← Gedling (all cycles) · 4 May 2023 cohort

Gedling 2023

Local elections held 4 May 2023.

19 ward races
41 seats
6 unfairly awarded seats
14.6% of seats unfairly awarded

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 19 wards in this cycle, parties received the vote totals below. The proportional column shows what each party would have won if the 41 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.

PartyVotesVote %Seats won% of seatsProportional seatsProportional %Δ
Labour Party36,58052.3%2868.3%2253.7%+6
Conservative Party23,65133.8%922.0%1434.1%-5
Liberal Democrats6,8239.8%49.8%49.8%0
Independent1,7782.5%00.0%12.4%-1
Green Party1,1461.6%00.0%00.0%0
Total69,978100.0%41100.0%41100.0%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.

Vote share
Actual seats
Proportional seats

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.

Current (2023)
Previous (2022)

Wards in this council

Sorted with the largest gap below the quota first. Click any ward to jump to its full result.

Race results

Dumbles · single-seat

Marginal winner Winning candidate's share of valid ballots. 55.1% Proportional quota 50.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +5.1 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 1 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,007

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes.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
1Greensmith, H.Conservative Party55555.1%+5.1 ptsElected
2Taylor, D.Labour Party27527.3%
3Smith, I.Green Party12412.3%
4O'Riordan, C.Liberal Democrats535.3%

Electorate 2,343 · Back to ward index

Cavendish · 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. 43.8% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +10.5 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,283

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 →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare 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
1Dunkin, A.Liberal Democrats60523.6%47.2%+13.8 ptsElected
2Hughes, P.Liberal Democrats56221.9%43.8%+10.5 ptsElected
3Clunie, L.Labour Party53620.9%41.8%
4Henry, D.Labour Party51820.2%40.4%
5Blandamer, P.Conservative Party1375.3%10.7%
6Osborne, C.Conservative Party1355.3%10.5%
7Gregory, G.Independent401.6%3.1%
8Gregory, K.Independent321.2%2.5%

Electorate 4,194 · Back to ward index

Colwick · single-seat

Marginal winner Winning candidate's share of valid ballots. 61.2% Proportional quota 50.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +11.2 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 1 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 694

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes.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
1Whiting, R.Labour Party42561.2%+11.2 ptsElected
2Doyle, K.Conservative Party23834.3%
3Milburn, P.Liberal Democrats314.5%

Electorate 2,083 · Back to ward index

Calverton · 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. 38.7% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +13.7 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,835

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 →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare 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
1Elliott, B.Conservative Party1,07519.5%58.6%+33.6 ptsElected
2Brown, L.Conservative Party75013.6%40.9%+15.9 ptsElected
3Walker, J.Conservative Party71112.9%38.7%+13.7 ptsElected
4Wilson, D.Labour Party61111.1%33.3%
5Smith, S.Labour Party4588.3%25.0%
6Hope, M.Independent4508.2%24.5%
7Inchboard, D.Labour Party4087.4%22.2%
8Bosworth, P.Independent3776.8%20.5%
9Bailey, J.Independent3526.4%19.2%
10Gordon, S.Independent3135.7%17.1%

Electorate 5,948 · Back to ward index

Trent Valley · 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. 50.1% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +16.8 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,060

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 →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare 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
1Adams, M.Conservative Party1,11026.9%53.9%+20.6 ptsElected
2Smith, S.Conservative Party1,03225.0%50.1%+16.8 ptsElected
3Fletcher, R.Labour Party84920.6%41.2%
4Malik, M.Labour Party80319.5%39.0%
5Fife, R.Liberal Democrats1654.0%8.0%
6Flynn, J.Liberal Democrats1613.9%7.8%

Electorate 4,712 · Back to ward index

Gedling · 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. 52.7% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +19.4 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,733

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 →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare 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
1Hollingsworth, J.Labour Party1,02229.5%59.0%+25.7 ptsElected
2Pearson, L.Labour Party91326.3%52.7%+19.4 ptsElected
3Godwin, C.Conservative Party52915.3%30.5%
4Maltby, D.Conservative Party47713.8%27.5%
5Dunkin, M.Liberal Democrats2948.5%17.0%
6O'Riordan, J.Liberal Democrats2306.6%13.3%

