Lee Glover Retires: Questions Around The Retirement Remain

Recently, the City of Frisco announced the retirement of Fire Chief Lee Glover, bringing an end to a 35-year career with the Frisco Fire Department.

According to the City, Glover joined the department in 1991, when Frisco had just seven paid firefighters. He worked his way through the ranks before becoming Interim Fire Chief in September 2022 and being appointed Fire Chief on June 19, 2023. The City of Frisco announced his retirement on April 7, 2026, with his final day scheduled for August 3, 2026.

On the surface, it is the familiar story of a longtime public servant riding off into retirement. But there is considerably more history here. And after more than three decades inside one of Frisco’s most important public-safety departments, there are questions that deserve answers.

Lee Glover Timeline

  • 1991: Joined the Frisco Fire Department.
  • 2011: Frisco conducted an Employee Climate Survey examining conditions within the Fire Department and its leadership.
  • January 2012: The climate report documented serious concerns regarding morale, trust, intimidation, retaliation and fear within the department. The report also identified concerns involving senior leadership, including then-Assistant Chief Lee Glover.
  • September 2022: Glover became Interim Fire Chief.
  • June 19, 2023: City Manager Wes Pierson appointed Glover Fire Chief after a selection process involving five finalists.
  • April 7, 2026: The City announced Glover’s retirement.
  • August 3, 2026: Glover’s final day with the City of Frisco

Turn Back Time: The 2011 Climate Report

We have written extensively about the history of the Frisco Fire Department and the concerns raised about its leadership. The 2011 Employee Climate Survey remains particularly important because it was not simply a disgruntled employee complaining about a supervisor. It was a formal examination of the department’s workplace environment.

The report described serious problems involving trust, respect, morale and the relationship between firefighters and department leadership. It characterized the culture as one involving intimidation, retaliation and fear. It also reported that a significant percentage of respondents said they would leave the department if they could.

Our previous reporting noted the report identified Lee Glover as part of the senior leadership structure under then-Chief Mack Borchardt.  The question that naturally follows is simple: What changed between 2011 and 2023 that convinced city management that Lee Glover was the right person to lead the department?

That question became particularly relevant when Glover was named Interim Fire Chief in 2022.

The 92.5% Question

When Glover became a finalist for the permanent Fire Chief position in 2023, the Frisco Fire Fighters Association conducted a survey of its membership.

According to the survey previously reported by Frisco Chronicles, 220 of 233 firefighters responded, and 92.5% said they did not want Glover to become the next Fire Chief. The survey also reported that 91.4% did not believe Glover had improved morale or restored trust during his time as Interim Chief.

Despite those numbers, City Manager Wes Pierson selected Glover.  At the time, Pierson said Glover’s experience, knowledge and leadership made him the best fit for the department.  That decision deserves scrutiny, not because an employee association should automatically determine who runs a municipal department, but because a 92.5% vote against a leadership candidate is an extraordinary number.

So the questions remain:

What did City Manager Wes Pierson know about the survey before selecting Glover?

Why did City Manager Wes Pierson believe the concerns expressed by the firefighters were not sufficient to disqualify Glover?

Did the City conduct any independent investigation into the concerns raised by the firefighters before making the appointment?

Did City Council members know about the survey results before Glover was appointed?

And perhaps most importantly: What did the City of Frisco do to determine whether the problems identified in the 2011 climate report had actually been resolved before putting Glover into the leadership role as Fire Chief?

Fast Forward: May 18, 2026

The City announced Glover’s retirement on April 7, 2026.  Approximately six weeks later, on May 18, Frisco Police responded to Glover’s residence following a 911 call.  We filed a Public Information Request seeking the police records associated with that call and incident.

The records we received were heavily redacted.  The Case Report Summary identifies Alvin Glover Jr. as a subject and Jamie Glover as the reporting person.

The report states that Frisco police responded to Glover’s residence at approximately 7:41 p.m. on May 18, 2026. According to the report, Jamie Glover identified herself as Alvin Glover Jr.’s wife and told officers that he had recently become increasingly aggressive following a change that is redacted from the report.

The report also states that Jamie reported that Alvin had been displaying certain signs since “recently retiring,” although the specific information is redacted. Officers subsequently made contact with Alvin Glover inside the residence. The remainder of the report contains additional redactions.

A supplemental report was also included in the records provided to us. There is an important distinction here.

We know a police response occurred. We know the City’s records identify the individuals involved. We know portions of the report describe concerns involving Glover’s behavior.

We do not know everything that happened because significant portions of the records were withheld or redacted. That leaves questions.

What Happened After the 911 Call?

