.

Recount Wednesday for 106th Assembly District Race

Only 48 votes separate the candidates in one of Newtown's state legislative districts.

Newtown’s Registrars of Voters are holding a recount on Wednesday for the 106th State Assembly District race between Republican Mitch Bolinsky and Democrat Lisa Romano on Nov. 6. As the returns were calculated late on election night, Bolinsky led in balloting by 48 votes, 5,748-5,700.

A recount is triggered by state statute if the margin of victory is less than half a percent of the total number of ballots cast in that race. With a total of 11,448 votes cast, the winning margin fell below the state threshold at 0.4 percent.

According to reports in the Newtown Bee and News-Times, Romano originally stated she planned to waive the right to a recount, however decided to allow it to proceed after reconsidering.

The registrars will be conducting the recount Wednesday at 4 p.m. Check back with Newtown Patch Wednesday evening for the results of the recount.

Kevin Fitzgerald November 14, 2012 at 12:37 PM
Considering the number of errors with machine counting these days, every outcome that meets the threshold for a recount should be recounted, regardless of what the candidates decide. Though unlikely, it would only take 25 "mis-read" ballots (or .002%) to make Lisa Romano the Representative-Elect. That alone makes this re-count worth the time and money.
Bruce Walczak TheNewtownRooster.com November 14, 2012 at 01:42 PM
I want to congratulate Mitch for what I do believe will be his election to the 106th. It was surely a close race. Mitch now has a big job to do for Newtown in Hartford and I wish him the best. I don’t begrudge Lisa at all for wanting he recount. There is nothing wrong with abiding by state law. I am a bit surprised however at Cathy’s anonymous comment above and even more surprises at Mr. Bolinsky’s comments in the News Times today. Mr. Bolinsky commented that in essence 50% of the voters were wrong as he is better choice to be the town’s legislator. 50% were not wrong and 50% were not right, it was simply an election. There is no right or wrong decision, just a person who happens to win. Mr. Bolinsky now represents the entire town, Republicans, Democrats, Independents and unaffiliated voters. He might be wise to be a bit more gracious and a bit slower to condemn those he feels were not on his side of the isle. Hartford can be tough on freshman members, especially those who are reluctant to show the humility that he says he gained during the election process.
Kevin Fitzgerald November 14, 2012 at 02:11 PM
Having been party to a smaller, local election recount just last year, I understand first hand why a "losing" candidate is quick to concede the race only to support a recount later. In my case, just last year, I lost my re-election bid to Newtown's Legislative Council. Just eight votes separated Paul Lundquist and I. I conceded the race to Paul on Election Night (via message as he was traveling) but on the advice of "experts" familiar with these things, I was advised to let the recount happen anyway. I explained that to Paul as well. Keep in mind, Paul was the last person I wanted to see lose the election. I had Paul's campaign sign in my yard! Even before I knew that a recount was required, I was pressured by the media to concede. It was days before I was informed officially about the recount process and because I did nothing about it, the recount happened anyway. So while the recount did not change the outcome of my race, it did in many others and I came to understand why they are necessary. So it doesn't surprise me that Lisa Romano changed direction. She owes it to the thousands of voters like me who came out to support her and I would say the same of Mitch under the same conditions. The good news in my case is that Paul has done a fantastic job in his Council role and rather than wish I had won the recount, I wish I could have served alongside Paul. The only concern we should have with recounts is why anyone would want to stop one.
Buck L. November 14, 2012 at 02:56 PM
Ms. Romano would have to find 49 votes to win, that's the difference (48 votes ) +1. An unlikely event seeing as the machines are in fact very accurate.
Cathy November 14, 2012 at 03:11 PM
