DOCSLIB.ORG

State and Congressional District Allocation Totals for A1 and A4

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
State and Congressional District Allocation Totals for A1 and A4 American Rescue Plan Higher Education Allocations by State A1 and A4 allocations on 5/11/2020 State/Congressional District Sum of Total Allocation Alaska 32,426,262 AK, District 01 32,426,262 Alabama 587,238,562 AL, District 01 68,351,486 AL, District 02 79,908,834 AL, District 03 97,104,973 AL, District 04 49,659,219 AL, District 05 93,447,788 AL, District 06 28,873,048 AL, District 07 169,893,214 Arkansas 358,844,038 AR, District 01 36,598,727 AR, District 02 134,997,501 AR, District 03 105,224,963 AR, District 04 82,022,847 American Samoa 4,673,971 AS, District 01 4,673,971 Arizona 675,274,667 AZ, District 01 99,648,931 AZ, District 02 54,308,330 AZ, District 03 108,510,496 AZ, District 04 36,655,621 AZ, District 05 18,267,764 AZ, District 06 25,198,149 AZ, District 07 54,978,282 AZ, District 08 36,605,999 AZ, District 09 241,101,095 California 5,029,221,669 CA, District 01 105,985,229 CA, District 02 53,961,390 CA, District 03 123,337,083 CA, District 04 39,459,570 CA, District 05 63,338,607 CA, District 06 210,004,208 CA, District 07 13,836,465 CA, District 08 48,937,454 CA, District 09 44,705,773 CA, District 10 74,738,272 CA, District 11 57,826,254 CA, District 12 31,637,766 CA, District 13 127,691,367 American Rescue Plan Higher Education Allocations by State A1 and A4 allocations on 5/11/2020 State/Congressional District Sum of Total Allocation CA, District 14 134,074,429 CA, District 15 69,733,084 CA, District 16 119,423,135 CA, District 17 55,878,289 CA, District 18 56,784,435 CA, District 19 114,735,972 CA, District 20 118,072,186 CA, District 21 12,213,195 CA, District 22 160,003,582 CA, District 23 150,036,705 CA, District 24 158,751,414 CA, District 25 31,613,827 CA, District 26 86,196,188 CA, District 27 145,580,409 CA, District 28 72,048,930 CA, District 29 44,424,994 CA, District 30 165,085,695 CA, District 31 160,722,009 CA, District 32 40,817,111 CA, District 33 168,961,035 CA, District 34 122,566,089 CA, District 35 5,621,616 CA, District 36 63,779,468 CA, District 37 88,586,667 CA, District 38 93,444,563 CA, District 39 302,015,752 CA, District 40 8,984,078 CA, District 41 172,886,355 CA, District 42 15,173,684 CA, District 43 72,902,332 CA, District 44 68,648,645 CA, District 45 135,519,483 CA, District 46 45,278,864 CA, District 47 199,517,785 CA, District 48 63,812,179 CA, District 49 150,718,710 CA, District 50 93,890,106 CA, District 51 28,987,445 CA, District 52 92,187,506 CA, District 53 144,084,280 Colorado 500,777,472 American Rescue Plan Higher Education Allocations by State A1 and A4 allocations on 5/11/2020 State/Congressional District Sum of Total Allocation CO, District 01 141,053,920 CO, District 02 53,110,842 CO, District 03 77,384,981 CO, District 04 45,698,028 CO, District 05 58,424,652 CO, District 06 64,421,579 CO, District 07 60,683,470 Connecticut 369,909,160 CT, District 01 54,692,560 CT, District 02 92,912,386 CT, District 03 102,273,357 CT, District 04 53,509,033 CT, District 05 66,521,824 District of Columbia 113,189,484 DC, District 01 113,189,484 Delaware 100,337,361 DE, District 01 100,337,361 Florida 2,222,099,725 FL, District 01 57,396,256 FL, District 02 98,001,730 FL, District 03 147,318,607 FL, District 04 44,414,869 FL, District 05 142,750,828 FL, District 06 85,287,139 FL, District 07 203,493,956 FL, District 08 44,748,522 FL, District 09 33,685,541 FL, District 10 108,647,581 FL, District 11 11,329,648 FL, District 12 46,261,430 FL, District 13 82,262,212 FL, District 14 195,408,038 FL, District 15 28,962,354 FL, District 16 29,544,204 FL, District 17 8,357,837 FL, District 18 33,620,030 FL, District 19 73,555,062 FL, District 20 80,434,353 FL, District 21 