On Tuesday, February 17, 2026, something curious happened at Frisco City Hall. According to a tipster who attended the meeting, while waiting in the reception area they observed Brian Livingston and Ann Anderson step off the elevator after closed session together and walk into Council Chambers prior to the meeting. Which raises a very simple question:
Did Ann Anderson attend the Executive Session?
And if she did — was that appropriate under Texas law? Let’s walk through it calmly. Facts first. Opinions later.
The Legal Framework: Texas Open Meetings Act (TOMA)
In Texas, closed meetings are governed by the Texas Open Meetings Act otherwise known as TOMA.
Executive sessions are permitted only for specific reasons — legal advice, personnel matters, real estate negotiations, and similar narrow categories. Attorney consultations fall under § 551.071.
Who May Attend Executive Session?
Sworn-in members of the governing body
The city attorney
Staff whose presence is necessary
Individuals whose participation is necessary to the subject being discussed
Notice a key word there: necessary.
Was Ann Anderson a Member of the Council?
That is the critical question.
The election was canvassed at a special meeting on 2/10/26.
A recount request was filed and accepted.
The City delayed the swearing-in pending the recount.
Therefore, on February 17, she had not taken the oath of office.
Under Texas law, an elected official becomes a member of the governing body only after qualification for office — which includes taking the oath. Until that oath is administered, a person is generally considered a private citizen. The law does not automatically grant access to someone who is merely a “candidate” or “apparent winner.”
So, the question becomes: If she had not been sworn in, on what legal basis could she attend executive session?
The Frisco City Charter
The Frisco City Charteris the foundational legal document that creates the city’s government and spells out how it operates, what powers it has, how officials are elected, how meetings are run, and what limits exist on authority.
Section 5.05, “Taking of Office” states:
Each newly elected person shall be inducted into office at the first regular meeting following the official canvass.
At such meeting the oath shall be administered in accordance with the Charter.
Was the election finalized? No, because an official recount was filed and accepted by the city. In fact, Angelia Pelham had to come in and certify the request. A recount does not automatically invalidate the canvass — it just re-examines the totals. But if the city intentionally delayed the swearing-in pending the recount (which the city did), then she technically remains a private citizen until the swearing-in.
That distinction matters.
The “Unauthorized Person” Question
The Candidate’s Status: Until a candidate is officially declared the winner and sworn in, they are legally a member of the public. The Texas Attorney General has repeatedly opined that a governmental body may not admit “selected members of the public” to an executive session (Op. No. GA-0511).
Attorney-client privilege during executive session depends on confidentiality. If a non-member — meaning someone not yet sworn in — is present during a § 551.071 consultation, does that risk waiving privilege?
As established in the 2026 Open Meetings Act Handbook, the presence of an unauthorized third party (Ann Anderson) during a § 551.071 consultation destroys the confidentiality required for the attorney-client privilege. The Texas Attorney General Opinion GA-0511 makes clear that a governmental body may not admit “selected members of the public” to executive session.
If that candidate is in the room while the City Attorney gives advice on a lawsuit or a contract, it is possible that the entire discussion becomes discoverable. Opposing counsel in that lawsuit can depose the candidate and the council members about exactly what was said.
Waiver of Attorney-Client Privilege
This is the biggest “red flag” for a City Attorney. Supposedly, for the attorney-client privilege to remain intact, the communication must stay between the client (the city, as represented by the Council) and the lawyer.
• The Potential Risk: If an outside third party (the candidate) is present, the privilege is waived.
• The Potential Consequence: Opposing counsel in a lawsuit or a citizen filing a Public Information Act (PIA) request could argue that the entire discussion is now “discoverable” because it was shared with a third party.
Potential Penalties (The “Rule Violations”)
Criminal Liability: Under § 551.144, a member of a governmental body commits a Class B misdemeanor if they knowingly call, aid, or participate in a closed meeting that is not permitted by law. READ THAT AGAIN
The “Aiding and Assisting” Rule: The leading guidance on this comes from Texas Attorney General Opinion JC-0307. It clarifies that a person who is not a member of the governmental body can indeed be charged with a criminal violation of TOMA under the Texas Penal Code’s “Law of Parties.” The logic behind that is if a non-member (an unseated candidate) “acting with intent, aids or assists” a member who is knowingly violating the Act, they are just as criminally liable as the official. Does that mean Anderson commit a crime?
