← Epsom & Ewell (all cycles) · 4 May 2023 cohort
Epsom & Ewell 2023
Local elections held 4 May 2023.
Each race compares the marginal winner's share of valid ballots to the proportional quota — the share they'd need under any common proportional method. How the numbers are derived →
If votes were counted by party
Across the 14 wards in this cycle, parties received the vote totals below. The proportional column shows what each party would have won if the 35 seats had been shared out in proportion to votes received (how, with caveats). The Δ column is the actual seat count minus the proportional seat count — positive numbers are parties First-Past-the-Post over-represented; negative are parties it under-represented.
| Party | Votes | Vote % | Seats won | % of seats | Proportional seats | Proportional % | Δ |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RES | 20,181 | 41.2% | 24 | 68.6% | 15 | 42.9% | +9 |
| Conservative Party | 9,863 | 20.1% | 2 | 5.7% | 7 | 20.0% | -5 |
| Liberal Democrats | 8,208 | 16.7% | 4 | 11.4% | 6 | 17.1% | -2 |
| Labour Party | 7,416 | 15.1% | 3 | 8.6% | 5 | 14.3% | -2 |
| Green Party | 1,725 | 3.5% | 0 | 0.0% | 1 | 2.9% | -1 |
| EC RES | 1,617 | 3.3% | 2 | 5.7% | 1 | 2.9% | +1 |
| Total | 49,010 | 100.0% | 35 | 100.0% | 35 | 100.0% | 0 |
Vote share vs seats won
The top bar is each party's share of votes cast in this council. Below, one square per seat, coloured by the party that won it — first the actual First-Past-the-Post result, then what a proportional method would have produced from the same vote totals. Divergence between the bar and the actual grid is the indictment of the method.
Council composition: what this election replaced
The 2023 cycle was an all-out election — every seat was contested. The two opencouncildata snapshots below show the council immediately after the 2023 election (current) and on the eve of it (2022), so you can see what the result replaced.
Wards in this council
Sorted with the largest gap below the quota first. Click any ward to jump to its full result.
- Stamford · 2 seats · won at 28.2% · −5.2 pts below quota
- Town · 3 seats · won at 39.5% · above quota
- Horton · 2 seats · won at 49.9% · above quota
- West Ewell · 3 seats · won at 41.9% · above quota
- Ruxley · 2 seats · won at 50.8% · above quota
- Woodcote and Langley Vale · 3 seats · won at 45.7% · above quota
- Ewell Village · 2 seats · won at 57.0% · above quota
- Nonsuch · 3 seats · won at 49.2% · above quota
- College · 3 seats · won at 49.6% · above quota
- Stoneleigh · 2 seats · won at 64.6% · above quota
- Court · 3 seats · won at 56.5% · above quota
- Auriol · 2 seats · won at 68.7% · above quota
- Ewell Court · 2 seats · won at 70.1% · above quota
- Cuddington · 3 seats · won at 64.3% · above quota
Race results
Stamford · 2-seat (bloc vote)
Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~2× smaller. 28.2% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. −5.2 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,531
This is a 2-seat ward under bloc vote — each voter could cast up to 2 votes, so summing candidate votes overcounts voters by ~2×. We show share of votes (matches the council's published figure) and share of voters (est.) (raw share × 2, the figure comparable to the proportional quota). Why two columns →
| Rank | Candidate | Party | Votes | Share of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes. | Share of voters (est.) Estimated share of voters who supported this candidate, comparable across single- and multi-seat wards. Each voter could cast up to 2 votes, so we approximate ballots as total votes ÷ 2. This is the figure compared against the proportional quota. | Below quota Each elected candidate's share of valid ballots minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = won the seat below the quota; positive = cleared it. | Elected |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Kelly, A. | Liberal Democrats | 439 | 14.3% | 28.7% | −4.7 pts | Elected |
