“We back them up. They back us up,” he said. “The Borough of Dormont is never without police presence … It’s all set up through dispatch. It’s all automatic.”

So Mr. Dwyer admits very clearly that there was NO DORMONT OFFICERS ON THE STREETS at this time. Back up officers from other departments working on a mutual aid agreement is not the same as active patrols! Make no mistake citizens of Dormont you were unprotected and unpatrolled during this time period last week period! Dwyer knows it and is trying to spin it. He no longer wears blue! He is a crooked politician just like the council (well certain members) of it who hired him. This is BS and needs to stop! So to the four members of council who have caused all these problems which one of you will have the guts to stand for what is right? Return Dormont to the way it was, get rid of Gino because he has done nothing but destroy Dormont! Get rid of the hired gun "fake" police chief and get Dormont out of the news!

The citizens of Dormont await your response.

My guess is that the agreement between the SHACOG members is to back up or help out when needed but not to cover the department because you don't want to pay overtime. I would lay money down that no other police department in SHACOG allows officers to go home prior to his/her replacement...none. To expect other communities to cover under these circumstances is abusive. And again I ask the council members that back this, next week when our children are going to and coming home from school will officers be held over to cover...is this the new policy in Dormont? Is the 2 hours of OT more important than our children's safety? Quit dodging the issue. There were no Dormont Police Officers in our community during a time when our children would have been coming home from school!

I am sorry that someone has flagged Mike V's comments on the Patch as inappropriate, the only thing inappropriate are the facts!!! The "gender bias" not sexual harrassment suit that he mentions was thrown out of court and those bringing suit were admonished by the court for their unfounded and flagrant actions. Chief Dwyer was never suspended during any time of his Pittsburgh Police career. Wilkinsburg (spelled without an H) bought out Chief Dwyer's contract and soon after the patrolmen he identified as being sexually inappropriate with several Wilkinsburg children, plead guilty and was sent to jail and the Mayor was charged by the State Ethics Commission and fined on those charges. The one fact I found that he got right was that Chief Dwyer's son and Chief Moffat's daughter are married, I guess that does make them related!
The last Chief we had while being a good police officer was/is no Chief and before him, we had an absent chief.
Dormont wants "tradition", wants things back the "way they were" in the good old days, why don't you look around, the millage is the 2nd highest only to Wilkinsburg (spelled without an H), a small town officer makes $146,000+ and right now everyone looks like bumbling fools! I guess there can never be any harmony, but why don't we get back to the business of Dormont!

Why are comments being removed?

I'll check into comment removal. Meanwhile, check this article out: http://patch.com/A-lx2s

if you write something against Chief Dwyer or Some council members your comments will be removed.. Gino Rizza runs this paper folks.

Since my previous post is MIA, here is something I sent to council and borough management:

Let me start by saying that I do understand what you are trying to do in reducing police overtime in order to save this borough money now and in the future as it relates to pensions. Really I do. I understand that our population in this community has dropped from 11,275 in 1980 to 8,593 in 2010. So our tax base is dropping. I understand that we do not collect a business privilege tax from the businesses in Dormont and I understand the need to have a well rounded community with a strong infrastructure. I do, I really do. I may not agree with how you are getting there but I do understand. But now, if what has been reported in the paper is correct, you have gone too far.

Not only was the public put at risk by only having one office available but that officer, who puts his life on the line everyday for you and me, was at a bigger risk. And shame on you Mr. Dwyer. You use to wear the same colors as those men you know oversee. How dare you put them at risk for less than $ 100? You know as well as anyone else the risk these officers face on every call. Anytime a policeman pulls over a vehicle or is called to a home they take the risk of being the victim of some individual looking to get his name in lights. Shame on you for not looking out for these individuals you use to ride with on a daily basis.

What is it going to take for all of you to understand? An office getting shot and killed? Is that officers life worth the $ 100 you saved by not having another officer work two extra hours?

You all need to stop this BS right now before someone gets serious hurt. I know you don’t want to see any Dormont Officers names added to this list of officers who have died in the line of duty this year.

