| 1001 |
Oxnard · Public Watch — engagement
|
Ventura |
628 |
2,380 |
13
|
53 |
24.0% |
21.2% |
10.5 |
2.1 |
333 |
80 |
| 1002 |
Los Angeles · Public Best in class
|
Los Angeles |
55 |
283 |
13
|
131 |
9.7% |
— |
12.7 |
5.5 |
72 |
7 |
| 1003 |
La Mirada · Public Weak at the gate
|
Los Angeles |
457 |
1,726 |
13
|
67 |
18.9% |
27.6% |
10.5 |
2.2 |
306 |
58 |
| 1004 |
Anaheim · Public Compounding decline
|
Orange |
331 |
1,446 |
13
|
47 |
26.9% |
26.2% |
11.2 |
1.8 |
156 |
42 |
| 1005 |
Porterville · Public Demand problem
|
Tulare |
458 |
1,855 |
13
|
49 |
25.9% |
6.9% |
10.0 |
1.3 |
224 |
58 |
| 1006 |
Oak Hills · Public Watch — engagement
|
San Bernardino |
545 |
2,370 |
13
|
47 |
26.7% |
17.4% |
10.8 |
1.8 |
258 |
69 |
| 1007 |
Bakersfield · Public Sharp downturn
|
Kern |
542 |
2,228 |
13
|
49 |
25.7% |
20.6% |
10.0 |
1.7 |
265 |
68 |
| 1008 |
Pomona · Public Material decline
|
Los Angeles |
463 |
1,567 |
13
|
55 |
22.9% |
10.3% |
11.0 |
2.2 |
253 |
58 |
| 1009 |
Selma · Public Demand problem
|
Fresno |
391 |
1,721 |
13
|
42 |
29.5% |
24.5% |
8.4 |
2.0 |
166 |
49 |
| 1010 |
San Bernardino · Public Watch — engagement
|
San Bernardino |
632 |
2,692 |
12
|
61 |
20.5% |
20.2% |
10.1 |
1.7 |
385 |
79 |
| 1011 |
Whittier · Public Weak at the gate
|
Los Angeles |
520 |
2,261 |
12
|
72 |
17.4% |
23.1% |
9.6 |
3.5 |
373 |
65 |
| 1012 |
Richmond · Public Material decline
|
Contra Costa |
288 |
1,047 |
12
|
68 |
18.5% |
41.7% |
6.6 |
2.8 |
195 |
36 |
| 1013 |
El Cajon · Public Compounding decline
|
San Diego |
24 |
37 |
12
|
100 |
12.5% |
— |
— |
— |
24 |
3 |
| 1014 |
Hayfork · Public Strong demand
|
Trinity |
24 |
96 |
12
|
46 |
27.3% |
— |
— |
— |
11 |
3 |
| 1015 |
Lodi · Public Sharp downturn
|
San Joaquin |
480 |
1,952 |
12
|
32 |
39.5% |
11.7% |
8.8 |
2.5 |
152 |
60 |
| 1016 |
Montclair · Public Watch — engagement
|
San Bernardino |
552 |
2,515 |
12
|
48 |
25.9% |
27.5% |
11.4 |
1.6 |
266 |
69 |
| 1017 |
Portola · Public Watch — engagement
|
Plumas |
40 |
256 |
12
|
92 |
13.5% |
— |
— |
— |
37 |
5 |
| 1018 |
Pomona · Public Demand problem
|
Los Angeles |
88 |
647 |
12
|
80 |
15.7% |
27.3% |
12.5 |
— |
70 |
11 |
| 1019 |
Merced · Public Strong demand
|
Merced |
441 |
1,943 |
12
|
46 |
27.4% |
9.1% |
8.6 |
0.7 |
201 |
55 |
| 1020 |
Delano · Public Best in class
|
Kern |
345 |
1,394 |
12
|
37 |
34.1% |
13.9% |
9.6 |
2.6 |
