North Huntingdon Township battling squatters parked on old restaurant property
According to neighbors, the camper trailer has been parked on the lot since before the old Rivertowne Pub along Route 30 was condemned and demolished last year.
KDKA-TV spoke via phone with Eric Gass, who is the township commissioner for Ward 7, where this blighted strip of land sits. He says this property has been a headache for years and the camper squatters are just the latest issues they have had.
"So we have issued a violation notice, we have given them 20 days to resolve everything," Gass said. "Those 20 days started about two or three days ago. And after that, we are going to issue a citation as we plan to abate or have them removed from the property."
Gass says the property is currently owned by an LLC that is largely absent from what has been going on, so dealing with this lot has fallen to the township.
He says the two big issues are public health and public safety.
These squatters are discarding tons of trash, and that trash attracts rodents and disease. And there is reason to believe that some of that trash may be being burned.
"You are only allowed to burn certain things on certain times on certain days in the township. There is an ordinance on that," said Gass. "So yeah, there is concern. And if we were going through a dry season, of course you'd be concerned about spillage of that fire, because it is very wooded and that could find itself to the businesses to the left, to the right, as well as the Dusty Rhodes trailer park."
The township hopes that this land will be cleared soon and the company that owns it will redevelop it.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Here's How This Forgotten Healthcare Stock Could Generate Life-Changing Returns
Key Points CRISPR Therapeutics' first approved therapy, Casgevy, was a breakthrough. One of Casgevy's biggest achievements may be demonstrating the viability of CRISPR Therapeutics' strategy. The biotech company could soar if it can follow up that win with more clinical and regulatory milestones. 10 stocks we like better than CRISPR Therapeutics › Over the past few years, the market hasn't been kind to somewhat speculative, unprofitable stocks. CRISPR Therapeutics (NASDAQ: CRSP), a mid-cap biotech, fits that description. The company's shares are down by 24% since mid-2022. The S&P 500 is up 50% over the same period. Despite this terrible performance, there are reasons to believe that CRISPR Therapeutics could still generate life-changing returns for investors willing to be patient. Here's how the biotech could pull it off. CRISPR Therapeutics' first success CRISPR Therapeutics' first approval was for Casgevy, a treatment for sickle cell disease (SCD) and transfusion-dependent beta-thalassemia (TDT), which it developed in collaboration with Vertex Pharmaceuticals. Before Casgevy, no CRISPR-based gene-editing medicine had been approved. While it became the first, it still faces some challenges. Ex vivo gene-editing therapies require a complex manufacturing and administration process that can only be performed in authorized treatment centers (ATCs). Moreover, they're expensive. Casgevy costs $2.2 million in the U.S. Getting third-party payers on board for that is no easy feat. Still, CRISPR Therapeutics and Vertex Pharmaceuticals are making steady progress. As of the second quarter, CRISPR Therapeutics had achieved its goal of activating 75 ATCs. It had also secured reimbursement for eligible patients in 10 countries. The two companies estimate there are roughly 60,000 eligible SCD and TDT patients in the regions they have targeted. Let's say they continue to strike reimbursement deals and can count on third-party coverage for 70% of this target population (42,000 people), then go on to treat another 30% of that group in the next decade (12,600 patients). Assuming they could extend that $2.2 million price tag to those countries, Casgevy could generate more than $27.7 billion over this period. Based on its agreement with Vertex, 40% would go to CRISPR Therapeutics, or roughly $11.1 billion over a decade. That's not bad, but it's not that impressive either. So, while Casgevy could contribute meaningfully to CRISPR Therapeutics' results -- and may even reach blockbuster status at some point -- the medicine may primarily serve as a proof of concept to demonstrate that the biotech's approach can be effective. Substantial progress with its first commercialized product will help the stock price. But the company's performance will depend even more on future clinical and regulatory milestones, especially as it shows with Casgevy that it can manage the intricacies and complexities of marketing gene-editing medicines. Can the pipeline deliver? CRISPR Therapeutics has six candidates in clinical trials, which isn't bad at all for a mid-cap biotech company. One of its leading programs is CTX310, a potential therapy designed to help reduce low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol in patients with certain conditions. CTX310 is already producing encouraging clinical trial results. Additionally, it's an in vivo medicine, meaning it bypasses the need to harvest patients' cells to manufacture therapies; in vivo gene-editing treatments are easier to handle than their ex vivo counterparts. The company's path to creating life-changing returns hinges on its ability to deliver consistent clinical and regulatory wins over the next few years for CTX310 and other important candidates. If CRISPR Therapeutics can successfully launch several new products in the next five to seven years, its shares are likely to skyrocket. In the meantime, under this scenario, the company would succeed in making gene-editing medicines more mainstream. This would encourage third-party payers to get on board -- and healthcare institutions, and perhaps even governments, to help push for more ATCs, since there'd be a greater need to accommodate these treatments. Can CRISPR Therapeutics achieve this? In my view, the biotech stock is on the riskier side, but does carry significant upside potential. There's a (small) chance the gene-editing specialist will deliver life-changing returns in the next decade, but investors need to hedge their bets. It's best to start by initiating a small position in the stock, then progressively add more if CRISPR Therapeutics lands more wins. Should you invest $1,000 in CRISPR Therapeutics right now? Before you buy stock in CRISPR Therapeutics, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and CRISPR Therapeutics wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $668,155!