78,749,310 FL, District 22 184,855,931 FL, District 23 27,674,984 American Rescue Plan Higher Education Allocations by State A1 and A4 allocations on 5/11/2020 State/Congressional District Sum of Total Allocation FL, District 24 203,919,109 FL, District 25 15,180,433 FL, District 26 130,112,420 FL, District 27 26,127,341 Federated States of Micronesia 11,778,105 Not applicable 11,778,105 Georgia 1,193,437,690 GA, District 01 72,454,300 GA, District 02 121,853,276 GA, District 03 64,942,030 GA, District 04 10,465,075 GA, District 05 269,577,707 GA, District 06 6,692,557 GA, District 07 65,394,807 GA, District 08 85,830,407 GA, District 09 87,712,488 GA, District 10 101,069,327 GA, District 11 107,936,284 GA, District 12 129,806,286 GA, District 14 69,703,146 Guam 18,303,906 GU, District 01 18,303,906 Hawaii 98,041,758 HI, District 01 68,348,720 HI, District 02 29,693,038 Iowa 364,872,819 IA, District 01 105,563,928 IA, District 02 89,341,152 IA, District 03 63,652,467 IA, District 04 106,315,272 Idaho 205,191,113 ID, District 01 62,219,164 ID, District 02 142,971,949 Illinois 1,281,478,906 IL, District 01 46,996,624 IL, District 02 52,505,208 IL, District 03 69,914,805 IL, District 04 11,508,263 IL, District 05 74,124,896 IL, District 06 85,694,108 IL, District 07 230,137,852 American Rescue Plan Higher Education Allocations by State A1 and A4 allocations on 5/11/2020 State/Congressional District Sum of Total Allocation IL, District 08 26,925,996 IL, District 09 68,086,060 IL, District 10 42,205,725 IL, District 11 40,625,232 IL, District 12 64,476,812 IL, District 13 215,874,480 IL, District 14 23,087,415 IL, District 15 51,355,010 IL, District 16 73,614,433 IL, District 17 44,069,443 IL, District 18 60,276,544 Indiana 701,067,502 IN, District 01 38,205,848 IN, District 02 43,931,351 IN, District 03 49,186,715 IN, District 04 73,991,220 IN, District 05 53,199,542 IN, District 06 49,422,047 IN, District 07 238,619,162 IN, District 08 75,740,320 IN, District 09 78,771,297 Kansas 331,912,950 KS, District 01 111,219,451 KS, District 02 112,404,469 KS, District 03 39,032,049 KS, District 04 69,256,981 Kentucky 456,988,250 KY, District 01 62,652,944 KY, District 02 72,646,105 KY, District 03 76,472,113 KY, District 04 51,001,243 KY, District 05 72,836,764 KY, District 06 121,379,081 Louisiana 539,049,877 LA, District 01 119,987,217 LA, District 02 82,763,365 LA, District 03 89,249,582 LA, District 04 58,845,516 LA, District 05 87,551,794 LA, District 06 100,652,403 Massachusetts 826,184,170 American Rescue Plan Higher Education Allocations by State A1 and A4 allocations on 5/11/2020 State/Congressional District Sum of Total Allocation MA, District 01 91,142,579 MA, District 02 127,848,507 MA, District 03 63,083,737 MA, District 04 70,289,669 MA, District 05 74,600,847 MA, District 06 64,646,616 MA, District 07 202,148,685 MA, District 08 104,950,820 MA, District 09 27,472,710 Maryland 549,525,881 MD, District 01 53,057,321 MD, District 02 94,422,636 MD, District 03 19,185,853 MD, District 04 73,429,242 MD, District 05 91,262,802 MD, District 06 38,475,554 MD, District 07 122,853,082 MD, District 08 56,839,391 Maine 122,113,670 ME, District 01 54,011,193 ME, District 02 68,102,477 Marshall Islands 6,497,877 Not applicable 6,497,877 Michigan 1,034,831,124 MI, District 01 61,882,114 MI, District 02 68,327,743 MI, District 03 66,418,467 MI, District 04 126,448,753 MI, District 05 57,617,211 MI, District 06 81,587,575 MI, District 07 37,632,587 MI, District 08 108,692,235 MI, District 09 37,344,556 MI, District 10 6,675,820 MI, District 11 94,302,153 MI, District 12 183,044,377 MI, District 13 70,378,351 MI, District 14 34,479,182 Minnesota 548,183,973 MN, District 01 80,282,701 MN, District 02 20,346,461 American Rescue Plan Higher Education Allocations by State A1 and A4 allocations on 5/11/2020 State/Congressional