126 |
43 |
| 1021 |
San Diego · Public Demand hides churn
|
San Diego |
402 |
1,487 |
12
|
52 |
23.8% |
32.0% |
11.2 |
2.5 |
210 |
50 |
| 1022 |
Lathrop · Public Tracking
|
San Joaquin |
346 |
1,486 |
12
|
50 |
24.9% |
20.9% |
7.2 |
— |
173 |
43 |
| 1023 |
Huntington Beach · Public Material decline
|
Orange |
298 |
1,154 |
12
|
63 |
19.6% |
24.3% |
10.1 |
2.4 |
189 |
37 |
| 1024 |
Fairfield · Public Sharp downturn
|
Solano |
419 |
1,631 |
12
|
67 |
18.5% |
30.8% |
6.7 |
0.7 |
281 |
52 |
| 1025 |
Lakewood · Public Best in class
|
Los Angeles |
372 |
1,384 |
12
|
51 |
24.1% |
23.9% |
10.8 |
0.8 |
191 |
46 |
| 1026 |
Beaumont · Public Demand hides churn
|
Riverside |
793 |
3,460 |
12
|
39 |
31.3% |
25.5% |
10.2 |
1.4 |
313 |
98 |
| 1027 |
Lompoc · Public Material decline
|
Santa Barbara |
235 |
1,060 |
12
|
43 |
28.4% |
17.2% |
8.1 |
— |
102 |
29 |
| 1028 |
Delano · Public Sharp downturn
|
Kern |
316 |
1,318 |
12
|
32 |
39.0% |
15.4% |
9.2 |
1.9 |
100 |
39 |
| 1029 |
Los Angeles · Public Watch — engagement
|
Los Angeles |
130 |
525 |
12
|
108 |
11.3% |
— |
8.5 |
— |
141 |
16 |
| 1030 |
Bakersfield · Public Weak at the gate
|
Kern |
683 |
2,575 |
12
|
47 |
26.2% |
22.6% |
9.5 |
1.2 |
320 |
84 |
| 1031 |
La Puente · Public Sharp downturn
|
Los Angeles |
171 |
747 |
12
|
54 |
22.8% |
— |
12.3 |
1.8 |
92 |
21 |
| 1032 |
Chico · Public Sharp downturn
|
Butte |
440 |
1,804 |
12
|
50 |
24.3% |
20.4% |
6.6 |
1.6 |
222 |
54 |
| 1033 |
Chico · Public
|
Butte |
440 |
1,804 |
12
|
50 |
24.3% |
20.4% |
6.6 |
1.6 |
222 |
54 |
| 1034 |
Santa Rosa · Public Compounding decline
|
Sonoma |
318 |
1,253 |
12
|
57 |
21.4% |
20.5% |
8.5 |
2.5 |
182 |
39 |
| 1035 |
Oxnard · Public Strong demand
|
Ventura |
638 |
2,452 |
12
|
47 |
26.3% |
21.8% |
9.7 |
1.7 |
297 |
78 |
| 1036 |
Lake Arrowhead · Public Sharp downturn
|
San Bernardino |
229 |
860 |
12
|
41 |
29.8% |
10.7% |
9.2 |
1.3 |
94 |
28 |
| 1037 |
Los Banos · Public Strong demand
|
Merced |
352 |
1,543 |
12
|
52 |
23.5% |
— |
8.8 |
1.4 |
183 |
43 |
| 1038 |
Monrovia · Public Weak at the gate
|
Los Angeles |
385 |
1,455 |
12
|
80 |
15.3% |
21.3% |
9.3 |
1.8 |
308 |
47 |
| 1039 |
Hughson · Public Best in class
|
Stanislaus |
189 |
859 |
12
|
42 |
28.8% |
26.1% |
6.3 |
— |
80 |
23 |
| 1040 |
Sacramento · Public Material decline
|
Sacramento |
436 |
1,652 |
12
|
61 |
20.1% |
28.3% |
7.6 |
