DOCSLIB.ORG

2011 Supervisorial District - Concept 04

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
2011 Supervisorial District - Concept 04 Contra Costa County DRAFT - 2011 Supervisorial District - Concept 04 r ive R nto Suisun me Honker ra Bay ac Bay S Conoco -Philips Military Ocean 160 San Crockett }þ Port Terminal Complex Pablo Car it er Franks 80 Costa quinez Stra Riv Rodeo¦¨§ in Tract Bay u aq 680 Jo ¦¨§ Bay an Bethel Tesoro Clyde PITTSBURG S Point Island Bayview Shell Vine 5 Big Mt Hill 4 Break 4 View }þ Montalvin PINOLE }þ Manor HERCULES Former Keller }þ4 Concord Canyon Buchanan Naval Airport Landfill Tara El Weapons Hills MARTINEZ Pacheco Sobrante Station ANTIOCH OAKLEY West Co. Rollingwood Landfill Alhambra North }þ242 4 Richmond SAN Valley }þ Briones PABLO CONCORD Knightsen Chevron East Richmond Reliez PLEASANT Heights 1 80 Valley HILL CLAYTON RICHMOND ¦¨§ San ¦¨§580 EL Pablo Contra BRENTWOOD Reservoir Briones Costa CERRITO Reservoir Centre Kensington Shell Acalanes North 4 Ridge Ridge Gate }þ LAFAYETTE WALNUT Discovery }þ24 CREEK Bay Saranap San 4 Miguel 4 Mt Diablo }þ Castle 3 Hill San Byron Francisco ORINDA ¦¨§680 Bay Alamo MORAGA J4 Diablo 456 Clifton Court Canyon Forebay Byron 2 DANVILLE Los Airport Vaqueros San Blackhawk Reservoir Leandro Reservoir Camino Current Supervisorial Boundaries Concept 04 Population Count Tassajara District Population Variance SAN RAMON 2 1 213,646 3 ,841 1 5 Norris 4 2 205,410 ( 4,395) Canyon Concept 04 Population Distribution Variance 3.00% 680 3 212,087 2 ,282 ¦¨§ 1.83% 1.09% 1.15% 3 2010 Population Variance 1.50% 4 205,666 ( 4,139) High: 1.83% 0.00% -1.50% -2.09% -1.97% Total: 1,049,025 Low: -2.09% -3.00% 5 212,216 2,411 Equal Distribution: 209,805 Spread: 3.92% District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4 District 5 Map Created for May 3, 2011 Board of Supervisors Meeting Miles Contra Costa County Department of Conservation & Development 651 Pine Street, 4th Floor - N. Wing, Martinez, CA 94553-0095 Prepared by the Department of Conservation and Development - GIS Group I 0 3 6 9 37:59:48.455N 122:06:35.384W Contra Costa County DRAFT - Boundary & Population Shift - Concept 04 r ve Ri to Suisun en am Honker cr Bay Sa Bay Conoco 160 -Philips Military Ocean }þ San Crockett Port Terminal Complex Pablo Car t er Franks 80 Costa quinez Strai iv Rodeo§ n R Tract ¦¨ i Bay u 680 aq 23,493 Jo ¦¨§ Bay n Bethel 74,475 Tesoro Clyde Sa 2 ► 1 Point PITTSBURG Island 2 ► 5 Shell Vine 5 Big Mt Hill 4 Break Bayview PINOLE }þ4 View }þ Montalvin Tara HERCULES Former Keller }þ4 Manor Hills Buchanan 53,117 Concord Canyon Naval Landfill El Airport 4 ► 5 MARTINEZ Pacheco Weapons Sobrante Station OAKLEY ANTIOCH West Co. Rollingwood Landfill Alhambra 242 North }þ 4 Richmond SAN Valley 141,522 }þ Briones PABLO 5 ► 3 Chevron East CONCORD Knightsen Richmond 14,976 Reliez PLEASANT Heights 1 80 2 ► 4 Valley HILL CLAYTON RICHMOND ¦¨§ San ¦¨§580 EL Pablo Contra BRENTWOOD Reservoir Briones Costa CERRITO Reservoir Centre Kensington Shell San Acalanes North 4 Ridge 19 }þ Francisco LAFAYETTE Ridge Gate WALNUT 4 ► 3 Discovery Bay CREEK }þ24 Saranap Bay San 4 4 Miguel Mt Diablo }þ Current Supervisorial Boundaries Castle 56,092 3 2,607 Hill 3 ► 4 3 ► 2 680 Byron ORINDA ¦¨§ Alamo 53 2 3 ► 4 1 5 MORAGA J4 Diablo 456 Clifton 4 Court Canyon Forebay Byron 3 2 Airport DANVILLE Los Vaqueros San Blackhawk Reservoir Leandro Reservoir 127,409 3 ► 2 Camino Concept 04 Summary of Boundary Shift Concept 04 Population Count Tassajara District Population Variance SAN RAMON 5 1 213,646 3 ,841 1 Norris 2 205,410 ( 4,395) Canyon Concept 04 