Town Square

Post a New Topic

Drug dogs to keep Pleasanton high school students on short leash

Original post made on Feb 3, 2012

Dogs may be man's best friend, but for some Pleasanton students, in the not-too-distant future, they may be anything but.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Friday, February 3, 2012, 7:45 AM

Comments (42)

Posted by Steve, a resident of Stoneridge
on Feb 3, 2012 at 1:20 pm

I didn't see an explanation of what happens to students if they're found in possession of drugs.

Will they be turned over to police, will it be a school disciplinary matter, or both?

I can foresee some (more lenient) parents having a problem with having their child arrested.

If anyone is caught, I'd like to have them led off campus in handcuffs as an example. Schools aren't the place for drugs.

If a parent has a problem with that, then let their kids do drugs at home. I couldn't care less what they do at home. (But please let me know your kid does drugs if my kid is friends with yours.)


Posted by Stacey, a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Feb 3, 2012 at 1:24 pm

Stacey is a registered user.

"The two dogs react to drugs -- marijuana, heroin, MDMA, commonly known as ecstasy, and methamphetamines"

So, no Oxycontin or even alcohol?


Posted by Toxic, a resident of Foothill High School
on Feb 3, 2012 at 1:50 pm

It is outrageous that many on the school board and supt and administration appear to hold the students and families in this community with such contempt and mistrust that they close and lock many of the bathrooms at Foothill High.

Kids can't even go to the bathroom at FHS because it is so big now (there is barely time to change classes) and they round up the kids that try to go to the bathroom in random "Sweeps" for Saturday detention.

Are they afraid of kids shooting heroin in the bathrooms? Oh brother.




Posted by Steve, a resident of Stoneridge
on Feb 3, 2012 at 2:59 pm

Closing bathrooms is usually done in response to vandalism or damage from smoking.

It sounds like the kids that are rounded up trying to go to the bathroom are actually trying to break into a closed bathroom. I cannot believe that the school is forcing kids to hold it the entire day. (My lie-detector is buzzing!)

Maybe the Saturday detention kids could be employed in cleaning and repainting the bathrooms.


Posted by Wow, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Feb 3, 2012 at 3:19 pm

Toxic-

So many untruths I don't know where to begin. The "sweeps" are to round up kids for mid-day tardies, a problem that had gotten out of control. The punishment is a before-school detention the following day. "Saturday school" is for students with 5 or more tardies. It is an effective deterrent - cured my kid of "meandering" to 5th period after lunchtime...

Kids can go to the restroom any time - between classes, at lunch and even during class teachers allow students to go to the restroom.

How about supporting the administration in trying to create a climate conducive to learning? Or at least spending time on campus so your "comments" are factual.


Posted by Toxic , a resident of Foothill High School
on Feb 3, 2012 at 4:48 pm

The PUSD administration and School Board is the poster child for: 1) unlawful actions and illegal contracts 2) poor facility planning and not but not least 3)the land of lawsuits.

The article cites the fact that Attorney General of California's has ALREADY in a published legal opinion stated that such a dog sniffing program is in fact UNCONSTITUTIONAL.

"We are asked whether a school's random investigation of drugs contained in pupils' personal belongings, using dogs to sniff the belongings outside of the pupils' presence, followed by a search of any belongings to which the dogs reacted, would be permissible under the Fourth Amendment of the federal Constitution and the privacy guarantee of the California Constitution. We conclude that the proposed random detection program would not survive constitutional scrutiny."

The PUSD has siphoned away tax money using illegal cash out refunding, deemed illegal by the Attorney General.

Now the PUSD and the city want to embark on a program that the Attorney General already says is illegal?

Every member of the public that is disappointed that their public officials would knowingly embark upon a program already deemed unconstitutional by the state Attorney General needs to send an email to the City Council and the School Board expressing their outrage.

And while the public is at it, the School Board president and superintendent need to be strongly rebuked for pushing this program on the community in spite of the pre-existing Attorney General opinion which indicates it is illegal.