District Sum of Total Allocation MN, District 03 57,298,537 MN, District 04 104,855,697 MN, District 05 111,407,550 MN, District 06 50,129,676 MN, District 07 68,965,191 MN, District 08 54,898,160 Missouri 630,403,742 MO, District 01 74,525,867 MO, District 02 71,590,545 MO, District 03 41,567,239 MO, District 04 112,785,994 MO, District 05 75,944,917 MO, District 06 59,515,946 MO, District 07 129,958,302 MO, District 08 64,514,932 Northern Mariana Islands 5,685,480 MP, District 01 5,685,480 Mississippi 425,419,369 MS, District 01 95,883,409 MS, District 02 141,079,354 MS, District 03 90,797,078 MS, District 04 97,659,528 Montana 93,550,564 MT, District 01 93,550,564 North Carolina 1,109,198,760 NC, District 01 132,372,444 NC, District 02 66,438,591 NC, District 03 56,289,610 NC, District 04 114,047,229 NC, District 05 107,575,158 NC, District 06 73,268,288 NC, District 07 76,796,428 NC, District 08 55,650,088 NC, District 09 50,555,524 NC, District 10 67,156,827 NC, District 11 57,307,618 NC, District 12 120,401,984 NC, District 13 131,338,971 North Dakota 75,899,296 ND, District 01 75,899,296 Nebraska 208,815,068 American Rescue Plan Higher Education Allocations by State A1 and A4 allocations on 5/11/2020 State/Congressional District Sum of Total Allocation NE, District 01 86,205,458 NE, District 02 74,825,836 NE, District 03 47,783,774 New Hampshire 163,736,762 NH, District 01 105,510,976 NH, District 02 58,225,786 New Jersey 906,504,452 NJ, District 01 86,427,601 NJ, District 02 44,446,988 NJ, District 03 35,126,434 NJ, District 04 49,196,540 NJ, District 05 78,451,640 NJ, District 06 190,297,645 NJ, District 07 39,933,143 NJ, District 08 8,820,972 NJ, District 09 23,659,174 NJ, District 10 182,433,534 NJ, District 11 114,817,993 NJ, District 12 52,892,788 New Mexico 210,709,472 NM, District 01 93,428,036 NM, District 02 65,456,057 NM, District 03 51,825,379 Nevada 203,746,473 NV, District 01 128,134,050 NV, District 02 62,734,081 NV, District 03 12,206,410 NV, District 04 671,932 New York 2,621,516,996
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Municipal Energy Planning and Energy Efficiency
    Municipal Energy Planning and Energy Efficiency Jenny Nilsson, Linköping University Anders Mårtensson, Linköping University ABSTRACT Swedish law requires local authorities to have a municipal energy plan. Each municipal government is required to prepare and maintain a plan for the supply, distribution, and use of energy. Whether the municipal energy plans have contributed to or preferably controlled the development of local energy systems is unclear. In the research project “Strategic Environmental Assessment of Local Energy Systems,” financed by the Swedish National Energy Administration, the municipal energy plan as a tool for controlling energy use and the efficiency of the local energy system is studied. In an introductory study, twelve municipal energy plans for the county of Östergötland in southern Sweden have been analyzed. This paper presents and discusses results and conclusions regarding municipal strategies for energy efficiency based on the introductory study. Introduction Energy Efficiency and Swedish Municipalities Opportunities for improving the efficiency of Swedish energy systems have been emphasized in several reports such as a recent study made for the Swedish government (SOU 2001). Although work for effective energy use has been carried out in Sweden for 30 years, the calculated remaining potential for energy savings is still high. However, there have been changes in the energy system. For example, industry has slightly increased the total energy use, but their use of oil has been reduced by two-thirds since 1970. Meanwhile, the production in the industry has increased by almost 50%. This means that energy efficiency in the industry is much higher today than in the 1970s (Table 1).
