| 1101 |
· Public Best in class
|
Shasta |
300 |
1,487 |
7
|
21 |
34.4% |
27.3% |
3.7 |
— |
64 |
22 |
| 1102 |
Hayward · Public Best in class
|
Alameda |
41 |
643 |
7
|
85 |
8.6% |
— |
7.3 |
— |
35 |
3 |
| 1103 |
Linden · Public Holding share
|
San Joaquin |
205 |
743 |
7
|
32 |
23.1% |
40.0% |
2.4 |
— |
65 |
15 |
| 1104 |
Concord · Public Both ends slipping
|
Contra Costa |
247 |
1,059 |
7
|
50 |
14.5% |
— |
4.5 |
1.6 |
124 |
18 |
| 1105 |
Victorville · Public Both ends slipping
|
San Bernardino |
481 |
2,165 |
7
|
32 |
22.6% |
31.4% |
5.4 |
— |
155 |
35 |
| 1106 |
Fresno · Public Best in class
|
Fresno |
344 |
1,438 |
7
|
47 |
15.5% |
— |
4.9 |
— |
161 |
25 |
| 1107 |
Galt · Public Sharp downturn
|
Sacramento |
207 |
959 |
7
|
29 |
24.6% |
— |
4.8 |
— |
61 |
15 |
| 1108 |
El Dorado · Public Demand problem
|
El Dorado |
249 |
1,033 |
7
|
33 |
22.2% |
— |
4.8 |
— |
81 |
18 |
| 1109 |
Manteca · Public Material decline
|
San Joaquin |
360 |
1,524 |
7
|
28 |
26.0% |
11.5% |
4.7 |
— |
100 |
26 |
| 1110 |
Sylmar · Public
|
Los Angeles |
42 |
208 |
7
|
64 |
11.1% |
— |
7.1 |
— |
27 |
3 |
| 1111 |
Exeter · Public Weak at the gate
|
Tulare |
196 |
909 |
7
|
29 |
25.0% |
21.4% |
4.6 |
— |
56 |
14 |
| 1112 |
Foresthill · Public Compounding decline
|
Placer |
42 |
190 |
7
|
45 |
15.8% |
— |
— |
— |
19 |
3 |
| 1113 |
Olivehurst · Public Compounding decline
|
Yuba |
252 |
1,254 |
7
|
20 |
36.0% |
33.3% |
4.0 |
1.2 |
50 |
18 |
| 1114 |
Orange Cove · Public Sharp downturn
|
Fresno |
155 |
635 |
7
|
18 |
39.3% |
— |
4.5 |
1.9 |
28 |
11 |
| 1115 |
Blythe · Public Weak at the gate
|
Riverside |
155 |
740 |
7
|
19 |
37.9% |
— |
4.5 |
— |
29 |
11 |
| 1116 |
Coalinga · Public Watch — engagement
|
Fresno |
299 |
1,256 |
7
|
33 |
21.4% |
— |
4.3 |
— |
98 |
21 |
| 1117 |
Waterford · Public Compounding decline
|
Stanislaus |
57 |
776 |
7
|
18 |
40.0% |
— |
— |
— |
10 |
4 |
| 1118 |
East Palo Alto · Public Compounding decline
|
San Mateo |
57 |
194 |
7
|
125 |
5.6% |
— |
— |
— |
71 |
4 |
| 1119 |
Middletown · Public Sharp downturn
|
Lake |
86 |
421 |
7
|
34 |
20.7% |
— |
3.5 |
— |
29 |
6 |
| 1120 |
Cloverdale · Public Material decline
|
Sonoma |
87 |
393 |
7
|
54 |
12.8% |
— |
— |
— |
47 |
6 |
| 1121 |
Vallejo · Public Watch — engagement
|
Solano |
58 |
186 |
7
|
107 |
6.5% |
— |
— |
— |
62 |
4 |
| 1122 |
Jackson · Public Demand problem
|
Amador |
132 |
593 |
7
|
33 |
20.4% |
— |
2.3 |
— |
44 |
9 |
| 1123 |
Elk Grove · Public Sharp downturn
|
Sacramento |
443 |
1,684 |
7
|
50 |
13.4% |
26.7% |
4.5 |
0.7 |
223 |
30 |
| 1124 |
Shafter · Public Best in class
|
Kern |
326 |
1,599 |
7
|
27 |
25.3% |
— |
4.9 |
— |
87 |
22 |
| 1125 |
· Public Compounding decline
|
San Joaquin |
478 |
2,065 |
7
|
25 |
26.7% |
34.4% |
4.2 |
0.8 |
120 |
32 |