Posted by Westsider, a resident of Laguna Oaks
on Feb 3, 2012 at 8:04 pm

Toxic--that offshore law degree aint working for you. Check the earlier blogs on this topic and get your facts straight.

Steve--No cuffs. The process is the same as if drugs were suspected due to a tip or observation: the facts are carefully investigated. The goal is go get help for the student if drugs are found. But to your point, the schools need to explain next steps.

Thanks, Glen, for introducing us to Falco--he's beautiful. Can't wait for him to be put in action on campus.


Posted by OMG, a resident of Downtown
on Feb 3, 2012 at 8:54 pm

The Attorney General's OPINION is NOT statute, Penal Code, Law, Case Law, higher court PUBLISHED Law,thus his stated OPINION has amost zero impact on the issues from a LEGAL standpoint.

"The article cites the fact that Attorney General of California's has ALREADY in a published legal opinion stated that such a dog sniffing program is in fact UNCONSTITUTIONAL."


Posted by OMG, a resident of Downtown
on Feb 3, 2012 at 8:59 pm

For clarification...

"Attorney General of California's has ALREADY in a published legal opinion"

There are many steps for "case Law" from a higher Court to be considered "published" and case Law MUST be published to be cited and considered.

The Attorney General can not MAKE "case Law" by publication of his opinion, you are confused.


Posted by Toxic, a resident of Foothill High School
on Feb 3, 2012 at 10:11 pm

School Board officials take an oath of office to follow the California Constitution: "that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California."

The formal legal opinions of the Attorney General have been accorded "great respect" and "great weight" by the courts because they cited already published case law, which if you haven't read it (apparently you haven't) include:

Vernonia School Dist. 47J v. Acton (1995) 515 U.S. 646, 652; Elkins v. United States (1960) 364 U.S. 206, 213; 80 Ops.Cal.Atty.Gen. 354, 355 (1997), White v. Davis (1975) 13 Cal.3d 757, 774-775, Tinker v. Des Moines Indep. Sch. Dist. (1969) 393 U.S. 503, 506), B.C. v. Plumas Unified Sch. Dist. (9th Cir. 1999) 192 F.3d 1260, 1271; Horton v. Goose Creek Ind. Sch. Dist. (5th Cir. 1982) 690 F.2d 470, 478-479; Doe v. Renfroe (7th Cir. 1981) 631 F.2d 91, 92, United States v. Place, supra, 462, New Jersey v. T.L.O., supra, 469 U.S. at p. 339; B.C. v. Plumas Unified School Dist., supra, 192 F.3d at p. 1267; In re Williams G., supra, 40 Cal.3d at pp. 557-563, n Vernonia School Dist. 47J v. Acton, supra, 515 U.S. 646

It is also quite embarrassing that during several school board meetings, this Attorney General opinion was never part of the published packet given to the public and the Board members.


Posted by YellowRose, a resident of Foothill High School
on Feb 3, 2012 at 11:48 pm

As one member of the public, I say let the Police and the Dogs do their jobs. The courts will arrive at a decision, soon. Hopefully, the scent searches will keep drugs & drug dealers out of our schools.

I heard some of the bathrooms at Foothill are kept locked because the Administrators cannot monitor all areas at all times, locking certain bathrooms may be the only way to prevent unacceptable (sex,drugs) activities/behaviour. Unfortunately, innocent students will also be affected - but there are other bathrooms they can use.

The parents and students were informed of the tardy sweeps before they began.


Posted by Toxic, a resident of Foothill High School
on Feb 3, 2012 at 11:58 pm

Locking bathrooms and not keeping them adequately supplied is a violation of the Williams Act. That kind of outrageous behavior happens in high crime, inner city schools.

Since it seems like the Administrators can't run schools properly, it's time for ones that are actually qualified to get hired and the rest to find other things to do.


Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Feb 4, 2012 at 6:28 am

"A Williams Complaint, another type of UCP complaint, regards instructional materials, emergency or urgent facilities conditions that pose a threat to the health and safety of pupils, and teacher vacancy or misassignment and may be filed anonymously. Local educational agencies (LEAs) shall have a complaint form available for these types of complaints, but will not reject a complaint if the form is not used as long as the complaint is submitted in writing"

Web Link


Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Feb 4, 2012 at 6:35 am

"The Attorney General's OPINION is NOT statute"

No, but it gives you an idea of the thinking here in California. That, combined with the rulings of the 9th circuit court, the fact tha Jerry Brown said he opposed the drug sniffing dogs, the fact that in the late 90's the ACLU sued a California school district (case did not go to court as district stopped using drug dogs), should have made PUSD THINK before approving the use of drug dogs.

I got an email from PUSD, with a letter from the superintendent and another from PPIE. Good luck with that. Bringing dogs to school did it for me. I overlooked the misuse of funds and have donated every year, but enough is enough. Drug dogs you say? Lawyers and NO donations I say! Violate even one student's civil rights, and you will see the biggest lawsuit you can imagine. Not to mention that you will deal with the ACLU.


Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Feb 4, 2012 at 6:38 am

"I heard some of the bathrooms at Foothill are kept locked because the Administrators cannot monitor all areas at all times"

The reason for locking the bathrooms does not justify it.

Parents of affected students: you can file a Williams Uniform Complaint with the California Department of Education:

"A Williams Complaint, another type of UCP complaint, regards instructional materials, emergency or urgent facilities conditions that pose a threat to the health and safety of pupils, and teacher vacancy or misassignment and may be filed anonymously. Local educational agencies (LEAs) shall have a complaint form available for these types of complaints, but will not reject a complaint if the form is not used as long as the complaint is submitted in writing"

Web Link


Posted by Amy, a resident of Laguna Oaks
on Feb 4, 2012 at 10:13 am

Bottom line IS...... DON'T DO DRUGS IN THE FIRST PLACE!
here in pleasanton we have too much denial
parents need to step up, realize what's happening, and stop defending their kids

Nuff said!


Posted by Joe, a resident of Ruby Hill
on Feb 4, 2012 at 3:46 pm

Resident/Toxic - my spouse works at FHS. Bathrooms are closed due to repeated vandalism and limited, due to budget cuts, campus supervision being available.
Amy -exactly. While large numbers keep screaming lawsuit and violation of kids rights, what about the rights of my kids to attend high school and not have to be exposed to drugs?


Posted by Toxic, a resident of Foothill High School
on Feb 4, 2012 at 9:25 pm

It is against state law to close bathrooms in schools unless they are being repaired. Period. It doesn't matter what the lame excuse happens to be.

What type of 'campus supervision' do you need for goodness sakes to allow kids to go to the bathroom?

And if they are being 'exposed to drugs' or 'exposed to alcohol,' there are drugs everywhere -- on college campuses, on high school campuses, at concerts, at friends' houses. Have them file a police report then.


Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Feb 4, 2012 at 11:19 pm

"Resident/Toxic - my spouse works at FHS. Bathrooms are closed due to repeated vandalism and limited, due to budget cuts, campus supervision being available. "

The California Department of Education does not care about your excuses for closing a bathroom. Clean bathrooms need to be available to students when they are in school.

That is why they have the Uniform Complaints (Williams). FHS is violating education section 35186

"DON'T DO DRUGS IN THE FIRST PLACE!"

I agree that students should not do drugs. But violating their civil rights is not a solution. Drug dogs will not solve the drug problem.


Posted by Stacey, a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Feb 5, 2012 at 12:10 am

Stacey is a registered user.

"Drug dogs will not solve the drug problem. "

Yep. I'm concerned that some people will be lulled into a false feeling of "problem solved" and think that no more needs to be done. Constitutional issues aside, all the dogs do is act as a deterrent to bringing drugs to school. Teens do spend time outside of school and those who think that drugs at school are the problem are only deluding themselves.


