← South Gloucestershire (all cycles) · 4 May 2023 cohort

South Gloucestershire 2023

Local elections held 4 May 2023.

28 ward races
61 seats
3 elected below the proportional quota
4.9% of seats below quota
3 unfairly awarded seats
4.9% 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 28 wards in this cycle, parties received the vote totals below. The proportional column shows what each party would have won if the 61 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
Conservative Party58,23935.9%2337.7%2337.7%0
Liberal Democrats55,01233.9%2032.8%2134.4%-1
Labour Party39,14724.1%1727.9%1524.6%+2
Green Party6,8474.2%00.0%23.3%-2
Independent2,3461.4%11.6%00.0%+1
Reform UK3290.2%00.0%00.0%0
NHP2280.1%00.0%00.0%0
Total162,148100.0%61100.0%61100.0%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

Patchway Coniston · single-seat

Marginal winner Winning candidate's share of valid ballots. 35.3% Proportional quota 50.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. −14.7 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 1 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 929

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
1Walker, I.Independent32835.3%−14.7 ptsElected
2Lawrence, D.Labour Party32334.8%
3Jones, S.Conservative Party18620.0%
4Pash, M.Green Party555.9%
5Wallis, J.Liberal Democrats374.0%

Electorate 3,858 · Back to ward index

Pilning and Severn Beach · single-seat

Marginal winner Winning candidate's share of valid ballots. 40.8% Proportional quota 50.0% 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 ÷ 1 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,173

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
1Johnson, S.Liberal Democrats47940.8%−9.2 ptsElected
2Begbey, S.Conservative Party44738.1%
3Segal, A.Labour Party24721.1%

Electorate 3,742 · Back to ward index

Stoke Park and Cheswick · single-seat

Marginal winner Winning candidate's share of valid ballots. 46.8% Proportional quota 50.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. −3.2 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 1 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 996

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
1Pocock, A.Liberal Democrats46646.8%−3.2 ptsElected
2Coyle-Larner, R.Labour Party31831.9%
3Ramarathnam, P.Conservative Party21221.3%

Electorate 3,268 · Back to ward index

Bradley Stoke 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. 36.1% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +2.7 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,585

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
1Cullen, T.Conservative Party1,06220.5%41.1%+7.8 ptsElected
2Owusu-Antwi, F.Conservative Party93218.0%36.1%+2.7 ptsElected
3Goldsmith, N.Labour Party76514.8%29.6%
4Rosenberg, G.Labour Party73114.1%28.3%
5Pomfret, S.Independent4839.3%18.7%
6Nelson, J.Green Party4578.8%17.7%
7Clayton, D.Liberal Democrats3546.8%13.7%
8Tomasin, W.Liberal Democrats2114.1%8.2%
9Crawley, T.Reform UK1743.4%6.7%

Electorate 8,177 · Back to ward index

Winterbourne · 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. 41.1% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +7.7 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,994

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
1Labuschagne, N.Conservative Party88922.3%44.6%+11.3 ptsElected
2Jones, T.Conservative Party81920.5%41.1%+7.7 ptsElected
3Bruce, P.Liberal Democrats67817.0%34.0%
4Goodwin, D.Liberal Democrats57214.3%28.7%
5Lloyd, J.Labour Party3428.6%17.2%
6McKinlay, B.Labour Party2907.3%14.5%
7Lankester, A.Green Party2406.0%12.0%
8Vernon, D.Green Party1584.0%7.9%

Electorate 5,558 · Back to ward index

Bitton and Oldland Common · 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. 41.8% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +8.5 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,993

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
1Hughes, P.Conservative Party89922.6%45.1%+11.8 ptsElected
2Williams, E.Conservative Party83320.9%41.8%+8.5 ptsElected
3Langley, D.Labour Party71117.8%35.7%
4Hallett, P.Green Party52113.1%26.1%
5Boon, K.Liberal Democrats3739.4%18.7%
6Freeman, S.Green Party3619.1%18.1%
7Perry, S.Liberal Democrats2887.2%14.5%

Electorate 7,194 · Back to ward index

Bradley Stoke 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. 44.7% 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. 2,046

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
1Bradbury, J.Labour Party96923.7%47.4%+14.0 ptsElected
2Randles, B.Conservative Party91522.4%44.7%+11.4 ptsElected
3Avenin, R.Conservative Party89521.9%43.7%
4Sappal, K.Labour Party76418.7%37.3%
5Moller, A.Liberal Democrats2857.0%13.9%
6Rawlinson, G.Liberal Democrats2646.5%12.9%