Deputy Sheriff Suzanne Hopper
Cause of Death: Gunfire

Chief of Police Ralph Painter
Cause of Death: Gunfire

Police Officer Christopher Matlosz
Cause of Death: Gunfire

Police Officer Kevin P. Marceau
Cause of Death: Struck by vehicle

Police Officer Larry Nehasil
Cause of Death: Gunfire

Detective Roger Castillo
Cause of Death: Gunfire

Detective Amanda Haworth
Cause of Death: Gunfire

Police Officer Tom Hayes
Cause of Death: Gunfire

Corporal Charles Richard (Chuck) Nesbitt, Jr.
Cause of Death: Automobile accident

Police Officer Jeffrey Yaslowitz
Cause of Death: Gunfire

Sergeant Tom Baitinger
Cause of Death: Gunfire

Officer David Spencer Moore
Cause of Death: Gunfire

Corrections Officer Casimiro Pomales
Cause of Death: Automobile accident

Correctional Officer Jayme Lee Biendl
Cause of Death: Assault

Park Ranger Chris Nickel
Cause of Death: Duty related illness

And those are from January of 2011 only. Get it together people!

Why is nobody upset that a "possible child abduction" went unreported for two hours?

To Mike V
Sir,
When I woke up this morning, I was a woman, not Chief Dwyer or anyone related to him, when I go to bed tonight, I will be the same woman. I prefer, unlike you, to check my facts before writing fantasy and then denigrating a reputation to suit your cause! I resent that anything written that doesn't suit your needs is believed to be either Rizza or Dwyer's doing. There are people in this community who would just like the truth and the ability to make decisions based on that.

School starts next Monday here in Dormont. Can they get their doo doo in order and quit playing who's on first, and who is in charge, and stop all this rediculas behavior so we can keep the kids safe ? If they short staff and it comprimises the safety of the kids just to save a buck how would you all feel then ? By the way are we still spending money on that assinine pasive park ? Can anyone fill me in on that one ?

Why not just hang a banner at the intersection of Rt. 19 and McFarland road. "Criminals welcomed. No police protection in force here"? You can spin this any way you like, but SHACOG mutual aid is generally for SWAT team and the response can be up to an hour. Fire departments work well together, but of course they are practically 100% volunteers, not politicians. What's it going to take? Bill Miller's close brush with death says nothing to the nincompoops on council?

I have to give credit to rizzo, council, the new sheriff in town and FOGAC for finally finding a story worthy of taking all the attention away from the personal vendetta they have against the Police department, Chief Ross, Sargent Burke, The Fire department and anyone else that never kissed their butts or questioned their authority. Even after the president of the Mayors association and district attorney agreed the Mayor had the power to dismiss certain tickets the circus act is still trying to use the Mayor as a scape goat. No matter how the Patch tries to spin the story to look better for them people will see through it all and show in November and January who they really support. Then the new parties involved can sit down like real men and women and figure out how to get Dormont out of the disgusting-embarassing mess they were left with and get Dormont back to being one big happy family. They won't work behind closed doors or at secret locations or forget to include some members of the team with lame excuses. Sounds to good to be true but that is how a real team works.

Rafalena, the answer to your question is No. Bottom line is this. The mayor likes Burke and Gino does not. Never did like him since Burke arrested him 20 years ago. Now of course Dwyer does not like Burke.Their putting a spin on a call that Burke handled. So what is going to happen next? Burke will be disiplined! Gino can do whatever he wants right now to Burke because the 4 horsemen on council back whatever he does. And of course Dan and The Patch will have the story 30 seconds after it happens. Gino just can't help himself it's not in his make up. Dormont in the papers again!!!!

Anyone else get their mail yet? Looks like the mafia has it out for the mayor. For those of you who haven't seen it yet, there is a giant postcard that says "IMPEACH MAYOR LLOYD" accusing him of ticket fixing, FBI requested to investigate him etc. and tells people to come to the boro council meetings on Monday 8/29. Hope we have lots of honest poll watchers set up for November, as this gang won't go down without pulling out every dirty trick they can think of to keep their gravy train rolling. Oh and "Concerned Residents" - don't worry, we will be at the meetings to support the mayor and to run you all out of power! What sleaze!

The "Impeach Mayor Lloyd" postcard has no return address of course and they used stamps to make sure that it couldn't be traced back to a particular person. How about we check the post office to ask who bought hundreds of postcard stamps recently? No worries though. They are terrified of losing their scheme to loot the boro and take over the police dept. They will lose badly in November and they know it. They are desperate to destroy the mayor and the few others who oppose them. They Mayor knows their dirty tricks as he has seen their kind before. He will prevail as always with the support of the decent people of Dormont.

By the way who's assinine idea was it to out source 911 calls to Point Breeze ? I have called 911 and thought I had the wrong number it rang over 11 times I had to hang up and call back the second time it was picked up on the 8th ring.This boro is going down the toilet how sad ! And Council thinks they can make it better ? Give me a break. Joan is the only one that makes sense she has my vote for sure.

