News

Former Pleasanton PD officer sues city, alleges wrongful termination after attending 'Stop the Steal' rally

Lawsuit argues McNeff was unjustly fired for expressing political opinions at protest in Sacramento on same day as insurrection in D.C., plus social media activity

A former Pleasanton police officer has filed a federal lawsuit against city and police department officials for allegedly firing him after finding out he attended a "Stop the Steal" rally in Sacramento at the same time as the insurrection in the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Peter McNeff at his swearing-in ceremony with the Pleasanton Police Department in December 2015. (File photo courtesy PPD)

Peter "Pete" McNeff was a five-year-plus veteran at the Pleasanton Police Department, after having joined the department back in December 2015. McNeff's attorneys contend that he had been previously lauded for his "exemplary record" and recognized for his actions in the department throughout his career.

But when McNeff decided to attend a "Stop the Steal" rally on Jan. 6, 2021 in the state's capital city on his own personal time, which was on the same day as the insurrection at Washington D.C., several of his co-workers saw photos of McNeff at the rally that he posted on his social media accounts, according to the lawsuit.

That led to complaints being filed against McNeff and officers criticizing him for his political beliefs, ultimately resulting on him being placed on leave, according to the lawsuit.

"On January 7, 2021, a police sergeant sent a memorandum to Mr. (David) Swing documenting internal complaints regarding Mr. McNeff's political action," the federal lawsuit states. "In this memorandum, authored and sent one day following the January 6, 2021 political rally, this Sergeant 'concluded' that Mr. McNeff attended an event organized by a group known for their propensity to discuss extreme violence, incitement of violence, and threats."

Help sustain the local news you depend on.

Your contribution matters. Become a member today.

Join

The memorandum also stated that McNeff had "directly associated himself with the unlawful activities at the U.S. Capitol."

This browser does not support PDFs. Please download the PDF to view it: Download PDF.

This browser does not support PDFs. Please download the PDF to view it:
Download PDF

While the lawsuit argues that there is no evidence that McNeff did anything other than attend and observe the rally, PPD followed up with a formal investigation just a few months later that year.

The investigation, led by an outside law firm, looked into McNeff's entire social media history and interviewed several other PPD employees before making five separate allegations all relating to his current and past political views, according to the lawsuit.

"The Department chose to commence such an investigation into Mr. McNeff's suspected radicalized and/or extremist associations, absent any information that Mr. McNeff actually associated with or supported any such hate or extremist groups, resulting in lasting and irreversible damage to Mr. McNeff's character and reputation. The department did so after at least one senior officer urged them not to touch this issue with a ten-foot pole," according to the lawsuit.

Some of the allegations made by the law firm included being associated with racist, extremist groups like the Proud Boys and posting multiple racist and anti-Muslim comments on several of his social media accounts, according to the lawsuit.

Stay informed

Get the latest local news and information sent straight to your inbox.

Stay informed

Get the latest local news and information sent straight to your inbox.

While the lawsuit states that most of the allegations were not sustained and some were exonerated due to freedom of speech and rights to express political views, McNeff was ultimately fired from PPD on Feb. 4, 2022.

"The department and city's stated reasons for termination are pretext," the lawsuit states. "Mr. McNeff was, in fact, fired because he expressed protected political opinions and ideologies deemed 'unpopular' and even stupid by the department, (Chief) Swing, and (PPD Capt. Larry) Cox."

Pleasanton city attorney Dan Sodergren told the Weekly that the city cannot comment on pending litigation and could not provide personnel records regarding McNeff's termination.

PPD Sgt. Marty Billdt also told the Weekly that the city is "legally prohibited from commenting on personnel matters."

McNeff will be seeking a trial by jury for economic and non-economic compensation and is alleging that the Pleasanton Police Department and city officials violated his First Amendment rights, retaliated against him for engaging in political activity, and wrongfully fired him for lawful, off-duty activities.

