This layer defines the five director divisions of the Water Replenishment District (WRD).

Redistricting is a constitutionally mandated redrawing of local, state, and federal political boundaries every ten years following the United States Census. The result of the decennial (every ten years) census is that the lines of every Assembly, Senate, and Congressional District, as well as special districts such as the WRD, may be redrawn to better reflect changes in demographics and/or shifts in the population. The boundaries of the WRD director divisions were adopted in 2021.

Following each census, Detroit City Council is required by the 2012 Detroit City Charter to redraw the boundaries of the City's seven non at-large districts to be "as nearly of equal population as practicable, contiguous, compact and in accordance with any other criteria permitted by law" (Sec. 3-108). After considering six district boundary proposals meant to meet these criteria, City Council selected the boundaries described in this document by an 8-1 vote on February 6, 2024. These boundaries will be used to determine resident districts when voting in 2025 municipal elections, and will officially take effect January 1, 2026.

In this layer, the geographical extent of The Regional Municipality of Waterloo is represented as a polygon. The Regional boundary is coincident with the outer perimeter of the Area Municipalities. In part (the Beverley annexation), the Region of Waterloo Act defines this boundary; however, most of it reflects the former County of Waterloo boundaries, which in turn were based on the original surveys of the Six Nations Tract and others. Today, roads effectively delineate much of the boundary; however, responsibility for maintenance of these roads does not necessarily coincide with the legal extent of the boundary. In some locations, private property ownership and taxation have superseded the original definition of the boundary, and in these cases modern property lines are used. Please note that this layer is not in its final state. There are known and suspected errors of various types, some resulting from attempts at redrawing the boundaries to meet criteria other than those set out above. Caution in interpreting these boundaries is advised. Some Area Municipalities or neighbouring municipalities may have versions of their respective limits that differ in certain respects.

We use a policy experiment in Indonesia to show how local political boundaries affect ethnic tension. Redrawing district borders along group lines reduces conflict. However, the gains in stability are undone or even reversed when new boundaries increase ethnic polarization. Greater polarization leads to more violence around majoritarian elections but has little effect around lower-stakes, proportional representation elections. These results point to distinct incentives for violence in winner-take-all settings with contestable public resources. Overall, our findings illustrate the promise and pitfalls of redrawing borders in diverse countries where it is infeasible for each group to have its own administrative unit.

This feature class depicts the boundaries of Operable Unit 1 (OU1) within the Carson River Mercury Site (CRMS), including the four Area of Investigation boundaries. NDEP lead an initiative to refine the boundaries shown on maps identifying the Carson River Mercury Superfund Site (CRMS) from the initial site identification and description as the Carson River hydrographic basin beginning in Carson City, NV to its terminal points in Churchill County, NV. This description of the CRMS was used in many of the early site investigation studies and reports and continued to be used in all public education and long-term site management controls until approximately 2012. Using site contaminant fate and transport determinations from the CRMS OU1 Remedial Investigation (RI) and Conceptual Site Model (CSM), it seemed inappropriate to include the much larger area of the hydrographic basin as being potentially impacted by site contaminants of concern (CoC). NDEP created protocols to estimate areas that are likely to have been impacted by CoCs and created maps using these protocols to redraw the CRMS boundary limits. In the development of these protocols, NDEP used: Historic records and documentation of probable source areas; The 2012 archaeological mill site research and field study conducted by Broadbent and Associates to locate the historic source areas; Soil and sediment transport mechanisms identified in the CSM and general soil transport and sedimentology principals to predict areas where CoCs have likely been located at and downstream of the historic sources. The overall area of transport was estimated to be reasonably large to include possible anthropogenic activity as well as historic and future natural events such as flooding and channel migration. Additionally, NDEP added a "buffer” to extend the potential areas beyond the conservatively defined primary areas of potential contamination to further address unknown and future effects. These buffers have been identified separately from the primary areas of concern and labeled as such on maps using these protocols. These revisions were formalized in the 2013 Explanation of Significant Differences to the OU-1 Record of Decision (RoD) to adopt the new site definition and boundaries identified by NDEP as new estimates of the CRMS extents. NDEP identified four geographic areas of prime importance to the CRMS. Originally labeled by NDEP as "Risk Areas”, the intent of this terminology was to indicate these were the areas understood to have the most likely "risk” of contamination. Under consultation with EPA R9 risk assessment staff, the term has been changed to "Area of Investigation” to avoid confusion that any actual quantitative level of human or ecological risk has been determined for these areas. They are only estimates of potential contamination and new or additional information that contradicts these boundaries as being insufficient will be used to adopt new boundaries as appropriate. The four Areas of Investigation have become the foundation for the residential soil sampling program mandated by the OU-1 RoD. Summarized briefly; Investigation Area 1 (IA 1)- This includes all areas in the Carson River drainage basin from about the area of the historic settlement of Empire in Carson City, NV downstream to the existing or historic terminal points of the river at Carson Lake, Carson Sink, Indian Lakes and the Stillwater National Wildlife Refuge that lie outside the buffer zones of the other three Investigation Areas. It is least probable that CRMS CoCs will be located in these areas. It is unlikely that any sampling will be requested on areas developed within IA 1, but it might be requested in special circumstances, especially near and around the source areas of the contamination where historic activities could potentially have caused contamination beyond the typical boundaries as identified by the CSM. Investigation Area 2 (IA 2)- This area is defined as a buffer that lies 100 feet along a normal horizontal to the Investigation Area 3 boundary. For Comstock-era mill sites and isolated tailings piles, this translates to the area between 350 feet and 450 feet from the center point of the historic feature. For the 100-year FEMA floodplain and areas of irrigation, this is the area beginning at the limit of the flood plain boundary or irrigated land along a normal to 100 feet. Investigation Area 3 (IA 3)- This area is defined as a buffer that lies 100 feet along a normal horizontal to the Investigation Area 4 boundary for Comstock-era mills or isolated tailings piles. For Comstock-era mill sites and isolated tailings piles, this translates to the area between 250 feet and 350 feet from the center point of the historic feature. It is also defined as the limits of the FEMA 100-year floodplain or past or current flood irrigation practices. A tributary of the Carson River must have a Comstock-era mill site or tailings pile located along it to be mapped in IA3 and only the portion of the tributary downstream of the historic feature is included, not including the IA3 area and buffer drawn around the historic feature itself. If a tributary does not have FEMA 100-year flood plain defined, then IA3 has been defined as the area 100 feet along a normal to Investigation Area 4 boundary of that tributary. Investigation Area 4 (IA 4)- This area represents the highest likelihood of mercury contamination. Multiple steps were used to define the extent of this area, described below: The area within a 250 feet radius from the center point of a Comstock-era mill Comstock-era tailings pile polygon with a 250 ft buffer The centerline of the current channel of the Carson River enclosed in a polygon 100-feet wide (50 feet either side). Tributaries to the Carson River, where Comstock-era mills and tailings piles were located are enclosed in a polygon 50-feet wide (25 feet either side) from the approximate center of the tributary channel. Irrigation canals are enclosed in a polygon 20 feet wide (10 feet either side) from the approximate center of the ditch.

