Commonwealth Report Legislators Method

Senate · Democrat

Kathleen O'Connor Ives

Former member, served 2015–2018 in the sessions covered here · First Essex

Data through FY2026; built October 19, 2026.

Residence

Newburyport

First elected

Senate 2012

Prior public offices

Newburyport City Councillor at-Large, 2008 – Jan. 1, 2013

Occupation

Legislator

Left office

did not seek reelection in 2018 (not a candidate in the 2018 primary or general election for this seat); term ended January 2, 2019

Seats held, General Courts 189–194 (the FY2017–FY2026 budgets)
SessionChamberDistrictLinesNote
189th (2015–16)SenateFirst Essex2011 lines
190th (2017–18)SenateFirst Essex2011 lines

Posts and stipends

Kathleen O'Connor Ives was paid $77,900 in leadership and committee stipends from 2016 to 2018.

Posts and stipends by session (stipends by calendar year)
SessionPostsFirst yearSecond year
189th (2015–16)Chair, Joint Committee on Community Development and Small Businesses; Vice chair, Senate Committee on Personnel and Administrationnot available$7,500
190th (2017–18)Chair, Senate Committee on Post Audit and Oversight; Vice chair, Senate Committee on Personnel and Administration$35,200$35,200

Posts: the Legislature’s leadership and roster records as compiled for this project; where those name no post, the member’s committee chair, vice-chair and ranking roles from the Legislature’s member profiles. Stipends: additional compensation in the Comptroller’s payroll data (CTHRU dataset 9ttk-7vz6), 2016–2026; 2026 is the year to date. Stipends for 2015 are not available. Base salary is not included.

The district

First Essex on its 2011 lines: 7 cities and towns, 187,786 residents (2020).

Haverhill · Methuen · Newburyport · Amesbury · North Andover · Salisbury · Merrimac

Percentages are each place’s share of the district’s 2020 residents; for a town split between districts, the share of the town inside this one follows.

Population-weighted Fairness Index of the district’s cities and towns: 49 for all state aid and 53 for discretionary money (50 is a fair share).

Local earmarks are counted three ways. District money uses the first, clauses that name a place in the district; the second table adds organizations located in the district (placed in the district) and state facilities located there (everything placed). Three ways to count a local earmark.

District money, first measure: enacted earmarks in clauses naming a place in the district, by session (district money, not the member’s)
SessionDistrictDollarsIn corrective clausesPer resident per budget, rankWithout corrective clauses, rank
189th (2015–16)First Essex$1.2M$0$6.59 · 3rd of 40$6.59 · 3rd of 40
190th (2017–18)First Essex$2.9M$0$7.68 · 5th of 40$7.68 · 5th of 40

District money is where enacted earmarks land, by the place a clause names, mapped to districts by 2020 population; it is not attributed to the member and does not include leadership’s base-text money that names no place. Ranks are of district money per resident among the chamber’s districts, 1 = most. “In corrective clauses” is the part carried by a Ways and Means chair’s corrective amendments, which is leadership’s money; the last column gives the per-resident figure and rank without it. Sessions are labeled by the General Court that enacted each budget. Per-resident figures use the district as drawn for each session (2011 lines through the 192nd General Court, 2021 lines from the 193rd), so they will not equal a session’s dollars divided by the resident count above.

The same district on the other two measures, by session (enacted; includes any corrective-clause money)
SessionDistrictPlaced in the districtPer resident per budget, rankEverything placedPer resident per budget, rank
189th (2015–16)First Essex$1.7M$9.14 · 4th of 40$1.7M$9.14 · 4th of 40
190th (2017–18)First Essex$3.6M$9.64 · 5th of 40$3.6M$9.64 · 5th of 40

Budget amendments

Kathleen O'Connor Ives sponsored 57 budget amendments in FY2017–FY2026, asking for $6.1 million in all.

Amendments sponsored

57

FY2017–FY2026 budgets

Adopted, known outcomes

42%

24 of 57

Chamber rate, same ask sizes

48%

expected at the chamber’s rates

Of the 57 with a known outcome, 24 were adopted (42%). At the chamber’s adoption rate for amendments of the same size, about 27 (48%) would have been.

Largest enacted items matched to an amendment Kathleen O'Connor Ives filed (strong text matches)
YearAmountEnacted budget text (excerpt)Amendment
FY2019$300,000“the Veterans Northeast Outreach Center, Inc., in the city of Haverhill”S4 #541
FY2019$250,000“the Greater Lawrence Family Health Center , Inc. for programs to increase access to health care for the medically underserved in the city of Haverhill”S4 #543
FY2017$250,000“the early college program administered by Northern Essex Community College”S4 #758
FY2017$250,000“the city of Newburyport for the purchase, installation and related costs, including engineering and design work, for a new landfill gas flare system…”S4 #839
FY2018$200,000“the Early College program administered by Northern Essex Community College”S3 #730

Strong matches: 10 enacted items, $1.6 million (the member’s share where several amendments claim one clause).

