Voters choose Pauline Calabrese as mayor of Penn Hills |
Penn Hills

Voters choose Pauline Calabrese as mayor of Penn Hills

Dillon Carr
Pauline Calabrese

An attorney and former Penn Hills school board member cruised to victory to be the municipality’s new mayor, according to unofficial tallies.

Pauline Calabrese earned 67.2% of the votes counted compared with opponent John Petrucci’s 32.6% with all precincts reporting results.

Calabrese, a 57-year-old Democrat, will serve a four-year term for a yearly $4,800 salary. She will replace Mayor Sara Kuhn, who served two back-to-back terms after serving on council since 2004. She did not seek re-election.

“I’m so excited to move forward,” Calabrese said as she celebrated the victory at the Moose Lodge in Verona. “It’s not about me, it’s about we. What we’re going to do do, and we’re going to do great things — starting today.”

Calabrese will serve with two new faces on council – Frank Pecora and Jim Getsy – once they are all sworn in in January.

The councilmen will replace Gary Underwood, who did not seek re-election and Mark Brodnicki, who finished second-to-last in the seven-way race for the two seats with 9% of the vote in the May primary.

Petrucci, who announced his bid for mayor in December 2018, was not immediately available to comment.

The councilman failed to earn enough democratic votes in the May primary but earned enough Republican write-in votes to be that party’s nomination. That made him “a Democrat running on the Republican ticket,” Petrucci had said.

The county’s unofficial election results do not account for absentee ballots. There were 19 write-in votes. The unofficial results reported a 30% turnout.

Dillon Carr is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Dillon at 412-871-2325, [email protected] or via Twitter .

Categories: Local | Penn Hills
TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using 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.