)
  2. Bank of America – ~6,566 employees (back office/operations)
  3. Capital One Finance – ~5,649 employees (finance services)
  4. Toyota Motor North America, Inc. – ~4,938 employees (North American HQ)
  5. PepsiCo Foods North America / Frito‑Lay – ~3,759 employees (food & beverage)
  6. Ericsson – ~3,346 employees (telecom/IT)
  7. AT&T Foundry and Services – ~2,500 employees (IT/telecom center)
  8. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company – ~2,100 employees
  9. JCPenney – ~2,000 employees (corporate headquarters)
  10. NTT DATA, Inc. – ~1,968 employees (tech services)

Did Laura Rummell Violate TOMA?

Back in 2023, one of our earliest blogs focused on the Texas Public Information Act — the law that ensures citizens have access to records showing what their government is doing on their behalf. Transparency is not a courtesy; it is a legal obligation.

Since then, residents regularly contact us with questions about Public Information Requests (PIRs). Sometimes they’re confused by the process. Sometimes they’re overwhelmed by what they receive. And sometimes, they suspect they’re being buried in paperwork rather than given what they actually asked for.

Recently, a resident forwarded several PIR responses and expressed frustration. They felt they were being flooded with documents but not real answers. They hoped we might spot something they missed.

We did!

Among the documents was a February 8, 2025 email from Councilwoman Laura Rummell to City Manager Wes Pierson and Assistant City Manager Henry Hill, with Angelia Pelham copied:

“In light of recent PIRs that have come to our attention and publicly posted, I’d like to ask for the topic of an animal shelter be brought up in Executive Session for alignment.”

Let’s pause right there. “In light of recent PIRs…”

Not pending litigation. Not a personnel matter. Not real estate negotiations.

PIRs.

The Pushback

On February 11, 2025, Pierson responded that he was not familiar with the recent PIRs or what had been posted. He asked for clarification: Was there a legal question related to the PIRs? Or was she seeking policy direction?

He stated clearly that if it was policy direction, it would likely need to be discussed in open session.

That distinction matters.

Under the Texas Open Meetings Act (TOMA), executive session is narrowly limited. Permissible reasons include:

  • Pending or contemplated litigation
  • Specific personnel matters
  • Certain real estate negotiations
  • Security matters
  • Limited economic development discussions

Avoiding public scrutiny — or reacting to public records requests — is not on that list.

Separately, the Texas Public Information Act governs what records must be released. You do not make something confidential simply by discussing it in executive session. Closed doors do not create confidentiality by magic.

Why Copy Angelia?

Rummell copied Angelia Pelham “for a second.”

A second what? A second vote? A second opinion? A second set of marching orders?

We are not alleging how anyone would vote. But when one council member seeks “alignment” on moving a controversial topic into executive session — particularly in response to public records being released — reasonable citizens are going to ask reasonable questions.

Council members are permitted to discuss city business in limited ways. But deliberating outside public view in ways that circumvent open meeting requirements is exactly what TOMA was designed to prevent.

Behind Closed Doors

Now fast forward. The February 17, 2026 agenda shows an executive session item:

“Receive legal advice regarding proposed interlocal agreement with Collin County, Texas, and other political subdivisions for the use of the Collin County Animal Shelter and related issues.”

The Animal Shelter and proposed holding facility have been one of the most discussed issues in Frisco over the last several months. Residents have raised concerns at town halls, council meetings, and special sessions. So why is such a heavily debated issue about the Collin County Animal Services ILA headed into executive session?

Legal advice can properly be discussed in closed session. But policy direction? Alignment? Messaging? Those belong on the dais — under the lights — where the public can hear it.

The Consent Agenda Shuffle

Then there’s Item #24 on the Consent Agenda: An annual contract modification for payment to Collin County in the amount of $651,774 — along with rescinding prior council approval from February 3, 2026.

For those unfamiliar, consent agenda items are typically passed in one vote with little to no discussion unless pulled by a council member. A $651,774 contract modification tied to a controversial shelter arrangement seems like the kind of item that deserves public discussion — not a quiet glide path.

Documents Attached To Item 24: Agenda Item Memorandum Click Here, FY 2026 Animal Shelter Billing Worksheet Click Here, Contract Modification Document Click Here

The Real Question

This isn’t about whether the city can receive legal advice. It can. This isn’t about whether executive session is ever appropriate. It is.

The question is motive. If executive session is being used as a shield in response to public information requests — if alignment is happening out of view of the public or because documents became public — then that is precisely what TOMA was designed to prevent.