| 1126 |
Citrus Heights · Public Demand problem
|
Sacramento |
225 |
894 |
7
|
28 |
23.8% |
26.7% |
1.8 |
— |
63 |
15 |
| 1127 |
Orange · Public Demand hides churn
|
Orange |
438 |
1,728 |
7
|
33 |
19.9% |
20.7% |
5.9 |
0.7 |
146 |
29 |
| 1128 |
Moreno Valley · Public Demand hides churn
|
Riverside |
471 |
1,924 |
7
|
43 |
15.2% |
— |
6.6 |
0.6 |
204 |
31 |
| 1129 |
Yreka · Public Demand hides churn
|
Siskiyou |
153 |
612 |
7
|
30 |
21.7% |
— |
3.9 |
— |
46 |
10 |
| 1130 |
North Hills · Private
|
Los Angeles |
92 |
745 |
7
|
100 |
6.5% |
— |
3.3 |
— |
92 |
6 |
| 1131 |
Riverdale · Public Sharp downturn
|
Fresno |
125 |
496 |
6
|
33 |
19.5% |
— |
3.2 |
— |
41 |
8 |
| 1132 |
San Diego · Private
|
San Diego |
47 |
196 |
6
|
179 |
3.6% |
— |
— |
— |
84 |
3 |
| 1133 |
Citrus Heights · Public Compounding decline
|
Sacramento |
141 |
559 |
6
|
40 |
15.8% |
— |
2.1 |
— |
57 |
9 |
| 1134 |
La Habra · Private
|
Orange |
94 |
410 |
6
|
67 |
9.5% |
— |
6.4 |
— |
63 |
6 |
| 1135 |
Sacramento · Private
|
Sacramento |
63 |
660 |
6
|
87 |
7.3% |
75.0% |
— |
— |
55 |
4 |
| 1136 |
Mount Shasta · Public Material decline
|
Siskiyou |
63 |
241 |
6
|
16 |
40.0% |
— |
6.3 |
— |
10 |
4 |
| 1137 |
Banning · Public Demand hides churn
|
Riverside |
268 |
1,145 |
6
|
30 |
21.2% |
23.5% |
6.3 |
— |
80 |
17 |
| 1138 |
Fortuna · Public Compounding decline
|
Humboldt |
177 |
826 |
6
|
29 |
21.6% |
27.3% |
3.4 |
— |
51 |
11 |
| 1139 |
Fresno · Public Sharp downturn
|
Fresno |
131 |
625 |
6
|
22 |
27.6% |
— |
3.0 |
— |
29 |
8 |
| 1140 |
Yucaipa · Public
|
San Bernardino |
641 |
2,755 |
6
|
23 |
26.0% |
25.6% |
5.0 |
— |
150 |
39 |
| 1141 |
Fairfield · Public Material decline
|
Solano |
448 |
1,844 |
6
|
31 |
19.7% |
25.9% |
3.1 |
0.9 |
137 |
27 |
| 1142 |
Visalia · Public Strong demand
|
Tulare |
455 |
2,059 |
6
|
27 |
21.8% |
29.6% |
4.0 |
— |
124 |
27 |
| 1143 |
Sutter Creek · Public Strong demand
|
Amador |
153 |
615 |
6
|
46 |
12.9% |
— |
2.6 |
— |
70 |
9 |
| 1144 |
Marysville · Public Demand problem
|
Yuba |
240 |
1,034 |
6
|
21 |
27.4% |
21.4% |
2.9 |
— |
51 |
14 |
| 1145 |
Cottonwood · Public Weak at the gate
|
Shasta |
446 |
1,857 |
6
|
43 |
13.6% |
15.4% |
5.2 |
— |
191 |
26 |
| 1146 |
Oakland · Public Demand hides churn
|
Alameda |
191 |
719 |
6
|
36 |
15.9% |
— |
3.1 |
— |
69 |
11 |
| 1147 |
Big Bear Lake · Public Sharp downturn
|
San Bernardino |
140 |
630 |
6
|
38 |
15.1% |
— |
5.7 |
— |
53 |
8 |
| 1148 |
Galt · Public Sharp downturn
|
Sacramento |
213 |
899 |
6
|
25 |
22.2% |
— |
3.8 |
— |
54 |
12 |
| 1149 |
Bakersfield · Public Demand hides churn
|
Kern |
747 |
3,069 |
6
|
19 |
29.0% |
9.5% |
4.3 |
— |
145 |
42 |
| 1150 |
Twentynine Palms · Public Watch — engagement
|
San Bernardino |
143 |
719 |
6
|
36 |
15.7% |
— |
5.6 |
— |
51 |
