First Round | Next Round | Final Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 1  Votes  2648 31/60 (25%) Max Peter Wing Ho CHIN     6568    (62.0%)  1 Richard WALLS     1677    (15.8%)  1 Lee VANDERVIS     965    (9.1%)  1 Fliss BUTCHER     766    (7.2%)  1 Phillip DE WATTIGNAR     278    (2.6%)  1 Diane YELDON     179    (1.7%)  1 Mark PETERS     161    (1.5%)  1           Results       Peter Wing Ho CHIN Elected               Transfers (to these colors):               Histograms  Surplus   New Max  Votes: Ballots   Peter Wing Ho CHIN 3919 29/60 20/60 1: 5818

Each ballot initially counts toward its highest-ranked eligible choice. However, in future rounds, a maximum fraction of a ballot may be imposed on a candidate. This allows voters for popular winners (or for eliminated losers) to help unelected candidates or candidates elected later. If there are no such candidates, the leftover fraction goes back to the first winner, or count toward "none of these" if there are no ranked winners.

The ballot fraction precision is equal to 1/Seats(Seats+1), which ensures that winners can always be kept between Enough votes to win, more than (Total Votes for Candidates)/(Seats+1), and the Ideal Number of votes, (Total Votes for Candidates)/Seats.
If all winners have at least "Enough" votes, it is impossible to elect too many candidates. This number is Ballots/(Seats+1) plus the smallest fraction.
If all winners have exactly the Ideal Number of votes, and they each have an equal voice, everyone who voted for a winner is equally represented.
The dotted line on the graph represents Enough votes.
The histogram shows how many ballots count a given fraction of a vote toward a winner. It is used to determine how much to lower the maximum. Ballots that cannot count for a lower-ranked candidate are not included in the histogram. The maximum is reduced in steps of the defined fractional precision, reducing the surplus by the number of ballots in the affected histogram bins divided by that precision. This process stops just before too many would be transferred. At this point, the affected bins are shown in red.
When only winners remain, they may reduce their maxima toward the Ideal Number.

Go to the next round

First Round | Next Round | Final Round | Previous Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 2  Votes  2648 31/60 (25%) Max Peter Wing Ho CHIN     2689 20/60  (25.4%)  20/60 Richard WALLS     3389 40/60  (32.0%)  1 Lee VANDERVIS     1791    (16.9%)  1 Fliss BUTCHER     1386 40/60  (13.1%)  1 Phillip DE WATTIGNAR     640 40/60  (6.0%)  1 Diane YELDON     321    (3.0%)  1 Mark PETERS     375 40/60  (3.5%)  1           Results       Richard WALLS Elected     Peter Wing Ho CHIN Equalized               Transfers (to these colors):     Transfers (from these colors):               Histograms  Surplus   New Max  Votes: Ballots   Richard WALLS 741 9/60 36/60 1: 1518 40/60: 1914   Peter Wing Ho CHIN 40 49/60 17/60 20/60: 6561

The histogram shows how many ballots count a given fraction of a vote toward a winner. It is used to determine how much to lower the maximum. Ballots that cannot count for a lower-ranked candidate are not included in the histogram. The maximum is reduced in steps of the defined fractional precision, reducing the surplus by the number of ballots in the affected histogram bins divided by that precision. This process stops just before too many would be transferred. At this point, the affected bins are shown in red.
When only winners remain, they may reduce their maxima toward the Ideal Number.

Go to the next round

First Round | Next Round | Final Round | Previous Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 3  Votes  2648 31/60 (25%) Max Peter Wing Ho CHIN     2710 33/60  (25.6%)  17/60 Richard WALLS     2687 37/60  (25.4%)  36/60 Lee VANDERVIS     2043 28/60  (19.3%)  1 Fliss BUTCHER     1575 30/60  (14.9%)  1 Phillip DE WATTIGNAR     743 14/60  (7.0%)  1 Diane YELDON     378 14/60  (3.6%)  1 Mark PETERS     455 24/60  (4.3%)  1           Results       Diane YELDON Defeated               Transfers (to these colors):

No elected candidates could reduce their maxima, so candidates were eliminated instead.
The last-place candidate is eliminated.
Go to the next round

