.

Fuoco Takes 2nd Council Term, Petraca Loses House Seat, Lombardo Wins

In the Johnston primary vote, incumbent Town Councilwoman Eileen Fuoco defeated two challengers to retain the Ward 1 seat, while state Sen. Frank Lombardo won and Rep. Peter Petrarca lost.

 

As of 10 pm last night, the Rhode Island Secretary of State website reported that incumbent Eileen Fuoco had won the three-candidate Democratic primary for Johnston Town Council Ward 1, and incumbent Sen. Frank Lombardo retained the Rhode Island Senate Dist. 25 seat.

Rep. Peter Petrarca lost his re-election bid to Democratic challenger Gregory Costantino in the state House Dist. 44 primary.

[The vote tallies are based on 12 of 13 precincts reporting as of 10 pm, or 92 percent of the Johnston vote. Results are unofficial until the Board of Elections counts mail-in ballots and certifies the results.]

For the second time in a row, the Ward 1 seat was decided in September among three hopefuls.

Fuoco collected 46 percent, or 171, of the votes cast for the council seat at , with Edward Cardillo finishing with 41 percent and Paul Crowell III collecting 13 percent.

At Pell Manor — where Fuoco won an appeal to the town's Board of Canvassers to reassign poll workers, as reported by the Johnston Sun Rise last week — Fuoco ended with 21 votes to Cardillo's 11 and Crowell's eight, to give her an overall 46-41-14 margin.

In the Senate race, Lombardo defeated first-time candidate Nicole Acciardo, 63-37 percent, taking 1,456 votes out of about 2,300 cast.

In the House Dist. 44 race,  Costantino defeated Petrarca, 159-136, in Johnston, with the final results [including polling places in Smithfield and Lincoln] giving Costantino the victory by a 60-40 margin.

Costantino advances to the Nov. 6 election against Republican James Archer of Smithfield.

And in the primaries for the U.S. House Dist. 2 seat currently held by Rep. James Langevin, Johnston voters favored the incumbent over challengers John Matson by a 67-33 margin.

On the Republican ticket, Michael Riley prevailed in a four-way primary with just over 50 percent of the vote.

Anna Murphy September 13, 2012 at 12:10 PM
Regarding Councilwomens Fouco statement in todays Providence Journal " Poll worker stated she would show support for a candidate while working the polls inside or out is a lie and fabrication I just wanted to set the record straight. At no time did i make this statement or would I be involved in this type of behavior. I would encourage everyone to take a minute and read the article noted above regarding reassigned poll workers and respond to where in the artricle it states I would act in the manor the Councilwomen stated in the Providence Journal. (9/10/12 page A10) See its apparent the Councilwomen has trouble telling the truth and thinking on her own. I would never in my wildest dreams believe i would receive this type of attention for working one day a year for the Town Board Of Canvasses. I guess the Councilwomen achived a few of her goals, a election win, a Board of Canvasses decision, preventing me from influencing voters to vote for the candidate i would support saying more or less the elderly cannot make there own decisions and preventing a couple of elderly residents form making a few extra bucks to suppliment there income to say help pay car taxes on vehicles that are not worth much. I believe the later reasons will not sit well nor should it with the elderly in District one and maybe her downfall in the future.
Anna Murphy September 13, 2012 at 02:18 PM
Providence Journal date is incorrect should read 9/12/2012
Joseph Hutnak September 13, 2012 at 03:06 PM
Hi Anna: Thanks for your comments on this issue. Just for clarity, the Sun Rise reported [in the article linked above] that you and the other two poll workers withdrew from participating in Tuesday's vote after the Board of Canvassers first voted to reassign you to different locations. If you feel this needs to be clarified further, I invite you to do so. Thanks.
Anna Murphy September 13, 2012 at 03:55 PM
I understand the link above is from the Sunrise, my point was when you read the PROjO article and the Sunrise article the reason for my removal from the board differs. Regarding reassigment to another location i gave the reason why i did not want to relocate and the board did not agree which i can understand there postion but that does not mean i agree. This post was to dispute what was told to the PROJO reporter and i will forward my response to the Providence Journal and the Sunrise. This is not about my disagreement for the reason i was removed its about what was fabricated to the journal reporter for the Councilwomens reason for asking for my removal. I never made the statement to her or anyone else again this is a complete fabrication to the truth and i will not sit idle to a statement that i did not make. Mr. Hutnak, I hope you have the chance to read the PROJO article and that should clear up any confusion.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something