Population Distribution Variance 4 3 3.00% 3 212,087 2 ,282 680 2010 Population ¦¨§ Variance 1.50% 1.83% 1.09% 1.15% 2 4 205,666 ( 4,139) High: 1.83% 0.00% -1.50% -2.09% -1.97% Total: 1,049,025 Low: -2.09% -3.00% 5 212,216 2,411 Equal Distribution: 209,805 Spread: 3.92% District 1 District 2 District 3 District 4 District 5 Area added to District 1 Area added to District 3 Miles Map Created for May 3, 2011 Board of Supervisors Meeting Prepared by the Department of Contra Costa County Department of Conservation & Development Area added to District 5 651 Pine Street, 4th Floor - N. Wing, Martinez, CA 94553-0095 Area added to District 2 Area added to District 4 Conservation and Development - GIS Group I 0 3 6 9 37:59:48.455N 122:06:35.384W DRAFT - Analysis - 2011 Supervisorial District - Concept 04 Contra Costa County¨¦§780 Supervisorial Districts - Concept 04 City of Martinez Split Concept 04 Facility Analysis O = District same as 2000 X = District changed District 5: Most of County Facilities 1 2 3 4 5 Martinez, with the Airport 5 Buchanan Field ► X Current exception of the Byron Airport O 1 Hospital District 2 southern peninsula. Doctors Medical Center O Contra Costa Regional Medical Center ► X 4 3 Mt Health Center 680 Vine View ¨¦§ Hill North Richmond Center for Health O Richmond Health Center O MARTINEZ }þ4 Concord Public Health Clinic ► X 2 }þ4 Concord Health Center - Adult Medicine ► X Bay Point Health Center O A lh Pittsburg Health Center O a CONCORD m Pacheco Antioch Health Center X ◄ b Brentwood Health Center O ra Current A }þ242 Housing Authority v District 4 e North Richmond O City of Walnut Creek Split San Pablo O District 4: Follows Census Rodeo ► X Alhambra Martinez 1 ► X District 4: Mt Diablo and S}þa24n2 Ramon Valley Unified School Valley geography to form a rough Martinez 2 ► X Districts, Acalanes High School District east of I-680 Bay Point O boundary at the southern Pittsburg O Reliez Antioch 1 X ◄ PLEASANT Current CONCORD Valley peninsula of Martinez. Antioch 2 X ◄ HILL District 4 Oakley X ◄ Current Current Brentwood O ¦¨§680 Current Detention Center District 2 District 4 West County Detention Facility O District 3 City of Concord Split Martinez Detention Facility ► X Contra Juvenile Hall ► X Rd }þ4 Costa lley District 5: north of Marsh Creek Detention Facility O Va Orin Allen Rehab O Mt. Diablo USD Centre acio Ygn Concord Ave, north Acalanes HSD of Clayton Rd Industrial Facilities }þ4 Refinery Acalanes Shell North }þ242 Chevron O Ridge Gate Current Current Conoco-Philips ► X WALNUT M Shell ► X Ridge t. D District 4 CREEK ia ord CONCORD District 5 Tesoro ► X }þ24 Ac blo Conc al U Landfill an SD e es Av West Contra Costa Sanitary Landfill O LAFAYETTE HS Saranap D Cla Keller Canyon Landfill O San Miguel yto Transfer Facility n Rd West Co Integrated Resource Recovery Facility O A cala ACME Landfill ► X Castle nes H District 2: SD Contra Costa Transfer and Recovery ► X Hill Sa Acalanes n Ram Pittsburg Recycling Center and Transfer Station O on V Brentwood Transfer Station O alley High USD CLAYTON ¨¦§680 School Current ¦¨§680 District District 2 Current Alamo WALNUT Current Legend Concept District 1 Concept District 2 District 3 west District 3 CREEK Concept District 3 Concept District 4 Concept District 5 of I-680 District 4: south of Concord Ave,south of Clayton Rd Current Supervisorial District School District City Limit Map Created for May 3, 2011 Board of Supervisors Meeting Contra Costa County Department of Conservation & Development 651 Pine Street, 4th Floor - N. Wing, Martinez, CA 94553-0095 Prepared by the Department of Conservation