First Round | Next Round | Final Round | Previous Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 4  Votes  2645 31/60 (25%) Max Peter Wing Ho CHIN     2758 31/60  (26.1%)  17/60 Richard WALLS     2737 50/60  (25.9%)  36/60 Lee VANDERVIS     2118 26/60  (20.0%)  1 Fliss BUTCHER     1681 6/60  (15.9%)  1 Phillip DE WATTIGNAR     783 58/60  (7.4%)  1 Mark PETERS     502 9/60  (4.7%)  1 None of these     12                Results       Peter Wing Ho CHIN Equalized     Richard WALLS Equalized               Transfers (to these colors):     Transfers (from these colors):               Histograms  Surplus   New Max  Votes: Ballots   Peter Wing Ho CHIN 113   16/60 17/60: 6515   Richard WALLS 92 19/60 35/60 36/60: 3327

The histogram shows how many ballots count a given fraction of a vote toward a winner. It is used to determine how much to lower the maximum. Ballots that cannot count for a lower-ranked candidate are not included in the histogram. The maximum is reduced in steps of the defined fractional precision, reducing the surplus by the number of ballots in the affected histogram bins divided by that precision. This process stops just before too many would be transferred. At this point, the affected bins are shown in red.
When only winners remain, they may reduce their maxima toward the Ideal Number.

Go to the next round

First Round | Next Round | Final Round | Previous Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 5  Votes  2645 31/60 (25%) Max Peter Wing Ho CHIN     2655 10/60  (25.1%)  16/60 Richard WALLS     2695 49/60  (25.5%)  35/60 Lee VANDERVIS     2174 12/60  (20.5%)  1 Fliss BUTCHER     1726 23/60  (16.3%)  1 Phillip DE WATTIGNAR     809 22/60  (7.6%)  1 Mark PETERS     521 4/60  (4.9%)  1 None of these     12                Results       Mark PETERS Defeated               Transfers (to these colors):

No elected candidates could reduce their maxima, so candidates were eliminated instead.
The last-place candidate is eliminated.
Go to the next round

First Round | Next Round | Final Round | Previous Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 6  Votes  2641 16/60 (25%) Max Peter Wing Ho CHIN     2767 4/60  (26.2%)  16/60 Richard WALLS     2829 17/60  (26.8%)  35/60 Lee VANDERVIS     2256 36/60  (21.4%)  1 Fliss BUTCHER     1825 43/60  (17.3%)  1 Phillip DE WATTIGNAR     886 20/60  (8.4%)  1 None of these     29                Results       Peter Wing Ho CHIN Equalized     Richard WALLS Equalized               Transfers (to these colors):     Transfers (from these colors):               Histograms  Surplus   New Max  Votes: Ballots   Peter Wing Ho CHIN 125 48/60 15/60 16/60: 6384   Richard WALLS 188 1/60 32/60 35/60: 3163

The histogram shows how many ballots count a given fraction of a vote toward a winner. It is used to determine how much to lower the maximum. Ballots that cannot count for a lower-ranked candidate are not included in the histogram. The maximum is reduced in steps of the defined fractional precision, reducing the surplus by the number of ballots in the affected histogram bins divided by that precision. This process stops just before too many would be transferred. At this point, the affected bins are shown in red.
When only winners remain, they may reduce their maxima toward the Ideal Number.

Go to the next round

First Round | Next Round | Final Round | Previous Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 7  Votes  2641 16/60 (25%) Max Peter Wing Ho CHIN     2681 16/60  (25.4%)  15/60 Richard WALLS     2689 11/60  (25.5%)  32/60 Lee VANDERVIS     2354 16/60  (22.3%)  1 Fliss BUTCHER     1907 12/60  (18.1%)  1 Phillip DE WATTIGNAR     933 5/60  (8.8%)  1 None of these     29                Results       Phillip DE WATTIGNAR Defeated               Transfers (to these colors):

No elected candidates could reduce their maxima, so candidates were eliminated instead.
The last-place candidate is eliminated.
Go to the next round

First Round | Next Round | Final Round | Previous Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 8  Votes  2632 31/60 (25%) Max Peter Wing Ho CHIN     2924 8/60  (27.8%)  15/60 Richard WALLS     2883 11/60  (27.4%)  32/60 Lee VANDERVIS     2567 32/60  (24.4%)  1 Fliss BUTCHER     2155 9/60  (20.5%)  1 None of these     64                Results       Peter Wing Ho CHIN Equalized     Richard WALLS Equalized               Transfers (to these colors):     Transfers (from these colors):               Histograms  Surplus   New Max  Votes: Ballots   Peter Wing Ho CHIN 291 37/60 13/60 15/60: 6144   Richard WALLS 250 40/60 27/60 32/60: 2983

The histogram shows how many ballots count a given fraction of a vote toward a winner. It is used to determine how much to lower the maximum. Ballots that cannot count for a lower-ranked candidate are not included in the histogram. The maximum is reduced in steps of the defined fractional precision, reducing the surplus by the number of ballots in the affected histogram bins divided by that precision. This process stops just before too many would be transferred. At this point, the affected bins are shown in red.
When only winners remain, they may reduce their maxima toward the Ideal Number.

