← Mid Sussex (all cycles) · 4 May 2023 cohort

Mid Sussex 2023

Local elections held 4 May 2023.

27 ward races
48 seats
4 elected below the proportional quota
8.3% of seats below quota
4 unfairly awarded seats
8.3% 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 27 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 Democrats28,24836.9%2041.7%1837.5%+2
Conservative Party25,14332.9%1837.5%1633.3%+2
Green Party9,17212.0%48.3%612.5%-2
Independent7,94010.4%510.4%510.4%0
Labour Party5,8707.7%12.1%36.3%-2
OMRL1500.2%00.0%00.0%0
Total76,523100.0%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

Haywards Heath North · single-seat

Marginal winner Winning candidate's share of valid ballots. 35.7% Proportional quota 50.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. −14.3 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
1Ellis, S.Conservative Party40035.7%−14.3 ptsElected
2Mancino, E.Liberal Democrats33930.2%
3Nicholson, R.Green Party16815.0%
4Morley, D.Labour Party16714.9%
5Pitt, C.Independent474.2%

Electorate 2,791 · Back to ward index

East Grinstead Baldwins · single-seat

Marginal winner Winning candidate's share of valid ballots. 38.5% Proportional quota 50.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. −11.5 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 1 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 882

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
1Mockford, J.Independent34038.5%−11.5 ptsElected
2Evans, C.Conservative Party29233.1%
3Tarada, F.Liberal Democrats25028.3%

Electorate 2,687 · Back to ward index

Handcross and Pease Pottage · single-seat

Marginal winner Winning candidate's share of valid ballots. 44.0% Proportional quota 50.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. −6.0 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 1 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 614

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
1Prescott, E.Conservative Party27044.0%−6.0 ptsElected
2Cox, P.Liberal Democrats19932.4%
3Steggles, C.Independent14523.6%

Electorate 2,655 · Back to ward index

East Grinstead Herontye · single-seat

Marginal winner Winning candidate's share of valid ballots. 45.6% Proportional quota 50.0% 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 ÷ 1 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 940

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
1Sweatman, D.Conservative Party42945.6%−4.4 ptsElected
2Hall, S.Liberal Democrats27228.9%
3Gibson, N.Independent12613.4%
4Martin, S.Green Party11312.0%

Electorate 2,706 · Back to ward index

Ardingly, Balcombe and Turners Hill · 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. 33.9% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +0.6 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,673

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
1Edwards, J.Green Party70921.2%42.4%+9.0 ptsElected
2Marsh, G.Conservative Party56716.9%33.9%+0.6 ptsElected
3Brewin, M.Green Party56516.9%33.8%
4Forbes, B.Conservative Party51115.3%30.5%
5Smith, J.Independent39311.7%23.5%
6Jerrit, B.Liberal Democrats35810.7%21.4%
7Theobald, B.Independent2437.3%14.5%

Electorate 4,650 · Back to ward index

Haywards Heath Franklands · 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. 37.6% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +4.3 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,578

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, R.Conservative Party62019.6%39.3%+6.0 ptsElected
2Kenny, P.Labour Party59418.8%37.6%+4.3 ptsElected
3Weekes, T.Labour Party56217.8%35.6%
4Pulfer, M.Conservative Party53617.0%34.0%
5Lucraft, A.Liberal Democrats35911.4%22.8%
6Knight, S.Liberal Democrats2939.3%18.6%
7Mendes, C.Green Party1926.1%12.2%

Electorate 4,608 · Back to ward index

East Grinstead Imberhorne · 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. 37.9% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +4.5 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,400

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
1Whittaker, R.Conservative Party66623.8%47.6%+14.2 ptsElected
2Farren, L.Conservative Party53018.9%37.9%+4.5 ptsElected
3Brunsdon, H.Independent51718.5%36.9%
4Williams, P.Liberal Democrats41214.7%29.4%
5Masters, C.Green Party34212.2%24.4%
6Lomas, C.Independent33311.9%23.8%

Electorate 4,989 · Back to ward index

Cuckfield, Bolney and Ansty · 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. 37.9% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +4.5 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,864

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
1Avery, M.Conservative Party89424.0%48.0%+14.6 ptsElected
2Knight, J.Conservative Party70618.9%37.9%+4.5 ptsElected
3King, B.Liberal Democrats54014.5%29.0%
4Dykes, S.Independent41911.2%22.5%
5Holloway, J.Liberal Democrats3679.8%19.7%
6McNamara, R.Green Party3609.7%19.3%
7Foster, A.Labour Party2927.8%15.7%
8Thunderclap, B.OMRL1504.0%8.0%

Electorate 5,007 · Back to ward index

Downland Villages · single-seat

Marginal winner Winning candidate's share of valid ballots. 55.5% Proportional quota 50.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +5.5 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 1 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 921

