Monroeville Mayor Greg Erosenko will face off against Councilman Bernhard Erb in the November general election, after both earned their party's nomination on Tuesday.
Erosenko, a Democrat, received 1,990 votes in the primary on Tuesday, while Democratic challenger Janice Olsweski received 1,067 votes.
Erb was the only Republican on the ballot and received 722 votes.
There were 530 write-in votes cast on the Republican ballot.
All results are unofficial until certified by the Allegheny County Division of Elections.
Erb said that if elected as mayor he would push for Marcellus shale gas drilling in Monroeville to generate more revenue.
“It definitely is one of the things I think we need to look at,” Erb said after Tuesday night's primary victory.
“Obviously, it's going to be council's decision whether or not we do it.”
Erosenko and Erb have debated the continued funding of the Monroeville Dispatch Center.
Erb — who argued that it would save hundreds of thousands of dollars and at least maintain the same level of service — voted unsuccessfully as a councilman to close the dispatch center and transfer services to Allegheny County.
Erosenko has voiced his support to maintain funding for all services provided by the municipality, which he has said are better than what an agency outside of Monroeville can offer.
He has said that if re-elected, he would focus on improving elected officials' relationship with residents and the business community.
Kyle Lawson is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-856-7400, ext. 8755, or email@example.com.
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.