Coronavirus Food Assistance Program - Round 1 in San Benito County, California, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 61 to 80 of 96
Recipients of Coronavirus Food Assistance Program - Round 1 from farms in San Benito County, California totaled $3,635,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Coronavirus Food Assistance Program - Round 1 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
61 | T.o. Cattle Company LLC | San Juan Bautista, CA 95045 | $7,473 |
62 | Michael Johnson | Gilroy, CA 95020 | $7,470 |
63 | R&r Livestock LLC | Hollister, CA 95023 | $7,245 |
64 | Dean Bell | Hollister, CA 95023 | $6,923 |
65 | Marc Stelling | Hollister, CA 95023 | $6,818 |
66 | Thomas Q Tobias | Tres Pinos, CA 95075 | $6,360 |
67 | Alex Naccarato Jr | Tres Pinos, CA 95075 | $6,352 |
68 | Rebecca Lynn Ford | Hollister, CA 95023 | $5,891 |
69 | Martin Miller | Paicines, CA 95043 | $5,062 |
70 | Vern Scattini | King City, CA 93930 | $5,006 |
71 | Alexander Schmidt | Paicines, CA 95043 | $4,844 |
72 | Jason K Lingo | Aromas, CA 95004 | $4,819 |
73 | Timothy E Griffin | Tres Pinos, CA 95075 | $4,406 |
74 | Kin Fai Chan | Hollister, CA 95023 | $4,325 |
75 | Tony Lobue | Hollister, CA 95024 | $4,056 |
76 | Larry Norris | Hollister, CA 95023 | $3,728 |
77 | Cameron Wright | Hollister, CA 95023 | $3,205 |
78 | Carla Setzer | San Jose, CA 95135 | $3,113 |
79 | Gary Bianchi | Hollister, CA 95023 | $2,431 |
80 | Brad Allmon | Hollister, CA 95023 | $2,388 |
* 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.”