ShareThis Page
Quotables: Cracking down on ‘disorderly premises’ |
Featured Commentary

Quotables: Cracking down on ‘disorderly premises’

Lindsay Dill | Tribune-Review
Latrobe residents look on as city police barricade a home in the 400 block of Lloyd Avenue in 2013.

Many municipalities have a troublesome area, a section where police calls are more of a routine than an exception. As such, Latrobe is taking a page from other Pennsylvania communities that have cracked down on owners of properties where police frequently get called. The so-called “disorderly premises” ordinance under review is intended to give city police the option of filing summary charges against residential property owners in situations where police are called to a property three times within 90 days. Fines could range from $300 to $1,000. More than the occasional nuisance, these are quality-of-life issues that affect neighbors and, left unresolved, bring down property values.

“It’s going to be a feeling-out process when we do this. We’re going to have to have better lines of communication with landlords.”


Latrobe’s police chief

“Every municipality has a building or two that is problematic. We’re looking for something that will address those landlords and those buildings where we’ve had issues, where sometimes there are multiple (police) calls in a day or a week.”


Latrobe’s mayor

“They’re not around, and they don’t have to deal with the repercussions like the residents of this community. It’s the properties around (a disorderly premises) that suffer when you’re not careful who you rent to or do appropriate background checks.”


Referring to properties owned by absentee landlords.

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.