Voters support incumbent Penn-Trafford board members
All four incumbent Penn-Trafford School Board members appear to have won nominations on both the Democratic and Republican ballots, according to unofficial results from county election bureaus.
The results from the May 21 primary election put Marty Stovar, P. Jay Tray, Rich Niemiec and Toni Ising in position to win re-election in November unless write-in candidates emerge to challenge them. Four new four-year terms begin in December.
The vote totals in this story include the results as they were reported last week in Westmoreland and Allegheny counties. It's possible that a few more absentee ballots from service members or residents who are overseas could have trickled in by a Tuesday-afternoon deadline in Westmoreland County to affect the tightest school board race — among Republicans in Region 3. That deadline was after this paper went to press.
In Region 3, Ising edged Michael Morocco Sr. among Republicans by 218 to 216, with Tim Wilson finishing last with 116 votes.
Ising, who is in her fourth year on the board, had a more comfortable margin on the Democratic side, where her 187 votes topped Wilson's 127 and Morocco's 79.
Stovar, who was appointed to the board in January 2012, fended off former board member Sallie Bradley in Region 1. Stovar topped Bradley 323 to 115 on the Republican ballot and 319 to 202 on the Democratic side, with all precincts in Westmoreland and Allegheny counties reporting.
In Region 2, Tray and Niemiec got the two nominations for both parties over Harry A. Smith, who retired in 2011 as the district's assistant superintendent.
Tray, the board's president, led among Republicans with 283 votes, followed by Niemiec with 230 and Smith with 181. Democrats also favored Tray with 281 votes, followed by 225 for Niemiec and 163 for Smith.
A political newcomer was the top vote-getter among Democrats seeking four nominations for four-year seats on Trafford Council.
Peter J. Ledwich, with 167 votes, earned a nomination along with incumbent councilmen John “Jay” Race, 164; Henry Schultz, 155; and Casey Shoub, 135.
The fifth candidate, Cheryl Petersen, had 107 votes.
Ledwich, Race and Shoub also are in the mix to receive two write-in nominations on the Republican side, where Council President Richard Laird and emergency-management coordinator Brian Ellicker were the only candidates on the ballot.
Depending on the election bureau's interpretation of the way their names were written in, Ledwich and Race each appear to have 16 GOP nominations, and Shoub might have 15.
A candidate needs to receive at least 10 write-in votes to earn a nomination.
The Democratic and Republican committees will nominate candidates later this year to run for a two-year seat that will appear on the Nov. 5 ballot.
Though Mayor Rey Peduzzi was unopposed for the Republican nomination for re-election, a former mayor had enough write-in votes to win the Democratic nomination.
Mary Dobos received 76 write-in votes from Democrats. The next-closest write-in candidate was Ronald Garvis, who could be credited with as many as 24.
Write-in candidate Mike Matrisch had enough votes to receive Democratic and Republican nominations — and become the fourth candidate for four open Manor Council seats.
Matrisch received support from 26 Democrats and 16 Republicans. His total on the GOP side was slightly higher than the 12 voters who wrote in Keith Kitterman's name.
Three incumbent councilmen who were on the ballot — Bruce Hartman, James Morgan and Steve Ira — won Republican nominations.
No Democrats filed for positions on the ballot.
Jeremy Dixon, the only Republican who filed, also received at least 10 votes to lead write-in candidates supported by Democrat voters. Besides the 10 voters who listed his name, three others wrote in “J.R.” Dixon or “Jeremiah Dixon.”
Chris Foreman is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-856-7400, ext. 8671, or email@example.com.
Show commenting policy
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.