As of Oct. 28, Mayor-elect Mark Kleinschmidt had spent about $16,000 out of just over $18,000 available to his campaign, according to a campaign-finance report he filed about a week late last Friday. It says he had raised about $5,300 -- close to his limit of $6,000 -- and received $13,000 from the voter-owned elections program. If he has any money left over, it must be returned to the town, regardless of where it came from.

Matt Czajkowski, one of the only three candidates who managed to file the special pre-election report by the Oct. 29 deadline, had raised $30,000 and spent more than $25,000.

Gene Pease had spent nearly $6,300 by Oct. 19, more than any other Town Council candidate, but he didn't file his report on time and it doesn't yet appear on the State Board of Elections web site. Matt Pohlman, the second-leading spender at $5,000 as of Oct. 19, did file his special pre-election report on time, and he had spent about $8,500 as of Oct. 28.

A post-election report is due on Nov. 19 and will reveal the final numbers.

At least one critic of the town's public financing program is questioning why most candidates didn't file their special pre-election campaign finance reports on time.

Pre-election reports were due on Oct. 26 and then again on Oct. 29. Only Matt Czajkowski, Matt Pohlman and Laurin Easthom hit the Oct. 29 deadline with a postmark. As of Oct. 28, Czajkowski had raised more than $30,000 and spent more than $25,000 on his mayoral campaign.

In 2007, Czajkowski spent more than $15,000 between the first "pre-election" report 10 days out and the election itself, prompting the council to insert a "special" pre-election report due a few days before the election. 

"It's actually there so that people who aren't participating [in public financing] can show people what they are doing near the end," said Mayor-elect Kleinschmidt, who qualified for $9,000 in public funding plus another $4,000 in rescue funds because Czajkowski topped $21,000 in contributions.

But Czajkowski-supporter Greg Gerdau criticized Kleinschmidt and top vote-getter Penny Rich for not submitting the special reports on time.

"Certain Town Council members were so furious two years ago about money spent in between the 'pre-election report' and the election that they put in the 'special pre-election report' which obviously is supposed to be filed immediately prior to the election," wrote Gerdau in an e-mail to the N.C. State Board of Elections. "Why was this not enforced? ... Why are you not requiring candidates spending taxpayer money on their own elections to be timely and transparent in their reporting of its expenditure?"

Rich did finally file hers on Nov. 5, a week late. Overall, Rich collected more than $1,400 in individual contributions and nearly $2,900 in public funds and spent nearly all of it. Kleinschmidt said he filed by Nov. 6, though his report still doesn't show up on the Board of Elections web site.

"That was a complete oversight on our part, and apparently everyone else's, and I regret that," he said.

Councilman-elect Gene Pease still hasn't filed his, according to the BOE, nor have outgoing incumbent Jim Merritt, challenger Jon DeHart or mayoral candidates Augustus Cho or Kevin Wolff. Town Council challenger Will Raymond filed his a day late.

UPDATE: Augustus Cho called to say he didn't know about the special report and would check with the State Board of Elections Wednesday to find out if he needed to comply. Kleinschmidt told me the board hadn't warned any of the candidates of the coming deadline, which he acknowledged was not an excuse. The lack of notice apparently tripped up a lot of them.

All the provisional ballots have been counted, and all the totals have been certified.

Mark Kleinschmidt gained seven votes on Matt Czajkowski from the provisional ballots and will be Chapel Hill's new mayor. Kleinschmidt finished with 4,176 votes, or 48.6 percent, to Czajkowski's 4,070 votes, or 47.4 percent.

Kleinschmidt, along with new council members Gene Pease and Penny Rich, will be installed on Dec. 7. At a special meeting on Dec. 9, the new council will hear presentations from 11 applicants to finish the two years left on Bill Strom's seat. On Dec. 14, they will make the appointment.

Mark Kleinschmidt edged Matt Czajkowski by 99 votes, and there could be more than that many provisional ballots left to be counted. There are 78 in Orange County, and the county Board of Elections will meet no later than Nov. 10 to decide whether they're valid ballots. Orange elections director Tracy Reams is still waiting to learn how many provisional ballots came out of the tiny portion of Chapel Hill that's in Durham County.

It's not likely very many, but Czajkowski nearly doubled up Kleinschmidt, 287-146, in that section of town, so it could make a difference, at least in narrowing the gap between the two men. If it closes to less than 1 percent of the total -- probably somewhere between 85 and 90 votes, depending on the total of provisionals -- Czajkowski would have the right to demand a recount. That will only take a difference of a dozen or so votes in the provisional ballots.

Czajkowski won election in 2007 after the Board of Elections denied a recount request from incumbent Cam Hill, who lost by about 60 votes.

UPDATE: Durham County has nine provisional ballots for the Town of Chapel Hill, making for 87 total -- not enough to change the outcome but perhaps enough to allow a possible recount. Czajkowski did not return a phone call inquiring whether he was considering asking for a recount.

We've had some questions on the News & Observer Web site and by e-mail about our story on Matt Czajkowski's insider-trading case, dismissed in 2005.

One reader wanted to know why we didn't elaborate on who has been questioning Czajkowski about the issue. The fact is, we didn't have room. So, for the record, Czajkowski himself told me he's been getting questions about it.

A letter to the editor in the Independent brought it up last week, concluding that he "got off on a technicality," which is not exactly true. Insider-trading cases often fail to go forward in Delaware because the burden of proof is high. The plaintiffs did not provide any evidence that Czajkowski had material nonpublic information that led him to sell off part of his stock holdings in the company.

At a public election forum held by the League of Women Voters earlier this month, Czajkowski took exception to a question about how management of his personal finances would reflect on how he would handle the town's finances.

"I've tried really, really hard to keep this campaign focused on the issues," he said. "It's almost sad that I have to address questions which are simply innuendo. I personally have a surplus, I have savings which I've worked hard for over the course of my life, and I hope that the town can have the same."