Pittsburgh council president will not run for mayor
Pittsburgh City Council President Darlene Harris ended speculation on Thursday that she would run as an independent candidate for mayor, saying she didn't want to cause a Democratic Party rift by running against its nominee.
The Spring Hill Democrat changed her voter registration to Independent after the May primary, saying she was positioning herself to run in case Mayor Luke Ravenstahl stepped down.
A federal grand jury has interviewed several people close to Ravenstahl, who decided in March not to run for re-election. Ravenstahl and his attorney have repeatedly said he is not a grand jury target.
Should Ravenstahl leave office, Harris would be first in line to replace him. To do that, however, she would have to relinquish her council seat.
“I was just keeping my options open,” Harris, 60, said.
Thursday was the deadline for independent candidates to file nominating papers with the Allegheny County Elections Division for the Nov. 5 election.
Retired businessman Lester Ludwig, 80, of Squirrel Hill was the only independent to file for the mayor's race. He will face Democrat Bill Peduto, 48, of Point Breeze and Republican Josh Wander, 42, of Squirrel Hill.
Two Constitution Party candidates filed to run for Allegheny County Sheriff and Allegheny County Council.
Mike Zitelli of Bridgeville will challenge Sheriff William Mullen, a Democrat. In the council's District 1 race, Jim Barr of West View will face Democrat Daniel A. McClain Jr. and Republican Tom Baker, both of Ross.
Bob Bauder is a staff writer forTrib Total Media.
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.