← Guildford (all cycles) · 4 May 2023 cohort

Guildford 2023

Local elections held 4 May 2023.

21 ward races
48 seats
1 elected below the proportional quota
2.1% of seats below quota
12 unfairly awarded seats
25.0% 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 21 wards in this cycle, parties received the vote totals below. The proportional column shows what each party would have won if the 48 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
Liberal Democrats28,27730.7%2552.1%1531.3%+10
Conservative Party27,13829.5%1020.8%1531.3%-5
RES21,45623.3%714.6%1225.0%-5
Labour Party9,66610.5%36.3%510.4%-2
GGG3,5353.8%36.3%12.1%+2
Green Party1,0561.1%00.0%00.0%0
Independent8300.9%00.0%00.0%0
PEACE920.1%00.0%00.0%0
Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition710.1%00.0%00.0%0
Total92,121100.0%48100.0%48100.0%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

St Nicolas · single-seat

Marginal winner Winning candidate's share of valid ballots. 46.2% Proportional quota 50.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. −3.8 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 1 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,121

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
1Hunt, T.Liberal Democrats51846.2%−3.8 ptsElected
2Goldsborough, M.Conservative Party25222.5%
3Ackerley, N.RES25022.3%
4Pegman, C.Labour Party1019.0%

Electorate 2,245 · Back to ward index

Bellfields and Slyfield · 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. 34.7% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +1.4 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,208

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
1Creese, A.Labour Party45318.8%37.5%+4.2 ptsElected
2Walsh, J.Labour Party41917.3%34.7%+1.4 ptsElected
3Hooper, P.Conservative Party33613.9%27.8%
4Wakeling, W.Liberal Democrats32713.5%27.1%
5Miah, S.Conservative Party28811.9%23.9%
6Strugnell, N.Liberal Democrats25710.6%21.3%
7Isaacs, S.RES1727.1%14.2%
8Tillett, L.RES1636.7%13.5%

Electorate 4,405 · Back to ward index

Burpham · 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. 37.8% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +4.4 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,221

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
1Potter, G.Liberal Democrats1,06524.0%48.0%+14.6 ptsElected
2Tyson, J.Liberal Democrats83918.9%37.8%+4.4 ptsElected
3Holliday, C.Conservative Party66915.1%30.1%
4Heilbron, A.Conservative Party66815.0%30.1%
5Hyland, L.RES46510.5%20.9%
6Creese, I.Labour Party3788.5%17.0%
7Wilce, C.RES3588.1%16.1%

Electorate 4,927 · Back to ward index

Ash South · 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. 39.5% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +6.1 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,356

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
1Wyeth-Price, S.RES73727.2%54.4%+21.0 ptsElected
2Shaw, D.RES53519.7%39.5%+6.1 ptsElected
3Elburn, M.Liberal Democrats53419.7%39.4%
4Buckley, P.Liberal Democrats38714.3%28.6%
5Flynn, C.Conservative Party27410.1%20.2%
6Wrycroft, G.Conservative Party2449.0%18.0%

Electorate 4,564 · Back to ward index

Stoke · 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. 31.4% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +6.4 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,840

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
1Taylor, C.Liberal Democrats63411.5%34.5%+9.5 ptsElected
2King, V.Liberal Democrats62911.4%34.2%+9.2 ptsElected
3Hives, S.Liberal Democrats57810.5%31.4%+6.4 ptsElected
4Peters, S.Green Party5169.3%28.0%
5Kittermaster, H.Labour Party4678.5%25.4%
6Hackman, S.Labour Party4608.3%25.0%
7Creese, B.Labour Party4317.8%23.4%
8Lakhani, A.RES3406.2%18.5%
9Tough, S.Conservative Party3195.8%17.3%
10Kidd, A.RES3185.8%17.3%
11Vorley, B.Conservative Party2905.3%15.8%
12Zissman, S.Conservative Party2835.1%15.4%
13Lyon, J.RES2564.6%13.9%

Electorate 5,504 · Back to ward index

Stoughton South · 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. 41.9% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +8.6 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,557

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
1Steel, K.Liberal Democrats66021.2%42.4%+9.1 ptsElected
2Miah, M.Liberal Democrats65321.0%41.9%+8.6 ptsElected
3Rouse, A.Labour Party42013.5%27.0%
4Dokimakis, G.Labour Party40713.1%26.1%
5Dinc, A.Conservative Party2949.4%18.9%
6Hester, A.Conservative Party2437.8%15.6%
7Nash-Williams, Z.RES1906.1%12.2%
8Johnston, T.RES1555.0%10.0%
9Morris, J.PEACE923.0%5.9%

Electorate 4,309 · Back to ward index

Merrow · 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. 34.0% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +9.0 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,924

