For mayor of Pittsburgh: Elect Bill Peduto
It would be easy to say that voting for anybody in Tuesday's Pittsburgh mayoral election would be better than what the city has been subjected to during the seven-year tenure of Luke Ravenstahl. But it would not be fair to the man set to be elected Pittsburgh's next mayor on Tuesday. For Bill Peduto is anything but a nondescript “anybody.”
Mr. Peduto, 49, a Democrat of Point Breeze, faces token opposition from Republican Josh Wander of Squirrel Hill. And the good measure of this decent man was evident and impressive when, immediately after his primary election victory in May, and through words and deeds, he filled the void of a largely AWOL Mr. Ravenstahl. Peduto looked and acted like the mayor he will become in January.
Born and bred in Pittsburgh, Peduto loves the city and has dedicated his life to its betterment. And he has not simply visions of how to get the city moving but concrete plans. Witness his continuing dogged efforts to convince Slovenian LED light maker Grah Lighting to build a manufacturing facility in Pittsburgh and make it Grah's North American headquarters. It's just one of many examples we could cite. And it is the stuff of leadership.
Indeed, Peduto faces significant challenges — leading Pittsburgh out of state receivership, fixing a broken pension system and restoring integrity to a scandal-ridden police department being right at the top. But given that at long last Pittsburgh will have a leader blowing a trumpet offering a clear and crisp sound, he will meet these challenges with aplomb.
And that's why we endorse Bill Peduto for mayor.
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.