Mike Kozlowski
2022 re-election · District 1
- Sources: Form 460 for Oct 23–Dec 31, 2022 (filing 214407294) · Schedule A filings 214407289 214407275 · IE ledger below.
A Nonpartisan Public-Records Project · Page last updated October 18, 2026
See anything incorrect? Let us know.
Folsom caps direct campaign contributions at $150 per contributor — whether an individual, a business, or a PAC — one of the strictest limits in California. So the real money arrives another way: independent expenditure committees funded by outside interest groups, including homebuilders, developers, chambers of commerce, and unions. Every dollar figure below comes from official campaign filings with the Folsom City Clerk; election results come from Sacramento County's certified returns. Click any figure to read the source document yourself.
// A note before you read on: independent expenditures are legal, disclosed, and — by law — made without the candidate's involvement. No candidate controls the money spent for them, or against an opponent. Nothing on this site should be read to state or imply that any candidate directed, coordinated, requested, or is responsible for any independent expenditure — for or against anyone. We simply show, in one place, what the public filings say.
Districts 1, 3, and 5 vote this November 3. Candidate filing closed August 7, 2026 — the seven candidates below have all qualified for the ballot per the City Clerk’s candidate filing status report.
| Candidate | Own committee raised, 2026¹ | IEs reported in support² | IEs reported against² | Money behind the candidacy | Sources (Form 460) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
![]() Mike Kozlowski District 1 · incumbent | $7,223.00 | $22,411.92 | — | $29,634.92 | Jul 1–Sep 19 460 (217483618); nothing reported through Jun 30 |
![]() Chad Vander Veen District 1 · challenger | $5,360.24 | — | — | $5,360.24 | Jan–Jun + Jul–Sep 460s (217086072, 217487277) |
Paul Kerfeld District 1 · challenger | $5,245.00 | — | — | $5,245.00 | Jul 28–Sep 19 460 as amended (217487577) |
![]() Sarah Aquino District 3 · incumbent | $13,223.49 | $30,900.34 | — | $44,123.83 | Jul 1–Sep 19 460 (217513042); $0 through Jun 30 |
![]() Jag Nagendra District 3 · challenger | $15,165.78 | $3,839.12 | — | $19,004.90 | Jan–Jun + Jul–Sep 460s (217101200, 217500839); incl. $1,500 self-loan |
![]() Anna Rohrbough District 5 · incumbent | $11,537.00 | $10,174.95 | $9,174.96† | $21,711.95 | Jan–Jun + Jul–Sep 460s (217004543, 217475280); incl. $1,000 self-loan |
![]() Justin Hurst District 5 · challenger | $15,390.00 | — | — | $15,390.00 | Jan–Jun as amended + Jul–Sep 460s (217510155, 217509993); incl. $10,000 self-loan |
| 2026 independent expenditures reported to date | $67,326.33 | $9,174.96† | $76,501.29 | ||
¹ Form 460 Summary Page Line 5, Column B (calendar-year total through September 19, 2026, the close of the first pre-election period), self-loans included. ² Every Form 496 filed in these races through October 15, 2026, itemized in the ledger below. † Reported as filed. The committee’s October 15 report on Anna Rohrbough (filing 217642982) marks the Oppose box; its three other 2026 reports on her mark Support, and this report’s cumulative total continues that support figure, so the box is likely a filing error. No amendment has been filed. This site reports what the filing says and will update if one is.
First independent expenditures of the 2026 cycle: on September 14, 2026, the Committee for Home Ownership, Sponsored by North State Building Industry Assoc. (FPPC ID 782240) — the homebuilder committee whose mass-mail spending appears throughout the 2022 and 2024 ledger entries below — e-filed the cycle’s first three Form 496 reports: $1,000 of polling “for advertising decisions” (expenditure date September 11, 2026) in support of each of the three incumbents on the ballot — Mike Kozlowski (filing 217426350), Sarah Aquino (filing 217426422), and Anna Rohrbough (filing 217426441). Each report also itemizes the committee’s own recent contributors (Form 496 Part 3), readable in the archived filings. As with every independent expenditure on this site: these are made, by law, without the candidate’s involvement, and no candidate controls or is responsible for them.
October: the mail and digital spending has started. Between October 8 and 10, 2026, three committees e-filed seven more Form 496 reports. The NSBIA Committee for Home Ownership reported mass mail supporting each of the three incumbents — $9,174.95 for Anna Rohrbough (filing 217604009), $9,714.04 for Mike Kozlowski (filing 217604064; the committee e-filed an identical second report three minutes later, filing 217604096, carrying the same cumulative total, which this site counts once), and $10,625.17 for Sarah Aquino (filing 217604082). The Sacramento Metropolitan Chamber PAC reported $8,650 in polling and web spending supporting Sarah Aquino (filing 217626127). And the Fire Fighters Local 522 PAC — the union committee that appears in the 2022 and 2024 ledger entries below — reported its first 2026 spending: $3,839.12 supporting Jag Nagendra in District 3 (signs, voter data, a mailer and social media; filing 217606893, filing 217626119) and $1,983.80 supporting Mike Kozlowski in District 1 (filing 217626107). Reported independent spending in the 2026 cycle now stands at $46,987.08 — $41,164.16 from builder and chamber committees, $5,822.92 from the firefighters’ union PAC. Each report also itemizes the filing committee’s own recent contributors (Form 496 Part 3), readable in the archived filings. As with every independent expenditure on this site: made, by law, without the candidate’s involvement.
October 15: a second mailer for each incumbent. The NSBIA Committee for Home Ownership e-filed three more Form 496 reports on October 15, 2026, each a mass mailing: $9,714.08 for Mike Kozlowski (filing 217642935), $10,625.17 for Sarah Aquino (filing 217642955), and $9,174.96 on Anna Rohrbough (filing 217642982 — filed with the Oppose box marked; see the note under the table). That brings this one committee to $62,028.37 across the three incumbents this cycle, and total reported independent spending in the 2026 races to $76,501.29. Each of the three reports also itemizes six new contributions to the committee received October 8–14, totaling $22,634, on top of the six received September 22–October 5 reported earlier — all from homebuilders, land and engineering firms, a Lincoln city council committee, and a Sacramento policy committee, itemized by name in the archived filings (Form 496 Part 3).
Pre-election money reports are arriving now: the first pre-election Form 460 of the cycle — covering July 1 through September 19, 2026 — was due September 24, 2026. All seven candidates’ reports were e-filed September 21–24 and are reflected in the cards below. The second pre-election statement, covering September 20 through October 17, is due October 22, 2026.
For each member: what their own committee raised in their winning election year (the $150-cap money), how much of it was their own personal loans, and what outside committees spent on their behalf. Bars show the total money behind the win — one color key, below, runs through every figure, bar, and chart on this page. Sources link to the actual filings. Independent expenditures are lawful, are made without candidate coordination, and are described here exactly as the spending committees reported them; no wrongdoing by any candidate, committee, or donor is alleged or implied.
Three rules explain nearly everything on this page.
Folsom's Measure V (1994) limits any contribution to a council campaign to $150. The winning campaigns of 2022 and 2024 raised between roughly $7,700 and $31,000 — and much of that is often the candidate's own money loaned to their committee.
Independent expenditure (IE) committees may spend unlimited amounts for or against candidates, as long as they don't coordinate with them. In 2024 IE committees reported $201,307 — more than every candidate combined raised.
In both recent council elections (2022 and 2024), the same two committees — one sponsored by a regional homebuilding-industry association, the other by a local chamber of commerce — were the dominant outside spenders. Their own filings disclose where that money comes from, itemized contributor by contributor, in the reports archived on this site and listed in the ledger below.
Each bar is the total reported money behind a candidacy in the candidate’s most recent race: the candidate’s own committee fundraising (Form 460, calendar year of the election, self-loans included) stacked with independent expenditures that committees reported making in support of them (Form 496). Independent expenditures are made without candidate coordination. The chart shows the five sitting council members, with the two 2024 challengers in their races’ IE crossfire at the right (neither was elected); three other candidates with ledger entries are noted below the chart rather than charted. This chart covers completed races only; independent expenditures reported in the ongoing 2026 cycle appear in the 2026 ballot section above and in the full ledger below.
