Tomorrow is election day! If you have not voted in the special election, tomorrow is the last day for you to get out and vote but there are some things you should know before you go!
On September 23, 2025 Ann Anderson announced on Facebook she was going to run for the next open City Council seat. She continued she was ready to be a strong, thoughtful, and collaborative voice for our city. Her campaign would be about unity, progress and shared purpose. Her slogan is One City, One Community, One Frisco!
The next post came on October 27, 2025, where Ann Anderson posted her intention to run for Frisco City Council Place 1, since it was being vacated by John Keating. While campaigning, Anderson made several statements or claims that do not sit right with Frisco Chronicles. Let’s dive into them:
Claim:Former Corporate Executive and successful Small Business Owner
Forgot to follow the law and file her campaign finance report updates for June 2024, July 2024, January 2025, and July 2025. It was not until Frisco Chronicles pointed it out in one of blogs that she was out of compliance that Ann noticed. The next day she filed updated campaign finance reports. View them here.
Funny thing, her most current campaign finance report does not show how she paid for her hit piece postcard. How much did it cost? Who paid for it? Why is it not listed on her campaign finance report?
A corporate executive and successful business owner would understand the importance of filing legal paperwork on time (not two years later). If you can’t file your campaign finance reports on time then how do you plan to help run a city of 250,000 plus people.
Claim: Public Safety is a top priority
On January 9th, Ann posted a National Law Enforcement Appreciate Day Image and then a few hours later made a second post attacking our former Fire Chief over a biased report from 3+ years ago. Anderson is not endorsed by any public safety entity or official.
Her opponent Mark Piland is endorsed by the Frisco Fire Fighters Association, Frisco Police Officers Association, and Denton County Sherrif Tracy Murphree.
Claim: Anderson claimed she was against the Fire Fighters propositions for civil service and collective bargaining.
According to the Frisco Police Officers Association in her interview (for their endorsement), she told them she supported Civil Service and voted for it. If that is the case, then why did she tell residents at forums she was against it?
Claim: Anderson said she is glad we lost the AT&T Corporate Relocation and glad they went to Plano.
Ann Anderson spoke in favor of Universal Kids Theme Resort which brought low paying job to Frisco. Yet NO to AT&T which is ranked 32nd on the Fortune 500 rankings of the largest United States corporations, with revenues of $122.4 billion at the end of fiscal year December 31, 2024.
Why would someone on our city council be against high paying jobs and a Fortune 500 company coming to Frisco?
Claim: Anderson claims she is ACCOUNTABLE only to Frisco Residents – not special interest group.
A Facebook post on 2/10/2020 reads, “It was with great pleasure that Thor & Ann Anderson endorse Jeff Cheney for his re-election!”
Screenshot
Ann is endorsed by many Cheney loyalists such as Donna Schmittler, Renee Sample, Dick Peasley, Laxmi Tummala, Mike Simpson and many more. The “Cheney Club” is a special interest group so to speak and those in it are loyal to the establishment!
Claim: Anderson claims she is a Republican and she is proud to support Democrats.
Ann has stated multiple times she is a Republican. She claims both the Collin County GOP and Denton County GOP were rigged for her opponent.
Screenshot
The endorsement by the Collin County GOP and Denton GOP were not rigged. Both groups were aware of Ann Anderson’s multiple endorsements for Democrat candidates for both city council and FISD school board.
While Denton went ahead and endorsed without interviewing the candidates they did so because they previously supported Mark Piland, because he is involved in the Denton GOP and attends meetings and events, and because they were fully aware of Ann Andersons endorsements for Cheney, Gopal Ponangi, Renee Sample and many others who are not in line with the Republican party principals.
Collin County interviewed both candidates and they both were at the same meeting when the vote was taken. Her opponent won it fair and square.
While claiming it was rigged suits her narrative, Anderson has provided no proof of any such “rigging” going on.
Claim: Vote 4 Ann Facebook Page “Likes” a Facebook page maintained and written by Bill Woodard (Establishment).
Bill Woodard has always been good at telling Frisco Residents how stupid they are and how they don’t understand how local city government is run. His election page was turned into a watch dog page where he tells us how to think and how to support the establishment candidates.
This is the same man who orchestrated the Vote No campaign against the Frisco Firefighters yet took endorsements and money from them when he ran for election.
