Texas Ethics Commission data
Release v1.4
Source snapshot September 17, 2026
Latest eligible reported transaction September 15, 2026
Canonical Vendor
MISSION DEMOCRATS OF BEXAR COUNTY
Resolved vendor identity assembled from reviewed Texas Ethics Commission payee records.
Canonical vendor · Vendor ID 215372 · Resolution: Indexed Canonical Identity
Total Payments
$18,656.00
Client Filers
32
Payments
86
Activity Range
09/09/2008–10/24/2018
Largest Payment
$575.00
Graph: 32 connected filers · 86 payments · $18,656.00 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.
- Mission Democrats of Bexar County
Top Client Filers
Canonical client relationships from vendor_clients_canonical.
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 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
BEXAR COUNTY DEMOCRATIC PARTY
Vendor ID 33267
|
28 | 87.5% | 184 | 14.9% |
|
HEB
Vendor ID 142370
|
24 | 75.0% | 1,480 | 1.6% |
|
TEXAS DEMOCRATIC PARTY
Vendor ID 310744
|
23 | 71.9% | 1,669 | 1.4% |
|
OFFICE DEPOT
Vendor ID 230284
|
22 | 68.8% | 3,017 | 0.7% |
|
PRESTIGE PRINTING
Vendor ID 249363
|
20 | 62.5% | 187 | 10.1% |
|
BEXAR COUNTY YOUNG DEMOCRATS
Vendor ID 33448
|
19 | 59.4% | 54 | 28.4% |
|
NORTHWEST DEMOCRATS
Vendor ID 228121
|
19 | 59.4% | 82 | 20.0% |
|
TARGET
Vendor ID 304420
|
19 | 59.4% | 1,174 | 1.6% |
|
ALLIED ADVERTISING
Vendor ID 11812
|
18 | 56.3% | 225 | 7.5% |
|
OFFICE MAX
Vendor ID 230798
|
18 | 56.3% | 1,327 | 1.3% |
|
SAM'S CLUB
Vendor ID 273581
|
18 | 56.3% | 1,360 | 1.3% |
|
NORTHEAST BEXAR COUNTY DEMOCRATS
Vendor ID 227762
|
17 | 53.1% | 62 | 22.1% |
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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 10/24/2018 | Martinez, Rebeca C. (The Honorable) | $250.00 | Sponsorship of Pete Leal Annual Awards Gala |
| 09/28/2018 | Mery, Michael E. (The Honorable) | $370.00 | Annual Pete Leal Award Gala sponsorship and tickets. |
| 09/24/2018 | Sakai, Peter A. (The Honorable) | $250.00 | Dinner tickets |
| 09/17/2018 | Pozza, Karen H. (The Honorable) | $250.00 | Tier III Sponsor for 9/28/18 Mission Democrats of Bexar County Pete Leal Banquet |
| 12/14/2017 | Rangel, Ronald (The Honorable) | $550.00 | Gala |
| 09/28/2017 | Perez, Marisa (The Honorable) | $250.00 | Amigos Sponsorship for 2017 Gala |
| 09/25/2017 | Alvarez, Maria Luisa (Ms.) | $57.50 | Gala food CF |
| 09/25/2017 | Alvarez, Maria Luisa (Ms.) | $57.50 | Gala food and beverage ML |
| 09/21/2017 | Northeast Bexar County Democrats PAC | $275.00 | Donation for Gala |
| 09/20/2017 | Chapa, Cynthia Marie (Ms.) | $110.00 | Gala Tickets |
| 09/18/2017 | Mery, Michael E. (The Honorable) | $360.00 | Pete Leal Awards Banquet Sposorship. |
| 09/18/2017 | Cortez, Philip (The Honorable) | $275.00 | sponsorship |
| 09/18/2017 | Alvarez, Maria Luisa (Ms.) | $110.00 | Gala tickets |
| 09/12/2017 | Pozza, Karen H. (The Honorable) | $250.00 | Amigos Sponsor for 9/22/17 Mission Democrats Ninth Annual Pete Leal Awards Banquet |
| 09/08/2017 | Sakai, Peter A. (The Honorable) | $250.00 | Dinner Tickets |
| 08/23/2017 | Martinez, Rebeca C. (The Honorable) | $575.00 | Gala Program Sponsorship/ticket |
| 09/27/2016 | Cortez, Philip (Mr.) | $275.00 | Table for Gala |
| 09/19/2016 | Perez, Marisa (The Honorable) | $250.00 | Contribution for 2016 Gala Sponsorship |
| 09/08/2016 | Northeast Bexar County Democrats PAC | $275.00 | Donation to GPAC |
| 08/24/2016 | Mery, Michael E. (The Honorable) | $250.00 | Sponsorship of 8th Annual Pete Leal Awards Banquet. |
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.