|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The Pleasanton City Council showed majority support to maintain the current police policy of allowing the chief to decide if the department should display its armored rescue vehicle during community events such as National Night Out.
While not an official vote at the May 20 public meeting — the council would have had to vote on a separate ordinance in order to change policy — three out of the five councilmembers, including Mayor Jack Balch, Matt Gaidos and Craig Eicher, showed support for allowing the armored vehicle to be displayed in the community.
“As a parent, in an emergency I want my son to run toward the ARV — not freeze up because he has never seen it before or not experienced it before,” Balch said. “We do these things because sometimes seconds do matter a lot.”
Councilmembers Julie Testa and Jeff Nibert both did not support displaying the vehicle out in public and during events such as National Night Out — an annual event where the police department and other first responders engage with various neighborhoods in the city.
“The BATT is not a toy … it is in fact and has been used as a piece of military equipment,” Testa said. “It is not a vehicle that should be used as a promotional vehicle.”
The vehicle was formally labeled as the “Ballistic Armored Tactical Transport” or BATT as Testa and others still call it.
During the May 20 meeting, the council received PPD’s annual military equipment use policy report, which is a result of Assembly Bill 481.
According to PPD Lt. Nicholas Albert, AB 481 was signed into law by Gov. Gavin Newsom in 2021 for the purpose of oversight and transparency regarding the funding, acquisition and use of military equipment as defined by legislation. The city tracks the military equipment usage from January through December of every year.
According to the city’s report on its military equipment, which includes things like less-lethal firearms, drones and the armored vehicle, the city only used the armored vehicle one time throughout all of 2024. Albert said the one time use was to support a high risk arrest warrant conducted by the East County Tactical Team for an individual who was manufacturing and distributing fully automatic firearms.
He said additionally the PPD utilized unmanned aerial vehicles a total of 14 times during last year but noted that PPD does not own these UAVs — they were deployed by outside agencies in support of ongoing incidents. Of those 14 usages, most were for fleeing suspects and missing persons at risk.
“There were no additional uses of the listed military equipment by the Pleasanton Police Department and we did not receive any complaints or concerns regarding the listed items during this reported period,” Albert said.
Albert also noted staff’s second recommendation from the council which was to allow the PPD to replace one of its robots due to the previous one being over 10 years old and it not being serviceable by the manufacturer anymore. The robot, Albert said, is used for “critical incidents” but he also pointed out that the new robot offers similar video and audio capabilities — it does not have any offensive or weaponized capabilities.
He said the new robot replacement is fully funded through the department’s repair and replacement budget. The council also unanimously approved that motion.
However, it was the display of the armored vehicle during community engagement and events that really sparked the discussions between the dais during the meeting.
“For an active, in-progress incident a sergeant or above can activate the use of the vehicle,” Albert said. “However, for community events and community engagement events, it requires a chief of police approval.”
According to the policy, which was previously approved by a former council, the community engagement section stipulates that the chief can authorize the use of the vehicle during certain events in order to allow the public to view the vehicle and learn more about the uses of the vehicle.
But a past council majority also previously gave City Manager Gerry Beaudin direction to not allow the armored vehicle to be displayed during community events, even though the policy gives the police chief authority to do so.
Albert confirmed that the vehicle was not deployed for community events in Pleasanton last year — the city of Livermore did use the vehicle for its National Night Out last year per the agency’s joint memorandum of understanding with Livermore’s police department.
While Testa said she supports giving PPD the tools they need to do their job, the vehicle should not be in neighborhoods or be publicly displayed during community events.
John Bauer, a Pleasanton resident who spoke during public comment on May 20, even took it a step further and said the vehicle, which he called a tank, should not be used as a deescalation tactic and should not be used by the city, period.
Bauer recalled the citywide conversations that followed the murder of George Floyd at the hands of a Minneapolis police officer back in 2020 regarding police reform where residents said Pleasanton is not like other metropolitan cities and what happened to Floyd would never happen in Pleasanton.
But because Pleasanton isn’t like big cities such as Chicago, Los Angeles or Oakland, that prompted his question as to why the city feels the need for the ARV, which would be more suited for those bigger communities.
Even though he recognized that the vehicle does not have canon, he argued that when an officer is in the turret with a high powered rifle, “it becomes a tank”.
