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.

Before you go early vote…

Misleading behavior in politics doesn’t always arrive with sirens blaring—it usually shows up quietly, tucked inside polished mailers and carefully scripted forum answers that sound just reasonable enough to pass without challenge.   When candidates blur facts, cherry-pick endorsements, or present half-truths as full transparency, voters are left making decisions on a manufactured reality.

That’s the real danger: not just that people are misled, but that trust itself erodes, leaving citizens unsure who to believe and democracy vulnerable to manipulation by whoever tells the most convincing story rather than the most honest one.   

While both candidates were probably preparing for the SLAN Forum tonight, I was preparing our next blog drop unveiling the misleading behavior happening in this Special Election Campaign. 

Ann Anderson’s Campaign Mailer

Wes Pierson, Matthew Sapp, George Purefoy, what do they all have in common?  They are quoted on Ann Andersons campaign mailer.  We hope she obtained these quotes from public records because if she didn’t that could be problematic.  

The quotes from two City of Frisco employees, prompted a simple but critical question: did she ask permission to use those quotes, and more importantly, did City Manager Wes Pierson authorize his words to appear in a political campaign mailer? Because “transparent government” and “borrowing credibility from city staff” don’t usually belong in the same sentence.  The quotes are misleading because it makes the public believe that she had permission from these individuals to use their names for political campaigning. 

Special Interest Groups

On Anderson’s campaign mailer she claims she is “Accountable only to Frisco Residents – not special interest groups.”   At the Frisco Lakes Forum she said she keeps hearing over and over, “You’re one of us, we are so thankful one of us is running, someone who is not intrenched, someone who is a regular person.”  Lastly, at the Frisco Chamber Forum she said she is regular citizen who has lived here for 20 years and is highly involved in non-profit organizations and has been on a few boards and commissions for the city.  Throughout the forums she has implied she is just a regular ole resident (like you and me), but is that true?  No.

Anderson claims she’s just a regular person, yet in the same breath boasts of a “broad understanding of city operations and governance.” That’s not something most everyday residents pick up between HOA meetings and grocery runs. Anderson has been embedded in Frisco’s political inner circle for years—far from an outsider, and nowhere near the political novice she’s selling.

Her political résumé complicates the picture even further. She claims the Republican label, yet previously served as campaign treasurer for Gopal Ponanji, endorsed hard Democrats like Renee Sample and Dynette Davis, and backed current Mayor Jeff Cheney in 2020.  That’s deep involvement, long-standing alliances, and a front-row seat to Frisco’s power structure.

While she may not be a part of any official special interest group, she is most definitely part of the Political Inner Circle of Frisco.  You know the ones who want to keep the status quo of running this city.   The proof was in the forums and who attended.  Big names like Mike Simpson (former Mayor), The Cheney’s, John Keating, Laura Rummell, Karen Cunningham, Lisa Kirby, Brad Sharp, David Bickerstaff, Jennifer Achu, and many more all there clapping loudly for Ann Anderson.  It was like a high school yearbook of the “popular kids” giggling and laughing and attacking someone who has spent their entire life in public service. 

So, before voters buy the “just like you” narrative, it’s time to pause and ask the obvious questions. Because Ann Anderson isn’t an everyday Frisco resident stumbling into politics, she’s part of the inner circle, and Frisco voters deserve honesty about who’s really asking for their vote.

Public Safety

Anderson continues to say Public Safety is important to her and one of her top priorities.  If that is the case why has she not dived in to learn more and better understand the ongoing issue with Public Safety and City Management / City Council.  Nope, instead she just wants to attack a person who spent 40+ years in public safety and trying to promote a false narrative of the investigation done a few years ago.  Online Anderson supporters are talking about the report and unions in post after post and in group after group.   They want to talk about how these associations are unions to scare voters and to make them believe Piland supports associations /unions, which is not the case.  Clearly at each forum Piland has addressed that he supports the people and when they city turned their back on the public safety employees and would not agree to meet and confer that left them no choice.  He clearly said he does not support unions but he does support people especially when we are asking them to risk their lives.

