In an age where information travels faster than verification, the line between opinion and journalism has never been more important—or more fragile. When a blog presents itself as a source of truth but operates without real journalism, the consequences can ripple far beyond a single headline. Readers trust what they believe is reporting. When readers know the blogger is a FORMER COUNCILMAN, they assume they can trust him – because our politicians would not lie, right?
Readers make decisions, form opinions, and sometimes even take action based on it. When that trust is misplaced, the damage isn’t just misinformation—it’s a breakdown of credibility across the entire information ecosystem.
At Frisco Chronicles, we believe that words carry weight. Calling something “journalism” is not just a stylistic choice; it’s a responsibility to the public. When that claim is misused—when speculation is dressed up as reporting or bias is masked as truth—it misleads readers and undermines the very foundation of informed communities. And in a city where residents are demanding transparency and trust, that’s not just careless—it’s dangerous.
On April 16, 2026, Former Councilman Bill Woodard published a blog speculating that little lies reveal big truths. He hinted to an important legal proceeding between Frisco Chronicles (me) and the Petitioner and explained he would get into that later.
Then Woodard makes a reference “What Court Documents Revealed” which immediately makes the implication that what is about to be written is based on facts revealed on the record. But is it factual, or staged to look factual?
Note: Anything in RED is directly cut and pasted from Woodards Blog. The rest is our commentary.
Woodard starts by giving context using words such as weaponize, strategizing, underhanded, political scheme, and secret recording. Then he drops the names of the Colberg’s and Sangita Datta. He then said what matters in this case is not just that the recording exists, but WHO was involved in how it was used. Woodard is wrong when he says what matters in this case is how the recordings were used. The Tammy Tapes have nothing to do with the petitioner’s claim of defamation or libel. However, his words probably put readers on the edge of their seat.
Woodard writes: Here is exactly what the text message shows:
It is an exchange between current Councilman Brian Livingston and Chris Fields.
– Brian forwards Chris a text from “The Colbergs.”
– Not “Brittany.” Not “Erich.” The Colbergs, plural. Both of them.
– Chris confirms he received the same message from “them”, detailing how to use the secret recordings against a sitting council candidate.
This is not speculation. This is actual documentation from court proceedings. The text establishes a direct connection between the secret recordings and both Brittany and Erich Colberg acting together.
Here is the PROBLEM with Bill Woodard’s article, he claims this is actual documentation from court proceedings and then posts a link to an image of a text message. I filed a PIR with Denton County Courts and the Court Reporter for all documents related to this case including submitted evidence and the transcript of the proceedings. When I received it, I reviewed everything in full detail. However, there was no copy of the text Bill Woodard posted. I went back to the court and specifically showed them what Bill had posted and asked for that evidence as well. You can read the response for yourself:
If the text messages were never entered into court evidence and they are not a part of the court record, HOW DID BILL WOODARD GET A COPY OF THE TEXT MESSAGE?
Why is this important, because he led readers to believe This is actual documentation from court proceedings which it was NOT! Speculation is he received the text from the Petitioner, her attorney Mr. Harbin, or maybe David Ovard (the PGA KING) who also wormed himself into this case and who works at Clark Hill with Mr. Harbin. However – none of it was from actual documentation from court proceedings.Bill Woodard LIED to his readers.
Dissecting Bills Words: Text between Councilman Livingston and Chris Fields
Woodard writes, “Brian forwards Chris a text from “The Colbergs.”
Woodard continues, “Not Brittany. Not Erich. The Colberg’s, plural. Both of them.”
The FACTS show, Brian forwarded a screen shot of just a text with no name, no phone number on it. There is no circle at the top showing who it was from or if both of the Colberg’s were on the text to Livingston, or what phone number it came from. Then in a second text, Livingston says “From the Colbergs” which means he implied it was from them “plural.”
The FACTS show Fields said, “they sent it to me as well” and he was probably replying in plural with that because Livingston made that implication in his text. As for Woodard’s claim, Chris confirms he received the same message he did not confirm that in court records. Chris said “I don’t remember that text, but that’s what he (referring to Erich) said yesterday” referring to their phone call. Mr. Martin then asked what he did with the text and Fields responds, “I didn’t do anything with it.” Mr. Harbin then shows him the text and asks Fields, does this look like an exchange between you and Livingston? Fields responds, “It definitely could be, I just don’t remember it.” A few questions later Mr. Harbin ask Fields again, “so does that refresh your memory that they sent you the text message?” Fields replies again, “Not really, I get a lot of texts.” At no time did Chris Fields confirm he received the text as Woodard claims according to actual court document proceedings.
Another Fact, the “Tammy Tapes” came out the first week of May and this text that Bill Woodard claims “implicates the Colberg’s” was sent June 3rd at 10:28 pm a month later after the tapes were already out. Why is the date of the text message important? It aligns with Chris Fields testimony on page 38 of the transcript. Mr. Martin (the petitioner’s attorney) asked Fields at any point after the tapes were released, did you receive a text from “The Colberg’s” regarding those tapes and a whistleblower?” Fields responds, “I don’t remember, but I had a conversation with Erich about it yesterday.”