Woodard always supports the establishment and Cheney line so who would expect anything other than that from his site.
Claim: Anderson supports the Frisco Rail District businesses
In a post about Brooklyn Cutz and his business revenue being down 50% since construction began Anderson writes in the comments, “My guys usually go to the shop in our neighborhood. I would have thought Brooklyn’s regulars would have continued to go and he wouldn’t feel the pinch of the construction as much as other businesses.”
Ann’s comments don’t support small business. Assuming construction would not hurt a barber shop? How did she expect the regulars to get there when he had no sidewalk and no nearby parking? To say she “thought” his business would not feel the pinch of the construction shows how deaf she is to real world problems, residents and businesses.
Election Day
So here we are, on the eve of Election Day, standing at the ballot box equivalent of the final scene in a courtroom drama—lights low, jury restless, closing arguments echoing in the room. Ann Anderson’s campaign branding promises One City, One Community, One Frisco, but as we’ve walked through the record, the claims, and the contradictions, what Frisco residents are left with is less unity and more confusion. Accountability isn’t a slogan; it’s a paper trail. Public safety isn’t a hashtag; it’s who stands with the people who run toward danger when the rest of us run away. And transparency isn’t yelling “rigged” when you lose—it’s proving it when you say it.
Ask yourself, why does the city, its leadership and their followers hate one candidate so much? Maybe it is because Piland knows how the city operates and wants to change it for the better and that terrifies them!
Tomorrow, you don’t just vote for a name—you vote for credibility, consistency, and whether Frisco continues down the well-worn path of establishment politics with Ann Anderson or demands something better and a change with Mark Piland. Ask the uncomfortable questions. Read the fine print. Follow the money. And most importantly, show up. Because if history has taught us anything, it’s this: the people who complain the loudest after an election are often the ones who stayed home or had the most to lose. Don’t be that voter. Frisco’s future deserves better than blind loyalty and bumper-sticker politics. See you at the polls.
“Diet Developers, Family Plans, and the Dollar Menu of Democracy”
If Part 1 of Follow the Money felt like a black-tie developer gala with valet parking and six-figure checks, then Part 2 is more of a backyard barbecue. Still political. Still smoky. Just… different and fewer lobsters.
This round, we cracked open the campaign finance reports of Shona Sowell and Rod Vilhauer, two mayoral candidates whose donor lists tell very different stories, neither of which includes a $100,000 developer cannon blast like John Keating.
Shona Sowell
At first glance you notice some developers but a scroll through the whole campaign finance report feels more like someone who has there feet on the ground. The report covering July 1, 2025 – December 31, 2025 shows:
Total Monetary Contributions: $40,073.71
In-Kind Contributions: $8,000
In Frisco politics, that’s not chump change—but it’s also not “who just bought City Hall?” money.
Donations Over $1,000 (aka: The Grown-Ups Table)
There’s a mix here: locals, professionals, and yes… developers. But unlike other reports we’ve seen, this list reads more like a community fundraiser than a developer convention.
A few highlights:
Trevor Huber (Frisco, Modera Clinic) – $5,000
Fehmi & Elisabeth Karahan (Fields Development) – $3,000
Robert Shaw (Columbus Realty Partners / Legacy West) – $3,000
John & Eleanor Landon (Landon Homes) – $3,000
Yes, developers are present. No one’s pretending otherwise. But this is more “sprinkle” than “avalanche.” Think side salad, not the whole buffet. Also worth noting: a solid number of Frisco residents, modest four-figure donations, and contributions that look personal—not corporate firehoses disguised as civic pride.
The Amended Report
Sowell’s amended report (March 2 – June 30, 2025) adds a little spice:
Dr. Tim & Kathi Schacherer (Frisco) – $10,000
Frank Peinado (Construction, Aubrey) – $10,000
Jared Patterson Campaign – $7,500
3 Peinado Construction Executives – $3,000 each
Kappi & Steve Helms (Frisco) – $5,000
Monica & Marty Wood (Real Estate) – $2,500
Ryan Griffin (President of FCS) – $5,000
Is construction money here? Yes. Is it coordinated? It looks organized. Is it eye-popping compared to other mayoral candidates? Not even close. This is developer money with the volume knob turned way down.
Question for voters: Is Sowell managing influence—or just keeping the lights on without selling the building?
