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.
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.
Campaign finance reports are essentially the political world’s version of a receipt drawer—crumpled, confusing, and full of clues about who paid for dinner and who’s expecting dessert later. They’re those legally required spreadsheets where candidates reveal who’s funding their dreams of public service (or at least their yard signs), listing donors, amounts, and expenditures with all the excitement of a tax audit but twice the intrigue. Why do they matter? Because buried between the $50 “grassroots supporter” and the suspiciously generous “consulting fee,” you’ll often find the real story of influence, priorities, and alliances—like a financial whodunit where the plot twist is that the money usually knows exactly what it’s buying.
Frisco Chronicles has questioned current and former council members, as well as candidates campaign finance reports for a few years now. You can read about those as we have attached the links at the end of this article to each blog. Most recently we wrote about John Keatings two recent donations of $50,000 each for a total of $100,000 from Frisco 380 Partners in our blog Follow The $100K and how we could not locate much information on them.
1) What is your philosophy of accepting campaign contributions from developers?
2) Should there be a limit on the amount a contribution should be?
John Keating is the first to respond because everyone from coffee shops to whispers at lunch, want to know about that One Hundred Grand sitting in his campaign account. Keating made a few points we will summarize or for more humor you can watch his 2 minute clip here.
Point 1: Keating begins by explaining that donations must come from an individual or a sole proprietor LLC. The name of the individual donor is on there unless it is sole Proprietor LLC. Keating continues a Sole Proprietor, “it is not a developer per se, I mean, it could be a developer.” Not sure what Keating was trying to say here.
Point 2: Keating continues that over the past 15 years he has run several campaigns for council and one for state rep which cost him at least $200,000. Then he pointed out that it is money he will never get back.
Frisco Chronicles would like to be clear over the years Keatings employment on several of his campaign finance reports list him as a “stay at home dad” which is fine. But Keating did not have an income other than his military benefits so for full clarity his “campaign races” were funded by his ex-wife who was the bread winner and went to work every day all the years they were married. Keating should clarify his ex-wife is out $200K for those races because clearly, he did not have that kind of money on his own.
Point 3: Keating begins to explain the donor (his words vendor) is Primary Media, a digital billboard company owned by Josh Feferman and he is the individual who donated to the campaign.
Why would a billboard company donate $100K? Keating explains the company is based out of Dallas and over the years as Highway 380 was expanded they had to move and find a new place for the digital billboards. Keating points out at that time Frisco did not have a digital sign ordinance. At the same time Primary Media was negotiating with other cities to take down several traditional billboards and replace them with one digital billboard. Keating said that while working with him here in Frisco he also helped with those other cities to understand the benefit of the digital billboards.
Keating then says back in September 2025 when he was having a conversation with Feferman he mentioned the campaign would probably cost about $200,000 and that is when Feferman said he was in for $100K!
Keating makes sure to point out, “I have not taken a dime from him over the years that we were working together because I didn’t feel that was fair as we were trying to build here in Frisco.”
FACT CHECK TIME
Fact, Ronald Feferman also donated $5,000 to Jeff Cheney in his last mayoral race in 2023 which can be seen on his campaign finance report.
Fact, on a 2024 Campaign Finance Statement – John Keating shows a $20,000 donation made on 4/12/24 by Ronald Fefeman who is listed as the CEO of Primary Media!
Fact, a simple Google search reveals a memo that shows the Frisco City Council acted in August 2023 with Primary Media, LTD. The memo subject 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.”
The Mayor and City Council (including John Keating) voted 6-0 to approve the “Consent Agenda” and that included Item 18 about Primary Media, LTD. Interestingly the minutes read, Mayor Pro-Tem John Keating moved to approve Consent Agenda Items #15 through #32. Deputy Mayor Pro-Tem Angelia Pelham seconded the motion.”
Fact, according to Primary Media’s website, “Primary Media is a Dallas-based outdoor advertising company and the first digital billboard provider in Frisco, TX.” The website also lists Josh Feferman as the CEO of Primary Media and identifies Ronald Feferman as the Real Estate and Government Relations contact for the firm.
Just wondering, is there any possibility Josh and Ronald are one and the same as a simple internet search reveals the name Ronald Josh Feferman and R Josh Feferman as the names associated with Primary Media, or is it just coincidence?
Trust Is Broken
So here we are, staring at the glowing billboard in the room—the one that flashes $100,000 in bright, undeniable lights—and we’re supposed to just…not squint?
Because if Keatings claim is “I have not taken a dime from him over the years,” then how does a documented $20,000 contribution from Ronald Feferman in 2024 fit into that narrative? Is that a forgotten footnote…or a conveniently misplaced decimal in the story?
And if a $5,000 contribution went to Mayor Jeff Cheney’s campaign shortly before council action involving Primary Media, are we really expected to believe timing like that is just civic-minded coincidence? Three months. A donation. Then a council item. No raised eyebrows?