Let me get this straight. First, if you read between the lines of Ms. Romano's "gracious" concession letter to the Bee (11/9/12), she warns readers that there are many unpublished flaws with her opponent, and if only Ms. Romano had pointed them out to us in her campaign, she would have won. Now we find out Ms. Romano had filed her recount waiver to the wrong government office, so apparently the waiver she announced to us is not official, and now she has a loophole to change her mind. Then she blames her change of mind on the Newtown Bee's publication deadline, which she says had forced her to make a hasty decision. Next, although her reason stated for waiving a recount was the cost to the town, now the cost isn't an issue for her since she figures if she gets her job in Hartford, she can make all CT taxpayers share that cost, rather than the burden just being on Newtown taxpayers (by securing "Newtown's fair share of state funding"). So, waive further recount, concede the election, un-waive, un-concede. I must question her tactics.
Bruce Walczak TheNewtownRooster.com November 14, 2012 at 03:13 PM
Apparently Cathy changed her name to Newtown Mom. Not sure why?
Bruce Walczak TheNewtownRooster.com November 14, 2012 at 03:14 PM
Buck actually if half of that changed to the other persons favor the results would change.
Bruce Walczak TheNewtownRooster.com November 14, 2012 at 03:51 PM
It appears that Cathy has two names she uses on the Patch. Cathy and Newtown Mom. or maybe even more?
Kevin Fitzgerald November 14, 2012 at 04:13 PM
Buck, if there were machine errors reading the ballots, assuming the same total, only 25 "mis-read" ballots (orignally counted at Mitch but recounted as Lisa) would give her the win. To your point, if there were no errors and just the total is wrong, then yes, she would need 49 "net new" votes.
Kevin Fitzgerald November 14, 2012 at 04:16 PM
Actually, I submitted a long Reply to the comment made by "Newtown Mom". But now I see the same comment under a new name "Cathy" and so my Reply is gone.
Bruce Walczak TheNewtownRooster.com November 14, 2012 at 04:31 PM
kevin said Having been party to a smaller, local election recount just last year, I understand first hand why a "losing" candidate is quick to concede the race only to support a recount later. In my case, just last year, I lost my re-election bid to Newtown's Legislative Council. Just eight votes separated Paul Lundquist and I. I conceded the race to Paul on Election Night (via message as he was traveling) but on the advice of "experts" familiar with these things, I was advised to let the recount happen anyway. I explained that to Paul as well. Keep in mind, Paul was the last person I wanted to see lose the election. I had Paul's campaign sign in my yard! Even before I knew that a recount was required, I was pressured by the media to concede. It was days before I was informed officially about the recount process and because I did nothing about it, the recount happened anyway. So while the recount did not change the outcome of my race, it did in many others and I came to understand why they are necessary. So it doesn't surprise me that Lisa Romano changed direction. She owes it to the thousands of voters like me who came out to support her and I would say the same of Mitch under the same conditions. The good news in my case is that Paul has done a fantastic job in his Council role and rather than wish I had won the recount, I wish I could have served alongside Paul. The only concern we should have with recounts is why anyone would want to stop one.
Kelley Anne November 14, 2012 at 04:47 PM
The Patch reported earlier that there were 29 Absentee votes, this nuimber seems to be unrealistic. Has anyone seen a different number reported?
Buck L. November 14, 2012 at 05:26 PM
The tallies from the machines have been checked and re-checked according to the registrar's office. Those numbers historically do not change. Errors in tabulation can occur in the AB vote which is a far greater number than reported in the Patch. While I admire Ms. Romano's enthusiasm, I believe she should have listened to her party and registrar and stuck to her original waiver. Flip flopping only irritates those who have to count the ballots. It puts into question the character of the individual and their ability at making a decision and sticking to it.
Bruce Walczak TheNewtownRooster.com November 14, 2012 at 06:08 PM
Last week Buck said:"Oh, and resorting to name calling from a troll identity is cowardly, Truthteller. " Now he is doing the same thing by questioning Lisa's character for asking for a re-count and then hiding behind his anonymous name.
Kelley Anne November 14, 2012 at 06:14 PM
What about the mail in absentee ballots, the 29 count reported on Patch is highly suspect.
yoda November 14, 2012 at 11:34 PM
Bruce, Please tell Yoda none of you IPN's will run for selectman? Actually, I can use some entertainment! Bruce give it a try!!!! COME ON YOU CAN DO IT!!!!!!!
Jaimie Cura (Editor) November 15, 2012 at 01:14 AM
Update here: http://newtown.patch.com/articles/newtown-s-106th-district-recount-underway

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »