Electoral receipt · State Senate
SARAH RASCON
State Senate · SEN-26 · 2026 cycle
Funding Receipt
SARAH RASCON · 2026 cycle
★ · campaign finance, itemized · ★
Funding mix · 280 unique donors ·
primary committee
S Small donors (Under $500) $42,772 · 53%
M Medium donors ($500–$999) $20,460 · 25%
L Large donors ($1,000+) $17,598 · 22%
Top donors to primary committee
(25 shown)
01 Lehrer, Mia · Studio MLA $2,000
02 Dake, Glen · GDML Holdings Inc. $1,810
03 Strong, Terence · Innovative Leisure $1,297
04 Kleen Corporation $1,266
05 Carbajal, Danny · Danny Carbajal $1,076
06 Happier Camper $1,047
07 Cendejas, Danielle · The Strategy Group $1,047
08 Ledesma, Aunduh · Aunduh Ledesma $1,047
09 Chividjian, Gabriel · None $1,047
10 Rivera, Tomas · None $1,047
11 Parfrey, Jonathan · Climate Resolve $1,024
12 Bar-Zemer, Yuval · Linear City Development, LLC $1,000
13 Law Offices of Ernesto Barreto, APC $1,000
14 Mendoza, Heriberto · Palante Campaigns $1,000
15 Christensen, Jon · UCLA $1,000
16 Jarvina, Yolanda · None $1,000
17 Osborn, Sean · Sean Osborn $1,000
18 Carollo Engineers Inc. PAC $1,000
19 Martin, Sally · None $800
20 Carrillo, Francisco · Pfizer Inc $786
21 Yu, George · Macco Investments Corporation $786
22 Griego, Lorena · Cathedral High School $762
23 Navarro, Daniel · Los Angeles Public Defenders $762
24 Khedry, Nadine · Panish Shea Ravipudi $750
25 Lehrer, Michael · Michael Lehrer $750
Primary committee total $80,830
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. "SARAH RASCON for Assembly 2026"). The wider footprint shows every committee SARAH RASCON 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.