Research the candidates
By The Tribune-Review
Published: Friday, May 10, 2013, 8:57 p.m.
When voters research candidates for the primary in May, they may be in for a bit of a surprise when it comes to one particular candidate for the position of Fayette County treasurer. I am speaking of Brad Geyer of Connellsville. He is the director of accounts and finance for the City of Connellsville.
In his announcement “seeking the Democratic nomination for Fayette County treasurer,” Geyer states, “When I looked at the other candidates that had announced, I didn't see the qualities I want in a county treasurer; I believe I have those qualities, and I have the experience that matters.”
Now, let's evaluate Geyer's statement.
First of all, if he did not see the qualities for treasurer in the other candidates, perhaps he did not take the time to read their announcements. The other candidates are: Nancy Wilson, clerk for the treasurer's office for over 30 years; Beth Patton, employee of the county's tax claim bureau and tax clerk for over three years; Mike Zimcosky, employee for the controller's office; Melvin Lerch Jr., supervisor for more than two terms; Tom Pearson, licensed insurance agent; Larry Russman, licensed insurance and notary for over 20 years; and former state Rep. Larry Roberts. All are qualified.
Next, let's consider his experience and qualities. On Oct. 24, 2012, TribLIVE wrote, “Connellsville's ‘financial crisis' continues. City Treasurer Judy Keller warned Geyer that if Connellsville is declared a financially distressed city, the state can step in and take it over. Geyer's solution was to ask Scottdale Bank & Trust about taking out a loan just to make it through the year.
So, voters, please evaluate and study all candidates. An informed voter who votes always votes best.
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.
- Lebo’s coyotes
- Saved her life
- Beneficial, irreplaceable
- Fix icy hazard on Rt. 66
- Dress code
- Conspicuous by absence
- Orwellian redefinitions
- Not reviled abroad