Electorate 4,945 · Back to ward index

Bestwood St Albans · 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. 55.2% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +21.9 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,043

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 →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare 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
1Ellis, R.Labour Party58628.1%56.2%+22.9 ptsElected
2Gibbons, D.Labour Party57627.6%55.2%+21.9 ptsElected
3Abbott, J.Conservative Party35216.9%33.7%
4Randall, K.Conservative Party32715.7%31.4%
5Vince, M.Green Party1155.5%11.0%
6Poynter, R.Liberal Democrats663.2%6.3%
7Shannon, P.Liberal Democrats643.1%6.1%

Electorate 4,109 · Back to ward index

Carlton · 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. 55.5% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +22.2 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,471

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 →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare 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
1Pope, C.Labour Party84528.7%57.5%+24.1 ptsElected
2Wilkinson, P.Labour Party81627.7%55.5%+22.2 ptsElected
3Harrison, K.Conservative Party52717.9%35.8%
4Banner, A.Conservative Party50817.3%34.5%
5Tanner, R.Green Party1204.1%8.2%
6Dewberry, G.Liberal Democrats652.2%4.4%
7Ho, J.Liberal Democrats602.0%4.1%

Electorate 4,186 · Back to ward index

Ernehale · 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. 56.1% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +22.8 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,390

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 →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare 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
1Ellis, D.Labour Party80829.1%58.1%+24.8 ptsElected
2Ellis, R.Labour Party78028.1%56.1%+22.8 ptsElected
3Clarke, G.Conservative Party42015.1%30.2%
4Walker, S.Conservative Party35612.8%25.6%
5Key, P.Independent1174.2%8.4%
6Stansfield, J.Liberal Democrats1124.0%8.1%
7Peet, D.Independent973.5%7.0%
8Barson, J.Liberal Democrats903.2%6.5%

Electorate 4,570 · Back to ward index

Phoenix · 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. 57.1% 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. 1,308

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 →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare 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
1Ellwood, A.Liberal Democrats76629.3%58.6%+25.3 ptsElected
2Towsey-Hinton, C.Liberal Democrats74628.5%57.1%+23.7 ptsElected
3Armstrong, A.Labour Party41315.8%31.6%
4Shipley, R.Labour Party38814.8%29.7%
5Bexon, A.Conservative Party1545.9%11.8%
6Maltby, T.Conservative Party1485.7%11.3%

Electorate 3,999 · Back to ward index

Plains · 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. 50.3% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +25.3 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,467

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 →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare 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
1Pope, G.Labour Party1,29117.4%52.3%+27.3 ptsElected
2Brocklebank, D.Labour Party1,27517.2%51.7%+26.7 ptsElected
3Strong, M.Labour Party1,24116.8%50.3%+25.3 ptsElected
4Seaton, K.Conservative Party1,06514.4%43.2%
5Walker, C.Conservative Party1,03414.0%41.9%
6Jayamaha, E.Conservative Party98813.3%40.0%
7Dunkin, L.Liberal Democrats1762.4%7.1%
8Beeken, M.Liberal Democrats1712.3%6.9%
9Gladwell, M.Liberal Democrats1602.2%6.5%

Electorate 6,747 · Back to ward index

Woodthorpe · 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. 62.2% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +28.9 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,943

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 →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare 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
1McCrossen, V.Labour Party1,28133.0%65.9%+32.6 ptsElected
2McCrossen, R.Labour Party1,20931.1%62.2%+28.9 ptsElected
3Pike, M.Conservative Party49012.6%25.2%
4Adams, S.Conservative Party47912.3%24.7%
5Clarke, S.Green Party1824.7%9.4%
6Patterson, R.Liberal Democrats1443.7%7.4%
7Swift, A.Liberal Democrats1002.6%5.1%

Electorate 4,354 · Back to ward index

Coppice · 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. 64.9% Proportional quota 33.3% 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 ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,509

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 →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare 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
1Paling, M.Labour Party99132.8%65.7%+32.3 ptsElected
2Wheeler, H.Labour Party97932.4%64.9%+31.5 ptsElected
3Abbott, M.Conservative Party43714.5%29.0%
4Walker, G.Conservative Party40713.5%27.0%
5Stuart, J.Green Party1294.3%8.5%
6Simons, M.Liberal Democrats752.5%5.0%

