Saint Paul has had a formal structure of neighborhood organizations to engage residents and collaborate with city government since 1975--one of the first in the nation. These organizations are known as district councils because they are resident groups that engage and represent the people living in one of the city's 17 planning districts. Each district council is a 501(c)(3) non-profit with a voluntary board of directors composed of members elected by their neighbors. The district council structure was formed as part of the development of the city's Citizen Participation Program, now known as the Community Engagement Program. The purpose of this program is to create opportunities for residents to learn about what is happening in their neighborhoods and collaborate with one another and city government to maintain and improve the quality of life in neighborhoods. The program includes funding allocated to each district council on a formula basis, technical assistance from city planners and other city staff regarding issues that are important to the neighborhood and non-profit management assistance from the city's Community Engagement Coordinator.District councils each are involved in work to improve the physical, social and economic structures in their neighborhood. The activity common to all district councils is the development of a district plan (sometimes referred to as a neighborhood plan) that is reviewed by the Planning Commission, City Council and the Metropolitan Council--the region's metropolitan planning organization--before being adopted as part of the city's Comprehensive Plan. The Comprehensive Plan is a key tool used by the city to guide law-making and budgeting. District plans are an opportunity for residents to influence how those laws and budgets impact their neighborhoods. Along with this critical planning work, district councils may also be involved in:Reviewing community development proposalsAdvocating for park and recreation center improvementsCoordinating community gardens and neighborhood beautification projectsPromoting environmental action through volunteering and advocacyOrganizing block clubs and working with the police department and other city agencies to improve public safetyDistrict councils rely on community-building activities and events as the basis for convening residents to become involved in their neighborhood. These include neighborhood forums, festivals, parades and block parties.A commitment to equity is foundational to successful community engagement. In 2017, the district councils proposed a change to the Community Engagement Program's Innovation Fund that was adopted in 2018. The fund is now divided equally among the 17 district councils to promote equitable practices and neighborhood outcomes. The goals of this program are:District council staff and volunteers more accurately reflect the communities they serve.District councils review and adopt policies and practices that intentionally create space for residents who are currently under-represented.District councils pursue systemic work that reflects the needs and priorities of residents who have been historically under-represented.Additionally, district council staff are required to participate in a peer support/best practices network composed of district councils or similar grassroots, place-based organizations in the region.

This dataset demarcates the municipal boundaries in Allegheny County. Data was created to portray the boundaries of the 130 Municipalities in Allegheny County the attribute table includes additional descriptive information including Councils of Government (COG) affiliation (regional governing and coordinating bodies comprised of several bordering municipalities), School District, Congressional District, FIPS and County Municipal Code and County Council District.

This dataset is harvested on a weekly basis from Allegheny County’s GIS data portal. The full metadata record for this dataset can also be found on Allegheny County's GIS portal. You can access the metadata record and other resources on the GIS portal by clicking on the "Explore" button (and choosing the "Go to resource" option) to the right of the "ArcGIS Open Dataset" text below.

Category: Civic Vitality and Governance

Department: Geographic Information Systems Group; Department of Administrative Services

A PDF map that shows the local authority districts, counties and unitary authorities in the United Kingdom as at April 2021. The map has been created to show the United Kingdom from country level down to local authority district level. (File Size - 1,969 KB)

This dataset portrays the boundaries of the County Council Districts in Allegheny County. The dataset is based on municipal boundaries and City of Pittsburgh ward boundaries and was updated as the result of reapportionment in September 2002. It has also been attributed with the current representatives' names.

This dataset is harvested on a weekly basis from Allegheny County’s GIS data portal.

Category: Civic Vitality and Governance

Department: Geographic Information Systems Group; Department of Administrative Services

This map contains the City of Laredo council districts, City Limits and Webb County Voting Precincts. For questions about Voting Precincts, please contact the Webb County Elections office. For information on City Elections please contact the City Secretary of the City of Laredo. Current City Council Districts took effect August 20th, 2022.

