|
|
|
Uploaded: Friday, February 15, 2008, 12:04 PM
Martial arts studio kicked out for good
In its denial, Planning Commission says owner needs child care license for its program
|
|
by Janet Pelletier
Pleasanton Weekly Staff
| A martial arts studio on Quarry Lane has been shut down indefinitely after the Planning Commission ruled 5-0 its owner would need to get a child care license before it would consider it.
The Tri-Valley Martial Arts Academy shuttered last month after the city determined that the scope of operations at the studio were different than what owner John Pfund described to them initially.
The business, located at 1262-A Quarry Lane, opened last July after it obtained what the city termed an "over the counter" zoning certificate. But the city soon realized that a new law that went into effect the same month meant the studio needed a conditional use permit, and they contacted the studio to correct the mistake. After a back-and-forth battle, city staff recommended that the commission deny the permit because the martial arts activities resembled more of a day care than and after school program.
The decision was crushing to Pfund, who said his passion for life comes from teaching youths the principles of martial arts.
"I've wanted to do this since I was 10 years old," he said.
"I've never told anyone it's a day care," Pfund said. "I don't provide supervision or care."
Pfund said his studio is no different than after school gymnastics, dance and swim programs and should be considered by the same rules.
Parents of children who went to the martial arts school agreed with Pfund, reiterating that he never told them it was a day care and that they never considered it one. The Tri-Valley Martial Arts Academy has left an indelible mark in their children's lives, they said.
"My 5-year-old daughter has really come out of her shell," said parent Amy Fluker.
Another mother said she was amazed at what her son learned about respect in such a small amount of time.
At the Wednesday meeting, commissioners said while they have no hesitations that Pfund is a great leader and role model to the children he teaches and that the martial arts program was exceptional, it didn't erase the fact that the longer hours of operation and regimented daily schedule falls into a day care category, which requires a state child care license.
"I have no doubt that John's a good teacher," Commissioner Jennifer Pearce said. "I'd like to see this succeed, but the way it's currently structured, I can't support it."
Commissioner Arne Olson added that the studio's practice of picking children up from school gives more of an element of care.
"The way to solve this would be to get a license," he said.
Pfund had been operating Tri-Valley Martial Arts under a 'free to come and go' policy--meaning students weren't required to be signed in and out by their parents which is how a day care would operate. But the city has a policy of requiring facilities to sign children in and out, according to city principal planner Donna Decker.
Under Pfund's policy, "children at any age would be free to come and go," Decker said. "Parents would sign a waiver, but the child would not be required to be signed out by an adult."
There were some inconsistencies with how the state viewed the situation. Initially, the State Department of Social Services Community Care Licensing Division told the city that Pfund would be required to get a child care license because children would be at the facility for more than an hour and a half and attending more than 16 hours per week. Other activities such as supervised homework also factored into the decision. However, the state revised that ruling following additional information it received from Pfund about the center's activities and determined a license wasn't necessary under an exemption that Pfund has parents sign a waiver stating the academy isn't a day care. The city said it disagrees with that decision because the exemption applies only to older children. The studio would be teaching children as young as 5 years old.
The vote commissioners made was a "denial without prejudice," which means that Pfund would be able to come back to the commission with a revised business proposal that includes a child care license. If the commission had denied the permit outright, Pfund would have to wait one year before bringing his proposal back. He has another option as well. He can appeal the Planning Commission's decision to the City Council. Are you receiving Express, our free daily e-mail edition? See a sample and sign-up for Express.
|
|
| Comments
|
Posted by MB, a resident of the Pheasant Ridge neighborhood, on Feb 15, 2008 at 9:31 pm Are all businesses in Pleasanton subject to these "new" rules?
I and my neighbors take our kids to many facilities/activities that don't have you sign in and out.
Some (not all) of them have kids there for more than an 90 minutes. Not the younger kids but the older ones who are dedicated to their art or sport.
Are Sunday schools following these rules? What about the library where middle school kids go to for minutes to hours until their parents get off of work?
So this guy offers to pick up the kids from school and also has the crazy idea of having some space to have the kids do homework.
I don't think a layman would consider this a day care by any stretch of the imagination.
Maybe there's more to the story, but this doesn't make any sense.
He'd probably have an easier time just opening a liquor store or something (yes I know, CA ABC and all that, but still), but no, he decides to be a do gooder and do something positive with kids.
All you other business folks who have been dealing with kids for years better take heed.
|
|
Posted by iwastheretoo, a resident of the Lemoine Ranch neighborhood, on Feb 17, 2008 at 9:01 am Why don't you 'google' John Duane Pfund and see what activities Mr. Pfund engaged in while in Dublin...then come back to us all and let us know if you position hasn't changed.
|
|
Posted by Karen, a member of the Vintage Hills Elementary School community, on Feb 17, 2008 at 9:16 am I could only find that he was charged, but not if he was found innocent or guilty of the charges. Can you shed light on this?
|
|
Posted by Timothy S, a resident of the Downtown neighborhood, on Feb 17, 2008 at 9:39 am He was obviously found innocent as he would not have been able to work with children at all in accordance with Federal and State laws. Innocent means that he didn't do it and it shouldn't even come up in conversation about his license. The fact that there was porn on his computer is not incriminating. I'm sure most people's computers have some "interesting" things on them. If you believe "accused" means "guilty" then you should move to another country.