    [Show full text]
  • Initial Stages of Federal Litigation: Overview
    Initial Stages of Federal Litigation: Overview MARCELLUS MCRAE AND ROXANNA IRAN, GIBSON DUNN & CRUTCHER LLP WITH HOLLY B. BIONDO AND ELIZABETH RICHARDSON-ROYER, WITH PRACTICAL LAW LITIGATION A Practice Note explaining the initial steps of a For more information on commencing a lawsuit in federal court, including initial considerations and drafting the case initiating civil lawsuit in US district courts and the major documents, see Practice Notes, Commencing a Federal Lawsuit: procedural and practical considerations counsel Initial Considerations (http://us.practicallaw.com/3-504-0061) and Commencing a Federal Lawsuit: Drafting the Complaint (http:// face during a lawsuit's early stages. Specifically, us.practicallaw.com/5-506-8600); see also Standard Document, this Note explains how to begin a lawsuit, Complaint (Federal) (http://us.practicallaw.com/9-507-9951). respond to a complaint, prepare to defend a The plaintiff must include with the complaint: lawsuit and comply with discovery obligations The $400 filing fee. early in the litigation. Two copies of a corporate disclosure statement, if required (FRCP 7.1). A civil cover sheet, if required by the court's local rules. This Note explains the initial steps of a civil lawsuit in US district For more information on filing procedures in federal court, see courts (the trial courts of the federal court system) and the major Practice Note, Commencing a Federal Lawsuit: Filing and Serving the procedural and practical considerations counsel face during a Complaint (http://us.practicallaw.com/9-506-3484). lawsuit's early stages. It covers the steps from filing a complaint through the initial disclosures litigants must make in connection with SERVICE OF PROCESS discovery.
    [Show full text]
  • Town District and Precinct Boundaries Town of Coventry, Rhode Island
    µ Scituate Cranston N G L P a l l e C e b o n r a lv R e v in P s i a i a Foster e S c i n Ma i R e n n x Exn t h St w d Rd W rke R ope Furnace E Cla r H t d o e Rd a rk c Cla R s a C r e Highland Ave S e e d c y t a w t t n W S er C r Ch C Pott W u F ase o t Hope Furnace Rd e Rd o h t h p d i o t Te i H e rr s C ac R e t P Av l e t e e d i t n O S G A L a e a u n s k i rd tu D R rr e m r d a n n t Mi S 115 S H ll S S R is tate t t id ex H g A Al t t wy e u J S ¬ S « d 11 u A o t r h R bo r C a rc 5 d h a d i n s opl r e B J H L t n P Rebecca St C ow n e D e a rd n A r F r n ve L d L r o k n a Black n s Waln R y ut Dr e n l a v e R l k A e d s n a l l l d C i o R h a ap n c r H lin D r E in r C L R A e d D tt e T m d K r y o R g yon D l e n Can e l id s P H K ill Rd l r o M r H rbs i l S d Ba r e d n t u S a n R ty m t t H T rm o R o Fa fo m t k oo t O r l d S br d g w t l d do i y i a S o m R Me a t k n P o O P H n e S L w o a io t s h n W e e k r n t a e R t o ter i g t s e ma l a M L S s n d H d e ill R s i M n le b V d G i r il i l e R e ill St c a H P L a d S R u G u r R a L B e R 06 03 d g 06P 03 r r a d h e t o u t o r n i i w D n d H S n d g o d r e e S l R Maple Valley Rd k D l i o D t w e N r Hillside Ave k Vin r s e St R i m Rd Yeaton St d F Pine Acres ornbea c Blvd H a M St a 0608 Fones C 0608 M a a r Is t n d S y F H S T i L o a n t a ow e a r i d d n Far ld ur n n n Sp R m d b d g e W d ger s e n R bur R e a c 14 m d l y R Ha t a e t o R D l C r Hw t n w S Rd te n Ct n M r t n a e a l Pierso St s li e rybrook Ln R o t e
    [Show full text]
  • Capital City Mill District Area Plan