According to sources familiar with the incident, Glover was experiencing a serious personal crisis and was transported to a hospital following the police response.

Sources have also alleged that the incident involved suicidal behavior and that Glover may have had a weapon in his possession before officers arrived.  Those allegations have not been independently verified by Frisco Chronicles and should not be treated as established fact without supporting documentation.

We are also told that Glover did not return to his normal duties following the May 18 incident and that his next public appearance connected to the department was associated with his retirement in August.

If that account is accurate, it raises some obvious questions:

What happened between May 18 and August 3? Was Glover placed on leave?

Was he using accrued sick leave, vacation, administrative leave or another form of paid leave?

Was he still designated as Fire Chief during that period? Was he performing any official duties? Was he receiving his regular salary? Who was running the Fire Department during Glover’s absence?

Did the City conduct any internal review? These are not questions about someone’s private medical history. They are questions about the administration of a taxpayer-funded public agency and the use of taxpayer-funded compensation.

Was Glover Treated Differently?

This may be the most important question of all.  Firefighters work in an extraordinarily stressful profession. Mental health, trauma, substance abuse, family crises and other personal struggles can affect first responders just as they can affect anyone else.

The City should have policies governing how employees, including department leadership, are treated when they experience a personal or medical crisis.

So we have to ask: Are those policies applied equally to everyone?  No.  The proof is in the previous pudding.

Are rank-and-file firefighters given the same flexibility, leave options and confidentiality that are available to department leadership?  No. The proof is in the previous pudding.

Has the City ever placed another firefighter or senior officer in a similar situation on paid leave while maintaining their position?

What are the City’s policies when a department head is unable to perform the duties of the position?  Well history shows they terminated the Assistant Fire Chief Cameron Kraemer who was out on medical leave for PTSD and mental health issues.

Who had authority to designate an acting chief and did they formally appoint an acting Chief after May 18, 2026?

If not, why not?  Those questions can and should be answered without disclosing someone’s private medical information. 

The Mack Borchardt Connection

There is another piece of this history that cannot simply be ignored.  Mack Borchardt served as Frisco’s Fire Chief for decades and later became Special Assistant to the City Manager. The City’s current staff directory still lists Borchardt as Special Assistant to the City Manager and states that he served as Fire Chief from 1981 to 2012.

Borchardt’s transition out of the Fire Chief position has been discussed extensively in connection with the 2011 climate report. He was terminated by the city then rehired by then City Manager George Purefoy (long time good ole boy friendship) who made him a “Fire Consultant Liaison within the City Manager’s office. He received a hefty salary and city vehicle. The 2011 report raised significant concerns about the department’s leadership culture at the time. It also identified concerns regarding the senior leadership structure surrounding Borchardt.

Glover was part of that senior leadership structure. Yet years later, Glover ultimately became the Fire Chief.  That creates a legitimate question about whether the City actually addressed the problems identified in 2011 or simply changed the name on the office door.

City Management’s Role

There is another issue that deserves examination.  The City knew about the 2011 climate report, knew about the concerns surrounding the department’s previous leadership structure, and knew that 92.5% of responding firefighters surveyed did not want Glover to become Fire Chief.  With all that knowledge and information what led City Manager Wes Pierson to reach the opposite conclusion?

The City has said Glover was the best fit for the job.  Fine. Then show taxpayers the work. What criteria were used?  Who conducted the interviews? Who evaluated the finalists?  What were the scoring criteria? What concerns were raised about each finalist?

Who recommended Glover? Were references checked? Were prior complaints or investigations reviewed?  Was the Fire Fighters Association survey discussed during the selection process? And did Pierson or anyone else in city management conduct an independent assessment of the concerns raised by members of the department?

These are reasonable questions when the person being selected is going to oversee one of the City’s largest and most important public-safety organizations.

Retirement or Something More?

Now we come back to the original question.  Why did Lee Glover retire?

The city announced his retirement on April 7, 2026, nearly four months before his final day. The official announcement described it as the conclusion of a 35-year career and praised the department’s accomplishments during his tenure.

That may be exactly what happened. But the timing of the May 18 police response, followed by questions about Glover’s absence from the department, makes it reasonable for taxpayers to ask whether there was more to the story.

Was the retirement entirely voluntary?  Was Glover ever asked to retire?

Was he facing an internal investigation?  Was he placed on leave?

Was he medically unable to return to duty?  Did he decide that retirement was the best option?

Did city management encourage or negotiate his departure?  And were any agreements, benefits, payouts, leave balances or other financial arrangements associated with his retirement?

