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

South Staffordshire 2023

Local elections held 4 May 2023.

20 ward races
42 seats
1 elected below the proportional quota
2.4% of seats below quota
9 unfairly awarded seats
21.4% 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 20 wards in this cycle, parties received the vote totals below. The proportional column shows what each party would have won if the 42 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 Party24,65347.0%2969.0%2150.0%+8
Labour Party10,41019.9%24.8%819.0%-6
Liberal Democrats7,31113.9%49.5%614.3%-2
Independent5,43810.4%511.9%49.5%+1
Green Party3,9157.5%24.8%37.1%-1
UK Independence Party (UKIP)3890.7%00.0%00.0%0
Heritage Party2080.4%00.0%00.0%0
FFS-FA950.2%00.0%00.0%0
Total52,419100.0%42100.0%42100.0%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

Lapley, Stretton and Wheaton Aston · single-seat

Marginal winner Winning candidate's share of valid ballots. 39.3% Proportional quota 50.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. −10.7 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 1 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 768

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
1Nelson, R.Independent30239.3%−10.7 ptsElected
2Sutton, M.Conservative Party24531.9%
3Ford, J.Independent17422.7%
4Liesens, H.Green Party476.1%

Electorate 2,126 · Back to ward index

Perton Wrottesley · single-seat

Marginal winner Winning candidate's share of valid ballots. 57.7% Proportional quota 50.0% 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 ÷ 1 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 673

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
1Davis, P.Conservative Party38857.7%+7.7 ptsElected
2O'Gorman, D.Labour Party12819.0%
3Payne, S.Independent10816.0%
4Braine, D.Green Party497.3%

Electorate 2,268 · Back to ward index

Perton Lakeside · 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. 43.0% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +9.7 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 779

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
1Heseltine, R.Conservative Party35422.7%45.5%+12.1 ptsElected
2Evans, C.Conservative Party33521.5%43.0%+9.7 ptsElected
3Caine, A.Independent25016.1%32.1%
4Thomas, M.Labour Party21513.8%27.6%
5Thomas, F.Labour Party21213.6%27.2%
6Caine, N.Independent19112.3%24.5%

Electorate 3,531 · Back to ward index

Great Wyrley Landywood · 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. 46.3% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +12.9 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 780

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
1Perry, R.Conservative Party36623.5%46.9%+13.6 ptsElected
2Williams, K.Conservative Party36123.1%46.3%+12.9 ptsElected
3Instone, W.Labour Party34922.4%44.7%
4Alexander, P.Labour Party27517.6%35.3%
5Norris, D.Independent1268.1%16.2%
6Sadler, J.Green Party835.3%10.6%

Electorate 3,883 · Back to ward index

Cheslyn Hay Village · 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. 38.5% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +13.5 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,467

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

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes.Share of voters (est.) Estimated share of voters who supported this candidate, comparable across single- and multi-seat wards. Each voter could cast up to 3 votes, so we approximate ballots as total votes ÷ 3. This is the figure compared against the proportional quota.Below quota Each elected candidate's share of valid ballots minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = won the seat below the quota; positive = cleared it.Elected
1Duncan, R.Conservative Party62014.1%42.3%+17.3 ptsElected
2Duncan, S.Conservative Party61113.9%41.6%+16.6 ptsElected
3Williams, B.Conservative Party56512.8%38.5%+13.5 ptsElected
4Brindle, A.Labour Party54312.3%37.0%
5Freeman, A.Labour Party45710.4%31.2%
6Lockley, J.Independent44710.2%30.5%
7Singh, A.Labour Party4009.1%27.3%
8Norris, D.Independent3698.4%25.2%
9Hollis, S.UK Independence Party (UKIP)2295.2%15.6%
10Emery, A.UK Independence Party (UKIP)1603.6%10.9%

Electorate 5,985 · Back to ward index

Himley and Swindon · single-seat

Marginal winner Winning candidate's share of valid ballots. 64.2% Proportional quota 50.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +14.2 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 1 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 592

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
1Lees, S.Conservative Party38064.2%+14.2 ptsElected
2Pincher, K.Liberal Democrats12721.5%
3Fanthom, G.Independent8514.4%

Electorate 2,082 · Back to ward index

Pattingham, Trysull, Bobbington and Lower Penn · 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. +15.7 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,358