Interestingly the issue of Civil Service and/or Collective Bargaining dates back to 2011, before Mark Piland became Fire Chief in Frisco.  The 2011 Climate Report, done by a third party clearly states in the summary and recommendations if change does not happen this time, the auditor believes much more is at risk – the potential for a Civil Service and/or Collective Bargaining election is very likely and the loss of many more valuable firefighters and paramedics.  Chief Borchardt and his staff (which included Lee Glover) who is now the CURRENT Fire Chief, management style must change dramatically. 

The other thing in this 2011 report is the FD staffs desire for 4 Person Staffing – which clearly shows that is not a new argument for them.  They had been calling it out for years, way before Mark Piland came into the picture.  In fact, Piland made a good point at one of the forums.  He has 10 years of good reviews from city management, and while he was Fire Chief the FD Staff never moved forward with Civil Service or Collective Bargaining.  However, after Mark Piland retired, and the city management chose to go back in time and appoint Lee Glover (from the 2011 Climate Report) as Fire Chief that is when the FD has a vote of no confidence for Glover and under Glovers leadership they filed for Civil Service and/or Collective Bargaining.   If you are wondering why public safety continues to endorse Mark Piland, it is because he is right for the city council seat. 

Republican, Democrat … or does it matter?

Piland is endorsed by both Collin County GOP and Denton County GOP.  Ann Anderson made statements at all the forums how the vote for Mark was “preplanned” and “in the bag” which according to our sources in both Collin/Denton GOP’s, was not true.   The Denton GOP did rush a meeting to make the endorsement for Mark Piland because while Ann is a Republican she does not live by or stand up for the Republican Values.  She has a history of endorsing Hard Democrats for elections and that does not go over well in the conservative Denton County area.  As much as we would like to think local politics is non-partisan in today’s world that is simply not true – nothing is nonpartisan.

When it comes to Collin County, we heard the same thing from inside sources, Ann’s previous endorsements and alignments did not go over well and it came down to a vote and Piland won because they felt he was the true Republican who had lived up the values in the Republican Agenda. 

We are also told that tonight at the SLAN Forum she continued to defend her relationships with Democrats.  What Anderson does not understand is you can have nonpartisan friendships all day long but if you have plans to run for office Republicans are not going to endorse fellow Republicans who openly help elect and endorse Democrats.  There is too big of a divide in our world and that is not going to fly.  John Keating will probably have a very hard time going for the endorsement for the same reasons.

Business 101

Ann Anderson said she is glad AT&T Headquarter Relocation choose Plano and not Frisco?  She was happy we lost a fortune 500 company that the city had worked very hard behind closed doors to get!

At the Chamber Forum she said Frisco “Dodged a Bullet” when they lost Grandscape / Nebraska Furniture Mart and that was “a GOOD BULLET that we dodged” because instead Frisco got the Dallas Cowboys.  I am curious if Ann Anderson understands Sales Tax and how it works.

Grandscape (anchored by Nebraska Furniture Mart) and The Star are both huge economic magnets —but based on the tax revenue figures public officials have shared, Grandscape as a retail tax generator likely produces more direct annual sales tax revenue than The Star’s sports/entertainment complex.   However, The Star drives a large, long-term economic impact through property value growth, tourism, and related development that isn’t easily captured in one annual number.

In practical terms, Retail sales tax drivers (like NFM/Grandscape) tend to produce easy-to-measure, recurring annual tax revenue — city and county officials are often very excited about them because the checks come in year after year and are predictable.

As for The Star (a sports/entertainment hub) will generate broader economic impact — more jobs, more tourism, and more spillover spending — but the direct annual tax revenue number per year isn’t always as public or as concentrated.