and Development - GIS Group 37:59:48.455N 122:06:35.384W Contra Costa County Population Summary - 2011 Supervisorial District - Concept 04 Supervisorial 2010 Census Supervisorial 2010 Census Supervisorial 2010 Census Place Place Place District Population District Population District Population Incorporated Area (Cities) Incorporated Area (Cities) Incorporated Area (Cities) 1 El Cerrito 2 3,549 2 Danville 4 2,039 3 Antioch 1 02,365 1 Pinole 1 8,366 2 Lafayette 2 3,893 3 Brentwood 5 1,488 1 Richmond 1 03,701 2 Moraga 1 6,016 3 Oakley 3 5,432 1 San Pablo 2 9,139 2 Orinda 1 7,643 Subtotal 1 89,285 Subtotal 1 74,755 2 San Ramon 7 2,160 2 Walnut Creek (Partial) 1 3,616 Unincorporated Area Unincorporated Area Subtotal 1 85,367 3 Bethel Island CDP 2,137 1 Bayview CDP 1,754 3 Byron CDP & MAC 1,416 1 East Richmond Heights CDP 3,280 Unincorporated Area 3 Discovery Bay CDP 1 3,352 1 El Sobrante CDP & MAC 1 4,033 2 Acalanes Ridge CDP 1,137 3 Knightsen CDP & TAC 1,729 1 Kensington CDP 5,077 2 Blackhawk CDP 9,354 3 Sandmound Slough (Remainder of Bethel Island 7 77 1 Montalvin Manor CDP 2,876 2 Camino Tassajara CDP 2,197 MAC) 1 North Richmond CDP 3,717 2 Norris Canyon CDP 9 57 Other Unincorporated (Includes Unincorporated 1 Rollingwood CDP 2,969 2 Saranap CDP 5,202 3 North Antioch, Ag Core, Morgan Territory Rd, 3,391 1 Tara Hills CDP 5,126 Marsh Creek Rd, Delta Islands) 2 Other Unincorporated (Includes Canyon, North and 1,196 1 Other Unincorporated (includes western Briones) 5 9 South Bollinger Canyon) Subtotal 2 2,802 Subtotal 3 8,891 Subtotal 2 0,043 District 3 Total 212,087 District 1 Total 213,646 District 2 Total 205,410 Supervisorial 2010 Census Place District Population Supervisorial 2010 Census Place Incorporated Area (Cities) District Population 4 Clayton 1 0,897 4 Concord (Partial) 7 4,158 Incorporated Area (Cities) 4 Martinez (Partial) 3,781 5 Concord (Partial) 4 7,903 4 Pleasant Hill 3 3,158 5 Hercules 2 4,132 4 Walnut Creek (Partial) 5 0,557 5 Martinez (Partial) 3 2,043 Subtotal 1 72,551 5 Pittsburg 6 3,264 Subtotal 1 67,342 Unincorporated Area 4 Alamo CDP 1 4,840 Supervisorial Districts - Concept 04 Unincorporated Area 4 Alhambra Valley CDP 9 26 5 Ayers Rd Neighborhood 8 07 4 Castle Hill CDP 1,029 5 Bay Point CDP 2 1,349 4 Contra Costa Centre CDP 5,364 5 Clyde CDP 7 10 4 Contra Costa Centre (north of Mayhew Way) 5 09 5 5 Crockett CDP 3,094 4 Diablo CDP 1,158 5 Mountain View CDP 2,372 4 North Gate CDP 6 79 1 5 Pacheco CDP & MAC 3,689 4 Pacheco South 1 86 5 Port Costa CDP 1 90 4 Reliez Valley CDP 3,101 4 3 5 Rodeo CDP 8,679 4 San Miguel CDP & Walnut Heights Neighborhood 3,610 5 Vine Hill CDP 3,761 4 Shell Ridge CDP 9 59 5 Other Unincorporated (Includes Unincorporated 2 23 Other Unincorporated (includes Unincorporated North Antioch, Kirker Pass Rd) 4 7 54 Clayton, Eastern Briones, Kirker Pass Rd) 2 Subtotal 3 3,115 Subtotal 4 4,874 District 4 Total 205,666 District 5 Total 212,216 Census Geography does not always coincide with actual Map Created for May 3, 2011 Board of Supervisors Meeting jurisdictional boundaries.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Rural Utilities Service - Electric Program
