Emergency Livestock Assistance Program (ELAP) in Sonoma County, California, 2023
Subsidy Recipients 61 to 80 of 117
Recipients of Emergency Livestock Assistance Program (ELAP) from farms in Sonoma County, California totaled $1,687,000 in in 2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Emergency Livestock Assistance Program (ELAP) 2023 |
---|---|---|---|
61 | William Barboni II | Petaluma, CA 94952 | $2,954 |
62 | Fred Radelfinger | Windsor, CA 95492 | $2,905 |
63 | Kevin Furlong | Valley Ford, CA 94972 | $2,876 |
64 | Joe Pozzi | Valley Ford, CA 94972 | $2,875 |
65 | Mitch Starkey | Bodega, CA 94922 | $2,823 |
66 | Frank Gambonini Dba Gamlake Dairy | Petaluma, CA 94954 | $2,771 |
67 | Ronald Alan Sartori | Petaluma, CA 94954 | $2,768 |
68 | Heather Bellmer | Windsor, CA 95492 | $2,733 |
69 | Beretta Dairy | Santa Rosa, CA 95407 | $2,589 |
70 | Nosecchi Dairy | Petaluma, CA 94952 | $2,487 |
71 | Guido Ricardo Frosini | Valley Ford, CA 94972 | $2,468 |
72 | Domenico Carinalli Jr | Sebastopol, CA 95472 | $2,389 |
73 | James Tunzi | Petaluma, CA 94952 | $2,379 |
74 | Ken Martin III | Santa Rosa, CA 95407 | $2,258 |
75 | , | $2,237 | |
76 | Martin Witt Jr. | Petaluma, CA 94952 | $2,211 |
77 | Kenneth V Palmer | Duncans Mills, CA 95430 | $2,124 |
78 | Francis Chris Cornett | Petaluma, CA 94952 | $2,121 |
79 | Rodney Hagge | Santa Rosa, CA 95407 | $1,889 |
80 | , | $1,866 |
* 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.”