The Bigger Issue

This story is not really about whether Lee Glover had a personal crisis.  If the allegations about the May 18 incident are true, that is a deeply personal matter, and nobody should use another person’s crisis as entertainment.  The issue is whether the City of Frisco has one set of rules for ordinary firefighters and another for those occupying the corner office. 

That is the issue taxpayers should care about. The Frisco Fire Department has grown enormously since Lee Glover joined in 1991. The city now describes the department as having 265 sworn personnel and 34 civilian employees. That is a massive public-safety operation.

The person sitting in the Fire Chief’s office has enormous responsibility.  The public therefore has a legitimate interest in how that position is filled, how leadership problems are handled, how employee complaints are investigated, how leave policies are applied and how taxpayer dollars are spent.

The questions surrounding Lee Glover do not begin with the May 18, 2026 police call.  They go back more than a decade.  The 2011 climate report raised questions about culture and leadership.

The 2022 appointment of Glover as Interim Chief raised questions about whether those problems had really been resolved.  The 2023 appointment of Glover as permanent Chief raised even more questions after the Fire Fighters Association survey reportedly showed overwhelming opposition.  And now the circumstances surrounding his final months with the City raise another set of questions.

Maybe there are perfectly reasonable answers to all of them.  If there are, the City should provide them.  Because transparency should not depend on whether the person involved is a firefighter, a department head, a city manager or anyone else on the public payroll.

Frisco taxpayers deserve to know whether the rules are actually applied equally.  And after years of controversy surrounding the Fire Department’s leadership culture, that is not an unreasonable thing to ask.  It is the minimum.

What Is Next Next we will address the issues with hiring the new Chief of the Frisco Fire Department.  We will examine some relationships and ask why the city is using a new company to do the search.   Is Wes Pierson looking for the best candidate or the best candidate who agrees with him on the operations of the department. 

This is Pierson’s first time working in a major city.  He previously worked in Addison, which is 4 square miles and before that Corpus Christi before their growth boom.  The leads us to ask does he have the background to make such a large decision.  Sources inside say there is a lot of doubt when it comes to his decision-making process with the Fire Department.  Stay Tuned for part two!

Disclaimer: This article is intended to report on matters of public record and public interest. If additional information becomes available this article may be updated accordingly.

This article is written as opinion, commentary, and personal interpretation based on publicly available records, meeting observations, agenda materials, and information we received from community sources.  Nothing in this article should be interpreted as a final statement of fact about any person’s legal conduct, criminal behavior, or ethical violations.

Behind The Scenes – FAC Robbery

Summer is over but the heat still has things percolating in Frisco.  It is time to break down some events that happened over the summer.

Over the summer you may have seen the post from the Frisco Police Department regarding the Frisco Athletic Center Robbery.  It was posted on July 1st and reads “On June 29, 2026, at approximately 8:00 p.m., Frisco Police responded to a robbery involving a firearm that occurred in the parking lot at the Frisco Athletic Center (FAC).”

The post detailed how the robbery occurred following a pre-arranged meeting at the FAC between two parties.  One party apparently left in a blue and white Ford Bronco before officers arrived. Officers learned the Bronco belonged to a nearby resident and later located the Bronco at a fast-food restaurant a few miles from the FAC. Officers interviewed the people associated with the vehicle and learned the person with the handgun was not there.

The shocking part is when they announced that with the assistance of detectives and school resource officers, the preliminary investigation revealed that the individuals involved were juveniles enrolled in Frisco ISD.  The post closed by saying, “All parties identified in the incident will be held accountable for their actions.”

You can imagine the community’s shock and concern when they learn JUVENILES ENROLLED IN FRISCO ISD were allegedly involved.  In my gut something did not add up, and I had several questions.

  1. What was the pre-arranged meeting for?  Facebook Marketplace Sale?  Drugs?
  2. What fast-food restaurant did they find the Bronco at?  There were no posts on social media asking why there is a police presence at a fast-food restaurant parking lot.  Frisconians are nosey so there would be a post somewhere.
  3. How did they immediately know it was juveniles and that they were enrolled in Frisco ISD?

We filed an open records request for all documents related to the case and agreed they could redact any information relating to the juveniles involved however they still sent out request to the Texas Attorney General to keep the info from the public.  Why? 

That was when I got an email from a parent who had several details on the incident because they were picking up someone nearby and when they saw the commotion they listened to the police scanner from 8pm to 8:36pm.   

All of the following details are ALLEGED and have not been corroborated due to Frisco PD holding the incident documents from our Public Information Request. 