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
1Wilson, V.Conservative Party72626.7%53.5%+20.1 ptsElected
2Reade, R.Conservative Party66624.5%49.1%+15.7 ptsElected
3Bull, S.Independent41515.3%30.6%
4Hill, N.Labour Party27210.0%20.0%
5Fuller, H.Green Party2479.1%18.2%
6Forrest, B.Independent2168.0%15.9%
7Young, A.Liberal Democrats993.6%7.3%
8Calloway, A.Liberal Democrats742.7%5.5%

Electorate 3,979 · Back to ward index

Penkridge North and Acton Trussell · 2-seat (bloc vote)

Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~2× smaller. 50.0% Proportional quota 33.3% 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 ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,457

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
1Harper-Wallis, S.Liberal Democrats93031.9%63.8%+30.5 ptsElected
2Adams, A.Conservative Party72925.0%50.0%+16.7 ptsElected
3Bills, L.Liberal Democrats68923.6%47.3%
4Bates, L.Conservative Party56619.4%38.8%

Electorate 4,364 · Back to ward index

Penkridge South and Gailey · 2-seat (bloc vote)

Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~2× smaller. 50.1% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +16.8 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,168

This is a 2-seat ward under bloc vote — each voter could cast up to 2 votes, so summing candidate votes overcounts voters by ~2×. We show share of votes (matches the council's published figure) and share of voters (est.) (raw share × 2, the figure comparable to the proportional quota). Why two columns →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes.Share of voters (est.) Estimated share of voters who supported this candidate, comparable across single- and multi-seat wards. Each voter could cast up to 2 votes, so we approximate ballots as total votes ÷ 2. This is the figure compared against the proportional quota.Below quota Each elected candidate's share of valid ballots minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = won the seat below the quota; positive = cleared it.Elected
1Adams, H.Conservative Party59725.6%51.1%+17.8 ptsElected
2Kelly, V.Conservative Party58525.1%50.1%+16.8 ptsElected
3Lenz, A.Labour Party45219.4%38.7%
4Smallwood, N.Labour Party42318.1%36.2%
5Smith, V.Independent27811.9%23.8%

Electorate 4,426 · Back to ward index

Perton East · single-seat

Marginal winner Winning candidate's share of valid ballots. 67.4% Proportional quota 50.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +17.4 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 1 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 688

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
1Allen, P.Independent46467.4%+17.4 ptsElected
2Evans, J.Conservative Party22432.6%

Electorate 2,001 · Back to ward index

Featherstone, Sharehill and Saredon · 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. 52.4% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +19.1 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 943

This is a 2-seat ward under bloc vote — each voter could cast up to 2 votes, so summing candidate votes overcounts voters by ~2×. We show share of votes (matches the council's published figure) and share of voters (est.) (raw share × 2, the figure comparable to the proportional quota). Why two columns →

RankCandidatePartyVotesShare of votes Candidate votes ÷ total votes cast in this ward. Matches the share the council publishes.Share of voters (est.) Estimated share of voters who supported this candidate, comparable across single- and multi-seat wards. Each voter could cast up to 2 votes, so we approximate ballots as total votes ÷ 2. This is the figure compared against the proportional quota.Below quota Each elected candidate's share of valid ballots minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = won the seat below the quota; positive = cleared it.Elected
1Cope, R.Independent80042.4%84.8%+51.5 ptsElected
2Brindle, J.Labour Party49426.2%52.4%+19.1 ptsElected
3Southern, H.Conservative Party43923.3%46.6%
4Pincher, M.Liberal Democrats1538.1%16.2%

Electorate 4,365 · Back to ward index

Huntington and Hatherton · 2-seat (bloc vote)

Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~2× smaller. 55.4% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +22.0 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 614

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
1Ashley, L.Labour Party36429.6%59.3%+26.0 ptsElected
2Williams, D.Conservative Party34027.7%55.4%+22.0 ptsElected
3Kenyon, R.Labour Party24620.0%40.1%
4Benton, C.Green Party20116.4%32.7%
5Dent, A.Green Party776.3%12.5%

Electorate 3,947 · Back to ward index

Wombourne 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. 48.4% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +23.4 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,404

