This dataset includes one file for each of the 51 counties that were collected, as well as a CA_Merged file with the parcels merged into a single file.Note – this data does not include attributes beyond the parcel ID number (PARNO) – that will be provided when available, most likely by the state of California.DownloadA 1.6 GB zipped file geodatabase is available for download - click here.DescriptionA geodatabase with parcel boundaries for 51 (out of 58) counties in the State of California. The original target was to collect data for the close of the 2013 fiscal year. As the collection progressed, it became clear that holding to that time standard was not practical. Out of expediency, the date requirement was relaxed, and the currently available dataset was collected for a majority of the counties. Most of these were distributed with minimal metadata.The table “ParcelInfo” includes the data that the data came into our possession, and our best estimate of the last time the parcel dataset was updated by the original source. Data sets listed as “Downloaded from” were downloaded from a publicly accessible web or FTP site from the county. Other data sets were provided directly to us by the county, though many of them may also be available for direct download. Â These data have been reprojected to California Albers NAD84, but have not been checked for topology, or aligned to county boundaries in any way. Tulare County’s dataset arrived with an undefined projection and was identified as being California State Plane NAD83 (US Feet) and was assigned by ICE as that projection prior to reprojection. Kings County’s dataset was delivered as individual shapefiles for each of the 50 assessor’s books maintained at the county. These were merged to a single feature class prior to importing to the database.The attribute tables were standardized and truncated to include only a PARNO (APN). The format of these fields has been left identical to the original dataset. The Data Interoperablity Extension ETL tool used in this process is included in the zip file. Where provided by the original data sources, metadata for the original data has been maintained. Please note that the attribute table structure changes were made at ICE, UC Davis, not at the original data sources.Parcel Source InformationCountyDateCollecDateCurrenNotesAlameda4/8/20142/13/2014Download from Alamenda CountyAlpine4/22/20141/26/2012Alpine County PlanningAmador5/21/20145/14/2014Amador County Transportation CommissionButte2/24/20141/6/2014Butte County Association of GovernmentsCalaveras5/13/2014Download from Calaveras County, exact date unknown, labelled 2013Contra Costa4/4/20144/4/2014Contra Costa Assessor’s OfficeDel Norte5/13/20145/8/2014Download from Del Norte CountyEl Dorado4/4/20144/3/2014El Dorado County AssessorFresno4/4/20144/4/2014Fresno County AssessorGlenn4/4/201410/13/2013Glenn County Public WorksHumboldt6/3/20144/25/2014Humbodt County AssessorImperial8/4/20147/18/2014Imperial County AssessorKern3/26/20143/16/2014Kern County AssessorKings4/21/20144/14/2014Kings CountyLake7/15/20147/19/2013Lake CountyLassen7/24/20147/24/2014Lassen CountyLos Angeles10/22/201410/9/2014Los Angeles CountyMadera7/28/2014Madera County, Date Current unclear likely 7/2014Marin5/13/20145/1/2014Marin County AssessorMendocino4/21/20143/27/2014Mendocino CountyMerced7/15/20141/16/2014Merced CountyMono4/7/20144/7/2014Mono CountyMonterey5/13/201410/31/2013Download from Monterey CountyNapa4/22/20144/22/2014Napa CountyNevada10/29/201410/26/2014Download from Nevada CountyOrange3/18/20143/18/2014Download from Orange CountyPlacer7/2/20147/2/2014Placer CountyRiverside3/17/20141/6/2014Download from Riverside CountySacramento4/2/20143/12/2014Sacramento CountySan Benito5/12/20144/30/2014San Benito CountySan Bernardino2/12/20142/12/2014Download from San Bernardino CountySan Diego4/18/20144/18/2014San Diego CountySan Francisco5/23/20145/23/2014Download from San Francisco CountySan Joaquin10/13/20147/1/2013San Joaquin County Fiscal year close dataSan Mateo2/12/20142/12/2014San Mateo CountySanta Barbara4/22/20149/17/2013Santa Barbara CountySanta Clara9/5/20143/24/2014Santa Clara County, Required a PRA requestSanta Cruz2/13/201411/13/2014Download from Santa Cruz CountyShasta4/23/20141/6/2014Download from Shasta CountySierra7/15/20141/20/2014Sierra CountySolano4/24/2014Download from Solano Couty, Boundaries appear to be from 2013Sonoma5/19/20144/3/2014Download from Sonoma CountyStanislaus4/23/20141/22/2014Download from Stanislaus CountySutter11/5/201410/14/2014Download from Sutter CountyTehama1/16/201512/9/2014Tehama CountyTrinity12/8/20141/20/2010Download from Trinity County, Note age of data 2010Tulare7/1/20146/24/2014Tulare CountyTuolumne5/13/201410/9/2013Download from Tuolumne CountyVentura11/4/20146/18/2014Download from Ventura CountyYolo11/4/20149/10/2014Download from Yolo CountyYuba11/12/201412/17/2013Download from Yuba County

River and Stream lines that represent flowlines and cartographic features such as stream centerlines and river banks.

