Peschong takes countywide fundraising lead
October 10, 2016
Despite being the last person to enter the 2016 San Luis Obispo County supervisor races, political consultant John Peschong has raised more money than all other candidates. Peschong, the front runner in the District 1 race, has raised nearly five times more money than his opponent, Paso Robles Mayor Steve Martin.
In the hotly contested District 3 race, incumbent Supervisor Adam Hill is the clear fundraising leader. Hill has raised in excess of $100,000 more than challenger San Luis Obispo Councilman Dan Carpenter.
However, Carpenter’s fundraising pace has picked up in recent months, and the SLO councilman held a nearly 11-point leader over Hill in a poll conducted by CalCoastNews over the summer.
District 1
Total Contributions
John Peschong – $250,203
Steve Martin – $52,721
Total Expenditures
John Peschong – $216,769
Steve Martin – $37,839
In 2015 and 2016, Peschong received a combined total of $250,203 in campaign contributions, as of Sept. 24. Peschong entered the race late last year, and his 2015 fundraising efforts only spanned one month.
Between July 1 and Sept. 24, the most recent filing period, Peschong raised a total of $96,290. As of Sept. 24, he had spent a total of $216,769 and had a cash balance of $52,379.
During the recent filing period, four donors each contributed $5,000 to Peschong’s campaign. The donors were: San Luis Obispo-based K&M Holding Corporation; San Luis Obispo-based H&S Walter Well Drilling & Pump Company; Santa Maria resident Herbert Perrett, the owner and operator of Perrett Ranches; and conservative group the Lincoln Club of San Luis Obispo County. The Lincoln Club has given Peschong a total of $7,000 this year.
Over the course of the campaign, Martin has received a total of $52,721 and spent a total of $37,839. As of Sept. 24, Martin had a cash balance of $14,269
In the June 7 primary, Peschong received 45.52 percent of the vote. Martin garnered 35.02 percent.
District 3
Total Contributions
Adam Hill – $242,246
Dan Carpender – $133,903
Total Expenditures
Adam Hill – $239,247
Dan Carpenter – $114,928
Hill raised a total of $131,385 in 2015. He has raised $110,861 in 2016, as of Sept. 24, bringing his combined total to $242,246. In 2015 and 2016, Hill has spent a combined total of $239,247. As of Sept. 24, his cash balance is $30,435.
Throughout the campaign, Hill has benefited from numerous contribution from developers, including several donors who have had or will have projects come before the board of supervisors. Developers including Nick Tompkins, of Arroyo Grande; Santa Barbara-based Somera Capital Management; and the Trilogy Central Coast Holding Company, each contributed $1,000 to Hill during the recent filing period.
During the 2016 campaign, Supervisor Bruce Gibson has donated $7,000 to Hill’s bid for reelection.
Carpenter only raised a total of $28,153 in 2015. But, his 2016 campaign contributions have totaled $105,750, bringing his overall fundraising amount to $133,903.
In all, Carpenter has spent $114,928. As of Sept. 24, he has a cash balance of $19,297.
During the last filing period, Carpenter raised $34,559, which exceeded Hill’s total of $28,785.
Like Hill, Carpenter received one donation of $5,000 during that period. It came from San Luis Obispo-based H&S Walter Well Drilling & Pump Company, the firm that also contributed $5,000 to Peschong.
Carpenter also received $1,000 from Arroyo Grande realtor Peter Keith; $1,000 from San Luis Obispo residents Evelyn and Ed Page, the property managers of Model Lands Inc.; $1,500 from Central Coast Support in Morro Bay; and $2,000 from the San Luis Obispo Cattlemen’s Political Action Committee.
In the June primary, Hill received 41.21 percent of the vote, and Carpenter garnered 31.63 percent. However, Carpenter and Debbie Peterson, the third candidate in the race, combined to receive 58.79 percent, which singled Hill is at risk of losing in November.
The comments below represent the opinion of the writer and do not represent the views or policies of CalCoastNews.com. Please address the Policies, events and arguments, not the person. Constructive debate is good; mockery, taunting, and name calling is not. Comment Guidelines