| 2 | Bridger, S. | RES | 431 | 14.1% | 28.2% | −5.2 pts | Elected |
| 3 | Buxton, D. | Liberal Democrats | 395 | 12.9% | 25.8% | — | |
| 4 | Olney, M. | RES | 389 | 12.7% | 25.4% | — | |
| 5 | Pontin, S. | Conservative Party | 355 | 11.6% | 23.2% | — | |
| 6 | Persand, A. | Conservative Party | 329 | 10.7% | 21.5% | — | |
| 7 | Bailey, A. | Green Party | 283 | 9.2% | 18.5% | — | |
| 8 | Landles, K. | Labour Party | 251 | 8.2% | 16.4% | — | |
| 9 | Chinn, R. | Labour Party | 190 | 6.2% | 12.4% | — |
Town · 3-seat (bloc vote)
Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~3× smaller. 39.5% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +14.5 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,408
This is a 3-seat ward under bloc vote — each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so summing candidate votes overcounts voters by ~3×. We show share of votes (matches the council's published figure) and share of voters (est.) (raw share × 3, the figure comparable to the proportional quota). Why two columns →
| Rank | Candidate | Party | Votes | Share of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes. | Share of voters (est.) Estimated share of voters who supported this candidate, comparable across single- and multi-seat wards. Each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so we approximate ballots as total votes ÷ 3. This is the figure compared against the proportional quota. | Below quota Each elected candidate's share of valid ballots minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = won the seat below the quota; positive = cleared it. | Elected |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Dallen, N. | RES | 622 | 14.7% | 44.2% | +19.2 pts | Elected |
| 2 | King, R. | RES | 568 | 13.5% | 40.4% | +15.4 pts | Elected |
| 3 | Abdulin, A. | RES | 556 | 13.2% | 39.5% | +14.5 pts | Elected |
| 4 | Gosling, J. | Labour Party | 504 | 11.9% | 35.8% | — | |
| 5 | Kenyon, S. | Labour Party | 501 | 11.9% | 35.6% | — | |
| 6 | Grunwald, Y. | Green Party | 258 | 6.1% | 18.3% | — | |
| 7 | Miles, G. | Liberal Democrats | 240 | 5.7% | 17.0% | — | |
| 8 | Fullilove, D. | Conservative Party | 213 | 5.0% | 15.1% | — | |
| 9 | O'Sullivan, J. | Conservative Party | 204 | 4.8% | 14.5% | — | |
| 10 | Whitworth, S. | Liberal Democrats | 202 | 4.8% | 14.3% | — | |
| 11 | Pavey, P. | Liberal Democrats | 182 | 4.3% | 12.9% | — | |
| 12 | Persand, M. | Conservative Party | 173 | 4.1% | 12.3% | — |
Horton · 2-seat (bloc vote)
Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~2× smaller. 49.9% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +16.5 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,424
This is a 2-seat ward under bloc vote — each voter could cast up to 2 votes, so summing candidate votes overcounts voters by ~2×. We show share of votes (matches the council's published figure) and share of voters (est.) (raw share × 2, the figure comparable to the proportional quota). Why two columns →
| Rank | Candidate | Party | Votes | Share of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes. | Share of voters (est.) Estimated share of voters who supported this candidate, comparable across single- and multi-seat wards. Each voter could cast up to 2 votes, so we approximate ballots as total votes ÷ 2. This is the figure compared against the proportional quota. | Below quota Each elected candidate's share of valid ballots minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = won the seat below the quota; positive = cleared it. | Elected |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Muir, B. | Conservative Party | 737 | 25.9% | 51.8% | +18.4 pts | Elected |
| 2 | Persand, K. | Conservative Party | 710 | 24.9% | 49.9% | +16.5 pts | Elected |
| 3 | Godson, R. | Labour Party | 357 | 12.5% | 25.1% | — | |
| 4 | Todd, M. | Labour Party | 339 | 11.9% | 23.8% | — | |
| 5 | Kington, E. | RES | 258 | 9.1% | 18.1% | — | |
