← Mole Valley (all cycles) · 4 May 2023 cohort

Mole Valley 2023

Local elections held 4 May 2023.

13 ward races
39 seats
12 unfairly awarded seats
30.8% 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 13 wards in this cycle, parties received the vote totals below. The proportional column shows what each party would have won if the 39 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 Democrats38,14048.4%3076.9%2051.3%+10
Conservative Party21,70027.5%37.7%1128.2%-8
Green Party8,13010.3%00.0%410.3%-4
ASHT IND8,07510.2%615.4%410.3%+2
Labour Party1,5442.0%00.0%00.0%0
Independent1,2411.6%00.0%00.0%0
Total78,830100.0%39100.0%39100.0%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

Capel, Leigh, Newdigate and Charlwood · 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. 36.8% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +11.8 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,959

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
1Bushnell, L.Liberal Democrats89415.2%45.6%+20.6 ptsElected
2Farrar-Astrop, J.Liberal Democrats81013.8%41.4%+16.4 ptsElected
3Loach, A.Liberal Democrats72012.3%36.8%+11.8 ptsElected
4Osborne-Patterson, C.Conservative Party69811.9%35.6%
5Baldwin, T.Conservative Party62010.6%31.7%
6Saunders, M.Conservative Party61910.5%31.6%
7Scott, L.Green Party60410.3%30.8%
8Abbott, R.Green Party4387.5%22.4%
9Hollis, K.Green Party4097.0%20.9%
10Nasskau, L.Labour Party641.1%3.3%

Electorate 5,288 · Back to ward index

Ashtead Park · 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. 44.6% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +19.6 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,176

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
1Cooper, M.ASHT IND1,24219.0%57.1%+32.1 ptsElected
2Stansfield, G.ASHT IND1,14017.5%52.4%+27.4 ptsElected
3Sevenoaks, G.ASHT IND97014.9%44.6%+19.6 ptsElected
4Patel, R.Independent70610.8%32.4%
5Harper, D.Independent5358.2%24.6%
6Cutler, K.Conservative Party2694.1%12.4%
7Brown, P.Green Party2644.0%12.1%
8Smith, A.Conservative Party2533.9%11.6%
9MacLeod, V.Liberal Democrats2453.8%11.3%
10Wray, M.Conservative Party2363.6%10.8%
11Waugh, J.Liberal Democrats2153.3%9.9%
12Cressy, A.Liberal Democrats2003.1%9.2%
13Eagle, S.Labour Party1362.1%6.2%
14Smith, G.Green Party1181.8%5.4%

Electorate 5,468 · Back to ward index

Leatherhead South · 3-seat (bloc vote)

Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~3× smaller. 45.0% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +20.0 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,845

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
1Kendrick, B.Liberal Democrats96017.3%52.0%+27.0 ptsElected
2Slater, J.Conservative Party85215.4%46.2%+21.2 ptsElected
3Chambers, J.Conservative Party83115.0%45.0%+20.0 ptsElected
4Parsons, G.Liberal Democrats77914.1%42.2%
5Elcock-Haskins, H.Conservative Party75413.6%40.9%
6O'Shea, N.Liberal Democrats70012.6%37.9%
7Awcock, M.Green Party3015.4%16.3%
8Clark, A.Labour Party2073.7%11.2%
9Sherring, J.Green Party1512.7%8.2%

Electorate 4,468 · Back to ward index

Holmwoods and Beare Green · 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. 46.4% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +21.4 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,686

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
1Hobbs, R.Liberal Democrats97919.4%58.1%+33.1 ptsElected
2Malcomson, C.Liberal Democrats87917.4%52.1%+27.1 ptsElected
3Wellman, C.Liberal Democrats78215.5%46.4%+21.4 ptsElected
4Maruziva, L.Conservative Party60712.0%36.0%
5Botting, L.Conservative Party54610.8%32.4%
6Mir, D.Conservative Party52410.4%31.1%
7Roche, J.Green Party2244.4%13.3%
8Auckland, E.Green Party1983.9%11.7%
9Case, F.Green Party1623.2%9.6%
10Foster, C.Labour Party1583.1%9.4%

Electorate 4,982 · Back to ward index

Dorking North · 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. 47.6% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +22.6 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,271

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
1Watson, H.Liberal Democrats1,30119.1%57.3%+32.3 ptsElected
2Draper, D.Liberal Democrats1,20717.7%53.1%+28.1 ptsElected
3Rosam, E.Liberal Democrats1,08215.9%47.6%+22.6 ptsElected
4Crook, C.Green Party77811.4%34.3%
5Smith, P.Green Party6429.4%28.3%
6Holland, S.Green Party6279.2%27.6%
7Mansfield, C.Labour Party3395.0%14.9%
8Foulston, M.Conservative Party3164.6%13.9%
9Cude, P.Conservative Party2643.9%11.6%
10Frost, S.Conservative Party2573.8%11.3%

Electorate 5,504 · Back to ward index

Mickleham, Westcott and Okewood · 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. 53.7% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +28.7 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,061