Justin Raithel2024 · D2 · elected
Sarah Aquino2022 · D3 · elected
Mike Kozlowski2022 · D1 · elected
Barbara Leary2024 · D4 · elected
✻ $18,579 in IEs reported opposing her
Anna Rohrbough2022 · D5 · elected
| Candidate (race) | Own committee¹ | Business-cmte IEs² | Union-cmte IEs² | Bar total | IEs opposing³ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Justin Raithel (2024, D2) | $30,638.00 | $60,460.86 | $5,766.87 | $96,865.73 | — |
| Sarah Aquino (2022, D3) | $21,638.91 | $17,125.61 | — | $38,764.52 | — |
| Mike Kozlowski (2022, D1) | $9,737.19 | $18,252.26 | $6,706.77 | $34,696.22 | — |
| Barbara Leary (2024, D4) | $22,080.23 | — | — | $22,080.23 | $18,579.05 |
| Anna Rohrbough (2022, D5) | $7,677.00 | — | $7,808.38 | $15,485.38 | — |
| Jim Ortega (2024, D4) | $14,679.00 | $72,257.42 | $2,514.88 | $89,451.30 | — |
| Hla Elkhatib (2024, D2) | $34,095.00 | — | — | $34,095.00 | $18,595.85 |
¹ Form 460 Summary Page Line 5, Column B (calendar year of the election), final filing of that year; self-loans included. Ortega and Elkhatib totals from filings 214423990 and 214424265, archived here. ² Sum of Form 496 entries in the ledger below reported as supporting that candidate. Five 2024 JobsPAC reports left the candidate box blank; they are attributed per each report’s own expenditure description ("support District 2/4 candidate” = Raithel/Ortega) and one $8,132.11 report naming no candidate is excluded from every bar. Opposition spending is never added to any candidate’s bar. ³ Form 496 entries reported as opposing the candidate, shown for context only. Rounded to the cent as filed; totals reproducible by filtering the ledger.
Business/industry committees here are the NSBIA Committee for Home Ownership, Folsom Chamber JobsPAC, Sacramento Metro Chamber PAC, and the 2024 “Sponsored by Business Leaders” committee, per each committee’s own sponsor identification. Union committees are Fire Fighters Local 522, the Deputy Sheriffs Association PAC, and the deputy-sheriffs'-association-funded Citizens for Accountable Local Government. Also in the ledger but not charted: committees reported $35,389 supporting Kerri Howell and $6,388 supporting Bill Miklos in 2022, and $15,000 supporting Dustin Silva in 2024 (their own-committee totals are not compiled here). Every underlying report is in the ledger below.
Every FPPC Form 496 independent-expenditure report filed in a Folsom City Council race, 2022–2026: 51 filed documents, itemized here into 60 candidate-level entries (some documents contain multiple reports or name more than one candidate). Click a filing ID to open our archived copy of the original document.
| Filed | Committee | Candidate | For / Against | Amount | What it bought | Filing |
|---|
Amounts are per-report itemized expenditures, transcribed from the filings. Five 2024 JobsPAC reports left the candidate-name box blank; candidates shown are drawn from each report's own expenditure description (e.g., "support District 2 candidate") and flagged with an asterisk. Totals here will not match committee-level cumulative boxes exactly where filers' own arithmetic differs.
This site exists to present the public record accurately. If any figure, name, characterization, or source looks wrong — or missing context — please say so. Every submission is reviewed, and confirmed errors are corrected promptly and noted.
Folsom Money Watch is an independent, unpaid, nonpartisan public-records project run by a Folsom resident. It exists to make the public campaign-finance filings for Folsom City Council elections easier to read — nothing more.
It takes no money and buys no advertising. No one is paid to produce it, it accepts no contributions, and it purchases no promotion or ads. It is not a campaign, a committee, or a political action group, and it neither raises nor spends money to support or defeat anyone.
No one it covers runs, funds, or directs it. Folsom Money Watch is not authorized, funded, or directed by any candidate, campaign committee, political party, or political club, and none of them reviews or approves what appears here. Its author, like many people who follow local politics closely, has civic and political involvements of his own — the method is built so they don't matter: every candidate and committee is presented from the same public filings, using the same method.
It reports; it does not advocate. This site describes what the public filings say. It does not tell anyone how to vote, does not endorse or oppose any candidate, and does not allege wrongdoing by any candidate, committee, or donor. The independent expenditures and PAC contributions described here are lawful and were publicly disclosed by the filers themselves.
Corrections & contact. Accuracy matters. If anything looks wrong, please use the corrections form — every submission goes straight to the project team and is reviewed promptly. The corrections form is the way to reach the project.
Use of this site is subject to our Terms of Use. Official council portraits are public records from folsom.ca.us; challenger photos are used solely to identify the candidate. See the methodology for exactly how every figure was sourced.