Electorate 4,533 · Back to ward index

Newstead Abbey · 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. 57.6% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +32.6 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,488

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 →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare 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
1Smith, M.Conservative Party1,49920.1%60.2%+35.2 ptsElected
2Bestwick, S.Conservative Party1,47019.7%59.1%+34.1 ptsElected
3Pickering, S.Conservative Party1,43419.2%57.6%+32.6 ptsElected
4Wright, C.Labour Party92512.4%37.2%
5Butterworth, S.Labour Party7299.8%29.3%
6Nelson, C.Labour Party7259.7%29.1%
7Bruch, P.Liberal Democrats3094.1%12.4%
8Sutherland, J.Liberal Democrats1922.6%7.7%
9Heath, J.Liberal Democrats1822.4%7.3%

Electorate 6,906 · Back to ward index

Carlton Hill · 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. 59.4% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +34.4 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,710

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 →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare 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
1Feeney, P.Labour Party1,12021.8%65.5%+40.5 ptsElected
2Creamer, J.Labour Party1,11821.8%65.4%+40.4 ptsElected
3Scroggie, A.Labour Party1,01619.8%59.4%+34.4 ptsElected
4Godwin, Y.Conservative Party4999.7%29.2%
5Greensmith, J.Conservative Party4578.9%26.7%
6Swann, S.Conservative Party4508.8%26.3%
7Conboy, J.Liberal Democrats1833.6%10.7%
8Gillam, A.Liberal Democrats1472.9%8.6%
9Hajat, N.Liberal Democrats1402.7%8.2%

Electorate 6,249 · Back to ward index

Redhill · 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. 69.1% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +35.8 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,692

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 →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare 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
1Payne, M.Labour Party1,29138.2%76.3%+43.0 ptsElected
2Fox, K.Labour Party1,16934.5%69.1%+35.8 ptsElected
3Lock, K.Conservative Party37711.1%22.3%
4Kenwood, G.Conservative Party36710.8%21.7%
5Jones, T.Liberal Democrats1273.8%7.5%
6Snodgrass, D.Liberal Democrats531.6%3.1%

Electorate 4,815 · Back to ward index

Netherfield · 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. 70.6% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +37.3 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,063

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 →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare 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
1Clarke, W.Labour Party76636.0%72.1%+38.8 ptsElected
2Hunt, A.Labour Party75035.3%70.6%+37.3 ptsElected
3Murphy, M.Conservative Party2049.6%19.2%
4Flor-Henry, M.Conservative Party1979.3%18.5%
5Baldwin, L.Green Party1426.7%13.4%
6Hajat, F.Liberal Democrats331.6%3.1%
7Hajat, E.Liberal Democrats331.6%3.1%

Electorate 4,027 · Back to ward index

Porchester · 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. 63.4% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +38.4 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,504

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 →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare 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
1Najuk, J.Labour Party1,66122.1%66.3%+41.3 ptsElected
2Welsh, M.Labour Party1,60721.4%64.2%+39.2 ptsElected
3Allan, R.Labour Party1,58721.1%63.4%+38.4 ptsElected
4Adams, L.Conservative Party6198.2%24.7%
5Smith, A.Conservative Party5967.9%23.8%
6Jenkins, T.Conservative Party5817.7%23.2%
7Penaluna, D.Green Party3344.4%13.3%
8Dawson, A.Liberal Democrats2092.8%8.3%
9Soar, H.Liberal Democrats1802.4%7.2%
10Swift, R.Liberal Democrats1391.9%5.6%

Electorate 6,367 · Back to ward index

Daybrook · 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. 78.6% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +45.3 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,140

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 →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare 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
1Barnes, S.Labour Party92340.5%81.0%+47.7 ptsElected
2Robinson-Payne, K.Labour Party89639.3%78.6%+45.3 ptsElected
3Walker, C.Conservative Party23510.3%20.6%
4Seaton, M.Conservative Party2259.9%19.7%

Electorate 4,365 · Back to ward index