Posted by Joe, a resident of Ruby Hill
on Feb 5, 2012 at 7:06 am

Quote all the legal requirements you want but did it occur to you that supervision might be required because of the very topic we are talking about? Clean bathrooms are available, just not all of them. Try coming up with solutions instead of the usual threats and chest pounding. "Drug dogs will not solve the drug problem" -no they won't but they are a part of a solution and one that PPD feels will be effective or they wouldn't be offering to spending the $ or resources. And back to "civil rights"-my kid has rights too and given that PUDS and PPD have a requirement of providing a SAFE and productive learning environment for ALL kids, this can be part of the solution. What I find interesting is how quickly people are jumping in to defend the 'rights' of kids who are dealing drugs or using drugs on a school campus here in Pleasanton. If this were Oakland/Richmond/San Leandro would everyone be so willing to jump in and protect those students 'rights'? Didn't think so...


Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Feb 5, 2012 at 8:00 am

"my kid has rights too "

All kids have rights, including yours. No one has the right to violate the civil rights of ANY kid, regardless of their excuse for doing so. Btw, if your kid is not using drugs, then what is your concern? He/she will not obtain drugs, right? And if he/she does, then you need to deal with it, not by violating the rights of others but by being a parent to your kid and letting others worry about theirs.

"Clean bathrooms are available, just not all of them"

A post above stated that during saturday detention, there is no bathroom available to students at FHS. I do not know whether this is true or not, but if it is, then FHS is violating education code and parents have the right to file a uniform complaint (Williams) with the California Department of Education.

"Try coming up with solutions "

We pay big salaries to the administration to come up with SMART and EFFECTIVE solutions, not so that they can foolishly propose dumb ideas that will make them feel good, pretend they are solving a problem when they are not.

That is just like with the budget: they continue to come up with "solutions" that do not accomplish anything, instead of solving the real problem. So every year we hear budget cuts, budget cuts, panic, panic, dumb solutions, administration feels good, people like you fooled once again. The same is about to happen: drug problem, panic, dumb solutions, people like you feel safe, lawsuits, more panic, drug problem not solved, admin wonders why, more panic. Hmmm....


Posted by Thinking, a resident of Castlewood
on Feb 5, 2012 at 10:19 am

Resident, a.k.a. Patriot,

As I read your posts, this is what I hear you saying:

Everyone is just "dumb" from the President down...

The Govenor, The Mayor, The Superintendent, City Hall, City Council,
School Board, Principals, Teachers and any and all parents who are for the drug dog program.

I find it interesting that so many claim that they have worked so hard to live in such a wonderful town, but the complaints and gripes abound and have been relentless.

Pleasanton has a MAJOR DRUG problem from around sixth grade students on through twelfth grade. These children using pot, MDA, L.S.D., XTC, becoming addicted to oxy, methadone, meth, heroin are from normal and upper middle class and wealthy families. It's an epidemic.
Even ONE child lost forever to addiction is ONE to many, no matter what CLASS his or her parents belong to.

Nothing has worked to stop this epidemic so far. Your suggestion is to "come up with SMART and EFFECTIVE solutions".

Are you involved in Government, PUSD, the schools? Why don't you become our Bill Gates Brainiac of Pleasanton and USE YOUR brain and come up with solutions other than pounding the Constitution and threatening Law Suits. The very education your children depends on, if you have any, is threatened.

Why dont you and all the others threatening to drain the city and PUSD dry with Law Suits take action, open your homes, bank accounts and fund town halls to productive intervention programs? Open a special trust to fund Councelors for at risk youth in this town.






Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Feb 5, 2012 at 12:24 pm

"Resident, a.k.a. Patriot"

Sorry, I do not post under "Patriot"

"The Govenor, The Mayor, The Superintendent, "

Actually, Jerry Brown said the drug dogs were not a good idea. I do not know where the mayor stands on this drug dog issue, but the superintendent has not demonstrated strong leadership when it comes to dealing with the drug problem and instead is going along with a "solution" that will not be effective in dealing with drugs.

