Primary narrows field in crowded Greensburg Salem School Board race |

Primary narrows field in crowded Greensburg Salem School Board race

Jacob Tierney
Robin Beckadic Savage
Frank Gazze
Steve Thomas
Desmond Grace
Jonathan O’Brien
Brian Conway

The race for five seats on the Greensburg Salem School Board has narrowed slightly from nine candidates to seven.

Tuesday’s primary was good for incumbents.

Board members Robin Beckadic Savage, Frank Gazze and Stephen Thomas, who are seeking reelection, all won on both the Democratic and Republican ballots.

“I’m very thankful for the way the election turned out, and I’m anxious to continue to keep the momentum going in November, and continue working for the students and the taxpayers,” said Beckadic Savage, who led the Republican ticket and got the most overall votes on both ballots.

Gazze, who led the Democratic candidates and came in second among Republicans, said the success of incumbents is a sign that voters are confident in the school board.

“We have a solid school board, and a lot of very caring people,” he said.

On the Democratic side, voters chose Rich Guerrieri and Desmond Grace to join the three incumbents on the ballot in November’s general election, while Republicans voted for Brian Conway and Jonathan O’Brien.

The seven successful candidates defeated Andrew Barnette and Ronel Baccus.

The full list of results is below:


Frank James Gazze – 14.73%

Robin Beckadic-Savage – 14.22%

Stephen D. Thomas – 11.91%

Rich Guerrieri – 11.63%

Desmond Grace – 10.48%

Brian Conway – 10.32%

Andrew Barnette – 9.58%

Jonathan O’Brien – 9.02%

Ronel Baccus – 7.99%


Robin Beckadic-Savage – 16.32%

Frank James Gazze – 15.37%

Brian Conway – 13.35%

Jonathan O’Brien – 12.93%

Stephen D. Thomas – 11.88%

Rich Guerrieri – 11.74%

Andrew Barnette – 10.84%

Desmond Grace – 7.22%

Jacob Tierney is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Jacob at 724-836-6646, [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.