Maybe the bigger question isn’t about one vote, but about the next one. If another item involving Primary Media lands on the council agenda tomorrow, can John Keating truly walk into that discussion as a neutral party? Or does six figures—paired with prior contributions—quietly take a seat at the dais with him? Influence doesn’t always announce itself; sometimes it just shows up early, shakes a few hands, and waits patiently for the vote.
Keating is running for Mayor and his word MATTERS! He lied! He did take a donation in the past and it was not a small one! It was $20,000 dollars. Frisco deserves more than explanations that require this much interpretation. From a mayoral candidate, it deserves clarity that doesn’t change depending on which report you’re reading—or which microphone is on.
Because at the end of the day, this isn’t about one donation, or even one donor.
It’s about trust. Can we trust John Keating? No! Why?
He has made questionable personal decisions that became public.
He (along with Pelham) has taken dirty money in the past from Veton Krasniqi who was sued by Frisco ISD for back taxes of $24,000.
He (along with Cheney) took donations in the past from Phillip Carter who bilked millions out of elderly investors.
He promised, in writing, he would support 4-men staffing for Frisco Firefighters then went back on his word when an election was over.
He knows as a Mayoral Candidate someone is bound to fact check his statements. No one forgets a $20,000 donation less than two years earlier. The issues go on and on, and for once the public is asking whether the math adds up. In his stories, it usually doesn’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.
Previous Blogs About Campaign Finance Reports
Follow The $100,000 – about John Keatings recent donation from Frisco 380 Partners and fellow opponent Mark Hill
Follow The Money (Part 2) – about Shona Sowell and Rod Vilhauers campaign finance reports
Follow the Money: When “Advertising” Starts Looking Like Something Else
There’s an old saying—if you want to understand what’s really going on, don’t listen to what people say… follow the money. So we did.
And what we found in the City of Frisco’s check register raises more questions than answers, especially when it comes to who’s getting paid, how much, and for what exactly.
The Curious Case of Friendly Headlines
For years, many residents have noticed a pattern: three major local media outlets rarely—if ever—publish negative coverage about the City of Frisco. That alone might seem like coincidence. Maybe things are just running that smoothly.
But then another pattern emerges—these same outlets often endorse candidates, particularly incumbents. With everything Frisco Chronicles has published you would think an investigative reporter would pick up a story, but no.
Now ask yourself: Is that journalism… or is that alignment?
The Money Trail
A closer look at city financial records shows that these same media organizations have received substantial payments from the City—often labeled as “advertising,” “professional services,” or “promotional marketing.”
Let’s break it down.
121 Media LLC (Star Local Media)
2022–2025: An Estimated $75,000
Payments are categorized under:
Advertising
Contract services
Professional services
Outside printing
But here’s where things get… interesting:
One payment: $14,521.72 labeled “Lease of Buildings”
Since when does a newspaper lease buildings to the city? Or handle sewer system expenses? Or supply capital furniture?
Are these simple accounting mislabels—or something that deserves a clearer explanation? Because right now, it reads less like transparency… and more like a riddle.
JG Media (Community Impact)
2017–2025: Estimated to be over $200,000
Labeled largely as advertising. No surprise there—cities do advertise public notices, initiatives, and community messaging. That would be a hefty price point for advertising. But again, the question isn’t whether the city advertises. It’s how much, how often, and with whom—especially when the coverage from those same outlets appears overwhelmingly positive.
Medium Giant (Dallas Morning News)
2022–2025: Estimated $2 million
Let that number sit for a second. $2+ million in taxpayer dollars directed toward “promotional marketing and advertising.” That’s not a rounding error. That’s a strategy.
And it raises a fundamental question: At what point does advertising cross the line and become influence?
The Bigger Question: Can Objectivity Survive the Paycheck?
No one is suggesting that cities shouldn’t communicate with residents. Public outreach matters. But when the same outlets receiving tens of thousands—or even millions—of dollars are also shaping public perception and endorsing political candidates…
…it’s fair to ask:
Where is the line between journalism and partnership?
Can a media outlet truly hold city leadership accountable while being financially tied to it?
And perhaps most importantly, would they ever risk biting the hand that feeds them?
Transparency Shouldn’t Require Translation
At the end of the day, this isn’t about being anti-media or anti-city. It’s about accountability. Taxpayers deserve to understand:
What their money is funding
Why certain vendors are chosen
And whether those relationships influence what information reaches the public
Because when financial relationships and public narratives start to overlap, trust becomes the casualty.
Final Thought
Maybe there are perfectly reasonable explanations for every line item. Maybe every dollar is justified. But if that’s the case—then explaining it should be easy.
So here’s the real question: Who’s willing to explain it?
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.
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…