Which one is better?  Cities live and die by predictable, repeatable revenue which is sales tax that shows up every month because retail sales happen 365 days a year.  When revenue and foot traffic are based on a schedule or a brand’s performance it gets much dicer.  That is where Grandscape / NFM wins!

Fact is, if I’m the city treasurer, I want Grandscape.  If I’m the mayor cutting ribbons in a tailored suit, I want The Star.  But if you are responsible for not raising taxes when the economy hiccups then you better take the furniture store. Every. Single. Time.

Final Curtain – Get out and VOTE!

In the end, Ann Anderson’s own words are what make this so hard to square. She says she wants negative politics out of Frisco. She says voters shouldn’t be boxed in by Republican or Democrat labels. Yet she turns around and sends a hit-style mailer packed with selective framing, questionable quotes, and political drive-bys that do exactly what she claims to oppose. She says public safety comes first, while simultaneously attacking a public safety leader trusted and endorsed by those who put their lives on the line—behavior that feels eerily familiar to a council that happily accepted firefighter endorsements, then turned its back on them once the votes were counted. That’s not reform politics; that’s the same old Frisco playbook with a new cover page.

The bigger question many residents keep asking out loud now: why does this city’s leadership—and its inner kool kids club—seem to hate one man so much that they’ve tried repeatedly to destroy his reputation?  Where was the moral outrage over the mayor’s keg party for teens?  Where was the pearl-clutching when a council member embarrassed the city at a public pool in an illicit affair, or when signs saying “Get Naked” were laughed off like locker-room humor? Where was the fury when forged documents led to a settlement package fit for royalty? Somehow, silence. Yet for one man, the knives never stop. And maybe that’s why some of us see leadership not in who lands the cleanest punch, but in who takes the hits, stands firm, dusts off the scuff marks, and keeps showing up for the right reason—the residents. If Frisco voters truly want less negativity and more integrity, it may be time to stop listening to slogans and start watching actions.

Early voting has begun and Frisco Chronicles is voting for change in Mark Piland!  We are done with the Frisco Playbook.

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.

Sassy Safranek’s Confidential Little Secret

In a city that prides itself on transparency, Frisco sure has a funny way of showing it. The departure of city employees should be a straightforward matter.  But nothing says, “honest government at work” quite like a settlement agreement wrapped in an NDA and buried beneath layers of off-limits files that are shadow labeled “confidential” and will only magically appear if someone knows exactly what to ask for. 

It’s almost poetic, really. City Hall bangs the drum of accountability every election season, even though they know the city turns around and stashes public records like they’re safeguarding state secrets.  One might expect this sort of maneuvering from Washington, where the filing system seems to be a combination of smoke, mirrors, and selective memory—but from Frisco?  The city that can’t even agree on a dog shelter without a special called meeting.

It is amazing what buried treasures you will find when reading through these settlement agreements the city has with ex-employees.  It is also interesting to see who is getting paid and how much!  For example, Elise Back, who worked for the Frisco Economic Development Corporation, agreed to accept a gross payment of $125,000 and Frank Morehouse accepted $112,500.  What and why are we paying this kind of money in secret NDA’s?

After months of whispers about “HR “mishaps,” and a public records chase that felt more like spelunking through a city-funded labyrinth, we now have a Settlement Agreement for the newly minted EX HR Director, Lauren “Sassy” Safranek.  Let me tell you finding this and getting our hands on this was tough and the city thought they had sealed it tighter than a Prohibition-era wine cellar.  And just when we thought we’d finally uncork the truth, out pop second files, “confidential” folders, and documents shuffled around like a crooked card dealer at a back-alley poker table.   But the saga of Lauren “Sassy” Safrenak takes the cake, the bakery, and the delivery truck.