"Pleasanton has a MAJOR DRUG problem from around sixth grade students on through twelfth grade. "

This is a problem that has existed for decades and is not unique to Pleasanton. Private schools, Palo Alto schools, top schools elsewhere in the state and other states have big drug problems, but you don't see them using drug dogs. Those schools that have attempted to use drog dugs have stopped due to lawsuits. Schools with lower socioeconomic people happily accept the abuse of power, but that will never be tolerated in a more affluent place where parents have the means to hire lawyers and know their rights.

"Why don't you become our Bill Gates Brainiac of Pleasanton and USE YOUR brain and come up with solutions"

Guarantee that if I come up with a good solution, we will FIRE the superintendent and all her staff, since they are NOT doing their jobs which we pay them high salaries for. Get that guarantee in writing, and I will come up with a smart solution. If we the residents of Pleasanton have to do the jobs we pay the admin to do, why on earth do we want to continue paying such big salaries for?


Posted by Toxic, a resident of Foothill High School
on Feb 5, 2012 at 12:37 pm

There is no drug epidemic in Pleasanton. I see no DEA stakeouts in the news about the drug cartels operating in Pleasanton and Federal press releases reported in the news about major drug trafficking happening in Pleasanton.

But I do see a number of Federal press releases in the news from the US Dept of Justice regarding criminal indictments and Federal grand juries and arrests in Pleasanton regarding a fake university operating in multiple locations in Pleasanton for 3 years, including on School District property in a room at the School Board office within the City of Pleasanton.

Who do you think reported the fake university to the Feds? 6th to 12th graders.

Pleasanton does not have a MAJOR DRUG problem in 6th to 12th graders in Pleasanton as the Castlewood resident states. Actually it has a MAJOR STUPIDITY problem in terms not all, but the majority of its elected officials on the School Board and City Council.

Thank you 6th to 12th graders for reporting the corruption to the Feds, by the way.


Posted by Patriot, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Feb 5, 2012 at 2:32 pm

I post as Patriot. Never as "Resident".


Posted by Patirot, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Feb 5, 2012 at 2:37 pm

"Even ONE child lost forever to addiction is ONE to many, no matter what CLASS his or her parents belong to."

Every ONE innocent child whose life is ruined by this policy is ONE too many. I have related again and again a story involving a personal friend of mine who was innocent and got caught up in a policy like this. It does happen. Yes we have a drug problem. This isn't the solution.


Posted by franco, a resident of Vineyard Hills
on Feb 5, 2012 at 9:43 pm

franco is a registered user.

It is my opinion that in this matter of drugs in high school the truth lies somewhere in the middle. To understand this I will make some statements of which I think most of you will agree.

Drugs in Pleasanton high schools are present and may be more prevalent than many of you think. My children who are ten and more years graduated from Amador/Foothill laugh about the gullability of today's parents who may believe otherwise.

There is certainly a responsibility on the part of administrators to reduce or control this activity in the schools. The issue is the use of a questionable tactic.

I believe the central issue here is the use of dogs sniffing student's belongings (cars in this case). There are many people who disagree with this tactic on the basis that it's accuracy is questionable, and it has a great propensity for sweeping many innocents into blackening their record with potentially false accusations.

Why do you believe that a dog has such a high degree of accuracy to objectively (without bias from its handler) sniff out these different drugs? Only because the police have told you so? What is the rate of false positives? What rate of false positives do you find acceptable? How many innocents who go into the police database listed as "investigated for possession of illegal substances" is OK? Of course, all of this is now pulled up in background checks when you go to get a job and apply for other types of acceptances. If you don't think so, then you haven't been engaged actively in today's real world.

School officials are doing their job to control the problem, however they are choosing to use a poor tactic.


Posted by Toxic, a resident of Foothill High School
on Feb 5, 2012 at 11:18 pm

In the Shasta Union case where the courts ruled recently that drug testing of selected students was illegal, in the 2008-2009 year, there were 8 positive and 20 false positive results, meaning of the positive results indicating supposed 'illegal drug use,' almost 5/7 or 71% were false positive results. A false positive occurred when the initial result shown in the I-Cup indicated positive, but the lab confirmed in follow-up testing it was in fact negative.