For 5 amendments the sponsor is the first mover named in the amendment text, because the Legislature’s record listed none. Ask size is the larger of the earmark dollars and the line-item change an amendment requests; bands: no dollar amount, under $50,000, $50,000–$250,000, $250,000–$1 million, $1–5 million, $5 million or more. Leadership’s unattributed base-text and corrective-amendment money is never assigned to a member. The comparison describes outcomes; it is not a measure of merit.

Bills sponsored

Kathleen O'Connor Ives filed 84 bills as lead sponsor in these sessions; three were enacted on their own. In completed sessions, 4% of their lead bills were enacted on their own, against chamber medians of 3% to 4% for the same sessions.

Most bills die in every legislature, and many policies pass inside other bills; the chamber median for the same session is the fair comparison.

Bills filed as lead sponsor, by session and outcome
SessionChamberLead billsEnactedFolded into an enacted billSent to studyReported favorably, then diedNo actionEnacted rateChamber medianCosponsored
189th (2015–16)Senate3832191048%4%137
190th (2017–18)Senate4600291430%3%178

Enacted bills as lead sponsor

Outcomes are the furthest point each bill reached in the record. “Folded into an enacted bill” means the history names the enacted bill that absorbed it. “Passed both branches; no chapter recorded” means the bill was enacted by both branches and laid before the Governor, with no chapter or veto in the history; in the 194th General Court such bills are shown as laid before the Governor (pending). The 194th General Court is in session until January 2027, so its open bills are pending, not dead, and its rates (*) are not comparable with completed sessions. Chairs and leaders control the calendar, which raises their rates. Source: malegislature.gov bill histories.

Recorded votes on accountability measures

Kathleen O'Connor Ives cast eight yes-or-no votes on the eight accountability roll calls in this file (five yes, three no).

Roll calls on rules, audits, public records, term limits and pay
DateMeasureVoteChamber result
January 26, 2017Senate engrossment of the pay-raise billYesYeas 31, nays 9
February 2, 2017Amendment 2.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Matters considered in an informal sessionYesYeas 38, nays 0
February 2, 2017Amendment 3.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Time to consider matters in an informalYesYeas 39, nays 0
February 2, 2017Amendment 7.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Provided with text of bills prior to pollYesYeas 39, nays 0
February 2, 2017Special orders by majority instead of two-thirds (contested meaning)NoYeas 6, nays 33
February 2, 2017Amendment 11.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Unanimous consentNoYeas 6, nays 33
February 2, 2017Amendment 13.0 (Bruce E. Tarr): Timely Local Aid NotificationNoYeas 7, nays 32
February 2, 2017Senate override of the veto of the pay-raise billYesYeas 31, nays 9

Votes marked “contested meaning” are rules-package and public-records passage votes; reform advocates were on both sides of them. Descriptions are the project’s plain summaries of each question, or the question as recorded for rules-package roll calls; the official record is on malegislature.gov. Votes are facts; no score is computed.

Campaign money in

Kathleen O'Connor Ives’s committee reported $46,000 in contributions of $250 or more in years the member served, 2015–2018.

By year (years in the Legislature)
YearContributions
2015$17,000
2016$17,000
2017$10,000
2018$1,750
By kind of contributor
KindTotalShare
Individuals$26,00056%
Political committees and PACs$19,00041%
Unions and associations$1,0002%
Individuals’ money by the employer they reported
Employer reportedShare
A named employer71%
Self-employed11%
Retired8%
Homemaker or at home2%
Not reported or withheld9%

Not counted as contributions: $1,500 in other receipts of $250 or more in the same years (candidate loans and the candidate’s own money, transfers, refunds, bank interest and aggregated small receipts).

The same committee also reported $0 in years the member was not in the Legislature (2020, 2021), for example while running for another office. Those receipts are not in the totals above.

Largest employers and organizations
Employer or organizationKindTotalContributions
SPS NEW ENGLANDindividuals, by employer$5,0006
MA CORRECTION OFFICERS FEDERATED UNION PAC M C O F U PACcommittee or PAC$1,8004
TRINITY EMSindividuals, by employer$1,6004
AMERICAN FEDERATION OF TEACHERS MA PACcommittee or PAC$1,5003
IBEW LOCAL 2321 COPE PACcommittee or PAC$1,5004
LAWRENCE TEACHERS UNION COMMITTEE ON POLITICAL ACTIONcommittee or PAC$1,5003
MA & NORTHERN NE LABORERS' DISTRICT COUNCIL POL ACTION COMMcommittee or PAC$1,5003
PROFESSIONAL FIRE FIGHTERS OF MA PEOPLE'S CTTEEcommittee or PAC$1,5003
ACCUDATAindividuals, by employer$1,2503
MA ASSOC OF REALTORS POL ACTION COMM - MA RPACcommittee or PAC$1,2003

Source: Office of Campaign and Political Finance, itemized receipts of $250 or more since 2015; OCPF filer record: O'Connor- Ives Committee (CPF 15501). Individuals are grouped by the employer they reported; no individual contributor is named, and an employer field that is a person’s name is withheld. Massachusetts bars business contributions to candidates. Employer shows affiliation, not instruction.

Sources

Every figure traces to a public record.

Facts only: posts, stipends, sponsored amendments, enacted items, roll-call votes and district money. No score or grade is computed. Associations shown here are not evidence of cause. Method.