Another fine example of City of Pleasanton making sure that someone can't do a business they love. It will start taking its toll on Pleasanton soon as people start to take their businesses elsewhere to cities that have more welcoming business environments. Then we can start listening to the complaints of residents as they have to drive too far for the services they want.
|
|
Posted by Karen, a resident of the Vintage Hills Elementary School neighborhood, on Feb 17, 2008 at 11:51 am Timothy, actually innocent can also mean there was not enough evidence to find guilty.
|
|
Posted by payback, a resident of another community, on Feb 19, 2008 at 7:36 am Timothy...do you have kids? How would you feel if your kids were left in the hands of someone who was accused....but never convicted of such a crime? There was obviously some suspicion to his actions in Dublin....why can't Pleasanton be commended for taking precautions? IF he was allowed to stay and something did happen....it would be all Pleasanton's fault. BUT Pleasanton takes the preventive maintenance route and you jump all over them.
|
|
Posted by Bill, a member of the Walnut Grove Elementary School community, on Feb 28, 2008 at 12:38 pm Looks like the city did us all a favor, that sicko should NEVER work with kids again
|
|
Posted by ted, a resident of the Pleasanton Meadows neighborhood, on Mar 11, 2008 at 11:18 pm Perhaps you would change your mind if you knew anything about this person. Perhaps you would change your mind if you learned he was falsely accussed and had witnesses to back him up and passed a polygraph test and psychological testing. Perhaps you would change your mind if you found out the child that accussed him was caught raping his little brother and had a motive to accuse someone else of molesting him so he could get his pending felony charges reduced. And perhaps you might be interested in knowing that this kid tried to implicate other people of molesting him before implicating this man. Maybe you would be interested in finding out that the detectives on the case did no investigating before ruining this persons life. And finally maybe you might try to find out all the facts before you make judgements about someone. Quite possibly this person was able to prove his innocence to the extent that his case was dissmissed by the court in the interest of justice. Just my thoughts.
|
|
Posted by T.S., a resident of Dublin, on May 7, 2008 at 9:23 am I worked for Dublin Schools when Pfund was running the same "day-care/martial arts" operation. He was always late in picking up the kids from school, his mode of transportation an old dilapidated van, and then later an old schoolbus that he left in the parking lot of his building (which also had a grocery store, drug store, Mervyns, etc.) with the door wide open all night. Somewhat strange. I certainly would not allow my children to attend his classes!
|
|
Posted by JaneB, a resident of the Danville neighborhood, on Jun 3, 2009 at 12:43 pm Gonna go ahead and jump in here. Ted is right in all his facts. My daughter attended the school at the same time as the aforementioned child...this same child was a convicted rapist in Texas, having sodomized his own six year old brother.
Ted is also correct that in trial, he blamed his own step father and others. The accusation of John Pfund was made to lessen his own punishment.
I personally was at that gym four days a week during the time in question. My Daughter was at the "Ninja Night" in question.
Ted is also right when he said I never recieved a call from Law Enforcent Investigators. I left at least 10 messages. If he was guilty, I more than anybody wanted to know. I knew at least 10 other moms at the time (we would talk when we went to pick up our kids) and NOT ONE of them recieved a call from investigators.
Want some more...
I attended the hearings...there was no evidence other than the kids testimony. And the kids testimony was so unbelieveable, the judge even said so.
And yes, there was naked pictures on his computer. The same computer that all the teenage boys that worked for him used when he was away. Check your own computer if you have kids. Look in your temp directories. It will have a ~ in the file name. You have porn on your computer. You are a child molester.
John lost his business, his home, his fiancee, his friends, and it still continues today. The city planning/building commission did everything they could to stop him from doing business, acting well outside their charter, because (lets be frank) of the covert characterization of John as a child molester. I had a city inspector come out openly and tell me he would continue to red tag anything he could find to keep John from opening. Forget about John's rights for a moment and imagine if city planning, the IRS, Health Inspectors, or the DMV employees started stepping into Crime Prevention and you found that your applications just went "missing" because the employee felt a duty to put you through a tangle of bureaucracy until you just gave up and quit.
Those of you that called him a Sicko and pervert, or continue to perpetuate this talk should take a good look at what your doing. Do a thorough investigation of the facts and quit accusing anonymously.
|
|
Posted by Randy S., a resident of the Valley Trails neighborhood, on Jun 16, 2009 at 12:53 am Agreeing with what Timothy and Jane stated I would like to add something else. The child in question accused John on 2 separate occasions. Even if you are a kid, if you were molested by the instructor would you continue would you continue taking the class? All he is trying to do is make a living doing what he loves and put his life back together after somebody falsely accused him of a serious crime. I agree that a parent needs to think twice before dropping their kid off with someone, and that is exactly what they should do. They are entrusting their kids to someone and if they are considering the person they should read farther than the first line in a report
|
|
Posted by anon, a resident of another community, on Dec 3, 2009 at 12:46 pm I have some information to offer on this topic: John's ex, Helen Ann Elliott, a.k.a, Helen Angelista Pfund Norton , currently is married to convicted, registered child molester, Paul Dwight Norton , of Vacaville, CA. (familywatchdog.us) Also, Helen Elliot's father, William Allen Elliott ("Bill") of Fremont, CA, was a serial child molester, who molested children as young as five at sleepovers at the Elliott house. I know this from personal experience. This might not be sufficient proof that John Dwayne Pfund raped this particular boy, but I hope people continue to watch him very closely and carefully protect their children.
Another thought is, if you were a child molester, how many jobs could be better than a martial arts instructor? The "sensei" is given great authority and control, and the sport allows more intimate physical contact than almost any other. Something to consider.
|
|
|
| |
|
Send this story
Print this story