    1136 Washington Street, Columbia, SC 29201 • Phone: 803-545-3222 The Capital City Mill District Area Plan The purpose of the Capital City Mill District Area Plan is to create a plan that will establish a community vision for the future development of the study area. The plan will provide recommendations and implementation strategies to achieve that vision. The Capital City Mill District area is located in an area experiencing significant change and development pressures from a resurgent City Center and a growing university. It is located between an industrial area to the South and the Central Business District to the North. To the West are a stone quarry and the Congaree River and to the East is the University of South Carolina. The area contains a diversity of uses from historic mill village neighborhoods and their respective textile mills (Granby, Olympia, and Whaley), to student oriented housing and a variety of lower density commercial and light industrial businesses. A proposal to purchase and redevelop the Capital City Ballpark underscored the need for a plan for the South Assembly Street corridor given its strategic importance as a major gateway into Columbia. Concurrently, the adjacent neighborhoods have been struggling with issues of transportation, parking, traffic, land use incompatibility, and flooding. The boundaries of the study, shown on the below map, include land in incorporated City of Columbia and unincorporated Richland County, and the jurisdictions resolved to work together to facilitate a plan to address the issues of the corridor and adjacent neighborhoods. City of Columbia and Richland County staff will be working with a project team headed by the Boudreaux Group and members of the community to develop this plan.
    [Show full text]
  • Sweden © Oecd 1997 403 Managing Across Levels Of
    SWEDEN MANAGING ACROSS LEVELS OF GOVERNMENT SWEDEN 1. Institutions and authority 1.1 Structures Sweden is a parliamentary democracy. The Parliament has until recently been elected for a three-year term. From 1994 the term is four years. The Parliament is elected directly and representation is strictly proportional. This promotes a multi-party system. Direct and proportional elections are also held for county councils, municipalities and parishes. Sweden has four constitutional laws, and one of these, the Instrument of Government provides constitutional protection for regional and local authorities. Chapter 1, section 7 reads: “There are in Sweden primary units of local government (municipalities) and county councils. The right of decision in municipalities and county councils is exercised by elected assemblies. The municipalities and county councils may levy tax for the performance of their duties.” Description of levels The ministries in Sweden are relatively small. State agencies and boards (around 300) handle most of the State responsibilities and administration. Some State agencies only work at the national level. Others can have regional and local branches. At the regional level, the central administration is represented by 24 counties. Around 250 000 persons are employed by the State including defence, and some State companies (railroads, post, airports). Sweden is divided into county councils (23), municipalities (288) and parishes (2 500). The counties are primarily a central government administrative division at the regional level. The parishes are local units of the State church administration. Approximately 734 000 persons are employed by municipalities, 303 000 persons are employed by county councils and 25 000 persons are employed by the church.
