Town Square

Post a New Topic

Police issue 200+ citations during traffic enforcement operation on Highway 84

Original post made on Apr 10, 2018

Some speeding drivers on Highway 84/Isabel Avenue in the Tri-Valley got a surprise last week -- increased enforcement by several police agencies who combined to issue more than 200 citations for driving infractions during one morning commute.

Read the full story here Web Link posted Tuesday, April 10, 2018, 10:14 AM

Comments (37)

Posted by Grumpy
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Apr 10, 2018 at 2:46 pm

Grumpy is a registered user.

I have been positively itching for this topic to show up.

Unfortunately, the enforcement is of an aggressive and illegal speed trap. There are a number of enforcement problems on 84.

On the pass, their speed study sets a speed limit of 50, which they enforce with maximum speed law violations. However; it is a (two-lane because the truck lanes don’t count) divided highway, and the maximum speed limit is 65 by statute. Furthermore, the speed study sets the speed so low by stating that the curve of the road is the reason to reduce below the 85% speed. Again, statute clearly states that they may not use the curve of the road, as that’s a condition readily apparent to the driver.

The speed limit in the construction zone is 40. I won’t argue with that at the moment. However, the spot where they were observing and ticketing is from the Stanley underpass. That area is out of the construction zone, and again has a 65 maximum speed. There too, the speed study is wrong—it’s an initial speed study, for one. Furthermore, the flow of traffic routinely approaches 65, which is why they were able to nab so many people. Since the legislative intent and operation of California’s basic speed law is to not outlaw the flow of traffic, these tickets are probably garbage.

Unfortunately, California law does not provide for an easy way for a court to throw out all tickets issued in this area at once. Each defendant must make the case on his own, and thus will get whatever the judge is in the mood for. However, it would be reasonable for people to coordinate, and for one person who loses at trial to appeal and ask for publication. They may not get it, but if they do, then that could stop further ticketing.


Posted by Grumpy
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Apr 10, 2018 at 2:48 pm

Grumpy is a registered user.

PS I feel terrible about the deaths along this stretch, and would warn anyone going southbound on 84 to watch for stopped traffic past Stanley. The Department could always post such a sign—it’s a standard one—if they actually care about deaths.


Posted by Speeding?
a resident of Birdland
on Apr 10, 2018 at 4:26 pm

Sounds like Grumpy got a ticket for speeding........


Posted by Grumpy
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Apr 10, 2018 at 5:46 pm

Grumpy is a registered user.

Sorry, Speeding. You’re wrong. I did not get a ticket.

But I don’t like speed traps either, and see them as abusive governmental overreach.

Next time, just ask.


Posted by Michael Austin
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Apr 10, 2018 at 7:16 pm

Michael Austin is a registered user.

Grumpy:
Curious question for you:

Do you consider the raid on president trump lawyer office and home normal Government business, or "abusive Government overreach"?


Posted by Grumpy
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Apr 10, 2018 at 7:36 pm

Grumpy is a registered user.

That’s where your mind went? Local infraction enforcement and felony federal investigations are related? I hope you’re not looking for some sort of virtue signaling.

I’m against the use of government to penalize the regular citizen. That’s a consistent value I hold. I don’t want the cities or county ticketing people who aren’t breaking the law. I don’t want the city giving away public land to private developers without a very good reason. I don’t want the state creating laws telling us to build tons of apartments.

I also want the government to protect the rebuke citizen from abuses by other citizens. So I support the police in their efforts to catch felons. And I support the government investigating a lawyer who they reached the threshold of proof in front of a judge for possibly committing violations of racketeering, laundering, or their equivalent electioneering crimes. But I expect that the government will, in fact, respect Trump’s privilege and only focus on crimes Cohen may have committed himself. Just like I hated Scalia but was 100% aligned with him when he struck down using infrared cameras or GPS to spy on suspects without a warrent.


Posted by Grumpy
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Apr 10, 2018 at 7:37 pm

Grumpy is a registered user.

*rebuke = regular citizen


Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Apr 10, 2018 at 8:02 pm

Pleasanton Parent is a registered user.

So two fatalities one for dui driving the other (no knowledge). How many of these tickets cited those behaviors this was claimed to be in reaction to?