Ward boundaries within the City of Sydney local government area (LGA) have shifted many times, dramatically affecting the number and character of people entitled to vote. The redrawing of ward boundaries was largely undertaken to redress imbalances as the demographic makeup of the City changed over time. The polygon layer represents the boundaries of each ward and table lists the corresponding assessment books. This data is part of the historic ward boundaries story map.

This is the code for the project "Attendance Boundary Policies and the Limits to Combating School Segregation". The data were analyzed at Statistics Denmark and are thus not possible to provide access to.Paper abstract: What is the efficacy of redrawing school attendance boundaries as a desegregation policy? To provide causal evidence on this question we employ novel data with unprecedented detail on the universe of Danish children and exploit changes in attendance boundaries over time. Households defy reassignments to schools with lower socioeconomic status. There is a strong social gradient in defiance, as resourceful households are more sensitive to the student composition of new schools. We simulate school assignment policies and find that boundary changes that reassign areas to a highly disadvantaged school are ineffective at altering the socioeconomic composition at the disadvantaged school.

This layer represents the Arkansas State House of Representatives district boundaries adopted by the Arkansas Board of Apportionment on July 29, 2011. The Board of Apportionment, members were Governor Mike Beebe, Secretary of State Mark Martin and Attorney General Dustin McDaniel. The Board's composition and purpose were created in 1936 by Amendment 23 to the Arkansas Constitution. The Board is responsible for redrawing 100 House and 35 Senate Districts so that each district meets various legal criteria, including each district being about the same size in population. This redistricting is required by law once every 10 years after the Federal Census. The District boundaries represent the legal boundary of each district. The boundaries were extracted from census block, voting district (VTD) or county boundaries in the 2010 Census files. A public record of the boundary plan is on file at the Elections Division of the Arkansas Secretary of State Office.

This dataset contains polygons and attributes which represent the two U.S. Congressional districts within Jefferson County, KY. The data was generated following the release of the 2010 Census data and was finalized in 2013 after a court ordered redistricting revision. During the redistricting process a number of precinct boundaries were redrawn. Precinct boundaries are the fundamental building blocks of all political layers in Jefferson County, KY. View detailed metadata.