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
1Zeidler, G.Conservative Party51155.5%+5.5 ptsElected
2Searle, N.Liberal Democrats18520.1%
3O'Hare, N.Labour Party11612.6%
4Rogers, C.Green Party10911.8%

Electorate 2,525 · Back to ward index

Haywards Heath Lucastes and Bolnore · 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. 39.7% Proportional quota 33.3% 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 ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,787

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
1Lucraft, P.Liberal Democrats71520.0%40.0%+6.7 ptsElected
2Bashar, A.Liberal Democrats71019.9%39.7%+6.4 ptsElected
3Mierre, R.Conservative Party70419.7%39.4%
4McPherson, A.Conservative Party69719.5%39.0%
5Murray, A.Green Party37510.5%21.0%
6Lashmar, N.Labour Party37210.4%20.8%

Electorate 5,241 · Back to ward index

Haywards Heath Bentswood and Heath · 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. 40.1% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +6.7 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,747

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
1Rees, A.Liberal Democrats75121.5%43.0%+9.7 ptsElected
2Platts, A.Liberal Democrats70020.0%40.1%+6.7 ptsElected
3Cromie, R.Conservative Party56016.0%32.1%
4Hillier, S.Conservative Party55215.8%31.6%
5Taplin, J.Labour Party36910.6%21.1%
6Nicholson, D.Green Party3118.9%17.8%
7Webb, B.Labour Party2517.2%14.4%

Electorate 5,644 · Back to ward index

East Grinstead Town · 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. 40.3% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +6.9 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,252

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
1Russell, J.Conservative Party53921.5%43.1%+9.7 ptsElected
2Dabell, J.Conservative Party50420.1%40.3%+6.9 ptsElected
3Barnett, S.Liberal Democrats49819.9%39.8%
4Gibbs, L.Liberal Democrats37815.1%30.2%
5Buonocore, L.Green Party2038.1%16.2%
6Mockford, N.Independent1997.9%15.9%
7Wilbraham, D.Labour Party1837.3%14.6%

Electorate 4,905 · Back to ward index

Lindfield · 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. 41.2% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +7.8 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,479

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
1Cooke, A.Liberal Democrats1,14123.0%46.0%+12.7 ptsElected
2Wood, C.Liberal Democrats1,02020.6%41.2%+7.8 ptsElected
3Edwards, J.Conservative Party90618.3%36.6%
4Lea, A.Conservative Party85517.2%34.5%
5Woolley, D.Green Party4509.1%18.2%
6Nisbett, S.Green Party3607.3%14.5%
7MacLean, I.Labour Party2254.5%9.1%

Electorate 5,329 · Back to ward index

Burgess Hill St. Andrews · 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. 42.6% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +9.3 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,562

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
1Cherry, C.Liberal Democrats80025.6%51.2%+17.9 ptsElected
2Cornish, M.Green Party66521.3%42.6%+9.3 ptsElected
3Woods, R.Independent44214.2%28.3%
4Catharine, J.Conservative Party36811.8%23.6%
5Rodway, J.Labour Party31910.2%20.4%
6Dawson, T.Conservative Party31710.2%20.3%
7Sinnatt, R.Labour Party2126.8%13.6%

Electorate 5,057 · Back to ward index

East Grinstead Ashplats · 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. 42.6% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +9.3 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,316

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
1Belsey, M.Conservative Party69626.5%52.9%+19.6 ptsElected
2Peacock, A.Conservative Party56121.3%42.6%+9.3 ptsElected
3Lane, A.Liberal Democrats31011.8%23.6%
4Langridge, A.Green Party27210.3%20.7%
5Godfrey, C.Independent27210.3%20.7%
6Britton, T.Labour Party26610.1%20.2%
7Hillwood, S.Independent2549.7%19.3%

Electorate 5,298 · Back to ward index

Haywards Heath Ashenground · 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. 43.2% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +9.9 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,639

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
1Bates, R.Liberal Democrats87326.6%53.3%+19.9 ptsElected
2Pascoe, D.Liberal Democrats70821.6%43.2%+9.9 ptsElected
3Wickremaratchi, S.Conservative Party53216.2%32.5%
4Cromie, J.Conservative Party46714.2%28.5%
5Crump, M.Labour Party37011.3%22.6%
6Kail, R.Green Party32810.0%20.0%

Electorate 5,424 · Back to ward index

Lindfield Rural and High Weald · 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. 43.5% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +10.1 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,958

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
1Brown, P.Green Party85221.8%43.5%+10.2 ptsElected
2Nunes-Carvalho, L.Conservative Party85121.7%43.5%+10.1 ptsElected
3Webster, S.Conservative Party82121.0%41.9%
4Lomax, E.Liberal Democrats56714.5%29.0%
5Cross, N.Green Party51913.3%26.5%
6Claiden, M.Labour Party3057.8%15.6%

Electorate 5,363 · Back to ward index

Burgess Hill Dunstall · 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. 44.9% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +11.5 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,386

