Former planning commissioner wins contested Monroeville Council race |

Former planning commissioner wins contested Monroeville Council race

Dillon Carr
Monroeville’s municipal building

An incumbent and a political newcomer who ran unopposed for Monroeville Council in Tuesday’s primary sailed to victory while a former planning commissioner edged out his opponent, according to unofficial tallies.

In Ward 6, Bob Williams, 75, earned 55.5% of the votes counted compared with opponent Domenic Russo Jr.’s 44.2% with all precincts reporting results.

Both were vying for the seat currently held by Democrat Steve Duncan, who is not seeking re-election.

“I just want to say thanks to the Democratic Party for their support, their endorsement, and the voters that came out. I will serve them the best way I can,” said Williams, who served on Monroeville’s planning commission for 15 years until 2017. The retired iron worker is a Gateway High School graduate who lives in Monroeville with his wife, Renee.

Democratic incumbent Eric Poach, 60, ran unopposed for re-election after being appointed last year to fill a vacancy in Ward 2 when former Councilman Nick Gresock became mayor.

Democrat Steve Wolfram, 63, ran unopposed for Jim Johns’ current seat in Ward 4. Johns did not seek re-election.

No Republicans were on the primary ballot in the three wards.

Monroeville had 13,023 registered Democrats and 7,112 registered Republicans for the primary. According to unofficial results from the Allegheny County Elections Division, turnout was 27%.

Write-in votes and absentee ballots will not be final until around 20 days, according to officials in Allegheny County Elections Division.

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

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.