CSO Electoral Divisions - National Statistical Boundaries - 2022 - Generalised 20mCSO EDs are a statistical geography that aligns closely with the official ED boundary. EDs are comprised of whole Small Areas. In a small number of cases, CSO EDs do not align with the official boundary, where EDs are amalgamated to ensure statistical confidentiality or where a change was required to ensure better CSO ED/CSO alignment.Creation of generalised versions of Published ED boundaries. Using Douglas-Peucker algorithm with tolerances of 20m, 50m, 100m and writes out features classes. Uses topology and option of preserving common boundaries to ensure output does not generalise differently on common boundaries.Update Notice: 4th August 2023: ED and LEA attributes changed on 15 SAs. As a result of the changes to SAs, CSO ED has one additional ED and the number of CSO EDs is 3420 and there is a change to 2 CSO LEAs. The ED and LEAs impacted are

ED 2ae19629-1d37-13a3-e055-000000000001 renamed to DALKEY-COLIEMORE

ED 94b26e15-6ed2-44c2-a0b0-207c369a2da8 SHANKILL-RATHSALLAGH added

LEA 40aece0e-a19d-4e78-af9d-e129f5557496 DÚN LAOGHAIRE redrawn

LEA d65ef6e7-75e6-49d9-bda9-d4690e8f68dc KILLINEY-SHANKILL redrawn

The Cincinnati SNA (Statistical Neighborhood Approximations) Boundary layer shows Cincinnati neighborhoods modified to closely "fit" the US Census 2010 Data & 2006-2010 American Community Survey five-year estimates. These boundaries are useful in that they can be correlated to US Census population data. The boundaries are redrawn every ten years following the Census.

Note: The Cincinnati SNA Boundaries are not the same as the Cincinnati Community Council Neighborhood Boundaries.