Again, it was Mr. Martin who implied “The Colberg’s” plural – which is not proof the actual text was from them both. Fields continues Erich Colberg reached out to him the day before to talk about something (not the tapes or the text) and it just came up in conversation. Mr. Martin continued and asked who brought it up and Fields replied, Erich Colberg. Fields reiterated again, “I didn’t even remember that text.”
Mr. Martin then asks Fields why Erich would bring that up and Fields responds, “lots of people made points about what they would and wouldn’t do.” This shows it was the talk of the town, and many were speculating who, what, when, where, etc.
On page 40 of the transcript Mr. Martin handed Mr. Fields a text message document they received in response to a subpoena from Mr. Livingston which is a text exchange between you and Livingston. The document was never entered into evidence by Mr. Martin to the court records.
The questions by Mr. Martin continue around the “Tammy Tapes” but my question is what does the tapes have to do with the Petitioner and her defamation case? It has nothing to do with the trolls who left nasty comments. What is the point of the line of questioning others to enter it into the record? Maybe it was all a setup for them to use later like Bill Woodard did in his blog.
Woodard then writes “Chris confirms he received the same message from “them”, detailing how to use the secret recordings against a sitting council candidate.”
Next up was cross examination by Mr. Harbin, Frisco Chronicles attorney, and he asks Fields if he has any personal knowledge of who the Frisco Chronicles Whistleblower is? Mr. Fields responds, “I have no proof whatsoever. Mr. Harbin continues, “you also testified that there was no personal knowledge that there’s anybody else other than Mr. Douglass that is ..” Fields responds, “I have no knowledge of the inside workings of Whistleblower.” Mr. Harbin continues and asked Fields, “What is the basis of your belief that there are others that are behind Frisco Chronicles…” Fields responded that he didn’t have anything specific, he just always thought it was a group of people. Mr. Harbin then said, “so purely a hunch?” Fields responded 100 percent.
Woodards Personal Opinion
Bill Woodard continues in his article calling out Brittany Colberg as a liar, when it is very possible, she did not know about the text. I cannot speak for them as I don’t know them. As for why Erich Colberg would file to have these text messages removed, my guess is because they have nothing to do with the case of defamation against the Petitioner. If every Frisco resident who texted friends or talked to friends regarding speculation of “who is Frisco Chronicles,” is guilty, then half of Frisco would be in trouble including Bill Woodard.
We have to ask the obvious again, what is the point of the questioning and the text itself? It had nothing to do with the comments the petitioner claims are defamatory. Why did the petitioner’s attorney not ask them if under a fake name, did they leave defamatory comments on a blog related to the petitioner? Why not ask them if they are Frisco Whistleblower? That would have something to do with this whole case.
The even more concerning thing is that the petitioner’s attorney may have had phone calls and conversations with all these witnesses before they came to court. One could say it was to apply pressure or influence what someone might say, the other thought it was simple preparation. You decided!
False Accusations
As we have said before this was never about libel or defamation, it was about outing the me, the Whistleblower, to try and put pressure on me to shut it down. It was to put pressure and discredit innocent residents who like a Frisco Chronicles post or left a comment. It was to embarrass those who came to court or donated to a go fund me for Frisco Chronicles. It was about applying public pressure, because that is what the Frisco Insiders do to shut those who disagree, or don’t like the Cheney status quo.
Woodard needs to be honest and transparent when it’s uncomfortable. Mr. Woodard, would you like to tell us how and where he got a copy of a text message that was not submitted to evidence and therefore is not a part of the court records or transcripts? Woodard needs to be accurate and honest about Fields testimony because he never confirmed anything.
Livingston and Fields turned those over under a subpoena to the petitioner’s attorney. Court does not have them, so who else has a copy of them? Deductive reasoning would tell you that it was given to him by his “friends” meaning the petitioners legal team, or the petitioner herself. Why would they give a blogger a text without any context to put into his blog? It goes to prove this is about the Frisco Insiders or the machine to shutting me down. They are tired of being the headlines or questioned about dealings in this city.
Woodard wrote “This is not speculation. This is actual documentation from court proceedings. The text establishes a direct connection between the secret recordings and both Brittany and Erich Colberg acting together.” https://friscowatchdog.com/…/2026/04/Colberg-Text.pdf
Nothing in the court evidence shows or confirms that the Colberg’s “acted together” on anything. If that is considered evidence to publicly convict someone, then I would argue the fact that Ann Anderson, our new councilwoman, whose campaign page liked Bill’s Blog makes her guilty of working with him and being a part of these false accusations. Or recently re-elected Laura Rummel is guilty of collusion with Bill Woodard because she shared his blog attacking innocent Frisco residents (which she later took down). MYPOINT: THAT IS COMPLETELY RIDICULOUS! A like of a page, a reshare of a post, or a text to a friend is not an admission of guilt on anything.
