Texas Ethics Commission data
Release v1.4
Source snapshot September 17, 2026
Latest eligible reported transaction September 15, 2026
Canonical Vendor
Chadderdon Lestingi
Resolved vendor identity assembled from reviewed Texas Ethics Commission payee records.
Canonical vendor · Vendor ID 57268 · Resolution: Indexed Canonical Identity
Total Payments
$498,293.97
Client Filers
4
Payments
35
Activity Range
08/02/2018–10/21/2020
Largest Payment
$33,335.00
Graph: 4 connected filers · 35 payments · $498,293.97 represented
Canonical vendor assembled from reviewed Texas Ethics Commission reported payee identities. Source records remain unchanged.
Reported Names
Payee names preserved from the reported/curated source layer and resolved to this canonical vendor.
- Chadderdon Lestingi
Top Client Filers
Canonical client relationships from vendor_clients_canonical.
| # | Filer | Paid | Payments | Last Payment |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Lucido, Rita (Ms.) | $236,741.87 | 17 | 10/31/2018 |
| 2 | Texas Democratic Party | $131,124.00 | 8 | 10/21/2020 |
| 3 | Beck, Elizabeth M. (Ms.) | $88,663.00 | 6 | 10/20/2020 |
| 4 | Chambers, Brandy K. (Mrs.) | $41,765.10 | 4 | 10/31/2018 |
Shared Client Network
Other canonical vendors paid by the same filer clients. Ranked by shared-client count.
This is a structural overlap measure, not evidence of affiliation or coordination.
| Vendor | Shared Clients | Focal Coverage | Peer Clients | Network Overlap |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
NGP VAN
Vendor ID 225757
|
3 | 75.0% | 252 | 1.2% |
|
TEXAS DEMOCRATIC WOMEN
Vendor ID 310805
|
3 | 75.0% | 243 | 1.2% |
|
CHEVRON
Vendor ID 59468
|
3 | 75.0% | 596 | 0.5% |
|
GOOGLE
Vendor ID 131689
|
3 | 75.0% | 620 | 0.5% |
|
STAPLES
Vendor ID 294208
|
3 | 75.0% | 1,045 | 0.3% |
|
HOME DEPOT
Vendor ID 148817
|
3 | 75.0% | 1,536 | 0.2% |
|
TEXAS DEMOCRATIC PARTY
Vendor ID 310744
|
3 | 75.0% | 1,669 | 0.2% |
|
USPS
Vendor ID 340732
|
3 | 75.0% | 1,958 | 0.2% |
|
OFFICE DEPOT
Vendor ID 230284
|
3 | 75.0% | 3,017 | 0.1% |
|
Message Audience & Presentation (MAP)
Vendor ID 210663
|
2 | 50.0% | 2 | 50.0% |
|
ECHO19
Vendor ID 98667
|
2 | 50.0% | 3 | 40.0% |
|
ECHO 19
Vendor ID 98626
|
2 | 50.0% | 4 | 33.3% |
Method: Focal Coverage = shared clients ÷ this vendor's client count.
Network Overlap = Jaccard similarity: shared clients ÷ union of both client sets.
Recent Reported Payments
| Date | Client Filer | Amount | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/21/2020 | Texas Democratic Party | $5,100.00 | Printing and production of candidate mail |
| 10/20/2020 | Beck, Elizabeth M. (Ms.) | $2,724.00 | Mail payment |
| 10/15/2020 | Beck, Elizabeth M. (Ms.) | $20,125.00 | Mail payment |
| 10/15/2020 | Texas Democratic Party | $5,100.00 | Postage expense |
| 10/13/2020 | Texas Democratic Party | $15,993.00 | Printing and production of mail |
| 10/09/2020 | Texas Democratic Party | $15,993.00 | Printing and production of mail |
| 10/09/2020 | Texas Democratic Party | $15,993.00 | Printing and productin of mail |
| 10/05/2020 | Texas Democratic Party | $28,018.00 | Printing and production of mail |
| 09/29/2020 | Texas Democratic Party | $33,335.00 | Printing and production mailings |
| 09/22/2020 | Texas Democratic Party | $11,592.00 | Printing and production of mail |
| 09/14/2020 | Beck, Elizabeth M. (Ms.) | $14,105.00 | Mail Payment |
| 09/08/2020 | Beck, Elizabeth M. (Ms.) | $18,802.00 | Mail payment |
| 10/31/2018 | Lucido, Rita (Ms.) | $5,000.00 | digital ads |
| 10/24/2018 | Lucido, Rita (Ms.) | $30,000.00 | streaming services and digital ads |
| 10/19/2018 | Lucido, Rita (Ms.) | $15,522.43 | Mailers |
| 10/09/2018 | Lucido, Rita (Ms.) | $15,278.13 | Mailers |
| 10/04/2018 | Lucido, Rita (Ms.) | $5,646.54 | door hangers |
| 10/01/2018 | Lucido, Rita (Ms.) | $9,600.00 | social media |
| 09/27/2018 | Lucido, Rita (Ms.) | $21,601.13 | mailers |
| 09/18/2018 | Lucido, Rita (Ms.) | $20,000.00 | Mailers |
Evidence basis: A canonical vendor identity was resolved using the curated vendor layer. Raw reported-payee statistics remain separate from canonical vendor statistics so the source record and analytical identity are distinguishable.