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
1Shaw, J.Liberal Democrats1,31515.0%45.0%+20.0 ptsElected
2De Contades, Y.Liberal Democrats1,09412.5%37.4%+12.4 ptsElected
3Bigmore, J.RES99511.3%34.0%+9.0 ptsElected
4Humphries, D.Conservative Party95410.9%32.6%
5Booth, D.RES8669.9%29.6%
6Lam, K.Conservative Party8619.8%29.4%
7Jay, C.Conservative Party8159.3%27.9%
8Brown, S.RES7368.4%25.2%
9Cassidy, N.Labour Party6487.4%22.2%
10Ellwood, G.Independent4875.6%16.7%

Electorate 7,150 · Back to ward index

Shalford · 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. 42.5% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +9.2 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,788

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
1Houston, C.Liberal Democrats94726.5%53.0%+19.6 ptsElected
2Williams, D.Liberal Democrats76021.3%42.5%+9.2 ptsElected
3Fremaux, J.Conservative Party47613.3%26.6%
4Watts, N.Conservative Party47013.1%26.3%
5Nagaty, R.GGG40711.4%22.8%
6Keane, N.GGG3339.3%18.6%
7Lockhart, P.Labour Party1825.1%10.2%

Electorate 4,134 · Back to ward index

Castle · 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. 35.0% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +10.0 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 3,115

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
1Redpath, M.RES1,15912.4%37.2%+12.2 ptsElected
2Mills, R.Conservative Party1,12812.1%36.2%+11.2 ptsElected
3Davis, G.Conservative Party1,09111.7%35.0%+10.0 ptsElected
4Redpath, J.RES1,07411.5%34.5%
5Perestaj De Gusmao Fiuza, A.Conservative Party96410.3%31.0%
6Doran, C.Liberal Democrats9109.7%29.2%
7Rigg, J.RES9099.7%29.2%
8Gillingham, S.Liberal Democrats7798.3%25.0%
9O'Byrne, J.Labour Party4394.7%14.1%
10Sussex, S.Labour Party3253.5%10.4%
11Smith, M.Labour Party3033.2%9.7%
12Canning, P.Independent2632.8%8.4%

Electorate 7,144 · Back to ward index

Stoughton North · 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. 44.8% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +11.4 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,528

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
1Harwood, G.Liberal Democrats75024.5%49.1%+15.8 ptsElected
2Griffiths, L.Liberal Democrats68422.4%44.8%+11.4 ptsElected
3Quelch, D.Conservative Party42313.8%27.7%
4Rowden, S.Conservative Party33611.0%22.0%
5Giess, A.Labour Party2849.3%18.6%
6Grainger, S.Labour Party2528.2%16.5%
7Moghaddam, N.RES1645.4%10.7%
8Stokoe, B.RES1625.3%10.6%

Electorate 4,269 · Back to ward index

Ash Wharf · 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. 45.8% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +12.4 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,348

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
1White, F.Liberal Democrats69925.9%51.9%+18.5 ptsElected
2Bellamy, P.Liberal Democrats61722.9%45.8%+12.4 ptsElected
3Tonks, J.Conservative Party47517.6%35.2%
4Pritchard, W.Conservative Party37914.1%28.1%
5Gallagher, M.Labour Party28010.4%20.8%
6Whitehouse, C.Green Party2469.1%18.2%

Electorate 4,866 · Back to ward index

Tillingbourne · 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. 45.9% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +12.6 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,701

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
1Newson, D.Liberal Democrats80123.5%47.1%+13.8 ptsElected
2Hughes, B.Conservative Party78123.0%45.9%+12.6 ptsElected
3Nusbacher, L.Conservative Party66719.6%39.2%
4Abbey, P.Liberal Democrats63018.5%37.0%
5Howard, L.Green Party2948.6%17.3%
6Wynn, J.Labour Party1183.5%6.9%
7Marsh, J.Labour Party1113.3%6.5%

Electorate 4,406 · Back to ward index

Effingham · single-seat

Marginal winner Winning candidate's share of valid ballots. 64.8% Proportional quota 50.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +14.8 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 1 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 804

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
1Rehorst-Smith, M.Liberal Democrats52164.8%+14.8 ptsElected
2Boder, L.Conservative Party24029.9%
3Rahman, S.Labour Party435.3%

Electorate 1,952 · Back to ward index

Worplesdon · 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. 42.3% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +17.3 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,487

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
1Brooker, H.Conservative Party1,08714.6%43.7%+18.7 ptsElected
2Akhtar, B.Conservative Party1,07114.4%43.1%+18.1 ptsElected
3Brooker, P.Conservative Party1,05214.1%42.3%+17.3 ptsElected
4McShee, B.RES85511.5%34.4%
5Ahier, B.RES7219.7%29.0%
6Pidgeon, R.RES6308.4%25.3%
7Edwards, J.Liberal Democrats4636.2%18.6%
8Merryweather, M.Liberal Democrats4626.2%18.6%
9Hawthorne, J.Labour Party3855.2%15.5%
10Trier, N.Labour Party3825.1%15.4%
11Webster, S.Liberal Democrats3524.7%14.2%