Mr. Woodard owes the Colberg’s and the readers an apology for misleading them because nothing he published in this specific blog was from actual documentation from court proceedings. His claim is not speculation; it is 1000% pure speculation on his part. Speculation that came out right during early voting in order to possibly upset the apple cart or discredit a candidate.
For legal purposes I must put the following: 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.
While many want to believe local politics is non-partisan, the truth is your values reflect how you vote and what you support. For the last several elections we have heard candidates say when they door knock communities one of the first questions they are asked is what party affiliation you are. It shows that your party does matter to voters at the end of the day.
Lack of Engagement with the Republican Party
Recently, Laura Rummell went after the Denton and Collin GOP endorsement, and Frisco Chronicles is curious as to why? She has not attended any Republican events, dinners, or meetings. Rummel has not visited or supported local Republican groups, and she has not supported Republican endorsed candidates.
Party Endorsements
She did not receive endorsement in either County. In Denton County, Vijay Karthik received 44 or 49 votes, while Laura Rummel only received 11 and 15 abstained. It was not enough for the 2/3 majority vote. In Collin County, Vijay Karthik received the Collin GOP endorsement in a landslide vote.
Lack of Support for Fellow Republican Candidates
In Frisco, Laura has not supported the last three Republican endorsed candidates and went as far as actively working for their opponents. But when it comes time to get “RE-ELECTED” she shows up asking to the Denton and Collin County GOP’s asking, well expecting their endorsement. Laura also campaigned against Stephanie Elad for Frisco ISD supporting her opponent a hard dem. Most recently Laura supported Ann Anderson for city council who was backed by local democrat groups instead of the endorsed Republican. Here she is supporting Tammy Meinershagen who ran against one of those republican endorsed candidates.
Screenshot
Endorsed by Hard Democrats
Rummel’s Re-Election Kickoff party in February 2026 was also filled with several hard dem’s. One of the speakers at her kickoff was Traci Reveal Shipman – a hard democrat. She also is very tight with our current Mayor Jeff Cheney and his wife Dana Cheney.
Let’s talk about endorsements. Laura Rummel has been endorsed by several Democrats such Angelia Pelham, the star of the Tammy Tapes, Tammy Meinershagen. Most recently on April 15th, Jesse Ringness a hard dem who has run state office before also has endorsed Rummel in a video on his Facebook Page. Just look at her posts and the who’s who of Frisco Dems are all over it.
Furthermore, at the December 2025 city council meeting Laura Rummel supported Jordan Villareal, a hard democrat, over a republican for the Tax Assessor Board. She has also supported hard democrats over republicans for local city boards and commissions within the city.
Selective Cultural Advocacy
In 2023, the City of Frisco made a public post on social media platforms renaming Good Friday as the “New Spring Holiday” … really? The post had over 340 comments, most of which were complaints about the lack of respect for Good Friday. Rummel said nothing! She supported the city’s post and shared it.
Meanwhile, Rummel shows consistent support for other religions and cultures. She continually supports every Islamic Center Candidate Forum and the Inclusion Committee celebrations of Muslim holidays. Rummel has posted her reflections on different speeches by Imam’s. She continually attends the EID Milap Brunch’s each year. She was a panelist recently at the ICF Woman’s Career Day. In 2023, she attended an event in the parking lot of the Islamic Center where she wore a Hijab. Why would you wear one of those in the parking lot unless the whole goal was to pander to Muslim voters.
Screenshot
At the same time, she has failed to attend the yearly Frisco Chabad events, although she did this last December 2025 because she is running for re-election. She has not attended every city Christmas Tree Lighting. Her lack of support publicly for Christian holidays should be concerning to Republican voters.
Inconsistent Fiscal Messaging and Voting
Rummel voted for Universal Kids! That is a project Frisco Chronicles, and many residents were adamantly against because of the potential crime it will bring. Also, residents were concerned about pedophiles, and the sex trafficking issues these types of parks can bring. After the backlash came from the announcement, the city, council members and the Mayor went on a marketing grandstand to sell the project to residents. The worst part was after doing that the night of the vote they changed the whole proposal, changing key terms of the deal.
For example, the park was sold as ages 3 to 9 then it went to 3 – 12. The original hours were going to be from 10am to 6pm which made no sense to most people. The night of the vote the hours changed from 10am to 10pm with some exceptions for early access at 8am and some late nights till 10 / 11 pm. The initial ride height was sold as 40 to 50 feet but the night of the vote it went up to 80 feet which is 7 stories tall. The initial proposal was not parades, no fireworks, and it would be indoor focused. The night of the vote changed to allow parades, outdoor concerts and shows. This is not the transparency this is a bait-and-switch which Laura Rummel voted for. Screw the nearby neighbors and their home values, just get the deal done at any cost and that is what Rummel voted for.
Next Laura Rummel ran on getting residents the long-awaited Animal Shelter they had been asking for. Instead, she is building a … well we don’t know. She voted to spend 12.5 million taxpayer CDC dollars without a FEASIBILITY STUDY. The night of the vote for the LOI she offered to keep it transparent the whole way through with the public, yet a 2025 email shows her asking to move the item to Closed Session to keep it from the eyes of the public.