1.8 |
264 |
53 |
| 1041 |
Ontario · Public Watch — engagement
|
San Bernardino |
535 |
2,109 |
12
|
51 |
24.0% |
26.1% |
10.5 |
0.8 |
271 |
65 |
| 1042 |
Madera · Public Best in class
|
Madera |
173 |
748 |
12
|
42 |
28.8% |
19.1% |
8.1 |
— |
73 |
21 |
| 1043 |
San Gabriel · Public Compounding decline
|
Los Angeles |
33 |
244 |
12
|
230 |
5.3% |
— |
12.1 |
— |
76 |
4 |
| 1044 |
Oxnard · Public Strong demand
|
Ventura |
722 |
2,675 |
12
|
39 |
31.1% |
21.8% |
9.1 |
2.1 |
280 |
87 |
| 1045 |
San Jose · Public Both ends slipping
|
Santa Clara |
391 |
1,564 |
12
|
45 |
26.7% |
12.8% |
7.7 |
1.3 |
176 |
47 |
| 1046 |
San Diego · Public Mid-year churn
|
San Diego |
208 |
823 |
12
|
65 |
18.4% |
12.0% |
9.1 |
1.4 |
136 |
25 |
| 1047 |
Los Angeles · Public Watch — engagement
|
Los Angeles |
50 |
207 |
12
|
192 |
6.2% |
— |
6.0 |
— |
96 |
6 |
| 1048 |
Apple Valley · Public Watch — engagement
|
San Bernardino |
400 |
1,791 |
12
|
44 |
27.0% |
27.1% |
8.2 |
1.8 |
178 |
48 |
| 1049 |
Tracy · Public Sharp downturn
|
San Joaquin |
125 |
436 |
12
|
87 |
13.8% |
20.0% |
5.6 |
— |
109 |
15 |
| 1050 |
Hacienda Heights · Public Sharp downturn
|
Los Angeles |
359 |
1,592 |
12
|
54 |
22.1% |
23.3% |
10.3 |
0.8 |
195 |
43 |
| 1051 |
Lakewood · Public Material decline
|
Los Angeles |
611 |
2,305 |
12
|
67 |
17.9% |
19.2% |
9.7 |
1.6 |
407 |
73 |
| 1052 |
Arleta · Public Material decline
|
Los Angeles |
252 |
1,038 |
12
|
45 |
26.3% |
13.3% |
8.7 |
1.2 |
114 |
30 |
| 1053 |
Calexico · Public Sharp downturn
|
Imperial |
707 |
2,746 |
12
|
41 |
28.8% |
21.4% |
10.2 |
1.6 |
292 |
84 |
| 1054 |
Hanford · Public Best in class
|
Kings |
261 |
1,183 |
12
|
39 |
30.1% |
12.9% |
8.1 |
— |
103 |
31 |
| 1055 |
Chowchilla · Public Weak at the gate
|
Madera |
236 |
1,017 |
12
|
34 |
34.6% |
— |
8.9 |
1.7 |
81 |
28 |
| 1056 |
Fresno · Public Material decline
|
Fresno |
557 |
2,485 |
12
|
46 |
25.5% |
24.2% |
8.8 |
1.4 |
259 |
66 |
| 1057 |
Sebastopol · Public Best in class
|
Sonoma |
347 |
1,473 |
12
|
60 |
19.8% |
19.5% |
6.9 |
0.9 |
207 |
41 |
| 1058 |
Paramount · Public Material decline
|
Los Angeles |
890 |
3,400 |
12
|
60 |
19.7% |
29.5% |
10.1 |
2.1 |
534 |
105 |
| 1059 |
Wilmington · Public Watch — engagement
|
Los Angeles |
603 |
2,422 |
12
|
59 |
20.0% |
23.9% |
10.6 |
1.5 |
355 |
71 |
| 1060 |
Holtville · Public Strong demand
|
Imperial |
119 |