ORDINANCE NO. 6364AN ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF SONOMA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING REVISED SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICT BOUNDARIES FOR ALL OF THE SUPERVISORIAL DISTRICTS OF THE COUNTY, REPEALING SONOMA COUNTY CODE SECTION 1-8, AND DIRECTING COUNTY STAFF TO MAINTAIN FOR AT LEAST TEN YEARS THE COUNTY'S REDISTRICTING WEBSITE TO CONTINUE TO INFORM THE PUBLIC ABOUT THE REDISTRICTING PROCESS AND THE REVISED BOUNDARIES.The Board of Supervisors of the County of Sonoma, State of California, ordains as follows:Section I. Public Participation. The Sonoma County Board of Supervisors has taken steps above and beyond the requirements of Elections Code Section 21508 to engage the community and invite public participation in the supervisorial boundary redistricting process. The Board has encouraged residents, including those in underrepresented communities and non-English speaking communities, to participate in the redistricting public review process. These steps have included all of the following:Provided information to media organizations that provide county news coverage, including media organizations that serve language minority communities.Provided information through good government, civil rights, civic engagement, and community groups or organizations that are active in the county, including those active in language minority communities, and those that have requested to be notified concerning county redistricting.Arranged for live translation in Spanish at redistricting public hearings and workshops.The County retained a public outreach and local engagement consultant who performed 34 Community Engagement Opportunities (including 13 focus group sessions; 16 group or radio presentations; 3 Town Halls; 2 map drawing parties).On February 23, 2021, the Board established the Sonoma County Advisory Redistricting Commission (ARC) to advise and assist the Board with redrawing supervisorial district boundaries. The ARC had 19 members, comprised of two appointees per district and nine at-large members.On June 28, 2021, the ARC held its first public meeting to learn about redistricting and listen to public comment.On July 26, 2021, the ARC held another public meeting to continue to discuss the redistricting process and listen to public input.On August 23, 2021, the ARC held a public hearing to discuss redistricting, receive public input about communities of interest, and learn about mapping tools.On September l, 2021, the ARC held a meeting to consider the redistricting process, receive map-drawing training and listen to public feedback.On September 13, 2021, the ARC held a meeting to discuss equity.On September 15, 2021, the County held a Town Hall meeting to review the redistricting process and how the public can provide input.On October 5, 2021, the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors held a public hearing to review the new census data and discuss the redistricting process.On October 18, 2021, the ARC held a duly noticed public meeting to consider draft supervisorial district maps.On October 18, 2021, the ARC held a duly noticed public meeting to consider draft supervisorial district maps.On October 22, 2021, the ARC held a duly noticed public meeting to discuss the draft maps and listen to public feedback.On October 25, 2021, the ARC held a duly noticed public meeting to discuss the draft maps, listen to public feedback and vote on a proposed supervisorial district map to present to the Board of Supervisors. The ARC recommended the Board continue to listen to public feedback and update the map to respond to continued community input and comply with federal and state laws.On November 2, 2021, the Board held a public hearing to consider the ARC's proposed map and recommendations.On November 16, 2021, the Board held a public hearing to consider proposed maps and continue to listen to public feedback.On November 22, 2021, County staff held a Town Hall meeting focused on the City of Rohnert Park's comments and to gather public input;On November 29, 2021, the Board held a public workshop to consider a proposed map and continue to listen to public input.On December 7, 2()21, the Board held a final public hearing to introduce, waive reading and consider adoption of an ordinance to adopt a new supervisorial district map.Section Il. Information Gathered. The Board has considered the 2020 federal census data, the ARC's recommendations, in addition to all of the other community input through the ARC process, as well as the Board's own public hearings, the public workshop and additional public comments. Additionally, the Board also retained a demographer, National Demographics Corporation, to analyze the population and demographic data. Since the release of the 2020 federal census data, the ARC and the Board have considered numerous variations of the supervisorial district boundaries to ensure the final version of the map satisfies the criteria of federal and state law. Based on that information and community input, the Board has developed the final revised County of Sonoma supervisorial district boundaries as specified and set forth in the map attached to this ordinance as Attachment A ("Revised Sonoma County Supervisorial District Boundaries").Section Ill. Findings. Based on the information gathered as set forth above, the Board makes the following findings:The Revised Sonoma County Supervisorial District Boundaries are based on the total population of residents of the county as determined by the 2020 federal decennial census;The Revised Sonoma County Supervisorial District Boundaries comply with the United States Constitution, the California Constitution, and the federal Voting Rights Act of 1965 (52 U.S.C. Section 10301 et seq.);The Revised Sonoma County Supervisorial District Boundaries comply with California Elections Code Section 21500 because those boundaries have been developed in accordance with these criteria as set forth in the following order of priority:To the extent practicable, the supervisorial districts are geographically contiguous;To the extent practicable, the geographic integrity of local neighborhoods and local communities of interest are respected in a manner that minimizes their division;To the extent practicable, the geographic integrity of a city or census designated place is respected in a manner that minimizes its division;The Revised Supervisorial District Boundaries are easily identifiable and understandable by residents and to the extent practicable are bounded by natural and artificial barriers, by streets, or by the boundaries of the county;To the extent practicable, and where it does not conflict with the preceding criteria above, the Revised Supervisorial District Boundaries are geographically compact; andThe Revised Supervisorial District Boundaries have not been developed for the purpose of favoring or discriminating against a political party.Communities of Interest. Based on public comment received during the Public Participation process set forth in Section I above, the Board has determined that the following are communities of interest as defined in Elections Code Section 21500(c)(2) because these are populations that share common social or economic interests that should be included within a single supervisorial district for purposes of effective and fair representation:Roseland has recently been annexed to the City of Santa Rosa and shares socioeconomic characteristics with Moorland; both areas represent a community of interest that should be included within a single supervisorial district that includes portions of the downtown area of Santa Rosa for purposes of effective and fair representation;Coastal communities share common interests and should remain within one supervisorial district for the purposes of effective and fair representation;Russian River communities share common social and economic interests and should remain within one supervisorial district for purposes of effective and fair representation;Coffey Park-Larkfield-Mark West-Wikiup community shares common interests and should remain within one supervisorial district for purposes of effective and fair representation;The Springs area (Eldridge, Fetters Hot Springs, Agua Caliente, Boyes Hot Springs) share common interests and should remain within one supervisorial district for purposes of effective and fair representation; andThe community within the Bennett Valley Area Plan, approved by the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors in Resolution No. 11-0461, on September 30, 2011, share common interests and should remain within one supervisorial district for purposes of effective and fair representation.Section IV. Adoption Procedures. California Elections Code Section 21500(e) allows the County to adopt supervisorial district boundaries by resolution or ordinance and clarifies that revised supervisorial district boundary adoption occurs on the date of passage of such ordinance or resolution. The Revised Sonoma County Supervisorial District Boundaries attached hereto as Attachment A have been posted on the County'sRedistricting website at https://sonomacounty.ca.gov/CAO/Policy-Grants-and-SpeciaIProjects/2021-Redistricting/for at least seven days prior to final adoption in compliance with Elections Code SectionSection V. Adoption of Revised Sonoma County Supervisorial District Boundaries. Based on the above findings and adoption procedures, the Board hereby determines that the Revised Sonoma County Supervisorial District Boundaries comply with all federal and state laws. Accordingly, the Board hereby adopts the Revised Sonoma County Supervisorial District Boundaries.Section VI. Posting on County's Redistricting Website. In compliance with Elections Code Section 21508(g), the Board directs County staff to maintain the County of Sonoma's Redistricting website at https://sonomacounty.ca.gov/CAO/Policy-Grants-and-Special-Projects/2021-Redistrictingfor at least 10 years after the adoption of new supervisorial district

