Electoral receipt · State Senate
STEVE SANCHEZ
State Senate · SEN-28 · 2022 cycle
Funding Receipt
STEVE SANCHEZ · 2022 cycle
★ · campaign finance, itemized · ★
Funding mix · 76 unique donors ·
primary committee
S Small donors (Under $500) $6,083 · 8%
M Medium donors ($500–$999) $9,500 · 13%
L Large donors ($1,000+) $57,500 · 79%
Top donors to primary committee
(25 shown)
01 Bellquist, Eric · Retired $9,800
02 Canyon Ridge Builders LLC (Marc Kleiman) $9,800
03 Miles, Karen · Retired $5,400
04 Burrtec Waste Industries Inc. $4,500
05 Douglas/Terrence Trans. Sites; Doug Jones $3,000
06 Wilson Meade Commercial Inc. $3,000
07 Asten, Peter · Asten Regroup LLC $3,000
08 California Revival PAC $2,500
09 Kaeser, Linda · Retired $2,000
10 Casella, Darlene · Retired $1,500
11 Humason, James · Retired $1,500
12 Bowers, Brian · Exquadrum $1,500
13 Cardwell, Dennis · Champion Framing $1,000
14 Fortun, Kevin · Fortun Companies $1,000
15 Johnson Commercial Real Estate Inc. $1,000
16 McCollister, Daniel · Bigmavericks of Wine $1,000
17 McKenzie, Milton · McKenzie Family LP $1,000
18 Nelson, John · Procopio Cory Hargreaves & Savitch L $1,000
19 Ortiz, Nicole · True You Medical $1,000
20 Renova Energy $1,000
21 Roberts, Jeff · Retired $1,000
22 Shalhoub, Stacey · Dns2 $1,000
23 Smith, Tracy Jean · Self-employed $1,000
24 Take Back California $1,000
25 Anthony, Capobianco · Self-employed $1,000
Primary committee total $73,083
Source: California Secretary of State Cal-Access bulk export
Pipeline: scripts/pull_calaccess_filings.py · Dedup: latest AMEND_ID
/methodology
Pipeline: scripts/pull_calaccess_filings.py · Dedup: latest AMEND_ID
/methodology
What you're seeing. The Raised for this race total counts only money that flowed into committees clearly named for State Senate in this cycle (e.g. "STEVE SANCHEZ for Assembly 2022"). The wider footprint shows every committee STEVE SANCHEZ controls during the same window — ballot-measure leadership PACs, future-office exploratory committees, officeholder accounts. A candidate raising large sums into non-electoral vehicles still shows where the institutional attention is. Both surfaces are honest; they answer different questions.