.
Feedback

Police Crack Down on Potomac Ave. Loitering

After a potentially dangerous situation in June, Dormont police are cracking down on teens who habitually hang out in the business district.

The plans to crack down this summer on the ongoing issue of teenagers hanging out on Potomac Avenue seems to have been successful so far.

Police had just one encounter will teens in June that resulted in an arrest, but officers Jim Briglia and Don Kelly said they’re not letting up.

“We had a pretty big problem with juveniles on the corners last year and we’re trying to stop it this year before it starts up again,” Briglia said. “There’s a lot of other things for kids to get involved in around here. We have pools. We have parks. There are summer programs.”

The intersection of West Liberty and Potomac avenues is the busiest part of Dormont’s business district. Historically, it's also been a spot where teenagers hang out, Kelly said.

“There’s a group where you can warn them again and again and they keep coming back anyway,” Kelly said.

Not every teenager is to blame, he said, but loitering in the area has led to criminal mischief in the past—and often, the teens hanging out in the area are not from Dormont.

“Some of them are from Dormont, but a lot of them come in from the city neighborhoods,” he said. “They come in from Brookline, Beechview, some from Castle Shannon.”

That was the case when Briglia stopped a group of about 15 teenagers loitering in front of CoGo’s on Potomac Avenue on June 14. Briglia said he was on patrol just after 8 p.m. when he saw the group and noticed that pedestrians were having to walk around them.

He asked them to move along, but said when he circled around the block again, he saw that the teens hadn’t left, and asked them to move a second time. At that point, he said, some members of the group began yelling profanity.

Several ran across Potomac Avenue and were nearly hit by cars, and one teen stood in the middle of the street, reportedly telling Briglia that this is America, and that he couldn’t be arrested for standing in the road.

That teenager—a 16-year-old boy with a Brookline address—began yelling profanity at Briglia, according to the police report. He then tried to run from the scene, but was arrested and charged with disorderly conduct and loitering.

The Dormont police have created an incident database to keep track of repeat offenders, and a system of issuing warnings to those loitering before filing charges.

Briglia and Kelly said that in the best interest of both drivers and pedestrians of all ages, they are hoping to keep dangerous situations from happening on Potomac Avenue.

“There’s so much here for people to do, and it’s close so people can walk to all the things they need,” Kelly said. “That’s a good thing, when people are using it for that purpose.”