The downloadable ZIP file contains Esri shapefiles and PDF maps. Contains the information used to determine the _location of the new legislative and congressional district boundaries for the state of Idaho as adopted by Idaho's first Commission on Redistricting on March 9, 2002. Contains viewable and printable legislative and congressional district maps, viewable and printable reports, and importable geographic data files.These data were contributed to INSIDE Idaho at the University of Idaho Library in 2001. CD/DVD -ROM availability: https://alliance-primo.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/permalink/f/m1uotc/CP71156191150001451These files were created by a six-person, by-partisan commission, consisting of six commission members, three democrats and three republicans. This commission was given 90 days to redraw congressional and legislative district boundaries for the state of Idaho. Due to lawsuits, the process was extended. This legislative plan was approved by the commission on March 9th, 2002 and was previously called L97. All digital data originates from TIGER/Line files and 2000 U.S. Census data.Frequently asked questions:How often are Idaho's legislative and congressional districts redrawn? Once every ten years after each census, as required by law, or when directed by the Idaho Supreme Court. The most recent redistricting followed the 2000 census. Redistricting is not expected to occur again in Idaho until after the 2010 census. Who redrew Idaho's legislative and congressional districts? In 2001, for the first time, Idaho used a citizens' commission to redraw its legislative and congressional district boundaries. Before Idaho voters amended the state Constitution in 1994 to create a Redistricting Commission, redistricting was done by a committee of the Idaho Legislature. The committee's new district plans then had to pass the Legislature before becoming law. Who was on the Redistricting Commission? Idaho's first Commission on Redistricting was composed of Co-Chairmen Kristi Sellers of Chubbuck and Tom Stuart of Boise and Stanley. The other four members were Raymond Givens of Coeur d'Alene, Dean Haagenson of Hayden Lake, Karl Shurtliff of Boise, John Hepworth of Buhl (who resigned effective December 4, 2001), and Derlin Taylor of Burley (who was appointed to replace Mr. Hepworth). What are the requirements for being a Redistricting Commissioner? According to Idaho Law, no person may serve on the commission who: 1. Is not a registered voter of the state at the time of selection; or 2. Is or has been within one (1) year a registered lobbyist; or 3. Is or has been within two (2) years prior to selection an elected official or elected legislative district, county or state party officer. (This requirement does not apply to precinct committeepersons.) The individual appointing authorities may consider additional criteria beyond these statutory requirements. Idaho law also prohibits a person who has served on the Redistricting Commission from serving in either house of the legislature for five years following their service on the commission. When did Idaho's first Commission on Redistricting meet? Idaho law allows the Commission only 90 days to conduct its business. The Redistricting Commission was formed on June 5, 2001. Its 90-day time period would expire on September 3, 2001. After holding hearings around the state in June and July, a majority of the Commission voted to adopt new legislative and congressional districts on August 22, 2001. On November 29th, the Idaho Supreme Court ruled the Commission's legislative redistricting plan unconstitutional and directed them to reconvene and adopt an alternative plan. The Commission did so, adopting a new plan on January 8, 2000. The Idaho Supreme Court found the Commission's second legislative map unconstitutional on March 1, 2002 and ordered the Commission to try again. The Commission adopted a third plan on March 9, 2002. The Supreme Court denied numerous challenges to this third map. It then became the basis for the 2002 primary and General elections and is expected to be used until the 2012 elections. What is the basic timetable for Idaho to redraw its legislative and congressional districts?Typically, and according to Idaho law, the Redistricting Commission cannot be formally convened until after Idaho has received the official census counts and not before June 1 of a year ending in one. Idaho's first Commission on redistricting was officially created on June 5, 2001. By law, a Commission then has 90 days (or until September 3, 2001 in the case of Idaho's first Commission) to approve new legislative and congressional district boundaries based on the most recent census figures. If at least four of the six commissioners fail to approve new legislative and congressional district plans before that 90-day time period expires, the Commission will cease to exist. The law is silent as to what happens next. Could you summarize the important dates for Idaho's first Commission on Redistricting one more time please? After January 1, 2001 but before April 1, 2001: As required by federal law, the Census Bureau must deliver to the states the small area population counts upon which redistricting is based. The Census Bureau determines the exact date within this window when Idaho will get its population figures. Idaho's were delivered on March 23, 2001. Why conduct a census anyway? The original and still primary reason for conducting a national census every ten years is to determine how the 435 seats in the United States House of Representatives are to be apportioned among the 50 states. Each state receives its share of the 435 seats in the U.S. House based on the proportion of its population to that of the total U.S. population. For example, the population shifts during the 1990's resulted in the Northeastern states losing population and therefore seats in Congress to the Southern and the Western states. What is reapportionment? Reapportionment is a federal issue that applies only to Congress. It is the process of dividing up the 435 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives among the 50 states based on each state's proportion of the total U.S. population as determined by the most recent census. Apportionment determines the each state's power, as expressed by the size of their congressional delegation, in Congress and, through the electoral college, directly affects the selection of the president (each state's number of votes in the electoral college equals the number of its representatives and senators in Congress). Like all states, Idaho has two U.S. senators. Based on our 1990 population of 1,006,000 people and our 2000 population of 1,293,953, and relative to the populations of the other 49 states, Idaho will have two seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. Even with the state's 28.5% population increase from 1990 to 2000, Idaho will not be getting a third seat in the U.S. House of Representatives. Assuming Idaho keeps growing at the same rate it did through the decade of the 1990's, it will likely be 30 or 40 years (after 3 or 4 more censuses) before Idaho gets a third congressional seat. What is redistricting? Redistricting is the process of redrawing the boundaries of legislative and congressional districts within each state to achieve population equality among all congressional districts and among all legislative districts. The U.S. Constitution requires this be done for all congressional districts after each decennial census. The Idaho Constitution also requires that this be done for all legislative districts after each census. The democratic principle behind redistricting is "one person, one vote." Requiring that districts be of equal population ensures that every elected state legislator or U.S. congressman represents very close to the same number of people in that state, therefore, each citizen's vote will carry the same weight. How are reapportionment and redistricting related to the census? The original and still primary reason for conducting a census every ten years is to apportion the (now) 435 seats in the U.S. House of Representatives among the several states. The census records population changes and is the legally recognized basis for redrawing electoral districts of equal population. Why is redistricting so important? In a democracy, it is important for all citizens to have equal representation. The political parties also see redistricting as an opportunity to draw districts that favor electing their members and, conversely, that are unfavorable for electing their political opposition. (It's for this reason that redistricting has been described as "the purest form of political bloodsport.") What is PL 94-171? Public Law (PL) 94-171 (Title 13, United States Code) was enacted by Congress in 1975. It was intended to provide state legislatures with small-area census population totals for use in redistricting. The law's origins lie with the "one person, one vote" court decisions in the 1960's. State legislatures needed to reconcile Census Bureau's small geographic area boundaries with voting tabulation districts (precincts) boundaries to create legislative districts with balanced populations. The Census Bureau worked with state legislatures and others to meet this need beginning with the 1980 census. The resulting Public Law 94-171 allows states to work voluntarily with the Census Bureau to match voting district boundaries with small-area census boundaries. With this done, the Bureau can report to those participating states the census population totals broken down by major race group and Hispanic origin for the total population and for persons aged 18 years and older for each census subdivision. Idaho participated in the Bureau's Census 2000 Redistricting Data Program and, where counties used visible features to delineate precinct boundaries, matched those boundaries with census reporting areas. In those instances where counties did not use visible features