How about ticketing
- cell phone use while driving
- hanging out in the left lane when cars are behind you (non rush hr)
- waiting until the off ramp lines go solid then stopping to merge in impeding exiting traffic


Posted by Bill
a resident of Pleasanton Heights
on Apr 10, 2018 at 8:23 pm

Hey grumpy, I have an easier way to figure out the right speed. Look at the sign. Adjust your speed to the posted limit. It's really that easy. You sound a little unhinged. Get away for a few days. Someplace quiet and calm.


Posted by Grumpy
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Apr 10, 2018 at 8:33 pm

Grumpy is a registered user.

Bill,

I don’t expect everyone to understand the principals of California law. That’s why I presented them here.

The posted speed limit (if it is above 25), is only the prima facie limit. That means that there is a presumption that that limit is correct, but you may rebut it with any evidence whatsoever showing that you were going a safe and reasonable speed. Furthermore, the sign is not the limit (and may also not be enforced by radar) if there has not been a traffic engineering study performed in that stretch of road for the last five years, or if the study produces a number that is lower than the 85% percentile of the traffic speed over that stretch of road, with a couple of ways of rounding down or reducing by 5. This is an absolute bar.

The reason for this is to not allow local jurisdictions to set speed limits low to get ticket revenue, and to not breed disrespect for the law by allowing jurisdictions to criminalize ordinary behavior.

Nolo Press has a good book about these principles and how to fight tickets given in violation of them.

As for this being unhinged, I would say instead that your ignorance of the law is shocking. As they say, it’s no excuse. You are required, as a driver, to know the California basic speed law, and where and how the signs apply and don’t apply. In pouring rain or fog, going the speed of the sign is a clear violation of the law. In clear weather with little traffic, no pedestrians or obstacles, and clear lines of sight, going above the sign is no violation of the law.

If you don’t care for the law, you’re welcome to try to change it, or move to a state where the sign is an absolute limit. In the mean time, I encourage you to study up.


Posted by Grumpy
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Apr 10, 2018 at 8:38 pm

Grumpy is a registered user.

And recovering from Bill’s off point distraction, the issue here is that Highway 84 is a divided highway from Pigeon Pass to 580. The maximum speed is 65. However, the local agencies have been erroneously enforcing the maximum speed at 55, thinking that the construction they have done doesn’t change the status of the road.

They are mistaken. And by writing tickets for violating the maximum speed law, they in theory cannot go back and charge you for violating the basic speed law (double jeopardy) when the court is informed of the error. That’s just the law. If they want to write the ticket, they have to do the work.

I do think this is a problem. The road is safe at 65, ignoring the construction and the Vineyard signal. Most drivers know it, which is why they go 65. And thus, this is why enforcement actions are not appropriate.


Posted by Mark
a resident of another community
on Apr 11, 2018 at 7:29 am

200 speeding tickets X $500 = $100,000. California making their money.


Posted by AntiGrumpy
a resident of Avila
on Apr 11, 2018 at 9:39 am

How about people just slow down and don’t speed. That would solve everyone’s problems.


Posted by Grumpy
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Apr 11, 2018 at 9:57 am

Grumpy is a registered user.

Everyone’s entitled to their opinion, and you’re welcome to disagree. But I would ask that you not use “antiX” as a name, as that’s a personal attack.

My point is not that people should speed. My point is that California has strict rules on how speeding is defined, and it is my considered opinion—which I provide support for—that the enforcement agencies are not following the law in their enforcement.

That’s an issue of public interest, and it should concern you. If it doesn’t, that’s okay.

I strongly believe, and advocate here, that the law should be followed by both drivers and police. When the police don’t follow the law, then this is a risk to the system, just as it is when drivers don’t follow the law.


Posted by over-aggressive
a resident of Downtown
on Apr 11, 2018 at 10:28 am

232 tickets in 4 hours is a bit over-aggressive. I really feel bad for normal drivers going with the flow of traffic to be ticketed. These tickets are not cheap ($500 post tax, would be about $800 pre-tax), and that meant most ticketed drivers that day would have had to work several day to pay to pay for the cost of the tickets. I don't mind police ticketing reckless drivers, but to pick on citizens going at normal flow of traffic is picking on kids at the playground.

