Councilmember Matt Prestenberg
I’ve only had few interactions with Matt Prestenberg.
Matt was not on the council when Jeff lied, or when the council voted to amend the by-laws per Jeff’s request to transfer authority over the SEDC under the City Manager.
Matt has no first-hand knowledge of those events, and he had no culpability in them, but he is culpable for continuing the coverup that started under Mike Felix's reign as Mayor.
My first interaction with Matt was when I sent emails to all of the councilmembers on April 24th of 2024, almost two years after he had been elected.
You can read all of my emails to Matt here.
In that first email, I stated:
“There is an objective truth about what happened and you should want to find it. Otherwise you are allowing yourself to be kept in the dark where you can be manipulated by lies.”
I was hoping to open the councilmember’s eyes to the fact that they had been kept in the dark, and prod them to investigate what had happened.
As a brief aside, I’d like to point out that in my communications with the council I have repeatedly asked them to find the truth for themselves. I didn’t need them to believe what I was telling them, because I knew the evidence of the lies and misconduct exists and leads to an inescapable conclusion that Jeff had lied and that the council had been manipulated. I just needed them to open their eyes and talk honestly about what had happened.
Matt did not reply to that email.
The morning after that first email to Matt I sent him a second email, with a copy of my complaint against Jeff attached. I offered to resubmit it officially if he needed me to.
Matt did not reply to that email.
A few days later, on May 4th, I posted a comment on a couple of the community’s Facebook pages about the council not addressing my complaint. Matt and I had a very interesting conversation in the comments, which you can read here.
In those comments, Matt said “It [my complaint] was reviewed by the city attorney and presented to the sitting council. You were informed of this in April 2022, and apparently aren’t satisfied with that outcome.”
I have no idea what Matt thinks I was informed of, but I received no communication back from the city on my complaint until 2024 when I reached out to the City Secretary to see if anything had been done. Matt is correct, however, that I’m not satisfied. My complaint was presented to the council but they never discussed it or investigated it. They ignored it.
I responded to Matt, telling him that I had not been notified of anything in April of 2022, and said again that my complaint had been ignored and that Matt should feel a moral obligation to address the matter.
Matt responded “you believe if a decision was investigated and resolved prior to me being on the council i should go back and reinvestigate the matter?”
I responded back to him, telling him “the issue was NEVER investigated or resolved”, and pointed out that it would have to be on a publicly posted agenda for them to have ever addressed it, as it is illegal for the council to address matters outside of the meetings. I also clarified to Matt that this wasn’t ancient history I was talking about, as it only predated his election by two months.
I told him in another comment, “you have been misled about this issue.” I asked him who he thought had notified me in April of 2022 that the council had resolved my issue, and asked him who had told him that I had been notified, among a couple other questions.
Matt replied, stating he believed I was contacted by city staff. He asked if that was incorrect and offered to take the conversation off of social media.
I clarified that I had received no response until 11 days prior to these comments when I had reached out the City Secretary for an update, and I told him I’d like to keep the conversation in the open on the public Facebook page. I then asked him to answer my questions publicly.
At some point Matt became aware of the emails I had received stating clearly that the council had never taken up the complaint.
Matt responded later that day “I believe the email response you received last month gave you the information that you requested and satisfied the inquiry.” He went on “I don’t believe FB is the proper place to continue conversations along this topic.”
He never answered the questions about how he came to be misinformed about the status of my complaint. Matt had been willing to discuss the topic when he believed my complaint had been investigated and resolved and that I had been notified of that resolution. When he learned that I had been told a week before that the council had never taken up the complaint, he dropped out of the conversation.
To sum up, in that conversation Matt stated that he believed my complaint had been investigated, the council had come to some resolution on the complaint, and that I had been notified of it in April of 2022. But none of that had happened. From the emails I had from the City Attorney and City Secretary (which you can read here) the complaint had been given to the council and nobody on the council had brought it forward for investigation or discussion.
Matt had been lied to about the status of my complaint, and he wouldn’t answer my questions about how he had been misled.
Where there’s smoke, there’s fire. Matt was lied to, but he is refusing to address that fact. And worse, he now knows that the complaint was never addressed and yet he still refuses to address it.
The fact that Matt was lied to is a clear indication that something is being covered up, something which Jeff Bickerstaff doesn’t want exposed by an investigation, yet Matt has just moved on, keeping up the illusion that there are no integrity problems on the City Council.
Matt put in writing his understanding of the status of my complaint, and that status is contradicted by the City Attorney, the City Secretary, and the public record. For a year now Matt has known the truth, that my complaint was never addressed and that he was misled about that fact, yet he has done nothing, and he refuses to publicly answer my questions on the matter about who misled them.
On January 5th of 2025, I emailed Matt as a follow-up to that Facebook conversation. He had offered to take the conversation off of Facebook, so I emailed him the questions and again asked him to answer them.
Matt did not reply to that email.
On February 11th I sent Matt another email again imploring him to listen the audio recordings and process for himself what had happened. I advised him “If you're not calling for accountability then you're on the wrong side.”
Matt did not reply to that email.
On February 13th I sent Matt (and the rest of the council and some city staff) an email pointing out the lies and leading them to the recordings which showed I was correct about what had happened. I advised them “If we all act with integrity to find the truth, share that truth openly with the citizens, and hold people accountable for any misconduct they've committed in their official positions, then we can put this matter behind us.“
Matt did not reply to that email.