Allegedly the 8PM MEET UP was a drug deal for Oxi! The Oxi dealer was supposedly driving a blue Bronco with a white top. The driver was a black male with an Afro, his passenger a black male with dreads in a red sweatshirt was carrying the oxi. The Bronco pulled up to the planned meeting spot, which happened to be right in front of the FAC which has cameras outside that supposedly captured the entire exchange. 

Allegedly the BUYER walked up to the car (passenger seat side) and opened the backpack to pick up the goods and handed over a wad of cash.  Supposedly the dealer counted the cash which was short of the agreed amount.  A verbal exchange ensued, then the dealer pulls a gun and demands the backpack at gunpoint (ie. Armed robbery). 

Supposedly the Bronco then drives off, and the kid (the buyer) goes inside and reports to the FAC staff he was robbed at gunpoint, and it was reported to the police.  Duh! 

According to the Frisco Chronicles tipster, based on the police scanner, Frisco PD immediately tracked the Bronco with FLOCK cameras and tracked it east on Wade, to south on Ohio, towards 121.  It was announced on the police scanner the plates came back to a house on Lily Pad Lane (corner of 380 and 423).

These details made much more sense and are very different than the summary posted by Frisco Police Department. The questions are not going away simply because summer is over.

If the preliminary investigation truly established that juveniles enrolled in Frisco ISD were involved, then the public deserves to know what happened next. Were arrests made?  Were charges referred to the Denton County District Attorney? Was the matter handled through the juvenile justice system? Or was this quietly turned over to Frisco ISD and left there?

And perhaps the bigger question is why the public version of the incident appears so thin when the alleged circumstances, if accurate, are anything but ordinary.

A reported armed robbery involving a firearm, alleged narcotics, juveniles, a pre-arranged meeting, surveillance cameras and FLOCK camera tracking is not exactly a minor parking-lot misunderstanding. Yet residents were given a carefully packaged summary and when Frisco Chronicles filed a PIR for the case file and underlying records, Frisco PD sought an Attorney General ruling rather than simply providing the releasable portions with juvenile information redacted.

That raises another question: What exactly is being protected?

To be clear, the allegations provided by our source remain allegations. We have not independently verified the alleged drug transaction, the identities of the people involved, the alleged weapon, or what was captured on surveillance video. That is precisely why public records matter. Journalism should not have to rely on a police scanner, a concerned parent and an anonymous tipster to piece together what happened during an alleged armed robbery in a public parking lot.

And this is where the phrase “all parties identified in the incident will be held accountable” deserves some follow-up.  Accountable how?  Accountability is not a slogan for a Facebook post. It is a process. It means determining what happened, identifying who was responsible, referring appropriate cases for prosecution, and allowing the public to understand the disposition of a serious incident without exposing protected information about juveniles.

Nobody is asking Frisco PD to publish the names of children. Nobody is asking for protected juvenile records. Frisco Chronicles is asking for the releasable facts.

What happened? What charges, if any, were filed? Was the case referred to the District Attorney? Was anyone arrested or detained? Was Frisco ISD involved? And what happened to the investigation after the initial police response?  

Those are reasonable questions for a community to ask.

Frisco has spent years cultivating an image as one of the safest cities in America. There is nothing wrong with being proud of that reputation. But a “safest city” designation should never become a reason to avoid uncomfortable questions. If anything, a city that takes public safety seriously should welcome scrutiny and demonstrate that its system works even when the facts are embarrassing, complicated or inconvenient.

Transparency does not tarnish Frisco’s reputation.  Hiding behind the reputation does.

So summer may be over, but this story isn’t.  The public deserves the facts, not the polished version. And until those records are released or the appropriate authorities explain what happened to this case, there are still more questions than answers.

That is not accountability. That is unfinished business.

Disclaimer: This article is intended to report on matters of public record and public interest. If additional information becomes available, including the dismissal of charges, acquittal, or other developments, this article may be updated accordingly.

This article is written as opinion, commentary, and personal interpretation based on publicly available records, tipster information, meeting observations, agenda materials, and information we received from community sources.  Nothing in this article should be interpreted as a final statement of fact about any person’s legal conduct, criminal behavior, or ethical violations. Reader discretion — and a sense of humor — are advised.

Colberg Happy Mug Shot

Recently Frisco Chronicles was alerted to an arrest made by the Frisco Police Department on 6/18/2026 involving Erich Colberg (husband of new council woman Brittany Colberg).  What do we know about the arrest?  Not much.  Readers can be assured Frisco Chronicles will report the information honestly and accurately as information becomes available.