    Presented by Richelle Richardson General Field Representative Office of Operations RUS Electric Program Rural Utilities Service - Electric Program 0 RUS Electric Program Available Programs: • Guaranteed Loan Program (Federal Financing Bank) • Rural Energy Savings Program (Relending) • Section 313a Guaranteed Underwriter Loans (Relending Financial Institutions) • High Energy Cost Grants (Energy costs must be at least 275% above the national average. I am no aware of any entities in Virginia that would qualify.) 1 Guaranteed Loan Program RUS Electric Program Makes Loans and Loan Guarantees to Finance: . The construction and/or acquisition of electric distribution, transmission, and generation facilities, including system improvements and replacements to furnish and improve electric service in rural areas. Demand side management, energy efficiency and conservation programs, and on-grid and off-grid renewable energy systems, and smart grid investment. 2 Guaranteed Loan Program Types of Eligible Borrowers: . Corporations, states, territories, and subdivisions and agencies thereof; municipalities; people’s utility districts; and cooperative, non-profit, limited-dividend, or mutual associations. Pretty much any entity! . However, to be an eligible borrower the loan must provide or propose to provide: • The retail electric service needs of rural areas, or • The power supply needs of distribution borrowers under the terms of power supply arrangements satisfactory to RUS. 3 Guaranteed Loan Program Rural Area means: (i) Any area of the United States, its territories and insular possessions…other than a city, town or unincorporated area that has a population greater than 20,000 inhabitants; and (ii) Any area within a service area of a borrower for which a borrower has outstanding loan as of June 18, 2008, made under titles I though V of the Rural Electrification Act of 1936 (7 U.S.C.
    [Show full text]
  • Is It Time for New York State to Revise Its Village Incorporation Laws? a Background Report on Village Incorporation in New York State
    Is It Time For New York State to Revise Its Village Incorporation Laws? A Background Report on Village Incorporation in New York State Lisa K. Parshall January 2020 1 ABOUT THE AUTHOR Lisa Parshall is a professor of political science at Daemen College in Amherst, New York and a public Photo credit:: Martin J. Anisman policy fellow at the Rockefeller Institute of Government 2 Is It Time for New York State to Revise Its Village Incorporation Laws? Over the past several years, New York State has taken considerable steps to eliminate or reduce the number of local governments — streamlining the law to make it easier for citizens to undertake the process as well as providing financial incentives for communities that undertake consolidations and shared services. Since 2010, the residents of 42 villages have voted on the question of whether to dissolve their village government. This average of 4.7 dissolution votes per year is an increase over the .79 a-year-average in the years 1972-2010.1 The growing number of villages considering dissolution is attributable to the combined influence of declining populations, growing property tax burdens, and the passage of the New N.Y. Government Reorganization and Citizen Empowerment Act (herein after the Empowerment Act), effective in March 2019, which revised procedures to make it easier for citizens to place dissolution and consolidation on the ballot. While the number of communities considering and voting on dissolution has increased, the rate at which dissolutions have been approved by the voters has declined. That is, 60 percent of proposed village dissolutions bought under the provisions of the Empowerment Act have been rejected at referendum (see Dissolving Village Government in New York State: A Symbol of a Community in Decline or Government Modernization?)2 While the Empowerment Act revised the processes for citizen-initiated dissolutions and consolidations, it left the provisions for the incorporation of new villages unchanged.