Civil Voiding: Any action taken or decided upon based on that illegal executive session could be declared void by a court (§ 551.141).
Frisco Charter Compliance: The Frisco City Charter requires the Council to follow state law. A violation of TOMA is, by extension, a violation of the city’s own governing rules.
Are there any exceptions? The only way a candidate could legally attend is if the Council determines their presence is necessary to the matter under discussion and their interests are not adverse to the city’s (AG Op. No. JC-0375). For example, if the candidate was a witness to a specific incident being discussed, they might be brought in to provide facts, but they should generally be excused once the legal deliberation begins. Observation: “Watching” to get a head start on the job does not count as “necessary” under Texas law.
The City Attorney Professional Responsibility & Risk
The State Bar Factor: Supposedly, if a City Attorney allows an unseated candidate into an executive session, they are effectively failing to protect the “privilege” of their actual client (the City). This could be a violation of the Texas Disciplinary Rules of Professional Conduct (specifically Rule 1.01 regarding competent representation and Rule 1.05 regarding confidentiality).
Reporting Criminal Violations (The District Attorney): Since knowingly participating in an illegal closed meeting is a Class B misdemeanor in Texas, the primary enforcement authority is the local District Attorney (DA). That means Frisco Residents should demand that the Collin County District Attorney look into this issue! Most Frisco City Council meetings take place at City Hall in Collin County. Write your Collin County District Attorney and demand they investigate and file a complaint for them to look at this. The more residents they hear from the better.
We were curious, what would the Texas Attorney General think about all this. Well, from what we could find, the OAG has been very consistent: Until a candidate is sworn in, they are legally a member of the public. The OAG has built a “three-pillar” framework that makes admitting an unsworn candidate to an executive session, especially in a contested race—a high-stakes legal gamble for the City Council.
1. The “No Selected Public” Rule (GA-0511): One of the most cited opinions on this is GA-0511 (2007). It poses the question: Can a governmental body let some members of the public in while keeping others out?
The Verdict: No. The OAG concluded that a governmental body may not admit “selected members of the public” to a meeting closed under the Texas Open Meetings Act (TOMA).
The Application: Since an unsworn candidate has no official status, admitting them is effectively admitting a “selected member of the public.” This violates the core intent of the Act.
2. The “Necessity and Adverse Interest” Test (JC-0375): Opinion JC-0375 (2001) sets the bar for when a non-member can be in the room. For a third party to attend, two conditions must be met:
1. Their presence must be necessary in relation to the matter under discussion (e.g., they have specific facts).
2. Their interests must not be adverse to the governmental body.
The Conflict: In a contested race, an unsworn candidate almost certainly fails the “adverse interest” test. If the legal advice involves election procedures, ballot disputes, or city liabilities, that candidate has a personal interest that is distinct from (and potentially adverse to) the City’s official interests.
3. The Criminal Liability Hook (JC-0307): Opinion JC-0307 (2000) should be the one that keeps City Attorneys up at night. It clarifies that non-members can be charged with a criminal violation of TOMA.
Lasty, if a candidate knows the session is illegal and participates anyway, or if the City Attorney “aids or assists” the council in holding this illegal session, they can be prosecuted under the Texas Penal Code’s “Law of Parties.
In A Nutshell – Potential Consequences (If Improper)
If an executive session includes someone not legally permitted confidentiality could be challenged. Discussions could become discoverable in litigation. Any action based on that discussion could be subject to challenge under § 551.141. § 551.144 provides criminal penalties for knowingly participating in an unlawful closed meeting.
Again — these are statutory realities, not blog hyperbole.
The Questions Are Simple
If Ann Anderson was not yet sworn in:
Was she considered a “member” under TOMA?
Was her presence formally deemed “necessary”?
Was that determination documented?
Did the City Attorney advise that her presence would not jeopardize privilege?
If the election was still under recount, did that create a potential adverse-interest problem?
Residents deserve clarity.
JDHQ HOTELS LLC Lawsuit…
The city is currently involved in litigation with JDHQ Hotels LLC. If legal advice about active litigation was discussed during executive session, and if an unauthorized individual was present, could opposing counsel raise questions about privilege?