Transparency does not end where discomfort begins.

Spotlight Moment

We have serious concerns and YOU SHOULD TOO!

A councilwoman asking to move a hot-button issue into executive session “in light of recent PIRs.”
A city discussing a controversial shelter agreement behind closed doors.
A six-figure contract modification sliding onto the consent agenda.

Maybe it’s all perfectly lawful. Maybe it’s all procedural. Maybe it’s all coincidence.

Or maybe Frisco residents are simply asking to see their government operate in the sunlight instead of the shadows.

Laura Rummell has championed this holding facility which many local animal advocates OPPOSE and calling it a Temporary Execution Hold Facility. Rummell’s email states, “the very first bullet is my concern where I believe clarity for the council is needed as that has not been the response to the community.” What response have you all been giving the community? Is this an admission they have been feeding the public one thing when in the background they are either doing something else or have no plan at all?

If everything is above board, then put it above the table. Discuss it openly. Debate it publicly. Vote on it transparently.

Because when public records trigger closed doors, citizens don’t stop asking questions. They start asking better ones like Laura Rummell, what are you hiding?

Links:

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. 

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.

Anderson’s False Claims

Tomorrow is election day!  If you have not voted in the special election, tomorrow is the last day for you to get out and vote but there are some things you should know before you go!

On September 23, 2025 Ann Anderson announced on Facebook she was going to run for the next open City Council seat.  She continued she was ready to be a strong, thoughtful, and collaborative voice for our city.  Her campaign would be about unity, progress and shared purpose.  Her slogan is One City, One Community, One Frisco!

The next post came on October 27, 2025, where Ann Anderson posted her intention to run for Frisco City Council Place 1, since it was being vacated by John Keating.  While campaigning, Anderson made several statements or claims that do not sit right with Frisco Chronicles.  Let’s dive into them:

Claim: Former Corporate Executive and successful Small Business Owner

Forgot to follow the law and file her campaign finance report updates for June 2024, July 2024, January 2025, and July 2025.  It was not until Frisco Chronicles pointed it out in one of blogs that she was out of compliance that Ann noticed.  The next day she filed updated campaign finance reports.  View them here.

Funny thing, her most current campaign finance report does not show how she paid for her hit piece postcard.  How much did it cost?  Who paid for it?  Why is it not listed on her campaign finance report?

A corporate executive and successful business owner would understand the importance of filing legal paperwork on time (not two years later).  If you can’t file your campaign finance reports on time then how do you plan to help run a city of 250,000 plus people. 

Claim: Public Safety is a top priority

On January 9th, Ann posted a National Law Enforcement Appreciate Day Image and then a few hours later made a second post attacking our former Fire Chief over a biased report from 3+ years ago.   Anderson is not endorsed by any public safety entity or official.

Her opponent Mark Piland is endorsed by the Frisco Fire Fighters Association, Frisco Police Officers Association, and Denton County Sherrif Tracy Murphree.

Claim: Anderson claimed she was against the Fire Fighters propositions for civil service and collective bargaining.

According to the Frisco Police Officers Association in her interview (for their endorsement), she told them she supported Civil Service and voted for it.  If that is the case, then why did she tell residents at forums she was against it?

Claim: Anderson said she is glad we lost the AT&T Corporate Relocation and glad they went to Plano.

Ann Anderson spoke in favor of Universal Kids Theme Resort which brought low paying job to Frisco. Yet NO to AT&T which is ranked 32nd on the Fortune 500 rankings of the largest United States corporations, with revenues of $122.4 billion at the end of fiscal year December 31, 2024.

Why would someone on our city council be against high paying jobs and a Fortune 500 company coming to Frisco? 

Claim:  Anderson claims she is ACCOUNTABLE only to Frisco Residents – not special interest group.

A  Facebook post on 2/10/2020 reads, “It was with great pleasure that Thor & Ann Anderson endorse Jeff Cheney for his re-election!”  

Ann is endorsed by many Cheney loyalists such as Donna Schmittler, Renee Sample, Dick Peasley, Laxmi Tummala, Mike Simpson and many more. The “Cheney Club” is a special interest group so to speak and those in it are loyal to the establishment!

Claim: Anderson claims she is a Republican and she is proud to support Democrats.

Ann has stated multiple times she is a Republican.  She claims both the Collin County GOP and Denton County GOP were rigged for her opponent.