    [Show full text]
  • Interior Board of Indian Appeals 63 Ibia 75 (05/24/2016)
    INTERIOR BOARD OF INDIAN APPEALS County of San Diego, California; Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Indians; and State of California v. Pacific Regional Director, Bureau of Indian Affairs 63 IBIA 75 (05/24/2016) United States Department of the Interior OFFICE OF HEARINGS AND APPEALS INTERIOR BOARD OF INDIAN APPEALS 801 NORTH QUINCY STREET SUITE 300 ARLINGTON, VA 22203 COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, ) Order Affirming Decision in Part, CALIFORNIA; VIEJAS BAND OF ) Vacating Decision in Remaining Part, KUMEYAAY INDIANS; and STATE OF ) and Remanding CALIFORNIA, ) Appellants, ) ) Docket Nos. IBIA 15-035 v. ) 15-041 ) 15-045 PACIFIC REGIONAL DIRECTOR, ) BUREAU OF INDIAN AFFAIRS, ) Appellee. ) May 24, 2016 These appeals to the Board of Indian Appeals (Board) are from an October 16, 2014, decision (Decision) of the Pacific Regional Director (Regional Director), Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), to accept in trust, for the Ewiiaapaayp Band of Kumeyaay Indians (Ewiiaapaayp or Band),1 18.95 acres of land, referred to as the Salerno parcel, located in San Diego County, California. Appellants contend that the Regional Director lacks legal authority to accept the Salerno parcel in trust for Ewiiaapaayp, and that, even assuming she has such authority, her decision is flawed as an exercise of discretion on various grounds and she failed to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), 42 U.S.C. § 4321 et seq. We reject Appellants’ arguments that the Regional Director lacks authority to accept the Salerno parcel in trust for Ewiiaapaayp, but we agree that the Regional Director did not adequately address a disconnect in the record between Ewiiaapaayp’s justification for the fee-to-trust acquisition and the Band’s stated intended use (or nonuse) of the parcel and purposes of the acquisition.
    [Show full text]
  • Subpart A—General Provisions § 570.1 Purpose and Primary
    Title 24: Housing and Urban Development PART 570—COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANTS Section Contents Subpart A—General Provisions § 570.1 Purpose and primary objective. § 570.3 Definitions. § 570.4 Allocation of funds. § 570.5 Waivers. Subpart B [Reserved] Subpart C—Eligible Activities § 570.200 General policies. § 570.201 Basic eligible activities. § 570.202 Eligible rehabilitation and preservation activities. § 570.203 Special economic development activities. § 570.204 Special activities by Community-Based Development Organizations (CBDOs). § 570.205 Eligible planning, urban environmental design and policy-planning- management-capacity building activities. § 570.206 Program administrative costs. § 570.207 Ineligible activities. § 570.208 Criteria for national objectives. § 570.209 Guidelines for evaluating and selecting economic development projects. § 570.210 Prohibition on use of assistance for employment relocation activities. Subpart D—Entitlement Grants § 570.300 General. § 570.301 Activity locations and float-funding. § 570.302 Submission requirements. § 570.303 Certifications. § 570.304 Making of grants. § 570.307 Urban counties. § 570.308 Joint requests. § 570.309 Restriction on location of activities. Subpart E—Special Purpose Grants § 570.400 General. § 570.401 Community adjustment and economic diversification planning assistance. § 570.402 Technical assistance awards. 1 § 570.403 New Communities. § 570.404 Historically Black colleges and universities program. § 570.405 The insular areas. § 570.406 Formula miscalculation grants. § 570.410 Special Projects Program. § 570.411 Joint Community Development Program. § 570.415 Community Development Work Study Program. § 570.416 Hispanic-serving institutions work study program. Subpart F—Small Cities, Non-Entitlement CDBG Grants in Hawaii and Insular Areas Programs § 570.420 General. § 570.421 New York Small Cities Program design.