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
1Kennedy, M.Liberal Democrats64823.4%46.8%+13.4 ptsElected
2Miah, M.Conservative Party62222.4%44.9%+11.5 ptsElected
3Parsons, G.Liberal Democrats55319.9%39.9%
4Mucklestone, C.Conservative Party52619.0%38.0%
5Davies, Y.Independent2499.0%18.0%
6Haigh, P.Labour Party1746.3%12.6%

Electorate 4,100 · Back to ward index

Copthorne and Worth · 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. 47.2% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +13.9 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,070

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
1Casella, G.Conservative Party61228.6%57.2%+23.9 ptsElected
2Phillips, C.Independent50523.6%47.2%+13.9 ptsElected
3Dorey, T.Conservative Party48122.5%45.0%
4Aston, M.Liberal Democrats32315.1%30.2%
5Smith, L.Green Party21910.2%20.5%

Electorate 4,276 · Back to ward index

Ashurst Wood and East Grinstead South · single-seat

Marginal winner Winning candidate's share of valid ballots. 64.0% Proportional quota 50.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +14.0 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 1 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 836

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
1Belsey, J.Conservative Party53564.0%+14.0 ptsElected
2Wells, P.Green Party16820.1%
3Knight, G.Liberal Democrats13315.9%

Electorate 2,053 · Back to ward index

Burgess Hill Victoria · single-seat

Marginal winner Winning candidate's share of valid ballots. 66.7% Proportional quota 50.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +16.7 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 1 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 999

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
1Chapman, P.Independent66666.7%+16.7 ptsElected
2Gregory, L.Labour Party20120.1%
3Willcock, M.Conservative Party13213.2%

Electorate 3,124 · Back to ward index

Hurstpierpoint · 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. 54.6% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +21.3 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,922

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
1Bennett, A.Liberal Democrats1,23632.2%64.3%+31.0 ptsElected
2Jackson, R.Liberal Democrats1,05027.3%54.6%+21.3 ptsElected
3Scholfield, M.Conservative Party47112.3%24.5%
4Lee, B.Conservative Party44411.6%23.1%
5Soares, G.Labour Party3288.5%17.1%
6Kelly, S.Green Party3158.2%16.4%

Electorate 4,869 · Back to ward index

Crawley Down · 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. 60.3% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +27.0 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,625

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
1Gibson, I.Independent1,08033.2%66.5%+33.1 ptsElected
2Hitchcock, J.Independent98030.2%60.3%+27.0 ptsElected
3Williams, L.Conservative Party43913.5%27.0%
4Coote, P.Conservative Party40312.4%24.8%
5Westcott, G.Green Party1885.8%11.6%
6Goldsmith, M.Liberal Democrats1594.9%9.8%

Electorate 4,653 · Back to ward index

Burgess Hill Meeds and Hammonds · 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. 63.8% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +30.5 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,639

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
1Eggleston, R.Liberal Democrats1,20836.9%73.7%+40.4 ptsElected
2Hussain, T.Liberal Democrats1,04631.9%63.8%+30.5 ptsElected
3Kelly, S.Independent40212.3%24.5%
4Catharine, C.Conservative Party33410.2%20.4%
5White, E.Conservative Party2878.8%17.5%

Electorate 4,770 · Back to ward index

Burgess Hill Franklands · 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. 65.9% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +32.5 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,681

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
1Henwood, J.Liberal Democrats1,13033.6%67.2%+33.9 ptsElected
2Eggleton, D.Liberal Democrats1,10732.9%65.9%+32.5 ptsElected
3Fussell, C.Conservative Party40412.0%24.0%
4Parker, T.Conservative Party39311.7%23.4%
5Stowe, A.Independent3289.8%19.5%

Electorate 4,213 · Back to ward index

Hassocks · 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. 58.7% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +33.7 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,895

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
1Hatton, S.Liberal Democrats2,31426.6%79.9%+54.9 ptsElected
2Berggreen, K.Liberal Democrats2,08424.0%72.0%+47.0 ptsElected
3Hobbs, C.Liberal Democrats1,69919.6%58.7%+33.7 ptsElected
4Simmons, A.Conservative Party5876.8%20.3%
5Whelan, A.Labour Party5646.5%19.5%
6Holmstrom, M.Green Party5416.2%18.7%
7Beck, P.Conservative Party4745.5%16.4%
8Horsfield, S.Conservative Party4234.9%14.6%

Electorate 6,727 · Back to ward index

Burgess Hill Leylands · 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. 68.5% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +35.1 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,188

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
1Eves, A.Green Party84835.7%71.4%+38.1 ptsElected
2Hicks, S.Liberal Democrats81334.2%68.5%+35.1 ptsElected
3Holden, C.Conservative Party38316.1%32.3%
4White, A.Conservative Party33113.9%27.9%

Electorate 3,702 · Back to ward index