The record · Split votes
How the Council Votes
Who voted the same way, counted from the verified roll calls on which the council split: at least one councilor voted Yea and at least one voted Nay. This page reports counts. It names no groups and implies no reason for any vote.
Every final vote behind these numbers is in the Council Vote Ledger, with its sources. Tied and failed roll calls are listed at the top of the ledger. Amendment roll calls are counted here too; the ledger lists an amendment roll call only when it was tied or failed.
Who voted the same way, on one line
← This end
Voted yes on Motion to amend the report as shown in Kanal 1 (2025-10-01) Single source: council minutes
Voted yes on Motion to change the April 30, 2026 date in the Resolution to May 30, 2026 (2026-02-12) Single source: council minutes
This end →
Voted no on Motion to amend the report as shown in Kanal 1 (2025-10-01) Single source: council minutes
Voted no on Motion to change the April 30, 2026 date in the Resolution to May 30, 2026 (2026-02-12) Single source: council minutes
- Candace Avalos D1
- Sameer Kanal D2
- Angelita Morillo D3
- Mitch Green D4
- Tiffany Koyama Lane D3
- Jamie Dunphy D1
- Steve Novick D3
- Elana Pirtle-Guiney D2
- Loretta Smith D1
- Olivia Clark D4
- Eric Zimmerman D4
- Dan Ryan D2
- District 1
- District 2
- District 3
- District 4
- Color shows district only.
Pair by pair
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 Candace Avalos | — | 138 of 163 | 142 of 160 | 143 of 164 | 134 of 157 | 120 of 163 | 99 of 162 | 88 of 163 | 75 of 153 | 72 of 155 | 53 of 156 | 50 of 161 |
| 2 Sameer Kanal | 138 of 163 | — | 137 of 162 | 139 of 166 | 129 of 157 | 118 of 165 | 102 of 164 | 88 of 165 | 70 of 154 | 71 of 155 | 53 of 157 | 56 of 162 |
| 3 Angelita Morillo | 142 of 160 | 137 of 162 | — | 147 of 164 | 135 of 156 | 120 of 163 | 99 of 162 | 88 of 163 | 72 of 153 | 71 of 154 | 54 of 155 | 56 of 161 |
| 4 Mitch Green | 143 of 164 | 139 of 166 | 147 of 164 | — | 139 of 159 | 130 of 167 | 111 of 165 | 93 of 167 | 78 of 156 | 76 of 157 | 57 of 159 | 57 of 164 |
| 5 Tiffany Koyama Lane | 134 of 157 | 129 of 157 | 135 of 156 | 139 of 159 | — | 124 of 159 | 98 of 156 | 89 of 160 | 72 of 147 | 71 of 148 | 57 of 151 | 55 of 155 |
| 6 Jamie Dunphy | 120 of 163 | 118 of 165 | 120 of 163 | 130 of 167 | 124 of 159 | — | 112 of 164 | 103 of 166 | 93 of 155 | 94 of 157 | 72 of 158 | 73 of 163 |
| 7 Steve Novick | 99 of 162 | 102 of 164 | 99 of 162 | 111 of 165 | 98 of 156 | 112 of 164 | — | 117 of 164 | 87 of 154 | 107 of 155 | 81 of 157 | 90 of 162 |
| 8 Elana Pirtle-Guiney | 88 of 163 | 88 of 165 | 88 of 163 | 93 of 167 | 89 of 160 | 103 of 166 | 117 of 164 | — | 115 of 155 | 127 of 156 | 110 of 158 | 113 of 163 |
| 9 Loretta Smith | 75 of 153 | 70 of 154 | 72 of 153 | 78 of 156 | 72 of 147 | 93 of 155 | 87 of 154 | 115 of 155 | — | 118 of 148 | 119 of 147 | 112 of 153 |
| 10 Olivia Clark | 72 of 155 | 71 of 155 | 71 of 154 | 76 of 157 | 71 of 148 | 94 of 157 | 107 of 155 | 127 of 156 | 118 of 148 | — | 118 of 153 | 120 of 158 |
| 11 Eric Zimmerman | 53 of 156 | 53 of 157 | 54 of 155 | 57 of 159 | 57 of 151 | 72 of 158 | 81 of 157 | 110 of 158 | 119 of 147 | 118 of 153 | — | 122 of 160 |
| 12 Dan Ryan | 50 of 161 | 56 of 162 | 56 of 161 | 57 of 164 | 55 of 155 | 73 of 163 | 90 of 162 | 113 of 163 | 112 of 153 | 120 of 158 | 122 of 160 | — |
Darker = same vote on a larger share of shared split votes. Scroll sideways on small screens, or open the list below.