However, for the last few elections the animal Shetler has come up. When Angelia was running, she told animal advocates of we are almost there – Not True! Tammy Meinershagen told advocates – an announcement is coming soon – Not True! Laura Rummel is doing the exact same thing. It has taken years to get answers from the city, yet Rummel now claims the city has all the answers. Collin County just pulled out supporting Frisco with animal services after the current contract ends November 2028. Within days the city has a website up claiming they have the answer, don’t worry, be happy! Fact is they have nothing, no answers, no plan, and they are using this again as a re-election tool for candidates. What do you want to bet something will happen after the election and it will magically fall apart, and they vote not to move forward? Rummel continues to use Cheney’s line, the Animal Shelter project will raise your property tax.
At the same time Rummel was one of the council members claiming the $350 million performing arts center that was going to be city owned would not raise taxes. A performing arts center has been one of her priorities for years on her campaign page. She also advocated for Tammy Meinershagens, whose pet project was a performing arts center, for re-election against a republican candidate. Now that is re-election time, her stance is … OH WAIT I did not support that.
ScreenshotScreenshot
Here she is attacking the PAC who stood against the Broadway Performing Arts Center. Even after residents overwhelming voted NO to a Performing Arts Center, Rummel posted it just two months later as the 2025 Progress in Motion List.
ScreenshotScreenshot
She also supported the employee health clinic that showed it would operate in the red up to the first 6 years. Truth is every project “won’t raise taxes” but an animal shelter. Frisco Chronicles has heard from advocates since our page started and I agree with them that the city is using that line to scare voters away from supporting it.
Her Opponents:
Sreekanth Reddy who you can’t even take seriously. He creates fake straw polls to publish to mislead the Indian Community. Has no original thoughts, plans, or ideas of his own and just agrees with whatever you say. He is more concerned running around town to different events getting a selfie with important people and posting it to display fake support for himself. He could give Jennifer Achu true competition if there was a race for “Selfie Queen of Frisco.”
Her other opponent is Vijay Karthik. Many questioned Karthik’s conversion to the Republican Party in recent years. However, many in the GOP believe he has done more for the party than his counterpart Laura Rummel. The proof is in his actions. Karthik and his wife have supported the last three party endorsed Republican Candidates including Burt Thakur, Jared Elad and Mark Piland. In Thakur and Elad’s election they stood in the hot sun at the polls during early voting to support them. In the most recent special election for Mark Piland, Karthik stood side by side with the candidate in 30-degree weather on election day for the entire day from sun up to sun down. Karthik also supported all three candidates at the polls, door knocking, phone banking and more. He has been honest about his conversion to the Republican Party and what driving principles were behind that. He has presented true concerns about the city’s rising debt and how we can do animal shelter without affecting property taxes. He is a proud American Citizen and Frisco Resident who raised twin boys here with his wife. He is the right choice to replace Laura Rummel.
In closing, Rummel’s record shows she has lied to residents, shifts positions for political advancement, supports democrats consistently over republicans, has inconsistent fiscal reasoning and ignores constituents when it matters most. There is a clear and consistent disconnect between what she claims and what she does. She has never displayed Republican leadership through her actions and decisions. For Frisco Chronicles, Laura Rummel is one of the Frisco Insiders who is here to serve Jeff Cheney and Cheney 2.0 agenda.
Ever since Frisco Chronicles saw the number $50,000, $50,000 and $20,000 in John Keatings campaign finance report we wondered … why would one person or company donate so much money to John Keating? Do you think someone donates that kind of money without expectation in return? Keating’s post today is poetic to Frisco Chronicles report!
The Relationship
I am pretty sure others have been wondering the same thing and we did some digging. A little birdy in the city told us to do some research and we would find there is a QUID PRO QUO between Keating and “The Donor” aka Frisco 380 Partners.
Frisco 380 Partners is an LLC owned and operated by Ronald Josh Feferman. Feferman is also the owner of Primary Media (a billboard operator). And here’s the kicker, that donation is directly tied to the same person who negotiated with the City of Frisco over 380 signage and who benefited from a 2023 settlement agreement allowing a digital billboard at 380 & Coit. Remember that, we will touch on it again shortly.
Simply put Frisco 380 Partners = the land/financial arm and Primary Media = the operating/signage arm. That’s not illegal. But it’s also not subtle.
Frisco Becomes a Certified City
According to our city source Keating was corralling support for a sign despite it being illegal by TXDOT at the time. City Council Meeting Minutes confirms that Keating was trying to get support, but as usual everything happened in “CLOSED SESSION” so we are limited to the actual details.
Our source tells us that Keating, over City Attorney, Richard Abernathy’s OBJECTIONS, got city staff to apply to become a “Certified City!”
What does that mean? Under the Highway Beautification Act a city can get certified by TXDOT which allows the city to control its own outdoor advertising / sign permitting instead of the state. Once a city is “certified” by Texas Department of Transportation:
The city—not TxDOT—issues permits for billboards and certain signage. The city gains local control over aesthetics and enforcement. It can shape how corridors look.