516 |
12
|
53 |
22.2% |
— |
7.6 |
— |
63 |
14 |
| 1061 |
Riverbank · Public Best in class
|
Stanislaus |
153 |
744 |
12
|
35 |
34.0% |
16.7% |
5.2 |
— |
53 |
18 |
| 1062 |
North Hollywood · Private
|
Los Angeles |
51 |
271 |
12
|
47 |
25.0% |
— |
11.8 |
5.9 |
24 |
6 |
| 1063 |
Los Angeles · Public
|
Los Angeles |
51 |
409 |
12
|
90 |
13.0% |
50.0% |
11.8 |
5.9 |
46 |
6 |
| 1064 |
San Jose · Public Both ends slipping
|
Santa Clara |
340 |
1,363 |
12
|
44 |
26.5% |
22.5% |
7.1 |
2.6 |
151 |
40 |
| 1065 |
Riverside · Public Best in class
|
Riverside |
588 |
2,399 |
12
|
49 |
24.0% |
24.6% |
10.4 |
1.7 |
287 |
69 |
| 1066 |
Brawley · Public Strong demand
|
Imperial |
393 |
1,863 |
12
|
32 |
36.8% |
23.9% |
10.2 |
1.0 |
125 |
46 |
| 1067 |
Modesto · Public Demand hides churn
|
Stanislaus |
488 |
2,083 |
12
|
42 |
28.1% |
28.1% |
7.6 |
1.6 |
203 |
57 |
| 1068 |
Firebaugh · Public Weak at the gate
|
Fresno |
163 |
673 |
12
|
48 |
24.4% |
42.1% |
7.4 |
— |
78 |
19 |
| 1069 |
Menifee · Public Material decline
|
Riverside |
549 |
2,487 |
12
|
40 |
28.8% |
40.6% |
10.9 |
1.5 |
222 |
64 |
| 1070 |
Arvin · Public Best in class
|
Kern |
627 |
2,653 |
12
|
39 |
30.0% |
16.4% |
8.4 |
1.6 |
243 |
73 |
| 1071 |
San Jacinto · Public Both ends slipping
|
Riverside |
524 |
2,388 |
12
|
44 |
26.4% |
31.1% |
10.9 |
1.9 |
231 |
61 |
| 1072 |
Soledad · Public Material decline
|
Monterey |
387 |
1,546 |
12
|
43 |
26.8% |
26.7% |
7.5 |
1.3 |
168 |
45 |
| 1073 |
Orange · Public Demand problem
|
Orange |
439 |
1,795 |
12
|
57 |
20.2% |
35.3% |
8.9 |
1.4 |
252 |
51 |
| 1074 |
Modesto · Public Holding share
|
Stanislaus |
413 |
1,609 |
12
|
39 |
29.6% |
27.1% |
8.0 |
0.7 |
162 |
48 |
| 1075 |
Salinas · Public Strong demand
|
Monterey |
526 |
2,106 |
12
|
48 |
24.0% |
14.8% |
7.8 |
2.1 |
254 |
61 |
| 1076 |
Riverside · Public Tracking
|
Riverside |
449 |
1,920 |
12
|
42 |
27.5% |
19.2% |
10.0 |
1.6 |
189 |
52 |
| 1077 |
Greenfield · Public Strong demand
|
Monterey |
285 |
1,274 |
12
|
56 |
20.8% |
12.1% |
8.4 |
— |
159 |
33 |
| 1078 |
Yuba City · Public Both ends slipping
|
Sutter |
415 |
1,678 |
12
|
39 |
29.6% |
29.2% |
6.8 |
1.7 |
162 |
48 |
| 1079 |
Davis · Public Both ends slipping
|
Yolo |
26 |
124 |
12
|
19 |
60.0% |
— |
11.5 |
11.5 |
5 |
3 |
| 1080 |
Redwood City · Public Compounding decline
|
San Mateo |
52 |
224 |
12
|
40 |
28.6% |
— |