All 66 pairs as a list
- Angelita Morillo and Mitch Green: 147 of 164 (90%)
- Candace Avalos and Angelita Morillo: 142 of 160 (89%)
- Mitch Green and Tiffany Koyama Lane: 139 of 159 (87%)
- Candace Avalos and Mitch Green: 143 of 164 (87%)
- Angelita Morillo and Tiffany Koyama Lane: 135 of 156 (87%)
- Candace Avalos and Tiffany Koyama Lane: 134 of 157 (85%)
- Candace Avalos and Sameer Kanal: 138 of 163 (85%)
- Sameer Kanal and Angelita Morillo: 137 of 162 (85%)
- Sameer Kanal and Mitch Green: 139 of 166 (84%)
- Sameer Kanal and Tiffany Koyama Lane: 129 of 157 (82%)
- Elana Pirtle-Guiney and Olivia Clark: 127 of 156 (81%)
- Loretta Smith and Eric Zimmerman: 119 of 147 (81%)
- Loretta Smith and Olivia Clark: 118 of 148 (80%)
- Tiffany Koyama Lane and Jamie Dunphy: 124 of 159 (78%)
- Mitch Green and Jamie Dunphy: 130 of 167 (78%)
- Olivia Clark and Eric Zimmerman: 118 of 153 (77%)
- Eric Zimmerman and Dan Ryan: 122 of 160 (76%)
- Olivia Clark and Dan Ryan: 120 of 158 (76%)
- Elana Pirtle-Guiney and Loretta Smith: 115 of 155 (74%)
- Candace Avalos and Jamie Dunphy: 120 of 163 (74%)
- Angelita Morillo and Jamie Dunphy: 120 of 163 (74%)
- Loretta Smith and Dan Ryan: 112 of 153 (73%)
- Sameer Kanal and Jamie Dunphy: 118 of 165 (72%)
- Steve Novick and Elana Pirtle-Guiney: 117 of 164 (71%)
- Elana Pirtle-Guiney and Eric Zimmerman: 110 of 158 (70%)
- Elana Pirtle-Guiney and Dan Ryan: 113 of 163 (69%)
- Steve Novick and Olivia Clark: 107 of 155 (69%)
- Jamie Dunphy and Steve Novick: 112 of 164 (68%)
- Mitch Green and Steve Novick: 111 of 165 (67%)
- Tiffany Koyama Lane and Steve Novick: 98 of 156 (63%)
- Sameer Kanal and Steve Novick: 102 of 164 (62%)
- Jamie Dunphy and Elana Pirtle-Guiney: 103 of 166 (62%)
- Candace Avalos and Steve Novick: 99 of 162 (61%)
- Angelita Morillo and Steve Novick: 99 of 162 (61%)
- Jamie Dunphy and Loretta Smith: 93 of 155 (60%)
- Jamie Dunphy and Olivia Clark: 94 of 157 (60%)
- Steve Novick and Loretta Smith: 87 of 154 (56%)
- Mitch Green and Elana Pirtle-Guiney: 93 of 167 (56%)
- Tiffany Koyama Lane and Elana Pirtle-Guiney: 89 of 160 (56%)
- Steve Novick and Dan Ryan: 90 of 162 (56%)
- Candace Avalos and Elana Pirtle-Guiney: 88 of 163 (54%)
- Angelita Morillo and Elana Pirtle-Guiney: 88 of 163 (54%)
- Sameer Kanal and Elana Pirtle-Guiney: 88 of 165 (53%)
- Steve Novick and Eric Zimmerman: 81 of 157 (52%)
- Mitch Green and Loretta Smith: 78 of 156 (50%)
- Candace Avalos and Loretta Smith: 75 of 153 (49%)
- Tiffany Koyama Lane and Loretta Smith: 72 of 147 (49%)
- Mitch Green and Olivia Clark: 76 of 157 (48%)
- Tiffany Koyama Lane and Olivia Clark: 71 of 148 (48%)
- Angelita Morillo and Loretta Smith: 72 of 153 (47%)
- Candace Avalos and Olivia Clark: 72 of 155 (46%)
- Angelita Morillo and Olivia Clark: 71 of 154 (46%)
- Sameer Kanal and Olivia Clark: 71 of 155 (46%)
- Jamie Dunphy and Eric Zimmerman: 72 of 158 (46%)
- Sameer Kanal and Loretta Smith: 70 of 154 (45%)
- Jamie Dunphy and Dan Ryan: 73 of 163 (45%)
- Tiffany Koyama Lane and Eric Zimmerman: 57 of 151 (38%)
- Mitch Green and Eric Zimmerman: 57 of 159 (36%)
- Tiffany Koyama Lane and Dan Ryan: 55 of 155 (35%)
- Angelita Morillo and Eric Zimmerman: 54 of 155 (35%)
- Angelita Morillo and Dan Ryan: 56 of 161 (35%)
- Mitch Green and Dan Ryan: 57 of 164 (35%)
- Sameer Kanal and Dan Ryan: 56 of 162 (35%)
- Candace Avalos and Eric Zimmerman: 53 of 156 (34%)
- Sameer Kanal and Eric Zimmerman: 53 of 157 (34%)
- Candace Avalos and Dan Ryan: 50 of 161 (31%)
How this is measured
- Which votes count
- Only editor-verified roll calls on which at least one councilor voted Yea and at least one voted Nay: 172 so far (70 on items, 102 on amendments), out of 520 verified final votes and amendment roll calls through 2026-10-01. Unanimous votes are left out because they show no difference between councilors. A vote on an item itself is read from two official sources that must agree: the City's vote database and the item's own page. An amendment roll call is read from one, the Clerk's minutes on the item's page, because the City's vote database does not list amendment roll calls; where one is named on this site it is labeled “Single source: council minutes”. A roll call on a budget