Electoral receipt · State Senate
JAIME RAUL ZEPEDA
State Senate · SEN-10 · 2022 cycle
Funding Receipt
JAIME RAUL ZEPEDA · 2022 cycle
★ · campaign finance, itemized · ★
Funding mix · 94 unique donors ·
primary committee
S Small donors (Under $500) $10,640 · 44%
M Medium donors ($500–$999) $4,525 · 19%
L Large donors ($1,000+) $8,900 · 37%
Top donors to primary committee
(25 shown)
01 Bush, Michael C. · Great Place to Work $4,900
02 Krach, Jennife · None $2,000
03 Hernandez-Storr, Luanne · uanne Hernandez-Storr $1,000
04 Campo, Ricardo · Lockheed Martin $1,000
05 Peppers, Tess · Wonderschool $525
06 Kasem, Ahmed · Kasem, Ko & Ahmed $500
07 Gallanter, Linda · None $500
08 White, Peter · None $500
09 Friedman, Robert · CFED $500
10 Huang, Yu John · S.J. Distributors $500
11 Tuman, Joe · SFSU $500
12 Zepeda, Raul · None $500
13 Casey, Donna M · None $500
14 Morales, Genaro · Watry Design $450
15 Najarro, Jason · One Medical $300
16 Simmons, Stacy · Great Place to Work Institute Inc. $300
17 Kellogg, Clark · University of California $300
18 Sukalski, Sonya · UU Fellowship of Tuolumne County $270
19 Mozer, Deborah · None $250
20 Leon, Hugo · McAfee $250
21 Cese??a, Nancy · Great Place to Work $250
22 Nguyen, Kevin · CBS Info $250
23 Samadian, Amin · None $225
24 Simpson, Daniel · None $200
25 Duarte, Derek · BlackStone Discovery $200
Primary committee total $24,065
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. "JAIME RAUL ZEPEDA for Assembly 2022"). The wider footprint shows every committee JAIME RAUL ZEPEDA 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.