Lawrenceville civic leader to run for City Council
A third candidate announced Friday he plans to run for the District 7 City Council seat formerly held by Patrick Dowd.
Tony Ceoffe, 29, of Lawrenceville, who unsuccessfully ran against Dowd in 2011, said he will seek the Pittsburgh Democratic Committee's nomination for the post.
Ceoffe will face Highland Park resident Deb Gross, 47, when Democratic committee members from the district elect a candidate to appear on the Nov. 5 ballot. The committee has not picked a date for its vote, according to Allegheny County Committee Chairwoman Nancy Mills.
Jim Wudarczyk, 61, of Bloomfield plans to run as an independent to serve the two years remaining in Dowd's term. Dowd, 45, of Highland Park resigned on Wednesday to head up a new North Side nonprofit.
District 7 includes East End neighborhoods such as the Strip District, Highland Park and Lawrenceville.
Ceoffe works as a client placement specialist for the Pittsburgh Housing Authority and serves as vice president of the board for the civic group Lawrenceville United. He chairs Pittsburgh's Sixth Ward Democratic Committee. He also serves on the steering committee for Friends of Arsenal Park in Lawrenceville and is a member of the Lawrenceville fireworks committee, which hosts an annual Independence Day celebration. His father is District Judge Anthony M. Ceoffe of Lawrenceville.
“I've been very, very active in our community, and I think that gives me a firm understanding of what the issues are in our neighborhoods,” Tony Ceoffe said. “We need an elected representative who can relate to those things from the ground up.”
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 â 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.