Kelly July 3, 2012 at 10:39 pm
Ed you must be republican with your "cans of worms"
Kelly July 3, 2012 at 10:41 pm
I guess 18 doesn't spell adult, and you can't count nor know the law of once you turn 18 you are one... or know that some 18 year olds still "play" with 16 year old and do stupid things. You're might be the sharpest knife in the drawer... Kudos Ed
DSA July 3, 2012 at 10:42 pm
@ kelly apparently not much of one. brief or otherwise, any time spent loitering shows a lack of judgement, parenting and control. she doesn't have every right unless she's 18. Until then, she and her actions are your responsibility. thats the point, its just not your point. again, kudos to the police department for cleaning up the streets.
Kelly July 3, 2012 at 10:43 pm
I am, but what can you do but teach them well and hope for the best. There has to be some sort of trust there or you will smother them, and they will rebel.
Angelica Blouch July 3, 2012 at 10:50 pm
I just wanted to point out that under the link I posted that lay out the laws of loitering it also states: "No parent of a juvenile shall knowingly permit that juvenile to loiter in violation of this chapter."
I've said what I wanted to say... this issue is about loitering not what "actually happened" (whether there was profanity or whose side is right or wrong). Not what the police claim happened or witnesses say. The fact that the police stopped and saw people hanging out means they ARE loitering, which again is against the law.
bruce July 3, 2012 at 10:53 pm
Kelly sorry you have not had good interaction with police in this community. I have not needed them lucky so can't speak to that. However as the comment "individuals of any age are JUST SOLELY congregating on street corners, there is no legitimate basis for police intervention"...there is, check out the link from Angelica above (http://keystatepub.com/keystate-pdf/PA/Allegheny/Dormont%20Borough/Chapter%20135%20Loitering.pdf)
"LOITERING — Remaining idle in essentially one (1) location without being able to establish having a legitimate business or purpose in so remaining idle or by conduct exhibiting the absence of a lawful purpose in so remaining idle."... You may disagree but it is the law of Dormont and the county. If you read through it, it also outlines parent responsibility as well as the rights police have to enforce it. My issue isn't with the kid in the article, I'll take your word he is a decent kid since you know him better and are obviously passionate about defending him, my issue is with allowing police to do their jobs, and again, my experience with them is different than yours.
Suz July 3, 2012 at 11:11 pm
Christina- you admit to smoking cigarettes but then claim you do nothing wrong. Is your mother aware that you smoke? Who buys them for you, if you are under the age of 18 it is illegal for you to purchase or smoke cigarettes in PA.
coreylahey July 3, 2012 at 11:17 pm
I don't let my kids hang out or "play" on the street, what else can I do to lend a hand?
DSA July 3, 2012 at 11:17 pm
are you 18, christina?
SV July 4, 2012 at 12:54 am
Parents do your job as it should be done and these things won't be a problem.
DSA July 4, 2012 at 01:07 am
'nuff said.
Red Penn July 4, 2012 at 03:31 am
It is better to keep a lid on the loitering before it gets out of control. I just saw undesirables working the street corner in Beechview selling heroin. Don't need that on Potomac Ave.
Ed M July 4, 2012 at 01:02 pm
That's good Kelly. Resort to personal attacks. Says a lot about you.
Ed M July 4, 2012 at 01:03 pm
Really Kelly???? That's the best you can offer????
Ed M July 4, 2012 at 01:08 pm
"She has every right to have her freedom to go where she wants." Yup she does but no one has the right to break the law and loitering, as harmless as it can be, is against the low in Dormont.
Nicole McDermott July 4, 2012 at 01:11 pm
Wow, just wanted to add my two cents as someone who has lived in Dormont the majority of their life. I once was one of those kids loitering on the street corners and the police would come up to us and tell us to keep moving....so we would. It was that simple, the police do not want to spend their time following teenagers around. They never harassed us or went out of their way to get us in trouble unless WE were causing trouble (blocking traffic, yelling profanities, fighting, etc). I know there has been a lot of controversy lately about the police and the borough council. However, as a now adult living in Dormont I have to say that whenever I have needed the police they have been there and they have always been respectful and helpful. I love living in a community such as this where the police take an active interest in maintaining the safety of our streets. If someone wants to live ina neighborhood where they can stand on a street corner yelling all night and watching drug deals, please feel free to move to any one of the city neighborhoods where that is common. Thanks to the Dormont police, that is not acceptable here!
Robert July 4, 2012 at 04:53 pm
I think they should put a State Park there instead
T July 4, 2012 at 09:00 pm
Great job Officers!
Born & Raised in Dormont July 5, 2012 at 02:02 pm
Great Job Offices!! Keep up the good work!! I have encounted these kids many time they are rude and disrespectful they will not and do not move off of the sidewalks for people to get past the language they use is terrible they should not be hanging out on Potomac Ave how about going and getting a job and doing something productive?