Polygon file representing the City County District boundaries in Indianapolis and Marion County, Indiana.Data projection: NAD 1983 StatePlane Indiana East FIPS 1301 (US Feet)

This dataset covers the geographic are within the City of Raleigh municipal boundary. The Raleigh City Council dataset includes polygons which represent the boundaries for each City Council district. This dataset also includes labels and other data relating to each district and its representative. The Raleigh City Council is made up of two at-large representatives, five district representatives, and the Mayor. Each resident of Raleigh has one district representative, determined by the electoral district in which their residence falls. Part of a map service displaying administrative boundaries for Wake County and the City of Raleigh.

Map Gallery for City Council Districts.
For raw GIS Data see City Council GIS Data

Playgrounds owned and managed by Clare County Council Dataset Publisher: Clare County Council Dataset language: English Spatial Projection: Web Mercator Date of Creation: 2020 Update Frequency: As Required Clare County Council provides this information with the understanding that it is not guaranteed to be accurate, correct or complete. Clare County Council accepts no liability for any loss or damage suffered by those using this data for any purpose.

This is an interactive interactive Map of the followingWifi Entaties in Fingal County Council. Small Census Area 2011TownlandsElectoral DivisionCounty BoundaryClick each layer to see individually or a whole

[Metadata] City and County of Honolulu Council District Boundaries, as adopted by the Honolulu Division of Elections. Source: City and County of Honolulu Division of Elections website, April 2022.

Note: Kauai County does not have Council District boundaries because all of their council seats are “at-large.”

For additional information, please refer to complete metadata at https://files.hawaii.gov/dbedt/op/gis/data/cty_council_dist.pdf or contact Hawaii Statewide GIS Program, Office of Planning and Sustainable Development, State of Hawaii; PO Box 2359, Honolulu, Hi. 96804; (808) 587-2846; email: gis@hawaii.gov; Website: https://planning.hawaii.gov/gis.

This dataset is the definitive set of the annually released regional council boundaries for 2022 as defined by the regional councils and/or Local Government Commission and maintained by Stats NZ (the custodian), clipped to coastline. This clipped version has been created for map creation/cartographic purposes and so does not fully represent the official full extent boundaries. The regional council is the top tier of local government in New Zealand. There are 16 regional councils in New Zealand (defined by Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Local Government Act 2002). Eleven are governed by an elected regional council, while five are governed by territorial authorities (the second tier of local government), who also perform the functions of a regional council and are known as unitary authorities. These unitary authorities are Auckland Council, Nelson City Council, and Gisborne, Tasman, and Marlborough District Councils. The Chatham Islands Council also performs some of the functions of a regional council but is not strictly a unitary authority. Unitary authorities act as regional councils for legislative purposes. The seaward boundary of any coastal regional council is the twelve-mile New Zealand territorial limit. Regional councils are defined at meshblock level. Statistical area 1 and statistical area 2 geographies nest within regional council boundaries. Names are provided with and without tohutō/macrons. The name field without macrons is suffixed ‘ascii’. This generalised version has been simplified for rapid drawing and is designed for thematic or web mapping purposes. Digital boundary data became freely available on 1 July 2007.

PDF. A map of St. Louis County Council districts with municipalities and U.S. Congressional districts. Map scale is 1:62500. Link to metadata.

This dataset contains the annually released regional council boundaries for 2020 as defined by the regional councils and/or Local Government Commission and maintained by Stats NZ (the custodian), clipped to coastline. This clipped version has been created for map creation/cartographic purposes and so does not fully represent the official full extent boundaries. This version contains 17 categories.

The regional council is the top tier of local government in New Zealand. There are 16 regional councils in New Zealand (defined by Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Local Government Act 2002). Eleven are governed by an elected regional council, while five are governed by territorial authorities (the second tier of local government), who also perform the functions of a regional council and are known as unitary authorities.

Auckland Council unitary authority was formed in 2010, under the Local Government (Tamaki Makarau Reorganisation) Act 2009, replacing the Auckland Regional Council and seven territorial authorities.The seaward boundary of any coastal regional council is the twelve-mile New Zealand territorial limit. Regional councils are defined at meshblock and statistical area 2

Names are provided with and without tohutō/macrons. The name field without macrons is suffixed ‘ascii’.

