VCGI E911 address points import

VCGI E911 address points import is an import of Emergency 911 addresses dataset which is maintained and made available by the Vermont Center for Geographic Information. The dataset covers the U.S. state of Vermont. The import is under way (as of March 2025).

The initial plan is to start small, and minimize risk by working on a town by town basis.

Goals

The goal is to import missing Vermont addresses.

Schedule

2021-07	assessment and manual entry of VCGI address data
2022-09	Public planning starts
2022-10	creation of street expansion script and generation of draft OSM data files
2025-03	Beginning the initial imports via JOSM for towns that use consistent postal communities for their addresses. Using account Adam Franco-Import

Import Data

Background

Data source site: https://geodata.vermont.gov/datasets/VCGI::vt-data-e911-site-locations-address-points-1/about
Data license: VCGI has stated the data has been made public with the intent for to be used in projects like OSM. An employee (J. McMullen) responded to an inquiry about data licensing on 2018-10-08, "The data that is post [sic] to the VCGI data warehouse is considered public data. There are no licensing restrictions on that data. Its posted to hopefully make every one else’s data better and at the same time making ours more accurate." Esri has evaluated the data set (listed here) and found it compatible with OSM, and includes the address points in the RapiD editor.

OSM Data Files

• Draft data import files can be downloaded here.

Import Type

Data imports will be done manually with JOSM.

Data Preparation

Data Reduction & Simplification

For the scope of this import project, we will work on towns that have less than 100 existing OSM addresses. Addresses that already exists in OSM will manually removed from the import data. As progress is made, the plan is develop a script that will help with the matching process, but ultimately every address will be manually, and individually be removed from the import data.

If a reliable script is made, an update to this project proposal will be made. The Vermont mapping and Import communities will be notified for project review and approval.

Tagging Plans

The following tags will be included for each node:

OSM tag	VCGI source
addr:city	TOWNNAME
addr:housenumber	HOUSE_NUMBER
addr:street	PD + SN + ST + SD	PD = Prefix Direction, SN = Street Name, ST = Street Type, SD = Suffix Direction
addr:postcode	ZIP
addr:state		"VT" for all nodes
ref:vcgi:esiteid	ESITEID	Unique ID from VCGI to facilitate tracking and future updates
source		"VCGI/E911_address_points"

Data Transformation

VCGI data is all uppercase and includes abbreviations in street names. A script has been written that Title Cases the elements makes the following transformations.

Street name suffixes (eg. Ave., St., Rd.) are expanded using this list.

Street names that include "U.S. Route" will be transformed from "US ROUTE #" to, "U.S. Route #".

Addresses on Vermont state routes will be transformed from "VT ROUTE #" to "Vermont Route #".

VCGI addresses that don't have a house number, or a house number of 0 are excluded.

Through testing of the script, several other custom "text cleanups" have been incorporated. As new exceptions are encountered, these transformations will continue to grow. See comments in the script for further details.

Data Merge Workflow

Team Approach

Preliminary work is being done by OSM user jared and Adam Franco with review from others on the #local-vermont Slack channel

Workflow

• Town priorities will be made. Towns with a small number of address points, and few existing OSM address nodes will be worked on first. The plan is to never commit a changeset larger than a town. Most towns are relatively small, but if the process is successful, and larger towns are going to be imported, it is possible that they would be broken up into smaller import files.
• For each town, an OSM file will be generated using E911 addresses from VCGI,
  • Address point data (primarily street name) will be transformed, and expanded to meet OSM standards.
  • This initial town OSM file will be conflated against existing OSM address data and sorted into several buckets:
    • no-match: to be reviewed and imported
    • tag-conflicts: to be reviewed and manually fixed if needed
    • review-distance: addresses that already exist in OSM, but significantly far from the E911 location
    • review-multiples: addresses that already exist in OSM multiple times. This is often the case if both a business and a building are tagged with the same address. These are not necessarily errors, but might be worth reviewing.
    • matches: to be skipped as the address already exists in OSM close to the E911 location.
• A visual check in JOSM will be made to make sure the address nodes visually look reasonable (eg. confirm the points all fall within the town boundary and are on or very near to their associated buildings).
• OSM files will be made available in advance to give others the opportunity to inspect
• Once everything looks good, the changeset will be committed through JOSM. The preliminary import user will be "jared-import".
• Progress updates will be provided here, and on the #local-vermont Slack channel so that others can keep an eye out for any issues

Conflation

As described in the workflow above, the initial town OSM file will be conflated against existing OSM address data and sorted into several buckets, each of which will be handled separately.