bee July 6, 2012 at 02:49 am
We live across from Cogo's. The kids are loud, rude, and obnoxious, and usually all the above after dark when we are trying to sleep. It's a nice break from the racket. We wouldn't care if they could just hang out quietly and not bother anyone, but they are loud and harass walkers by and each other, so I don't feel sorry for them. I'm sure they are smart kids; they will find something to do.
Rev. Annette Bolds July 7, 2012 at 03:33 pm
On July 3 I posted an offer to host a community forum at Dormont United Methodist Church, 1641 Potomac Avenue ( the church down the block from the T and Cogo's). Perhaps the offer got lost in all the back and forth conversation. I certainly agree that kids - and adults for that matter- should be respectful. And I also understand the concerns of those of you who have felt unsafe and harassed by some of the behavior of young people along Potomac. As I see it , this is a community issue that needs the involvement of all of us- adults and youth- to find solutions that may work for the benefit of the community. That is why I am again offering to host and facilitate a community forum. All are welcome and encouraged to participate- as long as you are willing to do so in a manner that is respectful to everyone. If you agree that we need to move beyond discussing the problem to finding solutions that can help our young people go forward in positive directions, please email me at: abolds@comcast.net. Rev. Annette Bolds, Pastor, Dormont United Methodist Church.
Angelica Blouch July 7, 2012 at 04:08 pm
Rev. Bolds,
I'm sure you mean well and it's very nice of you to offer your time and space to host a community discussion. I hope that those who are more directly involved seize the opportunity and use it. However, I wouldn't feel right in joining in on this since I am new to the neighborhood. I think some of us (myself included) simply wanted a place to voice our opinions and have done that through the now 92 comments on this article.
Guy July 7, 2012 at 05:23 pm
All due respect...discussing police officers enforcing the rules they are hired to enforce seems self defeating. No matter where each individual opinion may rest.
BTW, we have a lot of youth facilities including parks, a pool, basketball courts, tennis courts, softball fields, etc. Potomac Ave. is a business district for the patrons of said businesses. There is nothing further to debate or discuss.
Pam Farrell July 7, 2012 at 08:04 pm
Are you serious??? You sound like you yourself may have had some issues with the police.... They never know what they are up against. Kids today are out of control and should have to follow the rules just like everyone else!!! Oh and by the way I am a wife of a police officer and i can assure you I am not dominated by him. Next time you make a comment about something make an intelligent one.
Kelly July 7, 2012 at 09:15 pm
@Pam, do some research about a specific Dormont cop who pushed his girlfriend down Slapshots stairs... you must be one of the new young cop wives who are new. This may not be referencing "your husband" per say, just like all of the kids referenced are not all bad, like the boy in this story that I know personally. Yes they never know what they are up against... but they get paid 3 figures. Read the Dormont article that comes out... & like doctors should be held to a higher standard, and when they make a mistake (like this one) should get run through the ringer... Just like they do with the kids. 50/50, fair is fair.
Rev. Annette Bolds July 8, 2012 at 08:14 pm
Angelica,
I have often found that new persons in a community can offer some valuable insights that those of us who have been here awhile may miss. So I would encourage you to join in.
Rev. Annette Bolds July 8, 2012 at 08:16 pm
My concern isn't about the police officers enforcing the rules. It is trying to help us go forward as a community to see how we can develop something positive for youth who may not be sports oriented.
Debby July 8, 2012 at 09:22 pm
@Kelly. Profanity falls under freedom of speech & this is America, wrong this is Dormont. I was on my front porch using profanity while talking on my cell phone and a neighbor called the police who informed me that I was not to use profanity. Sucks living in a duplex for 30 something years then have someone move in and harass you via the police.
Rev. Annette Bolds July 8, 2012 at 09:53 pm
Again I would like for us to consider this as a community issue. And as I see it we all need to focus on our mutual responsibility to move the community forward in positive directions for the benefit of all of us. I invite anyone with a similar perspective to either email me at : abolds@comcast.net or call the church at 412-531-9055 and leave me your name and #. I'm ready to meet with anyone who wants to stop venting and start envisioning how we can go forward together.
Guy July 9, 2012 at 02:55 pm
Rev. - the challenge is by continuing to honor this "issue" you allow it to become an issue. There is no issue for the community to come forward and discuss. I understand kids who are not sports oriented; we also offer libraries, gaming shops, coffee shops, and several parks for just relaxing outdoors. You can choose not to recognize the many examples that have been offered as places to go, but it would be unreasonable to expect me to list them all. The point is in a town less than 1 square mile, we offer a heck of a lot of options - Potomac Ave. is not one of them....by law.

