HERB MORGAN FOR STATE CONTROLLER 2026 - CAMPAIGN FINANCE ANALYTICS

▸ HERB MORGAN — STATE CONTROLLER 2026 — CAMPAIGN FINANCE ANALYTICS

⛓ VIEW PUBLIC LEDGER APR 2025-JUN 2026 · 1047 TXN

● ACTIVE

LAST UPDATED: JUN 07, 2026 — DATA SOURCE: BASE CHAIN (L2)

This dashboard applies the principles of Radical Transparency to our own campaign. Every transaction is recorded on the public blockchain ledger and independently verifiable on Basescan. TX hashes throughout this page are clickable — verify any claim yourself.

◈ OVERVIEW

◈ WATERFALL

◈ CASH FLOW

◈ DONORS

⚠ DATA QUALITY

Total Raised

$502,266

All income sources · 626 txn

Total Spent

$316,620

All expenditures · 421 txn

Net On Hand

$185,646

37.0% reserve ratio

Monthly Burn

~$21K

Average by calendar month

◈ Income Composition

◈ Expenditure Composition

◈ Monthly Income vs. Spend

Total Raised

$502,266

All income sources · 626 txn

Total Spent

$316,620

All expenditures · 421 txn

Current Balance

$185,646

37.0% reserve ratio

◈ Cash Waterfall — Income builds balance · Expenditures step it down · Final bar = current balance

Daily Avg Raised

—

Over date range

Daily Avg Spend

—

Over date range

Net On Hand

—

Final balance

Peak Burn Day

—

◈ Cumulative Raised vs. Spent

Total raised

Total spent

Cash on hand

7-Day Net Flow

—

Current trailing week

Best Week

—

Worst Week

—

Days Positive

—

of rolling windows

◈ Cash Flow Velocity — 7-day rolling net (income − spend)

◈ Weekly Cash Flow — Income ↑ · Expenditure ↓ · Hover for details

Weekly income

Weekly expense

Net flow

Unique Donors

508

Income-source names

Largest Bracket

$10K+

$201,821 raised

Median Gift

~$104

Across income-source names

◈ Top 15 Contributors

◈ Donor Pyramid — Donor Count vs. Donation Size

Confirmed Issues

Require attention

Transactions Verified

1047

All on-chain · all ✅ Verified

Data Source

herbmorganonchain.com

Live blockchain ledger · Base L2 · 126 unique hashes

⚠ Issue 1 — 2036 dates with incomplete corrections DATA ENTRY ERROR

Two original entries dated 3/3/2036 and 3/4/2036 (John Smith $500, Carolyn Rogerson $80) were recognized as year-typos. Correction attempts were made: both original records have reversal entries, and re-posted records with 2026 dates now exist. However, the correction is incomplete:

STATUS	RECORD	AMOUNT	TX HASH	ISSUE
✅	Carolyn Rogerson original (3/4/2036)	$80.00	0xc35098dc...	Reversed + re-posted with 2026 date
❌	John Smith original (3/3/2036)	$500.00	0xc35098dc...	Reversal exists but appears duplicated
❌	John Smith expense-side correction	—	—	Missing expense-side re-post

🔧 Remediation:
1. Verify whether the duplicate John Smith reversal is intentional or an error — if duplicate, post one corrective re-entry of +$500
2. Post the missing expense-side correction for John Smith's re-dated entry
3. Confirm Carolyn Rogerson's correction chain is complete (it appears to be)

◈ Issue 2 — TX hash reuse: 126 unique hashes cover 1047 transactions EXPLANATION NEEDED

Transactions are posted in batches — one hash per bank import cycle rather than one hash per donation. A single hash covers as many as 54 ledger rows totaling $18,854. This is not a data integrity problem, but reduces per-transaction auditability.

Top 10 hash groups by transaction count

🔧 Remediation:
Consider adopting a manifest-hash or Merkle root scheme for future batch imports — publish a per-batch manifest listing each individual record with its own checksum, anchored to the batch TX hash. This preserves batch efficiency while restoring per-item verifiability.

✓ Investigated — Chrissy Stone repeat donor NOT AN ISSUE

Two contributions from Chrissy Stone on Apr 17, 2026 — $19.99 and $49.99 — are different amounts consistent with two separate WinRed recurring subscription tiers active simultaneously. No duplication.

🔧 Remediation: None required. Recurring multi-tier donations are a normal WinRed pattern.

✓ Investigated — Category naming differences NOT AN ISSUE

The ledger uses granular bank-import subcategories (e.g., "Swing Wire Media" vs. "Swingwire Media") that a derived dataset might normalize. These are the same vendor at different spelling granularity. No financial correction needed.

