Total Commodity Programs in Marin County, California, 2019
Subsidy Recipients 1 to 20 of 22
Recipients of Total Commodity Programs from farms in Marin County, California totaled $635,000 in in 2019.
| Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Total Commodity Programs 2019 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Mccall Dairy | Petaluma, CA 94952 | $55,423 |
| 2 | Lafranchi Ranch | Nicasio, CA 94946 | $53,933 |
| 3 | Neil Mcisaac & Son Inc | Tomales, CA 94971 | $51,452 |
| 4 | Cypress Lane Ranch | Petaluma, CA 94952 | $51,412 |
| 5 | Spaletta Dairy | Point Reyes Station, CA 94956 | $42,359 |
| 6 | Mcisaac Dairy | Novato, CA 94947 | $40,973 |
| 7 | Kehoe Dairy Inc | Inverness, CA 94937 | $40,489 |
| 8 | G B T Nunes & Co | Point Reyes Station, CA 94956 | $40,373 |
| 9 | R & J Mcclelland Dairy | Tomales, CA 94971 | $30,887 |
| 10 | Double M Dairy LLC | Point Reyes Station, CA 94956 | $28,555 |
| 11 | Moretti Family Dairy | Petaluma, CA 94952 | $26,007 |
| 12 | Moreda Valley Dairy | Petaluma, CA 94952 | $25,998 |
| 13 | L Corda & Sons | Petaluma, CA 94952 | $25,977 |
| 14 | Bianchini Inc | Point Reyes Station, CA 94956 | $25,839 |
| 15 | Bordessa Family Dairies Gp | Valley Ford, CA 94972 | $25,540 |
| 16 | Doug Ielmorini Dairy | Nicasio, CA 94946 | $20,663 |
| 17 | Calvin C Dolcini Rvoc. Living Tr | Santa Rosa, CA 95407 | $19,539 |
| 18 | George Bianchi Inc | Petaluma, CA 94952 | $15,027 |
| 19 | A & M Dairy | Petaluma, CA 94954 | $12,456 |
| 20 | Spaletta Ranch | Petaluma, CA 94952 | $1,644 |
* USDA data are not "transparent" for many payments made to recipients through most cooperatives. Recipients of payments made through most cooperatives, and the amounts, have not been made public. To see ownership information, click on the name, then click on the link that is titled Ownership Information.
** EWG has identified this recipient as a bank or lending institution that received the payment because the payment applicant had a loan requiring any subsidy payments go to the lender first. In 2019, the information provided to EWG by USDA began to include the entity that received the payment, rather than the person or entity that applied for it, which was previously provided. This move to shield subsidy recipients from disclosure enables USDA to further evade taxpayer accountability. Six percent of subsidy dollars went to banks, lending institutions, or the Farm Service Agency.”
Next >>
Federal crop insurance reform vital for incentivizing climate adaptation on farms
Farm Subsidies Ballooned Under Trump
Is Federal Crop Insurance Policy Leading to Another Dust Bowl?
Double Dipping:
The "Farm Crisis" Myth
Crying Wolf