Frisco’s leadership keeps insisting to the public this is all perfectly normal, nothing to see here, folks, but is it normal?  Is this just a standard, everyday NDA?  We decided to peal it back and unwrap the taxpayer-funded mystery treasure chest (I mean document).   Frisco, where transparency is optional, NDAs are fashionable, and the truth is apparently stored somewhere in File Cabinet B—the one nobody is allowed to open.

BACKSTORY

Lauren Safranek has had reputation in the city for years.  Management loved her!  Employees had great disdain for her!  Back in June 2023 I questioned why Lauren Safranek wanted to change the Nepotism Policy and revise the Employee Code of Conduct policy that had been in place since 2006.  We wrote about it in our blog All in The Family.  Then we wrote about the Workers Comp Policy Changes in our blog Sassy Safranek and the mean-spirited memo written by our Professional HR Director Sassy Safranek.  In December 2023 we did our 12 Days of Malfeasance blogs.  Day 3 was about the HR MALFEASANCE which was about good ole Lauren Safranek forging the signature of then Fire Chief Mark Piland to a document that would change the pay scale for an entire department.  Did she really think this would not raise any eyebrows and her forgery would be unearthed?  Yep, she really thought she was that smart!   

When she realized, she had gotten caught she kicked into overdrive to find a fake reason to investigate then Fire Chief Mark Piland and his staff.  We presented all the receipts in our Day 12: Tangled Web of Lies blog! 

If you forgot about all this drama you should go back and read it because this is the heart of why the city, the mayor and the cabal are trying to destroy one man who has a 40+ exemplary career years, plus positive job reviews in the city of Frisco year after year until Lauren uncovered some “malfeasance” in order to cover her own forgery of legal HR documents

SASSY SAFRANEKS LITTLE CONFIDENTIAL SECRET WRAPPED UP IN AN NDA

Remember transparency is supposed to be the heart of good government here in Frisco.  Truthfully it is more of a suggestion, something politically ignored much like turn signals on the Tollway side roads.  The Lauren Safranek NDA reads like a political thriller written by a board attorney on a Friday afternoon.  It has pages of legal yapping designed to make sure the public learns absolutely nothing about why the City’s top HR official suddenly needed to be paid nearly a year’s salary just to walk out the door quietly.

Is this a general release?  No, it is so sweeping it could double as a Tornado Warning.  Safranek isn’t just leaving her job, she’s legally erasing every single gripe, claim, concern, complaint, or whisper she ever uttered about the City.
Ethics Complaints filed against her? Gone.  Any HR violations she witnessed? Gone.
Any retaliation she alleged? Gone.  Potential whistleblower issues? Vaporized.

The Payout: A Golden Parachute Stuffed with Taxpayer Cash

40 weeks of salary.
40 weeks of COBRA medical, dental, vision coverage.
A lump-sum payout for her accrued leave that has not been used.
Payment by city for $1,716.65 for a conference she attended.
Payment by city for employees attorneys fee’s in the amount of $7,600.

City will compensate Safranek for time spent assisting with the defense in pending lawsuits at a rate of $100.00 per hour, such payment to be made in 30 days of submission. 

ASK YOURSELF: An at-will HR director being handed nearly a year’s pay to quietly resign is not “normal.”  It’s not even “Frisco normal,” and this city has normalized some Olympic-level gymnastics around accountability.

The Most Alarming Part: The Secret Second File

Buried deep inside the NDA is the crown jewel of municipal opacity: The City agrees to take all negative documents—complaints, investigations, findings, her ethics complaint, and more—and remove them from her public personnel file and place them in a separate, hidden, confidential file.

Transparency Hidden In – A literal second file. 

According to the NDA  “these documents will be agreed upon by Safranek and will include, at a minimum, the following: Shank’s complaint, Coulthurst’s complaint, investigation findings, employee’s ethics complaints,” the letter from the Deputy City Manager dated June 16, 2025 and this agreement.

It also notes that basically the second file the public will not see, that is kept “to the extent permitted by law,” which is lawyer-speak for “we’ll hide it unless someone catches us!”  WE CAUGHT YOU!