On February 10th I posted a comment on a Facebook post by Catherine Cavalier on “’The’ Sachse Community Page” Facebook page. Matt engaged with me on the comment thread, which you can read here.
My comment was “We desperately need new leaders with integrity. The current crop is seriously lacking, especially at the top.”
Matt chimed in to defend himself, and I pointed out that he still hadn’t answered my questions from the year before.
Matt responded, pointing out that my complaint was not an “Ethics Complaint” and that the council made no request to move forward on it. Matt asked that I “determine my integrity by some other equation.”
I responded pointing out that Matt had previously asserted that my complaint had been investigated, resolved, and I had been notified, but that he was now acknowledging that the council had never taken it up and asking why he had believed otherwise.
I thanked him for admitting that “nothing had been done” regarding my complaint.
Matt responded that the council “decided not to move it forward”, which isn’t entirely accurate. The “council” did not meet and come to a decision. Each councilmember failed to bring it forward for discussion, but the “council” did not make a decision.
He then said the nonsensical statement “Sometimes inaction is action, I never said nothing was done.”
Matt can’t have it both ways here, the council chose to do nothing. No investigation. No discussion. No resolution of the complaint. That was a choice, but it wasn’t “action”. Despite Matt’s statement, “nothing” was exactly what was done.
I responded to Matt pointing out that “inaction should not be an option when a councilmember abuses their office to lie to get a person fired.” I asked Matt again “Who told you I had been notified?”
Matt did not reply.
To those of you who don't know, Matt attended West Point, and West Point has an Honor Code: "A cadet will not lie, cheat, or steal, or tolerate those who do."
I think Matt is falling short of that Honor Code here. Matt’s not only tolerating Jeff lying to get the CEO fired, but he’s tolerating that he was misled about the status of my complaint. Worse than just tolerating it, he’s keeping that information from the citizens to cover it up.
In addition to the Honor Code, West Point has "Three Rules to Live By", to ensure actions they are undertaking aren't dishonorable. The three rules are:
Does this action attempt to deceive anyone or allow anyone to be deceived?
Does this action gain or allow the gain of privilege or advantage to which I or someone else would not otherwise be entitled?
Would I be dissatisfied by the outcome if I were on the receiving end of this action?
By my assessment, Matt’s silence on this matter is an attempt to deceive the citizens into believing that Jeff was conducting himself properly. Matt should feel a duty to demand integrity on the council, but he’s overlooking the fact that somebody lied to him about official business of the city.
Also, Matt’s silence is allowing Jeff to gain the privilege of being elected to serve the citizens on the City Council, which I don’t believe he would be entitled to if Matt had investigated my complaint, or if he had exposed who had lied to him about the status of my complaint.
Lastly, I don’t believe that Matt would be satisfied by the outcome if he had been on the receiving end of Jeff’s lies.
In Matt’s write-up in the Sachse News’ “Voter’s Guide”, he says “The leadership qualities I bring to the council are integrity, empathy, and communication. I ensure that no matter what I do, I do it honestly and build trust through my words and my actions.”
I don’t see “integrity” in how Matt has handled this issue. He knows my complaint was not addressed, and he knows that he was misled about that fact. Matt inadvertently spread lies publicly when he said on Facebook last year that my complaint had been investigated and resolved and I had been notified in 2022. Integrity would require that he address these lies which have infested the city.
I also don’t see “communication” as one of his leadership qualities. He has never replied to my emails. The only times he responds to me is on Facebook when he wants to argue and defend his inaction on this matter.
Matt claims that everything he does he does it honestly, and he builds trust through his words and his actions. Is he being honest when he refuses to answer who misled him? Is he building trust when he says “Inaction is action”? Is he building trust by refusing to address the lies in the council, including the lies which misled him about the status of my complaint?
Matt has repeatedly pointed out on Facebook that my complaint is not an "Ethics Complaint", and he's pointing that out to excuse his and the council's inaction on this matter. If my complaint were an "Ethics Complaint" then the council would be legally required (by the city's Code of Ethics) to address it, however I could not file an Ethics Complaint because the Code of Ethics doesn't prohibit lies. If I had filed my complaint regarding Jeff's lies as an Ethics Complaint they would have summarily dismissed it as I wasn't alleging any violation of the Code of Ethics.
But we all know it is unethical to lie to get a woman fired from her job, right?
When Matt points out that my complaint wasn't an "Ethics Complaint" he is pointing out that the council had no "legal obligation" to address the complaint, but the council still has the authority to address the complaint, and the moral and ethical obligation to investigate and address Jeff's dishonesty and misconduct.
Is that the standard for integrity that we want to accept from our council, that they can ignore misconduct and lies as long as they don't have a legal obligation to address them? I would hope for better, and the voters need to demand better.
In his Facebook comments, Matt has tried to deflect his responsibility for the council's refusal to address my complaint by pointing out that previous council under Mike Felix was the original group to ignore the complaint. If you listen to my phone call with Mike Felix (discussed here), Mike acknowledged that what Jeff had told me wasn't the truth but he refused to hold Jeff accountable for lying to me. Matt wants to deflect to Mike's position, that Jeff wasn't going to be held accountable for lying, but Matt has received the complaint, and I have implored him to address it. Yet he continues to hide behind the deflection that he is only following in the footsteps of the other councilmembers who are covering up Jeff's misconduct.
That isn't integrity, and it isn't leadership. The city deseves better.
If you think it is okay for councilmembers to ignore the lies and misconduct in the city’s government, then keep voting for incumbents like Matt Prestenberg who have stonewalled this investigation for years.