A better effort would be to increase patrol and catch the thugs that break in cars at parking lots of shopping malls, BART, and those losers robbing mom-and-pop shops!


Posted by Grumpy
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Apr 11, 2018 at 10:58 am

Grumpy is a registered user.

Thanks, overaggressive. You stated it better than I did. I too don’t mind them ticketing reckless drivers, but I do mind them picking on people going he flow of traffic.


Posted by BobB
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 11, 2018 at 1:44 pm

BobB is a registered user.

@Grumpy,

People should slow down. That is the main problem.

And as long as you brought up apartments, we need to build more of them and more high density housing near rapid transit stops.


Posted by Grumpy
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Apr 11, 2018 at 3:11 pm

Grumpy is a registered user.

The statement that “people should slow down” is far too facile an argument. It seems to be used for every road for every situation. Although speed can certainly be a cause of accidents for a given road, we should require proof that speed is causing the risk for a given section.

So, as it turns out, no, I don’t think that everyone should slow down. I don’t think you’ve met your burden of proof, or even tried.

I won’t stand on the argument by absurdity that, if people should just slow down, then we ought to reduce all roads to maximum 25mph. However, I think the truth lies in the direction that speed is only a cause in certain specific cases, that California law is quite sophisticated in determining what those cases are already, and that it’s rather Chicken Little like to state that slowing down is the answer per se or even here.

I support the way our state speed laws take reasonability into account and require a showing of excessiveness. Many people state that California has terrible laws and might not know that our speed laws are rather unique in the nation for being aware and do dictatorial.

As for apartments, high density apartments near transit is good. High density apartments near work is far better. High density apartments and work in an existing urban area is best.


Posted by Grumpy
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Apr 11, 2018 at 3:11 pm

Grumpy is a registered user.

*do dictatorial = not dictatorial.


Posted by Grumpy
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Apr 11, 2018 at 3:18 pm

Grumpy is a registered user.

By the way, I think understanding our laws and why they operate the way they do is an important part of our civic duty, and I’m surprisingly disappointed that people here have pushed back against it.

One has said I need to relax for caring about the enforcement of our laws and how it unobtainable innocent drivers. One has said that I must be bitter for having gotten a ticket that I never did. One has been anti me. And many have said “just slow down”, which completely sidesteps the question of fairness, responsibility, and punishment.

I expected more from Pleasanton. I’d like to find out my expectations were right and this has been an aberration so far.


Posted by Grumpy
a resident of Vineyard Avenue
on Apr 11, 2018 at 3:19 pm

Grumpy is a registered user.

* time for a new phone. I have no idea how it got “unobtainable” from “affects”.


Posted by BobB
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 11, 2018 at 5:29 pm

BobB is a registered user.

I recommend one of the stock Android phones, like Pixel 2, or Moto X4.


Posted by Bill
a resident of Pleasanton Heights
on Apr 11, 2018 at 8:59 pm

Someone stole grumpys red stapler.


Posted by Map
a resident of Del Prado
on Apr 12, 2018 at 9:14 am

Maybe that was grumpy that blew by me in the right lane and used the stop signs on valley and blackbird as a “suggestion “ only?? Hey whoever, it’s 35mph on valley slow down before you kill somebody and 25 mph when the kids in our 2 overcrowded schools in that neighborhood are arriving and leaving. Speed limit on main st. Is 25 mph, u-turns are illegal and those stop signs need to be enforced, bring back our bike officers and foot patrols in the evenings and on weekends


Posted by OG [old guy]
a resident of Stoneridge
on Apr 12, 2018 at 10:11 am

OG [old guy] is a registered user.

Thank you, Grumpy. I argee with almost everything you said, and at this point you are far more articulate than myself.
However, for personal reasons, I am against anymore high density housing in Pleasanton, especially when mandated by the state. We had a housing cap voted in by the residents, and the state blew it away.
Let Dublin be proud of their "transit housing." I don't want to be near it.


Posted by BobB
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 12, 2018 at 10:27 am

BobB is a registered user.

As long as we're off the subject, I support SB 827, as currently proposed.

A great solution to NIMBYS who "don't want to be near" any new housing.

I was also glad to see the Pleasanton housing cap fall. I like the new apartments at Stanley and Valley, along with a lot of the other new developments throughout the city.