After the 2020 federal decennial census was released in 2021, the County began the redistricting process. The purpose of redistricting is to redraw the district boundaries to rebalance the population between districts every 10 years so that each district is substantially equal in population and meets certain criteria within the Election Code and U.S. constitution. As a result of the redistricting process, in 2021 Map ID No. 74786 (aka the “Patten Map”) was adopted. In April 2023, due to litigation, the Board of Supervisors set aside Map ID 74786 (layer name: CR_SUPDIST_2021) and approved Map A (layer name: CR_SUPDIST_2023) which established different supervisorial district boundaries. These boundaries are in effect as of their adoption, however, per the Elections Code, they are phased in over the course of several years as terms of office expire and as elections occur in each of the new districts. The original 2011 (2010 Census) district boundaries were used as a framework. The only changes made were to adhere to P.L. 94-171 2020 federal decennial census block lines where they deviate from the 2011 district boundaries. The Map A - 2023 boundaries were adopted by the Board of Supervisors in 2023 to replace the boundaries adopted in 2021.In 2024, Districts 1, 3, and 5 will vote for their supervisor using the 2023 district boundaries. In 2026, Districts 2 and 4 will vote for their supervisor using the 2023 district boundaries. Once the new Board takes office in January 2027, all supervisors will then be re-elected under the 2023 district boundaries. 2023-2030 Supervisorial District Boundaries in polygon format. The Coordinates for this dataset are State Plane Coordinate System, Zone 5, NAD 1983 (2011) Feet.April 4th, 2023 – Item #6 on agendaConsideration and introduction of three ordinances each of which repeal the Supervisorial District boundaries established by Ordinance No. 3467 which was adopted at the end of the County’s 2021 redistricting process and each of which propose new boundaries based on three previously considered maps commonly referred to as Map A, Map B, and the Chamber Map. Hearing date set for April 18, 2023. All Districts.Agenda Item TransmittalApril 18th, 2023 – Item #35 on agendaHearing to Adopt an Ordinance to Amend Chapter 2.60 of the County Code to repeal Ordinance 3476 and change Supervisorial District boundaries and submittal of a resolution confirming the Board’s findings in support of the new district boundaries. All Districts.Agenda Item Transmittal