8 |
| 1151 |
Durham · Public Best in class
|
Butte |
72 |
320 |
6
|
24 |
23.5% |
— |
— |
— |
17 |
4 |
| 1152 |
Kelseyville · Public Weak at the gate
|
Lake |
145 |
515 |
6
|
28 |
20.0% |
— |
2.1 |
— |
40 |
8 |
| 1153 |
Gustine · Public Sharp downturn
|
Merced |
128 |
531 |
5
|
31 |
17.5% |
— |
3.1 |
— |
40 |
7 |
| 1154 |
Atwater · Public Material decline
|
Merced |
421 |
1,704 |
5
|
34 |
16.1% |
26.1% |
3.3 |
— |
143 |
23 |
| 1155 |
Bakersfield · Public Demand hides churn
|
Kern |
498 |
2,135 |
5
|
22 |
24.1% |
— |
4.4 |
— |
112 |
27 |
| 1156 |
Oakland · Public Compounding decline
|
Alameda |
74 |
273 |
5
|
78 |
6.9% |
— |
— |
— |
58 |
4 |
| 1157 |
Taft · Public Tracking
|
Kern |
262 |
1,064 |
5
|
18 |
29.8% |
— |
3.4 |
— |
47 |
14 |
| 1158 |
Tranquillity · Public Weak at the gate
|
Fresno |
94 |
370 |
5
|
72 |
7.3% |
— |
— |
— |
68 |
5 |
| 1159 |
Antioch · Public Compounding decline
|
Contra Costa |
417 |
1,812 |
5
|
33 |
16.1% |
27.3% |
3.4 |
0.7 |
137 |
22 |
| 1160 |
Hayward · Public Demand hides churn
|
Alameda |
419 |
1,511 |
5
|
21 |
25.3% |
13.6% |
3.6 |
0.7 |
87 |
22 |
| 1161 |
Santa Rosa · Public Compounding decline
|
Sonoma |
230 |
1,029 |
5
|
22 |
23.5% |
— |
2.2 |
— |
51 |
12 |
| 1162 |
· Public Both ends slipping
|
San Joaquin |
405 |
1,677 |
5
|
15 |
35.6% |
— |
2.7 |
— |
59 |
21 |
| 1163 |
El Cerrito · Public Best in class
|
Contra Costa |
78 |
554 |
5
|
117 |
4.4% |
— |
— |
— |
91 |
4 |
| 1164 |
Fresno · Public Demand hides churn
|
Fresno |
412 |
2,040 |
5
|
32 |
16.0% |
14.3% |
3.9 |
1.0 |
131 |
21 |
| 1165 |
Bakersfield · Public Demand problem
|
Kern |
516 |
2,043 |
5
|
21 |
24.3% |
— |
3.9 |
— |
107 |
26 |
| 1166 |
Nevada City · Public Compounding decline
|
Nevada |
80 |
294 |
5
|
19 |
26.7% |
— |
5.0 |
— |
15 |
4 |
| 1167 |
Oroville · Public Compounding decline
|
Butte |
242 |
872 |
5
|
19 |
26.1% |
58.3% |
2.5 |
— |
46 |
12 |
| 1168 |
Fairfield · Public Demand hides churn
|
Solano |
387 |
1,605 |
5
|
24 |
20.6% |
36.8% |
2.6 |
— |
92 |
19 |
| 1169 |
Redding · Public Best in class
|
Shasta |
270 |
1,148 |
5
|
34 |
14.0% |
53.9% |
2.2 |
— |
93 |
13 |
| 1170 |
Antioch · Public Demand hides churn
|
Contra Costa |
399 |
1,776 |
5
|
33 |
14.5% |
— |
2.8 |
0.8 |
131 |
19 |
| 1171 |
· Public Compounding decline
|
San Diego |
63 |
226 |
5
|
60 |
7.9% |
— |
4.8 |
— |
38 |
3 |
| 1172 |
Ridgecrest · Public Weak at the gate
|
Kern |
345 |
1,536 |
5
|
23 |
20.0% |
31.2% |
3.2 |
— |
80 |
16 |
| 1173 |
Thermal · Public Demand hides churn
|
Riverside |
65 |
503 |
5
|
83 |
5.6% |
— |
4.6 |
— |
54 |
3 |
| 1174 |
Grass Valley · Public Best in class
|
Nevada |
152 |
664 |
5
|
39 |
11.9% |
— |
2.6 |
— |
59 |
7 |
| 1175 |
Grass Valley · Public Best in class
|
Nevada |
350 |
1,561 |
5
|
32 |
14.4% |
— |
3.1 |