“This tank does not belong in Pleasanton,” Bauer said. “This vehicle should not be used as a photo prop with members of swat in front of it. It should not be in a parade, it should not be used on National Night Out.”
He also said children should not be allowed to climb in or around the vehicle because “there is nothing normal about this vehicle.”
But Eicher, a retired Pleasanton police captain, thought differently in that he thinks the vehicle should be displayed as a way to educate the community about the equipment that officers use for serious incidents.
Albert said the vehicle allows them to work in hostile environments and he used the worst case scenario of an active shooter as an example. He said in the case of an active shooter, the armored vehicle allows PPD to get into that scene immediately, which would be difficult to do without that tool.
“It is a tool that we want to utilize infrequently but have in case of emergency,” Albert said. “Not having an armored vehicle would restrict our ability to respond to certain critical incidents where there are armed individuals.”
Eicher also asked if the presence of having the vehicle escalates incidents to which Albert said it depends on each situation and circumstance.
“While the intent of the armored vehicle is not to escalate situations, I think it would be unfair of me to presume how certain people might react to it,” Albert said
However, he said it is not intended nor utilized as an offensive tool as much as it is used as a defensive tool.
Eicher then asked about displaying the vehicle during community events to which Albert responded that when they are dealing with a major incident or crisis, the appropriate time to expose people to tools such as the ARV is not during those stressful times, but rather during controlled settings where PPD can educate the public about the vehicle.
That’s why Eicher strongly supported displaying the vehicle during events like National Night Out.
“This protects our people, our community from somebody that has the intention of doing harm to others,” Eicher said. “This is not a toy, it’s not meant to be a toy — it’s meant to be an education,” he said.
Gaidos also supported keeping the current policy where the chief has the discretion of displaying the vehicle during those events and he did not join Testa or Nibert in wanting to keep the piece of equipment away from the public eye.
“We should invite the public in, not close the door,” Balch said. “Transparency helps build education and demystify this.”
Thank you to the rational council members who support SAFETY equipment displays (public education + positive community relations) that keep our local police officers protected and well-equipped when those all-to-frequent critical incidents evolve or escalate!! To the other two, don’t be ashamed of our public safety workers and what tools they may need to keep OUR community safe and secure. This is why we all live, work, and invest in Pleasanton!!
As an enthusiastic participant in National Night Out, I wholeheartedly support the event and the value of the interaction between our police officers and our residents. I am very proud of our public safety workers and the job they do. I favor providing equipment that keeps our local police officers and community safe. I support keeping the current policy of the police chief having the discretion to display the armored vehicle. My point in the council meeting was that our public displays of equipment are already impressive and effective. I said that kids love experiencing the police equipment in the fun way it’s done now. I was asked for an opinion and gave one: changing our display of police equipment to include a military vehicle is unnecessary. Considering how little it’s used, it’s not clear that the city needs one. I agreed with a public speaker to this extent. There was no vote taken on the city policy nor direction given. This “Weekly” article stated almost nothing about what I said.
Displaying an armored vehicle during a National Night Out event in America can serve several positive purposes.
It allows residents to interact with law enforcement in a non-threatening environment, fostering trust and understanding.
People, especially children, can learn about the role of specialized vehicles in emergency response and public safety.
Demonstrating the capabilities of such vehicles can help communities understand how they are used in critical situations.
It can inspire young attendees to consider careers in law enforcement or emergency services.
Seeing and exploring an armored vehicle can be a fun and memorable experience for attendees.
National Night Out events have a significant impact on communities by fostering stronger relationships between residents and law enforcement.
Some Key Benefits:
These events encourage neighbors to look out for one another, reducing crime rates.
They create a sense of unity and belonging, making neighborhoods safer and more connected.
Officers interact with residents in a friendly setting, improving trust and communication.
Residents learn about crime prevention, emergency preparedness, and local safety programs.
Testa and Nibert have no sense of community, they lack basic knowledge on how to teach children that police officers are their protectors, people to seek help from.
Michael, you make some good points in your first six paragraphs. I can’t argue with them, nor should I. I very much agree with your seventh paragraph and the key points you stated. Please also see my note above. I love National Night Out. I also am quite satisfied with teaching my three children to respect and trust the protection of our police officers.