ShareThis Page
Valley News Dispatch

Uncounted write-in votes may decide Cheswick Council race

Brian C. Rittmeyer
| Tuesday, Nov. 7, 2017, 11:24 p.m.

A large number of write-in votes were cast for Cheswick Council in Tuesday's election, making it unclear who the victors were for four council seats.

According to unofficial election results, 485 write-ins were cast — accounting for about 30 percent of the vote.

It was not known Tuesday how many candidates were among the write-ins, or if any of them had received enough votes to upset those who were on the ballot.

Among ballot candidates, newcomer Catherine Crail was the top vote-getter, with just over 16 percent of the vote.

She had been touted on a slate of candidates that included three write-ins — Geoff Benedict, Rose Cale and Rich Graf.

Rounding out the top vote-getters on the ballot were incumbents Kathleen Gillard, Frank Meledandri Jr. and Paul Jack.

Lewis Accorsi, a former mayor and councilman, failed to win a council seat.

To get onto council, a write-in candidate would need at least 210 votes to top Jack, who came in fourth for the four seats with 209 votes, according to the unofficial but complete results.

If Benedict, Cale and Graf equally split the 485 write-ins cast, they would fall well short of that threshold, with about 161 votes each.

Crail and Jack could not be reached for comment Tuesday night.

Gillard and Meledandri said they were not aware of the write-ins or how they may have affected the race.

“Whatever it is, it is,” Gillard said.

Meledandri said he hadn't been following the results.

“My heart really wasn't really much into the election,” he said.

“Whatever the residents of Cheswick voted for, that's who's going to run the community,” Meledandri said. “It's a critical time. We're getting a new secretary.”

But, he said, “the borough's in good shape financially.”

Mayor Dan Carroll was unopposed for re-election, appearing on both party lines. He received 384 votes; only 11 write-ins were cast for mayor.

Brian C. Rittmeyer is a Tribune-Review staff writer.

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.

click me