The endorsement by the Collin County GOP and Denton GOP were not rigged.  Both groups were aware of Ann Anderson’s multiple endorsements for Democrat candidates for both city council and FISD school board. 

While Denton went ahead and endorsed without interviewing the candidates they did so because they previously supported Mark Piland, because he is involved in the Denton GOP and attends meetings and events, and because they were fully aware of Ann Andersons endorsements for Cheney, Gopal Ponangi, Renee Sample and many others who are not in line with the Republican party principals. 

Collin County interviewed both candidates and they both were at the same meeting when the vote was taken.  Her opponent won it fair and square.

While claiming it was rigged suits her narrative, Anderson has provided no proof of any such “rigging” going on. 

Claim:  Vote 4 Ann Facebook Page “Likes” a Facebook page maintained and written by Bill Woodard (Establishment).

Bill Woodard has always been good at telling Frisco Residents how stupid they are and how they don’t understand how local city government is run.  His election page was turned into a watch dog page where he tells us how to think and how to support the establishment candidates. 

This is the same man who orchestrated the Vote No campaign against the Frisco Firefighters yet took endorsements and money from them when he ran for election. 

Woodard always supports the establishment and Cheney line so who would expect anything other than that from his site.

Claim: Anderson supports the Frisco Rail District businesses

In a post about Brooklyn Cutz and his business revenue being down 50% since construction began Anderson writes in the comments, “My guys usually go to the shop in our neighborhood. I would have thought Brooklyn’s regulars would have continued to go and he wouldn’t feel the pinch of the construction as much as other businesses.”

Ann’s comments don’t support small business. Assuming construction would not hurt a barber shop? How did she expect the regulars to get there when he had no sidewalk and no nearby parking? To say she “thought” his business would not feel the pinch of the construction shows how deaf she is to real world problems, residents and businesses.

Election Day

So here we are, on the eve of Election Day, standing at the ballot box equivalent of the final scene in a courtroom drama—lights low, jury restless, closing arguments echoing in the room. Ann Anderson’s campaign branding promises One City, One Community, One Frisco, but as we’ve walked through the record, the claims, and the contradictions, what Frisco residents are left with is less unity and more confusion.  Accountability isn’t a slogan; it’s a paper trail. Public safety isn’t a hashtag; it’s who stands with the people who run toward danger when the rest of us run away. And transparency isn’t yelling “rigged” when you lose—it’s proving it when you say it.

Ask yourself, why does the city, its leadership and their followers hate one candidate so much? Maybe it is because Piland knows how the city operates and wants to change it for the better and that terrifies them!

Tomorrow, you don’t just vote for a name—you vote for credibility, consistency, and whether Frisco continues down the well-worn path of establishment politics with Ann Anderson or demands something better and a change with Mark Piland. Ask the uncomfortable questions. Read the fine print. Follow the money. And most importantly, show up. Because if history has taught us anything, it’s this: the people who complain the loudest after an election are often the ones who stayed home or had the most to lose. Don’t be that voter. Frisco’s future deserves better than blind loyalty and bumper-sticker politics. See you at the polls.

The Frisco Lake Files

Frisco Lakes held their candidate meet and greet on January 8th for residents who lived in the community.  The day after we received an email from an anonymous Frisco Lakes Resident giving us a summary of the recent Candidate Forum featuring Ann Anderson and Mark Piland, both of whom are running for Place 1.   According to our insider, Ann Anderson came out of the gate attacking her opponent at the Forum. Did we expect anything different?  No.  Why?  Because those running the Forum were Frisco Insiders aligned with the Mayor and Frisco Elite!  

Our Frisco Lakes insider sent us a transcript of her voice recording, and a few things stood out to us.   Ann Anderson starts out “We have been tricked in this city to believe everything is peachy keen and everything is great.”   She continues, But Mark I read that report and it makes me angry that we had a hostile work environment in our Fire Service.  I don’t think they want you there!  I don’t think they want you leading them.  I don’t think it is right for you to stand here and say you want to help them.  I have the report on my table for anyone who wants to see it.  It makes me angry and as a corporate executive if I see a hostile work environment on an email it is my job to do something about it.

Ann, who has given you approval to speak on behalf of the leadership and staff of the Fire Department?  Mark Piland has been endorsed in this election by both Public Safety Department Associations: Frisco Police Officer’s Association and the Frisco Firefighters Association.   Their choice is clear, and you Ann … are not it! 

Based on the transcript we received, Mark Piland chose to use his rebuttal and said page 20 of the report states that he did nothing wrong.  Best part was when Ann rebutted him again and said you are right Mark (wait, what?)   Ann Anderson admitted at the Frisco Lakes Forum that page 20 said he did nothing wrong, yet she still had concerns about other issues within the report – okay fine!    

I am curious if Ann is so upset and angry over this report then how would she have felt if she read the 2011 Climate Report based on Mack Borchardt’s leadership and his Assistant Fire Chief Lee Glover.   It was done by a third party that reads “After reading the surveys and conducting over 140 hours of meetings with firefighters and officers, it is clear there is a SIGNIFICANT EMPLOYEE RELATIONS ISSUE in the department.  The report continues “it appears there is a lack of trust, respect, and dignity” within the department.  “The CULTURE is VERY NEGATIVE and one of INTIMNDATION, RETALIATION AND FEAR.”  At the time the survey showed 76.3% of the respondents indicated they would LEAVE THE DEPARTMENT if they could.  The report summary notes that this is the “fourth study done in the past ten years” and the management style will need to change moving forward DRAMATICALLY.   Can you guess the outcome of that report?

Mack Borchardt was terminated as the Fire Chief and then George Purefoy hired him to work in the City Manager’s office reporting directly to his best friend – George, the City Manager!  The hunt for a new Fire Chief began and that is when Mark Piland was offered the job and came to Frisco.  In essence Piland’s job was to right a wrong ship! 

Ann, where was your outrage and anger in 2011?  Let’s give Ann the benefit of the doubt she didn’t know in 2011 about this report.  However, Frisco Chronicles reported it in our blog The Valve Report in December 2023.  We also reported about it again and provided a full link to the 50+ page report in March 2025 in our blog Weasel Wes & The LetterWhere was Ann Anderson’s anger then?  What was her outrage then?  Fact is she didn’t have any anger or outrage until she decided to run for office and needed a talking point to help boost her up.

Ann also lists Public Safety as her #1 priority on her new mailer, which is funny when her whole mailer attacks those who have served or currently serve in public safety positions.   She didn’t get any endorsement from a public safety official in any capacity.  

Other interesting points from the Frisco Lakes debate include Ann Anderson saying she was in support of the Frisco Performing Arts Center, then she said she made a mistake, and then she learned she shouldn’t have been?  I am curious, how did you learn that you shouldn’t have been in support of it?  Clearly voters spoke when 65% said no at the ballot box.  She continued, do we need a Performing Arts Center?  The citizens voted on it, and there is money set aside in a bond.  Frisco Chronicles would like to know how much of that bond money is left after the city has done 5 to 7 studies for a PAC? 

Anderson also said she is not for autonomous vehicles and does not like drones to help with traffic flow. Yet her mailer I got today says under her “Priorities” was that she is for smart mobility and infrastructure that keeps Frisco moving. What type of smart mobility is she referring to then? That is interesting comment considering many state and federal programs are leaning towards that technology to help mobility. Just look at that number of grant programs available to help fund smart mobility technology that she said she was against.

And with that, we’ll put a pin in it—for now. But don’t get too comfortable.

Next up: a closer look at Ann Anderson’s political mailer—where facts appear to have taken a scenic detour—and a breakdown of the Frisco Chamber Candidate Debate Monday night.

Keep your reading glasses handy and your skepticism well-fed. As always, Frisco Chronicles will be here asking uncomfortable questions, double-checking the receipts, and shining a flashlight where others prefer mood lighting.

Stay tuned—this show’s just hitting intermission.

The RIM Division

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.

The Employee Health Clinic

If It’s Such a Great Deal, Why the Peek-a-Boo?
The City of Frisco loves to tell residents how transparent they are but it is Crystal clear, like spring water, they don’t want us asking questions about the 2021 decision to open the Employee Health Clinic pushed by former HR Director Sassy Safranek.  Transparency for city officials is like one of those novelty shower doors that looks clear until the steam hits and suddenly you can’t see a thing.

Welcome to the fog.

Back in 2021, the City’s Employee Health Clinic wasn’t some sleepy consent-agenda item. It was hotly contested, debated, dissected, and ultimately shoved across the finish line by a rare mayoral tiebreaker vote. Millions of dollars. Long-term projections. Big promises about savings, efficiency, and “doing right by employees.”

Fast-forward to today. Naturally, we thought: Hey, let’s see how that investment is actually doing.  You know—basic follow-up … Journalism and Accountability. The stuff transparency is supposedly made of.  And the City’s response?  NO. NO. NO.
(But said politely, on letterhead, with lawyers involved.)

