ShareThis Page
Mt. Pleasant school director hopefuls must reapply for job |

Mt. Pleasant school director hopefuls must reapply for job

| Thursday, February 18, 2016 11:00 p.m
Evan Sanders | Tribune-Review
The Mount Pleasant Area School District Administration Building photographed on Thursday, Feb. 18, 2016.

Candidates who want to fill the unexpired term of a Mt. Pleasant Area school director will have to reapply, and a panel of Westmoreland County judges will decide who among them is the best qualified.

School directors Feb. 8 failed to select a candidate from among eight residents who expressed interest in finishing Richard Albright’s unexpired term. Albright, whose term runs through the end of 2017, resigned Jan. 11.

Directors nominated three of the eight who applied — John W. Sarnese, Gail Heskey and John Walton, all of Mt. Pleasant — but they failed to reach a majority vote on any of the candidates, according to solicitor John S. Toohey.

Citing the state’s public school code, the board Wednesday petitioned Westmoreland County Court of Common Pleas to appoint someone to the vacancy.

Judge Richard E. McCormick Jr. on Thursday issued an order directing candidates to submit resumes and letters of recommendation to the court by March 1. The candidates will appear at 3 p.m. the following day before a panel of judges to interview for the post.

Toohey said the district will place a legal ad notifying candidates to send their information to the courts. The district will not forward to the courts the resumes of the eight who previously applied, he said.

“These eight can (reapply), as well as anybody else,” he said. “It’s out of the district’s hands.”

Contacted Thursday, Sarnese and Walton said they intend to apply again.

“I will probably apply, since I’ve gone this far with it,” Sarnese said, noting he served on the board in the 1980s until he left Pennsylvania to take a job as an executive vice president with a software and security company in Washington, D.C.

“I ran a large company and have budget and security experience,” said Sarnese, who is retired. “If I was a good board member before, now that I have knowledge in more areas, I think I would be again.”

Walton, who is the warden at the Westmoreland County Prison, said he has attended board meetings for the past several years. He said he served on a district safety committee that made recommendations on the hiring of school police officers and the placement of security cameras in buildings.

“I have a lot to offer, with my background at the prison,” Walton said. “I handle a $15 million budget, I’m well-versed in mental health and the drug task force, and I’ve been through contract negotiations.”

Heskey could not be reached for comment.

The other five candidates who applied but were not nominated for a vote at the Feb. 8 meeting are Richard Mazza and Donald Seder, both of Mt. Pleasant; Michael Picarsic and Lisa Tuccarello, both of Acme; and Denise Temple of Jones Mills.

At the meeting, the board deadlocked 4-4 on candidates Sarnese and Heskey. When Walton’s name was added, the vote was three each for Sarnese and Heskey and two for Walton.

In his order, McCormick directed candidates to send their resumes and letters of recommendation to Amy DeMatt, Esquire, Court Administrator for the 10th Judicial District, 2 N. Main St., Greensburg, PA, 15601 or at by March 1.

Tribune-Review staff writer Renatta Signorini contributed to this report. Liz Zemba is a Tribune-Review staff writer. Reach her at 412-601-2166 or

Categories: 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.