Former GOP challengers support Doug Chew for Westmoreland commissioner |

Former GOP challengers support Doug Chew for Westmoreland commissioner

Rich Cholodofsky

Republican Doug Chew, one of four candidates seeking three positions on the Westmoreland County board of commissioners, was endorsed Thursday by three former challengers.

Republicans John Ventre, Heather Cordial and Paul Kosko threw their support to Chew in the general election.

Chew and Republican Sean Kertes finished atop the six-candidate GOP primary field in May.

“I am truly honored to receive the endorsements of these three candidates. They are stand-up public servants who set aside the challenges of the primary to fight the status quo. They could have sat quietly, but they chose to continue to fight to bring leadership, accountability, and professional experience to our county government,” Chew said.

Retiring Republican County Commissioner Charles Anderson has endorsed Kertes, who works as Anderson’s chief of staff.

The Republicans are running separate campaigns this fall, as are Democratic incumbents Gina Cerilli and Ted Kopas.

The top three vote-getters on Nov. 5 will be elected to the board.

Rich Cholodofsky is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Rich at 724-830-6293, [email protected] or via Twitter .

Categories: Local | Westmoreland
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.