In plain English: certification = more local power, less state oversight and removes TXDOT’s watchful eyes at permit or application time.
Via the “Consent Agenda,” Frisco, Texas was officially certified on September 16, 2022. Guess who made the motion to pass the consent agenda that day? Mayor Pro-Tem John Keating moved to approve Consent Agenda Items #15 through #30. Deputy Mayor Pro-Tem Angelia Pelham seconded the motion. Coincidence? Nope.
Donation Time
Furthermore, our city source told us that allegedly Feferman, through himself or sources, donated to several council members over the years. Our source continued that several times talks were dead in the water but one councilman, one superman worked harder than ever for their big donation. Can you guess who? John Keating.
Who else did Feferman donate to? From campaign finance reports we see the following:
Rob Cox on 10/9/2020 – Josh Feferman donated $2500
*Rob Cox was on Planning & Zoning and ran for office
Angelia Pelham on 5/22/2021 – Josh Feferman donated $250.00
Jeff Cheney on 4/28/2023 (2023 Mayoral Race) – Ronald Feferman who owned Primary Media donated $5,000
John Keating on 4/12/2024 – Ronald Feferman donated $20,000
John Keating on 11/14/2025 – Frisco 380 Partners donated $50,000
John Keating on 12/30/2025 – Frisco 380 Partners donated $50,000
John Keating on 4/8/2026 – Frisco 380 Partners donated $20,000
What is the 2023 Settlement Agreement between the City of Frisco and Primary Media?
Supposedly, a billboard company with existing or claimed rights along US 380, tied to roadway changes, negotiated a settlement with the City of Frisco that allowed a digital billboard—despite a local ban—in exchange for resolving disputes and possibly removing other signs.
The 380 Billboard Deal: How a “Prohibited” Sign Went Up Anyway
Frisco residents are told the city bans digital billboards. The ordinance is clear. The message is simple: no flashing ads, no towering digital screens cluttering the skyline.
So how did one end up lighting up US 380 & Coit? The answer isn’t via a permit, it’s a settlement. In August 2023, the City of Frisco quietly approved a “First Amended Settlement Agreement” with Ronald Josh Feferman’s company, Primary Media—the same operator behind the digital billboard now standing along one of the city’s fastest-growing corridors.
That agreement did something extraordinary: It carved out an exception to a citywide ban.
The sharper question is: What specific property or rights does Frisco 380 Partners hold along 380, and were those leveraged in the billboard agreement? Because if the same entity owns the dirt, negotiates the sign, and funds the politics …then you’re not looking at separate events. You’re looking at a strategy.
From Prohibited… to Profitable
Frisco’s sign code doesn’t leave much room for interpretation—digital billboards are prohibited. Yet under the settlement, one was not only allowed, but it was also effectively guaranteed. Why? Because the deal wasn’t about permission, it was about leverage.
Feferman’s network of entities, including Frisco 380 Partners LLC, held interest along the US 380 corridor during a time of massive highway expansion. In Texas, billboard owners impacted by road projects often claim relocation rights—a powerful legal tool that can force cities to negotiate rather than deny.
The Trade-Off Nobody Talked About
These agreements usually follow a familiar script. One, remove older static billboards. Two, replace them with fewer, more lucrative digital displays. Three, lock in long-term rights tied to the land. The public hears “less clutter.” The operator gets more revenue per sign.
And buried in the legal language is the key phrase: “Notwithstanding city ordinance.” Translation? The rules still apply—just not here.
The Timeline That Raises Questions
September 2022 – Frisco becomes a TxDOT-certified city, gaining control over billboard permitting
August 2023 – City approves settlement with Primary Media
Late 2023 – Digital billboard goes live on US 380
That sequence matters. Because it suggests the billboard wasn’t simply inherited from state control—it was approved locally, after the city had full authority to say no.
Follow the Structure, Follow the Money
This isn’t just about one sign. It’s about how a billboard operator, a real estate holding entity, and a city-level legal agreement …intersected at exactly the right moment along one of North Texas’ most valuable corridors.
The same network tied to the project has also surfaced in local political funding, raising a bigger question: Was this just a legal necessity… or a negotiated outcome shaped by influence?
The Question Frisco Hasn’t Answered
If digital billboards are banned in Frisco— Why was this one allowed? And more importantly: Would anyone else have gotten the same deal?
As for John Keating, he is dirty! As dirty as they come! He is bought and paid for by Feferman and that shows through the campaign finance reports. I bet as soon as Keating became Mayor, he would allow digital billboards all over the city. Maybe one outside Universal Kids to shine into Cobb Hill homes. They already have to look at a ugly hotel why not an electronic billboard?
REFERENCE TO OVERALL TIMELINE OF EVENTS:
June 18, 2019 – Receive legal advice regarding contract with Primary Media.
