Norwin School Board fails to fill vacancy |

Norwin School Board fails to fill vacancy

Norwin High School and football stadium

The Norwin School Board still has a vacancy this week because the board could not agree on someone to fill the vacancy created when a member resigned last month.

The eight-member school board considered two people to fill the vacancy — former director Rebecca Gediminskas of Irwin and William Essay of North Huntingdon —- but neither received the required five votes to win the appointment.

Gediminskas, who lost her bid for re-election in November 2017, received four votes and Essay received three votes. There was no vote on the third candidate, Gerald O’Donnell Jr. of North Huntingdon, because his nomination did not receive the support of a second director.

Nine candidates were interviewed by the school board during its workshop session. The votes were conducted during a special meeting that followed the workshop.

The vacancy was created when Shawn Petrisko resigned from the board on Aug. 20. Whomever is appointed can fill the remainder of Petrisko’s term, which was to expire in December 2019.

The school board is seeking guidance from its solicitor to determine its next move, said Jonathan Szish, school district spokesman. The board will meet on Sept. 17 for its regular monthly voting meeting.

If the board does not appoint a member within 30 days of Petrisko’s resignation, a Westmoreland County judge will appoint someone if the court is petitioned by 10 or more Norwin resident taxpayers, according to the Pennsylvania School Code. Those who are at least 18 years old and a school district resident for a year are eligible to serve on the board.

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.