Nine Yuma-area legislative campaigns reported $167,798 in Q3 receipts

The latest campaign-finance reports offer a look at the money behind Yuma-area legislative races. Reading them as a fundraising scoreboard would leave out quite a bit.

Nine candidate committees in Legislative Districts 23 and 25 reported a combined $167,798.49 in cash receipts and $57,216.10 in cash disbursements for the state’s Q3 reporting period. Those figures include public campaign funding as well as private contributions. They are the committees’ reported amounts, not audited bank balances.

One important calendar detail: these reports cover July 22 through Sept. 30, rather than all of July through September. The Secretary of State’s reporting schedule assigns July 1–21 to a separate post-primary report. The Q3 filing deadline was Oct. 15.

What the reports show

The figures below come from the reports’ cash summaries. Each candidate’s name links to the state-hosted PDF. “Disbursements” means money paid out; it is not a measure of every ad or outside expenditure supporting a candidate.

• LD23 Senate: Brian Fernandez. Cash receipts: $57,745.00; cash disbursements: $0.00.
• LD23 Senate: Michelle Altherr. Cash receipts: $4,202.55; cash disbursements: $1,596.39.
• LD23 House: Gary Garcia Snyder. Cash receipts: $1,500.00; cash disbursements: $1,168.42.
• LD23 House: Michele Pena. Cash receipts: $40,050.00; cash disbursements: $0.00.
• LD23 House: Mariana Sandoval. Cash receipts: $16,052.32; cash disbursements: $13,419.06.
• LD25 Senate: Timothy Dunn. Cash receipts: $4,400.00; cash disbursements: $8,515.00.
• LD25 House: Tiffany Byrne. Cash receipts: $34,548.62; cash disbursements: $15,100.27.
• LD25 House: Michael Carbone. Cash receipts: $6,250.00; cash disbursements: $16,202.13.
• LD25 House: Nickolas “Nick” Kupper. Cash receipts: $3,050.00; cash disbursements: $1,214.83.

Nine-report total: $167,798.49 in cash receipts; $57,216.10 in cash disbursements.

Fernandez’s amended report has the largest receipt total among these nine. Pena reported the next-largest amount. Both cash summaries show no disbursements for this particular reporting period. That does not mean either campaign has never spent money.

Byrne’s receipts illustrate why “money received” and “private fundraising” are different measures. Her report lists $34,649 from Citizens Clean Elections and a $100.38 return to the commission, producing the $34,548.62 net cash-receipt figure in the comparison. Calling all of that donor fundraising would give readers the wrong picture.

Why Huber is excluded

Laura Huber’s committee, number 101997, appears in the official SeeTheMoney portal with a Q3 filing dated Oct. 15 and marked “On Time.” Its linked PDF does not provide a consistent set of figures to add to the comparison.

The cover page shows negative $28,737 in cash receipts and negative $28,700.54 in cash disbursements, with the ending cash balance blank. Later transaction pages include a positive $34,649 Citizens Clean Elections entry and positive expense detail. Several detail pages also carry an “Unfiled report” footer, despite the portal’s on-time filing entry.

The reviewed records do not explain that conflict. Huber’s amounts are excluded from both totals. The discrepancy is not a basis to say she failed to file or violated a campaign-finance rule.

The limits of this comparison

This is a review of the ten named committees’ Q3 reports, with nine usable summaries. It is not a complete inventory of every candidate, PAC or independent spender operating in the region. A missing result in a public index would not establish nonfiling.

The figures also do not cover October campaigning. They show reported activity during a specific earlier window, and amendments can change the record. Voters looking for candidate and district context can use Yuma Informed’s 2026 Election Center.