Family units with children by type of family and age of children by Small Area. (Census 2022 Theme 4 Table 3 )Census 2022 table 4.3 is family units with children by type of family and age of children. Details include family types by number of families and number of children. Census 2022 theme 4 is Families. Census Small Areas are the lowest level of geography for the dissemination of Census data and typically contain between 50 and 200 dwellings. They are generally comprised of complete neighbourhoods or townlands and they nest within CSO Electoral Divisions. Census 2022 Small Areas have been redrawn to ensure they remain consistent with the principle of data protection and are relatively comparable in size. This redraw was necessary following changes in population size and distribution between 2016 and 2022 and was done by the CSO with support from Tailte Éireann. Small Areas were first published for Census 2011 following work undertaken by the National Institute of Regional and Spatial Analysis (NIRSA) on behalf of Tailte Éireann and in consultation with the CSO. Coordinate reference system: Irish Transverse Mercator (EPSG 2157). These boundaries are based on 20m generalised boundaries sourced from Tailte Éireann Open Data Portal. CSO Small Areas 2022

Small Areas were designed as the lowest level of geography for the dissemination of statistics and generally comprise either complete or part of townlands or neighbourhoods. Small Areas were created by The National Institute of Regional and Spatial Analysis (NIRSA) on behalf of the Tailte Éireann (TE) in consultation with CSO.

Small Areas generally comprise between 80 and 120 dwellings and nest within CSO Electoral Divisions.

The Small Area boundaries have been amended based on Census 2022 population data.

Generalised data: provided for information only.

Update Notice: 4th August 2023: Attribution changed for ED and LEA attributes. An implication of this is CSO ED increase in count from 3419 to 3420 and CSO LEA boundary changes. ED and LEAs impacted are

LEA 40aece0e-a19d-4e78-af9d-e129f5557496 DÚN LAOGHAIRE redrawn

LEA d65ef6e7-75e6-49d9-bda9-d4690e8f68dc KILLINEY-SHANKILL redrawn

ED 2ae19629-1d37-13a3-e055-000000000001 renamed to DALKEY-COLIEMORE

ED 2ae19629-1e18-13a3-e055-000000000001 SHANKILL-RATHSALLAGH

SA by GUIDS Impacted:

('4c07d11e-166e-851d-e053-ca3ca8c0ca7f','4c07d11e-30f0-851d-e053-ca3ca8c0ca7f','4c07d11e-30b0-851d-e053-ca3ca8c0ca7f','4c07d11e-30a0-851d-e053-ca3ca8c0ca7f', '4c07d11e-30e2-851d-e053-ca3ca8c0ca7f','4c07d11e-30e3-851d-e053-ca3ca8c0ca7f','4c07d11e-309d-8

Population aged 5 years and over by time leaving home to travel to work, school or college by Small Area. (Census 2022 Theme 11 Table 2 )Census 2022 table 11.2 is population aged 5+ by time leaving home to travel to work, school or college. Attributes include a breakdown of population by time leaving for work, school or college. Census 2022 theme 11 is Commuting, Working from Home and Childcare.Census Small Areas are the lowest level of geography for the dissemination of Census data and typically contain between 50 and 200 dwellings. They are generally comprised of complete neighbourhoods or townlands and they nest within CSO Electoral Divisions.Census 2022 Small Areas have been redrawn to ensure they remain consistent with the principle of data protection and are relatively comparable in size. This redraw was necessary following changes in population size and distribution between 2016 and 2022 and was done by the CSO with support from Tailte Éireann.Small Areas were first published for Census 2011 following work undertaken by the National Institute of Regional and Spatial Analysis (NIRSA) on behalf of Tailte Éireann and in consultation with the CSO.Coordinate reference system: Irish Transverse Mercator (EPSG 2157). These boundaries are based on 20m generalised boundaries sourced from Tailte Éireann Open Data Portal. CSO Small Areas 2022.This Census 2022 table is available at other levels of geography from Ireland Census Data Hub.

Commission district boundaries are redrawn every ten years following the United States Census. Redistricting occurred September 2021 through December 2021. Commissions approved new commission boundaries on December 07, 2021. Commissioners formally adopted new boundary legal descriptions February 14, 2012. Reviewed 12/17/2021. No changes made.

Source: BCGIS

Effective Date: 12/17/2021

Last Update: 12/17/2021

Update Cycle: 10 years.