Current Information: All we know at this time is Mr. Colberg was booked on 6/18/2026 under the following information:

Booking Date and Release Date: 6/18/2026

Booking Number: 668715

Warrant Number: M26-002J6

Charge: Deadly Conduct

Issuing Auth: Justice of the Peace PCT #6

Offense Date: 12/1/2025

Bond: 4,000.00 (Surety Bond)

Disposition: Bond Posted

Side Note: The information provided by Frisco Chronicles in this article is based on public records, law enforcement records, court filings, and other publicly available sources available at the time of publication. An arrest or criminal charge is an allegation only and is not evidence of guilt. All individuals are presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty in a court of law.

Screenshot

Charge: Deadly Conduct Defined

In Denton County, the offense of Deadly Conduct is defined by Texas law, specifically Texas Penal Code § 22.05. Frisco Chronicles went to ChatGPT to ask what is charge “Deadly Conduct” related to in Texas. This is soley for informational purposes to understand the allegations of the charge. The statute has two primary forms of deadly conduct:

1. Recklessly placing another person in imminent danger of serious bodily injury

This is generally a Class A misdemeanor.

The prosecution must prove that a person recklessly engaged in conduct that placed another in imminent danger of serious bodily injury. Serious bodily injury means an injury creating a substantial risk of death or causing permanent disfigurement or long-term loss of bodily function.

Examples could include:

  • Driving a vehicle directly at another vehicle or pedestrian.
  • Intentionally swerving toward another motorist.
  • Throwing heavy objects at moving vehicles.
  • Brandishing or pointing a firearm at someone, even if no shot is fired (Texas law presumes recklessness when someone knowingly points a firearm at another person).

2. Knowingly discharging a firearm

This is a Third-Degree Felony.

A person commits felony deadly conduct if they knowingly discharge a firearm:

  • At or in the direction of another person; or
  • At a vehicle, building, or habitation while being reckless as to whether it is occupied.
Screenshot

Breaking Down the Law

Can Deadly Conduct arise from a traffic incident?

Yes. While many people associate the offense with firearms, Section 22.05(a) does not require a firearm.  In a traffic-related incident, prosecutors may pursue a Deadly Conduct charge if they believe the driver used the vehicle in a reckless manner that placed another person in imminent danger of serious bodily injury.

Examples could include intentionally attempting to ram another vehicle, purposely forcing another vehicle off the roadway, driving head-on toward another vehicle, and aggressive road-rage maneuvers that create an immediate risk of death or serious injury. The vehicle itself can be the instrumentality of the offense if it is used recklessly enough.

What if the incident involved a gun during road rage?

Deadly Conduct is one of the more common charges in Texas road-rage cases where someone points a handgun at another driver, displays a firearm in a threatening manner, fires a shot from a vehicle, or fires toward another vehicle.

Even if no one is struck and no physical injury occurs, the charge may still apply because the offense focuses on creating an imminent danger, not on whether someone was actually hurt.

Frisco Chronicles is just giving context to the charge deadly conduct. It is important to note per public records today; there is nothing that notes Erich Colberg had a weapon on him of any kind or that has anything to do with his charge of Deadly Conduct.

The Arrest

Why an arrest over 6 months later?  Based solely on the information on Denton County’s website it suggests that investigators may have developed evidence after the initial incident or presented the case to prosecutors at a later date. Without the offense report, probable cause affidavit, or warrant affidavit, it’s not possible to determine whether the allegation involves reckless operation of a motor vehicle, a firearm, both, or another form of conduct.

Public Information Request

Frisco Chronicles has submitted a PIR for the more information and will let you know what we find out based on records such as an offense report, probable cause affidavit, warrant affidavit, 911 recording, and witness statements.  That is the only way to provide the factual basis for the charge, subject to any lawful withholding if the criminal case is still pending.

Statement from Brittany Colberg For Frisco

We did reach out to Councilwoman Brittany Colberg via Facebook Messenger last month on June 23rd.  The response we received read,

“Thank you for reaching out.  This matter relates to a December 2025 traffic incident in which Erich called 911, remained at the scene, gave a statement to law enforcement, and cooperated with the investigation.  Brittany was not present or involved.  Erich is addressing the allegation through counsel.  Because this is a pending legal matter, we cannot discuss details publicly or provide further comment at this time.”

In closing, Frisco Chronicles will follow this case and report any new findings. The charges are allegations only until the case goes to court.

Disclaimer: This article is intended to report on matters of public record and public interest. If additional information becomes available, including the dismissal of charges, acquittal, or other developments, this article may be updated accordingly.

This article is written as opinion, commentary, and personal interpretation based on publicly available records, meeting observations, agenda materials, and information we received from community sources.  Nothing in this article should be interpreted as a final statement of fact about any person’s legal conduct, criminal behavior, or ethical violations.