— |
111 |
16 |
| 1176 |
San Juan Bautista · Public Material decline
|
San Benito |
66 |
267 |
5
|
9 |
50.0% |
— |
— |
— |
6 |
3 |
| 1177 |
East Palo Alto · Public Demand problem
|
San Mateo |
68 |
278 |
4
|
59 |
7.5% |
— |
4.4 |
— |
40 |
3 |
| 1178 |
Temecula · Public Mid-year churn
|
Riverside |
207 |
987 |
4
|
22 |
19.6% |
— |
2.4 |
— |
46 |
9 |
| 1179 |
Seaside · Public Material decline
|
Monterey |
278 |
1,073 |
4
|
22 |
20.0% |
41.7% |
1.4 |
— |
60 |
12 |
| 1180 |
Sacramento · Public Material decline
|
Sacramento |
93 |
469 |
4
|
31 |
13.8% |
— |
— |
— |
29 |
4 |
| 1181 |
North Highlands · Public Demand hides churn
|
Sacramento |
186 |
778 |
4
|
16 |
26.7% |
50.0% |
— |
— |
30 |
8 |
| 1182 |
Loma Linda · Private
|
San Bernardino |
96 |
1,261 |
4
|
62 |
6.7% |
— |
4.2 |
— |
60 |
4 |
| 1183 |
Yucca Valley · Public Sharp downturn
|
San Bernardino |
268 |
1,168 |
4
|
17 |
23.9% |
— |
4.1 |
— |
46 |
11 |
| 1184 |
Lakeport · Public Material decline
|
Lake |
74 |
335 |
4
|
32 |
12.5% |
— |
4.0 |
— |
24 |
3 |
| 1185 |
Stockton · Public Sharp downturn
|
San Joaquin |
277 |
1,657 |
4
|
29 |
13.9% |
27.3% |
1.1 |
— |
79 |
11 |
| 1186 |
Highland · Public Compounding decline
|
San Bernardino |
101 |
528 |
4
|
37 |
10.8% |
— |
4.0 |
— |
37 |
4 |
| 1187 |
Lincoln · Public Material decline
|
Placer |
305 |
1,184 |
4
|
17 |
22.6% |
25.0% |
1.6 |
— |
53 |
12 |
| 1188 |
Barstow · Public Demand hides churn
|
San Bernardino |
363 |
1,558 |
4
|
16 |
23.7% |
— |
2.5 |
— |
59 |
14 |
| 1189 |
· Public Material decline
|
Humboldt |
286 |
1,162 |
4
|
24 |
16.2% |
— |
1.8 |
— |
68 |
11 |
| 1190 |
Eureka · Public
|
Humboldt |
286 |
1,162 |
4
|
24 |
16.2% |
— |
1.8 |
— |
68 |
11 |
| 1191 |
Mariposa · Public Material decline
|
Mariposa |
83 |
461 |
4
|
28 |
13.0% |
— |
3.6 |
— |
23 |
3 |
| 1192 |
Clarksburg · Public Compounding decline
|
Yolo |
198 |
291 |
4
|
8 |
46.7% |
42.9% |
— |
— |
15 |
7 |
| 1193 |
Denair · Public Best in class
|
Stanislaus |
87 |
306 |
3
|
16 |
21.4% |
— |
— |
— |
14 |
3 |
| 1194 |
Vallejo · Public Compounding decline
|
Solano |
273 |
1,146 |
3
|
19 |
17.0% |
33.3% |
2.2 |
— |
53 |
9 |
| 1195 |
San Jose · Public Demand hides churn
|
Santa Clara |
92 |
313 |
3
|
54 |
6.0% |
— |
3.3 |
— |
50 |
3 |
| 1196 |
San Andreas · Public Material decline
|
Calaveras |
157 |
703 |
3
|
12 |
26.3% |
— |
3.2 |
— |
19 |
5 |
| 1197 |
Parlier · Public Weak at the gate
|
Fresno |
190 |
901 |
3
|
28 |
11.1% |
— |
— |
— |
54 |
6 |
| 1198 |
Altaville · Public Tracking
|
Calaveras |
130 |
559 |
3
|
25 |
12.1% |
— |
3.1 |
— |
33 |
4 |
| 1199 |
Paradise · Public Material decline
|
Butte |
101 |
495 |
3
|
22 |
13.6% |
— |
3.0 |
— |
22 |
3 |
| 1200 |
· Public Watch — engagement
|
Kern |
376 |
1,927 |
3
|
22 |
13.2% |
— |
2.9 |
— |
83 |
11 |