| 6 | Lanwa, H. | RES | 191 | 6.7% | 13.4% | — | |
| 7 | McLauchlan, P. | Liberal Democrats | 130 | 4.6% | 9.1% | — | |
| 8 | Vagg, P. | Liberal Democrats | 126 | 4.4% | 8.8% | — |
West Ewell · 3-seat (bloc vote)
Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~3× smaller. 41.9% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +16.9 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,398
This is a 3-seat ward under bloc vote — each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so summing candidate votes overcounts voters by ~3×. We show share of votes (matches the council's published figure) and share of voters (est.) (raw share × 3, the figure comparable to the proportional quota). Why two columns →
| Rank | Candidate | Party | Votes | Share of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes. | Share of voters (est.) Estimated share of voters who supported this candidate, comparable across single- and multi-seat wards. Each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so we approximate ballots as total votes ÷ 3. This is the figure compared against the proportional quota. | Below quota Each elected candidate's share of valid ballots minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = won the seat below the quota; positive = cleared it. | Elected |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | McIntyre, L. | RES | 682 | 16.3% | 48.8% | +23.8 pts | Elected |
| 2 | Williamson, A. | RES | 629 | 15.0% | 45.0% | +20.0 pts | Elected |
| 3 | Reynolds, H. | RES | 586 | 14.0% | 41.9% | +16.9 pts | Elected |
| 4 | Anderson, J. | Labour Party | 417 | 9.9% | 29.8% | — | |
| 5 | Campion, P. | Conservative Party | 367 | 8.7% | 26.2% | — | |
| 6 | O'Sullivan, K. | Conservative Party | 285 | 6.8% | 20.4% | — | |
| 7 | Foster, T. | Green Party | 272 | 6.5% | 19.5% | — | |
| 8 | Casey, A. | Liberal Democrats | 264 | 6.3% | 18.9% | — | |
| 9 | Chmiel, L. | Liberal Democrats | 259 | 6.2% | 18.5% | — | |
| 10 | Huq, N. | Conservative Party | 240 | 5.7% | 17.2% | — | |
| 11 | Haghir, L. | Liberal Democrats | 194 | 4.6% | 13.9% | — |
Ruxley · 2-seat (bloc vote)
Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~2× smaller. 50.8% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +17.4 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 776
This is a 2-seat ward under bloc vote — each voter could cast up to 2 votes, so summing candidate votes overcounts voters by ~2×. We show share of votes (matches the council's published figure) and share of voters (est.) (raw share × 2, the figure comparable to the proportional quota). Why two columns →
| Rank | Candidate | Party | Votes | Share of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes. | Share of voters (est.) Estimated share of voters who supported this candidate, comparable across single- and multi-seat wards. Each voter could cast up to 2 votes, so we approximate ballots as total votes ÷ 2. This is the figure compared against the proportional quota. | Below quota Each elected candidate's share of valid ballots minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = won the seat below the quota; positive = cleared it. | Elected |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Coley, A. | RES | 396 | 25.5% | 51.0% | +17.7 pts | Elected |
| 2 | Mason, J. | RES | 394 | 25.4% | 50.8% | +17.4 pts | Elected |
| 3 | Adnitt, R. | Labour Party | 172 | 11.1% | 22.2% | — | |
| 4 | Carver-Hill, C. | Labour Party | 166 | 10.7% | 21.4% | — | |
| 5 | Collins, D. | Conservative Party | 144 | 9.3% | 18.6% | — | |
| 6 | Alawo, J. | Conservative Party | 131 | 8.4% | 16.9% | — | |
| 7 | Kidd, D. | Green Party | 85 | 5.5% | 11.0% | — | |
| 8 | Morrison, M. | Liberal Democrats | 64 | 4.1% | 8.2% | — |
Woodcote and Langley Vale · 3-seat (bloc vote)
Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~3× smaller. 45.7% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +20.7 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,611
