Coronavirus Food Assistance Program - Round 2 in San Bernardino County, California, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 61 to 80 of 92
Recipients of Coronavirus Food Assistance Program - Round 2 from farms in San Bernardino County, California totaled $7,664,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Coronavirus Food Assistance Program - Round 2 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
61 | Mark Thomas Buoye | Redlands, CA 92374 | $9,460 |
62 | Min A Lee | Apple Valley, CA 92307 | $8,840 |
63 | Cal-neva Land & Livestock LLC | Big Bear City, CA 92314 | $8,800 |
64 | Jim H Bootsma | Ontario, CA 91764 | $8,580 |
65 | Joseph Soffel | Redlands, CA 92374 | $7,859 |
66 | Vcog LLC | Murrieta, CA 92562 | $7,738 |
67 | Spencer Thornton | Alta Loma, CA 91737 | $7,645 |
68 | Jae Chang Joo | Los Angeles, CA 90019 | $7,280 |
69 | Lee Graham | Victorville, CA 92395 | $6,985 |
70 | Canyon Creek Mushroom LLC | Yucca Valley, CA 92284 | $6,704 |
71 | Jim D Mc Williams | Yucaipa, CA 92399 | $5,690 |
72 | Jacob Overson | Baker, CA 92309 | $5,500 |
73 | Clayton Thornton | Alta Loma, CA 91737 | $5,390 |
74 | Robin D Quincey | San Clemente, CA 92672 | $5,390 |
75 | Gerardo Cuellar Rivera | Yucaipa, CA 92399 | $4,876 |
76 | Hwa Yong Chung | Lucerne Valley, CA 92356 | $4,823 |
77 | James Steinbrugger | Redlands, CA 92373 | $4,558 |
78 | Mojave Gold Inc. | Hinkley, CA 92347 | $3,426 |
79 | Jun Ho Choi | Lucerne Valley, CA 92356 | $3,344 |
80 | Lisa Steg Miss | Big Bear City, CA 92314 | $3,240 |
* 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.”