See also

The preliminary import plan was shared with the #local-vermont Slack channel on 2022-09-14. An update was posted at the beginning of import on 2025-03-05.

The imports-us mailing list was notified on September 17, 2022 (link).

Import process

Over 50,000 VCGI address points have already been added manually using RapiD. The data is considered highly accurate.

Initial imports will be kept small enough that data can be manually inspected to confirm that transformations were done properly. Points will be verified in JOSM to make sure alignment is accurate.

OSM files will be made available to other contributors for verification. Conflated files for review are available at https://github.com/JaredOSM/vermont-address-import/tree/main/data_files_to_import/conflated

As QA issues are found in initial small imports, this section will be expanded.

Comparing E911 addresses to existing OSM addresses in JOSM

Tutorial: Using the JOSM Conflation plugin to add 1500 addresses in 10 minutes

1. Open JOSM and install the "conflation" plugin.
2. Load the existing OSM addresses for a town in JOSM using an Overpass Query (see below)
3. Add the following JOSM filters to ensure that the conflation plugin is only matching objects with addresses or building, not random nodes on nearby features
   1. (type:node AND ("addr:street"= OR untagged)) OR highway=*
   2. natural=* OR landuse=* OR boundary=* OR waterway=*
   3. type:relation
4. Open the import project's .osm file for the town in JOSM as a new layer
5. In the Conflation plugin's dialog, select the existing (filtered) objects as the subject and the import's as the reference and have it look for matches.
6. Compare the conflicts and missing addresses, looking for issues like invalid name conversions or other problems.
   1. Go through the Conflation plugin's "Matches" first.
      1. The matches where the distance is greater than 10m are often either an outbuilding matching when the main building hasn't been mapped or horribly drawn/aligned buildings. You can add/fix these and then re-conflate or manually copy the address points into the data layer.
      2. In dense down-towns with multiple addresses per building, you may need to copy the source address node and paste it in its original position in the data layer.
   2. The Conflation plugin's "Reference Only" list may be spot checked, but can be bulk-conflated. This will result in stand-alone address points where buildings haven't been mapped yet and also on new lots where there is not yet construction. Some of these may also be address points in parks, solar fields, and other infrastructure points.
7. Upload your data layer and include the tag <code>#vt-e911-address-import</code> in the comment.

Loading existing OSM addresses for a town into JOSM

Use "Expert Mode" to download from an Overpass query, replacing "Middlebury" with the name of the town you are interested in. This will load all buildings and other features that have street or housenumber tags:

[out:xml][timeout:90];
(
  area["ISO3166-2"="US-VT"]["admin_level"="4"]["boundary"="administrative"]->.state;
  area["name"="Middlebury"]["admin_level"="8"]["boundary"="administrative"]->.city;
  nwr["addr:street"](area.city)(area.state);
  nwr["addr:housenumber"](area.city)(area.state);
  nwr["building"](area.city)(area.state);
);
(._;>;);
out meta;

Accounts used for this import

• Adam Franco-Import
• ezekielf_import

Import Progress

For each town there are 4 files in data_files_to_import/conflated:

• no-match - This is the primary file that will have the most missing addresses to import with hopefully the fewest conflicts.
• tag-conflict - This file contains addresses that were matched, but have field conflicts with the E911 data. Often these indicate misspellings in either OSM or E911. Please use judgement and discuss if needed rather than blindly trusting E911.
• review-distance - This file contains addresses that were matched, but are more than 100 meters from where they are located in E911. Review these.
• matches - This file contains addresses that were determined to exist in OSM. This can be used for review if needed, but probably doesn't need to be imported since they already exist. Conflating would add the ref:vcgi:esiteid and any missing addr:state tags to the OSM object, but is not completely necessary.
• review-multiple - This file contains addresses that were matched to multiple objects in OSM. This can be used for review if needed, but probably doesn't need to be imported since they already exist. Conflating would add the ref:vcgi:esiteid to the OSM object, but is not necessary.

There is also a final check step. For this, it may make sense to try conflating the draft file for the town from data_files_to_import/draft to identify any discrepancies.