This generalised version has been simplified for rapid drawing and is designed for thematic or web mapping purposes.

Digital boundary data became freely available on 1 July 2007.

A map book shows the regional council and the local council council boundaries in the Bay of Plenty.

[Metadata] Hawaii County Council District Boundaries for Hawaii County as of 2022. Source: Hawaii County, April 2022.

The region is the top tier of local government in New Zealand. There are 16 regions of New Zealand (Part 1 of Schedule 2 of the Local Government Act 2002). Eleven are governed by an elected regional council, while five are governed by territorial authorities (the second tier of local government) who also perform the functions of a regional council and thus are known as unitary authorities. These unitary authorities are Auckland Council, Nelson City Council, Gisborne, Tasman, and Marlborough District Councils. The Chatham Islands Council also perform some of the functions of a regional council, but is not strictly a unitary authority. Unitary authorities act as regional councils for the purposes of a wide range of Acts and regulations. Regional council areas are based on water catchment areas. Regional councils are responsible for the administration of many environmental and public transport matters.Regional Councils were established in 1989 after the abolition of the 22 local government regions. The local government act 2002, requires the boundaries of regions to confirm as far as possible to one or more water catchments. When determining regional boundaries, the local Government commission gave consideration to regional communities of interest when selecting water catchments to included in a region. It also considered factors such as natural resource management, land use planning and environmental matters. Some regional boundaries are conterminous with territorial authority boundaries but there are many exceptions. An example is Taupo District, which is split between four regions, although most of its area falls within the Waikato Region. Where territorial local authorities straddle regional council boundaries, the affected area have been statistically defined in complete area units. Generally regional councils contain complete territorial authorities. The unitary authority of the Auckland Council was formed in 2010, under the Local Government (Tamaki Makarau Reorganisation) Act 2009, replacing the Auckland Regional Council and seven territorial authorities.The seaward boundary of any costal regional council is the twelve mile New Zealand territorial limit. Regional councils are defined at meshblock and area unit level.Regional Councils included in the 2013 digital pattern are:Regional Council CodeRegional Council Name01Northland Region02Auckland Region03Waikato Region04Bay of Plenty Region05Gisborne Region06Hawke's Bay Region07Taranaki Region08Manawatu-Wanganui Region09Wellington Region12West Coast Region13Canterbury Region14Otago Region15Southland Region16Tasman Region17Nelson Region18Marlborough Region99Area Outside RegionAs at 1stJuly 2007, Digital Boundary data became freely available.Deriving of Output FilesThe original vertices delineating the meshblock boundary pattern were digitised in 1991 from 1:5,000 scale urban maps and 1:50,000 scale rural maps. The magnitude of error of the original digital points would have been in the range of +/- 10 metres in urban areas and +/- 25 metres in rural areas. Where meshblock boundaries coincide with cadastral boundaries the magnitude of error will be within the range of 1–5 metres in urban areas and 5 - 20 metres in rural areas. This being the estimated magnitude of error of Landonline.The creation of high definition and generalised meshblock boundaries for the 2013 digital pattern and the dissolving of these meshblocks into other geographies/boundaries were completed within Statistics New Zealand using ESRI's ArcGIS desktop suite and the Data Interoperability extension with the following process: 1. Import data and all attribute fields into an ESRI File Geodatabase from LINZ as a shapefile2. Run geometry checks and repairs.3. Run Topology Checks on all data (Must Not Have Gaps, Must Not Overlap), detailed below.4. Generalise the meshblock layers to a 1m tolerance to create generalised dataset. 5. Clip the high definition and generalised meshblock layers to the coastline using land water codes.6. Dissolve all four meshblock datasets (clipped and unclipped, for both generalised and high definition versions) to higher geographies to create the following output data layers: Area Unit, Territorial Authorities, Regional Council, Urban Areas, Community Boards, Territorial Authority Subdivisions, Wards Constituencies and Maori Constituencies for the four datasets. 