Next up, Rod Vilhauer: “Keep It in the Family” Edition
Now let’s talk about Rod Vilhauer, whose first campaign finance report (filed 10/28/25, covering Nov 1 – Dec 31, 2025) shows:
The Donor List (Short. Sweet. Familiar.)
Clark Vilhauer – $20,000
Jerry Vilhauer – $1,000
Rod Vilhauer – $1,000
Angela Carrizales – $2,500
Kristen Lively – $1,000
That’s it. No developers. No PACs. No LLC alphabet soup. No mystery money from three cities over. Just family, friends, and one very generous Clark Vilhauer carrying this thing like an Olympic torch. If this were a movie, it wouldn’t be Follow the Money. It would be We’re Pooling Resources.
Question for voters: Is this independence—or simply a campaign still warming up?
The Big Picture: Relative Cleanliness Is Still a Thing
Let’s be clear:
Sowell took developer money, but nowhere near the scale of other mayoral candidates past or present.
Vilhauer’s report looks less like a political machine and more like a family potluck.
No six-figure developer bombs. No mystery entities with zero web presence. No PACs lurking like political middlemen in trench coats. In today’s Frisco political climate, that alone feels… novel.
Final Thought: Who’s Buying, Who’s Borrowing, and Who’s Betting on Themselves?
Campaign finance reports don’t tell us who will be the best mayor. But they do tell us who expects access, who expects influence, and who expects nothing more than a fightingchance. So we’ll leave you with this:
Is “less money” actually more independence? Is family-funded better than developer-funded? And in Frisco politics, is the quietest check sometimes the loudest signal?
Stay tuned. The money may slow down—but the questions won’t.
Disclaimer: This blog includes satire, parody, and comic relief. It contains summarized accounts created solely for humor and commentary. Any resemblance to real events is either coincidental or intentionally satirical. Reader discretion — and a sense of humor — are advised.
For some time now we have questioned the campaign finance reports of local leaders. Back in February of 2023 we wrote about Dark Money where we laid out how individuals associated with the PGA, The Link, or Fields projects donated to our current sitting city council members. If you haven’t read it, you should because it is alarming. Then we asked the question, did Keating and Pelham accept “DIRTY FUNDS?” We are talking about the $10,000 Keating took and $5000 Pelham took in 2021 from Veton Krasniqi, a man who appears to owe the school district $24,093.47 in back taxes. How did we learn about this, a campaign finance report. As we said they can be Shakespearean sonnets of bureaucratic paperwork.
Well Friends, we have hit that moment in every local election where you stop arguing about yard signs and start arguing about spreadsheets. Campaign finance reports are in, the ink is dry, and the numbers are… well… robust. The kind of robust you usually only see in luxury hotel valuations and developer prospectuses.
Let’s do what Frisco Chronicles does best: open the books, raise an eyebrow, crack a joke, and ask the questions everyone else is politely avoiding. Because when the money talks this loud, voters deserve to listen carefully.
Exhibit A: John Keating — “Show Me the Money” Edition
Mayor John Keating filed his January 12, 2026, campaign finance report covering 7/1/25 through 12/31/25, reporting $142,909.24 in Total Political Contributions. That’s not couch-cushion money. That’s “somebody expects a return on investment” money.
Let’s stroll through a few highlights:
Myles Freeman, President of Wiley X Inc – $1,000
Joe Hickman, Blue Star Land – $1,000
Jordan Wallace, Wallace Ventures – $1,000
(Appears to be invested in a $130 million luxury hotel… casual.)
Gerrit Parker – $2,500
Ryan Griffin, Rockhill Investments – $5,000
James Webb – $5,000
James Webb (again) – $10,000
James Webb’s name kept nagging at us. Turns out, we’d written about him before in “Election Fix: Developer Dreams & Dollars.” According to the DMN, Preferred Imaging LLC, headed by James H. Webb of Frisco, allegedly performed services requiring a supervising physician without one on-site. The company did not admit wrongdoingbut still paid a $3.5 million settlement following investigations by federal and state authorities, including the Civil Medicaid Fraud Division. So, here’s the uncomfortable question no one else is asking out loud: When Keating accepted Webb’s donation in 2017, should he have known about Webb’s past? And knowing what’s publicly available now, why keep accepting the money? Did he have any concerns in 2026 taking two donations that totaled $15000?
Asking questions is not an accusation. It’s civic hygiene.