    [Show full text]
  • A Toolkit for Implementation
    Working with Individuals, Families and Communities to Improve Maternal and Newborn Health A Toolkit for Implementation Module 1: An Overview of Implementation at National, Province and District Levels Working with Individuals, Families and Communities to Improve Maternal and Newborn Health: A Toolkit for Implementation Module 1: An Overview of Implementation at National, Province and District Levels Working with individuals, families and communities to improve maternal and newborn health: a toolkit for implementation Contents: Module 1: An overview of implementation at national, province and district levels; Module 2: Facilitator’s guide to the orientation workshop on the IFC framework; Module 3: Participatory community assessment in maternal and newborn health; Module 4: Training guide for facilitators of the participatory community assessment in maternal and newborn health; Module 5: Finalizing, monitoring and evaluating the IFC action plan. ISBN 978-92-4-150852-0 © World Health Organization 2017 Some rights reserved. This work is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 IGO licence (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 IGO; https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/igo). Under the terms of this licence, you may copy, redistribute and adapt the work for non-commercial purposes, provided the work is appropriately cited, as indicated below. In any use of this work, there should be no suggestion that WHO endorses any specific organization, products or services. The use of the WHO logo is not permitted. If you adapt the work, then you must license your work under the same or equivalent Creative Commons licence. If you create a translation of this work, you should add the following disclaimer along with the suggested citation: “This translation was not created by the World Health Organization (WHO).
    [Show full text]
  • Developing Sustainable Cities in Sweden
    DEVELOPING SUSTAINABLE CITIES IN SWEDEN ABOUT THE BOOKLET This booklet has been developed within the Sida-funded ITP-programme: »Towards Sustainable Development and Local Democracy through the SymbioCity Approach« through the Swedish Association of Local Authorities and Regions (SALAR ), SKL International and the Swedish International Centre for Democracy (ICLD ). The purpose of the booklet is to introduce the reader to Sweden and Swedish experiences in the field of sustainable urban development, with special emphasis on regional and local government levels. Starting with a brief historical exposition of the development of the Swedish welfare state and introducing democracy and national government in Sweden of today, the main focus of the booklet is on sustainable planning from a local governance perspective. The booklet also presents practical examples and case studies from different municipalities in Sweden. These examples are often unique, and show the broad spectrum of approaches and innovative solutions being applied across the country. EDITORIAL NOTES MANUSCRIPT Gunnar Andersson, Bengt Carlson, Sixten Larsson, Ordbildarna AB GRAPHIC DESIGN AND ILLUSTRATIONS Viera Larsson, Ordbidarna AB ENGLISH EDITING John Roux, Ordbildarna AB EDITORIAL SUPPORT Anki Dellnäs, ICLD, and Paul Dixelius, Klas Groth, Lena Nilsson, SKL International PHOTOS WHEN NOT STATED Gunnar Andersson, Bengt Carlsson, Sixten Larsson, Viera Larsson COVER PHOTOS Anders Berg, Vattenfall image bank, Sixten Larsson, SKL © Copyright for the final product is shared by ICLD and SKL International, 2011 CONTACT INFORMATION ICLD, Visby, Sweden WEBSITE www.icld.se E-MAIL [email protected] PHONE +46 498 29 91 80 SKL International, Stockholm, Sweden WEBSITE www.sklinternational.se E-MAIL [email protected] PHONE +46 8 452 70 00 ISBN 978-91-633-9773-8 CONTENTS 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Erstwhile Enclaves in India
    i Erstwhile enclaves in India: A post-LBA analysis Written by: Prachi Lohia Reviewed and Edited by: Anjuman Ara Begum and Marte Hellema, FORUM ASIA First Edition: 10 December 2019 Published by FORUM-ASIA Kathmandu Office c/o INSEC, Syuchatar, Kalanki Kathmandu, Nepal E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.forum-asia.org /FORUMASIA /Forum_Asia /ForumAsiaVideo Phone: +977 1 5218770 Fax: +977 1 5218251 Copyleft © Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA) 2019: This report is written for the benefit of human rights defenders and civil society organisations, and may be quoted from and copied so long as the source and authors are acknowledged. In association with: Banglar Manabadhikar Suraksha Mancha (MASUM) Balaji Palace (Fourth floor), 40/A Barabagan Lane Shibtala, Serampore, Hooghly, Pin-712203 E-mail: [email protected] Website: www.masum.org.in Phone: +91-33-26220843 Cover Photo: Abhijit Sengupta Cover Design: Sujoy Singh Roy Printed at: "A Four 'S' Art", 64 Mullickpara, Serampore, Hooghly - 712203 ii Erstwhile enclaves in India: A post-LBA analysis Written by Prachi Lohia iii Acknowledgements Banglar Manabadhikar Suraksha Mancha (MASUM) has been working for the cause of erstwhile enclave dwellers since 2013, before the Land Boundary Agreement was implemented. We firmly believe that the narrative of the lives in the enclaves is one of disenfranchisement and injustice, but also of ground breaking resilience. We are grateful to the people of the enclaves for speaking to us about their struggles and their sincere cooperation. The publication of this report has been facilitated by the Asian Forum for Human Rights and Development (FORUM-ASIA).
