Additional candidate added to list of Norwin board hopefuls |

Additional candidate added to list of Norwin board hopefuls

Joe Napsha
Joe Napsha Photo
Norwin Senior High School building

The list of candidates for the Norwin School Board has grown by one to 11 people seeking to fill a term that will end in December.

Kimberly Piekut of North Huntingdon was inadvertently omitted from a list of candidates who submitted their letters of interest and resumes to Westmoreland County Court by the Dec. 27 deadline, said Amy DeMatt, court administrator.

The Westmoreland County judges are scheduled to meet on Jan. 7 to hear the candidates present their reasons why they should be appointed to the school board to fill the vacancy created by the resignation of Shawn Petrisko in August. If the judges appoint someone as expected on Jan. 7, the candidate would be able to be seated in time for the board’s Jan. 14 and 21 meetings.

Two former directors — Rebecca Gediminskas and Ronald Giuliana, are joined by Patrick Lynn, the son of a former director, Albert Lynn, in applying for the position. Jennifer Blasko, the wife of North Huntingdon Commissioner Brian Blasko, is seeking the appointment, as is William Essay, a former North Huntingdon commissioner. Parag R. Bedekar, Keith Genicola, Amy Johnson, Cindy Kovacevic and James S. McGinley also are seeking the appointment.

The appointment fell to the judges when the school board failed to reach an agreement on a candidate multiple times and Director Barb Viola filed a petition asking the court to make the selection.

Joe Napsha is a Tribune-Review staff writer. You can contact Joe at 724-836-5252 or [email protected]

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.