Then …the Real Jaw-Dropper
Frisco 380 Partners made two donations of $50,000 each. That’s $100,000. From a developer. Let that marinate.
Who is Frisco 380 Partners? Great question. We tried to find them. Information is… sparse. Very sparse. Which only adds to the mystery. Because when a developer writes a six-figure check in a local mayoral race, voters are allowed—no, obligated—to ask: What do they want? What do they expect? And will Frisco residents be paying the bill later?
Oh, and let’s not forget: HillCo PAC – $5,000
Exhibit B: Mark Hill — LLC Palooza 🎪
Mark Hill’s report shows: Total Political Contributions: $110,434.25
And this one read less like a donor list and more like a Chamber of Commerce speed-dating event for LLCs. A sampling:
ARKONS Ventures LLC (Irving) – $15,000
Yash Vasti (Irving) – $10,000
Atchuta Rao Roppana (Frisco) – $10,000
CMSW Realty LLC – $5,000
Orange Roofing & Construction – $5,000
Lone Star Food Plano LLC – $5,000
Bawarchi Holdings LLC – $2,500
Trilock Foods, LLC (McKinney) – $2,500
Plus a long list of donors from Irving, Richardson, Southlake, McKinney, The Colony, San Antonio—which raises another question: Why does so much outside money care deeply about who runs Frisco?
Jennifer Luney donated $2,000 and we are curious if this is the same JL connected to the Visual Arts Guild of Frisco? We’re genuinely curious.
Now, Let’s Talk Law (Because This Part Matters)
Straight from the Texas Ethics Commission FAQ: Corporations (including nonprofit corporations) and labor organizations may not make political contributions in connection with Texas and local elections.
While the word “LLC” isn’t explicitly shouted from the rooftops, the practical effect under Texas law is clear: Individuals may donate personally. Corporations and most LLCs may NOT donate directly to a candidate.
LLCs with only individual members may donate if the contribution is properly attributed to those individuals—not the company. Business entities can donate to ballot-measure-only PACs, not candidates. So, the million-dollar (or $15,000) question becomes: Were these LLC donations properly attributed to individual members? Or were businesses writing checks directly to candidates?
Because that distinction isn’t trivia—it’s the law.
Final Thought: Residents Should Be Concerned
This isn’t Republican vs Democrat. This isn’t pro-growth vs anti-growth. This is about who gets heard in Frisco—and who gets drowned out by money. Residents should be asking loudly $100,000 grand from one developer. When developers, PACs, and LLCs dominate campaign finance reports, regular residents are left wondering whether their $25 donation, no donation—or their vote—still matters. For years you have heard voters in Frisco have voter apathy but maybe they just don’t think it will matter because our elections are bought and paid for. Voters are wondering if Frisco’s elections are bought, or merely… heavily leased? And when City Hall opens for business, who exactly is the biggest client? Next up, the other two mayoral candidates.
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.
Anyone who regularly watches Frisco City Council meetings knows there is choreography involved. Speaker order matters. And more often than not, the Deputy Mayor Pro Tem Laura Rummel saves the most politically charged speaker for last—the closer meant to leave the final impression on viewers and those sitting in the chamber.
Next up came Tracie Reveal Shipman, who delivered her remarks with the intensity of someone who still has a campaign yard sign in her garage “just in case.” On December 2nd, she stepped to the podium to speak, in her words, “in the spirit of transparency and ethical leadership.” What followed deserves a closer look—because when someone invokes ethics, the facts and consistency matter.
The Résumé as Credibility Shield
Tracie opened with a detailed recount of her credentials:
A 30-year Frisco resident. Two terms on City Council. Selected twice as Mayor Pro Tem by her peers. Appointments to the Comprehensive Advisory Committee, Charter Review Commission, Citizen’s Bond Committee, Visit Frisco, and the Community Development Corporation.
She listed volunteer roles with PTAs, the Heritage Association, Frisco Education Foundation, Scooter Bowl, the Miracle League Turkey Trot, and Leadership Frisco. None of this is in dispute. But credentials are not a substitute for accuracy—and they don’t immunize statements from scrutiny.
An Accidental Admission of Bias
Tracie then made one of the most revealing statements of the night. She acknowledged that she has been involved in at least one local political campaign every year since 1996, and that—upon reflection—she had been on the opposite side of every race run by the current council members.