Aug 4, 2020 – Receive legal advice from city attorney regarding proposed changes to Primary Media agreement
April 21, 2020 – Consult with and receive legal advice from city attorney regarding proposed changes to Primary Media agreement
June 21, 2022 – Receive legal advice regarding amendment to the Primary Media Agreement.
May 2022 – Ordinance Change Reads: Consider and act upon adoption of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Frisco, Texas, repealing Ordinance Nos. 11-06-21, 16-03-25 and 17-02-10, and amending Frisco’s Code of Ordinances, Ordinance No. 06-03-31, as amended, Chapter 70 (Signs); modifying certain regulations governing the erection, maintenance, and operation of signs. (Development Services/PC) ORDINANCE 2022-05-21
September 16, 2022: Via the “Consent Agenda,” Frisco, Texas was officially named a Certified City. Mayor Pro-Tem John Keating moved to approve Consent Agenda Items #15 through #30. Deputy Mayor Pro-Tem Angelia Pelham seconded the motion.
June 6, 2023 – Receive legal advice regarding amendment to the Primary Media Agreement
May Consider and act upon adoption of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Frisco, Texas, repealing Ordinance Nos. 11-06-21, 16-03-25 and 17-02-10, and amending Frisco’s Code of Ordinances, Ordinance No. 06-03-31, as amended, Chapter 70 (Signs); modifying certain regulations governing the erection, maintenance, and operation of signs. (Development Services/PC) ORDINANCE 2022-05-21
Aug 15 2023 – Consent Agenda Item 18 was approved when Mayor Pro-Tem John Keating made the motion and Deputy Mayor Pro-Tem Angelia Pelham seconded the motion.
Item 18 Reads: Consider and act upon authorizing the City Manager to execute the First Amended Settlement Agreement by and between the City of Frisco and Primary Media, LTD. (CMO/BB)
Action Requested: Consider and act upon authorizing the City Manager to execute the First Amended Settlement Agreement by and between the City of Frisco and Primary Media, LTD.
Background Information: City Council authorized the Settlement Agreement on May 5, 2015. On or about June 2022, the Sign become inoperable and was removed due to planned TxDOT expansion of US 380, through TxDOT condemnation. City and Primary Media desire to amend the settlement agreement to allow for a new sign to be built at the southwest corner of US 380 and Coit Road.
The Settlement Agreement established the framework of responsibilities relating to the two static billboards located on US 380 and a proposed digital sign in the same location. The Agreement calls for the removal of the two static signs during the construction of the digital sign, so that the only remaining sign will be one digital sign. This is a ten-year agreement. 90 days after Primary Media receives its building permit from the City, the clock will start on the term of the agreement.
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.
Since the Chihuahua has written his blog accusing innocent people of being involved Frisco Chronicles or connected to it, I thought I would clear up a few more of his SO-CALLED FACTS.
Bobblehead Bill listed out the folks who attended the evidentiary court hearing. He claims they came out in support, but my guess is they were just nosey and hoping that I would show up so they could learn the identity of Frisco Chronicles. Like everyone else they too were curious.
However, Bobblehead Bill left off a name. I wonder why? Maybe they sent their own spy that day to watch the court hearing. Well, Lisa Kirby, would you like to tell us why you were there that day? Maybe you can enlighten us why were you not mentioned in the political hit piece written by Bobblehead Bill?
Next let’s talk subpoenas! Bubblehead Bill said, following the deposition, subpoenas were issued to others, including but not limited to City Council member Brian Livingston and campaign manager Chris Fields.
Funny, the Chihuahua forgot to mention their friend Judy Adams! Judy Adams is a Republican Precinct Chair who somehow always ends up supporting Democrats or those linked to Democrats like Mark Hill and Laura Rummel. It sure is convenient Adams was left out of his story tale. No mention of her subpoena!
He also failed to mention that Julie Harville received a subpoena. When I first saw that back in January, I wondered why? I cannot recall, nor do I think I have ever even met Ms. Harville.
Harville filed a “Motion To Quash” which was an interesting read. The summary argument states, “Julie Harville is a non-party witness who does not possess first-hand knowledge regarding the identity of the alleged whistleblower or the events at issue.
Any information she has heard or communicated is based on rumor, speculation, or second-hand reports.”
The motion goes on to state, “The subpoena was issued after informal questioning in which Plaintiff’s counsel expressed frustration with witnesses and indicated that the subpoena was being used to compel cooperation rather than to obtain relevant, admissible information.” The facts detailed in the motion are an interesting read.
Il. FACTUAL BACKGROUND (Listed in the Motion To Quash)
Movant Julie Harville is a private citizen residing in Frisco, Texas and is not a party to any pending lawsuit.
On January 14, 2026, Plaintiff’s counsel, Ryan D. Martin, telephoned Ms. Harville and questioned her regarding the identity of the alleged whistleblower.
During this call, Mr. Martin stated that several individuals had already told him the whistleblower was “Shannon Greer.” Ms. Harville did not confirm this and advised that she had no first-hand knowledge.
