Critics question inaugural funding

Common Cause, the independent political watchdog group, said yesterday that it was "deeply disappointed" with Governor-elect Deval Patrick's plans to seek corporate donations for his inauguration, even as Patrick's advisers finalized plans to use a network of political insiders and business people to solicit contributions.

Patrick's plan for an outdoor inauguration draws opposition among legislators. B1.

The group's Massachusetts chapter said it was sending a letter to Patrick to register its concerns about Patrick's plans to raise up to $50,000 each from corporate and individual donors to help pay for the $1 million-plus inauguration festivities, the state's most expensive celebration ever.

"Businesses that are looking for favorable treatment from the new administration and are subject to regulation, are fighting for contracts, are looking for tax breaks, should not be part of the equation," said Pamela H. Wilmot, executive director of Common Cause Massachusetts. "It gives the appearance that it is politics as usual and that it is a political insiders' ball and [that] it is not an open grass-roots event where the common man is treated the same as everyone else."

Meanwhile, more than a dozen well-heeled members of the Democratic Party establishment are asking local businesses for $50,000 donations to help pay for the five days of events that will celebrate Patrick's Jan. 4 swearing-in.

The group of fund-raisers that Patrick has assembled is in sharp contrast to the pledges he made in his campaign for governor, when he portrayed himself as a political outsider who would bring major changes to the way business is conducted at the State House and give a strong voice to average citizens.

Patrick aides insist that they have taken extraordinary steps to include Patrick's grass-roots supporters in the inauguration, by staging events in several cities outside Boston, throwing a "youth inaugural," and encouraging partygoers to donate shoes for needy children. The inauguration organizers have also set restrictions on the source of the donations to the inaugural committee, refusing to accept money from Big Dig contractors, tobacco lobbyists, firearms and gaming corporations, and trade associations.

But criticism of the high-dollar inauguration has been mounting.

The governor-elect and his team have faced other conflicts. The Globe reported last week that a lobbying firm and a law firm were planning receptions and forums featuring top officials in the incoming Patrick administration. In one case, the report prompted the lieutenant governor-elect, Timothy P. Murray, to cancel a scheduled talk at a breakfast gathering being organized by O'Neill and Associates, a lobbying and strategy firm that represents Big Dig contractors and other special interests.

Cyndi Roy, a spokeswoman for the Patrick transition team, said the governor-elect is pledging "completely open and transparent" activities by the inaugural committee. But she refused a Globe request for the names of those who are raising corporate funds. Roy has said the committee will release the names of donors, but has not specified a time frame. Yesterday, she refused to immediately disclose the contributions on the inaugural committee website as they are received.

"A broad, diverse committee is being formed on an ongoing basis, and we expect that, come Inauguration Day, there will be over 400 people credited with raising money and planning events," Roy said. "We will also release a complete list of individual and corporate donors and the level of their contributions. Our focus now is on ensuring that we provide the citizens of Massachusetts with the most inclusive and accessible inauguration in the history of the Commonwealth."

But sources who are involved in the effort to round up major donors and corporate funds say the crux of the fund-raising campaign is centered on key figures in the state's business and political establishment who are often involved in trying to influence policy making on Beacon Hill.

According to three organizers in the fund-raising effort, the dozen fund-raisers include:

Jack Connors, former chief of the advertising firm Hill Holiday Connors Cosmopulos and chairman of the board of Partners Health, who is a central figure in ongoing development of the state's healthcare reform law. Connors, in a nonpaying position as Partners chairman, was a significant player in this year's groundbreaking healthcare law. Partners and Blue Cross-Blue Shield paid almost $500,000 to influential State House lobbyists as part of their effort to ensure the bill provided as much as $200 million in new Medicaid reimbursements for hospitals. Partners, which stands to get up to $15 million from that provision, is a large state vendor that is constantly in negotiations over Medicaid rates for its hospital network and their doctors.

Cheryl M. Cronin, a partner in a major Boston law firm, who has represented high-profile political clients on ethics and legal issues, including former acting governor Jane Swift and former House speaker Thomas M. Finneran. Her clients include healthcare companies and other firms with state regulatory interests. She also represents Bechtel/Parsons Brinckerhoff, the Big Dig's management consultant.

Robert B. Crowe, a major Democratic fund-raiser and close friend of US Senator John F. Kerry, who heads up the Boston government relations office for a large Philadelphia-based law firm, Wolf, Block, Schorr and Solis-Cohen.

Robert Beal, a large Boston real estate developer and Democratic Party fund-raiser whose firm, The Beal Cos., does business with a host of state agencies and public authorities. He served for many years on the board of MassDevelopment, a state authority that promotes economic development. He was removed by Governor Mitt Romney, and associates say he would like to return to the board.

Nick Littlefield, a Boston lawyer and former aide to US Senator Edward M. Kennedy, whose legal practice focuses on life science and biotechnology companies that have a strong agenda to streamline zoning, state regulations, and permitting and to boost public funding of science education.