It is not unreasonable to ask.
Closing Thoughts
In conclusion, did they all know they could be breaking the law? Did any of them question if Ann Anderson should be engaged in closed session? We are filing PIR’s now for more information. In the meantime, Frisco Residents should be up in arms! The arrogance of the City Council, The Mayor, The City Attorney and City Manager it displayed at Tuesday’s council meeting was on a level never seen before. Should John Keating, who has spent 18+ years in local government, have known better? He is asking to be your next Mayor so shouldn’t he understand TOMA better than anyone as he is the longest sitting person on that dais? Angelia Pelham, Mayor Pro Tem and Laura Rummell, Deputy Mayor Pro Tem should have known better, or they should not have the label Mayor Pro Tem and Deputy Mayor Pro Tem. Should we re-elect Laura Rummell when her actions potentially put the city at risk. Should the city hire a new City Attorney? One might expect or think that Richard Abernathy, our current city attorney, should have stopped what happened at Tuesday’s closed session before the city council meeting.
The city leadership continues to break the rules, and they act as if they just don’t care! They throw it in the face of residents daily! In the three years I have done this blog, I thought I had seen everything. Truly nothing has angered me more than the blatant disrespect to the election process, oath of office process, and to the TOMA rules and Texas Law that each person in that meeting committed Tuesday night.
We would also like full disclosure to anything in that meeting and we plan to file a PIR for it and fight it all the way to the Texas Attorney General’s Office. Based on Texas Law and previous OAG opinions – I think we will win!
This is not about personalities. It is about process. It is about whether the oath of office matters. It is about whether executive session rules apply evenly — or flex depending on convenience. If the City delayed the swearing-in pending recount, then by its own action it recognized that the office had not yet been assumed. So which is it?
Was she a private citizen?
Or was she functioning as a council member?
Because under Texas law, you cannot be both! If everything was done properly, the City should have no issue explaining.
We are not alleging wrongdoing. We are asking for clarity. And in government, clarity should never require a Public Information Request to obtain.
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.
In Frisco, an election is determined by every single vote! When Frisco Chronicles learned Mark Piland was ahead, heck the Dallas Morning News called it and said Piland won, then all the sudden the candidate loses by 106 votes, we paused with concern.
How do the numbers change so quickly? Why did it take Collin County 3+ hours to count ballots for Frisco and Plano with only one place on the ballot? Why did the City of Frisco post the initial numbers causing confusion for residents and voters show Mark Piland in the lead?
A City of Frisco post based on the numbers at 7:10 pm show Ann Anderson with 1,790 votes and Mark Piland with 2,132 votes. It also reads there are 143,202 REGISTERED VOTERS between Collin and Denton County.
Collin County 78,929
Denton County 64,273
A second post by the City of Frisco based on the 9pm numbers shows Ann Anderson with 3,122 votes and Mark Piland with 3,343 votes. It also reads there are 138,720 REGISTERED VOTERS between Collin and Denton County.
Collin County 78,929
Denton County 59,791 (the number was reduced by 4,482 registered voters)
Wait, did you catch that? How does the first post read 143,202 registered voters versus the second post which reads 138,720 registered voters between Collin and Denton County. They reduced the number of registered voters in Denton County by 4,482 voters. How does that happen? In two hours, the number of registered voters changes?
Next, let’s look at Collin County, who for the first time used paper ballots, could there have been a miscount? We looked at the Preliminary Election Reconciliation Totals and we noticed 22 Provisional Ballots were rejected or pending, 2 mail ballots were rejected or pending. Then they said the difference between voters and ballots is 4 and under the notes it says “INVESTIGATING.” Then it reads mail ballots not returned or pending voter action is 177. It does not add up!
How did Piland lead in early voting? How did Piland lead up until 9:00 tonight and then all the sudden the votes shift for Anderson? We are not experts, but something does not add up. We also heard through the grapevine that Stephanie Spies Cunningham and Jake Petras showed up at Mark Piland’s watch party. Why? Petras has been very clear on his feelings for Piland and supporters of Piland so why come to the watch party? Frisco Chronicles is guessing the spies came to report back to Camp Cheney and Anderson.