Electorate 6,525 · Back to ward index

Send and Lovelace · 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. 42.5% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +17.5 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,010

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
1Oven, P.GGG98016.3%48.8%+23.8 ptsElected
2Brooker, J.GGG96015.9%47.8%+22.8 ptsElected
3Fenwick, J.GGG85514.2%42.5%+17.5 ptsElected
4Bennett, P.RES5158.5%25.6%
5Powell, G.RES5068.4%25.2%
6Griffiths, A.Conservative Party4737.8%23.5%
7Stewart-Clark, A.Conservative Party4257.0%21.1%
8Offord, J.Conservative Party3796.3%18.9%
9Bahrani, B.Liberal Democrats1923.2%9.6%
10McMillan, D.Liberal Democrats1893.1%9.4%
11Baker, J.Labour Party1883.1%9.4%
12Woof, R.Labour Party1863.1%9.3%
13Miller Dale, M.Liberal Democrats1813.0%9.0%

Electorate 5,445 · Back to ward index

Onslow · 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. 43.0% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +18.0 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,112

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
1Goodwin, A.Liberal Democrats1,27220.1%60.2%+35.2 ptsElected
2Jones, J.Liberal Democrats93314.7%44.2%+19.2 ptsElected
3Lee, S.Liberal Democrats90814.3%43.0%+18.0 ptsElected
4Chandler, A.Conservative Party4797.6%22.7%
5Alam, S.Conservative Party4256.7%20.1%
6Moss, H.RES3956.2%18.7%
7Ekinci, A.Conservative Party3916.2%18.5%
8Heaphy, J.RES3896.1%18.4%
9Brown, L.RES3175.0%15.0%
10Rich, H.Labour Party2894.6%13.7%
11Bragger, N.Labour Party2734.3%12.9%
12Stoiana-Mois, V.Labour Party1933.0%9.1%
13Church, S.Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition360.6%1.7%
14Lewis, J.Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition350.6%1.7%

Electorate 5,037 · Back to ward index

Pilgrims · 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. 54.3% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +20.9 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,380

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
1Furniss, M.Conservative Party83530.3%60.5%+27.2 ptsElected
2Barker, S.Conservative Party74927.1%54.3%+20.9 ptsElected
3Belcher, T.RES35813.0%25.9%
4Price, J.RES2388.6%17.2%
5Mallet, S.Liberal Democrats2348.5%17.0%
6Rogers, A.Liberal Democrats1967.1%14.2%
7Hill, M.Labour Party1505.4%10.9%

Electorate 4,025 · Back to ward index

Westborough · 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. 46.1% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +21.1 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,103

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
1McShane, J.Liberal Democrats59918.1%54.3%+29.3 ptsElected
2Lowry, S.Liberal Democrats57017.2%51.7%+26.7 ptsElected
3Smith, H.Labour Party50815.4%46.1%+21.1 ptsElected
4Steel, J.Liberal Democrats45013.6%40.8%
5Selim, S.Conservative Party2908.8%26.3%
6Parsons, M.Conservative Party2638.0%23.9%
7Spooner, P.Conservative Party2497.5%22.6%
8Lal, S.RES1996.0%18.0%
9Lal, S.RES1805.4%16.3%

Electorate 5,335 · Back to ward index

Normandy and Pirbright · 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. 55.7% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +22.3 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
1Witham, K.Conservative Party93831.1%62.2%+28.8 ptsElected
2Bilbe, D.Conservative Party84027.8%55.7%+22.3 ptsElected
3Howard, K.Liberal Democrats34111.3%22.6%
4Doven, G.RES32410.7%21.5%
5Schofield, S.Labour Party2829.3%18.7%
6Redpath, G.RES2137.1%14.1%
7Hill, J.Independent802.7%5.3%

Electorate 4,545 · Back to ward index

Ash Vale · 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. 64.4% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +31.1 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,661

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
1Morson, C.Liberal Democrats1,18335.6%71.2%+37.9 ptsElected
2Lucas, R.Liberal Democrats1,07032.2%64.4%+31.1 ptsElected
3Manning, N.Conservative Party57117.2%34.4%
4Moseley, M.Conservative Party49815.0%30.0%

Electorate 5,123 · Back to ward index

Clandon and Horsley · 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. 60.7% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +35.7 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,973

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
1Young, C.RES1,94921.9%65.6%+40.6 ptsElected
2Bennett, D.RES1,85920.8%62.5%+37.5 ptsElected
3Brothwell, R.RES1,80420.2%60.7%+35.7 ptsElected
4Cullens, S.Conservative Party6677.5%22.4%
5Bond, I.Conservative Party6417.2%21.6%
6Hourahane, T.Conservative Party5956.7%20.0%
7Ross, W.Liberal Democrats4004.5%13.5%
8Roe, D.Liberal Democrats3604.0%12.1%
9O'Keeffe, L.Liberal Democrats3343.7%11.2%
10Symonds, D.Labour Party3093.5%10.4%

Electorate 7,096 · Back to ward index