Electoral receipt · State Assembly
CAROL PEFLEY
State Assembly · ASM-28 · 2026 cycle
Funding Receipt
CAROL PEFLEY · 2026 cycle
★ · campaign finance, itemized · ★
Funding mix · 81 unique donors ·
primary committee
S Small donors (Under $500) $13,859 · 34%
M Medium donors ($500–$999) $3,500 · 9%
L Large donors ($1,000+) $23,400 · 57%
Top donors to primary committee
(25 shown)
01 Hansen, Thomas · Retired $5,400
02 Howell, James · A & J Assembly, Inc $5,000
03 John, BJ Baimba · Retired $5,000
04 Pefley, Ruth · Biola University $2,500
05 Varich, Robert · Pinnacle One Insurance Services, Inc $2,500
06 Hobbs, Robert · Retired $2,000
07 Dupuy, Victoria · Roofs by Reveille $1,000
08 Hawks, Jennifer · Retired $1,000
09 Metcalf, Micki · DBA: Micki Metcalf $1,000
10 Weiland, John · Retired $936
11 Hahn, Joy · Retired $586
12 Ealy, Sally · Retired $500
13 Chang, Singhuey · DBA: Singhuey Chang $500
14 Kanwar, Diane · Retired $500
15 Klusendorf, John · DBA: John Klusendorf $500
16 Levenseller Cresswell, Jane · Realty world pinnacle $500
17 Cocaneur, Carolyn · Retired $500
18 Howell, Robert · Exatron $500
19 Worden, Carl · DBA: Carl Worden III $500
20 Freimuth, Rita · Tpmg $385
21 Booker, Martha · Retired $300
22 Herbert, Julie · Retired $300
23 Santos Rivera, Francisca · Retired $250
24 Bernosky, Robert · Special Situation Solutions $250
25 Brukwinski, Wendy · Retired $250
Primary committee total $40,759
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 Assembly in this cycle (e.g. "CAROL PEFLEY for Assembly 2026"). The wider footprint shows every committee CAROL PEFLEY 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.