    [Show full text]
  • District Breakdown by State/Province
    DISTRICT BREAKDOWN BY STATE/PROVINCE: DIVISION I District 1 (red): CT, MA, ME, NH, NY, RI, VT District 2 (blue): DC, DE, KY, MD, NJ, PA, WV District 3 (green): NC, TN, VA District 4 (yellow): AL, FL, GA, PR, SC District 5 (orange): IL, IN, MI, OH District 6 (brown): AR, IA, LA, MN, MO, MS, ND, SD, WI District 7 (purple): CO, ID, KS, MT, NE, NM, OK, TX, WY District 8 (gray): AK, AZ, CA, HI, NV, OR, UT, WA, Canada DISTRICT BREAKDOWN BY STATE/PROVINCE: DIVISION II updated 7/2013 For all sports other than football, Division II districts are broken down by conference. District 1 (East): Central Atlantic (Bloomfield, Caldwell, Chestnut Hill, Concordia (NY), Dominican (NY), Felician, Georgian Court (NJ), Goldey-Beacom, Holy Family, Nyack, Philadelphia University, Post, U. of the Sciences, Wilmington (DE)) East Coast (Bridgeport, Daemen, District of Columbia, Dowling, LIU-C.W. Post, Mercy, Molloy, NYIT, Queens (NY), Roberts Wesleyan, St. Thomas Aquinas) Northeast 10 (Adelphi, American International, Assumption, Bentley, Franklin Pierce, Le Moyne, Merrimack, New Haven, Pace, St. Anselm, St. Michael's, St. Rose, Southern Connecticut, Southern New Hampshire, Stonehill) District 2 (Atlantic): Central Intercollegiate (Bowie State, Chowan, Elizabeth City State, Fayetteville State, Johnson C. Smith, Lincoln (PA), Livingstone, Saint Augustine's, Shaw, Virginia State, Virginia Union, Winston-Salem State) Mountain East (Charleston, Concord, Fairmont State, Glenville State, Notre Dame (OH), Shepherd, Urbana, Virginia-Wise, West Liberty, West Virginia State,
    [Show full text]
  • 156.313 Ov-Hd; Old Village Historic District
    § 156.313 OV-HD; OLD VILLAGE HISTORIC DISTRICT. (A) Purpose of district. The intent of this district is to: (1) To protect, preserve, and enhance the architecture of the Old Village; (2) To promote the economic and general welfare of the residents of the Old Village and the Town; (3) To foster civic pride; (4) To encourage harmonious growth and development within the Old Village Historic District; and (5) To promote the use and preservation of the historic district for the education and welfare of the residents of the town. (B) Definition of boundaries. (1) The boundaries encompassed by the historic district zoning are described as: on the north beginning at the intersection of Whilden and Live Oak Streets and running generally southeasterly following the western side of Whilden Street, however, including the property on the east side of Whilden Street located at 440 Whilden Street known as St. Andrews Episcopal Church, and continuing on as Whilden Street becomes Royall Avenue to the common corporate municipal limit line of the town and the Town of Sullivan's Island, then running generally southwesterly to the town corporate municipal boundary line in Charleston Harbor, then generally northwesterly to a point at the centerline of the mouth of Shem Creek from the northern extended side property line of the residentially zoned lot at the foot of Haddrell Street, following the same generally southwesterly and extending east back to the intersection of Whilden and Live Oak Streets, including only the residentially zoned lots abutting Haddrell Street, Magwood Lane, Live Oak Street, and Church Street, saving and excepting therefrom the residential house lots on the south side of Shem Creek in the development known as The Boatyard.