Sign off your progress by adding {{Check yes}} --~~~~ after the item you complete

Addison County

• ADDISON => Addison -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 21:27, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
  • tag-conflict ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 04:33, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
  • review-distance ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 04:33, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
  • matches ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 04:33, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
  • review-multiple ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 04:33, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
  • Final check ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 04:33, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
• BRIDPORT => Bridport -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 21:27, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
  • tag-conflict ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 21:48, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
  • review-distance ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 21:48, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
  • matches ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 21:48, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
  • review-multiple ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 21:48, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
  • Final check ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 21:48, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
• BRISTOL => Bristol -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 21:27, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
  • tag-conflict ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 00:52, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
  • review-distance ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 19:32, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
  • matches ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 19:32, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
  • review-multiple ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 19:32, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
  • Final check ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 19:32, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
• CORNWALL => Cornwall -- Uses consistent postal community. There may be a few data-entry errors in the southwest corner.
  • no-match ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 00:36, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
  • tag-conflict ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 21:30, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
  • review-distance ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 21:30, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
  • matches ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 21:30, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
  • review-multiple ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 21:30, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
  • Final check ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 21:30, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
• FERRISBURGH => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• GOSHEN => Goshen -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• GRANVILLE => Granville -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• HANCOCK => Hancock -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• LEICESTER => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• LINCOLN => Lincoln -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 21:27, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
  • tag-conflict ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 16:51, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
  • review-distance ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 16:51, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
  • matches ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 16:51, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
  • review-multiple ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 16:51, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
  • Final check ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 16:51, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
• MIDDLEBURY => Middlebury -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 21:27, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
  • tag-conflict ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 21:27, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
  • review-distance ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 16:31, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
  • matches ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 16:31, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
  • review-multiple ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 16:31, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
  • Final check ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 16:31, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
• MONKTON => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• NEW HAVEN => New Haven -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 20:20, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
  • tag-conflict ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 20:20, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
  • review-distance ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 20:20, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
  • matches ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 20:20, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
  • review-multiple ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 20:20, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
  • Final check ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 20:20, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
• ORWELL => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• PANTON => Panton -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• RIPTON => Ripton -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 21:27, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
  • tag-conflict ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 18:21, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
  • review-distance ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 18:21, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
  • matches ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 18:21, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
  • review-multiple ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 18:21, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
  • Final check ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 18:21, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
• SALISBURY => Salisbury -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• SHOREHAM => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• STARKSBORO => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• VERGENNES => Vergennes -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WALTHAM => Waltham -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WEYBRIDGE => Weybridge -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 18:54, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
  • tag-conflict ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 18:54, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
  • review-distance ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 18:54, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
  • matches ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 18:54, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
  • review-multiple ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 18:54, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
  • Final check ✓ --Adamfranco (talk) 18:54, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
• WHITING => Whiting -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check

Bennington County

• ARLINGTON => Arlington -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• BENNINGTON => -- Mixed postal communities. North Bennington is entered as a separate TOWNNAME in E911, but there may also be an OLD BENNINGTON postal community. Needs more research.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• DORSET => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• GLASTENBURY => Glastenbury -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• LANDGROVE => Landgrove -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• MANCHESTER => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• NORTH BENNINGTON => North Bennington -- North Bennington is a village in the Town of Bennington. E911 address points that use North Bennington as the TOWNNAME should use it as the postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• PERU => Peru -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• POWNAL => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• READSBORO => Readsboro -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• RUPERT => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• SANDGATE => Sandgate -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• SEARSBURG => Searsburg -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• SHAFTSBURY => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• STAMFORD => Stamford -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• SUNDERLAND => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WINHALL => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WOODFORD => Woodford -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check

Caledonia County

• BARNET => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• BURKE => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• DANVILLE => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• GROTON => Groton -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• HARDWICK => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict*
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• KIRBY => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• LYNDON => -- Mixed postal communities. Most should use Lyndonville, but some may use East Burke or Lyndon Center.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• NEWARK => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• PEACHAM => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• RYEGATE => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• SHEFFIELD => Sheffield -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• SAINT JOHNSBURY => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• STANNARD => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• SUTTON => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WALDEN => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WATERFORD => Waterford -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WHEELOCK => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check

Chittenden County

• BUELS GORE => Buel's Gore -- Uses consistent postal community. Note addition of possesive apostrophe.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• BOLTON => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• BURLINGTON => Burlington -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• CHARLOTTE => Charlotte -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• COLCHESTER => Colchester -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• ESSEX JUNCTION CITY => Essex Junction -- Uses consistent postal community. Note removal of City from the name.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• ESSEX TOWN => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• HINESBURG => Hinesburg -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• HUNTINGTON => Huntington -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• JERICHO => Jericho -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• MILTON => Milton -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• RICHMOND => Richmond -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• SAINT GEORGE => Saint George -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• SHELBURNE => Shelburne -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• SOUTH BURLINGTON => South Burlington -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• UNDERHILL => Underhill -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WESTFORD => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WILLISTON => Williston -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WINOOSKI => Winooski -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check

