Fugitives General Crime

* Confrontation Between Council Member Pierluigi Oliverio & Police Caught on Video-Watch Here




A campaign debate over a San Jose measure heated up late Saturday morning when a councilman was caught taking down signs that urged residents to vote against a measure he supports on the November ballot.San Jose Councilman Pierluigi Oliverio said he took down four “No on (Measure) V” signs Saturday morning, saying he had seen “an incredible number” of the signs in San Jose while driving to an opening of a community center. Measure V would change the mandatory arbitration process for police and fire department employee disputes. It’s opposed by police and firefighters, who claim it will make it easier to lay off firefighters and police officers and to close neighborhood fire stations. Prominent supporters of Measure V include Mayor Chuck Reed, San Jose Silicon Valley Chamber of Commerce CEO Patricia Dando and Silicon Valley Taxpayers’ Association president Douglas McNea.They claim that the measure would rein in the power of outside arbitrators, essentially limiting the ability to increase pension plans of police and firefighters.”Right now, all the property tax that San Jose residents pay goes to pay for pensions,” Oliverio said.A “No on Measure V” lobbyist, Tom Saggau, yelled at Oliverio after spotting him taking a sign near Curtner Avenue and Almaden Road, according to both Saggau and Oliverio.”I grabbed it, put it in my car and at the same time I heard the lobbyist shouting,” Oliverio said in a telephone interview.”He saw me, closed his trunk, jumped into his car and peeled out of a parking lot,” Saggau said.Police went to Oliverio’s home, but the councilman said he was still at the community center’s ribbon cutting ceremony at that time. Oliverio then headed to another appointment on Lincoln Avenue, and when he exited, he said about eight off-duty firemen surrounded him.”They blocked my car. They would not allow me to leave, which you can’t really do to someone,” he said, adding that he called the police chief and city attorney for help.The incident ended in a parking lot at Lincoln and Brace avenues, where Oliverio gave the signs to officers responding to the altercation.Saggau and “No on Measure V” campaigners recorded the exchange .In the video, Saggau is heard saying, “Where’s our property? I want our property. I’m making a citizen’s arrest right now.”Oliverio is then seen opening the trunk to a four-door silver Saturn. Inside, there are several signs supporting Measure V, and the four “No on V” signs he said he took.The councilman said he didn’t do anything illegal, citing a municipal code. “It allows for the removal of illegal signs in the public right of way by the city and volunteers,” he said.Saggau, however, insisted the removed signs were taken from private property.A San Jose police spokesman for the incident said no arrests were made.”I don’t know if you want to call it stealing,” spokesman Sgt. Ronnie Lopez said. “Nobody was cited. Nobody was arrested,” he said.

Copyright © 2010 by Bay City News, Inc. Republication, Rebroadcast or any other Reuse without the express written consent of Bay City News, Inc. is prohibited.

Comment Advisement

We welcome your thoughts, but for the sake of all readers, please refrain from the use of obscenities, personal attacks or racial slurs. All comments are subject to our terms of service and may be removed. Repeat offenders may lose commenting privileges.

Leave a Comment


  • Good point Brian. I’m not sure why anyone else does not get the part of “public property” – Garage sale, buy these diet pills or even lost cat signs are not legal to post on a sign, light post or anywhere else that is public domain. Who cares if Pierluigi took down a sign that was never supposed to be there in the first place. Some really great topics that came from one issue….he did nothing wrong or illegal. He did not pull it out of someones lawn – he did what was in the scope of the law. If I put an annoying advertisement on every car at Oakridge and someone else has to pay for it to clean them up after people throw them all on the ground – what I did was not legal and I can be held accountable.

  • Brian – Measure V does NOthing to balance the budget, or control pension costs. All it does is handcuff the impartial 3rd party arbitrator so the city can decide where ALL the money goes (mabey a new A’s stadium). By the way, in order for an Arbitrator to award any compensation benefits, it must be proven that the City has the ability to pay.

  • Brian And Bill I found this on another web site in comments I could not be more proud of our Officers and Firefighters.

