Production Flexibility Program in Saint Louis County, Missouri, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 81 to 100 of 198
Recipients of Production Flexibility Program from farms in Saint Louis County, Missouri totaled $2,009,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Production Flexibility Program 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
81 | Ferguson Lane Properties Co | West Alton, MO 63386 | $2,348 |
82 | Ruby Pemberton | Eureka, MO 63025 | $2,242 |
83 | Dennis Wallach | Eureka, MO 63025 | $2,170 |
84 | Monarch-chesterfield Levee Distri | Chesterfield, MO 63005 | $2,124 |
85 | Lillie Devine | Pacific, MO 63069 | $2,115 |
86 | Riverport Farm Partners | Saint Louis, MO 63141 | $2,089 |
87 | Fern Ridge Trust | Saint Louis, MO 63144 | $2,040 |
88 | Dorothy Martin | Saint Louis, MO 63124 | $1,993 |
89 | Charlotte M Hoch Rev Liv Trust | Saint Louis, MO 63141 | $1,927 |
90 | J & D Walter | Saint Louis, MO 63129 | $1,882 |
91 | Willi Estate M | Chesterfield, MO 63017 | $1,848 |
92 | Charles Bianco | Saint Louis, MO 63105 | $1,820 |
93 | John Rademacher | Pacific, MO 63069 | $1,788 |
94 | Velma Vasquez | Saint Louis, MO 63134 | $1,785 |
95 | Thomas R Mckeever | Pacific, MO 63069 | $1,760 |
96 | Mel Storch | Lake Saint Louis, MO 63367 | $1,743 |
97 | Randy Beckemeier Rev Trust | Saint Louis, MO 63146 | $1,691 |
98 | Walter Stemme | Marthasville, MO 63357 | $1,682 |
99 | Cordell Queathem | Chesterfield, MO 63017 | $1,604 |
100 | Wilroy Schaffner | Florissant, MO 63033 | $1,599 |
* 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.”