This is the Frisco leadership and government equivalent of cleaning your house by shoving everything into the garage and padlocking the door.  Frisco taxpayers deserve better than a filing system borrowed from Watergate.

The City Also Requires Her to Help Defend Them in Lawsuits

Safranek must cooperate in two ongoing lawsuits involving Cameron Kraemer and Jesse Zito, paid at $100/hour — and she gets to keep her notes connected to those cases.

A city that insists it did nothing wrong is apparently very eager to keep its former HR Director close at hand… just not on staff, not in the building, and not talking.

A “Neutral Reference” to Keep the Story Contained

If a future employer calls?  HR will give a bland, robotic response confirming her dates of employment.  Nothing more. Nothing less. Nothing truthful.

Because when you’ve spent thousands of taxpayer dollars hiding the mess, the last thing you want is someone in HR accidentally telling the truth.

City Admits Nothing, Explains Nothing, Accepts Nothing

As expected, the NDA contains the standard “we did nothing wrong” boilerplate.
The City denies all wrongdoing, says they’re settling merely to avoid “cost” and “distraction.”  Right — because nothing says “totally innocent” like hiding negative documents in a secret secondary file and giving your fired HR director 40 weeks of hush money.

Council Approval: Your Elected Officials Signed Off

Don’t miss this detail: The NDA was contingent on City Council approval at a public meeting which happened on July 1, 2025. This was the meeting that Burt Thakur and Jared Elad were installed as new council members. How much did they know about this agreement is to be seen.  We are curious how much knowledge Jeff Cheney, John Keating (mayoral candidate), Brian Livingston, Angelia Pelham, and Laura Rummel had. 

Fact remains, every elected official who voted “yes” signed off on lying to the public, a year’s salary and cobra benefits, withholding information from the public in a secret file, hiding negative or truthful reviews to a future employer and more.   Keating made the motion to approve, and it was seconded by Angelia Pelham. 

Crazy part is if you go to that agenda on the city website and click on Item 24 it has not documents attached to it.  Why because the city PLAYED HIDE AND HOPEFULLY, THEY WON’T SEEK!

The Bottom Line

You could hide a small nation’s war crimes under a release this wide. The Safranek NDA isn’t a routine HR separation.  It’s not a miscommunication.  It’s not an exit interview gone wrong. It is a coordinated legal shutdown, executed at the highest levels, designed to hide information from the public and neutralize the City’s own HR Director.

The City didn’t just settle a dispute. It purchased silence. It buried documents. It built a second file. It erased complaints. It sealed the story.

And they used your tax dollars to do it.

Frisco deserves transparency — not confidentiality closets, political NDAs, and under-the-table golden parachutes.

More to come.

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 Mayor’s Meetings

The last few Frisco City Council meetings have been electrifying, to say the least. Truth be told – we are LOVING IT! Between the Mayor staking claim over “his” meetings and the resulting drama on the dais, you could almost sell tickets. But credit where it’s due — it’s been exciting to finally see genuine conversation on the dais happening at City Hall for the first time in years.

The October 21st Showdown

At the October 21 meeting, following the presentation and citizen input on the Animal Holding Facility, Councilmember Burt Thakur began speaking and moved to table the item — citing unanswered questions and wanting to hold a community feedback session. Before he could even finish, Mayor Cheney cut him off, declaring he wasn’t “taking motions yet.” He wanted to “hear from others first.”

Thakur, undeterred, looked to the City Attorney and again tried to make his motion. That’s when the Mayor doubled down:

“I am not taking motions; I am taking comments. I run these meetings like you have been told.”

Cheney then cleared his throat and awkwardly corrected himself, saying “as we have discussed.” But the tone was set — and the message was clear. When it comes to running the show, Mayor Cheney leads with a heavy hand (and perhaps a lead foot). Moments later came the headline-worthy declaration:

THIS IS MY MEETING!