Ms. Harville explained that any information she may have heard was second-hand, based on rumor or inference, and she declined to speculate or provide names of others. All information Ms. Harville has heard, received, or communicated to others, whether in conversation or otherwise, is based on rumor, inference, or second-hand reports, and she does not possess first-hand knowledge regarding the identity of any whistleblower or the events at issue.
Approximately one hour and fifty-nine minutes after his call, Mr. Martin called Ms. Harville again and stated she would be subpoenaed for a hearing or testimony session scheduled for the following week.
When Ms. Harville asked why she was being subpoenaed, Mr. Martin stated, “We’re sick of everyone giving us the runaround and not telling us what they know, so we’re going to start calling people in…”
Ms. Harville received the subpoena on January 15, 2026.
The requested appearance is scheduled for January 20, 2026, providing fewer than three business days’ notice to a non-party witness.
Ms. Harville does not possess first-hand knowledge of the whistleblower’s identity, actions, or communications, and has no documents or direct evidence relevant to this matter.
Frisco Chronicles believes back in January, when the Plaintiff’s counsel, Ryan D. Martin, telephoned Ms. Harville, it was not because he was looking for the truth. More he was looking to fill a narrative the Plaintiff’s team already had in place, which was Shannon Greer was the mastermind of it all. It would be nice if Mr. Martin or Bobblehead Bill released a list of who “the several individuals” are? Because there are none!
If I were Harville, I would have taken Mr. Martins “if you don’t tell me, we will subpoena you” as a threat. It is basically saying give me what I want, or else. Mr. Martin stated, “We’re sick of everyone giving us the runaround” but maybe, just maybe, everyone was not giving you the runaround. Since Frisco Chronicles started there have been numerous accusations and rumors as to who it could be. Groups of friends trying to guess coming up with their own narratives – but that does not make it true.
If Ryan D. Martin and his client thought it was Shannon Greer, then why didn’t they subpoena her? Why was her name never brought up during my original deposition. Many names were brought up in my deposition, but I can’t recall her name being asked about. They didn’t subpoena Dan Stricklin, Karthik’s, Eisenmann, or others. Why not?
If you are so sure these folks are involved, then put them under oath back in January and get the answers you believed were out there. I am guessing you knew under oath their answers were not going to support your narrative.
Let’s discuss the continued rumors by regular every day ole citizens like Jake Petras. In one comment under Bill’s post he claims, “there is a signed affidavit out there that describes a conversation someone had directly with SG where she admitted to owing Steve Noskin $60k in legal fees.”
Screenshot
Maybe someone is trying to determine who is talking “XXXX” about them because no one knows what I owe Noskin. It is way more than $60k. Jake conveniently then says he does not have the actual affidavit, but he knows it exists. My guess, someone is trying to figure out who and how their name keeps getting brought into this. In fact, it is $80,493.69 plus, so if anyone would like to help me cover that please visit the Go Fund Me. I would be more than happy to take a $60K donation from anyone to help pay off my legal fee’s!
Hey Jake! Last night I saw an Allien Invasion. The spaceship landed at the Walmart parking lot on Ohio drive. I was coming out of the store, and the Aliens told me they were looking for you. They said something about you breaking up a marriage and having an affair with a school board member.
Oh, wait … I didn’t actually see the aliens land in the parking lot, but I know it happened because someone told me. That must make it true right?
Bill lists residents who donated to a GFM so they must be guilty or connected with Frisco Chronicles. Shame on the bobblehead. Well, should we list all the names on the Karmelo Anthony Go Fund Me that also coincide with FRWC Facebook page and those who like the or commented on that post, then assume they are linked. Because they are linked, they must be guilty of supporting an alleged accused murder. Surely, they are guilty of something and probably donated because of that post by the plaintiff, right? No – that is a ridiculous notion, and common sense can tell you that.
Ask me why I started Frisco Chronicles and you might be surprised by the answer. I supported a young lady who filed five ethics complaints against the city council. I went every other week with her to citizens input and watched how Cheney and the other council members dismissed her as crazy. How the Cabal Insiders attacked her online and somehow, they leaked personal information on her that no one should know. I defended her and I did so because it was the right thing to do. I do not regret standing by this person back then, and she had the guts to do what many of us have talked about for years relating to corruption in Frisco. Where was the backbone of support then for her? That is why I started Frisco Chronicles and as I have said before I stand behind everything I have written. If something is wrong, I will correct it or update it.
Bill’s journalism was nothing but a hit piece to cause upheaval in an election. Create doubt and change the narrative. Many have asked what the difference between his story and me releasing the Tammy Tapes. Facts! Tammy said what she said! Tammy should have never spoken out of turn on her friends and political fellows. Tammy is responsible for her actions and there is a tape to prove it all! No innuendos, no rumors, no fake interpretation of the record.
If you choose to speak up in this town against any sitting council member, the mayor, a city project, or have a political say they disagree with … they will come out and attack you! Like a tornado they swirl around you with the goal to shut you up and make you afraid to talk or comment. Allegedly it is the same little mosquito’s every time, and “several individuals” have confirmed it. The list allegedly includes the following:
Sean Merrell – on the city planning and zoning board.