"They knew that firing Mr. McNeff for engaging in off-duty political speech protected by the First Amendment was illegal, immoral and wrong," according to the lawsuit. "In addition, they knew or should have known, and acted with reckless disregard of the fact that engaging in the above-described adverse employment actions would result in substantial harm to Mr. McNeff, his reputation, his career, his employment, and his employability. Nevertheless, they acted with cruel and retaliatory motives and deliberate indifference to Mr. McNeff's rights under the law."

The lawsuit, filed on Jan. 10 in the U.S. District Court for Northern California in Oakland, names as defendants the city, PPD, Chief Swing, Capt. Cox and Brian Dolan, who was interim city manager at the time.

A front row seat to local high school sports.

Check out our new newsletter, the Playbook.

Christian Trujano
 
Christian Trujano, a Bay Area native and San Jose State alum, joined Embarcadero Media in May 2022 following his graduation. He is an award-winning student journalist who has covered stories in San Jose ranging from crime to higher education. Read more >>

Follow PleasantonWeekly.com and the Pleasanton Weekly on Twitter @pleasantonnews, Facebook and on Instagram @pleasantonweekly for breaking news, local events, photos, videos and more.

Get uninterrupted access to important local crime news. Become a member today.

Former Pleasanton PD officer sues city, alleges wrongful termination after attending 'Stop the Steal' rally

Lawsuit argues McNeff was unjustly fired for expressing political opinions at protest in Sacramento on same day as insurrection in D.C., plus social media activity

by / Pleasanton Weekly

Uploaded: Mon, Feb 13, 2023, 11:13 pm

A former Pleasanton police officer has filed a federal lawsuit against city and police department officials for allegedly firing him after finding out he attended a "Stop the Steal" rally in Sacramento at the same time as the insurrection in the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.

Peter "Pete" McNeff was a five-year-plus veteran at the Pleasanton Police Department, after having joined the department back in December 2015. McNeff's attorneys contend that he had been previously lauded for his "exemplary record" and recognized for his actions in the department throughout his career.

But when McNeff decided to attend a "Stop the Steal" rally on Jan. 6, 2021 in the state's capital city on his own personal time, which was on the same day as the insurrection at Washington D.C., several of his co-workers saw photos of McNeff at the rally that he posted on his social media accounts, according to the lawsuit.

That led to complaints being filed against McNeff and officers criticizing him for his political beliefs, ultimately resulting on him being placed on leave, according to the lawsuit.

"On January 7, 2021, a police sergeant sent a memorandum to Mr. (David) Swing documenting internal complaints regarding Mr. McNeff's political action," the federal lawsuit states. "In this memorandum, authored and sent one day following the January 6, 2021 political rally, this Sergeant 'concluded' that Mr. McNeff attended an event organized by a group known for their propensity to discuss extreme violence, incitement of violence, and threats."

The memorandum also stated that McNeff had "directly associated himself with the unlawful activities at the U.S. Capitol."

While the lawsuit argues that there is no evidence that McNeff did anything other than attend and observe the rally, PPD followed up with a formal investigation just a few months later that year.

The investigation, led by an outside law firm, looked into McNeff's entire social media history and interviewed several other PPD employees before making five separate allegations all relating to his current and past political views, according to the lawsuit.

"The Department chose to commence such an investigation into Mr. McNeff's suspected radicalized and/or extremist associations, absent any information that Mr. McNeff actually associated with or supported any such hate or extremist groups, resulting in lasting and irreversible damage to Mr. McNeff's character and reputation. The department did so after at least one senior officer urged them not to touch this issue with a ten-foot pole," according to the lawsuit.

Some of the allegations made by the law firm included being associated with racist, extremist groups like the Proud Boys and posting multiple racist and anti-Muslim comments on several of his social media accounts, according to the lawsuit.

While the lawsuit states that most of the allegations were not sustained and some were exonerated due to freedom of speech and rights to express political views, McNeff was ultimately fired from PPD on Feb. 4, 2022.

"The department and city's stated reasons for termination are pretext," the lawsuit states. "Mr. McNeff was, in fact, fired because he expressed protected political opinions and ideologies deemed 'unpopular' and even stupid by the department, (Chief) Swing, and (PPD Capt. Larry) Cox."

