← Tunbridge Wells (all cycles) · 2 May 2024 cohort

Tunbridge Wells 2024

Local elections held 2 May 2024.

14 ward races
39 seats
8 unfairly awarded seats
20.5% 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 14 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 Democrats28,79734.2%2256.4%1538.5%+7
Conservative Party24,67329.3%717.9%1230.8%-5
Labour Party12,02214.3%512.8%615.4%-1
Tunbridge Wells Alliance7,3238.7%410.3%37.7%+1
Green Party5,4856.5%00.0%25.1%-2
Independents for Tunbridge Wells3,0563.6%12.6%12.6%0
IRTW1,2051.4%00.0%00.0%0
Reform UK9061.1%00.0%00.0%0
Independent8501.0%00.0%00.0%0
Total84,317100.0%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 2024 cycle was an all-out election — every seat was contested. The two opencouncildata snapshots below show the council immediately after the 2024 election (current) and on the eve of it (2023), so you can see what the result replaced.

Current (2024)
Previous (2023)

Wards in this council

Sorted with the largest gap below the quota first. Click any ward to jump to its full result.

Race results

Rusthall and Speldhurst · 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. 29.4% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +4.4 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 3,017

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
1Sharratt, J.Labour Party1,00411.1%33.3%+8.3 ptsElected
2Sankey, M.Tunbridge Wells Alliance97510.8%32.3%+7.3 ptsElected
3Britcher-Allan, A.Labour Party8869.8%29.4%+4.4 ptsElected
4Curry, P.Tunbridge Wells Alliance8289.1%27.4%
5Leach, R.Liberal Democrats7608.4%25.2%
6Franklin, M.Liberal Democrats7278.0%24.1%
7Moreland, J.Liberal Democrats6977.7%23.1%
8Wheeler, P.Labour Party6877.6%22.8%
9Allen, H.Conservative Party6627.3%21.9%
10Brand, A.Conservative Party6126.8%20.3%
11McInroy, J.Conservative Party5976.6%19.8%
12Gandon, S.Green Party2743.0%9.1%
13Hardy, M.Reform UK1721.9%5.7%
14Withers, G.Independents for Tunbridge Wells1701.9%5.6%

Electorate 7,349 · EC ward code E05015812 · Back to ward index

High Brooms · single-seat

Marginal winner Winning candidate's share of valid ballots. 55.9% Proportional quota 50.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +5.9 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 1 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 764

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
1Hill, D.Labour Party42755.9%+5.9 ptsElected
2Humphreys, S.Liberal Democrats13017.0%
3Mobbs, F.Conservative Party8210.7%
4Williams, R.Reform UK618.0%
5Froome, P.Green Party476.2%
6Kain, D.IRTW172.2%

Electorate 2,362 · EC ward code E05015807 · Back to ward index

Southborough and Bidborough · 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. 33.0% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +8.0 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,781

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
1Ellis, M.Liberal Democrats1,05912.7%38.1%+13.1 ptsElected
2Le Page, B.Liberal Democrats1,03712.4%37.3%+12.3 ptsElected
3Opara, J.Liberal Democrats91711.0%33.0%+8.0 ptsElected
4Breedon, P.Labour Party8009.6%28.8%
5Bridges, S.Conservative Party7959.5%28.6%
6Oakford, P.Conservative Party7929.5%28.5%
7Puffette, A.Conservative Party7178.6%25.8%
8Francis, J.Labour Party7088.5%25.5%
9Lewis, A.Labour Party6838.2%24.6%
10Colangelo, L.Independents for Tunbridge Wells3474.2%12.5%
11McBennett, M.Green Party2753.3%9.9%
12Farina, J.Tunbridge Wells Alliance2132.6%7.7%

Electorate 7,330 · EC ward code E05015814 · Back to ward index

Rural Tunbridge Wells · 3-seat (bloc vote)

Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~3× smaller. 34.8% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +9.8 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,552

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
1Darrah, L.Conservative Party1,03413.5%40.5%+15.5 ptsElected
2Mobbs, T.Conservative Party90411.8%35.4%+10.4 ptsElected
3Knight, D.Tunbridge Wells Alliance88711.6%34.8%+9.8 ptsElected
4Andrew, J.Conservative Party86311.3%33.8%
5Webster, A.Tunbridge Wells Alliance78610.3%30.8%
6Fox, J.Green Party5326.9%20.8%
7Mason, G.Green Party4395.7%17.2%
8Rappoport, Q.Liberal Democrats3674.8%14.4%
9Douglass, G.Liberal Democrats3564.6%13.9%
10Glazier, P.IRTW3314.3%13.0%
11Yeo, H.Green Party3294.3%12.9%
12Kerrigan, K.Labour Party3003.9%11.8%
13Gill, M.Liberal Democrats2753.6%10.8%
14Scott, A.Labour Party2543.3%10.0%