A Simple Question Turns Into a Legal Obstacle Course

On November 12, 2025, Frisco Chronicles filed a Public Information Request (PIR). Nothing exotic. Nothing personal. No medical records. No names. No HIPAA panic.

We asked for basic performance data for the City of Frisco Employee Health Clinic over the past five fiscal years (or as available):

  • Annual number of clinic visits
  • Number of unique employees using the clinic
  • Annual operating revenue and expenses
  • Whether the clinic was running on a surplus or deficit
  • Any reports detailing utilization, cost savings, or performance

In other words: Is this thing working the way the City told taxpayers it would?  Seems reasonable, right?  Apparently not.

The Attorney General (Because Why Not?)

Instead of releasing the data—or even part of it—the City Attorney’s Office punted the request straight to the Texas Attorney General, asking for permission to keep the curtain closed.  From their letter:

“Frisco requests that the Texas Attorney General’s Office determine whether Frisco is required to disclose the information.”

Translation: “We’d rather not decide transparency ourselves. Please hold.”

Even more interesting? The City claims it “takes no position” on releasing the information… while simultaneously triggering a process that delays a release of requested documents and invites third parties to object.

That’s like saying: “I’m not stopping you from leaving… I’m just locking the door and hiding the keys.”

Third Parties, Copyrights, and Other Smoke Bombs

The City also notified Premise Health, the private contractor operating the clinic, giving them the opportunity to argue against disclosure under Section 552.305 of the Texas Public Information Act.

Premise Health, unsurprisingly, filed a brief supporting the City’s request to withhold information. (We’ll publish that response in full—because transparency is apparently contagious when citizens do it.)

The City’s letter also raises the specter of copyright protection, which begs the obvious question:  If this is just boring operational data, why the legal gymnastics?

Let’s Rewind: Why This Matters

Back in November–December 2021, City Council members openly worried about low employee utilization, long-term financial losses, and whether the private sector would ever make such an investment.

Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Brian Livingston said at the meeting, “I believe it’ll take us close to eight to nine years—if not longer than a decade—to break even … I don’t believe that the private industry would make that choice.”   He continued, “I’m very afraid that the losses will be much larger due to lower utilization that’s planned or expected.”

According to an article in Community Impact the estimated expenses  in the clinic’s first year  were expected to be over $1.44 million which included salaries, insurance, management and implementation fees and equipment purchases.  The clinic’s fifth-year budget is listed at more than $1.31 million. Premise Health projeced that the clinic will operate at a loss in its first three years.

Breaking down the numbers, the clinic required a $173,754 implementation fee, over $6.28 million in salary and management fees in the first five years, and subsidization from the City’s insurance reserve fund.

Despite all that, the deal passed—barely—with Mayor Jeff Cheney casting the deciding vote.  Council Members Brian Livingston, Shona Huffman and Dan Stricklin voted against the clinic.  And now, four years later, when citizens ask: “So… how’s it going?”  The answer is silence, lawyers, and a referral to Austin.

If It’s Saving Money, Show the Receipts

The City’s own website proudly claims the Employee Wellness Center saves taxpayer dollars, reduces insurance costs, and helps recruit and retain top talent.   Great! Fantastic! Pop the champagne!  So why not release the utilization numbers, cost comparisons and savings analyses?

If the clinic is the fiscal success story we were promised, these records should be the City’s favorite bedtime reading.  Instead, we’re told third parties might object, copyright might apply, and the Attorney General must decide.

That’s not transparency.  That’s strategic opacity.

The Real Question: What Are We Not Supposed to See?

No one is accusing the clinic of wrongdoing.  No one is demanding personal health data.  No one is attacking city employees for using a benefit.  This is about taxpayer accountability

When a multi-million-dollar program was controversial from the start, required subsidies, and was justified on future savings …citizens have every right to ask whether those promises materialized.  And the City has an obligation to answer without hiding behind contractors and legal process.

Call to Action: This Is Bigger Than One Clinic

Residents of Frisco should not shrug this off.  We encourage citizens to:

  1. Write to the City of Frisco, demanding the release of these records
  2. Contact the Texas Attorney General’s Office, urging disclosure under the Public Information Act related to PIR G093023
  3. Remind leadership that “trust us” is not a financial metric

Transparency isn’t a slogan.  It’s a practice.

And if the City truly believes this clinic is a win for employees and taxpayers, then sunlight won’t hurt a thing.  Unless, of course… there’s something they’d rather keep in the dark.

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.