Share This Page

Schenck elected mayor of Green Tree

| Tuesday, Nov. 5, 2013, 10:57 p.m.

Green Tree Mayor C.F. Hammer did not run for reelection. Democrat Edward Schenck received 68 percent of the 1,088 votes.

Schenck had been serving on borough council.

Additionally, there currently is a tie for the fourth open council seat with all four precincts reporting. David Lorenzini (R) and Daniel Gall (D) each have 486 votes — 11.72 percent.

The three other seats were kept by incumbents Mark Sampogna (D), David Rea (D) and John A. Novak (R).

Unopposed incumbent Mayor Jack Kobistek (I) will serve Carnegie for another term. Write-in candidates received nine votes.

Carnegie Council candidates were also unopposed. Phil Boyd (cross-filed) beat out Robert Veres (R) in the May primary to represent Ward 1. Council president Rick D'Loss (D) and vice president Pat Catena (D) will serve another term for Ward 2.

Write-in candidates received 42 votes in Crafton against unopposed incumbent James G. Bloom, who received 666 votes.

On council, incumbents Tracy Post (D) and David O'Brien (R) were reelected. Nina Amendola (D) and Fred Amendola (crossfiled) unseated incumbents Timothy Stewart (R) and Thomas Phillips (D).

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.