Rogers paid ex-partner's firm a big fee

House majority leader John H. Rogers, one of two leading contenders to become the next speaker, spent $196,000 from his campaign fund over a two-year period to hire his former law partner as a political consultant, in an informal arrangement that Rogers says did not include a fee schedule or a written contract.

Rogers' s political committee made the payments to Bay State Consulting, which lists its address as the Wrentham law office that Rogers shared for many years with Philip F. Filosa. Filosa, who says he is sole proprietor of the consulting outfit, collected $115,000 in 2005 from the committee -- more than half of its expenditures that year. Filosa said the company was created to help Rogers and has no other clients.

Roger s 's payments to Filosa are far higher than the consulting fees paid by most legislators, especially when uncontested in their re election bids, and more in line with what consultants charge state wide candidates for such services. The payments extended from August 2004 through November 2006. Rogers has faced no serious opposition in his home district, running unopposed in 2004 and winning against a long-shot opponent in 2006.

The arrangement highlights a loophole in the state's campaign finance law, which allows office holders and candidates to avoid detailing expenses in their public filings by simply paying a large, lump sum to a consultant. Their campaign report must list that expenditure, but does not have to detail how that money is spent.

Rogers and Filosa, in separate interviews, said the money was used to pay for staff, rent, fund-raising, and other political activities. At the Globe's request, they offered to make the records available, but could not until this week because they are in Filosa's law office and he is out of town.

"This is an absolute loophole that needs to be closed," said Pamela Wilmot, executive director of Common Cause of Massachusetts, which advocates for government ethics. She said the state's campaign finance laws are designed to allow the public to see how candidates and office holders are using their political accounts and to guard against abuse.

"This loophole allows a candidate to pay a large sum to a consultant who then spends it on all sorts of items and services without the public ever knowing."

Rogers acknowledged that the arrangement with Filosa could raise eyebrows, but said that several years ago he felt his political expenses were growing too rapidly and his fund-raising lagging. He said he asked Filosa to take control of his campaign committee. In 2003, Rogers left the two-person law office in Wrentham to join a Boston law firm.

"I needed someone who is trustworthy, who is a former business partner with a proven track record of good faith negotiations and honesty," Rogers said in explaining his decision to make the payments to Filosa. "Phil is also someone who knows politics and knows the requirements of both campaign finance and ethics laws."

Filosa, a 58-year old former legislator, said he created Bay State Consulting in 2004 after Rogers asked him to take over his political operations. He said part of the payments went to hiring two full-time workers for the committee. He said he could not recall what kind of contract, if any, was signed. Rogers said there was no contract between his committee and Filosa, nor was there any agreement on fees.

In August 2004, when Filosa began receiving a monthly fee that was often as high as $10,000, Rogers' s campaign committee had a balance of $237,000. By December 2005, its accounts had dwindled to $34,538 during a period in which he had no political opposition in his district, according to campaign finance records.

Rogers, a former chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee who lost a speaker battle with Salvatore F. DiMasi in September 2004, is laying the groundwork for what some say is a pending succession fight within the next year or two. His major rival is Representative Ronald Mariano , a Quincy Democrat. Both are quietly courting support as speculation mounts over DiMasi's future.

Filosa said that Rogers had cleared the consulting arrangement with the Office of Campaign and Political Finance. "This was all approved," he said. "He laid it all out to OCPF, and they gave it the stamp of approval. There is nothing untoward."

There is no formal record of any kind of approval at OCPF, state campaign finance officials said, but the office frequently provides informal advice.

The office and the attorney general's office have questioned payments to families and close associates in the past, but there is no record that the office is looking at Rogers's consulting payments to Filosa. The attorney general's office last year questioned nearly $10,000 in payments that the committee for state Senator Dianne Wilkerson made to her two sons for campaign work, as part of a larger investigation into her finances. In a pending court suit, state prosecutors are seeking to force the committee to provide records showing how the money was used.

Filosa, who represented Wrentham in the House during the 1970 s, said he has not profited from the payments from Rogers's committee. "None of the money went into my pocket," Filosa said in an interview. He later said in the interview that he took a $500 fee some months, but stopped about 18 months ago.

He said the consulting outfit is not incorporated and is not a limited partnership. He described it as a "proprietorship" and said he reports the income on a Schedule C form on his income tax returns.

Filosa said he and Rogers decided to end the consulting fees almost 18 months ago. He said the only work he did for Rogers last year was to work the phone banks on primary day.