    Officer X Tue, Oct 26, 2010 – 9:39 pm

    Mayor Reed’s fake outrage is ridiculous. He should have been an actor. Police and Fire are greatly limited in our ability to respond by staffing levels. That is a cold hard fact. It is NOT A THREAT and not intended as such. Measures V & W will adversely effect staffing. There is no propaganda in the message being delivered by officers and firefighters walking precincts. It is ugly to hear but it is the truth.

    Mayor Reed makes a distinction. His point, and there is a nasty difference, is that we would slow our response and do so willingly,…of our own volition! That, my friend, is what I categorize as political terrorism! The thought of it makes me nearly sick and speechless. Police and Fire Departments have measured response times for decades and it is a point of pride. As I said above,
    “To accuse police officers and firefighters of anything less than an urgent professional response to citizen’s calls is APPAULING and REPREHENSIBLE and tantamount to political terrorism.”

    There is not a single officer or firefighter I would not chastise, in harsh language, for doing anything short of their damn best to get to calls for help as quickly and safely as possible. And I cannot think of anyone wearing a badge who does not feel the same way. Anything less than that is disgusting and is not tolerated. We take our commitments to you, the citizens we serve, to heart and as a solemn oath.
    Whether you realize it or not, our ability to deliver service has been weakened for years by some politicians in City Hall. When I arrived here we had just over 1400 officers. That number has been reduced by approx 200. Has that stopped annexations, population growth, crime, etc,…? Of course not. Those officers are gone and the shell game continues. We have become reactive, not proactive. Why do you think we speak of VCET (Violent Crimes Enforcement Team) in the past tense? A SWAT team that has been cut in half. Financial Crimes Detective teams that will not investigate your fraud unless you have suffered a min loss of at least $5,000.00 (unless you are a VIP/Council/friend thereof/etc). I personally was assigned a case because the victim was a “friend” of a councilman. Guess who sent an e-mail on behalf of his “friend”? LOL. Fewer Detectives means, fewer crimes get solved, that includes homicide Mr. Mayor.

    The fact is we are hungry. As officers and firefighters we are hungry to make our neighborhoods safe. Every time I slide my sidearm into my holster I know I may use it to say a life. Sadly though, not a week goes by where I can not take proactive enforcement because I do not have a cover officer available. The cause, deficient staffing levels. Long before this financial crisis City Hall has not staffed the Police Department fully. This case has been repeatedly and is no longer debatable. I happen to work in one of the busier districts in the city and do so proudly. It is truly a shame; I never thought I would see the day in my career where politicians are more concerned with the bottom line than public safety. I suppose I am showing my idealism but it’s true. Stopping SJPD and SJFD from accomplishing stated goals in this day and age are not hard core felons and arsonists. Truly they exist and are deadly challenges.

    It is City Hall that stands in the way of making San Jose a safer city again. Specifically politicians like Reed, Oliverio, and Constant are fighting a war like politicians, instead of giving the generals what is needed. Worst of all, they make this decision from a place of privilege. Crime has no effect upon them. It does not touch them. When they feel threatened they request VIP service. Threats? They receive a personal SJPD “Varda” alarm in their home which communicates directly with SJPD Dispatch. Does your alarm do that? Just ask City Manager Figone about these. VIP politicians don’t advertise their perks. They do not wait like you or I if our homes are burglarized. You and I do not have personal bodyguards. As such, decisions impacting delivery of public safety are surgical for them, clinical. And sadly, I think many citizens will underestimate the negative impact these measures will have here. I for one will be applying elsewhere if/when these pass. I refuse to have a dictatorial government impose a contract upon me, especially when law forbids I strike. And, after contributing over $2,000.00/month to my retirement I believe I have earned it back after 30 years. It breaks my heart. I grew up in SJ, am a Spartan alum, and truly love our city. I said enough, if you have read this , thanks for indulging me.

    In my humble opinion, passage of V & W will stoke a winter migration, officers will flee here for better, more supportive climates, and those cities will enjoy a flood of new found talent. This Mayor and his two comrades have successfully demonized police officers and fire fighters. Morale for all city workers is at an all time low. Well done. Quite a legacy you are creating.

