Blogging Bayport Alameda

September 3, 2020

Law and Order: Special Alameda Unit

Filed under: Alameda — Lauren Do @ 6:03 am

Looks like whoever is writing the text over on Gig Codiga’s website is either going rogue or Gig Codiga is fully embracing the Trumpian strategy of LAW AND ORDER to win himself a seat on the City Council trying to appeal to the Suburban housewives and all.

It’s a pretty bold statement to make that the current Council has not made safety a priority. Given the lack of supporting receipts as well it’s probably the first major ugliness to come out of any official campaign so far. Also alleging that the Council has “looked the other way when your safety, the safety of your kids and grandkids has come up” should be challenged at wherever the next Council forum is.

Then he has at the bottom of his Issues page a side by side comparison between what Gig will do and what the current Council is doing. While he is saying he will “right-size” the police department which is just another adjective for unbundling or defunding the police, he writes that the current Council’s position is:

Which, is, again dancing around the Trumpian strategy of being the only candidate who is tough on the crime that is all around us. He probably is the only tough on soup can candidate as well.

Then there was this part which was puzzling and was a contrast to Gig Cogida’s position to “Cultivate positive and constructive dialogue” and “Generate diversity of expression by promoting redistricting.”

I guess in Gig Codiga’s estimation “[c]ultivat[ing] positive and constructive dialogue” includes saying that a group of five people (Tony Daysog who has already endorsed him included) don’t care about the safety of Alamedans.

“Cultivat[ing] positive and constructive dialogue” also is saying that a group of five people are bullies, “intimidate dissenters,” and “[s]uppress expressions.” I mean, I never realized that that was positive and constructive dialogue. I appreciate the example being set.


  1. Gig certainly needs to stand behind every word that has been put up on his website.
    I am starting to believe he has someone that is all about the Trump party’s fear based campaign tactics doing most of his drafting. I could be wrong. If so I would very disappointed.

    During the Demo forum at least he was clear and concise with policy statements. While I disagree with many of his positions during that forum, he certainly is someone I could sit down and have a discussion over a drink. Always assuming best intentions.

    So with the so many ‘interesting’ post on his website as it started up, what is on there now certainly should be verifiable … those you’ve pointed out above, and others in that “Council Positions” list just do not seem that they can be backed up by fact. I will be waiting to see if anything gets explained, but fear not.

    We have 8 weeks of sound bites ahead I fear, and not much detail. Hopefully truth and love will prevail.

    Comment by Ron Mooney — September 3, 2020 @ 7:45 am

  2. Back in June, almost every pharmacy in town was hit by looters. For a few days, thousands of people couldn’t get a prescription filled. I do not recall a single statement from any council member about this. A simple PSA about where & how to get medication would have meant something. I didn’t hear a peep or read a tweet about that.

    In recent weeks we’ve had a mass shooting on Park St. Witnesses reported about two dozen shots fired in broad daylight at a busy intersection. Weekend before last there were *four* muggings at gunpoint on a Sunday afternoon. Has any council member had anything to say about these shocking incidents?

    Car theft has skyrocketed. Catalytic converter thefts have become commonplace. I haven’t heard a word about this from council.

    Alameda used to be stereotyped as a speedtrap town that took 25MPH very seriously. Those days are gone. As someone who rides a bike daily, I can tell you the posted speed limit is a joke and it’s getting worse all the time. If you don’t believe that, drive around town for a day, especially on 4 lane streets, and carefully stick to 25. You’ll be passed constantly by cars going much faster. Our council, which loves to flaunt its bike & pedestrian cred, has done nothing about that.

    All of this is happening while the police force is seriously understaffed. While it’s not possible to directly attribute all recent crime to this, it’s also impossible to believe the two are not correlated. Drivers know there are no more speed traps, so they speed. Criminals have observed that the streets are no longer well patrolled, so they are acting is response.

    While this has been happening the only message I’ve heard from council is a proposal to de-fund and already strained police force by 42%. (Note that the fire department remains overstaffed and overpaid with brand new office space space.)

    Mr Codiga is not wrong.

    To call that “Trumpian” is beneath contempt (and that term was edited down sharply from the blunt profanity it deserves). I’ve been among the biggest and most consistent anti-Trumpers on this board since well before he was elected and I am of course far from alone in that belief. We all know the president is deeply unpopular in Alameda. But our blogmistress now equates a simple, human desire for safe streets with the brazen corruption, right wing hatred and shocking maladministration of the worst President in American history.