Next look at the electioneering happening at Fire Station 6 by City Council Woman – Angela Pelham. Standing right outside the door of the polls talking to voters as they went in. She was within the 100ft electioneering and notice when she see’s someone taking a picture – she looks nervous. Word on the streets is she approached voters encouraging them to vote for Ann Anderson. If that is true, that is illegal and she should resign from her seat on council immediately. As soon as a camera approached her filming, she ran to her car in a hurry to get out of there. Shame on you Angelia Pelham!
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.
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!”
Screenshot
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.
Screenshot
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.
“Diet Developers, Family Plans, and the Dollar Menu of Democracy”
If Part 1 of Follow the Money felt like a black-tie developer gala with valet parking and six-figure checks, then Part 2 is more of a backyard barbecue. Still political. Still smoky. Just… different and fewer lobsters.
This round, we cracked open the campaign finance reports of Shona Sowell and Rod Vilhauer, two mayoral candidates whose donor lists tell very different stories, neither of which includes a $100,000 developer cannon blast like John Keating.
Shona Sowell
At first glance you notice some developers but a scroll through the whole campaign finance report feels more like someone who has there feet on the ground. The report covering July 1, 2025 – December 31, 2025 shows:
Total Monetary Contributions: $40,073.71
In-Kind Contributions: $8,000
In Frisco politics, that’s not chump change—but it’s also not “who just bought City Hall?” money.
Donations Over $1,000 (aka: The Grown-Ups Table)
There’s a mix here: locals, professionals, and yes… developers. But unlike other reports we’ve seen, this list reads more like a community fundraiser than a developer convention.
A few highlights:
Trevor Huber (Frisco, Modera Clinic) – $5,000
Fehmi & Elisabeth Karahan (Fields Development) – $3,000
Robert Shaw (Columbus Realty Partners / Legacy West) – $3,000
John & Eleanor Landon (Landon Homes) – $3,000
Yes, developers are present. No one’s pretending otherwise. But this is more “sprinkle” than “avalanche.” Think side salad, not the whole buffet. Also worth noting: a solid number of Frisco residents, modest four-figure donations, and contributions that look personal—not corporate firehoses disguised as civic pride.
The Amended Report
Sowell’s amended report (March 2 – June 30, 2025) adds a little spice:
Dr. Tim & Kathi Schacherer (Frisco) – $10,000
Frank Peinado (Construction, Aubrey) – $10,000
Jared Patterson Campaign – $7,500
3 Peinado Construction Executives – $3,000 each
Kappi & Steve Helms (Frisco) – $5,000
Monica & Marty Wood (Real Estate) – $2,500
Ryan Griffin (President of FCS) – $5,000
Is construction money here? Yes. Is it coordinated? It looks organized. Is it eye-popping compared to other mayoral candidates? Not even close. This is developer money with the volume knob turned way down.
Question for voters: Is Sowell managing influence—or just keeping the lights on without selling the building?
Next up, Rod Vilhauer: “Keep It in the Family” Edition
Now let’s talk about Rod Vilhauer, whose first campaign finance report (filed 10/28/25, covering Nov 1 – Dec 31, 2025) shows:
The Donor List (Short. Sweet. Familiar.)
Clark Vilhauer – $20,000
Jerry Vilhauer – $1,000
Rod Vilhauer – $1,000
Angela Carrizales – $2,500
Kristen Lively – $1,000
That’s it. No developers. No PACs. No LLC alphabet soup. No mystery money from three cities over. Just family, friends, and one very generous Clark Vilhauer carrying this thing like an Olympic torch. If this were a movie, it wouldn’t be Follow the Money. It would be We’re Pooling Resources.
Question for voters: Is this independence—or simply a campaign still warming up?
The Big Picture: Relative Cleanliness Is Still a Thing
Let’s be clear:
Sowell took developer money, but nowhere near the scale of other mayoral candidates past or present.
Vilhauer’s report looks less like a political machine and more like a family potluck.
No six-figure developer bombs. No mystery entities with zero web presence. No PACs lurking like political middlemen in trench coats. In today’s Frisco political climate, that alone feels… novel.
Final Thought: Who’s Buying, Who’s Borrowing, and Who’s Betting on Themselves?