Go to the next round

First Round | Next Round | Final Round | Previous Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 9  Votes  2632 31/60 (25%) Max Peter Wing Ho CHIN     2764    (26.2%)  13/60 Richard WALLS     2681 46/60  (25.5%)  27/60 Lee VANDERVIS     2762 31/60  (26.2%)  1 Fliss BUTCHER     2321 43/60  (22.0%)  1 None of these     64                Results       Lee VANDERVIS Elected               Histograms  Surplus   New Max  Votes: Ballots   Lee VANDERVIS 130   1 1: 864 47/60: 792 33/60: 175 20/60: 260

The histogram shows how many ballots count a given fraction of a vote toward a winner. It is used to determine how much to lower the maximum. Ballots that cannot count for a lower-ranked candidate are not included in the histogram. The maximum is reduced in steps of the defined fractional precision, reducing the surplus by the number of ballots in the affected histogram bins divided by that precision. This process stops just before too many would be transferred. At this point, the affected bins are shown in red.
When only winners remain, they may reduce their maxima toward the Ideal Number.

There is a newly elected candidate whose maximum could not be reduced. The surplus is lower than the number of ballots in the first histogram bin (the ballots counting the largest fraction toward the candidate) times the smallest fraction, so they cannot all transfer that fraction without exceeding the surplus.
Go to the next round

First Round | Next Round | Final Round | Previous Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 10  Votes  2632 31/60 (25%) Max Peter Wing Ho CHIN     2764    (26.2%)  13/60 Richard WALLS     2681 46/60  (25.5%)  27/60 Lee VANDERVIS     2762 31/60  (26.2%)  1 Fliss BUTCHER     2321 43/60  (22.0%)  1 None of these     64                Results       Fliss BUTCHER Defeated               Transfers (to these colors):

No elected candidates could reduce their maxima, so candidates were eliminated instead.
The last-place candidate is eliminated.
Go to the next round

First Round | Next Round | Final Round | Previous Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 11  Votes  3445 (33.3%) Max Peter Wing Ho CHIN     3580 22/60  (34.6%)  13/60 Richard WALLS     3240 12/60  (31.4%)  27/60 Lee VANDERVIS     3514 26/60  (34.0%)  1 None of these     259                Results       Peter Wing Ho CHIN Equalized     Lee VANDERVIS Equalized               Transfers (to these colors):     Transfers (from these colors):               Histograms  Surplus   New Max  Votes: Ballots   Peter Wing Ho CHIN 135 22/60 11/60 13/60: 5530   Lee VANDERVIS 69 26/60 49/60 1: 864 47/60: 728 33/60: 170

The histogram shows how many ballots count a given fraction of a vote toward a winner. It is used to determine how much to lower the maximum. Ballots that cannot count for a lower-ranked candidate are not included in the histogram. The maximum is reduced in steps of the defined fractional precision, reducing the surplus by the number of ballots in the affected histogram bins divided by that precision. This process stops just before too many would be transferred. At this point, the affected bins are shown in red.
When only winners remain, they may reduce their maxima toward the Ideal Number.

Only winners remain, so the dotted line is raised to the Ideal Number.
Go to the next round

First Round | Final Round | Previous Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Round 12  Votes  3445 (33.3%) Max Peter Wing Ho CHIN     3497 47/60  (33.8%)  11/60 Richard WALLS     3368 15/60  (32.6%)  27/60 Lee VANDERVIS     3468 58/60  (33.6%)  49/60 None of these     259                Results         Peter Wing Ho CHIN Elected     Lee VANDERVIS Elected     Richard WALLS Elected

No further maximum reductions are allowed, so the count is complete. All winners should be near the Ideal Number of votes. Usually most ballots count toward their highest-ranked winner. Some count for two winners, but rarely more than that. See the slice report. The depth report shows the contribution of lower choices to the result. The "none of these" pile is an accurate measure of unsatisfied voters.

First Round | Final Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Rank	Fraction of votes for winners
1st	41.7%
2nd	38.3%
3rd	14.8%
4th	2.5%

First Round | Final Round | Depth | Slices | How it works | Main Page

Slices	Percentage of ballots with that many slices
1	26.9%
2	58.8%
3	14.3%