Electoral receipt · State Senate
ANASTASIA L. STONE
State Senate · SEN-19 · 2020 cycle
Funding Receipt
ANASTASIA L. STONE · 2020 cycle
★ · campaign finance, itemized · ★
Funding mix · 25 unique donors ·
primary committee
S Small donors (Under $500) $2,450 · 22%
M Medium donors ($500–$999) $4,949 · 44%
L Large donors ($1,000+) $3,893 · 34%
Top donors to primary committee
(25 shown)
01 Mackenzie, Douglas · Pacific Plastic Surgery $1,950
02 COUNTY OF VENTURA, AUDITOR CONTROLLER $1,893
03 Erath, Kristie · Santa Ynez paint $1,500
04 Fischbein, Stuart · self employed $1,000
05 Kopel, Irene · self employed $1,000
06 Melissa Drake, OBGYN $999
07 Moses, Eliza · Casa Barranca inc. $500
08 Pickard, Greg · Linkedin $500
09 Fowle, Kacie · Kacie Jean Photography $200
10 Fischer, Justin · Carpinteria Veterinary hospital $150
11 Davin, Jamie · Pulse One $150
12 Waite, Sandra · Aptus $150
13 Stone, Dustin · Hayward Lumber $100
14 Davis, Zachary · Appfolio $100
15 Levinson-Kuzmin, Randi · Retired $100
16 Herbert, Alissa · Santa Barbara Birth Center $100
17 Holland, Nancy · Retired $100
18 Nurra, Linda · self employed $100
19 Barry, Nicole · Barry Family Chiropractic $100
20 Martinez, Jeffrey · self employed $100
21 Sherman, Cindy · Retired $100
22 Waite, Elizabeth · Astar $100
23 Matoza, Emily · home maker $100
24 Wilson, Mia · Coral group $100
25 Levine, Ann · self employed $100
Primary committee total $11,292
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. "ANASTASIA L. STONE for Assembly 2020"). The wider footprint shows every committee ANASTASIA L. STONE 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.