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
1Kinsey, D.Conservative Party89121.2%63.5%+38.5 ptsElected
2Bond, B.Conservative Party81319.3%57.9%+32.9 ptsElected
3Perry, M.Conservative Party68016.1%48.4%+23.4 ptsElected
4Sadler, I.Green Party42510.1%30.3%
5Davidson, M.Labour Party4029.5%28.6%
6Wood, C.Labour Party3428.1%24.4%
7Blaikie, R.Heritage Party2084.9%14.8%
8Male, C.Liberal Democrats1954.6%13.9%
9Thorpe, J.Green Party1493.5%10.6%
10Middleton, M.Liberal Democrats1072.5%7.6%

Electorate 5,521 · Back to ward index

Great Wyrley 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. 58.1% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +24.7 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,008

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
1Perry, K.Conservative Party65432.5%64.9%+31.6 ptsElected
2Jackson, M.Conservative Party58529.0%58.1%+24.7 ptsElected
3Jones, J.Labour Party44922.3%44.6%
4Levy, B.Labour Party32716.2%32.5%

Electorate 4,144 · Back to ward index

Brewood, Coven and Blymhill · 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. 53.3% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +28.3 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,746

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
1Holmes, D.Conservative Party1,10921.2%63.5%+38.5 ptsElected
2Sutton, W.Conservative Party1,05520.1%60.4%+35.4 ptsElected
3Szalapski, S.Conservative Party93117.8%53.3%+28.3 ptsElected
4Hamlyn, A.Labour Party69013.2%39.5%
5Olojede, A.Labour Party62511.9%35.8%
6Davis, V.Liberal Democrats4328.2%24.7%
7Singh, N.Green Party3967.6%22.7%

Electorate 6,625 · Back to ward index

Kinver and Enville · 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. 53.4% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +28.4 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,224

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
1Dufty, S.Liberal Democrats1,41621.2%63.7%+38.7 ptsElected
2Harrison, P.Liberal Democrats1,37520.6%61.8%+36.8 ptsElected
3Spruce, G.Liberal Democrats1,18817.8%53.4%+28.4 ptsElected
4Sisley, G.Conservative Party84812.7%38.1%
5Pauli, R.Conservative Party78311.7%35.2%
6Charlesworth-Jones, S.Conservative Party73311.0%33.0%
7Southall, J.Labour Party2353.5%10.6%
8Ward, J.FFS-FA951.4%4.3%

Electorate 6,321 · Back to ward index

Wombourne 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. 53.5% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +28.5 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,286

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
1Davies, M.Conservative Party81921.2%63.7%+38.7 ptsElected
2Evans, M.Conservative Party74819.4%58.1%+33.1 ptsElected
3Merrick, V.Conservative Party68817.8%53.5%+28.5 ptsElected
4Beaumont, D.Labour Party41910.9%32.6%
5McIlvenna, C.Green Party38710.0%30.1%
6Boswell, V.Labour Party3188.2%24.7%
7Vaccaro, T.Labour Party2947.6%22.9%
8Westlake, E.Green Party1864.8%14.5%

Electorate 5,689 · Back to ward index

Codsall · 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. 58.4% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +33.4 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,788

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
1Chapman, V.Conservative Party1,16421.7%65.1%+40.1 ptsElected
2Barrow, M.Conservative Party1,15221.5%64.4%+39.4 ptsElected
3Michell, J.Conservative Party1,04419.5%58.4%+33.4 ptsElected
4Fewtrell, C.Labour Party74813.9%41.8%
5Vernon, R.Labour Party73113.6%40.9%
6Bansal, G.Liberal Democrats5269.8%29.4%

Electorate 6,293 · Back to ward index

Bilbrook · 2-seat (bloc vote)

Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~2× smaller. 70.1% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +36.7 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,145

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
1Burnett, G.Green Party86637.8%75.7%+42.3 ptsElected
2Hopkins, F.Green Party80235.0%70.1%+36.7 ptsElected
3Armitage, R.Conservative Party34114.9%29.8%
4Hillback, R.Conservative Party28012.2%24.5%

Electorate 3,819 · Back to ward index

Essington · 2-seat (bloc vote)

Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~2× smaller. 78.0% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +44.7 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 726

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
1Fisher, W.Independent64744.6%89.2%+55.8 ptsElected
2Steel, C.Independent56639.0%78.0%+44.7 ptsElected
3Smith, A.Conservative Party23816.4%32.8%

Electorate 4,034 · Back to ward index