AUGUSTA
Sen. Garrett Paul Mason, R-Lisbon, remains the winner in the Nov. 6 election to represent Senate District 17.
The recount and results were reported Friday by the Secretary of State’s Office.
Colleen J. Quint, D-Minot, requested the recount after unofficial results from Election Day indicated she lost the election by 50 votes.
The recount determined the margin was 28 votes, with 9,818 votes cast for Mason, while 9,790 were cast for Quint. Early on election night, Quint appeared to have defeated Mason, with unofficial returns giving her 9,804 votes to Mason’s 9,727.
Quint, a lifelong Mainer who has lived in Minot for 25 years, served as executive director of the Mitchell Institute, Sen. George Mitchell’s scholarship program, for the past 13 years.
Mason, of Lisbon Falls, was 25 when he won his first term in the Senate two years ago.
Mason said this morning, “Every vote counts.”
“It’s an incredibly close election and I think it just underscores the impor- tance that every voter really does matter in these elections,” said Mason. “It’s important to get out there and vote for what you believe in.”
Knowing that he’s headed to Augusta for a second term, “I’m ecstatic,” Mason said. “I think that I got to really start some work for the people of Maine last time and I’m just so delighted that the people of Androscoggin County chose me to go back. I think that I bring a unique voice to the discussion — a young person from rural Maine — and I think I can bring an important voice as to why young people are leaving,” and not coming back to Maine.
Mason said he will continue to focus on making sure people are sticking around for the long haul and is excited to see how legislators can help create more jobs and get Maine on a firm financial footing.
Senate District 17 covers Greene, Leeds, Lisbon, Livermore, Livermore Falls, Mechanic Falls, Minot, Sabattus, Turner and Wales.
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less