If It’s Such a Great Deal, Why the Peek-a-Boo? The City of Frisco loves to tell residents how transparent they are but it is Crystal clear, like spring water, they don’t want us asking questions about the 2021 decision to open the Employee Health Clinic pushed by former HR Director Sassy Safranek. Transparency for city officials is like one of those novelty shower doors that looks clear until the steam hits and suddenly you can’t see a thing.
Welcome to the fog.
Back in 2021, the City’s Employee Health Clinic wasn’t some sleepy consent-agenda item. It was hotly contested, debated, dissected, and ultimately shoved across the finish line by a rare mayoral tiebreaker vote. Millions of dollars. Long-term projections. Big promises about savings, efficiency, and “doing right by employees.”
Fast-forward to today. Naturally, we thought: Hey, let’s see how that investment is actually doing. You know—basic follow-up … Journalism and Accountability. The stuff transparency is supposedly made of. And the City’s response? NO. NO. NO. (But said politely, on letterhead, with lawyers involved.)
A Simple Question Turns Into a Legal Obstacle Course
On November 12, 2025, Frisco Chronicles filed a Public Information Request (PIR). Nothing exotic. Nothing personal. No medical records. No names. No HIPAA panic.
We asked for basic performance data for the City of Frisco Employee Health Clinic over the past five fiscal years (or as available):
Annual number of clinic visits
Number of unique employees using the clinic
Annual operating revenue and expenses
Whether the clinic was running on a surplus or deficit
Any reports detailing utilization, cost savings, or performance
In other words: Is this thing working the way the City told taxpayers it would? Seems reasonable, right? Apparently not.
The Attorney General (Because Why Not?)
Instead of releasing the data—or even part of it—the City Attorney’s Office punted the request straight to the Texas Attorney General, asking for permission to keep the curtain closed. From their letter:
“Frisco requests that the Texas Attorney General’s Office determine whether Frisco is required to disclose the information.”
Translation: “We’d rather not decide transparency ourselves. Please hold.”
Even more interesting? The City claims it “takes no position” on releasing the information… while simultaneously triggering a process that delays a release of requested documents and invites third parties to object.
That’s like saying: “I’m not stopping you from leaving… I’m just locking the door and hiding the keys.”
Third Parties, Copyrights, and Other Smoke Bombs
The City also notified Premise Health, the private contractor operating the clinic, giving them the opportunity to argue against disclosure under Section 552.305 of the Texas Public Information Act.
Premise Health, unsurprisingly, filed a brief supporting the City’s request to withhold information. (We’ll publish that response in full—because transparency is apparently contagious when citizens do it.)
The City’s letter also raises the specter of copyright protection, which begs the obvious question: If this is just boring operational data, why the legal gymnastics?
Let’s Rewind: Why This Matters
Back in November–December 2021, City Council members openly worried about low employee utilization, long-term financial losses, and whether the private sector would ever make such an investment.
Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Brian Livingston said at the meeting, “I believe it’ll take us close to eight to nine years—if not longer than a decade—to break even … I don’t believe that the private industry would make that choice.” He continued, “I’m very afraid that the losses will be much larger due to lower utilization that’s planned or expected.”
According to an article in Community Impact the estimated expenses in the clinic’s first year were expected to be over $1.44 million which included salaries, insurance, management and implementation fees and equipment purchases. The clinic’s fifth-year budget is listed at more than $1.31 million. Premise Health projeced that the clinic will operate at a loss in its first three years.
Breaking down the numbers, the clinic required a $173,754 implementation fee, over $6.28 million in salary and management fees in the first five years, and subsidization from the City’s insurance reserve fund.
Despite all that, the deal passed—barely—with Mayor Jeff Cheney casting the deciding vote. Council Members Brian Livingston, Shona Huffman and Dan Stricklin voted against the clinic. And now, four years later, when citizens ask: “So… how’s it going?” The answer is silence, lawyers, and a referral to Austin.
If It’s Saving Money, Show the Receipts
The City’s own website proudly claims the Employee Wellness Center saves taxpayer dollars, reduces insurance costs, and helps recruit and retain top talent. Great! Fantastic! Pop the champagne! So why not release the utilization numbers, cost comparisons and savings analyses?
If the clinic is the fiscal success story we were promised, these records should be the City’s favorite bedtime reading. Instead, we’re told third parties might object, copyright might apply, and the Attorney General must decide.
That’s not transparency. That’s strategic opacity.
The Real Question: What Are We Not Supposed to See?
No one is accusing the clinic of wrongdoing. No one is demanding personal health data. No one is attacking city employees for using a benefit. This is about taxpayer accountability.
When a multi-million-dollar program was controversial from the start, required subsidies, and was justified on future savings …citizens have every right to ask whether those promises materialized. And the City has an obligation to answer without hiding behind contractors and legal process.
Call to Action: This Is Bigger Than One Clinic
Residents of Frisco should not shrug this off. We encourage citizens to:
Write to the City of Frisco, demanding the release of these records
Contact the Texas Attorney General’s Office, urging disclosure under the Public Information Act related to PIR G093023
Remind leadership that “trust us” is not a financial metric
Transparency isn’t a slogan. It’s a practice.
And if the City truly believes this clinic is a win for employees and taxpayers, then sunlight won’t hurt a thing. Unless, of course… there’s something they’d rather keep in the dark.
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.
After former council member Tracie Reveal Shipman stepped up to the Citizens Input podium to publicly scold two sitting council members over their campaign finance reports, we figured it was a good time to do what Frisco Chronicles does best: pull the thread and see what unravels.
If we’re going to talk aboutethical leadership and transparencywith a straight face, then the microscope shouldn’t only hover over political opponents or convenient targets. Transparency, after all, is not a karaoke song—you don’t get to sing only the parts you like.
So, in the spirit of civic duty, ethical leadership, and good old-fashioned dumpster diving, we decided to take a look at campaign finance compliance across both Frisco ISD trustees and City Council candidates.
Spoiler alert: this trash pile has layers.
The Rules (Because Facts Are Stubborn Things)
Under Texas Election Law, the rules are not optional, vibes-based, or enforced only when politically convenient. Here’s the short version:
Anyone who files a Campaign Treasurer Appointment (Form CTA) must file semiannual campaign finance reports.
This requirement continues even after the election ends, even if the candidate:
Lost
Raised $0
Spent $0
Retired emotionally from politics
The only way out? Cease campaign activity and file a FINAL report.
Straight from Texas Election Code §254.063:
July 15 report (covering Jan 1 – June 30)
January 15 report (covering July 1 – Dec 31)
No report. No “oops.” No “but I meant to.” The law does not care.
Frisco ISD Trustees: Let’s Start There
Public disclosures and election records can be found here:
Mark Hill Frisco ISD Board of Trustees – Now Running for Mayor
Not in Compliance
Filed a campaign finance report in January 2024
That report was NOT marked “Final”
Meaning… the reporting requirement continues
Missing Reports:
❌ July 2024
❌ January 2025
❌ July 2025
Even $0 activity requires a filing. The form literally allows you to write “$0” repeatedly. Democracy loves paperwork.
Question for voters: If a candidate can’t follow the most basic campaign finance rules, should they be trusted with the mayor’s office? Asking for a city.
Dynette Davis Frisco ISD Trustee
In Compliance
Filed her July 2025 report which shows $0 contributions and $0 expenditures
Boring? Yes.
Correct? Also yes.
Gold star. No sarcasm required.
Sherrie Salas Frisco ISD Board of Trustees
Not in Compliance
Missing required reports:
❌ January 2025
❌ July 2025
Again, silence is not a filing strategy.
Keith Maddox Frisco ISD Board of Trustees
Not in Compliance
❌ Missing July 2025 report
One report doesn’t sound like much—until you remember compliance isn’t optional.
City Council: Same Rules, Same Problems
Now let’s shift from the school board to City Hall.
Mark Piland Candidate in the January 31 Special Election
In Compliance
Filed correctly. Reports accounted for. No notes.
Ann Anderson Candidate – City Council
Major Compliance Issues
Filed a Campaign Treasurer Appointment on November 17, 2023
Has filed ZERO campaign finance reports since
That means we’re missing:
❌ June 2024
❌ July 2024
❌ January 2025
❌ July 2025
Per state law, once a treasurer is on file, reports are mandatory until a FINAL report is filed. No reports = not compliant. Full stop.
So… About That Podium Speech
When someone publicly calls out others for ethical lapses, it’s fair to ask:
Has this same scrutiny been applied consistently?
Has the speaker reviewed all campaign finance reports with equal vigor?
Or is ethics enforcement selective—like a traffic cop who only pulls over certain cars?
Transparency is not a weapon. It’s a standard. And standards only work when they apply to everyone.
Final Thought
Campaign finance compliance isn’t complicated. It’s tedious. It’s boring. It’s paperwork-heavy. And that’s exactly why it matters.
Because if a candidate can’t handle the boring rules when no one’s watching, how exactly are they going to handle power when everyone is?
We’ll keep digging. Because someone has to.
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.
Sec. 254.063. SEMIANNUAL REPORTING SCHEDULE FOR CANDIDATE. (a) A candidate shall file two reports for each year as provided by this section.
(b) The first report shall be filed not later than July 15. The report covers the period beginning January 1, the day the candidate’s campaign treasurer appointment is filed, or the first day after the period covered by the last report required to be filed under this subchapter, as applicable, and continuing through June 30.
(c) The second report shall be filed not later than January 15. The report covers the period beginning July 1, the day the candidate’s campaign treasurer appointment is filed, or the first day after the period covered by the last report required to be filed under this subchapter, as applicable, and continuing through December 31.
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.
Politics is nasty. No surprise there. It attracts the best and the worst in people—but mostly the worst when election season heats up like a June sidewalk in Texas. And while anonymous commentary has long been a staple of free speech (hey, Frisco Whistleblower isn’t exactly sending selfies), there’s a wide, dusty canyon between anonymity and outright impersonation.
Let’s make this clear: creating an anonymous account to voice your opinion is one thing. Creating a fake account using someone else’s real photo, name, and identity? That’s a whole other universe of dirty. And in that universe, you’re not just trolling your political enemies—you’re potentially slandering innocent people and opening them up to have their reputational ruined, legal jeopardy, or worse.
Case in point: a local keyboard warrior operating under the name Bryan Bridges III (sometimes known as Ezra Bridges) has been bouncing around social media like a pinball, slapping his name on some big accusations and slinging insults like confetti at a cheap parade. The problem? The smiling face on Bryan’s profile pic? That’s not Bryan. That’s James Bridges—a real man who lives near the Oklahoma border, works with the Fellowship of Christian Athletes, and whose wife of 36 years is a Texas schoolteacher. He is a father of two sons and a grandfather of four grandchildren. He leads Bible studies and hosts weekly FCA huddles.
We are guessing James Bridges is not the Frisco flamethrower or political hatchet man. We are guessing he is just a man, living his life, who probably has no idea his photo is being used to publicly drag elected officials, political candidates, and constituents through the digital mud.
We like to fact check, so we have reached out to James Bridges via email and will be reaching out to his wife as well. We will of course let you know how he responds. If he responds the way we think he might, it’s going to be a doozy. We’ve taken all the screenshots sent to us of Bryan Bridges III comments and archived them as evidence. And if Mr. Bridges didn’t give consent for his image to be used in this toxic identity-theft theater, then “Bryan Bridges III” might be facing more than a few angry replies. He might be facing a libel suit.
Let’s stop and think about this: what if James’s employer stumbles across these posts and assumes he’s the one spouting off? What if someone at his wife’s school district mistakes him for the venomous ghostwriter behind the name? This is the sort of stunt that doesn’t just smear political opponents—it scorches innocent bystanders, too.
There’s a word for people who do this kind of thing: cowards. Cowards with no moral compass, hiding behind stolen faces because they know that if they showed their own, they’d have to answer for the mess they’re making. Maybe if they showed their face then we would know if they were the spouse of a council member, or a town bully, or maybe the sister of a political candidate.