— |
— |
21 |
6 |
| 1081 |
Albany · Private
|
Alameda |
52 |
160 |
12
|
108 |
10.7% |
— |
5.8 |
— |
56 |
6 |
| 1082 |
Indio · Public Sharp downturn
|
Riverside |
417 |
1,650 |
12
|
32 |
36.1% |
31.2% |
9.6 |
0.7 |
133 |
48 |
| 1083 |
Bakersfield · Public Both ends slipping
|
Kern |
469 |
2,107 |
12
|
60 |
19.1% |
22.2% |
8.7 |
1.3 |
282 |
54 |
| 1084 |
Lompoc · Public Strong demand
|
Santa Barbara |
409 |
1,593 |
11
|
45 |
25.7% |
12.8% |
9.1 |
2.0 |
183 |
47 |
| 1085 |
Lower Lake · Public Watch — engagement
|
Lake |
174 |
966 |
11
|
34 |
33.9% |
20.0% |
5.8 |
— |
59 |
20 |
| 1086 |
San Rafael · Public Strong demand
|
Marin |
367 |
1,332 |
11
|
74 |
15.4% |
38.1% |
7.9 |
3.3 |
273 |
42 |
| 1087 |
Ventura · Public Demand hides churn
|
Ventura |
70 |
221 |
11
|
89 |
12.9% |
— |
4.3 |
— |
62 |
8 |
| 1088 |
El Segundo · Public Sharp downturn
|
Los Angeles |
132 |
536 |
11
|
87 |
13.0% |
— |
7.6 |
— |
115 |
15 |
| 1089 |
Los Angeles · Public Demand hides churn
|
Los Angeles |
44 |
265 |
11
|
127 |
8.9% |
— |
11.4 |
— |
56 |
5 |
| 1090 |
Bishop · Public Strong demand
|
Inyo |
141 |
608 |
11
|
39 |
29.1% |
18.8% |
8.5 |
— |
55 |
16 |
| 1091 |
Anaheim · Public Compounding decline
|
Orange |
592 |
2,326 |
11
|
56 |
20.2% |
23.9% |
10.1 |
1.0 |
331 |
67 |
| 1092 |
Redlands · Public Sharp downturn
|
San Bernardino |
433 |
1,845 |
11
|
49 |
22.9% |
26.5% |
10.4 |
1.6 |
214 |
49 |
| 1093 |
Dinuba · Public Best in class
|
Tulare |
434 |
2,115 |
11
|
35 |
32.5% |
6.1% |
6.9 |
0.7 |
151 |
49 |
| 1094 |
Concord · Public Compounding decline
|
Contra Costa |
275 |
1,137 |
11
|
43 |
26.5% |
45.2% |
7.3 |
2.9 |
117 |
31 |
| 1095 |
Spring Valley · Public Demand hides churn
|
San Diego |
417 |
1,539 |
11
|
51 |
22.0% |
21.3% |
9.8 |
2.4 |
214 |
47 |
| 1096 |
Sacramento · Public Demand hides churn
|
Sacramento |
321 |
1,417 |
11
|
55 |
20.2% |
27.8% |
4.7 |
— |
178 |
36 |
| 1097 |
Colton · Public Material decline
|
San Bernardino |
448 |
1,729 |
11
|
55 |
20.3% |
16.0% |
9.4 |
1.1 |
246 |
50 |
| 1098 |
Ceres · Public Strong demand
|
Stanislaus |
512 |
2,317 |
11
|
43 |
26.1% |
24.6% |
8.0 |
1.8 |
218 |
57 |
| 1099 |
Oakley · Public Demand problem
|
Contra Costa |
602 |
2,460 |
11
|
44 |
25.5% |
37.3% |
7.0 |
1.5 |
263 |
67 |
| 1100 |
Fresno · Public Compounding decline
|
Fresno |
342 |
1,867 |
11
|
33 |
33.9% |
7.9% |
8.5 |
2.0 |
112 |
38 |