Council Questions the Rules — and the Silence is Deafening

At the end of the meeting, Councilmember Brian Livingston asked a simple, reasonable question: What form of governance or parliamentary procedure does the city follow when disputes arise?

The City Attorney’s answer?

“We don’t have one.”

The Mayor quickly followed up, asserting that it’s all governed “by the city charter.”

Livingston pressed the point — noting that with council turnover and growing diversity of thought, it might be wise to establish some formal procedures. Mayor Cheney stood firm:

“There is language in the charter.”

Frisco Chronicles Fact-Checks the Charter

So, we did what any responsible chronicler would do — we went straight to the City Charter.

Section 3.05 — The Mayor:
It reads, “The Mayor shall preside at meetings of the City Council and shall be recognized as head of the City government for all ceremonial purposes.” It continues: the Mayor may participate in discussion and may vote only in case of a tie or when required by law. Nowhere does it state the Mayor dictates meeting procedures.

Here’s the kicker: while Section 3.05 gives the Mayor the gavel, it doesn’t say what procedural rules should be followed — not Robert’s Rules, not anything. So, when the City Attorney said there’s “no procedural method of record,” that was spot on.

Translation: It’s Not Your Meeting, Mr. Mayor

Yes, the Mayor presides — but without a formally adopted set of rules, technically, any councilmember can make a motion at any time. Mayor Cheney clearly stated the rules are in the city charter and he is wrong! There is no procedural method of record in the city charter that defines how or who rules on them and who is responsible for enforcing them. It maybe the ceremonial Frisco Way but there is nothing that gives the Mayor the right to call it or control it as “HIS MEETING!”

The Mayor can preside over the agenda but without clarity of what procedural rules you oversee technically a motion can be made by any council member without hearing from all council members.  In that case you need to vote to hold the motion to the end of the discussion or vote on it, then move on with more discussion.  At least that is how Robert Rules would be applied but again they are not operating by that either.  The language in our city charter is standard in Texas city charters. It’s about representation — not authority

In other words: you don’t get to run the council like your own HOA meeting.

Ceremonial Head ≠ Commander-in-Chief

The Charter calls the Mayor the “Ceremonial Head.” Translation: you cut ribbons, sign proclamations, and smile for photos. That role does not include controlling council debate or deciding who speaks when. It’s representation, not authority.

Who Really Holds the Power?

Section 3.07 — Powers of the City Council states:

“All powers of the city and the determination of all matters of policy shall be vested in the city council.”

“Determination of all matters of policy” means the council as a collective — not the Mayor alone — directs city policy. The Mayor may lead discussions and participate in discussions but has no more policymaking power than any other member, except to break a tie. Power in Frisco, by design, comes from majority decisions, not a single voice.

The power is collective, not individual!

The Missing Rules of Procedure

Section 3.13 — Rules of Procedure says:

“The City Council shall determine its own rules of order and business.”

That’s it. No specific rulebook, no reference to Robert’s Rules of Order. The council — not the Mayor — is supposed to establish those rules together. Until they do, it’s essentially the Wild West of parliamentary procedure in Frisco.

If a dispute arises, there’s no formal method of resolution — meaning “This is MY meeting!” has no legal backing. The Mayor’s authority begins and ends with presiding, not dictating. It was the Mayor who said the rules are in city charter – guess he has to live with there are no rules, which means he has no collective power without those he sits next to.


Final Word

News Flash Mayor Cheney: It is NOT your meeting! The City Charter does not define the procedural rules for conflict resolution which leaves the rules of order undefined. The result is it invites confusion — and, in this case, a power struggle. If Cheney can be questioned or challenged at every corner because as the City Attorney said, “there are not any procedural governance rules.” If Frisco wants to avoid more “electrifying” meetings that play out like reality TV, the council should adopt formal procedures once and for all.