This is a 3-seat ward under bloc vote — each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so summing candidate votes overcounts voters by ~3×. We show share of votes (matches the council's published figure) and share of voters (est.) (raw share × 3, the figure comparable to the proportional quota). Why two columns →
| Rank | Candidate | Party | Votes | Share of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes. | Share of voters (est.) Estimated share of voters who supported this candidate, comparable across single- and multi-seat wards. Each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so we approximate ballots as total votes ÷ 3. This is the figure compared against the proportional quota. | Below quota Each elected candidate's share of valid ballots minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = won the seat below the quota; positive = cleared it. | Elected |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Frost, L. | RES | 891 | 18.4% | 55.3% | +30.3 pts | Elected |
| 2 | McCormick, S. | RES | 796 | 16.5% | 49.4% | +24.4 pts | Elected |
| 3 | Froud, B. | RES | 737 | 15.2% | 45.7% | +20.7 pts | Elected |
| 4 | Ware, E. | Conservative Party | 369 | 7.6% | 22.9% | — | |
| 5 | Peer, F. | Conservative Party | 352 | 7.3% | 21.8% | — | |
| 6 | Strausser, H. | Conservative Party | 338 | 7.0% | 21.0% | — | |
| 7 | Parkinson, J. | Green Party | 319 | 6.6% | 19.8% | — | |
| 8 | Bloom, A. | Labour Party | 272 | 5.6% | 16.9% | — | |
| 9 | Martyr, E. | Liberal Democrats | 225 | 4.7% | 14.0% | — | |
| 10 | Martyr, D. | Liberal Democrats | 185 | 3.8% | 11.5% | — | |
| 11 | Payne, J. | Liberal Democrats | 176 | 3.6% | 10.9% | — | |
| 12 | Westbrook, M. | Labour Party | 174 | 3.6% | 10.8% | — |
Ewell Village · 2-seat (bloc vote)
Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~2× smaller. 57.0% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +23.7 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 991
This is a 2-seat ward under bloc vote — each voter could cast up to 2 votes, so summing candidate votes overcounts voters by ~2×. We show share of votes (matches the council's published figure) and share of voters (est.) (raw share × 2, the figure comparable to the proportional quota). Why two columns →
| Rank | Candidate | Party | Votes | Share of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes. | Share of voters (est.) Estimated share of voters who supported this candidate, comparable across single- and multi-seat wards. Each voter could cast up to 2 votes, so we approximate ballots as total votes ÷ 2. This is the figure compared against the proportional quota. | Below quota Each elected candidate's share of valid ballots minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = won the seat below the quota; positive = cleared it. | Elected |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Cleveland, C. | RES | 588 | 29.7% | 59.3% | +26.0 pts | Elected |
| 2 | Woodbridge, C. | RES | 565 | 28.5% | 57.0% | +23.7 pts | Elected |
| 3 | Hatfield, S. | Labour Party | 189 | 9.5% | 19.1% | — | |
| 4 | Lee, D. | Green Party | 152 | 7.7% | 15.3% | — | |
| 5 | Cook, A. | Conservative Party | 151 | 7.6% | 15.2% | — | |
| 6 | Kimber, K. | Liberal Democrats | 123 | 6.2% | 12.4% | — | |
| 7 | Rapier, G. | Conservative Party | 119 | 6.0% | 12.0% | — | |
| 8 | Kubicek, A. | Liberal Democrats | 95 | 4.8% | 9.6% | — |
Nonsuch · 3-seat (bloc vote)
Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~3× smaller. 49.2% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +24.2 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,687
This is a 3-seat ward under bloc vote — each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so summing candidate votes overcounts voters by ~3×. We show share of votes (matches the council's published figure) and share of voters (est.) (raw share × 3, the figure comparable to the proportional quota). Why two columns →