Electorate 6,871 · Back to ward index

Filton · 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. 45.0% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +11.7 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,135

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
1Monk, A.Labour Party1,11426.1%52.2%+18.8 ptsElected
2Doyle, A.Labour Party96122.5%45.0%+11.7 ptsElected
3Boardman, D.Green Party48511.4%22.7%
4Adjeivi, E.Conservative Party47611.1%22.3%
5Contenot, F.Conservative Party4249.9%19.9%
6Vernon, J.Green Party2997.0%14.0%
7Robinson, A.Independent2195.1%10.3%
8Joinson, M.Liberal Democrats1854.3%8.7%
9Emmerson, R.Liberal Democrats1072.5%5.0%

Electorate 7,421 · Back to ward index

Stoke Gifford · 3-seat (bloc vote)

Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~3× smaller. 38.2% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +13.2 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 3,611

This is a 3-seat ward under bloc vote — each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so summing candidate votes overcounts voters by ~3×. We show share of votes (matches the council's published figure) and share of voters (est.) (raw share × 3, the figure comparable to the proportional quota). Why two columns →

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
1Addison, D.Labour Party1,53014.1%42.4%+17.4 ptsElected
2Cranney, K.Conservative Party1,44013.3%39.9%+14.9 ptsElected
3Gupta, N.Conservative Party1,37912.7%38.2%+13.2 ptsElected
4Mead, B.Labour Party1,35812.5%37.6%
5Griffiths, T.Conservative Party1,34912.5%37.4%
6Harris, D.Labour Party1,28911.9%35.7%
7Williams, J.Liberal Democrats9278.6%25.7%
8Stansfield, K.Liberal Democrats8678.0%24.0%
9Tomasin, K.Liberal Democrats6936.4%19.2%

Electorate 10,777 · Back to ward index

Frenchay and Downend · 3-seat (bloc vote)

Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~3× smaller. 38.3% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +13.3 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 4,386

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
1Sood, R.Liberal Democrats1,99415.2%45.5%+20.5 ptsElected
2Burton, B.Conservative Party1,78013.5%40.6%+15.6 ptsElected
3Brennan, L.Conservative Party1,67812.8%38.3%+13.3 ptsElected
4Eldridge, D.Liberal Democrats1,67312.7%38.1%
5Griffiths, J.Conservative Party1,62212.3%37.0%
6Tansey, J.Liberal Democrats1,48711.3%33.9%
7Dockerty, J.Labour Party1,0347.9%23.6%
8Richards, M.Labour Party1,0337.9%23.6%
9Smith, A.Labour Party8586.5%19.6%

Electorate 10,752 · Back to ward index

Chipping Sodbury and Cotswold Edge · 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. 47.8% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +14.5 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 3,514

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
1Rush, A.Liberal Democrats1,68724.0%48.0%+14.7 ptsElected
2Romaine, B.Conservative Party1,68023.9%47.8%+14.5 ptsElected
3Hall, R.Conservative Party1,67823.9%47.8%
4Trull, P.Liberal Democrats1,64723.4%46.9%
5Lowe, I.Labour Party3364.8%9.6%

Electorate 7,900 · Back to ward index

Parkwall and Warmley · 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. 48.0% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +14.6 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,855

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
1Bromiley, E.Conservative Party91424.6%49.3%+15.9 ptsElected
2Bromiley, S.Conservative Party89024.0%48.0%+14.6 ptsElected
3Farmer, M.Labour Party80121.6%43.2%
4Rabone, K.Labour Party69918.8%37.7%
5Marsden, P.Liberal Democrats2135.7%11.5%
6Pirooz, H.Liberal Democrats1935.2%10.4%

Electorate 7,011 · Back to ward index

Severn 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. 48.0% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +14.7 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 3,181

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
1Williams, T.Liberal Democrats1,53724.2%48.3%+15.0 ptsElected
2Riddle, M.Conservative Party1,52824.0%48.0%+14.7 ptsElected
3Oaten, M.Liberal Democrats1,43522.6%45.1%
4Burchell, K.Conservative Party1,32520.8%41.7%
5Curtis, A.Labour Party3074.8%9.7%
6Carroll, N.Labour Party2293.6%7.2%

Electorate 7,665 · Back to ward index

Charlton and Cribbs · 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. 40.3% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +15.3 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,523