    Comment by dave — September 3, 2020 @ 7:54 am

    • It is Trumpian. Simply because you have an issue with the current Council because of their positions on a myriad of topics does not mean that what Gig Codiga is presenting (and the fact free way he is presenting it) is any different than what Donald Trump is currently fixating on to fix his flagging poll numbers.

      Alleging that the Council is “demonizing” police because they say that Black Lives Matter and that we should be re-examining the role of police officers as the catch-all for all social ills is no better than Trump going around saying that protesters were wielding soup cans which are more dangerous than his supporters macing people from the back of trucks.

      “Safety” is a priority. Black Alamedans should feel safe that they can walk down the street without being handcuffed when they “don’t comply.” Black Alamedans should feel safe that simply walking through a neighborhood doesn’t elicit a call from a “well meaning” neighbor to the police to question their behavior. Black Alamedans should feel safe that every traffic stop is not going to end in their lives being taken. Black Alamedans should feel safe that even if they are having a psychotic break in a Walmart that they aren’t shot. Not caring about “safety” I guess depends on whose safety we’re discussing here. For too long this country has shown that the safety of Black Americans is not a priority to whatever the white American standard is. And that message is being telegraphed loud and clear in Gig Codiga’s platform.

      Comment by Lauren Do — September 3, 2020 @ 8:10 am

      • We are in trouble if we can’t address both the issues raised by dave and ensuring that Black Alamedans (and non-Alamedans) feel and are safe. The two should not be in conflict.

        Comment by MP - aka, on this occasion, Captain Obvious — September 3, 2020 @ 8:30 am

      • Amen, Lauren. The folks having a case of the vapors over a discussion about the proper purview of the police is curious.

        Comment by David Burton — September 3, 2020 @ 8:27 pm

    • Right on Dave. That tactic won’t work. Under the current city council we are down 16 officers and crime is up. Only the Fire Department (the favorite of Oddie and Vella) is expanded. There appears to be no motorcycle patrol anymore, and it is not coincidence that the Police Chief chose early retirement after Oddie and Vella supported cutting his budget further and “redirecting” it to other services.

      What Lauren is right about is that the National law and order question has seriously boomeranged on those public officials who asked the police to stand down during riots, while calling for defunding the police during a dangerous hike in crime.

      Comment by Nowyouknow — September 3, 2020 @ 8:20 am

      • I see the motorcycles nearly daily, and they are a fundamental part of weekend safety on the Point with the car gatherings and sideshows.

        Comment by Bart — September 3, 2020 @ 9:21 am

    • Dave Hart – why do you think the days of enforcing 25MPH are long gone? Why do you think the police force is seriously understaffed? Why do you think people are angry and looting? I feel you’re looking at symptoms while completely ignoring the cause – nowhere in your diatribe did you make a single mention of Black Lives Matter.While the city has the budget for 15-20 more officers, nobody wants to sign up to be a police officer anymore. Police officers are being asked to do too much – they’re acting as social workers, community liaison, check on mental health, provide paramilitary support, etc – and very easily things can go sideways and it’s just not easy anymore. City council even agreed to do poaching bonuses to nab officers from rival departments, to no avail.

      “Defunding” is a misnomer, but it means to unburden officers so that they can go back to just being police officers, and delegate other tasks to those more appropriate to handle them. So our police force is not strained due to a lack of funding – the funding is there. They’re strained because they’re being asked to do much, and Gig Codiga’s solution seems to be to double down. This is very outdated and out of touch thinking, and yes, Trumpian, because it’s driven by fear instead of facts.

      Comment by JRB — September 3, 2020 @ 10:11 am

      • JRB, you probably know that Black Lives Matter does not approve of the crimes discussed by dave, i.e. the looting of pharmacies, shoot-outs or attempted hit jobs during business hours on major commercial streets (non-mass, but-incredibly-dangerous shootings in the vicinity of innocent bystanders, if you will, so as to avoid a quibble even as to that), catalytic converter thefts or muggings, and probably takes no position on Alameda’s 25MPH law. Maybe you have read more than I about who was involved, but “anger” of the type that would lead one into non-violent or violent protest is likely a remote cause, at best. The profit motive, including in specialized illegal drug and car part markets, plus perceived opportunity (chances of getting caught) are more likely proximate causes.

