PAC Cash, Secret Alliances, and a Stack of Signs: Fate City Council Candidates Raise Eyebrows and Questions
Fate, Texas—In the small town of Fate, TX, where community events, neighborly chats, and local Facebook groups typically shape civic life—the 2025 City Council elections have taken a sharp turn toward big-money tactics, behind-the-scenes alliances, and political intrigue more befitting of Austin than a quiet Dallas suburb.
Candidates Emily Camacho and Brett Bushnell have emerged as the subjects of growing controversy, following campaign finance disclosures, reports of political coordination with a deeply unpopular outgoing mayor, and the visible backing of a local political action committee known for its heavy-handed tactics. Camacho faces off against Rick Maneval and George Lewis for Place 4, while Bushnell is challenging Martha Huffman for Place 6. Both seats are open due to incumbents who will not seek re-election.
What has historically been a low-cost, volunteer civic race has turned into a full-blown political operation—with all the red flags that come with it.
A Curious Entrance and a Pseudonymous Past: The Camacho Conundrum
Emily Camacho’s campaign is under scrutiny for how it began—before she even filed. Under the alias “Emily Schmuker,” she quietly joined a private Facebook group called “Fate May 2025,” a digital strategy room created for the explicit purpose of recruiting and promoting candidates who would oppose the current city council. The group had one goal: to flip the council in the next election. Camacho joined, stayed silent, and remained anonymous until after she officially filed to run.
Once discovered, she was promptly removed from the group—reportedly the only candidate to be ousted. The move sparked backlash and suspicion, especially after Camacho posted a self-serving, and defensive explanation on Facebook, complaining about her being removed from the group.
In her response, Camacho confirmed that the group was created to recruit candidates and acknowledged joining for that very purpose, albeit under a different name tied to her “personal” Facebook account. She claimed she sat quietly to avoid drama, used the alias only for privacy, and “had no hidden agenda.” She further insisted her involvement was motivated by a desire for “transparency,” though the use of a pseudonym, combined with her sudden appearance as a candidate, has led many to question whether that transparency was ever truly intended.
Denials, PAC Money, and the Mayor’s Garage
Perhaps more concerning than her online identity are Camacho’s repeated denials of any political association with outgoing Mayor David Billings. Billings, who took office unopposed and without receiving a single vote, quickly became a deeply unpopular figure for his enthusiastic support of the “Strong Towns” development agenda—a framework that favors dense housing projects, including apartments, and centralized planning. Faced with mounting public pressure, Billings chose not to run for re-election.
Camacho has attempted to distance herself from him, stating plainly that she is not associated with the mayor. But campaign finance disclosures, along with local eyewitness accounts, paint a very different picture.
Both Camacho and Bushnell are endorsed by a local political action committee known as “Keep Fate Great,” a group formed by outgoing Councilman Lance Megyesi – Place 6. Not only is Billings a major donor to the PAC, but multiple residents have reported seeing stacks of Bushnell and Camacho campaign signs stored in the mayor’s garage. Reports also indicate Billings has been actively promoting both candidates and campaigning on their behalf.
Camacho claims her candidacy is powered by “grassroots support,” but the visible and financial backing of a PAC tied to Billings and Megyesi makes that assertion increasingly difficult to defend. Her denial of these connections has only fueled further distrust among voters.
Bushnell’s Big Spending: Six Loans, National Consultants, and a Question of Motive
Even more puzzling is the campaign finance report filed by Brett Bushnell, an attorney affiliated with investment firm Hudson Advisors. In the latest reporting period covering the first three months of 2025, Bushnell disclosed six separate personal loans to his own campaign, totaling over $7,750. This isn’t pocket change—it’s a significant financial commitment for a seat on a mostly, volunteer city council.
Unlike a donation, a loan implies an expectation of repayment. If Bushnell’s campaign raises funds from supporters, those donations could be used to pay himself back—raising ethical questions about how campaign dollars are being used and whether donors are truly aware that their money might be going straight back into the candidate’s wallet. Then there is the question of who are the clients of Hudson Advisors? Do they have any investors interested in Fate? These are valid questions.
Bushnell’s campaign spending has also raised eyebrows for its professional scope. He’s hired Battlefield Consulting, a political firm run by longtime GOP strategist Cindy Horne, who claims to have worked with the campaigns of George W. Bush and John McCain. This is the same exact firm hired by the “Keep Fate Great” PAC, run by Councilman Megyesi, and supported by Mayor Billings. Additionally, Bushnell retained JLK Political Strategies, a Virginia-based firm with national-level experience, including congressional and gubernatorial races.
The involvement of these high-dollar, political consultants for a city council race in Fate—a city whose councilmembers receive only $100 per month in salary—has sparked concerns among voters. What outside interest finds such value in controlling a small-town government?
Missing Agendas and the Elephant in the Room
Despite the political machinery supporting them, neither Bushnell nor Camacho has publicly detailed a policy platform. Their campaigns remain largely void of specifics and more on slogans: “Voices be heard”; “Safe neighborhoods”; “Local businesses thrive”; “Together we build”, yada, yada, yada. Instead, both have stuck to vague, feel-good language about “serving the community”, but nothing about plans on how to accomplish the “vision” or what they will do if actually elected.
Their opponents, by contrast—Huffman, Maneval, and Lewis—have offered clear and concrete proposals. Huffman, is fighting to preserve Fate’s suburban charm, pushing back against dense development. Maneval has called for a return to traditional zoning and fiscal government transparency. At a recent town hall meeting, when the candidates were asked who would have supported the widely unpopular development known as “LaFayette Crossing”? Two hands went up, Bushnell and Camacho. Indicating that if elected, Fate will get more of that.
The silence from Camacho and Bushnell on substantive issues is growing louder. It leaves many asking: Why are these campaigns spending so much money to say so little? It appears that their goal is to keep the status quo.
A Pivotal Election with Outsized Implications
The 2025 elections in Fate may prove to be the most consequential in the city’s history. At stake is not only the ideological direction of the city council, but also the question of whether Fate’s governance will be shaped by its citizens—or by a network of PACs, consultants, and political operatives with goals far removed from the concerns of everyday residents.
The aggressive political spending, shadowy alliances, and lack of transparency surrounding Camacho and Bushnell’s campaigns stand in stark contrast to the small-town values Fate voters hold dear.
Trust, once lost, is hard to regain. In this election, voters will decide whether they want representatives who are of the people—or candidates who answer to political strategists, silent financiers, and the legacy of a failed mayor.
With ballots set and early voting just around the corner, the future of Fate is in the hands of its citizens. And this year, that choice may matter more than ever.
