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.

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.

• If you’re “in,” mistakes are misunderstandings.
• If you’re “out,” everything is a violation.

Where was Tracie’s outrage when John Keating and Angelia Pelham used the logos. We addressed it in 2024 in our blogs Legal Logo Woes, BNSF Railway Responds To Logo Woes, and Keating & Pelham: Legal Logo Woes. Where was Bill Woodard then to question those, he called colleagues? Rules for thee are not for we (insiders).

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.