        Those are the types of crime that are within the core competency of the police and that no one wants to see increase in frequency. If dave suggested a trade off between that and ensuring that Black Alamedans are safe, I missed it.

        Why shouldn’t I take your comment about the causes of the police being understaffed as a less-than-enthusiastic endorsement of the incumbent city council candidates*. They’ve been in office since 2014 and 2016. If the reason for police understaffing – and drains on core police functions – in Alameda is that potential recruits don’t want to be burdened with non-police tasks or are being asked to do too much, where have the incumbents been for the past many years in terms of reassigning non-police tasks? Are those incumbents better positioned to undertake that than one, two, or more, of the challengers?

        * – Perhaps also the former mayor/challenger, although in her case she can at least point to having brought a proposal to “optimize police resources in our City by providing thoughtful insight into the safety and security needs of our diverse community and by monitoring police activity in our City”. According to you, she had a bad motive for that proposal. Perhaps. But even if true, what about the balance of the City Council in 2017 – including current incumbent candidates – that could have taken that moment (if not earlier ones) to do what you agree is necessary to reassign non-police tasks? Instead, they tabled the proposal, one made a comment about not having seen data supporting the idea that there is a racial profiling issue within APD, and then they moved on. Or is unbundling such a new idea that we cannot question why the Council did not move earlier?

        Comment by MP — September 4, 2020 @ 7:24 am

    • I recall unwarranted fears of looting, but no actual looting in June, and as horrifica as the park street incident was, it in no way classifies as a mass shooting, and to try and fear monger in such a way is truly a trumpian tactic.

      Comment by notadave — September 3, 2020 @ 10:26 am

      • Walgreens stores were looted. Glass smashed, items stolen. It happened.

        And regardless of the precise label for it, is a few clips of ammo squeezed off on a busy sidewalk something to be blasé about? Really?

        Comment by dave — September 3, 2020 @ 10:40 am

        • Dave, a mass shooting is where a person’s n intentionally targets a place to cause mass casualties and as much death as possible. The incident near Park Street, while deplorable and concerning, was pretty clearly a fight between rival groups (with a disregard for life I can’t comprehend) that is a completely different thing. This isn’t hard a hard thing to understand.

          Comment by David Burton — September 3, 2020 @ 8:20 pm

  3. Did I miss the part about the City Council being responsible for recruiting new police officers? What is Gig’s solution for this? Just spouting off Trumpian slogans doesn’t gain us anything. Vella and Oddie have had a comfortable relationship with the APD in their tenure (and in the case of Oddie, perhaps not as comfortable as he had figured since he likely thought his friendly conversation with Rollieri was between them). But neither of them demonize police. Would he rather go the route of his like-minded buddy, Trish Spencer? Her frosty relationship with APD did not begin and end with her being upset at them for arresting her husband for a DUI. Can you give me ONE example of Spencer truly supporting our local officers?

    Comment by Sleepy Moe — September 3, 2020 @ 8:37 am

  4. This is not true. I was in Safeway and nearly tripped. Jim Oddie was there and he reached out to assist me personally, then offered the kind parting advice of “be safe” with a smile. Is that what Gig is expecting? Our council doesn’t “look the other way”, they are proactive within the means they are allowed – perhaps too proactive like with the hiring top public safety managers.

    Comment by Bart — September 3, 2020 @ 9:17 am

  5. that’s just great Dave, you now have “no nuthin” on your side, that doesn’t say much. Bart, I agree with you, I have seen two motorcycle officers on patrol this week on two different days. to quote “no nuthin”, thier appears to be no motorcycle patrol anymore, you see how that is phrased. when there is actually a motorcycle patrol.

    Comment by trumpisnotmypresident — September 3, 2020 @ 10:14 am

  6. It is especially telling that Gig is endorsed by that loveable jolly ex police chief Burney Mathews. While he was chief, he initiated the militarization of the police force, talking the city council into purchasing an array of surplus military weapons and property. He demonized low-income residents in the west end as a rationale for needing all that extra fire power..

    Comment by notadave — September 3, 2020 @ 10:32 am

  7. Dave, the Fire Department is not, nor has it ever been “overstaffed”. It has never had more firefighters than it’s authorized staff. Residents of most cities would be happy to have a fully staffed fire department.

    Comment by DOUG CLIFTON — September 6, 2020 @ 7:32 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Say what you want

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Blog at