Precinct by precinct turnout: 2011 v 2013

In the 2011 city election, just 9946 people voted. In the 2013 election, that number rose 16% to 11581, an increase of 1635 voters. The following table shows where those additional votes came from KY. The below columns are (1) ward/precinct; (2) total vote in that precinct in 2011; (3) total vote in that precinct in 2013; (3) the difference in the number of votes between 2011 and 2013; (4) what that difference represents as a percentage change from 2011 to 2013; and (5) the councilor who came in first in that precinct

1-1 – 239 – 276 – +37 – +15% – Mercier
1-2 – 993 – 1028 – +35 – +4% – Mercier
1-3 – 831 – 911 – +80 – +10% – Milinazzo

2-1 – 93 – 100 – +7 – +8% – Mercier
2-2 – 133 – 219 – +86 – +65% – Nuon
2-3 = 280 – 307 – +27 – + 10% – Mitchell

3-1 – 237 – 302 – +65 – +27% – Gitschier
3-2 – 159 – 222 – +63 – +40% – Nuon
3-3 – 231 – 263 – +32 – +14% – Nuon

4-1 – 346 – 443 – +97 – +28% – Nuon
4-2 – 146 – 215 – +69 – +47% – Nuon
4-3 – 172 – 208 – +36 – +21% – Nuon

5-1 – 228 – 300 – +72 – +32% – Mercier
5-2 – 157 – 216 – +59 – +38% – Mercier
5-3 – 297 – 351 – +54 – +18% – Mercier

6-1 – 405 – 455 – +50 – +12% – Mercier
6-2 – 468 – 495 – +27 – +6% – Mercier
6-3 – 454 – 508 – +54 – +12% – Mercier

7-1 – 142 – 214 – +72 = +51% – Mercier
7-2 – 116 – 203 – +87 – +75% – Nuon
7-3 – 145 – 197 – +52 – +36% – Nuon

8-1 – 246 – 286 – +40 – +16% – Mercier
8-2 – 348 – 394 – +46 – +13% – Mercier
8-3 – 774 – 764 -10 – -1% – Elliott/Gitschier

9-1 – 230 – 253 – +23 – +10% – Mercier
9-2 – 396 – 436 – +4- – +45% – Mercier
9-3 – 275 – 327 – +52 – +19% – Mercier

10-1 – 260 – 299 – +39 – +15% – Mercier
10-2 – 150 – 185 – +35 – +23% – Mercier
10-3 – 89 – 129 – +40 – +45% – Mercier

11-1 – 225 – 311 – +86 – +38% – Mercier
11-2 – 309 – 358 – +49 – +16% – Mercier
11-3 – 372 – 406 – +34 – +9% – Mercier

6 thoughts on “Precinct by precinct turnout: 2011 v 2013”

  1. 8-3 needs a correction, at least in the vote numbers, and hopefully in the percent change. If the percent change is correct as is, then it flags an issue that should be examined further.

  2. That 1% decrease is disappointing, especially in light of the overall increase of 16%. Why? Maybe its the dearth of candidates from the usually involved Highlands. This year it was Erik Gitschier and Fred Doyle on the council side, and Erik is not in 8-3, and on the school committee only Jim Leary is from the Highlands. Maybe the Highlands have become the rest home for people who are sick of politics.

  3. Precinct boundaries were redrawn effective 2012 in light of the 2010 Federal Census..Thus , 8-3 today may not be an exact match with what was 8-3 in 2011.

  4. Before election day, I would have said a higher turnout would benefit candidates like Mitchell, Hargis, or Nuon.

    Clearly many more citizens made their voices heard and they made their opinions sound loud and clear. People want a change and people want neighborhoods to be a focus and not only Downtown.

  5. I’ll post this here.

    Received a call today for a research survey regarding on local elections. Since I finished the survey, the caller informed me of the professor and the university that the research was being done for. One of the questions was a candidate ranking question, and the other was asking which side of partisan politics I leaned to. I said no to the ranking idea, but I tried not to answer the partisan politics one. I gave in and said ‘independent’, when I wanted to respond non-partisan. Also he asked questions on the numerous ways I was contacted by candidates. The surveyor sounded like a student and he asked for my first name at the end of the interview, and I responded but you already know my name, you asked for me when I answered the phone. “I have to go by the script”, was his response. I understood.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>