  • Brian I get what you are saying and yes everyone needs to take a deep breath. Political signs are always everywhere during elections and as a citizen we get use to them. I see them on public and private property. They always go away after the elections, what that councilmen did was wrong. If he was doing the right thing then his trunk would have been full of signs that were not just vote NO. As it was he was seen taking only the vote NO signs and ignoring the others. I draw my conclusion that he was not trying to do the right thing and should be dealt with. How would you feel about our police and firefighters only taking down signs on issues they did not agree with? I would be upset with them and not trust them to look out for our best interest. As far as the vote I voted No because I agree with the fact that no one person should have all the power. That is what the Mayor wants. There should be an arbitrator or third party that is neutral and agreed on by both sides. As one of the comments said you dont throw the judges and the umps out of the game and make the calls yourself. That really sounds like a dictator to me. I want that arbitrator in there looking out for my best interest as well as the organizations that cant agree. Police and fire only have that because it is against the law for them to strike or do work slow down. This is the best way to assure the professional service we have come to expect. As citizens we should protect them from dictators or people that are hungry for power as we expect them to protect us. I urge a NO vote for our public safety people lets show them that they can count on us, as we expect to count on them. I think an arbitrator would not make the City pay anything that they could not afford thats why they are there they do their homework and so should we.

  • If the signs (any of them, from either side of the debate over V and W) are placed on public property, that is litter. Anyone, from a councilman, to a firefighter, to my mother-in-law can dispose of litter as they see fit. There’s a number of “No on V” signs outside my neighborhood, along median strips and publiuc right-of-ways at intersections — I have seen no “Yes on V” signs. Both sides need to take a deep breath and settle down. As for me, I voted “Yes” on both measures — no matter how either side spins it, the city’s budget is my budget, and I won’t make promises to pay that I can’t afford. Do you?

  • http://www.sanjoseinside.com/news/entries/10_25_2010_measure_v_measure_w_chuck_reed_unions/
    Chuck talk about no ethics this whole editorial of yours is full of twist and turns concerning the truth. It is obvious that you and your minions feel you are above the law and that you are not held to any ethical standards. You have been nothing but dishonest with citizens from the beginning. You guys even sent out literature and disguised it as if it was from the police and stating that we endorsed Measure V. This is all about you having all the power all the marbles a hammer to make you feel you can crush the unions. You dont want the arbitrator because they will not allow you to have all the power. No one organization should, not the police or the fire or you. In the pass when arbitrators ruled, it was fair across the board. You are only upset because the arbitrator caught the city dirty and hiding money. It is to bad that you did not hide enough and you and your City Officials went spend crazy. Now you want to blame the economic collapse on city employees. Bottom line you are asking to take the referee out of the world series and let the Rangers coach make all the calls. It is as simple as that. Though it would be great for all the Ranger fans you would be screwing the Giants fans. Perhaps we should take the judges out of the court rooms and you can make those calls as well. You sound more like a person for dictatorship. You still have that Billion dollars for your baseball team? I suppose you will be the ump and the referee as well as coach. You are a disgrace to your position with your twisted lies and political games.

  • ETHICS !!!! That is what it comes down to. One simple word. Reed why have you decided to have a lack of Ethics? I was also one of your supporters always have been. I seriously question your Ethics and your minions. I was just watching the news and its reported that you agree with your minions tactics. I sure hope the media got this wrong. I am one very disapointed San Jose resident.

  • Mayor Reed backed his employee for stealing. They have done this right out in the open. This is crazy they think they are above the law. Mayor Reed is acting sleazy. I supported him up to this point. He sounds like one of those parents that back their children even when they are wrong. As a resident I am not fooled by this I am embarrassed for our mayor. This is wrong I think the police and fire should go after them in civil court. If I am on the jury I will find them guilty. I can not trust anything they say now.