It is odd that this is starting now, or at least this year, when no other Council ever questioned Tom for doing this the past 15 years and no one ever questioned any other mayor. I guess Gino not only wants to control the police he wants even more control over the borough. He is an idiot and so are the Council people who sing his praises. Everyone complained when John was controlling the Council and running the meetings. That was nothing compared to what it is now.

I find this mailing disgusting and the simple sack of monkey dung that put it out there needs to have formal charges against them. Council is behind this thats for certain.Who else would fork up the money to create such slander ? Mailing to every house in the Boro cant be cheap, but hey the tax payers probably paid for this mess. I hope the fleas of a thousand camels infest their arm pits and a few other places as well. These are nasty vile people we are dealing with here in Dormont, and it looks like they will stop at nothing. Mayor Lloyd, fight with all you have the masses support YOU ! Dont let these mafia wannabe's think they will win for a second !

The "mafia" made have under estimated just how many residents are behind the mayor and their ridiculous flyer just might backfire on them.

There needs to be a complete investigation as to where this mailing came from. If ANY public taxpayer money was used to fund this libelous and pathetic attack on the Mayor and our police department then the perpetrators need to be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. Council? Do you have the courage to face the music and provide complete transparency on the boro finances and show the taxpayers irrefutable proof that no tax payer money was utilized for this? Yes, everyone show up for the meetings and demand accountability from not only your elected officials but also the Boro Manager, whose salary our tax dollars pay. I am willing to bet we hear nothing but crickets or get a blank stare as a response.

Another very helpful bit of the law that council is breaking is found in the link I posted above. Council CANNOT reinstate a suspended police officer, even one with no arrest powers (!) before the next regular meeting of the council. They cannot reinstate via a letter signed by a boro manager.

"In addition, the Borough Code, 53 P.S. § 46124, provides that the mayor has the power, for just cause and without pay, to suspend any police officer until the succeeding regular meeting of the borough council, at which time the council may suspend, discharge, reduce in rank or reinstate with pay the officer. "

Yes a complete investigation is in order! What a great way to spend the taxpayer money! That's using your noggin. Last I checked Dormont was part of the Unites States and freedom of the press is not unlawful. If you don't like the message, ignore it just like I ignore those public safety cut signs.

There is freedom of speech and then there is libel and harrassment. And no one has stuffed a sign in your mailbox lately have they?

LOL Someone stuffed a yard sign in your mailbox? Really? Why didnt you call the police to file a report of vandalism? Just to play Devil's advocate mystery person, how would have this mass mailing gone down if it screamed "Impeach Kim Lusardi"? Or perhaps "Terminate Gino Rizza"? There would most likely be another press conference at the boro building.

Yes everyone is entitled to freedom of speech, so yes people can put this flyer out but... I keep reading this flyer and it amazes me how wrong these people are. "Millions of dollars", Tom has "caused Dormont to have one of the highest tax rates in Allegheny County" "total chaos in the police department". Come on people, even my kids know how ridiculous these statements are. "the laughing stock of the South Hills." That and so many more statements can be attributed to Gino, Kim and Laurie, not to the mayor. He didn't start this bull, But it needs to end, and hopefully it will end when the elections are done and we have new people who want to change all this.

Because it isn't vandalism. And it would go down the same way....just less whining.

Lol..ok Drew you go with that.

Thanks to our Patch supporters. Also, to everyone who has called to offer their support to Mayor Tom Lloyd. We, the family, appreciated it. Hope to see you all at the meeting on Mon. August 29 and Tues. September 6.

The Kaminskis will be there to support Mayor Lloyd.

" I don't see anything libelous in the flyers either - care to make any specific examples or just keep using big words you don't understand?"

Well Drew, nothing in the flyer is true therefore libelous.

Linda, voter records are public information so that is easy to get through the county. Wouldn't surprise me if you did see the two clowns - putting their dopey heads together to come up with this trash? Councils errand boys?

This may be of interest.
http://www.fec.gov/pages/brochures/notices.shtml
From the Federal Election Commission rules on governing political ads and solicitations. Of particular interest is the section entitled disclaimer notices and definitions of public communications. So if the cowardly individuals behind the mass mailing(covered under the commission rules) was given legal counsel that this action was fully legal, perhaps your counsel was unaware of the Federal rules governing such activity?

How and Where must the Disclaimer Appear?
In order to give the reader sufficient notice about the person(s) paying for or authorizing a public communication regardless of its medium, the disclaimer notice must be "clear and conspicuous" on the committee's communications, solicitations and response materials. The notice will not be considered to be "clear and conspicuous" if:
•It is difficult to read or hear; or
•The notification is placed where it can be easily overlooked.