Pleasanton city attorney Dan Sodergren told the Weekly that the city cannot comment on pending litigation and could not provide personnel records regarding McNeff's termination.

PPD Sgt. Marty Billdt also told the Weekly that the city is "legally prohibited from commenting on personnel matters."

McNeff will be seeking a trial by jury for economic and non-economic compensation and is alleging that the Pleasanton Police Department and city officials violated his First Amendment rights, retaliated against him for engaging in political activity, and wrongfully fired him for lawful, off-duty activities.

"They knew that firing Mr. McNeff for engaging in off-duty political speech protected by the First Amendment was illegal, immoral and wrong," according to the lawsuit. "In addition, they knew or should have known, and acted with reckless disregard of the fact that engaging in the above-described adverse employment actions would result in substantial harm to Mr. McNeff, his reputation, his career, his employment, and his employability. Nevertheless, they acted with cruel and retaliatory motives and deliberate indifference to Mr. McNeff's rights under the law."

The lawsuit, filed on Jan. 10 in the U.S. District Court for Northern California in Oakland, names as defendants the city, PPD, Chief Swing, Capt. Cox and Brian Dolan, who was interim city manager at the time.

Comments

Nicki
Registered user
Jensen Tract
on Feb 14, 2023 at 9:22 am
Nicki, Jensen Tract
Registered user
on Feb 14, 2023 at 9:22 am
Pton Resident
Registered user
Foothill High School
on Feb 14, 2023 at 9:24 am
Pton Resident, Foothill High School
Registered user
on Feb 14, 2023 at 9:24 am

If these facts are correct, it seems Office McNeff will be getting a massive settlement from the city of Pleasanton.


Willy
Registered user
Old Towne
on Feb 14, 2023 at 9:42 am
Willy, Old Towne
Registered user
on Feb 14, 2023 at 9:42 am

Hoping he wins! People that handled and approved his termination to be fired!


dknute
Registered user
Golden Eagle
on Feb 14, 2023 at 9:46 am
dknute, Golden Eagle
Registered user
on Feb 14, 2023 at 9:46 am

I hope he wins also. This officer is absolutely being denied his lawful rights to Free Speech, Free Will, Freedom to Rally, be it Protest or Cheer.
His affiliation with the police department should have no bearing on his rights as an American.
It’s absolutely his right to attend ANY lawful gathering, anywhere in the United States.
We are not living in Russia, China, or North Korea. At least, not yet. It’s an affront to Our Civil Liberties to see something such as this being done.


dknute
Registered user
Golden Eagle
on Feb 14, 2023 at 9:47 am
dknute, Golden Eagle
Registered user
on Feb 14, 2023 at 9:47 am

I hope he wins his lawsuit also.


dknute
Registered user
Golden Eagle
on Feb 14, 2023 at 9:50 am
dknute, Golden Eagle
Registered user
on Feb 14, 2023 at 9:50 am
Patriots
Registered user
Birdland
on Feb 14, 2023 at 10:53 am
Patriots, Birdland
Registered user
on Feb 14, 2023 at 10:53 am

He can express his insurrection and domestic terrorism views but not as a member of our police force. Best he is gone. Thank goodness our leadership can stand strong for our democracy against those that associate with stop the steal.


CWM
Registered user
Stoneridge
on Feb 14, 2023 at 12:47 pm
CWM, Stoneridge
Registered user
on Feb 14, 2023 at 12:47 pm

Just because you become a police offer you don't give up your constitutional rights. It is a sad day when you can lose a job for what you believe in. I may not agree with some of his thoughts but he has a right to them as long as he doesn't break any laws. If he wasn't attending the event in uniform or representing the police department then he has a right to his beliefs. It seems to be OK for mayors, police chiefs and other officials to participate in BLM and LGBT events, but heaven forbid if you attend an event in support of conservative ideas. Are we going to start firing people that are pro-life? Where does it end??