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,106,071!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,070% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 184% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of August 13, 2025 Prosper Junior Bakiny has positions in Vertex Pharmaceuticals. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends CRISPR Therapeutics and Vertex Pharmaceuticals. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Here's How This Forgotten Healthcare Stock Could Generate Life-Changing Returns was originally published by The Motley Fool Sign in to access your portfolio
CBS News
16 minutes ago
- CBS News
Transcript: Rep. Jason Crow on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan," Aug. 17, 2025
The following is the transcript of an interview with Democratic Rep. Jason Crow of Colorado that aired on "Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan" on Aug. 17, 2025. MARGARET BRENNAN: And we're joined now by Colorado Democratic Congressman Jason Crow. Good to see you in person. Before we start talking about Ukraine, I want to pick up on something, since you sit on the Intelligence Committee. The Secretary of State just said that lawmakers had come to the Trump administration with information that they've been granting visas to individuals with ties to Hamas, or with organizations with ties to Hamas. That's a pretty stunning accusation. Israel controls who enters and exits Gaza. The United States screens all visas. So, is there really a blind spot that you are aware of? REP. JASON CROW: I'm not aware of that. But if that's true, actually, that is concerning. That would be a problem. I mean, Hamas is a brutal terrorist organization. They should not be traveling anywhere. So, if that's happening, it should be stopped immediately. And, you know, the Intelligence Committee has a role to play in that. MARGARET BRENNAN: But the Intelligence Committee wasn't behind the information presented to the Secretary of State. SPEAKER: I have not been briefed on that. I have no information about it. MARGARET BRENNAN: Okay, on Ukraine: You know that the U.S. intelligence assessment is that the battlefield is turning in Russia's favor, despite the fact that Putin has to rely on Iran and North Korea to keep this thing going. If neither President Biden nor President Trump were ever willing to commit troops, doesn't the secretary have a point that it has to be hammered out at the negotiating table? REP. CROW: You know, this absolutely will end at a negotiating table, like most conflicts will. But what happened on Friday was a historic embarrassment for the United States. There's no other way to put it. Right? You listen to what Marco Rubio and the president have said. They keep on saying they're dedicating time. They're making it a priority. They're focusing their attention on it. In any negotiation, when you're trying to end an armed conflict, there's nothing more important than understanding what motivates your adversary. What is making Vladimir Putin tick, in this instance. Vladimir Putin does not care about the amount of time that we're nego- we're allocating to this, does not care about a B-2 bomber flyover, does not care about a lineup of F-22 fighters rolled out. He doesn't care about any of that. What Vladimir Putin cares about is basically three things. He cares about economic pressure in the form of sanctions. He cares about political, diplomatic isolation, being a pariah state. And he cares about military defeat. Those are the three things that will end this conflict if he feels pressure on all of those three fronts. And this administration continues to be unwilling to do anything to assert pressure in any of those three areas. MARGARET BRENNAN: Well, they have put in place some secondary sanctions, at least on India here, and they haven't pulled back. They need Congress to help them repeal a lot of these sanctions. But bigger picture, in hindsight, do you think the United States to date has been too hesitant to actually help Ukraine win this war? President Obama did not send offensive weapons to Ukraine. President Biden was criticized for being perhaps too slow in delivery of certain weapons. REP. CROW: There's no doubt. As you know, I was one of the members of Congress that, on a bipartisan basis, pushed really hard in the first two years of this war, under the Biden administration, to do more, to do more quicker. And I was concerned that we were doing just enough to prevent Ukraine from losing and not doing enough to help them win. And I do believe that had we done more, and we had done it faster, and that we were willing to be more aggressive in providing aid and support for Ukraine, then they would be in a different position on the battlefield today. But compare that to what this administration has done, which has relieved almost all pressure. Like look at what happened on Friday. U.S. military personnel in uniform, literally, were on their hands and knees, rolling out a red carpet for the most murderous dictator of the 21st century. Somebody who has kidnapped and is holding prisoner tens