This shapefile contains tax rate area (TRA) boundaries in Calaveras County for the specified assessment roll year. Boundary alignment is based on the 2012 county parcel map. A tax rate area (TRA) is a geographic area within the jurisdiction of a unique combination of cities, schools, and revenue districts that utilize the regular city or county assessment roll, per Government Code 54900. Each TRA is assigned a six-digit numeric identifier, referred to as a TRA number. TRA = tax rate area number

The TIGER/Line Files are shapefiles and related database files (.dbf) that are an extract of selected geographic and cartographic information from the U.S. Census Bureau's Master Address File / Topologically Integrated Geographic Encoding and Referencing (MAF/TIGER) Database (MTDB). The MTDB represents a seamless national file with no overlaps or gaps between parts, however, each TIGER/Line File is designed to stand alone as an independent data set, or they can be combined to cover the entire nation. Block Groups (BGs) are defined before tabulation block delineation and numbering, but are clusters of blocks within the same census tract that have the same first digit of their 4-digit census block number from the same decennial census. For example, Census 2000 tabulation blocks 3001, 3002, 3003,.., 3999 within Census 2000 tract 1210.02 are also within BG 3 within that census tract. Census 2000 BGs generally contained between 600 and 3,000 people, with an optimum size of 1,500 people. Most BGs were delineated by local participants in the Census Bureau's Participant Statistical Areas Program (PSAP). The Census Bureau delineated BGs only where the PSAP participant declined to delineate BGs or where the Census Bureau could not identify any local PSAP participant. A BG usually covers a contiguous area. Each census tract contains at least one BG, and BGs are uniquely numbered within census tract. Within the standard census geographic hierarchy, BGs never cross county or census tract boundaries, but may cross the boundaries of other geographic entities like county subdivisions, places, urban areas, voting districts, congressional districts, and American Indian / Alaska Native / Native Hawaiian areas. BGs have a valid code range of 0 through 9. BGs coded 0 were intended to only include water area, no land area, and they are generally in territorial seas, coastal water, and Great Lakes water areas. For Census 2000, rather than extending a census tract boundary into the Great Lakes or out to the U.S. nautical three-mile limit, the Census Bureau delineated some census tract boundaries along the shoreline or just offshore. The Census Bureau assigned a default census tract number of 0 and BG of 0 to these offshore, water-only areas not included in regularly numbered census tract areas.

In 2012, the CPUC ordered the development of a statewide map that is designed specifically for the purpose of identifying areas where there is an increased risk for utility associated wildfires. The development of the CPUC -sponsored fire-threat map, herein "CPUC Fire-Threat Map," started in R.08-11-005 and continued in R.15-05-006. A multistep process was used to develop the statewide CPUC Fire-Threat Map. The first step was to develop Fire Map 1 (FM 1), an agnostic map which depicts areas of California where there is an elevated hazard for the ignition and rapid spread of powerline fires due to strong winds, abundant dry vegetation, and other environmental conditions. These are the environmental conditions associated with the catastrophic powerline fires that burned 334 square miles of Southern California in October 2007. FM 1 was developed by CAL FIRE and adopted by the CPUC in Decision 16-05-036.FM 1 served as the foundation for the development of the final CPUC Fire-Threat Map. The CPUC Fire-Threat Map delineates, in part, the boundaries of a new High Fire-Threat District (HFTD) where utility infrastructure and operations will be subject to stricter fire‑safety regulations. Importantly, the CPUC Fire-Threat Map (1) incorporates the fire hazards associated with historical powerline wildfires besides the October 2007 fires in Southern California (e.g., the Butte Fire that burned 71,000 acres in Amador and Calaveras Counties in September 2015), and (2) ranks fire-threat areas based on the risks that utility-associated wildfires pose to people and property. Primary responsibility for the development of the CPUC Fire-Threat Map was delegated to a group of utility mapping experts known as the Peer Development Panel (PDP), with oversight from a team of independent experts known as the Independent Review Team (IRT). The members of the IRT were selected by CAL FIRE and CAL FIRE served as the Chair of the IRT. The development of CPUC Fire-Threat Map includes input from many stakeholders, including investor-owned and publicly owned electric utilities, communications infrastructure providers, public interest groups, and local public safety agencies. The PDP served a draft statewide CPUC Fire-Threat Map on July 31, 2017, which was subsequently reviewed by the IRT. On October 2 and October 5, 2017, the PDP filed an Initial CPUC Fire-Threat Map that reflected the results of the IRT's review through September 25, 2017. The final IRT-approved CPUC Fire-Threat Map was filed on November 17, 2017. On November 21, 2017, SED filed on behalf of the IRT a summary report detailing the production of the CPUC Fire-Threat Map(referenced at the time as Fire Map 2). Interested parties were provided opportunity to submit alternate maps, written comments on the IRT-approved map and alternate maps (if any), and motions for Evidentiary Hearings. No motions for Evidentiary Hearings or alternate map proposals were received. As such, on January 19, 2018 the CPUC adopted, via Safety and Enforcement Division's (SED) disposition of a Tier 1 Advice Letter, the final CPUC Fire-Threat Map.Additional information can be found here.