Frisco Delays PIR Requests

by | Apr 21, 2023 | City Council, Frisco City Secretary, HR Department, Politics, Public Information Requests

We received an email today from a resident who said they are upset that their PIRs are being delayed. The resident asked for “All electronic communications via email for Project P117/ Universal from 1/1/22 – 2/27/23 amongst all city council members , Wes Pearson, Maria Row, Ben Brezina, Jason Ford.” We have laid out the timeline sent to us by the resident below and we are wondering why the city is trying to delay this information from being released until after “THE ELECTION”
Feb 27, 2023: Resident files PIR request

March 14, 2023: Resident receives response that the documents will cost $72.36 (for labor)

Resident Makes Payment

March 20, 2023: Resident sends message asking when they can expect files?

March 23, 2023: Resident notices status change reads “sent to attorney” sends message asking when should they expect their documents? Then they ask why has it been sent to attorney?

March 29, 2023: Resident receives a response asking for them to clarify what information they are seeking from the city.

April 2, 2023: Resident replies asking them to confirm they are asking for clarification of the request after they charged the resident $72.36 for files. They state what they are asking for is very clear all files related to the Universal Project (code name P117 or US). They state all emails between council members, city management, and Frisco EDC, the developers Fehmi and Universal management. Travel Expenses for the 10 people who went to Universal Florida. The resident states how did you determine a price for labor if you did not know what I was asking for and why are you delaying the records release?

April 5, 2023: Resident writes to city again asking where are the files they have requested and paid for? They note they have been waiting patiently since Feb 27, 2023. The resident notes the games the city are playing by charging them, then asking for clarification, then sending to city attorney. The resident then asks how they can have a city council meeting, vote to releases records for a PIR request regarding a MAYORAL CANDIDATE and an article can be in the paper the next morning but they can’t seem to respond to others requests regarding Universal. The resident asks for a response in 24 hours.

April 18, 2023: Resident “FINALLY” receives an email that that they have released a few documents but the rest has been sent to the Attorney General in Austin, Texas due to “confidentiality” issues. The resident said he received travel invoices, 6 redacted emails and a Choose Frisco presentation. Is the city trying to say there are no emails regarding this project?

April 21, 2023: Resident calls AGO and asks the turn around time on approval or denial to the city’s request and how they can file a objection. They are told by the state representative it can take “UP TO 45 DAYS” for a response and gave the resident the address to mail a letter of objection.

QUESTION: HOW CAN THE CITY RELEASE HR DOCUMENTS ON A RETIRED EMPLOYEE AND A DMN REPORTER CAN HAVE AN ARTICLE IN THE NEXT MORNING PAPER WITH A FULL ARTICLE BUT THEY CAN NOT RELEASE DOCUMENTS REGARDING UNIVERSAL?

WHAT IS CONFIDENTIAL? WHAT IS THE CITY WITHHOLDING?

TO SUM IT UP – IT IS CLEAR THE CITY IS PLAYING GAMES AND DELAYING THESE DOCUMENTS UNTIL AFTER THE ELECTION AND WE WANT TO KNOW WHY? WHAT ARE THEY HIDING?

If you have filed PIR’s are getting the run around from the city we want to hear from you! Email us via our contact us page.

Analyzing an Ethics Complaint

by | Feb 14, 2023 | City Council, Ethics Complaints, Frisco City Secretary, Home Rule & City Charter, HR Department, Politics

In 2021 several Ethics Complaints were filed by residents involving those who serve on the city council.  One of those complaints was filed by Frisco resident Ms. Rouse and was against Mayor Jeff Cheney.  It alleged that the mayor used his city email for political campaign purposes to support then-candidate Angelia Pelham.  It pointed to a Facebook post by the Mayor on May 25, 2021, where he states he asked each senior member of city staff, “In the runoff race which Place 3 candidates have asked to meet with you?”   He then proceeded to publicly publish the responses in a Pro Angelina endorsement on his official Mayor Jeff Cheney Facebook page.

Review of Mayor Jeff Cheney’s Sworn Response:

Mayor Cheney states in his sworn response that the complaint does not comply with the requirements for filing a complaint and that Ms. Rouse did not provide a statement of facts but instead offered her statement of opinions, assumptions, and allegations, and none were not supported by facts or evidence.   FACT: First Exhibit A,  Ms. Rouse pointed directly to the mayor’s post on May 25, 2021, which that acknowledges on May 24th he used electronic media and sent a message to every senior staff member and then published their names and answers to his question. 

Second, he proceeds to state that none of the responses were a result of his city email (he texted them) so that part was factually false.   TRUE: He texted senior staff and her reference in the complaint was he used city email.   OPINION: One could argue the mayor tried to mislead the public in his social media post when he says he sent it via electronic communication because most would assume that he alluding to email.  

On his social media post, he notes that any city staff response is part of the official city record and subject to Public Information Requests.  In his written sworn response, he noted that he was not asking any of the senior staff to support a candidate.   TRUE: His social media post is correct in that Senate Bill 933 & 944 states work-related text messages sent by public officials (the mayor to senior staff) are a matter of public record even if sent from their own personal device or outside work hours.   OPINION: He said he was not asking them to support a candidate, but he did not explain why he was asking the question.  So the senior staff had no idea if it was a personal question if he was asking for city purposes, and/or asking on behalf of his position as Mayor.  The mayor did not tell them ahead of time he was going to use them in a social media post where he intended to support a candidate.  Had he been upfront with city staff about his intentions they may not have chosen to respond to his text. 