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
1Scott, S.Labour Party69515.2%45.6%+20.6 ptsElected
2Shambhu, S.Conservative Party68314.9%44.8%+19.8 ptsElected
3Buddharaju, J.Conservative Party61413.4%40.3%+15.3 ptsElected
4Hopkinson, B.Conservative Party60313.2%39.6%
5Ravi, R.Labour Party50711.1%33.3%
6Wilding, V.Labour Party4379.6%28.7%
7Knight, P.Independent3758.2%24.6%
8Loveridge, R.Independent3156.9%20.7%
9Ford, J.Liberal Democrats1192.6%7.8%
10Stringer, M.Liberal Democrats1172.6%7.7%
11Hockey, D.Liberal Democrats1042.3%6.8%

Electorate 6,448 · Back to ward index

Boyd Valley · 2-seat (bloc vote)

Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~2× smaller. 48.9% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +15.6 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,523

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
1Palmer, M.Liberal Democrats1,31626.1%52.2%+18.8 ptsElected
2Stokes, B.Conservative Party1,23424.5%48.9%+15.6 ptsElected
3Reade, S.Conservative Party1,21124.0%48.0%
4Willmott, N.Liberal Democrats1,13022.4%44.8%
5Banwell, A.Reform UK1553.1%6.1%

Electorate 6,994 · Back to ward index

Longwell Green · 2-seat (bloc vote)

Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~2× smaller. 49.1% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +15.8 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,383

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
1Strange, C.Conservative Party1,44230.3%60.5%+27.2 ptsElected
2Murphy, K.Conservative Party1,17024.6%49.1%+15.8 ptsElected
3Allinson, E.Liberal Democrats90619.0%38.0%
4Price, C.Independent62613.1%26.3%
5Allard, C.Liberal Democrats62113.0%26.1%

Electorate 7,612 · Back to ward index

Emersons 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. 42.1% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +17.1 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 3,582

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
1Al-Hassan, K.Labour Party1,61415.0%45.1%+20.1 ptsElected
2Hunt, R.Conservative Party1,53214.3%42.8%+17.8 ptsElected
3Hardie, R.Labour Party1,50814.0%42.1%+17.1 ptsElected
4Al-Hassan, S.Labour Party1,49813.9%41.8%
5Hunt, C.Conservative Party1,48213.8%41.4%
6Mehta-Graham, A.Conservative Party1,18311.0%33.0%
7Harris, S.Green Party8768.2%24.5%
8Miron, G.Liberal Democrats4243.9%11.8%
9Walker, S.Liberal Democrats3243.0%9.0%
10Walker, L.Liberal Democrats3062.8%8.5%

Electorate 12,377 · Back to ward index

Hanham · 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. 44.0% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +19.0 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 3,035

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
1Bamford, J.Conservative Party1,52516.7%50.2%+25.2 ptsElected
2Langley, B.Conservative Party1,45516.0%47.9%+22.9 ptsElected
3Begley, A.Labour Party1,33614.7%44.0%+19.0 ptsElected
4Pitts, M.Conservative Party1,31414.4%43.3%
5Newman, M.Labour Party1,19513.1%39.4%
6Allen, K.Green Party6517.1%21.4%
7Huddy, W.Green Party5436.0%17.9%
8Johnston, D.Green Party3854.2%12.7%
9Gawn, J.Liberal Democrats2753.0%9.1%
10Marshall, M.Liberal Democrats2542.8%8.4%
11Thoyts, P.Liberal Democrats1721.9%5.7%

Electorate 9,832 · Back to ward index

Woodstock · 2-seat (bloc vote)

Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~2× smaller. 52.5% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +19.2 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,767

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
1Evans, A.Labour Party1,03929.4%58.8%+25.5 ptsElected
2Scott, I.Labour Party92826.3%52.5%+19.2 ptsElected
3Groenewald, J.Conservative Party54515.4%30.9%
4Shambhu, K.Conservative Party47713.5%27.0%
5Corrigan, J.Liberal Democrats3359.5%19.0%
6Davis, T.Liberal Democrats2095.9%11.8%

Electorate 7,404 · Back to ward index

New Cheltenham · 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. 53.2% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +19.9 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,705

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
1Palmer, M.Labour Party93627.5%54.9%+21.6 ptsElected
2Davis, S.Labour Party90726.6%53.2%+19.9 ptsElected
3Adams, I.Conservative Party66419.5%39.0%
4Singh, G.Conservative Party54616.0%32.0%
5Davis, R.Liberal Democrats2046.0%12.0%
6Parkinson, R.Liberal Democrats1524.5%8.9%

Electorate 6,618 · Back to ward index

Charfield · single-seat

Marginal winner Winning candidate's share of valid ballots. 70.7% Proportional quota 50.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +20.7 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 1 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,277