Because until then, Mayor Cheney may claim “It’s my meeting” — but by Charter definition, it’s our city’s meeting and THE ENTIRE COUNCIL RUNS IT!!!

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.

Politics in Frisco ISD: Where’s the Line for District Administrators?

Let’s talk about something we’ve all seen before: a teacher or administrator who takes to Facebook after hours and lets it fly. Maybe it’s a post that says, “Make Fascism Wrong Again”, “No Kings”, or “This is Trump’s Shutdown.”

Now, on one hand, they’re private citizens. They have First Amendment rights, just like you and me. They can say what they want — on their own time, on their own page. That’s the beauty of America.

But here’s where it gets tricky: what happens when that same Facebook page clearly identifies them as a Frisco ISD employee? Is it still considered a personal opinion floating in the ether?   Or is it a reflection — fair or not — on the institution that educates our kids.

Perception vs. Policy

Frisco ISD, like most school districts, holds its staff to a standard of neutrality when representing the district.  They adopted a resolution supporting a culture of voting and seeks to encourage maximum participation by employees and eligible students in the election process. 

Texas law (and now Senate Bill 875) goes a step further — it forbids the use of any district resources to push a political agenda.  That’s the law.  But there’s a gray area that no statute fully covers which is perception.

If an administrator is loudly proclaiming that one side of the political spectrum is to blame for society’s ills, parents can’t help but wonder — does that belief stop at the classroom door?  Do political views seep into decisions about what gets taught, what gets emphasized, or how certain students are treated?

Associate Deputy Superintendent

What if we told you the Facebook posts in question belong to Wes Cunningham whose bio on the Frisco ISD website reads, he is responsible for teaching & learning, student services and special education.  Would you care then?  What if they co-facilitate the District Advisory Council?  What if they are responsible for supporting the goals of the district? 

Cunningham’s posts were after hours and they did not use school resources, however, let’s talk about his INFLUENCE.  He has influence over employees and what if he learns an employee disagrees with him, could he retaliate?  He has INFLUENCE over curriculum?   Next let’s look at the district letter sent out after the assassination of Charlie Kirk to be careful about posting politically driven content if their profile states they are an employee of Frisco ISD?   Cunninghams profile clearly states he is a Frisco ISD employee.

Apolitical vs Declaration of Ideology

We’d like to believe educators can compartmentalize. But let’s be honest — when someone posts, “No kings!” or “Make fascism wrong again,” it’s not exactly an apolitical message. It’s a declaration of ideology. And while it might resonate with some, it raises eyebrows for others — especially in a community that values diversity of thought and expects schools to remain politically neutral zones.

Free Speech Comes with Responsibility.  Nobody’s saying teachers and administrators should be silent. But there’s a difference between expressing values and declaring political allegiance. There’s a difference between advocating kindness or equality and pointing fingers at politicians.

When you’re in a public position — especially one shaping young minds — your words carry extra weight. You represent something bigger than yourself. And when you list your job in your bio, your personal soapbox starts to look like a district platform.

The Real Question

Here’s the question every Frisco parent should ask: If an educator’s political beliefs are loud enough to echo through Facebook, are we confident they leave those beliefs outside the classroom door?  Because schools should be where kids learn to think, not what to think.

If we want to maintain trust between parents, teachers, and the district, transparency and restraint both matter. We expect educators to teach, not preach. And we expect administrators to lead, not lean — politically, that is.

Final Bell

Frisco ISD has worked hard to build a reputation for excellence. That reputation deserves protection — from partisanship, from bias, and yes, from the temptation to score points online.

Free speech is a right, but professionalism is a choice. And when you’re shaping young minds, the line between the two isn’t just legal — it’s ethical.

So, next time you scroll past a public post from a Frisco ISD employee that reads like a campaign bumper sticker, ask yourself: Does this sound like someone who keeps politics out of the classroom or administration office?  Because that’s a question worth asking — before it becomes a problem worth solving.

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.