Frisco deserves better than this kind of clown show. Say what you want, stand for what you believe—but do it under your own name or be completely anonymous. But don’t put real people on the line who don’t even live in our town to carry out your devious acts. Frisco Whistleblower has never claimed to be anyone but a resident of Frisco. We are not portraying ourselves as anyone we are not, we are just not disclosing who we are. Very different!
Because when you steal someone else’s identity just to hurl insults in a local election? That’s not speech. That’s sabotage. And we’re not letting it slide.
Let us know what you think:
Should the Frisco Police investigate this?
Should our city council members demand an investigation into this, the same way they did into the so-called “illegal recordings per Laura Woodward and Bryan Bridges III?” If they would like James Bridges information, we are happy to supply it to them.
Well, Frisco…we didn’t have this one on the bingo card today. The soap opera that is Frisco politics just added another act, and this one had all the flair of a daytime drama mixed with a deleted tweet. Today, we were all witnesses to what could’ve been a turning point — or at the very least, a moment of reckoning. That is, until it vanished faster than ethics at a campaign fundraiser.
This morning, Marcia Locke, fiancée of Councilman John Keating, broke her silence on the now-infamous Toxic Tammy Tapes. You know the ones — the recordings that have been circulating through local inboxes and Facebook threads like wildfire through a dry prairie.
Not only did she break her silence, but boy did she come in swinging a bat that was on fire. In a now-deleted social media post, Locke took to her page and finally addressed what we’ve all been talking about in hushed tones and wide-eyed reactions:
“I can no longer accept the pressure to stay silent,” she began. “I am not okay with what has been thrown at myself or my family… Politics is one thing… Being a person of integrity is a requirement of an elected official… and I have to speak my truth.”
Let’s pause for applause. 👏👏👏
But then Marcia didn’t stop there. She went full-on mic drop mode, calling out Councilmember Tammy Meinershagen directly:
“Tammy, you were exposed!!!”
Then—like a twist in a Netflix docuseries—she receipts us. Locke posted a screenshot from our very own comment section, a post from a reader named Rick, thanking him for telling the truth.
“Accountability is not persecution,” Locke wrote. “Those were your actions, your words, your choice, and your consequences. I look forward to early voting tomorrow!”
🔥 Mic. Drop. Honestly? It felt bold. It felt brave. It felt truthful.
Ladies and gentlemen, for a few shining hours, we thought finally, someone with firsthand knowledge, courage, and ties to the inner circle was willing to stand up, take the heat, and say what needed to be said.
We were so floored we even commented on the post ourselves—respectfully, of course. We said we were glad she spoke out and told her truth, but also disappointed it took this long. After all, when the house is burning, it doesn’t help to show up with a water hose two years later. But then…
Poof!!! The Post Was Deleted.
Gone. Like it never existed. No follow-up. No explanation. Just silence.
And now, we’re left wondering: What happened?
Did a certain councilman, mayor or city manager make a phone call?
Did someone remind her of who’s pulling the marionette strings on the cabal puppets?
Was there pressure from a political ally?
Did the local Cabal whisper in her ear?
Or did someone with influence promise support… in exchange for silence?
Who knows? But what we do know is this:
For one minute, Marcia had the guts and glory to speak up—and then someone, somewhere, convinced her to un-speak. That’s not transparency. That’s political puppetry. And it reeks. It is the clearest sign yet of the power behind the scenes in Frisco politics.
If politics is theater, then this was the deleted scene they didn’t want you to see. Which only confirms what many in Frisco already suspect—truth is dangerous here, and the pressure to suppress it comes fast and hard. We can vouch for that as we were served papers ourselves today. More details to come about that!
We applaud Marcia for finding her voice, even if it was just for a few hours. We hope she finds it again. And next time, we hope she doesn’t give it up so easily. Because, like she said, “integrity is a requirement of elected officials.” That must mean that the silence in the face of corruption isn’t just disappointing, it’s complicity. We will be reminding you of John Keating’s silence when he jumps to run for Mayor in a year!
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…