    [Show full text]
  • Land-Use Related Extraterritorial Authorities
    FACT SHEET- ET POWERS (00095856).DOC PCE/NMA 12/14/16; 3/17/06 SEWRPC COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING FACT SHEET Land-Use Related Extraterritorial Authorities Cities and villages in Wisconsin have several types of extraterritorial authority that may affect land development in adjacent towns. Under the Wisconsin Statutes, cities and villages have authority to exercise extraterritorial planning, platting (subdivision review), and official mapping by right. In order to exercise extraterritorial zoning, cities and villages must work cooperatively with the adjoining town to develop an extraterritorial zoning ordinance and map. Cities and villages also have extraterritorial authority over offensive industries and smoke emissions. Cities, villages, and towns have limited extraterritorial authority over navigational aids and uses surrounding airports owned by the city, village, or town. Each of these extraterritorial authorities is summarized in the following sections. Extraterritorial Planning Under Section 62.23 (2) of the Statutes, the plan commission of a city has “the function and duty” to “make and adopt a master plan for the physical development of the city, including any areas outside of its boundaries that in the commission’s judgment bear relation to the development of the city.” Section 61.35 grants this same authority to village plan commissions. The Statutes do not specify the distance outside the city or village boundaries that may be included in the city or village master plan. Because the comprehensive planning law (Section 66.1001 of the Statutes) defines a city or village comprehensive plan as a plan developed in accordance with Section 62.23 (2) or (3), a city or village comprehensive plan presumably could also include areas outside the city or village corporate limits, including any areas outside the city or village boundaries that in the plan commission’s judgment bear relation to the development of the city or village.
    [Show full text]
  • Local Profiles Report 2019
    Profile of Unincorporated Los Angeles County Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) Regional Council includes 69 districts which represent 191 cities and 6 counties in the SCAG region LOCAL PROFILES REPORT 2019 This profile report was prepared by the Southern California Association of Governments and shared with Los Angeles County. SCAG provides local governments with a variety of benefits and services including, for example, data and information, GIS training, planning and technical assistance, and sustainability planning grants. May 2019 Southern California Association of Governments TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction .......................................................................................................... 1 II. Population ............................................................................................................ 4 III. Households ........................................................................................................... 9 IV. Housing ............................................................................................................... 12 V. Transportation .................................................................................................... 18 VI. Active Transportation ......................................................................................... 20 VII. Employment ....................................................................................................... 21 VIII. Retail Sales ........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Colorado Condo Statutes
    Colorado Condo Statutes COLORADO REVISED STATUTES TITLE 38. PROPERTY - REAL AND PERSONAL REAL PROPERTY ARTICLE 33. CONDOMINIUM OWNERSHIP ACT 38-33-101. Short title This article shall be known and may be cited as the "Condominium Ownership Act". HISTORY: Source: L. 63: p. 782, § 1. C.R.S. 1963: § 118-15-1. 38-33-102. Condominium ownership recognized Condominium ownership of real property is recognized in this state. Whether created before or after April 30, 1963, such ownership shall be deemed to consist of a separate estate in an individual air space unit of a multi-unit property together with an undivided interest in common elements. The separate estate of any condominium owner of an individual air space unit and his common ownership of such common elements as are appurtenant to his individual air space unit by the terms of the recorded declaration are inseparable for any period of condominium ownership that is prescribed by the recorded declaration. Condominium ownership may exist on land owned in fee simple or held under an estate for years. HISTORY: Source: L. 63: p. 782, § 1. C.R.S. 1963: § 118-15-2.L. 69: p. 982, § 1. 38-33-103. Definitions As used in this article, unless the context otherwise requires: (1) "Condominium unit" means an individual air space unit together with the interest in the common elements appurtenant to such unit. (2) "Declaration" is an instrument recorded pursuant to section 38-33-105 and which defines the character, duration, rights, obligations, and limitations of condominium ownership. (3) Unless otherwise