Electorate 7,828 · EC ward code E05015805 · Back to ward index

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. 39.6% Proportional quota 25.0% 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 ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,545

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
1Lowe, M.Liberal Democrats1,24016.2%48.7%+23.7 ptsElected
2Keefe, C.Liberal Democrats1,07614.1%42.3%+17.3 ptsElected
3Matthews, T.Liberal Democrats1,00913.2%39.6%+14.6 ptsElected
4Pope, N.Tunbridge Wells Alliance86411.3%33.9%
5Atwood, B.Conservative Party7479.8%29.4%
6Hobart, A.Conservative Party7129.3%28.0%
7Zorba, S.Conservative Party6899.0%27.1%
8Fraser, A.Green Party4345.7%17.1%
9Pound, S.Labour Party3394.4%13.3%
10Faulkner, J.Labour Party3094.0%12.1%
11Jerrom, M.Reform UK2162.8%8.5%

Electorate 6,616 · EC ward code E05015810 · Back to ward index

Sherwood · 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. 1,691

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
1Pound, H.Labour Party72114.2%42.6%+17.6 ptsElected
2Jones, V.Labour Party69213.6%40.9%+15.9 ptsElected
3Atwood, C.Conservative Party68113.4%40.3%+15.3 ptsElected
4Weatherly, L.Conservative Party67113.2%39.7%
5Rogers, S.Labour Party66113.0%39.1%
6Harrington, R.Conservative Party64712.8%38.3%
7Lovell, S.Green Party2254.4%13.3%
8Healing, W.Liberal Democrats2134.2%12.6%
9Dore, J.Independents for Tunbridge Wells2003.9%11.8%
10Morton, M.Liberal Democrats1883.7%11.1%
11Raptis, Y.Liberal Democrats1753.4%10.3%

Electorate 6,345 · EC ward code E05015813 · Back to ward index

Paddock Wood · 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. 41.7% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +16.7 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,037

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
1Munday, M.Liberal Democrats87214.3%42.8%+17.8 ptsElected
2Kent, D.Liberal Democrats85013.9%41.7%+16.7 ptsElected
3Pitts, A.Liberal Democrats84913.9%41.7%+16.7 ptsElected
4Tucker, R.Conservative Party77712.7%38.1%
5Atkins, R.Independent67011.0%32.9%
6Maari, N.Conservative Party60910.0%29.9%
7Hall, J.Conservative Party5509.0%27.0%
8Robichand, B.IRTW3706.1%18.2%
9Bisdee, T.Green Party3405.6%16.7%
10Kerrigan, I.Labour Party2243.7%11.0%

Electorate 6,560 · EC ward code E05015808 · Back to ward index

St John's · 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. 50.3% Proportional quota 33.3% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +17.0 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 2 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,611

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
1Lidstone, P.Liberal Democrats85526.5%53.1%+19.8 ptsElected
2Fox, M.Liberal Democrats81025.1%50.3%+17.0 ptsElected
3Francis, D.Labour Party44613.8%27.7%
4Faulkner, M.Labour Party41913.0%26.0%
5Lewis-Grey, A.Conservative Party2216.9%13.7%
6Winter, R.Conservative Party1946.0%12.0%
7Thorne, A.Green Party1243.8%7.7%
8Colangelo, F.Independents for Tunbridge Wells993.1%6.1%
9Nicholson, M.Independents for Tunbridge Wells531.6%3.3%

Electorate 4,209 · EC ward code E05015816 · Back to ward index

Pembury and Capel · 3-seat (bloc vote)

Marginal winner Voter-share estimate of the lowest-vote elected candidate. Comparable to the proportional quota. The raw vote share would be ~3× smaller. 42.3% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +17.3 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,340

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
1Patterson, H.Liberal Democrats1,09915.7%47.0%+22.0 ptsElected
2Birch, A.Liberal Democrats1,03214.7%44.1%+19.1 ptsElected
3Hayward, D.Independents for Tunbridge Wells98914.1%42.3%+17.3 ptsElected
4Sefton, C.Liberal Democrats88812.6%37.9%
5Wakeman, S.Independents for Tunbridge Wells80711.5%34.5%
6Barrington-King, P.Conservative Party79711.4%34.1%
7Roberts, P.Conservative Party5547.9%23.7%
8Gautam, V.Conservative Party4466.4%19.1%
9Hurst-Buist, E.Green Party2263.2%9.7%
10Musker, A.Labour Party1832.6%7.8%

Electorate 6,513 · EC ward code E05015811 · Back to ward index

Hawkhurst, Sandhurst and Benenden · 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. 42.8% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +17.8 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,891