Newsletter & Alerts

Get the best stories each day and important breaking news

Subscribe

Not from Dormont-Brookline Patch? Find your Local Patch »

Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors. Write a new post... What's up? Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell something
Johann Lynge June 13, 2013 at 03:54 am
@MCG - I appreciate how you perceived the situation and I apologize if that was in fact the case.Read More Like I said I was not privy to the exact conversation. However at the time it wasn't explained like that to me so I was unaware and handled it as I interpreted it. My apologies if I was mistaken.
Johann Lynge June 13, 2013 at 04:07 am
@Debbie L. Actually the police have not been to the pub in a long time. The last time they wereRead More there was because I called them because a man who was intoxicated (which we didn't serve because he is barred) came in and refused to leave. And I don't ever recall seeing the fire department there. But to blame it on the Pub is a misconception because even if you closed the pub there are half a dozen other bars on the blvd that everyone would then frequent. While Bob Dobbs recommendation of reinstating prohibition might sound like a good idea good luck with that. Prohibition didn't prevent drinking in the 20's and it wouldn't stop it now either. Ultimately we can not make everyone happy but we do our best to run a safe and friendly establishment. And I make it my personal mission to prevent any and all fights. Since I've been the door man (almost 6 months) we have only had 1 fight in the bar which was quickly broken up. We are not perfect. Nor is any other bar. But we constantly strive to make improvements. We are a community pub. We love our community and everyone in it.
Bob Dobbs June 13, 2013 at 01:23 pm
i should say that out of the handful of bars in the vicinity, i prefer the brookline pub if i'mRead More gonna go to a bar . i dont care for the younger kids that accumulate on saturday nights with that annoying ghetto music but the food specials are decent and they do stock a decent selection of beers . i find zippy's to be much more clique-y and narrow-minded .
Brad Birdwell June 10, 2013 at 09:18 pm
@Daria. My description is 100% accurate. Yes, the bouncer quickly handled the situation by claimingRead More he witnessed "the whole thing". And he did. He witnessed my friends and I waiting to order a drink. That's all. Nothing more. Nothing less. The description is not harsh, it's actually toned down in comparison to what actually happened. The bouncer said, "I witnessed the whole thing and you were being a ****. One customer standing in line to order. One customer flicking another customer's hood and getting in his face. Which one was wrong? Apparently me since I don't go there frequently.
Johann Lynge June 11, 2013 at 08:39 am
To everyone following this thread, I'm the doorman in question at the Brookline Pub. I've posted aRead More response to the original poster on Patch.com that can be found at the following address: http://dormont-brookline.patch.com/groups/opinion/p/in-response-to-the-post-brookline-pubhorrible-experience I implore everyone to read that response to hear my side of the story. Thank you.
Debbie L. June 12, 2013 at 09:36 pm
Brad,,i totally agree with ya 100 percent,,nothing but trouble there, when my son starts going thereRead More from time to time again, i know hes up to no good.
Erin Faulk (Editor) June 8, 2013 at 06:08 pm
Thanks for adding this, Drew! Article coming soon. If you have any photos from the games, pleaseRead More feel free to add the photos here, too.
Drew Lehman June 9, 2013 at 10:08 am
The game actually will be played at Green Twp. Park in Scotland Pa. (near Chambersburg)
JLMK June 8, 2013 at 01:36 pm
Hi there. My fiancee and i are interested. Can you inbox me? Jesskrchmar@Gmail. Com
coreylahey June 5, 2013 at 05:51 pm
But I reported on documented actions that happened within the community. Where is the violation?
Erin Faulk (Editor) June 5, 2013 at 05:54 pm
One was removed for personal attacks, another because it implied that there was corruption by aRead More specific person. Although you didn't name the person, it was implied. Since the corruption was never proven, I removed the comment. It's over. You're welcome to continue commenting as long as you follow the term of use.
coreylahey June 6, 2013 at 12:25 am
Yeah I guess the public online court records showing someone pleading guilty is not proof