Third, he states in his response that the complaint on its face does not state a violation of the ethics laws.   FACT: Ms. Rouse in the third paragraph of her complaint stated the section and specific portion of the City Ethics Code she believed the Mayor had violated (Sections 6, 7, 8, and 9).  OPINION: Now we are common folk and no legal eagle but upon review, it is our opinion the Mayor most definitely violated Section 7 of the City Code of Ethics Section A (1) which talks about influencing subordinates and states a city official shall not directly or indirectly, induce or attempt to induce any subordinate of the Official to participate in an election campaign or to engage in any political activity related to a candidate or issue.  Also, it is our opinion he violated Section 8 of the city code of ethics which states a city official shall now knowingly assist or induce or attempt to assist or induce another city official to violate any provision of the Code of Ethics. 

In the mayor’s sworn response to the complaint, he said citizens were asking him if city staff had met with any of the candidates and argued they had the right to know.  OPINION: He is partially correct, and he should have told each resident they can file a Public Information Request (PIR) requesting that information from city staff, city management, and the city council.  However, say 5, 10, or even 100 citizens asked that question it does not mean the mayor should use that in a campaign support message for a candidate.  He did not post these responses in an FYI public information message.  He published these responses in a political endorsement for Angelia Pelham on his OFFICIAL MAYOR JEFF CHENEY Facebook page where he tagged the OFFICIAL Facebook page for Angelia Pelham for Frisco and in the last sentence he says make your voice heard, vote Angelia. 

Going back and watching the city video for this meeting, Cheney read the agenda item and then made a few statements.  Cheney started by saying the complaints should have facts, not allegations, and he denied any wrongdoing.  He also stated it does not allege facts sufficient to constitute a violation of the ethics policy.  Then he recused himself and Bill Woodard, Mayor Pro Tem took over.  They received advice from the city attorney, opened the public hearing for citizens’ comments, then some of the council gave feedback.  One member of the council noted that any complaint should have contained a sworn affidavit and that she needed to have a lawyer help her.  Then Bill Woodard (Mayor Pro Tem) said “I know every member up here has spent a significant amount of time reading these complaints over the weekend, discussing them with the city attorney, then discussing them tonight in executive session again with the city attorney”  – wait, what?  Bill Woodard admitted to discussing the complaints before the City Attorney would have met with them at the City Council in executive session at its next regular meeting to present a written report describing in detail the nature of the complaint, and the attorney’s assessment of whether the facts as alleged constitute a violation of the ethics laws.”   So that leaves us asking, who discussed it over the weekend?   How can we be sure there were no back-door deals made for a vote?  The issue is perception and transparency.  If the city does not follow its own process written in its Code of Ethics then how can we trust the process?   Why does a citizen with a true concern need a lawyer to file an ethics complaint, last I checked we the citizens voted you in and you work for us!  Now we have no voice without an attorney.

The council agreed in a 5 – 0 vote to dismiss the complaint.  Now let’s look at the shady shit that makes the Ethics policy bogus!

City of Frisco’s Ethics Policy

by | Feb 8, 2023 | City Council, Home Rule & City Charter, HR Department, Mayor Jeff Cheney, Politics

As Frisco has grown so have residents’ concerns and questions about future developments, density, and the lack of transparency between the city, its leaders, and residents.  In recent years residents have called for transparency and filed ethics complaints against members of the city council.  Before we get into the complaints and why the system is rigged, you first need to understand the process. 

The process for filing a complaint under Ordinance number 09-04-25 with the city is for any person who believes that there has been a violation of the ethics laws to file a sworn complaint with the City Secretary.  The complaint must identify the person or persons who allegedly committed the violation, provide a statement of the facts on which the complaint was based, identify the rule of rules allegedly violated, and be sworn to in the form of an affidavit. 

As for confidentiality, the ordinance also states that no city official shall reveal information relating to the filing or processing of a complaint except as required for the performance of Official duties.  All papers relating to a pending complaint are to be confidential.

After filing a copy of the complaint, the notification process begins.  A copy of the complaint shall be promptly forwarded by the City Secretary to the City Attorney and the person charged with the complaint.  The person charged with the complaint shall receive a copy of the ethics rules and be informed that within fourteen days of receipt of the complaint, they may file a sworn response with the City Secretary.   

A copy of any response by the person charged in the complaint will be provided by the City Secretary to the complainant, who may within seven days reply to the sworn response with sworn writing filed with the City Secretary and a copy of the response will be provided to the person charged in the complaint.  Then the person charged with the complaint may request a hearing. 

The ordinance states “at any time assistance is required, the City Secretary shall provide information to the persons who inquire about the process for filing a complaint.”  

Once the complaint has gone through the process it will be reviewed by the City Attorney.  Within seven business days after the attorney receives the complaint the City Attorney shall make an initial assessment of the complaint.  The City Attorney is to assume that all facts alleged are true and determine if the facts constitute a violation of the ethics law.  After that is completed the City Attorney meets with the City Council in executive session at its next regular meeting to present a written report describing in detail the nature of the complaint, and the attorney’s assessment of whether the facts as alleged constitute a violation of the ethics laws.   Then in an open session of the council meeting, a majority of the council members not implicated in the complaint may dismiss the complaint based on certain grounds,  determine that the complaint on its face does not state a violation of the ethics laws, or refer it to an investigation. 

Sounds easy, right?  Sounds fair, reputable, and honest right?  If you ask Ms. Rouse she might disagree with you!   Next, we will dig into the Shady Shit of one of the complaints.