Posted by MeAlso
a resident of Amador Estates
on Apr 12, 2018 at 11:20 am

I'm with BobB. I like to see crowded urban housing conditions coming to Pleasanton. Pack em and stack em. Soon to be followed by urban decay, filty crowded living conditions, crime, drugs, bored youths, disease and the myriad of other conditions that come with crowded living environments. Right on BobB.

PS Oakland is becoming gentrified, perhaps it is time to move.


Posted by Buc Lau
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 12, 2018 at 12:16 pm

Those who support SB827 will be sorely disappointed if it passes. Completely eliminates local control. Honestly, can we really trust our state “representatives” to craft any legislation that is void of socialism and central control?
SB827 is BAD news.

What’s next, paying folks to convert their garages and build sheds (like they just announced yesterday in LA), in their backyards in the name of curing the so-called housing crisis?

Absurd.


Posted by BobB
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 12, 2018 at 12:34 pm

BobB is a registered user.

@Buc Lao,

Not totally, but yes, partially lose local control.

Too much local control and NIMBYISM is what led to the current housing and traffic crisis in California.

@MeAlso,

It is exactly that fear mongering, NIMBY attitude that got us into this housing mess. Have you been to any of those new apartments or houses in Pleasanton? I haven't seen any evidence of "crime" or "filth". In fact they all look rather nice to me.


Posted by MeAlso
a resident of Amador Estates
on Apr 12, 2018 at 1:05 pm

They were just built! It takes to time to ferment. I hope you support Libby Schaaf and build a tiny house in your backyard for a homeless person.


Posted by BobB
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 12, 2018 at 1:24 pm

BobB is a registered user.

@MeAlso,

Then look at the apartments at Case and Bernal. Been there for decades, and they still look nice.

Maybe we should keep opposing construction of all cell towers. You know, because only drug dealers have cell phones. Got to make sure AT&T has spotty coverage so we can keep the crime rate down. :-)


Posted by NeAlso
a resident of Amador Estates
on Apr 12, 2018 at 6:41 pm

The apartments at case and bernal are normal aprtments. Not cement block house like across from Bart. (removed)


Posted by BobB
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 12, 2018 at 7:07 pm

BobB is a registered user.

The apartments across from BART are very nice apartments. What are you talking about?


Posted by Pleasanton Parent
a resident of Pleasanton Meadows
on Apr 12, 2018 at 9:19 pm

Pleasanton Parent is a registered user.

I have no desire to live in San Francisco or anything that resembles it.


Posted by BobB
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 13, 2018 at 8:57 am

BobB is a registered user.

@PP,

Dublin and Pleasanton do not resemble San Francisco, and that is not the point of SB 827. It does not turn suburban areas into urban areas. It does push back against NIMBYs who created the traffic and housing mess in the first place.

Next, we can work on getting more AT&T and T-Mobile cell towers built. Cell phones aren't just for drug dealers.


Posted by OG [old guy]
a resident of Stoneridge
on Apr 13, 2018 at 10:03 am

OG [old guy] is a registered user.

Anyone who is against SB827 needs to contact Sen. Steve Glazer right now.
I am tired of the state telling us what we should build here. I am for local control.
We here did not "create" the traffic and housing problem.
5 stories of high density housing would soon be an urban nightmare, with everything it brings with it.


Posted by BobB
a resident of Another Pleasanton neighborhood
on Apr 13, 2018 at 10:27 am

BobB is a registered user.

@OG,

Wrong. We, and all the other NIMBYs did create the housing and traffic problems by always saying no to everything. There was too much local control. I have contacted my representative, and will continue to work against NIMBYS.

Dublin is not an "urban nightmare". Building high density housing near rapid transit is the right way to go.

Next, let's build more cell towers.


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

Email:


Post a comment

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

Stay informed.

Get the day's top headlines from PleasantonWeekly.com sent to your inbox in the Express newsletter.

Gun violence shatters sense of safety
By Gina Channell Wilcox | 21 comments | 2,038 views

Two measures to re-invigorate Livermore Valley wine country headed to November ballot
By Tim Hunt | 1 comment | 1,275 views

What it takes to become a teacher
By Monith Ilavarasan | 1 comment | 1,072 views