Essex County

• AVERILL => Averill -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• AVERYS GORE => Avery's Gore -- Uses consistent postal community. Note addition of possesive apostrophe.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• BLOOMFIELD => Bloomfield -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• BRIGHTON => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• BRUNSWICK => Brunswick -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• CANAAN => Canaan -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• CONCORD => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• EAST HAVEN => East Haven -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• FERDINAND => Ferdinand -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• GRANBY => Granby -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• GUILDHALL => Guildhall -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• LEMINGTON => Lemington -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• LEWIS => Lewis -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• LUNENBURG => Lunenburg -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• MAIDSTONE => Maidstone -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• NORTON => Norton -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• VICTORY => Victory -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WARNERS GRANT => Warner's Grant -- Uses consistent postal community. Note addition of possesive apostrophe.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WARRENS GORE => Warren's Gore -- Uses consistent postal community. Note addition of possesive apostrophe.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check

Franklin County

• BAKERSFIELD => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• BERKSHIRE => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• ENOSBURGH => -- Mixed postal communities. Most should use Enosburg Falls as the postal community, but here are some in the Northeast corner that may use Richford.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• FAIRFAX => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• FAIRFIELD => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• FLETCHER => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• FRANKLIN => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match ✓ --Ezekielf (talk) 03:00, 13 March 2025 (UTC)
  • tag-conflict ✓ --Ezekielf (talk) 03:00, 13 March 2025 (UTC)
  • review-distance ✓ --Ezekielf (talk) 03:00, 13 March 2025 (UTC)
  • matches ✓ --Ezekielf (talk) 03:00, 13 March 2025 (UTC)
  • review-multiple ✓ --Ezekielf (talk) 03:00, 13 March 2025 (UTC)
  • Final check ✓ --Ezekielf (talk) 03:00, 13 March 2025 (UTC)
• GEORGIA => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• HIGHGATE => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match ✓ --Ezekielf (talk) 03:32, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
  • tag-conflict ✓ --Ezekielf (talk) 03:32, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
  • review-distance ✓ --Ezekielf (talk) 03:32, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
  • matches ✓ --Ezekielf (talk) 03:32, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
  • review-multiple ✓ --Ezekielf (talk) 03:32, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
  • Final check ✓ --Ezekielf (talk) 03:32, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
• MONTGOMERY => -- Mixed postal communities. Most should use Montgomery Center, but some in the northwest may use Richford.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• RICHFORD => Richford -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• SAINT ALBANS CITY => Saint Albans -- Uses consistent postal community. Note removal of City from the name.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• SAINT ALBANS TOWN => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• SHELDON => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• SWANTON => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check

Grand Isle County

• ALBURGH => Alburgh -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• GRAND ISLE => Grand Isle -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• ISLE LA MOTTE => Isle La Motte -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• NORTH HERO => North Hero -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• SOUTH HERO => South Hero -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check

Lamoille County

• BELVIDERE => Belvidere -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• CAMBRIDGE => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• EDEN => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• ELMORE => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• HYDE PARK => Hyde Park -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• JOHNSON => Johnson -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• MORRISTOWN => Morrisville -- Uses consistent postal community. Note village in postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• STOWE => Stowe -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WATERVILLE => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WOLCOTT => Wolcott -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check

Orange County

• BRADFORD => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• BRAINTREE => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• BROOKFIELD => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• CHELSEA => Chelsea -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• CORINTH => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• FAIRLEE => Fairlee -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• NEWBURY => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• ORANGE => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• RANDOLPH => Randolph -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• STRAFFORD => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• THETFORD => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• TOPSHAM => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• TUNBRIDGE => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• VERSHIRE => Vershire -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WASHINGTON => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WEST FAIRLEE => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WILLIAMSTOWN => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check