| Rank | Candidate | Party | Votes | Share of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes. | Share of voters (est.) Estimated share of voters who supported this candidate, comparable across single- and multi-seat wards. Each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so we approximate ballots as total votes ÷ 3. This is the figure compared against the proportional quota. | Below quota Each elected candidate's share of valid ballots minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = won the seat below the quota; positive = cleared it. | Elected |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Howells, C. | RES | 962 | 19.0% | 57.0% | +32.0 pts | Elected |
| 2 | Leach, R. | RES | 875 | 17.3% | 51.9% | +26.9 pts | Elected |
| 3 | Goldman, S. | RES | 829 | 16.4% | 49.2% | +24.2 pts | Elected |
| 4 | Uppal, A. | Conservative Party | 411 | 8.1% | 24.4% | — | |
| 5 | Liu, S. | Conservative Party | 391 | 7.7% | 23.2% | — | |
| 6 | Abrahams, J. | Conservative Party | 379 | 7.5% | 22.5% | — | |
| 7 | Baker, J. | Green Party | 356 | 7.0% | 21.1% | — | |
| 8 | Hadfield, G. | Labour Party | 198 | 3.9% | 11.7% | — | |
| 9 | Stead, S. | Liberal Democrats | 183 | 3.6% | 10.8% | — | |
| 10 | Ward, I. | Labour Party | 174 | 3.4% | 10.3% | — | |
| 11 | Dixon, S. | Liberal Democrats | 170 | 3.4% | 10.1% | — | |
| 12 | Peters, G. | Liberal Democrats | 132 | 2.6% | 7.8% | — |
College · 3-seat (bloc vote)
Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~3× smaller. 49.6% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +24.6 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,260
This is a 3-seat ward under bloc vote — each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so summing candidate votes overcounts voters by ~3×. We show share of votes (matches the council's published figure) and share of voters (est.) (raw share × 3, the figure comparable to the proportional quota). Why two columns →
| Rank | Candidate | Party | Votes | Share of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes. | Share of voters (est.) Estimated share of voters who supported this candidate, comparable across single- and multi-seat wards. Each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so we approximate ballots as total votes ÷ 3. This is the figure compared against the proportional quota. | Below quota Each elected candidate's share of valid ballots minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = won the seat below the quota; positive = cleared it. | Elected |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Morris, J. | Liberal Democrats | 1,225 | 18.1% | 54.2% | +29.2 pts | Elected |
| 2 | Lawrence, J. | Liberal Democrats | 1,142 | 16.8% | 50.5% | +25.5 pts | Elected |
| 3 | Freeman, J. | Liberal Democrats | 1,121 | 16.5% | 49.6% | +24.6 pts | Elected |
| 4 | Brooks, K. | RES | 573 | 8.5% | 25.4% | — | |
| 5 | Muller, C. | Conservative Party | 551 | 8.1% | 24.4% | — | |
| 6 | Collin, N. | RES | 508 | 7.5% | 22.5% | — | |
| 7 | Ware, M. | Conservative Party | 468 | 6.9% | 20.7% | — | |
| 8 | Peer, T. | Conservative Party | 445 | 6.6% | 19.7% | — | |
| 9 | Day, C. | RES | 421 | 6.2% | 18.6% | — | |
| 10 | Lewis, H. | Labour Party | 327 | 4.8% | 14.5% | — |
Stoneleigh · 2-seat (bloc vote)
Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~2× smaller. 64.6% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +31.3 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,114
This is a 2-seat ward under bloc vote — each voter could cast up to 2 votes, so summing candidate votes overcounts voters by ~2×. We show share of votes (matches the council's published figure) and share of voters (est.) (raw share × 2, the figure comparable to the proportional quota). Why two columns →