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
1Dawlings, T.Conservative Party90315.9%47.8%+22.8 ptsElected
2Palmer, B.Conservative Party84614.9%44.7%+19.7 ptsElected
3Neville, E.Tunbridge Wells Alliance80914.3%42.8%+17.8 ptsElected
4Escombe, C.Tunbridge Wells Alliance74813.2%39.6%
5Taylor-Smith, M.Conservative Party74513.1%39.4%
6Dahl, M.Labour Party3095.4%16.3%
7Keech, D.Green Party2815.0%14.9%
8Strouts, H.Liberal Democrats2674.7%14.1%
9Hilton, S.Reform UK2484.4%13.1%
10Dawson, A.Liberal Democrats2284.0%12.1%
11Widgery, V.Liberal Democrats1232.2%6.5%
12Ward, A.IRTW841.5%4.4%
13Littlechild, D.IRTW821.4%4.3%

Electorate 6,497 · EC ward code E05015806 · Back to ward index

Pantiles · 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. 42.9% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +17.9 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,358

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
1Johnson, J.Liberal Democrats1,18516.8%50.3%+25.3 ptsElected
2Hall, C.Liberal Democrats1,17916.7%50.0%+25.0 ptsElected
3Wilkinson, P.Liberal Democrats1,01114.3%42.9%+17.9 ptsElected
4Allen, J.Conservative Party6859.7%29.1%
5Dommett, Z.Conservative Party6709.5%28.4%
6Evans, D.Conservative Party6379.0%27.0%
7Peerless, P.Green Party3344.7%14.2%
8Bullion, A.Labour Party3334.7%14.1%
9Calvert, M.Green Party2653.7%11.2%
10Sergeant, K.Green Party2403.4%10.2%
11Spence, J.Reform UK2093.0%8.9%
12Kift, P.Independent1802.5%7.6%
13Myers-Lamptey, D.Independents for Tunbridge Wells1462.1%6.2%

Electorate 6,859 · EC ward code E05015809 · Back to ward index

Cranbrook, Sissinghurst and Frittenden · 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. 1,423

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
1Fairweather, A.Conservative Party91721.5%64.4%+39.4 ptsElected
2Warne, N.Tunbridge Wells Alliance84319.7%59.2%+34.2 ptsElected
3Somers, D.Conservative Party64015.0%45.0%+20.0 ptsElected
4Austen, J.Conservative Party54712.8%38.4%
5Hurst, J.Green Party3608.4%25.3%
6Turner, J.Labour Party2756.4%19.3%
7Moesgaard-Kjeldsen, S.Liberal Democrats1974.6%13.8%
8Cole, J.Liberal Democrats1974.6%13.8%
9Hoare, C.IRTW1553.6%10.9%
10Guinnessy, B.Liberal Democrats1393.3%9.8%

Electorate 5,552 · EC ward code E05015803 · Back to ward index

St James' · 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. 48.2% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +23.2 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 1,985

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
1Chapeland, B.Liberal Democrats1,42724.0%71.9%+46.9 ptsElected
2Wormington, R.Liberal Democrats1,02417.2%51.6%+26.6 ptsElected
3Souper, C.Liberal Democrats95716.1%48.2%+23.2 ptsElected
4Gavin, M.Green Party4237.1%21.3%
5Moore, D.Labour Party4086.9%20.6%
6Hawes-Webb, K.Tunbridge Wells Alliance3706.2%18.6%
7Stevenson, C.Labour Party3576.0%18.0%
8Mitchern, M.Conservative Party2554.3%12.8%
9Woodward, C.Conservative Party2464.1%12.4%
10Tucker, J.Conservative Party2434.1%12.2%
11Nicholson, C.Independents for Tunbridge Wells1282.1%6.4%
12Richardson, L.Independents for Tunbridge Wells1172.0%5.9%

Electorate 6,050 · EC ward code E05015815 · Back to ward index

Culverden · 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. 49.6% Proportional quota 25.0% Below quota Marginal winner's share minus the proportional quota for this race. Negative = below; positive = above. +24.6 pts Valid ballots (est.) Estimated voters: total votes ÷ 3 seats. Source data does not publish a ballot count for this cycle. 2,156

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
1Rutland, J.Liberal Democrats1,18418.3%54.9%+29.9 ptsElected
2Brice, M.Liberal Democrats1,12817.4%52.3%+27.3 ptsElected
3Osborne, D.Liberal Democrats1,07016.5%49.6%+24.6 ptsElected
4Dunn, A.Conservative Party71311.0%33.1%
5Scott, D.Conservative Party65310.1%30.3%
6White, V.Conservative Party6209.6%28.8%
7Moll, V.Green Party3375.2%15.6%
8Betts, M.Labour Party3305.1%15.3%
9Holder, G.Labour Party2674.1%12.4%
10Macdonald Walmsley, S.IRTW1662.6%7.7%

Electorate 6,182 · EC ward code E05015804 · Back to ward index