of thousands of Ukrainian children. Somebody who started this whole war, right? This both-sides-ism that the administration is engaging in, that both sides need to come to the table and negotiate. Ukraine is the victim. They are the victim. They didn't start this war. Russia did. And somehow we keep on acting like Vladimir Putin deserves to be brought out into the open like any other head of state. This is a historic embarrassment and defeat for U.S. foreign policy. MARGARET BRENNAN: You have served this country in uniform. I wonder, since you sit on the Armed Services Committee, how comfortable you would be with the United States giving this, whatever the Article Five-like security guarantee would look like. Is that something you should see boots on the ground to do? REP. CROW: I don't think boots on the ground would be the way to go. But, certainly, the United States has assets and capability that I think are essential to any type of security guarantee. I think Europe has to come forward with the forward presence of military. But we can provide intelligence. We can provide economic support, diplomatic support. One of the most important things that we can do right now is actually seize Russian assets. This would be huge. This would be a game-changing thing that put pressure on Vladimir Putin. And actually create security guarantees and reconstruction for Ukraine. There's over $150 billion of seized Russian assets, and the United States could lead a coalition to seize that money. Allocate it towards reconstruction, allocate it towards security, allocate it towards the building of a Ukrainian military that could actually resist Russia going forward. But this administration is unwilling to do it. MARGARET BRENNAN: Last administration was too, they-- REP. CROW: --That's right. MARGARET BRENNAN: They did agree to the legislation. But on the immigration front, you and your fellow Democratic lawmakers are now trying to challenge the Trump administration's policy that requires notice to be given before you visit an immigration facility. You just did visit some. What did you see, and how does that compare to the last visit? REP. CROW: Well, there's an ICE detention center in my district, in Aurora, Colorado. I have visited that center 10 times now over the last five years, six years. And oversight of federal facilities is one of the most important things that any member of Congress does. Air Force bases, military bases, VA hospitals and ICE detention centers. This administration just tripled the budget of ICE. Made it the largest federal law enforcement agency in the history of the United States. Bigger than the FBI, ATF, DEA, all others combined. And they are putting in roadblocks to prevent oversight, to prevent transparency because they were trying to hide what they are doing. That is unacceptable. So we filed a lawsuit to force them to abide by federal law that guarantees us access. MARGARET BRENNAN: And we'll see where that heads next. Jason Crow, thank you. We'll be right back.
New York Times
16 minutes ago
- New York Times
Trump Administration Minimizes Summit Papers Left in Hotel
The Trump administration this weekend downplayed a report that officials left in a public area of a hotel documents describing the confidential movements of President Trump and President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia during their meeting in Alaska on Friday. NPR reported earlier that the documents were left on a printer in the Hotel Captain Cook in downtown Anchorage, near Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson, where Mr. Trump and Mr. Putin had their meeting about the war in Ukraine. The documents were produced by the Office of the Chief of Protocol, a position held by Monica Crowley, a former Fox News personality who served in Mr. Trump's first term. The papers were found around 9 a.m. on Friday and sent to NPR by a guest of the hotel, who was granted anonymity. They listed the sequence of events, which included a smaller meeting with Mr. Trump, Mr. Putin and their top foreign policy advisers; an expanded meeting and working lunch with several cabinet officials; a news conference; and an interview between Mr. Trump and Sean Hannity of Fox News. The documents also included a lunch menu for a three-course luncheon held 'in honor of his excellency Vladimir Putin.' Green salad, filet mignon, and halibut Olympia — a humble local favorite — were on the menu. But since the lengthy day of meetings was cut short on Friday, the expanded meeting and the working lunch were bypassed in favor of an abrupt news conference between the two leaders, who did not take questions. The White House and State Department have both derided the documents as a glorified lunch menu. 'Instead of covering the historic steps towards peace achieved at Friday's summit, NPR is trying to make a story out of a lunch menu. Ridiculous,' Tommy Pigott, a State Department spokesman, said in an email. The White House did not respond to a request for comment on Sunday, but NPR reported a day earlier that an administration spokeswoman had characterized the papers as a 'multipage lunch menu' and not a security breach. The papers included precise times and locations of each meeting, as well as the phone numbers of several administration officials. Eliot A. Cohen, a former counselor in the State Department who served in the Bush administration, said in an interview that the administration had been both 'sloppy' and 'incompetent' in leaving behind the materials. 'Above all, they don't have process,' said Mr. Cohen, who is now an analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. 'A well-drilled bureaucracy doesn't do these things.' But he added that the materials did not seem high-level or reveal state or military secrets. 'My guess is the Russians already have everybody's phone numbers,' Mr. Cohen said.