    [Show full text]
  • Revisiting the Americas: Teaching and Learning the Geography of the Western Hemisphere
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 383 623 SO 024 984 AUTHOR Martinson, Tom, Ed.; Brooker-Gross, Susan, Ed. TITLE Revisiting the Americas: Teaching and Laarning the Geography of the Western Hemisphere. Pathways in Geography Series, Title No.4. INSTITUTION National Council for Geographic Education. REPORT NO ISBN-0-9627379-2-5 PUB DATE 92 NOTE 280p. AVAILABLE FROM National Council for Geographic Education, 16-A Leonard Hall, Indiana University of Pennsylvania, Indiana, PA 15705 ($25.00). PUB TYPE Guides Classroom Use Instructional Materials (For Learner) (051) Guides Classroom-Use Teaching Guides (For Teacher)(052) EDRS PRICE MFO1 /PC12 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS American Indian History; *American Indians; Area Studies; *Cross Cultural Studies; Culture; Ethhic Groups; Foreign Countries; *Geography; *Latin American Culture; Latin American History; *Latin Americans; North American History; Spanish Culture; Western Civilization IDENTIFIERS North America; South America; Western Hemisphere ABSTRACT This book, issued in observance of the Columbus Quincentennial and on the occasion of the 27th International Geographical Congress, addresses a broad range of contemporary topics including environmental change, dynamics of the world economy, human needs, wants and rights, political order and change, and contemporary cultures. The format is one of essays and complementary learning activities, including one essay and two activities in Spanish. Divided into five sections, section 1, "Environmental Change," contains the following essays:(1) "The Changing Use of Water in the Americas" (Lee);(2) "Streamflow" (Bock);(3) "The Effects of Volcanoes on the Landscapes and Peoples of the Americas"(Romey); (4) "Volcanoes and Human Activities in the Caribbean (Bencloski);(5) "The Global Effect of El Nino" (Caviedes);(6) "Teaching El Nino" (Prorok);(7) "Tropical and Temperate Rainforests" (Hansis); (8) "Humans, Owls, and Trees" (Beaman and Osborne); and (9) "Deforestation on Trial" (Sandmeier).
    [Show full text]
  • Local Government Handbook (2018)
    2018 Colorado Local Government Handbook Research Publication No. 719 The following Legislative Council Staff members contributed to this report: Chris Creighton, Fiscal Analyst Anna Gerstle, Fiscal Analyst Vanessa Reilly, Research Analyst Libby Taylor, Constituent Services Analyst This page intentionally left blank. Introduction This handbook is intended to serve as a resource guide on the role and responsibilities of local governments, including counties, municipalities, special districts, and school districts. It is divided into the following nine sections: Section 1 provides an overview of the Colorado Department of Local Affairs; Sections 2 through 4 describe county governments, municipal governments, and city and county governments; Section 5 provides an overview of local government land use and planning powers; Sections 6 and 7 describe special districts and public schools; Section 8 discusses the initiative and referendum process for local governments; and Section 9 describes the laws concerning term limits and recall of local elected officials. This page intentionally left blank. Table of Contents Section I: Overview of Colorado Department of Local Affairs ............................................................................. 1 Section II. County Governments .............................................................................................................................. 3 Organization and Structure ...................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Voluntary Municipal Disincorporation: Creative Solutions for Counties of the Second Class by Aaron Lauer Voluntary Municipal Disincorporation
    Voluntary Municipal Disincorporation: Creative Solutions for Counties of the Second Class By Aaron Lauer Voluntary Municipal Disincorporation 2 Table of Contents 3 Letter from Co-chairs 4 Creating Robust Communities 4 What is Disincorporation? 