Far Hills, NJ itemized contributions to INTEGRITY NJ

A city string joined to C00671099

This URL exists because two tables meet: the Far Hills, NJ city extract ($12,973,545 across recipients) and the INTEGRITY NJ committee extract. $950,000 is the cell where those keys coincide. Quoting only $12,973,545 drops the committee. Quoting only INTEGRITY NJ without Far Hills drops every other city on C00671099.

$12,023,545 remains after subtracting $950,000 from $12,973,545. That leftover (92.7% of the city book) went to other committees under the same FAR HILLS grouping, or sits outside this recipient filter. The Far Hills, NJ city hub holds that remainder. The INTEGRITY NJ page holds receipts whose city field did not group to Far Hills.

Cite $950,000, $12,973,545, and C00671099. Keep both sides named: Far Hills, NJ as the city string, INTEGRITY NJ as the recipient. Motive is outside the packet. This join is committee receipts from one city key, not a spending ledger.

The Far Hills, NJ side of the join

The stored city sits in New Jersey. Neighboring places are not rolled into FAR HILLS. State NJ stays on the citation so Far Hills is not merged with a same-named city in another state. A repeated city name under another state code is a different FEC key. $12,973,545 is the NJ key only.

City labels are filer-entered. A donor who typed FAR HILLS is counted in the city book. A donor who typed a neighborhood, a firm city, a nearby suburb, or a misspelling is not recoded into Far Hills. LobbyVault does not rewrite the city field into a Census place. Treat $12,973,545 as lines that stored this string.

INTEGRITY NJ (C00671099) as the recipient key

C00671099 is disclosed as INTEGRITY NJ. This page does not list independent expenditures the committee made. The $950,000 is Far Hills-coded individual receipts. Other cities giving to INTEGRITY NJ appear on the committee hub. Adding them here would break the Far Hills filter.

The committee hub for INTEGRITY NJ holds receipts whose city field did not group to Far Hills. This tie page exists so the city total and the committee overlay stay comparable without being stacked. FEC.gov is the source. Live hubs override this snapshot.

A city gift is not a federal-award trail

Do not read $950,000 as proof that Far Hills “controls” INTEGRITY NJ or that INTEGRITY NJ “represents” Far Hills. The join is two fields. Correlation is not causation. PAC or joint-fundraising addresses that stored this pair of strings follow the same rule as household streets.

This packet does not publish contribution counts, unique-donor counts, occupation mix, or cycle splits for the Far Hills × INTEGRITY NJ overlap. Open the live Far Hills, NJ page and the live INTEGRITY NJ page for breakdowns if the extract publishes them. This prose stays on $950,000 and $12,973,545.

If the overlay on C00671099 disagrees with $950,000, the overlay and FEC.gov control. This snapshot is not a third disclosure system. Amended Form 3/3X filings can move a city-committee cell after this file was written.

How to cite Far Hills × INTEGRITY NJ

The Far Hills, NJ city page holds the $12,973,545 grouping and the committees that received the other 92.7%. The INTEGRITY NJ page holds C00671099 receipts from every city. All FEC ties collects neighboring pairs without mixing independent expenditures into this cell. New Jersey campaign finance is the state roll-up.

Name both keys: city Far Hills, NJ totaling $12,973,545 across all recipients, and $950,000 in itemized gifts to INTEGRITY NJ (C00671099). The share of the city bucket is 7.3%. The leftover is $12,023,545. Do not print a Far Hills share of federal awards. This packet has no USAspending field.

Keep the three numbers together: $950,000 dollars, $12,973,545 city book, and committee C00671099. Quoting only the $12,973,545 city hub without C00671099 drops this cell. Quoting only the committee without the Far Hills string drops every other city on the fund.

Related tables without stacking dollars

A high or low share (7.3%) is a filing pattern, not an unique-donor census and not a ranking of Far Hills against other cities. Do not rank cities as more or less politically active from this single cell. Other city-committee pages are other filters.

Live hubs override this snapshot. If the Far Hills, NJ overlay or the INTEGRITY NJ overlay disagrees, the overlay and FEC.gov control. Cite $950,000, $12,973,545, 7.3%, $12,023,545, and C00671099. Keep both sides named.

This tie only publishes the overlap: $950,000 coded to Far Hills, NJ and received by INTEGRITY NJ (C00671099), against a city grouping of $12,973,545. About 7.3% of that grouping is here; $12,023,545 is not. Independent expenditures are not in this join.

Questions

How much money from Far Hills, NJ went to INTEGRITY NJ?

FEC.gov aggregates of itemized individual contributions show $950,000 coded to contributor city Far Hills, NJ and received by INTEGRITY NJ (C00671099). The broader Far Hills city book across all committees is $12,973,545. This cell is about 7.3% of that city total. These figures are not independent expenditures.

Is $950,000 all of Far Hills’s federal political money?

No. $12,973,545 is the all-committee itemized book for contributor city FAR HILLS in NJ. The INTEGRITY NJ slice is $950,000, 7.3% of that book. Other committees in the same city string are on the Far Hills, NJ hub. $12,023,545 (92.7%) is the remainder in this extract.

Does the Far Hills total to INTEGRITY NJ count only residents?

No. The city is the contributor-city value on the FEC itemization. Filers typed FAR HILLS with state NJ. Office addresses and joint-fundraising mail that list Far Hills can sit in $950,000 when that is the stored string. LobbyVault does not recode the field into a residential-only book.

Where do the Far Hills × INTEGRITY NJ numbers come from?

FEC.gov itemized contribution aggregates, indexed on LobbyVault: $950,000 for Far Hills, NJ to INTEGRITY NJ (C00671099), and $12,973,545 for the city string across committees. Original reports remain on FEC.gov. If a later extract disagrees with this snapshot, the Commission’s filing controls. Independent expenditures are omitted.