| Rank | Candidate | Party | Votes | Share of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes. | Share of voters (est.) Estimated share of voters who supported this candidate, comparable across single- and multi-seat wards. Each voter could cast up to 2 votes, so we approximate ballots as total votes ÷ 2. This is the figure compared against the proportional quota. | Below quota Each elected candidate's share of valid ballots minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = won the seat below the quota; positive = cleared it. | Elected |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Dalton, H. | RES | 853 | 38.3% | 76.6% | +43.2 pts | Elected |
| 2 | Froud, A. | RES | 720 | 32.3% | 64.6% | +31.3 pts | Elected |
| 3 | Angus, C. | Conservative Party | 178 | 8.0% | 16.0% | — | |
| 4 | Muller, T. | Conservative Party | 131 | 5.9% | 11.8% | — | |
| 5 | Hoyle, S. | Labour Party | 120 | 5.4% | 10.8% | — | |
| 6 | Raymond, R. | Labour Party | 83 | 3.7% | 7.5% | — | |
| 7 | Fisher, B. | Liberal Democrats | 75 | 3.4% | 6.7% | — | |
| 8 | Ahmed, R. | Liberal Democrats | 68 | 3.1% | 6.1% | — |
Court · 3-seat (bloc vote)
Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~3× smaller. 56.5% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +31.5 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,204
This is a 3-seat ward under bloc vote — each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so summing candidate votes overcounts voters by ~3×. We show share of votes (matches the council's published figure) and share of voters (est.) (raw share × 3, the figure comparable to the proportional quota). Why two columns →
| Rank | Candidate | Party | Votes | Share of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes. | Share of voters (est.) Estimated share of voters who supported this candidate, comparable across single- and multi-seat wards. Each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so we approximate ballots as total votes ÷ 3. This is the figure compared against the proportional quota. | Below quota Each elected candidate's share of valid ballots minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = won the seat below the quota; positive = cleared it. | Elected |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Ames, C. | Labour Party | 735 | 20.3% | 61.0% | +36.0 pts | Elected |
| 2 | Chinn, K. | Labour Party | 692 | 19.2% | 57.5% | +32.5 pts | Elected |
| 3 | Geleit, R. | Labour Party | 680 | 18.8% | 56.5% | +31.5 pts | Elected |
| 4 | Beams, C. | RES | 293 | 8.1% | 24.3% | — | |
| 5 | Sullivan, M. | RES | 284 | 7.9% | 23.6% | — | |
| 6 | Triggs, D. | RES | 219 | 6.1% | 18.2% | — | |
| 7 | Smyth, S. | Conservative Party | 187 | 5.2% | 15.5% | — | |
| 8 | Lyndsay, D. | Conservative Party | 187 | 5.2% | 15.5% | — | |
| 9 | Seidel, K. | Liberal Democrats | 170 | 4.7% | 14.1% | — | |
| 10 | Pope, G. | Conservative Party | 165 | 4.6% | 13.7% | — |
Auriol · 2-seat (bloc vote)
Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~2× smaller. 68.7% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +35.3 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,004
This is a 2-seat ward under bloc vote — each voter could cast up to 2 votes, so summing candidate votes overcounts voters by ~2×. We show share of votes (matches the council's published figure) and share of voters (est.) (raw share × 2, the figure comparable to the proportional quota). Why two columns →
| Rank | Candidate | Party | Votes | Share of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes. | Share of voters (est.) Estimated share of voters who supported this candidate, comparable across single- and multi-seat wards. Each voter could cast up to 2 votes, so we approximate ballots as total votes ÷ 2. This is the figure compared against the proportional quota. | Below quota Each elected candidate's share of valid ballots minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = won the seat below the quota; positive = cleared it. | Elected |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Beckett, J. | RES | 773 | 38.5% | 77.0% | +43.7 pts | Elected |
| 2 | Talbot, D. | RES | 689 | 34.3% | 68.7% | +35.3 pts | Elected |