5 Disincorporation across the Country 6 Disincorporation in Pennsylvania 7 Recommended Task Force Disincorporation Plan 10 Voluntary Municipal Disincorporation Task Force Membership 12 Appendix: State Municipal Disincorporation Statutes 2 Voluntary Municipal Disincorporation Letter from Co-chairs Municipal governments have a far more profound effect on the Municipal Disincorporation Task Force. The Voluntary quality of our daily lives than any other level of government. Municipal Disincorporation Task Force was composed of Through the delivery of essential public services, municipal elected officials, state government officials with an expertise governments give us a unique sense of place and community. in local government affairs, local government practitioners, Municipal governments shape the character of our neighborhoods, academics, and business leaders. The group convened regularly they provide gathering places in parks and libraries, and they over nine months to deliberate on issues surrounding deliver the public services that ensure our families’ safety and municipal disincorporation. The result of the task force’s effort health. This is why we call the municipalities in which we is a clear and concise roadmap for municipal disincorporation. live “home.” The proposal defines not only the criteria for determining when disincorporation is an appropriate strategy but also the However, these are difficult times for municipalities. Municipal steps for implementation. It is the consensus of the committee governments are being asked to deal with more and increasingly that, given the myriad challenges facing Allegheny County complex challenges at a time when local revenue sources are municipalities, it makes sense to expand eligibility for stagnant or declining.
    [Show full text]
  • OHIO Ohio Ranks 7Th Among the States in Number of Local Governments
    OHIO Townships with 3,500 to 5,000 residents in an unincorporated territory may adopt a limited Ohio ranks 7th among the states in number of home rule government upon petition of voters local governments with 3,702 as of October after a referendum. Townships with 5,000 or 2007. more population in their unincorporated area may adopt limited home rule government COUNTY GOVERNMENTS (88) powers, either after voter approval or by resolution of the board of township trustees There are no areas in Ohio lacking county under certain conditions. Such townships with government. The county governing body is 15,000 or more population are called “urban called the board of county commissioners. All townships.” but one county in Ohio operates in accordance with general statutes, although they may also PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEMS (668) organize, with voter approval, either under an alternate statutory form or under home rule School District Governments (668) charter. As of October 2007, Summit County is The following types of school districts in Ohio are the only county to adopt one of the alternate counted as separate governments for census forms (home rule charter). Its governing body is purposes: called the county council. City school districts SUBCOUNTY GENERAL PURPOSE GOVERNMENTS (2,246) Local school districts The 2,246 subcounty general purpose Exempted village school districts governments in Ohio comprise the 938 municipal (authorization for formation of any (city and village) governments, and the 1,308 additional exempted village school township governments. districts, however, has been repealed) Municipal Governments (938) Community college districts Municipal governments in Ohio are the cities Joint vocational school districts (incorporated places having 5,000 inhabitants or more) and villages (incorporated places with An elected board of education governs each city fewer than 5,000 inhabitants).
    [Show full text]
  • Municipal Incorporation Handbook
    Municipal Incorporation Handbook Table of Contents Municipal Incorporation Introduction ........................................................................... 3 Background ........................................................................... 3 Authority ............................................................................... 4 Procedures ............................................................................. 6 Historical Success ................................................................. 8 Incorporation Considerations ................................................................ 8 Municipal Government Finances ........................................................... 9 State Shared Revenues and State Administered Local Revenues ....... 11 Maryland Municipal Incorporation Procedures Flow Chart ................ 14 Code of Maryland—Local Government Article .................................. 17 Index of Typical Charter Provisions .................................................... 24 Incorporation Checklist ....................................................................... 27 2 Municipal Incorporation Introduction This handbook has been prepared by the staff of the Maryland Municipal League to provide guidance to individuals and communities on procedures and considerations associated with municipal incorporation in Maryland. League staff members are also available to answer any questions persons may have relating to this issue. Individuals wishing to arrange for presentations on municipal incorporation
    [Show full text]