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
1Budleigh, C.Liberal Democrats1,18019.1%57.3%+32.3 ptsElected
2Magesh, A.Liberal Democrats1,10817.9%53.8%+28.8 ptsElected
3Mursaleen-Plank, L.Liberal Democrats1,10617.9%53.7%+28.7 ptsElected
4Hebberd, M.Conservative Party76912.4%37.3%
5Irvine, D.Conservative Party70311.4%34.1%
6Musgrave, G.Conservative Party68411.1%33.2%
7Poke, J.Green Party3726.0%18.1%
8Szachno-Hodgkinson, D.Green Party2604.2%12.6%

Electorate 5,228 · Back to ward index

Brockham, Betchworth, Buckland, Box Hill and Headley · 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. 54.6% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +29.6 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,996

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
1Potter, P.Liberal Democrats1,21720.3%61.0%+36.0 ptsElected
2Budd, S.Conservative Party1,13919.0%57.1%+32.1 ptsElected
3Keay, P.Liberal Democrats1,08918.2%54.6%+29.6 ptsElected
4Nelson, B.Liberal Democrats86814.5%43.5%
5Austin, R.Conservative Party64510.8%32.3%
6Tiley, C.Conservative Party5769.6%28.9%
7Green, P.Green Party2854.8%14.3%
8Humphrey, N.Labour Party1682.8%8.4%

Electorate 5,197 · Back to ward index

Fetcham · 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. 57.1% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +32.1 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,298

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
1Haque, R.Liberal Democrats1,42620.7%62.1%+37.1 ptsElected
2Hammond, P.Liberal Democrats1,40220.3%61.0%+36.0 ptsElected
3Joseph, C.Liberal Democrats1,31119.0%57.1%+32.1 ptsElected
4Chambers, S.Conservative Party85312.4%37.1%
5Austin, P.Conservative Party75511.0%32.9%
6McCorquodale, D.Conservative Party6179.0%26.9%
7Crook, J.Green Party2193.2%9.5%
8Creber, D.Green Party1592.3%6.9%
9Heath, B.Labour Party1512.2%6.6%

Electorate 5,553 · Back to ward index

Leatherhead North · 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. 57.8% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +32.8 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,080

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
1Vyvyan-Robinson, K.Liberal Democrats68921.3%63.8%+38.8 ptsElected
2Wall, B.Liberal Democrats66120.4%61.2%+36.2 ptsElected
3Wear, B.Liberal Democrats62419.3%57.8%+32.8 ptsElected
4Gibbs, A.Conservative Party36811.4%34.1%
5Gibbs, A.Conservative Party33010.2%30.5%
6Ali, M.Conservative Party3029.3%28.0%
7Stewart, S.Green Party2678.2%24.7%

Electorate 4,493 · Back to ward index

Dorking South · 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. 58.3% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +33.3 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,032

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
1Cooksey, M.Liberal Democrats1,30121.3%64.0%+39.0 ptsElected
2Cooksey, S.Liberal Democrats1,21920.0%60.0%+35.0 ptsElected
3Wright, N.Liberal Democrats1,18519.4%58.3%+33.3 ptsElected
4Crook, M.Green Party4457.3%21.9%
5Jones, R.Conservative Party4136.8%20.3%
6Barford, L.Green Party3956.5%19.4%
7Gunn, B.Conservative Party3866.3%19.0%
8Sharpe, L.Conservative Party3846.3%18.9%
9Bolton, G.Green Party3686.0%18.1%

Electorate 5,721 · Back to ward index

Bookham East and Eastwick Park · 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. 2,499

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
1Daly, E.Liberal Democrats1,57721.0%63.1%+38.1 ptsElected
2Kennedy, P.Liberal Democrats1,56820.9%62.8%+37.8 ptsElected
3Matthews, A.Liberal Democrats1,46719.6%58.7%+33.7 ptsElected
4Chambers, S.Conservative Party99413.3%39.8%
5Swinbank, R.Conservative Party83411.1%33.4%
6Morrish, P.Conservative Party80010.7%32.0%
7Stewart, E.Green Party1762.3%7.0%
8Mansfield, B.Labour Party801.1%3.2%

Electorate 4,892 · Back to ward index

Bookham West · 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. 60.0% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +35.0 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,092

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
1Weller, M.Liberal Democrats1,40822.4%67.3%+42.3 ptsElected
2Adams, R.Liberal Democrats1,39022.2%66.5%+41.5 ptsElected
3Miller, C.Liberal Democrats1,25620.0%60.0%+35.0 ptsElected
4Cracknell, T.Conservative Party72511.6%34.7%
5Moyse, R.Conservative Party66410.6%31.7%
6Zharova-Berbner, D.Conservative Party5649.0%27.0%
7Suggett, E.Green Party2684.3%12.8%

Electorate 4,982 · Back to ward index

Ashtead Lanes and Common · 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. 67.2% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +42.2 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,283

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
1Hunt, C.ASHT IND1,63623.9%71.7%+46.7 ptsElected
2Wiltshire, P.ASHT IND1,55322.7%68.0%+43.0 ptsElected
3Hawksworth, D.ASHT IND1,53422.4%67.2%+42.2 ptsElected
4Shimmin, P.Liberal Democrats4887.1%21.4%
5Hartwell, A.Liberal Democrats4256.2%18.6%
6Moncur, R.Liberal Democrats4226.2%18.5%
7Cook, D.Conservative Party2844.1%12.4%
8Newton, G.Conservative Party2653.9%11.6%
9Gilchrist, S.Labour Party2413.5%10.6%

Electorate 5,937 · Back to ward index