| 3 | Abrahams, H. | Conservative Party | 138 | 6.9% | 13.8% | — | |
| 4 | Heather, C. | Conservative Party | 107 | 5.3% | 10.7% | — | |
| 5 | Bigwood, G. | Labour Party | 98 | 4.9% | 9.8% | — | |
| 6 | Lucas, J. | Labour Party | 94 | 4.7% | 9.4% | — | |
| 7 | Wilbs, D. | Liberal Democrats | 56 | 2.8% | 5.6% | — | |
| 8 | Schuster, O. | Liberal Democrats | 52 | 2.6% | 5.2% | — |
Ewell Court · 2-seat (bloc vote)
Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~2× smaller. 70.1% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +36.8 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,142
This is a 2-seat ward under bloc vote — each voter could cast up to 2 votes, so summing candidate votes overcounts voters by ~2×. We show share of votes (matches the council's published figure) and share of voters (est.) (raw share × 2, the figure comparable to the proportional quota). Why two columns →
| Rank | Candidate | Party | Votes | Share of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes. | Share of voters (est.) Estimated share of voters who supported this candidate, comparable across single- and multi-seat wards. Each voter could cast up to 2 votes, so we approximate ballots as total votes ÷ 2. This is the figure compared against the proportional quota. | Below quota Each elected candidate's share of valid ballots minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = won the seat below the quota; positive = cleared it. | Elected |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | O'Donovan, P. | EC RES | 816 | 35.7% | 71.5% | +38.1 pts | Elected |
| 2 | Watson, C. | EC RES | 801 | 35.1% | 70.1% | +36.8 pts | Elected |
| 3 | Chaloner, T. | Conservative Party | 150 | 6.6% | 13.1% | — | |
| 4 | Clement, O. | Conservative Party | 144 | 6.3% | 12.6% | — | |
| 5 | Edwards, D. | Labour Party | 127 | 5.6% | 11.1% | — | |
| 6 | Monksfield, D. | Labour Party | 117 | 5.1% | 10.2% | — | |
| 7 | Gulland, D. | Liberal Democrats | 66 | 2.9% | 5.8% | — | |
| 8 | Balog, T. | Liberal Democrats | 63 | 2.8% | 5.5% | — |
Cuddington · 3-seat (bloc vote)
Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~3× smaller. 64.3% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +39.3 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,447
This is a 3-seat ward under bloc vote — each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so summing candidate votes overcounts voters by ~3×. We show share of votes (matches the council's published figure) and share of voters (est.) (raw share × 3, the figure comparable to the proportional quota). Why two columns →
| Rank | Candidate | Party | Votes | Share of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes. | Share of voters (est.) Estimated share of voters who supported this candidate, comparable across single- and multi-seat wards. Each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so we approximate ballots as total votes ÷ 3. This is the figure compared against the proportional quota. | Below quota Each elected candidate's share of valid ballots minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = won the seat below the quota; positive = cleared it. | Elected |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Neale, P. | RES | 1,013 | 23.3% | 70.0% | +45.0 pts | Elected |
| 2 | Jones, G. | RES | 960 | 22.1% | 66.3% | +41.3 pts | Elected |
| 3 | Spickett, K. | RES | 930 | 21.4% | 64.3% | +39.3 pts | Elected |
| 4 | Barretto, C. | Labour Party | 238 | 5.5% | 16.4% | — | |
| 5 | Doran, G. | Conservative Party | 215 | 5.0% | 14.9% | — | |
| 6 | Walker, L. | Conservative Party | 201 | 4.6% | 13.9% | — | |
| 7 | Davies, K. | Labour Party | 201 | 4.6% | 13.9% | — | |
| 8 | Cole, A. | Conservative Party | 198 | 4.6% | 13.7% | — | |
| 9 | Brown, D. | Liberal Democrats | 182 | 4.2% | 12.6% | — | |
| 10 | Saini, A. | Liberal Democrats | 108 | 2.5% | 7.5% | — | |
| 11 | Saini, R. | Liberal Democrats | 96 | 2.2% | 6.6% | — |