Campaign finance reports don’t tell us who will be the best mayor. But they do tell us who expects access, who expects influence, and who expects nothing more than a fightingchance. So we’ll leave you with this:
Is “less money” actually more independence? Is family-funded better than developer-funded? And in Frisco politics, is the quietest check sometimes the loudest signal?
Stay tuned. The money may slow down—but the questions won’t.
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.
Alright, grab your popcorn —this one has all the makings of a classic Frisco Chronicles feature: money, media, and that familiar scent of roses wafting through the pages of the Dallas Morning News.
All Good in the Frisco Hood: Brought to You by… Medium Giant?
By now, longtime Frisco residents have noticed a curious phenomenon. Whenever the Dallas Morning News (DMN) writes about Frisco, the city sparkles. Streets are shinier. Leadership is visionary. Problems? What problems? If Frisco had potholes, DMN would probably call them “community engagement craters designed to slow traffic and save lives.”
Which raises the obvious question: why does Frisco always smell like roses in the DMN? Not weeds. Not smoke. Roses.
For years, residents have speculated. Maybe DMN is afraid of being cut off from exclusives. Maybe access journalism is alive and well. Or maybe—just maybe—it’s about the oldest motivator in local government and media alike: Money.
Enter Stage Left: Medium Giant
Here’s where things get interesting. A sharp-eyed reader recently connected a few dots that deserve a closer look. The Frisco Economic Development Corporation (FEDC) has entered into several contracts over the years with a company called Medium Giant.
Whose Medium Giant, you ask?
They’re an “integrated creative marketing agency.” Which is marketing-speak for we make things look good. Even better? Medium Giant just happens to be the sister company of the Dallas Morning News.
Cue the dramatic music. So now the question isn’t why DMN never seems to publish critical reporting on Frisco or its leadership. The question becomes: would they dare?
Follow the Money (Because It Always Tells a Story)
When we reviewed city check registers, we noticed multiple payments over the years made to Medium Giant. Not chump change. Not lunch money. Not “oops, forgot to expense that Uber.”
The total? $2,105,631.76
That’s over two million dollars paid by Frisco entities to a company tied directly to the same organization responsible for shaping Frisco’s public narrative in one of North Texas’ largest newspapers.
Now, we’re not saying this proves corruption. We’re not saying there’s a secret smoky backroom with editors and city staff clinking champagne glasses. We’re not even saying there’s an explicit quid pro quo.
What we are saying is this: If you were the DMN, would you risk torching a relationship connected—directly or indirectly—to a $2 million revenue stream by publishing hard-hitting, unvarnished reporting about Frisco’s leadership, finances, or controversies?
Hit Pieces for Some, Rose Petals for Others
What makes this dynamic even more eyebrow-raising is DMN’s recent track record. The paper has shown it’s perfectly willing to publish aggressive, sometimes glowing-less-than-rose-scented coverage of candidates who fall outside the Frisco inner circle.
Just ask: Jennifer White, Mark Piland, John Redmond
Funny how the gloves come off for political outsiders, but stay neatly folded when it comes to City Hall, current council members, and current city leadership.
Journalism, Marketing, or a Blurred Line?
Let’s be clear: Medium Giant being a marketing firm isn’t inherently wrong. Cities hire marketing agencies all the time. But when the marketing arm and the newsroom live under the same corporate roof, the public has every right to question whether the coverage they’re reading is journalism… or brand management.
Because from where residents sit, the pattern looks less like watchdog reporting and more like: “Frisco: Presented by Medium Giant, distributed by DMN.”
Final Thought
Transparency isn’t just about open records and posted agendas. It’s also about who controls the narrative—and who’s being paid behind the scenes while that narrative is shaped.
Two million dollars isn’t small change. It’s not accidental. And it certainly isn’t irrelevant.
So the next time you read a glowing DMN article telling you everything in Frisco is just peachy, ask yourself: Is this news… or is this advertising with better grammar?
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.
I went to her to ask for help with an issue my child that was getting nowhere with the school,…
So whatever became of the $17 million dollars that the city council gave the Mayor to beautify a drainage ditch?
At last count, there are 3 different "spa/massage" businesses in the small office park at the northeast corner of John…
I literally just saw this. Yeah, she used to forward everybody’s emails behind their backs.
You're dropping truth bombs! These mom and pop shops are what should be the least of Karen's worries. If they…