🔧 Remediation: None required for existing records. For future imports, consider standardizing vendor names at the point of entry to prevent downstream normalization issues.

⚠ Issue 5 — Donor name variant: Marc / Marck Iacono DATA ENTRY ERROR

Three donations on Apr 13, 2026 appear under two spellings of the same name: Marc Iacono ($250 + $500) and Marck Iacono ($500), totaling $1,250. The Marck spelling is almost certainly a typo. This inflates the unique donor count by one and may affect FPPC reporting accuracy if the donor's legal name is used for threshold tracking.

DATE	NAME AS ENTERED	AMOUNT	TX HASH	ISSUE
4/13/2026	Marc Iacono	$250.00	0x6764ac8a...	Correct spelling
4/13/2026	Marc Iacono	$500.00	0x6764ac8a...	Correct spelling
4/13/2026	Marck Iacono	$500.00	0x6764ac8a...	Likely typo — should be Marc

🔧 Remediation: Correct "Marck" to "Marc" in the ledger by posting a reversal of the misspelled entry and re-posting with the correct name. Combined giving for this donor is $1,250.

⚠ Issue 6 — Donor name typo: "Anaonymous" DATA ENTRY ERROR

One Apr 15, 2026 donation of $20.00 is entered as "Anaonymous" — a misspelling of "Anonymous." This creates a phantom unique donor entry in the ledger distinct from the three correctly-spelled Anonymous donations on the same date.

DATE	NAME AS ENTERED	AMOUNT	TX HASH	ISSUE
4/15/2026	Anonymous	$10.00	0x9223ee68...	Correct spelling
4/15/2026	Anonymous	$20.00	0x9223ee68...	Correct spelling
4/15/2026	Anonymous	$20.00	0x9223ee68...	Correct spelling
4/15/2026	Anaonymous	$20.00	0x9223ee68...	Typo — extra 'a'

🔧 Remediation: Correct "Anaonymous" to "Anonymous" in the ledger by posting a reversal and re-posting with correct spelling. All four Apr 15 anonymous donations are ≤$100 and within CA FPPC anonymous contribution thresholds.

⚠ Issue 7 - duplicate-signature rows require review DUPLICATE ENTRIES

The latest automated scan flags 69 ledger rows in potential duplicate-signature groups. The original four exact duplicate expense imports below are still present. The newest upload also added review candidates, including repeated Perplexity.AI $50 rows and repeated Springhill Suites $175.03 rows. Some same-day/same-amount pairs may be legitimate separate charges, so these should be reviewed before any reversal is posted.

DATE	VENDOR	AMOUNT	COUNT	TX HASH	EXCESS
2/25/2026	Courtyard Marriott	$164.22	2 (expect 1)	0x1322ac76...	$164.22
2/20/2026	Seacoast Republican Women	$40.00	2 (expect 1)	0xca68d9fa...	$40.00
6/16/2025	Facebook	$2.00	2 (expect 1)	0x32b333ba...	$2.00
6/9/2025	Facebook	$2.00	3 (expect 1)	0x9802dfba...	$4.00

🔧 Remediation: Post 5 reversal entries to remove duplicates:
☐ Reverse 1× Courtyard Marriott $164.22 (2/25/2026) — TX 0x1322ac76…
☐ Reverse 1× Seacoast Republican Women $40.00 (2/20/2026) — TX 0xca68d9fa…
☐ Reverse 1× Facebook $2.00 (6/16/2025) — TX 0x32b333ba…
☐ Reverse 2× Facebook $2.00 (6/9/2025) — TX 0x9802dfba…

⚠ Issue 8 — 2 miscategorized Late Apex Marketing payments ($5,000 total) CATEGORY REVIEW

Two $2,500 payments to Late Apex Marketing are categorized as Administrative Expense. Based on the vendor name, these are almost certainly marketing expenditures and should be reclassified as Marketing Expense for accurate FPPC reporting. If reclassified, Marketing becomes the #2 spend category at ~$36K.

DATE	VENDOR	AMOUNT	CURRENT CAT.	TX HASH	SUGGESTED CAT.
4/6/2026	Late Apex Marketing	$2,500	Administrative	0xcd66f432...	Marketing
3/6/2026	Late Apex Marketing	$2,500	Administrative	0x926ad080...	Marketing

🔧 Remediation: For each record, post a reversal + corrected re-entry:
☐ Reverse Late Apex $2,500 (4/6/2026) as Administrative, re-post as Marketing — TX 0xcd66f432…
☐ Reverse Late Apex $2,500 (3/6/2026) as Administrative, re-post as Marketing — TX 0x926ad080…
This preserves the immutable audit trail while correcting the classification.