amendment is an amendment roll call too and is measured with them once the editor has verified it; it is read from one source as well, the vote sheet the City published, and is labeled “Budget amendment” and “Single source: budget vote sheet (City efiles)”. Only those two kinds, final votes and amendment roll calls, are measured here. A separately voted part of an amendment (a divided question) is an amendment roll call and is measured with them. Roll calls on procedural motions (to call the question, refer, table, recess and so on), separately voted parts of an item itself, and ballots in council officer elections are listed on the vote ledger but are left out of this page. What the Record holds in full: each final vote on an ordinance, resolution or report listed in the City's vote database, with items passed together on a consent agenda counted one by one; each amendment roll call that the Clerk's minutes record as a “Motion to amend” or “Vote to amend”, as a motion to add, remove, replace, strike, delete, change, insert, substitute or update text, or as a motion to make a technical amendment, including on an item that never reached a final vote; each roll call on a budget amendment printed on one of the vote sheets the City publishes as a PDF in its efiles records, where the whole sheet reads exactly (one motion, all twelve councilors each marked once, and printed totals and a printed result that equal the marks), counted with the amendments, and each roll call such a PDF shows only as a picture that was transcribed by hand and approved by the editor against the page; each separately voted part of a divided question (“Vote called on …”) where the minutes show a division directly above it, counted with the amendments when it was an amendment that was divided and on its own when it was a part of the item itself; and each roll call on a procedural motion that the minutes record as a motion to call the question, close or limit debate, suspend the rules, refer, table, postpone, reconsider, recess, adjourn or reorder the agenda, or as an appeal of the presiding officer's ruling. Not included: budget-amendment roll calls for which the City has published no vote sheet, or whose vote sheet records more than one vote on a page in text (a motion that was reconsidered, amended, divided or withdrawn), prints its result as a vote on a motion rather than on an amendment, or does not read exactly, which are withheld; roll calls the minutes record under any other wording (for example a tentative decision on a land-use appeal, a motion to approve or adopt part of a budget or report, or the confirmation of an appointment); committee votes; and roll calls whose tally cannot be read exactly from the City's minutes (for example, a printed count that differs from the names listed, or a tally that does not account for all twelve councilors), which are withheld.
- Same way
- Two councilors voted the same way when both voted Yea or both voted Nay. For each pair, the denominator is the split votes on which both recorded a Yea or a Nay; an absence, abstention, or recusal by either one leaves that vote out of the pair's count rather than counting as a difference. The mayor, who votes only to break a council tie, is not included.
- The line
- Each pair's share of different votes is treated as a distance, and classical multidimensional scaling finds the single line whose spacing comes closest to all of those distances at once. The direction is fixed by a rule, not a judgment: the councilor first in alphabetical order is always placed left of center. The line's two ends are labeled only with the verified split votes whose Yea and Nay votes most closely follow the order along it, in the vote's own title. Dot colors show each councilor's district and nothing else.
- When it appears
- The line and the table appear once there are at least 20 verified split votes and every pair of councilors shares at least 10 of them. Below that, this page says so instead of drawing a pattern.
- What it does not say
- Nothing here explains why anyone voted as they did, and nothing groups councilors beyond the counts shown. Distance on the line is relative to this council and these votes only.