Orleans County

• ALBANY => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• BARTON => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• BROWNINGTON => -- Mixed postal community, the northwest corner may use Newport.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• CHARLESTON => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• COVENTRY => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• CRAFTSBURY => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• DERBY => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• GLOVER => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• GREENSBORO => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• HOLLAND => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• IRASBURG => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• JAY => Jay -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• LOWELL => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• MORGAN => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• NEWPORT CITY => Newport -- Uses consistent postal community. Note removal of City from the name.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• NEWPORT TOWN => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• ORLEANS => Orleans -- Orleans is a village in the Town of Barton. E911 address points that use Orleans as the TOWNNAME should use it as the postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• TROY => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WESTFIELD => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WESTMORE => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check

Rutland County

• BENSON => Benson -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• BRANDON => Brandon -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• CASTLETON => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• CHITTENDEN => Chittenden -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• CLARENDON => Clarendon -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• DANBY => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• FAIR HAVEN => Fair Haven -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• HUBBARDTON => Hubbardton -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• IRA => Ira -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• KILLINGTON => Killington -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• MENDON => Mendon -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• MIDDLETOWN SPRINGS => Middletown Springs -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• MOUNT HOLLY => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• MOUNT TABOR => Mount Tabor -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• PAWLET => Pawlet -- E911 TOWNNAME is differentiated between PAWLET & WEST PAWLET consistently.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• PITTSFIELD => Pittsfield -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• PITTSFORD => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• POULTNEY => Poultney -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• PROCTOR => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• RUTLAND CITY => Rutland -- Uses consistent postal community. Note removal of City from the name.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• RUTLAND TOWN => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• SHREWSBURY => Shrewsbury -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• SUDBURY => Sudbury -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• TINMOUTH => Tinmouth -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WALLINGFORD => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WELLS => Wells -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WEST HAVEN => West Haven -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WEST PAWLET => West Pawlet -- E911 TOWNNAME is differentiated between PAWLET & WEST PAWLET consistently.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WEST RUTLAND => West Rutland -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check

Washington County

• BARRE CITY => Barre -- Uses consistent postal community. Note removal of City from the name.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• BARRE TOWN => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• BERLIN => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• CABOT => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• CALAIS => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• DUXBURY => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• EAST MONTPELIER => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• FAYSTON => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• MARSHFIELD => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• MIDDLESEX => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• MONTPELIER => Montpelier -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• MORETOWN => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• NORTHFIELD => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• PLAINFIELD => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• ROXBURY => Roxbury -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WAITSFIELD => Waitsfield -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WARREN => Warren -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WATERBURY => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WOODBURY => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WORCESTER => Worcester -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check

Windham County

• ATHENS => Athens -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• BELLOWS FALLS => Bellows Falls -- Bellows Falls is a village in Rockingham and any E911 address points that use BELLOWS FALLS as the TOWNNAME should use it as the postal-community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• BRATTLEBORO => Brattleboro -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• BROOKLINE => Brookline -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• DOVER => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• DUMMERSTON => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• GRAFTON => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• GUILFORD => Guilford -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• HALIFAX => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• JAMAICA => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• LONDONDERRY => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• MARLBORO => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• NEWFANE => Newfane -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• PUTNEY => Putney -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• ROCKINGHAM => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• SAXTONS RIVER => Saxtons River -- Saxtons River is a village in the Town of Rockingham and the E911 addresses with this as TOWNNAME should all use it for the postal-community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• SOMERSET => Somerset -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• STRATTON => Stratton -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• TOWNSHEND => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• VERNON => Vernon -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WARDSBORO => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WESTMINSTER => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WHITINGHAM => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WILMINGTON => Wilmington -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WINDHAM => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check

Windsor County

• ANDOVER => -- Mixed postal community. There are several parcels in the north that may use Ludlow as the postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• BALTIMORE => Baltimore -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• BARNARD => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• BETHEL => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• BRIDGEWATER => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• CAVENDISH => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• CHESTER => Chester -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• HARTFORD => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• HARTLAND => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• LUDLOW => Ludlow -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• NORWICH => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• PLYMOUTH => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• POMFRET => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• READING => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• ROCHESTER => Rochester -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• ROYALTON => -- Mixed postal communities. Most use South Royalton, but some may use Bethel.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• SHARON => Sharon -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• SPRINGFIELD => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• STOCKBRIDGE => Stockbridge -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WEATHERSFIELD => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WEST WINDSOR => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WESTON => Weston -- Uses consistent postal community.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WINDSOR => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check
• WOODSTOCK => -- Mixed postal communities.
  • no-match
  • tag-conflict
  • review-distance
  • matches
  • review-multiple
  • Final check