    [Show full text]
  • District of Columbia, Washington
    Guide to Catholic-Related Records in the East about Native Americans See User Guide for help on interpreting entries Archdiocese of Washington new 2006 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, WASHINGTON Jesuits, Maryland Province Archives Georgetown University Special Collections E-6 [Lauinger Library, Fifth Floor] 37th and N Streets, Northwest Washington, District of Columbia 20057 Phone 202-687-7452 http://www.library.georgetown.edu/dept/speccoll/index.htm Hours: Monday-Friday, 9:00-5:30 Access: No restrictions Copying facilities: Yes History: Organized in 1814, the Jesuits Mission of the United States became the Maryland Province in 1833, which was renamed the Maryland-New York Province in 1879. Under its Missouri and Rocky Mountain Missions, the Maryland Province administered the following Indian missions and schools: Missouri Mission 1836-1841 (closed) Kickapoo Mission and School (Kickapoo), Kansas 1838-1841 (closed) St. Joseph Mission and School (Potawatomi), Council Bluffs, Iowa 1838-1847 (closed) Sugar Creek Mission and School (Potawatomi), Kansas 1847-1849 (closed) St. Francis Regis Mission (Miami), Missouri 1847-1863 (transferred to Missouri Osage Mission and School (Osage), Province) Kansas 1848-1863 (transferred to Missouri St. Mary Mission and School Province) (Potawatomi), St. Marys, Kansas Rocky Mountain Mission 1841-1854 (transferred to Turin Rocky Mountain Mission (various), Province, Italy) Idaho, Montana, Oregon, and Washington Holdings of Catholic-related records about Native Americans: Inclusive dates: 1823-1840 Volume: Less than 50 letters 1 Description: The "Maryland-New York Province Archives" includes correspondence on St. Regis Seminary, Florissant, Missouri and the evangelization of Osage Indians by Reverend Charles F. Van Quickenborne, S.J., 1820s; and on the Kickapoo Mission and School with major correspondents including Reverends Charles Van Quickenborne, S.J., Francis Dzierozynski, S.J., Theodore De Theux, S.J., John A.
    [Show full text]
  • R. HEALTH DISTRICT, CITY, GENERAL-EACH CONSTI TUTE
    OPINIONS 1195 r. HEALTH DISTRICT, CITY, GENERAL-EACH CONSTI­ TUTE PRIMARY REGISTRATION OF VITAL STATISTICS -DIRECTOR OF HEALTH MAY ORDER SUCH PRIMARY REGISTRATION DISTRICTS COMBINED-SECTIONS 1261- 16, 1261-20 G.C. - 2. HEALTH, BOARD OF-COMBINED HEALTH DISTRICT- AUTHORIZED TO APPOINT LOCAL REGISTRAR OF VITAL STATISTICS IN EACH PRIMARY REGISTRATION DISTRICT-WITHIN GEOGRAPHICAL JURISDICTION OF COMBINED HEALTH DISTRICT-PROVISO, UNLESS DIS­ TRICTS HAVE BEEN COMBINED BY ORDER OF DIREC­ TOR OF HEALTH-RECOMMENDATION OF HEALTH COMMISSIONER OF COMBINED DISTRICT. SYLLABUS: 1. A city health district and a general health district created by Section 1261-16, General Code, each constitutes a primary registration district for the registration of vital statistics, even though the health districts have combined pursuant to the provisions of Section 1261-20, General Code, unless by order of the Director of Health such primary registration districts shall be combined. 2. The board of health of a combined health district is authorized to appoint, upon the recommendation of the health commissioner of the combined district, the local registrar of vital statistics in each primary registration district within the geographical jurisdiction of the combined health district, unless such primary regis­ tration districts have been combined by order of the Director of Health. ATTORNEY GENERAL 1 47 Columbus, Ohio, February 25, 1952 Hon. William G. Batchelder, Jr., Prosecurting Attorney Medina County, Medina, Ohio Dear Sir: Your request for my opinion reads in part as follows : "On January 4, 1939, the City Council of Wadsworth, Ohio, contracted with the District Advisory Council of Medina County, in accordance with Section 1261-20, G.
    [Show full text]