Hey Sean there is no everyone, just me! You and Bill should look in the mirror Sean!
Screenshot
Jeff and Dana Cheney along with Kimberly and Michelle Cheney
Dana, I think many people in Frisco don’t hold you in high regard, not just me!
ScreenshotScreenshot
Jake Petras – also served on several city boards and commissions
Rene Archambault (Jake Petras lover) – former Frisco ISD Board President
Steve Cone – serves on Planning and Zoning (I hope he never serves on a jury trial and convicts someone without evidence)
Screenshot
Dawn Sample – probably the most vile of them all
Tracy Gamble – does not even live here anymore
Rob Cox – former Planning and Zoning and former resident of Frisco
Heather Zacny –
Karen Cunningham – serves on boards and commissions, former City Council Candidate
Dan Peril – who runs the most vile political page on Facebook
Lance Taylor – allegedly screwed his neighbors over in Cobb Hill during Universal
Lisa Kirby – also sits on city boards and commissions and attends court hearings
Simon B – he doesn’t even live anymore
Amanda Baze Hall
Sadaf Haq – leads the ICF Forums
Judy Adams – precinct chair who turned against her party
Stephanie Cleveland
Lorie Medina – Jeff Cheney’s former Chief of Staff and political planner
Tracie Reveal Shipman “The Ethical Leader”
Cindy Dobbs Hons
Jesse Ringness
Bill Woodard “The Chihuahua”
Jennifer Achu
Sheryl Bashara Holton – says we and they are still hiding. No, I am not! I am right here always have been. I am glad we now know who you are and how you judge others on one-sided information.
Screenshot
Who liked the Chihuahua’s post that is filled with rumors, innuendos, false and defamatory information regarding everyday citizens. This information is still being vetted and more updates will come! (Sound Familiar)
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.
Rules for Thee, Not for Me: The Frisco Insider Playbook Strikes Again
If you’ve watched Frisco politics long enough, you start to notice a pattern. It’s not subtle. It’s not accidental. And it’s definitely not new. It’s the classic insider move to weaponize the rules when it benefits you—ignore them when it doesn’t.
Welcome to the latest episode.
The “Gotcha” That Wasn’t
Recently, Tracie Reveal Shipman and Bill Woodard publicly questioned Shona Sowell over a podcast post shared to her campaign page. The issue? The alleged use of the City of Frisco logo in promotional material. Shipman raised concerns about whether the logo was used legally—suggesting it might violate city rules.
On the surface, that sounds like accountability. But scratch just a little—and it starts to look a lot more like selective outrage.
ScreenshotScreenshot
Let’s Talk About Context (Because It Matters)
Sowell’s response was straightforward and she is correct – she did nothing wrong! She was a guest on a podcast. She didn’t create the promotional graphic. She didn’t design the branding. She shared content produced by a third party. That’s not a loophole—that’s reality.
If there’s a question about logo usage, it falls on the content creator. Not the interview guest who hit “share.” Otherwise, every candidate better start lawyering up before retweeting anything.
Now Here’s Where It Gets Interesting
Because while fingers were being pointed, something else quietly sat in plain view: A candidate video featuring Shipman… Filmed in front of the Frisco flag… And promoted through the Frisco Chamber of Commerce.
So, let’s ask the uncomfortable question: Why is one use of city imagery a scandal… and another just Tuesday?
Where is Bill Woodards outrage and why did he not publicly question his best friend when she did it in 2021. This video was promoted by the Frisco Chamber of Commerce and still is on their YouTube page today.
Is the flag somehow less “official” than the logo? Does intent suddenly matter when it’s your own content? Or are we just bending the rules depending on who’s in the frame?
The Insider Immunity Clause (Unwritten, Of Course)
This is the part longtime observers recognize immediately. There’s an informal system in play—a kind of political VIP section—where certain players get the benefit of the doubt, while others get the microscope.
And when that double standard gets called out … cue the deflection. Cue the “you should ask someone else.” Cue the slow walk away from the actual question.
The Bigger Problem
This isn’t really about a logo. It’s about credibility. Remember Tracie prides herself on “ETHICAL LEADERSHIP.” Bill Woodard claims to call himself the Chihuahua Watchdog of Frisco. He likes to write blogs about proper governance, but the rules don’t apply for his friends.
Because when the same voices who demand strict adherence to the rules appear to interpret those rules… creatively… when it suits them, people notice. Voters notice. And they start asking a much bigger question:
Are these rules about fairness, the ability to discredit a candidate, or about control?
Time for Some Answers
If Shipman and Bobblehead Bill believe the use of city branding in campaign-related content is inappropriate, that’s a fair position. But it comes with a responsibility: Apply it consistently.
Explain why one scenario is acceptable and another isn’t. Clarify where the line actually is. And most importantly—own your own use of similar imagery. Because right now, it looks a lot less like accountability… and a lot more like the dirty politics Frisco Insiders like to pullout during elections. And in Frisco, voters are getting tired of that playbook.
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…