In 1952, one of the most popular shows on tv was I Love Lucy and one of the best episodes was Vitameatavegamin.   Lucy meets with the director of the commercial and he explains that Vitameatavegamin is a health tonic and gives her the lines to learn.  What none of them knew was the health tonic was 23% alcohol.  During the first practice set, Lucy reads her lines and then takes a spoon full of the health tonic and begins to make funny faces because it tasted so bad.  Take after take Lucy got a little more drunk, and by the time it was over Ricky had to take her off the stage.  The episode is a perfect example of truth in advertising. 

Mirror, Mirror, on the wall, it’s time to spill the secrets once and for all!  If you live in Frisco then you hear city leaders reflecting on how Money Magazine voted Frisco the #1 Best Place to Live in America.  The truth is Frisco is a great city to live in, but it has not been ranked #1 since 2018 which is 5 years ago.  In fact,  in the  2021/22  Money Magazine, The City of Frisco was ranked #19 for the Best Places to Live.   That means in 5 years we fell 18 spots so why do they continue to talk about a ranking from 2018?  Shouldn’t we be asking ourselves; how did we drop 18 spots?  Is this truthful advertising? 

The City of Frisco puts together a series of video messages called Progress In Motion to talk about the change and growth happening in our town.  The series is truly one the city’s greatest forms of advertising.  These videos are so professional, and they cover an array of different topics. Wes Pierson recently stated in a July 2023 article in Frisco Enterprise that there is a powerful message behind the idea of “Progress In Motion.”  For Frisco’s city manager, the city tagline inspires a focus on the concept of “growth” rather than “change.  Sometimes when people talk about change, there can be a negative connotation related to change, but if you talk about progress, it really emphasizes, in my opinion, a focus on growth,” he said.

Even our own Mayor puts out a series of videos on his Cheney for Frisco Mayor YouTube page.  When we saw his campaign video this year announcing his re-election we were impressed because it was truly a professional video with amazing footage.  Then my wife said, “I could swear I have seen this footage before” and I replied, yeah probably in another video he has done running for office.   She was adamant that was not it and night after night as we sat watching tv she played on her iPad until I heard,  “See, I told you I have seen this footage before,” and with a big grin on her face, she played me one of the city’s Progress in Motion videos.  Then she played a portion of Cheney’s campaign video and sure as shady shit it was a match.  We decided to do a little research to see how much of his election video matched up with the Progress in Motion videos put out by the city.  We decided to do a little research to see how much of his election video matched up to the Progress in Motion videos put out by the city.

In Cheney’s election video at the 24 second mark you see the drone footage coming into the Cowboy Star which is from the NFLs HBO’s Hard Knocks: The Dallas Cowboys at the 07-second mark.  Did he get approval from HBO, NFL and Jerry Jones to use that footage?  Would any of them give him authorization to use that for a political campaign ad?  Should we consider this and endorsement?

At the 25 second mark you see Hall Park and the Future Kaleidoscope Park which matches up to several shots in the Progress In Motion – Hall Park New Development.

At the 48 second mark he uses footage from a Fox4 newscast of the UNT Campus announcement followed by footage at the 52 second mark that is an exact match to the Progress In Motion – Collin College I.T. Ribbon Cutting. 

Now compare Cheney’s election video to the  Progress in Motion – Public Safety Training Center video.  On Cheney’s election video at the 1:17 mark you see footage of the fireman from the back in a training which is an exact match to the PIM at the 1:39 video mark.  Then at the 1:18 mark on Cheney’s election video you see footage of a burning car which matches the 1:09 video mark in the PIM video.  Then at the 1:22 mark on the election video you see a Frisco Police Car which matches the footage at the 1:22 video mark in the PIM.  Lastly, at the 1:24 mark on Cheney’s election video you see footage of the FD training center which matches the 1:28 video mark on the PIM video.

On Cheney’s election video at the 1:43 mark he talks about The Rail District and the future of outdoor entertainment.  Interestingly the renderings were produced by Kimley Horn and are on the city’s site and labeled with the Frisco logo.  The renderings are show in an article on Frisco Enterprise and they note the renderings which match Cheneys election video were the courtesy of The City of Frisco.

On Cheney’s election video at the 2:16 mark he shows the ground-breaking of the Dr. Pepper Keurig office complex with Jerry Jones which is an exact match to the start of the city’s PIM – Keurig Dr Pepper Groundbreaking video.

On Cheney’s election video at the 2:23 mark he shows the ribbon cutting of Texas Health which is an exact match to the PIM – Texas Health Hospital Frisco video.

Cheney was even bold enough to use ESPN or PGA footage of Tiger Woods in his election video at the 2:25 mark.  We found a few city videos and it appears as if the PGA may have given the city some footage to use for advertising videos.  The question is did they give Cheney permission to use footage in a political campaign video?   Did he have permission to use the professional golfer and their likeness in his video?  Did he have permission from ESPN or the PGA to use this footage in a political campaign video?  Do ESPN or the PGA endorse Mayor Cheney?  Is Tigers appearance an endorsement?  At the 2:30 mark he uses Universal’s Theme Park rendering given to the city for press releases. So, did he have NBC Universal’s permission to use their rendering in a political campaign video?  Does that mean NBC Universal endorsed the mayor?   Lastly at the 2:50 mark in his election video he shows aerial views of the new PGA which look very similar to the PIM PGA videos.

You are probably wondering, why is this important?  Well, in 2021 a local resident filed an ethics complaint against the mayor for using his city email to solicit feedback from department heads which he later used in a personal Facebook post to endorse and support Angelia Pelham for council.  In the complaint she cited it was a violation per the Code of Conduct Section 7.   According to Section 7: Public Property and Resources it states a city official shall not use, request, or permit the use of city facilities, personnel, equipment and supplies for private purposes (including political purposes).  Now his fellow council members voted against moving forward with the ethics complaint in 2001 but in our own opinion it was clear as day he violated it then.  SO, DID HE VIOLATE THE CODE OF CONDUCT WITH HIS ELECTION VIDEO?

We are estimating about 75% of the election video is made from city footage.  Are political candidates allowed to use city footage paid for by taxpayers?  Does the city not have any copyright rules?  Is it fair for anyone to use city footage?  If so, then I could make a video and use some of the footage that includes Cheney speaking?  Can a realtor in Frisco make videos using city footage to advertise their business?  What about small businesses, can they use city footage to make social media commercials for their business?  Can a local realtor use local renderings from P&Z documents to advertise their business and talk about new things coming to Frisco?   Were all the candidates aware they could use city footage to make political campaign videos?  If they were allowed to use the video footage was it disclosed to them or was that something the Mayor knew as an “inside tip” that he used for his advantage.  A video of this nature could and probably does cost thousands of dollars if he had to film all this footage himself.  Filming is not cheap or inexpensive.  So, did the mayor pay the city for the use of the footage?  Is this another example of Jeff Cheney taking Mayoral Privilege for his personal use and benefit?   

We are thinking that someone needs to look in the mirror and decide if he is the FAIRest of them all.