Loan Deficiency in Sonoma County, California, 1995-2021
Subsidy Recipients 1 to 20 of 131
Recipients of Loan Deficiency from farms in Sonoma County, California totaled $498,000 in from 1995-2021.
| Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Loan Deficiency 1995-2021 |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Jacobsen Ranches | Petaluma, CA 94954 | $106,041 |
| 2 | Glenn Yenni & Sons Inc Dba | Sonoma, CA 95476 | $81,990 |
| 3 | F Kiser & Sons | Sonoma, CA 95476 | $49,208 |
| 4 | Tom Crane | Santa Rosa, CA 95404 | $30,588 |
| 5 | Mertens Dairy | Sonoma, CA 95476 | $22,032 |
| 6 | Wesley Haire | Sonoma, CA 95476 | $11,382 |
| 7 | Charles Welling | Bodega, CA 94922 | $10,322 |
| 8 | Johnson & Neles Dairy | Sonoma, CA 95476 | $9,860 |
| 9 | Kiser Bros | Sonoma, CA 95476 | $8,094 |
| 10 | Randy Allen | Sonoma, CA 95476 | $7,752 |
| 11 | Sleepy Hollow Cert Milk Co | Petaluma, CA 94954 | $7,316 |
| 12 | Manuel N Azevedo & Sons | Petaluma, CA 94952 | $7,230 |
| 13 | Mulas Dairy Company | Sonoma, CA 95476 | $7,017 |
| 14 | Joe Pozzi | Valley Ford, CA 94972 | $6,120 |
| 15 | Ken Martin III | Santa Rosa, CA 95407 | $5,855 |
| 16 | Mc Clellands Dairy | Petaluma, CA 94952 | $5,714 |
| 17 | Don Silacci | Petaluma, CA 94954 | $5,616 |
| 18 | Delmar Friedrichsen | Petaluma, CA 94952 | $5,217 |
| 19 | Kullberg Farms | Petaluma, CA 94953 | $5,138 |
| 20 | Spirito J Ballatore | Valley Ford, CA 94972 | $5,045 |
* 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