Westmoreland labor council endorses Democrats seeking local political office | TribLIVE.com
Westmoreland

Westmoreland labor council endorses Democrats seeking local political office

Rich Cholodofsky
1073938_web1_vote-1804596_1920--3-

The Greater Westmoreland County Labor Council announced it has endorsed a slate of candidates seeking county office this year.

The organization, which is affiliated with the AFL-CIO labor unions, announced it will support lawyers Mike Stewart and Jessica Rafferty in their bids to fill two vacancies on the Westmoreland County Court of Common Pleas. Six candidates are seeking the judicial seats.

Labor council delegates also endorsed incumbent Democratic Commissioners Ted Kopas and Gina Cerilli, who are running unopposed this spring, incumbent Democrat Recorder of Deeds Tom Murphy and Katie Pecarchik, one of two Democrats running in the spring primary who seek to oust Republican Register of Wills Sherry Magretti Hamilton.

Other candidates endorsed were: Mark Mears, a Democrat running for county controller; Democrat Matt Mascara in the race for county Treasurer; and James Albert, the lone Democrat running for county sheriff.

“The candidates that we have endorsed have shown over the course of their various careers a commitment to working people,” said Harriet Ellenberger, the labor council’s secretary.

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 TribLive.com 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.