ShareThis Page

Police in Allegheny County communities fear loss of grants that provide DUI checkpoints

| Friday, July 4, 2014, 9:47 p.m.

Local police have ramped up drunken driving patrols for the holiday weekend, but officers say they're worried about grant funding that pays for the extra enforcement.

“The grant is huge as far as both education and enforcement. We'll be doing patrols this weekend, and the guys on the road aren't investigating (other) crimes or anything else — their goal is to find and arrest DUIs,” said Mt. Lebanon police Lt. Duane Fisher, grant coordinator for the 10-department Mt. Lebanon area task force. “And that's the key — with municipal budgets the way they are in order to really address this hazard you have it so the officer is not tied up with regular policing.”

Police drunken driving task forces are paid from federal funds doled out by PennDOT annually. Fisher said his task force received $55,000 this year allowing for four fixed checkpoints and 10 roving patrols. Next fiscal year, the funding will drop by $5,000, forcing them to cut one checkpoint or two roving patrols, Fisher said.

PennDOT officials said they don't know how much money will be available statewide in the coming fiscal year but $5.4 million was handed out in each of the past two years.

Cathy Tress, the Western Pennsylvania liaison for the Pennsylvania DUI Association, said the grant money pays for police overtime and equipment. She wasn't overly concerned about small drops in funding.

“Our guys come up with creative ideas. They partner with other agencies to share expenses and partner with the state police,” Tress said. “(If there was a large decrease) it would be tough to continue this level of enforcement with regular duty officers. I think with DUI, unfortunately, we still have our fair number of arrests.”

PennDOT data show that last year, there were 2,759 crashes from June 30 through July 9, of which 256 were alcohol-related.

Allegheny County District Attorney Stephen A. Zappala Jr. said that police agencies across the county were ramping up drunken driving enforcement over the weekend. He said the District Attorney's Office prosecutes 5,000 drunken driving cases annually.

“What we're trying to communicate (is), ‘Please be responsible,' ” Zappala said. “At a picnic in the sun, a couple beers can affect you differently.”

Plum police Lt. Lanny Conley, director of the nine-department East Hills DUI Task Force, said his group received $39,000 for the current year but doesn't know what next year's allotment will be. They conduct three full checkpoints and six roving patrols. He said in past years, they had more money that paid for five checkpoints.

“If you have more money, you're able to do more of those. Checkpoints eat up most of the budget,” Conley said. “It's totally dependent on the grant. I think it's effective because it's not just getting the drunk drivers off the road, it's educating the people not to drive buzzed and impaired.”

West Deer senior Patrolman Brian Dobson, coordinator for the eight-department North Hills DUI Task Force, agreed, saying checkpoints are a deterrent. He said their funding dropped to $55,000 this fiscal year from $60,000 last year. They run five checkpoints and six roving patrols each year.

“From what I've heard, we may lose another five grand,” Dobson said. “It shortens the checkpoints and how many we run.”

Staff writer Corinne Kennedy contributed. Bobby Kerlik is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-320-7886 or

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.