Controversy has surrounded House Speaker Nicholas Mattiello on several fronts of late – but he says he has received broad support in the face of recent developments and is preparing a bid for a new term.

“Constituents have actually been extremely supportive and almost protective. My colleagues have been great and very supportive,” Mattiello, who represents District 15 in Cranston, said in a phone interview with the Herald following a Tuesday morning appearance on Gene Valicenti’s WPRO radio program.

The speaker said he will “absolutely” seek re-election in 2020 – noting that he is close to finalize office space for his campaign – and rejected calls from some corners for him to step aside following the reemergence of a controversial 2016 campaign mailer and the indictment of Jeffrey Britt, one of his former aides.

He further said he aims to continue serving as speaker until a phase-out of the car tax is complete, at which point he would reevaluate his plans. He said the Britt situation is “not going to be a distraction” and he is “focused on policy issues that are going to help my constituents.”

“I certainly have my political opponents … The overwhelming majority have been very supportive,” he added.

Responding directly to the Britt indictment, Mattiello said: “It’s a 3-year-old issue, it’s been thoroughly vetted by the Board of Elections and the attorney general’s office, and the conclusion was that only one person was involved in any illegality.”

Meanwhile, Republican Steven Frias, who challenged – and narrowly fell short to – Mattiello in both 2016 and 2018, said he has not ruled out another bid for the District 15 seat.

Asked prior to news of Britt’s indictment last week if he would make another run, Frias said: “Let’s see what the grand jury reveals and how Speaker Mattiello handles the IGT no-bid deal.”

In an email statement after the indictment, Frias wrote: “Speaker Mattiello ran a campaign which engaged in criminal activity, and this criminal activity played a role in his win. He also misled the voters when he said his campaign had no involvement with the illegal mailer. If it was me, I would be so ashamed. In fact, I find it embarrassing to be even represented by somebody like him. Why does Mattiello surround himself with criminals?”

Britt’s indictment, announced Oct. 18 by Attorney General Peter Neronha, concerns a campaign mailer sent in the waning days of Mattiello’s tight 2016 race against Frias – one the speaker ultimately won by just 85 votes.

The mailer served as an endorsement of Mattiello by Shawna Lawton, who ran against Frias for the Republican nomination for the District 15 seat. Prosecutors allege Britt – who is charged with one felony count of money laundering and one misdemeanor count of making a prohibited campaign contribution – facilitated improper, disguised contributions to Lawton’s campaign to fund the mailer.

Britt faces up to 20 years in prison. His arraignment is scheduled for Nov. 1.

The matter was referred to the attorney general’s office by the state Board of Elections in October 2018, and was subsequently investigated in conjunction with Rhode Island State Police.

Neronha said he does not expect any additional charges to be filed in the matter, and that there is no evidence Mattiello was aware of his aide’s alleged wrongdoing.

“Rhode Island's election laws exist for a reason: to ensure transparency in our elections,” Neronha said in a statement. “They exist to ensure that the public knows the true source of funds used to support political candidates. They exist to ensure that the public can judge the motivation underlying support for a candidate. In short, they exist to ensure the integrity of our elections.”

John Marion, executive director of Common Cause Rhode Island, wrote in a email statement that the indictment of Britt indicates Nernoha’s office is taking campaign finance issues seriously.

“Campaign finance laws in Rhode Island are based on three principles; a $1,000 limit on direct contributions to candidates, timely disclosure of those donations, and no coordination between candidates and those who are doing independent expenditures,” he said. “Attorney General Neronha made an important statement with this indictment that he will work to make sure all of those principles are met. No should be able to use straw donors or illegal coordination to circumvent the limits on and disclosure of campaign funds. Common Cause Rhode Island is happy to see the attorney general take such strong action.”

During his interview with Valicenti, Mattiello said he hired Britt for his 2016 campaign “for the same reason a lot of people do – I didn’t want him on the other side shooting at me.” He said Britt’s reputation is that of a skilled political operative who has worked for candidates and officials of both parties.

“I have no animosity toward Mr. Britt, but some of the things he did, obviously we’re not going to condone,” he said.

He added: “At the end of the day, the facts are very well known to everybody on this … I believe very strongly that everybody involved knows that I had nothing to do with that mailer.”

Yet to be seen is how Britt responds to the charges against him. A statement from his attorney, former U.S. Attorney Robert Corrente, asserts that Britt is being used as a “fall guy” by the Mattiello campaign.

“We believe that the evidence at trial will leave Rhode Islanders scratching their heads about who did and who did not get charged … We are confident that the jury will see this set-up for what it is, once they hear the testimony from everyone involved,” the statement reads.

Britt’s situation is not the only one to result in questions for, and about, Mattiello.

Earlier this month, the Providence Journal first reported that the office of U.S. Attorney Aaron Wiesman has subpoenaed state records related to Victor Pedro, a Cranston chiropractor who was set to received a $1 million appropriation in the current year’s state budget before Mattiello moved to withdraw the funding amid controversy.

Pedro has donated to Mattiello’s campaigns in the past, and Frank Montanro Jr., a former lawmaker who serves on the speaker’s staff, previously lobbied on behalf of Pedro and one of his organizations.

Pedro’s cortical integrative therapy, or CIT – which his website describes as being for “a broad spectrum of brain-based disorders, traumatic brain injuries, and discomforts of chronic pain – has received state funding in the form of payment through the state’s Medicaid program. That would have continued through the planned appropriation for the current year.

State and federal officials, and members of the medical community, have questioned Pedro’s practice and CIT, saying it lacks needed evidence to support its effectiveness.

On Tuesday, Mattiello reiterated past comments that he believes Pedro’s treatments have “helped people.” But he said the U.S. attorney’s subpoena – focused on billing practices – would involve the executive branch, not the legislature.

“That has nothing to do with me or the House of Representatives,” he said.

Mattiello has also drawn scrutiny in the wake of reports that Grant Pilkington, his deputy chief of staff, is a stakeholder in a hemp business that was licensed through the state. Critics question the appropriateness of one of the speaker’s top aides having ties to that business given the legislature’s role in crafting regulations regarding the marijuana and hemp industry.

During his interview with Valicenti, Mattiello dismissed the alleged conflict as a “made-up story” and offered praise for Pilkington.

During his interview with the Herald, he confirmed he will move to repeal a so-called “legislative veto” over cannabis regulations that was adopted during the last session.

“At this point, rather than litigate an issue at great expense … We’re going to reverse that and back that out,” he said.

He added: “That’s an industry that is unique. It’s growing very rapidly and I thought it needed enhanced oversight. And I still believe that, and that oversight has to be provided by some mechanism.”

Hours later, however, Gov. Gina Raimondo’s office announced it has filed a legal challenge to the “legislative veto” for marijuana regulations. In a statement, the governor’s office asserts that the provision violates the constitutional separation of powers.