Note: This council district layer goes into effect on January 1, 2026. The council district layer in effect until December 31st, 2025 can be found hereThis Council Districts map is for illustrative purposes only and the City of Detroit makes no representations as to its accuracy. For the official geographic boundaries, please refer to the geographical boundaries formally approved by the Detroit City Council on February 6, 2024. For convenience, a link to the formally approved boundaries may be found here. The reapportioned City Council District boundaries take effect on January 1, 2026.Following each census, Detroit City Council is required by the 2012 Detroit City Charter to redraw the boundaries of the City's seven non at-large districts to be "as nearly of equal population as practicable, contiguous, compact and in accordance with any other criteria permitted by law" (Sec. 3-108).City Council selected the boundaries illustrated here by an 8-1 vote on February 6, 2024. These boundaries will be used to determine resident districts when voting in 2025 municipal elections, and will officially take effect January 1, 2026.

The Metropolitan Planning Area (MPA) boundary is the line that includes the entire existing urbanized area defined by the United States Census, plus the areas expected to urbanize in the next 20 years. These areas are the basis for long-range and short-range transportation plans required by Federal law.After each Census, Federal rules require that ARC and local governments redraw the boundary. Being included in the MPA means those local governments can apply for federal funding through the TIP process and become eligible for funding under the Livable Centers Initiative, the comprehensive transportation plan, and other ARC projects. Following the 2020 Census, the Census Bureau designated a revised Atlanta Urbanized Area(UA) based on 2020 Census data. The Atlanta UA includes all or part of 20 counties, down from the 23 counties designated following the 2010 Census. These 20 include Barrow, Bartow, Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, Coweta, Dawson, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth, Fulton, Gwinnett, Hall, Henry, Newton, Paulding, Rockdale, Spalding, and Walton counties.The Census applied new, stricter criteria in determining whether a census tract was urban or rural. In some places, this has meant that the Atlanta UA appears to have gotten smaller. For this reason, Pike County is no longer included in either the Atlanta Urbanized Area or the new MPA boundary. The Atlanta UA also no longer extends into Carroll County, though the new MPA boundary will include part of Carroll County as detailed below. The parts of Jackson County previously included in the Atlanta UA are now classified with the Gainesville UA. Adjacent to the Atlanta UA are the Cartersville and Gainesville UAs. These areas are represented by their own metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs). By previous formalagreement, ARC has assigned transportation planning responsibilities for the portion of the Atlanta UA in Bartow County to the Cartersville-Bartow Metropolitan Planning Organization (CBMPO).By similar previous formal agreement, ARC has assigned transportation planning responsibilities for the portions of the Atlanta UA in Hall and Jackson counties to the Gainesville-Hall Metropolitan Planning Organization (GHMPO), while GHMPO has assigned transportation planning responsibilities for the portions of the Gainesville UA in Forsyth and Gwinnett counties to ARC. These agreements will be updated to reflect new geographies andnecessary agreements following the 2020 Census.Data from the 2020 Census identified a new Winder Urban Area existing in Barrow,Gwinnett, and Walton counties. With a population of 50,189, the Winder UA exceeds the threshold of 50,000 established by Federal law to be designated as its own MPO. Conversations continue between ARC, the State, the City of Winder, and Barrow County about whether the City and County will form their own MPO; Federal law requires agreementbetween the two bodies. Until and unless Winder and Barrow County elect to form an MPO, they shall remain part of ARC. Should a Winder MPO be created, the new agreement between ARC and GHMPO will also need to include the new Winder MPO and divide transportation planning responsibilities in Barrow, Gwinnett, Hall, and Walton counties between the three agencies. ARC has developed the attached revised Metropolitan Planning Area through discussions with planning partners.• Like before, the new MPA boundary continues to contain the ARC’s 11-county region (Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth, Fulton, Gwinnett, Henry, and Rockdale) in its entirety, as well as the entirety of Coweta and Paulding counties.• Newton County is now included in the new MPA boundary in its entirety to account for significant growth along Interstate 20 in the Covington and Stanton Springs areas.• Barrow County is also now included in the new MPA boundary in its entirety until and unless the City of Winder and Barrow County form their own MPO.• While the Atlanta UA was reduced in Spalding County, and a separate Griffin UA identified that does not meet the minimum threshold to form its own MPO, the new MPA boundary expands to include all of Spalding County to account for expected growth along Interstate 75, US 19-41, and State Route 16.• In Dawson County, the new MPA boundary accounts for population growth along Lake Lanier.• In Walton County, the new MPA boundary includes areas that the Census has designated as urban, as well as the cities of Monroe and Social Circle.• Carroll County is no longer considered part of the Atlanta Urbanized Area. The county contains two separate Urbanized Areas, Carrollton and Villa Rica, neither of which is large enough to form its own MPO. Because the City of Villa Rica is geographically divided between Carroll and Douglas counties, the City has opted to remain entirely within ARC. Accordingly, the new MPA boundary includes the portion of Villa Rica in Carroll County.