    For those of you busy celebrating the Giant’s victory over the weekend you may have missed the stories about Councilmember Oliverio’s embarrassing activities.In a nutshell, Councilmember Oliverio was spotted on Saturday removing a No on Measure V lawn sign from private property in Willow Glen. When confronted the Councilmember fled. When campaign volunteers went to his residence to reclaim their signs, the Councilmember fled again driving away at high speeds. When campaign volunteers located the Councilmember parking his car he fled once more, this time on foot. Nearly two hours later he returned to his vehicle, No on V volunteers called the police, and that’s when the events depicted in this YouTube video (which has now been viewed by over 3,000 people) take off.In the video, Councilmember Oliverio pulls out four No on V Lawn Signs from the trunk of his car and hands them over to police.Having being caught red handed, the Councilmember now is claiming that his efforts were a form of vigilante justice. He asserts he was only removing illegally placed signs on public property—this despite the fact that he was witnessed removing a sign from private property. He also seems to only take offense with No on V signs as several yes on V signs were witnessed illegally placed on public property just blocks from his residence.But most importantly in all of this–If Councilmember Oliverio didn’t believe he was doing anything wrong, why did he flee…not one time…not two times…but three times?
    Protect San Jose http://protectsanjose.com/blogs/2-poa-perspectives/356-councilmember-oliverios-wild-ride has complied the newslinks on this shameful tale below for your convenience.
    KPIX 5 News Report
    KTVU 2 News Report
    San Jose Mercury News (also published here in the Contra Costa Times)
    PR Newswire

  • Double-standard….if that was a policeman or fireman they would have at least been cited or taken to Jail. Then they would be fired for theft. Why did the department lie about not giving the politician preferential treatment? The policeman getting the signs, from the scumbag politician, is a captain, not a lowly patrolman. Captain’s usually don’t perform these lowly tasks. What a joke!!!

  • No lets check his phone records he says he called and was going ot return it .. lets see if he is a liar did he steal the sign and lie.
    As for Pete why cant he wrestle .. he actually has a rod all the way down his back he cant be a cop. what is more concern is how was he injured. could he have injured his back sitting at his computer while running his photo business all day editing 10 hours a day. did he tell the docotors? what every earns as city council should be taken from his retirement ? there are rule no doubt he cant work as a cop and there are too many hurt cops some have to retire but did he claim the income he made while on disabilty?

  • Wow, the councilperson can get away with theft. What if we did the same thing. Just think if you extrapolate this to what he and the other council people do during council meetings. This guy is pathetic. To use his position to protect him from justice. This councilperson needs to be removed from his position. Ethics none, justice none so what does he give the city corruption.

  • Pierluigi Oliverio,
    Just agree what you did was wrong and move on. We all know why those were the only signs that you removed. STOP trying to justify what you did. Now you are encouraging other people to join you in stealing signs and pulling weeds ETC… on your facebook. You are embarrassing yourself and the your mayor.

  • Hey Johnny I just watched that video. Confirm he is on disability from the police department? What he is doing is fraud ! if he is getting disability retirement. That’s a Felony , How come he is not being prosecuted ?

  • CHECK THIS OUT. I just seen this on a facebook this guy Pete is too much.

    VOTE No on Measure V San Jose Since we seem to enjoy videos. Here’s one of Pete Constant on June 22 of
    this year. Let us remind you that he is on a full disability retirement
    on your tax dollar. When you go on full disability retirement it means
    your injuries are so sever you can’t even perform a desk job. Isn’t being a Councilman a desk job? If th…at’s permissible I’m pretty sure wrestling isn’t.
    See More
    Pete wrestling June 22,2010 while on a full disability retirement!
    Councilmember Pete Constant and Youth Mongolian Wrestler match wits at the Tech Museum in Downtown San Jose. A dozen 300-pound Mongolian men skilled in the ancient art of folk wrestling took on a few brave special guests including San Jose Councilman Pete Constant and grapplers from the San Jose .

  • Anyone know Mayor Reeds position on this? Has he been interviewed publicly ? I am just curious if he is backing these guys up on their dysfunctional actions.

  • Ok I know this Mayor there is no way Reed is a part of this. These guys were acting independent and foolishly. Reed would not be a part of this. He is not that that stupid.

  • What a Jerk, this guy is really into himself I can tell by the interview. Mayor Reed I am one of your supporters and I strongly urge you to distance yourself from this guy and any other person that may drag you into this. I can not sincerely believe for one second that our Mayor would agree with this type of activity.

  • What a punk i saw pete constant with a no on v sign i thought he was putting it out but now i think he was taking it. Because there no sign there now. Wow wow

Show Buttons
Hide Buttons