What has happened at Foothill High is almost a classic case of the Zimbardo experiment at Stanford -- Web Link . You have overzealous administrators with heavy handed tactics (like locked bathrooms and tardy sweeps) using tactics more appropriate to correctional institutes to make the high school as prison-like as possible. This adds to the stress of student life.

What is also an issue is a classic envy complex. Some staff are envious that some of the students make more money than they do now. Some students at Foothill are so smart they run their own internet companies, for goodness sake. So what better way to bring the students down than dehumanizing them even more by bringing in police dogs.

Adding police drug sniffing dogs is an outrage.


Posted by Resident, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Feb 6, 2012 at 9:03 am

A Chicago article about drug dogs false positives:

"state data show the dogs have been wrong more often than they have been right about whether vehicles contain drugs or paraphernalia."

"a Tribune analysis of three years of data for suburban departments found that only 44 percent of those alerts by the dogs led to the discovery of drugs or paraphernalia."

"even advocates for the use of drug-sniffing dogs agree with experts who say many dog-and-officer teams are poorly trained and prone to false alerts that lead to unjustified searches. Leading a dog around a car too many times or spending too long examining a vehicle, for example, can cause a dog to give a signal for drugs where there are none, experts said."

"Civil rights advocates and detector-dog experts said the lack of regulation or standards has led police to subject innocent drivers to prolonged, humiliating roadside searches."

"The main check on the competency of a dog-handling officer comes in court, where a defense lawyer may question a dog's ability to sniff out drugs. "

"Dog handlers can accidentally cue alerts from their dogs by leading them too slowly or too many times around a vehicle, said Lawrence Myers, an Auburn University professor who studies detector dogs. Myers pointed to the "Clever Hans" phenomenon in the early 1900s, named after a horse whose owner claimed the animal could read and do math before a psychologist determined the horse was actually responding to his master's unwitting cues."

Web Link


Posted by Stacey, a resident of Amberwood/Wood Meadows
on Feb 6, 2012 at 9:30 am

Stacey is a registered user.

It is interesting that Mothers with a Purpose is republishing entire articles of the Pleasanton Weekly on their website in apparent violation of copyright laws. Do they have permission from Embarcadero Publishing to republish the articles? Are Dolores Fox Ciardelli, Jeb Bing, and Glenn Wohltmann being paid a licensing fee?


Posted by Jason Javed, a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Feb 7, 2012 at 12:14 pm

[Post removed due to disrespectful comment or offensive language]


Posted by resident resident, a resident of Birdland
on Feb 7, 2012 at 2:15 pm

this isnt going to solve any problems, it just deals with them after they occur, the real problem is WHY so many kids do drugs in pleasanton, its like a community living next to a radioactive area that keeps giving people cancer, and instead of dealing with the source of the cancer they just keep treating the cancer...


Posted by Republican who is sick and tired, a resident of Rosewood
on Feb 7, 2012 at 2:24 pm

Is it too much to ask for people to take responsibility for themselves and their children? Too busy cashing in food stamps and going to the welfare office?


Posted by Lol, a resident of Foothill High School
on Feb 7, 2012 at 5:09 pm

Hah, of course a failure of a principal like Dwyer would think this would work.


Posted by Pooch-Patrol, a resident of another community
on Feb 7, 2012 at 10:53 pm

[Post removed due to disrespectful comment or offensive language]


Posted by Toxic, a resident of Foothill High School
on Feb 7, 2012 at 11:10 pm

I read also that most school districts use private firms for drug sniffing dogs, not the local police, and these private firms can be funded by Federal grants. I find Pooch-Patrol's post above very interesting and informative because since this story came to light, I have heard about many people being pulled over in Pleasanton for looking 'suspicious' but for no other reason. That isn't policing. That's profiling.