7. Complete a frequency analysis to determine that each code only has a single record.8. Re-run topology checks for overlaps and gaps.9. Export all created datasets into MapInfo and Shapefile format using the Data Interoperability extension to create 3 output formats for each file. 10. Quality Assurance and rechecking of delivery files.The High Definition version is similar to how the layer exists in Landonline with a couple of changes to fix topology errors identified in topology checking. The following quality checks and steps were applied to the meshblock pattern:Translation of ESRI Shapefiles to ESRI geodatabase datasetThe meshblock dataset was imported into the ESRI File Geodatabase format, required to run the ESRI topology checks. Topology rules were set for each of the layers. Topology ChecksA tolerance of 0.1 cm was applied to the data, which meant that the topology engine validating the data saw any vertex closer than this distance as the same location. A default topology rule of “Must Be Larger than Cluster Tolerance” is applied to all data – this would highlight where any features with a width less than 0.1cm exist. No errors were found for this rule.Three additional topology rules were applied specifically within each of the layers in the ESRI geodatabase – namely “Must Not Overlap”, “Must Not Have Gaps” and “"Area Boundary Must Be Covered By Boundary Of (Meshblock)”. These check that a layer forms a continuous coverage over a surface, that any given point on that surface is only assigned to a single category, and that the dissolved boundaries are identical to the parent meshblock boundaries.Topology Checks Results: There were no errors in either the gap or overlap checks.GeneralisingTo create the generalised Meshblock layer the “Simplify Polygon” geoprocessing tool was used in ArcGIS, with the following parameters:Simplification Algorithm: POINT_REMOVEMaximum Allowable Offset: 1 metreMinimum Area: 1 square metreHandling Topological Errors: RESOLVE_ERRORSClipping of Layers to CoastlineThe processed feature class was then clipped to the coastline. The coastline was defined as features within the supplied Land2013 with codes and descriptions as follows:11- Island – Included12- Mainland – Included21- Inland Water – Included22- Inlet – Excluded23- Oceanic –Excluded33- Other – Included.Features were clipped using the Data Interoperability extension, attribute filter tool. The attribute filter was used on both the generalised and high definition meshblock datasets creating four meshblock layers. Each meshblock dataset also contained all higher geographies and land-water data as attributes. Note: Meshblock 0017001 which is classified as island, was excluded from the clipped meshblock layers, as most of this meshblock is oceanic. Dissolve meshblocks to higher geographiesStatistics New Zealand then dissolved the ESRI meshblock feature classes to the higher geographies, for both the full and clipped dataset, generalised and high definition datasets. To dissolve the higher geographies, a model was built using the dissolver, aggregator and sorter tools, with each output set to include geography code and names within the Data Interoperability extension. Export to MapInfo Format and ShapfilesThe data was exported to MapInfo and Shapefile format using ESRI's Data Interoperability extension Translation tool. Quality Assurance and rechecking of delivery filesThe feature counts of all files were checked to ensure all layers had the correct number of features. This included checking that all multipart features had translated correctly in the new file.

PDF. A map of County Council districts in St. Louis County. State Representative and State Senate districts are also shown. Scale is 1:62500. Link to metadata.

This is a graphical polygon dataset depicting the polygon boundaries of the ten City of San Antonio City Council Districts. 2012 Redistricting Plan precleared by D.O.J. under Section 5 of the Voting Rights Act 11/27/2012. Updated per Limited Purpose Annexation Ordinance 2014-11-06-0861, of 36.266 Acres. Ordinance 2014-01-09-0001 of Areas 1 - 4.Updated per Ordinance 2015-01-15-0020, Boundary Adjustment of approx. 1,906.12 Acres (Government Cayon)

Since 1978, voters have elected council members from among candidates living within their district, plus the mayor who is elected at large citywide. With the subsequent release of decennial census data by the US Census Bureau in the years 1980, 1990, 2000, and 2010, City Council District boundaries have been adjusted to meet legal requirements and San Jose's own redistricting criteria. The City Council District boundaries are updated every ten years.