The following table shows the total campaign receipts and expenditures for 2017 Cambridge City Council candidates. You can sort by any of the fields shown by clicking on the field name – one click ascending and second click descending. Figures reflect the period from Dec 1, 2016 through Jan 31, 2018.
Note: You can see the figures for the 2019 City Council election here.
| Candidate | ID | Receipts | Cambridge | % Cambridge | Expenditures (to Jan 31) | #1 Votes | $/Vote |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Moree, Gregg | 14683 | $905.22 | $905.22 | 100.0% | $905.22 | 46 | $19.68 |
| Devereux, Jan | 16062 | $59,949.50 | $54,043.50 | 90.1% | $50,613.59 | 1699 | $29.79 |
| Levy, Ilan | 16173 | $13,706.86 | $12,350.00 | 90.1% | $12,008.79 | 246 | $48.82 |
| Kelley, Craig | 14104 | $26,327.86 | $20,500.60 | 77.9% | $24,886.39 | 1092 | $22.79 |
| Musgrave, Adriane | 16657 | $34,162.97 | $26,223.99 | 76.8% | $33,749.31 | 580 | $58.19 |
| D'Ambrosio, Olivia | 16520 | $7,900.00 | $5,600.00 | 70.9% | $7,945.19 | 216 | $36.78 |
| Carlone, Dennis | 15680 | $40,675.89 | $28,275.00 | 69.5% | $35,908.61 | 1176 | $30.53 |
| Harding, Richard | 16737 | $34,500.49 | $22,641.00 | 65.6% | $34,318.46 | 836 | $41.05 |
| Mallon, Alanna | 16530 | $55,932.88 | $36,539.70 | 65.3% | $51,094.85 | 1329 | $38.45 |
| Burgin, Josh | 16709 | $24,189.02 | $14,124.52 | 58.4% | $24,104.02 | 392 | $61.49 |
| Sutton, Bryan | 16713 | $1,314.44 | $719.95 | 54.8% | $1,293.08 | 45 | $28.74 |
| McGovern, Marc | 15589 | $88,717.14 | $48,362.49 | 54.5% | $85,337.31 | 1880 | $45.39 |
| Benjamin, Ronald | 16493 | $1,262.55 | $677.00 | 53.6% | $1,434.52 | 242 | $5.93 |
| Siddiqui, Sumbul | 16556 | $47,574.60 | $21,795.00 | 47.9% | $36,190.55 | 2532 | $14.29 |
| Zondervan, Quinton | 16516 | $62,916.69 | $29,649.42 | 47.1% | $64,073.97 | 1565 | $40.94 |
| Toner, Paul | 16576 | $85,390.87 | $39,693.26 | 46.5% | $111,739.75 | 980 | $114.02 |
| Tierney, Sean | 16559 | $31,620.29 | $14,400.00 | 45.5% | $30,779.71 | 779 | $39.51 |
| Simmons, Denise | 13783 | $70,646.47 | $29,385.00 | 41.6% | $93,897.96 | 2616 | $35.89 |
| Toomey, Tim | 12222 | $75,092.81 | $27,067.86 | 36.0% | $41,063.88 | 1619 | $25.36 |
| Volmar, Gwen | 16691 | $13,374.56 | $4,713.94 | 35.2% | $12,839.56 | 248 | $51.77 |
| Santos, Jeffrey | 16686 | $14,708.95 | $4,964.30 | 33.8% | $12,667.82 | 147 | $86.18 |
| Sivongxay, Vatsady | 16528 | $38,639.88 | $11,829.00 | 30.6% | $37,933.19 | 740 | $51.26 |
| Gebru, Samuel | 16531 | $66,642.14 | $19,805.03 | 29.7% | $65,323.20 | 787 | $83.00 |
| Okamoto, Nadya | 16596 | $10,189.49 | $1,235.00 | 12.1% | $10,603.52 | 550 | $19.28 |
| Lenke, Dan | 16771 | $0.00 | $0.00 | - | $920.00 | 54 | $17.04 |
| Pillai, Hari | 16770 | $0.00 | $0.00 | - | $0.00 | 107 | $0.00 |
Note 1: Figures reflect the period from Dec 1, 2016 through Jan 31, 2018.
Note 2: Adjustments to the totals have been made to reflect returned donations, candidate loans repaid, etc.
Note 3: There will be no additional updates except for corrections. This table is meant to give an idea what the actual total receipts and expenditures are for a full municipal election cycle. The choice to use a 14 month period is somewhat arbitrary but reflects what seems to be when campaign activity starts up and winds down.
Have you considered deducting candidates’ loans to their own campaigns from the % Cambridge stats?
Comment by Jan Devereux — October 21, 2017 @ 8:47 am
I consider personal contributions by candidates to be a completely legitimate Cambridge-based campaign contribution. If they are later paid back from other contributions (from non-Cambridge sources), then those will appear in later reports. I do, when possible and I have the available time, deduct the candidate loans from both donations and expenditures if and when they are reimbursed.
A totally self-funded campaign would appropriately show as a 100% Cambridge-based campaign.
Comment by Robert Winters — October 21, 2017 @ 8:57 am
Then I suggest you consider adding a column that shows “% self-funded” when you have not yet deducted candidate loans. The “% Cambridge” should be a measure of the extent of local support for the candidate from residents, not of the candidate’s ability to self-fund.
Comment by Jan Devereux — October 22, 2017 @ 5:16 pm
Councillor Devereux – I would like to point out that everything I do is voluntary, and I actually have a real job in addition to this charity work. I have only so much time to dedicate to this and, unlike you, I have no City-funded staff to do everything I might ask. Most people I know feel that I already spend too much time on this. I’m sorry if this isn’t good enough for you or if I am unable to fashion everything into a form that complements your campaign narrative. Next time, try a simple “Thank You”.
Comment by Robert Winters — October 22, 2017 @ 5:45 pm