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
1O'Neill, J.Liberal Democrats90370.7%+20.7 ptsElected
2Crumpton, M.Conservative Party28822.6%
3Watts, P.Green Party866.7%

Electorate 3,628 · Back to ward index

Kingswood · 2-seat (bloc vote)

Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~2× smaller. 57.0% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +23.7 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,487

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
1Ingham, L.Labour Party90130.3%60.6%+27.3 ptsElected
2Rhodes, S.Labour Party84828.5%57.0%+23.7 ptsElected
3Dando, K.Conservative Party46915.8%31.5%
4Chandar, J.Conservative Party36112.1%24.3%
5Hope, S.Liberal Democrats2026.8%13.6%
6Poarch, M.Liberal Democrats1936.5%13.0%

Electorate 6,428 · Back to ward index

Frampton Cotterell · 3-seat (bloc vote)

Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~3× smaller. 50.8% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +25.8 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 4,307

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.Liberal Democrats2,55619.8%59.3%+34.3 ptsElected
2Clark, T.Liberal Democrats2,33118.0%54.1%+29.1 ptsElected
3Lean, J.Liberal Democrats2,19016.9%50.8%+25.8 ptsElected
4Howell, T.Conservative Party1,66412.9%38.6%
5Niblett, T.Conservative Party1,61512.5%37.5%
6Pullen, A.Conservative Party1,59212.3%37.0%
7Echegaray, C.Green Party4443.4%10.3%
8Millard, R.Labour Party2832.2%6.6%
9Trollope, J.Labour Party2471.9%5.7%

Electorate 10,412 · Back to ward index

Yate Central · 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. 64.5% 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. 1,910

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
1Emms, S.Liberal Democrats1,26933.2%66.4%+33.1 ptsElected
2Davis, J.Liberal Democrats1,23132.2%64.5%+31.1 ptsElected
3Gilpin, M.Conservative Party58415.3%30.6%
4Lewis, J.Conservative Party47012.3%24.6%
5Jackson, C.Green Party2667.0%13.9%

Electorate 6,491 · Back to ward index

Dodington · 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. 68.6% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +35.3 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,086

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
1Harris, L.Liberal Democrats1,47935.5%70.9%+37.6 ptsElected
2Kirkby, C.Liberal Democrats1,43234.3%68.6%+35.3 ptsElected
3Welch, R.Conservative Party51712.4%24.8%
4Nicholson, J.Conservative Party51612.4%24.7%
5Leat, C.NHP2285.5%10.9%

Electorate 7,623 · Back to ward index

Staple Hill and Mangotsfield · 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. 65.4% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +40.4 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 3,078

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
1Boulton, I.Labour Party2,33125.2%75.7%+50.7 ptsElected
2Bell, M.Labour Party2,15323.3%69.9%+44.9 ptsElected
3Cooper, K.Labour Party2,01421.8%65.4%+40.4 ptsElected
4O'Hara, A.Conservative Party7898.5%25.6%
5Shore, A.Conservative Party6046.5%19.6%
6Mishra, A.Conservative Party5566.0%18.1%
7Daer, A.Liberal Democrats3373.6%10.9%
8Allen, B.Liberal Democrats2282.5%7.4%
9Davis, G.Liberal Democrats2222.4%7.2%

Electorate 10,972 · Back to ward index

Thornbury · 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. 67.4% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +42.4 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 3,972

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
1Tyrrell, M.Liberal Democrats2,71822.8%68.4%+43.4 ptsElected
2Davies, C.Liberal Democrats2,68222.5%67.5%+42.5 ptsElected
3Stansfield, J.Liberal Democrats2,67922.5%67.4%+42.4 ptsElected
4Gash, J.Green Party1,0208.6%25.7%
5Weeks, A.Labour Party7616.4%19.2%
6Owusu-Antwi, O.Conservative Party7045.9%17.7%
7Buxton, J.Conservative Party6805.7%17.1%
8Buxton, J.Conservative Party6725.6%16.9%

Electorate 10,979 · Back to ward index

Yate 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. 74.5% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +49.5 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,989

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
1Drew, M.Liberal Democrats2,28225.5%76.4%+51.4 ptsElected
2Willmore, C.Liberal Democrats2,23024.9%74.6%+49.6 ptsElected
3Nutland, B.Liberal Democrats2,22824.8%74.5%+49.5 ptsElected
4Williams, S.Conservative Party7598.5%25.4%
5Lewis, M.Conservative Party7348.2%24.6%
6Williams, D.Conservative Party7338.2%24.5%

Electorate 9,974 · Back to ward index