This Bermuda Triangle of the school system, police and the district attorney's office as described on that Mothers With A Purpose website is also very troubling ---

"A local restaurant owner used his connections to put together a meeting with the City Manager, Police Captain, Superintendent of Schools, and Senior Director of Pupil Services, and invited Mothers with a Purpose to attend. Two weeks prior to this meeting, Nancy O'Malley, Alameda County's District Attorney, and a friend of one of the members of Mothers with a Purpose, attended the first meetings at Foothill High and pledged her support to the group. Within days, Kelly and Donna were at Nancy's Oakland office with each of her local DA's (Oakland, Hayward, and Pleasanton) to talk strategy. Each person in this meeting became more committed and excited to support the cause. The District Attorney and her local Pleasanton DA joined the "Downtown" meeting, along with 6 members of Mothers with a Purpose. It was a very productive meeting, with everyone gaining a better understanding of the issues with a commitment to help in any way possible."


Posted by Toxic, a resident of Foothill High School
on Feb 7, 2012 at 11:53 pm

UNBELIEVABLE! But it is TRUE! I just looked up the court cases regarding the Police Department for Pleasanton and found a case on the Alameda County Superior Court website with case number RG05207411 . Everyone should look that up on Domainweb and look at the case.

It describes police in Pleasanton violating constitutional rights, being pressured by superiors in Pleasanton to falsify police reports, then when police report it to the higher ranks of the city, then being put on performance improvement plans to have quotas of arrests and citations, then they are terminated!!!!

Seriously folks. And the school district wants these people on their school campuses?




Posted by majormomma, a resident of Pleasanton Middle School
on Feb 10, 2012 at 6:22 pm

I've been writing honestly about the stupid monster (drugs) that has been invading my teenagers life. I applaud this school for doing something to fight the "no big deal" attitude so many teenagers have with drugs these days. Feel free to read my blog and share with anyone and everyone who could benefit. majormomma.com


Posted by Jeffrey Harlan, a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Oct 29, 2012 at 10:49 am

What's going to happen to your kid when K9 partner Officer Tim Martens who is all over the Internet, in Pleasanton weekly, on channel 2 news, on integrityconcerns.com, etc. accused of lying as recent as 1 week ago, with several cases of dropped charges "in the interest of justice" per judge Jacob Blea arrests your kid? what's going to happen to you and your family's position in the community??? Drug dogs sniffing cars in school parking lots... Is it a deterrent? Maybe a little; but do the risks outweigh the rewards, especially when this Officer. What's stopping a cancer, epilepsy, etc patient that legally uses medicinal marijuana from rubbing up against your kids car in any parking lot, transferring canna oil to the car, and your son or daughter is wrongfully accused and arrested by an Officer who... What do you know about this Officer? Do you want him in our schools, around our kids?


Posted by Mike Judge, a resident of another community
on Oct 29, 2012 at 11:27 am

Dude--settle down.


Posted by Tim, a resident of Birdland
on Oct 29, 2012 at 7:16 pm

Many Pleasanton officers are more than willing to disregard civil liberties.
Joe Pleasanton just wait until it is you or your kid.


If you were a member and logged in you could track comments from this story.

Post a comment

Posting an item on Town Square is simple and requires no registration. Just complete this form and hit "submit" and your topic will appear online. Please be respectful and truthful in your postings so Town Square will continue to be a thoughtful gathering place for sharing community information and opinion. All postings are subject to our TERMS OF USE, and may be deleted if deemed inappropriate by our staff.

We prefer that you use your real name, but you may use any "member" name you wish.

Name: *

Select your neighborhood or school community: *

Comment: *

Verification code: *
Enter the verification code exactly as shown, using capital and lowercase letters, in the multi-colored box.

*Required Fields

Moneyball, the Sequel: Billy Beane for President!
By Tom Cushing | 6 comments | 1,037 views

Planning the "Pleasanton way"
By Tim Hunt | 13 comments | 915 views

Getting rid of an old toilet
By Roz Rogoff | 8 comments | 466 views

Take Full Advantage of Free Standardized Testing Opportunities
By Elizabeth LaScala | 0 comments | 425 views