Joe V
Registered user
Birdland
on Feb 14, 2023 at 12:51 pm
Joe V, Birdland
Registered user
on Feb 14, 2023 at 12:51 pm

Possible jurors commenting above, have sided with the ex officer's case, without knowing the full evidence of the case. With this type of bias, anything is possible in a jury trial, OJ Simpson was found not guilty by the jurors in his trial.


BobB
Registered user
Vintage Hills
on Feb 14, 2023 at 1:30 pm
BobB, Vintage Hills
Registered user
on Feb 14, 2023 at 1:30 pm

@CWM,

Police attend events in support of conservative ideas all the time. The implication here is that not only the event but also the social media postings from this officer went beyond just "conservative ideas". If they were contrary to the rules and regulations of the police department then his firing was justified. Hopefully, the facts will come out in the trial.


Carl
Registered user
Stoneridge
on Feb 14, 2023 at 1:45 pm
Carl, Stoneridge
Registered user
on Feb 14, 2023 at 1:45 pm

@BobB
I think we agree. I’m saying that as long as he wasn’t representing himself as a PPD officer he has the right to express himself. It is a different story if someone presents themselves as a PPD officer, either in person or in social media posts. It’ll all come out at some point unless their is a settlement of some kind, which is the most likely outcome.


keeknlinda
Registered user
Vintage Hills
on Feb 14, 2023 at 2:05 pm
keeknlinda, Vintage Hills
Registered user
on Feb 14, 2023 at 2:05 pm

Joe V, potential jurors are quizzed before being accepted to serve on the jury. If they answer honestly, and they are under oath when they are quizzed,they wouldn't qualify.


Former PTown Resident
Registered user
Stoneridge
on Feb 15, 2023 at 4:49 am
Former PTown Resident, Stoneridge
Registered user
on Feb 15, 2023 at 4:49 am

Cut to the chase; he was fired because he voted for Trump. I hope he sues the snot to of the City. He's a good cop.


Been here a while
Registered user
West of Foothill
on Feb 15, 2023 at 9:25 am
Been here a while, West of Foothill
Registered user
on Feb 15, 2023 at 9:25 am

May I remind all that a Complaint is a document filed by a plaintiff (someone seeking damages), written by the plaintiff's attorneys, and it is nothing more than a summary of their allegations, set out in the most favorable light possible, and only from their perspective. It sets forth not facts, but allegations. It is at most only half of the story, and it's told from the perspective of only one side. Folks should never assume that everything, or even anything, in a Complaint actually is a fact. That's why we have a judicial system, where both sides are allowed to present their version, and then other folks -- hopefully without preconceived notions based on their unawareness of "the rest of the story -- listen carefully and decide which version makes much more sense. You have only heard from one side. Perhaps judgments ought to be withheld when one does not have any idea of what the facts actually are, and the other side has not yet had the opportunity to respond.


Art Vanderlay
Registered user
Birdland
on Feb 16, 2023 at 4:25 pm
Art Vanderlay, Birdland
Registered user
on Feb 16, 2023 at 4:25 pm

I find this whole story a tragedy. This former officer, Mr McNeff, should enjoy all the freedoms that the constitution offers. How dare his employers and others fire him simply for exercising his right to attend a peaceful process. He should be reinstated and compensated for the trauma his innocent behavior induced.

As a member of this community, I don't think about the political persuasions of the officers who are bravely putting themselves on the front line. All I care about is their duty to uphold the law, serve our community and represent the interests of our society.

It is entirely their OWN BUSINESS if they decide to be swept along by ridiculous conspiracy theories about the election that hold up to no scrutiny whatsoever, or harbor racist thoughts, or write demeaning words about other religions. We should rejoice in our ability to do this in America, whether we are police officers or not.

Reinstate Officer McNeff now!


Longtime Resident
Registered user
Amador Valley High School
on Feb 23, 2023 at 8:51 pm
Longtime Resident, Amador Valley High School
Registered user
on Feb 23, 2023 at 8:51 pm

Do police swear an oath to the Constitution? If so, good riddance. Just because you don't like the outcome doesn't make it unconstitutional.


Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.

Post a comment

Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.