That matters. It establishes not just experience, but persistent political opposition. And when criticism follows, that context cannot be ignored.
The Cease-and-Desist Narrative
Tracie recounted receiving a Cease & Desist letter dated May 30, 2025, from attorney Steven Noskin, on behalf of council candidates Jared Elad and Burt Thakur, relating to alleged false and misleading campaign advertising connected to the Frisco Firefighters Association.
She stated the allegations were untrue and described engaging in a week-long dispute while out of state, asserting she was prepared to seek sanctions against Mr. Noskin and his clients. According to her remarks, the correspondence ceased the day before the runoff election.
These are her claims, delivered publicly.
Frisco Chronicles has confirmed she was sent a cease and desist which was published on a social media page. Allegedly it is related to the Frisco Porch Pirate who was pushing out information for a PAC that Shipman admits involvement in. Read more about here: Porch Pirates. As for the council meeting roadshow, we have no documentation beyond the letter itself was presented to substantiate the broader allegations made at the podium.
Where the Argument Breaks Down: Campaign Finance Law
The core of Tracie’s speech centered on campaign finance reporting. She asserted that because Mr. Noskin provided legal services related to the cease-and-desist letter, those services “technically should be reflected” in Elad and Thakur’s campaign finance reports—either as legal expenses or in-kind contributions—and she publicly urged them to amend their filings. This is where her argument collapses.
Under Texas campaign finance law, legal services paid personally by a candidate—using non-campaign funds—are not reportable. Likewise, legal services provided independently and not as a political contribution do not automatically constitute an in-kind contribution. Consultation alone does not trigger a reporting requirement. Timing alone does not create a disclosure obligation. And legal representation is not presumed to be a campaign expense absent campaign funds being used.
Transparency does not mean inventing reporting requirements that do not exist.
Free Speech—But Selectively Applied
Tracie framed the cease-and-desist letter as an attempt to “quash” her rights. Yet this framing is difficult to reconcile with her broader political posture. Shipman has openly posted on her social media that she supports the efforts to silence Frisco Chronicles speech.
Free speech cannot be situational. You don’t get to invoke it when convenient and oppose it when critical voices are involved.
A Pattern Worth Questioning
It is also worth noting that Tracie—and others aligned with her—continue to serve on Frisco boards and commissions, roles intended to advise and support city governance. Using Citizen Input to attack sitting council members, question their integrity, and relitigating campaign grievances raises legitimate concerns about conflicts between civic service and political warfare.
That is not transparency. That is not ethical leadership. That is political grievance dressed in ethical language.
A Familiar Warning
Ironically, the most fitting response to Tracie Reveal Shipman’s remarks comes from her closest political ally, Bill Woodard, who recently cautioned others: “Don’t speak of things to which you have no knowledge.”
That advice applies here. Statements made from the podium don’t become facts by repetition. Credentials don’t convert assumptions into law. And transparency demands accuracy—not implication.
But the public record is clear. And selective ethics rarely survive sustained scrutiny.
Let’s Call This What It Was: A Revenge Roadshow
Bill and Tracie’s little duet had all the subtlety of a drunk uncle at Thanksgiving trying to reenact the moon landing.
This wasn’t about City business. This wasn’t about procedures, decorum, or government transparency. This was personal. A double-shot of bitterness served neat.
They’re still mad they lost:
Their preferred candidate, Tammy Meinershagen
Their dream of a taxpayer-funded Performing Arts Center
Their long-held grip on the establishment seat warmers
And—let’s be honest—the fact that Burt and Jared, two unapologetic Republicans, won decisively
They are, in medical terms, butt-hurt. A condition known to flare up when the voters say, “Thanks, but no thanks.”
And now they’re online celebrating their citizens-input rant like it was the Gettysburg Address. Their crowd is cheering them on as if “scold two people publicly” is a constitutional achievement. Please.
The Bottom Line
Frisco deserves grown-ups at the podium. We deserve commentary that cares about the city—not ex-officials turning citizen input into therapy hour. What we saw December 2nd wasn’t courage. It wasn’t leadership. It wasn’t accountability. It was the political equivalent of a participation ribbon taped to a midlife crisis.
And if this is the new standard for public discourse, buckle up, Frisco. The circus is back in town—and the clowns are fighting over who gets to hold the microphone.
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.
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…