Who Gives to Elorza? Part 1: Lawyers

This is the first in a series of posts on contributors to Mayor Jorge Elorza’s campaign war chest. My analysis is based upon all contributions from 2013 through November 2, 2016, which totaled $1,332,555. I begin with lawyers, who together contributed $162,045, or about 12 percent of all contributions to date. That includes the lawyers themselves, their relatives and Political Action Committees.

Law Firm Contributions 7-Dec-2016.png

For example, in the case of the top contributing law firm, Roberts, Carroll, Feldstein & Peirce, members of the firm contributed a total of $14,075, while relatives listed at the same home addresses as these contributing lawyers chipped in another $4,950. In the case of the second most generous law firm, Partridge, Snow, & Hahn, individual members contributed $12,160, their relatives contributed $2,100, and the firm’s PAC contributed an additional $3,000.

The graph above shows the breakdown of the top 15 contributing law firms, which gave a combined total of $110,810, or 73% of all contributions by lawyers to Mayor Elorza’s campaign. Here are the details for the top 15: Roberts, Carroll, Feldstein & Peirce, $19,025; Partridge, Snow, & Hahn, $17,260; Adler, Pollock & Sheehan, $11,225; Donoghue, Barrett, & Singal, $10,500; Hinckley Allen, $9,475; Law Office of John P. Garan, $6,500; Motley Rice, $6,150; Nixon Peabody, $5,275; Kiernan Plunkett & Redihan Law, $5,100; Sullivan, Whitehead, & DeLuca, $4,850; Law Offices of Kevin B. Murphy, $3,750; Chisholm, Chisholm, & Kilpatrick, $3,150;and DeLuca & Weizenbaum, $2,950; Kessler Topaz Meltzer & Check, $2,900; and Pannone, Lopes, Devereaux & West, $2,700.

These individuals and entities exercised their First Amendment rights to contribute to the political campaigns of their choice, subject to applicable state and federal laws. I make absolutely no claim that any individuals or entities sought or received political favors in return for their campaign contributions.

I have submitted a public records request to the Comptroller of the City of Providence for the current accounts of each of the above law firms, including all amounts invoiced and paid since the start of the Elorza Administration in January 2015. The R.I. Access to Public Records Act ordinarily requires a governmental entity to respond within 10 business days. However, having filed numerous public records requests, it is my experience that the City routinely  takes advantage of a provision in the Act to request an additional 20-business-day extension.

I’ll keep everyone posted.

Addendum

Here is the December 8, 2016 response of the Public Records Unit to my November 20 request for the “current accounts, showing all amounts invoiced to and paid by the City of Providence from 1/1/15 to the present,” of each of the law firms listed above. The City claimed that “it will require a significant amount of search, retrieval, review, and/or redaction to respond to your request. More specifically, it is estimated that it will take 5 hours.” At the statutory rate of $15/hour for all time in excess of 1 hour, I therefore had to make an advance payment of $60 to proceed with my request. Upon receipt of payment, the City responded, “The Public Records Unit respectfully extends the time to respond by an additional twenty (20) business days…” That gives the City until after the New Year to respond.

(Last updated 18-Dec-2016 at 10:10 P.M.)

PR_Avatar_3

This entry was posted in Access, Transparency and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a comment