Election 2016 Candidates Questionnaire: Ally Medina

Ally Medina:

On Livability

The Tattler presents the 2016 election candidates questionnaire.  Candidates for elected office will answer questions broken down into topical sections that effect Emeryville residents. Responses will be released section by section rotating through all the responding candidates representing the City Council and School Board hopefuls.  

The order of presentation was chosen randomly. Regular Tattler stories will be interspersed in the 2016 election questionnaire.  Readers wishing to peruse all the answers by an individual may use the search bar function by entering ”Election 2016 Candidates Questionnaire” with the name of the candidate and all of that candidate’s sections will be presented. Alternatively just typing in the name of the candidate will also work. 

There are six candidates running for three seats and all answered our questionnaire save candidate for City Council Brynnda Collins.  

Today, candidate for City Council Ally Medina answers questions on livability (please check the previously posted section 1 answers for this candidate's bio):

Section 4  Livability

Tattler:  Other cities have implemented bans on ‘formula’ retail; that being national chains, franchises, fast food etc.  Emeryville already has a plethora of these kinds of businesses.  Do you see constituting a ban as something Emeryville should do moving forward?

Ally Medina:  I would be interested in looking into that and would want to see a report on the impact that would have on the city. As a rule, I believe formula retail does not help small cities thrive and have seen Berkeley have great success banning certain types of it.

Tattler:  New construction is commonly too expensive for local retail to afford because of the high rents developers must charge to recoup their construction costs.  This is often cited as the reason Emeryville can’t seem to deliver the kind of locally serving retail Emeryville residents want.  The Tattler has proposed new development write off retail rents associated with their residential projects by forcing developers to put in writing their assurances to bring locally serving/non-formula retail.  Would you force this assurance guarantee from developers for new residential development?

Ally Medina:  I would in general support that, but would want to balance it with other community benefits we might extract from new developments.

Tattler:  Emeryville has gotten worse over time in several key areas, specifically with regards to the things residents tell us they want to see in their town.  We have been told by a generation of City Council members by their voting records that we must accept that Emeryville must get worse over time. The Tattler has made a declaration that we should not permit new development to make our town worse insofar as can be measured.  So for instance in affordability, park acreage per resident, locally serving retail, ratio of home ownership to rentals; these hallmarks of livability (and more) are measurable and the effect new development has on our existing metrics can be measured.  We could have a blanket insistence that all new development not make the town get measurably worse in key areas or even an insistence that new development make our town get measurably better.  Would you support this?

Ally Medina:  I support using benchmarks to increase the livability of our city, but some developments might provide a massive improvement on one such measure while a small or even moderate decrease in another. I think it would be difficult for every single development to improve on every single standard, but would support ordinances for areas that are especially critical (such as park space).

As with cities throughout the Bay Area, we are dealing with how to accommodate a growing population with neighborhood needs such as more parks, strengthening our public transportation system and encouraging small businesses to thrive.   These issues are not easy for any city to address and our council works hard to be representative and responsive to our needs, while navigating the economic and demographic shifts we’ve seen in the past few years.  I have made Emeryville my home.  I am running for office precisely because I love living here and I want to apply my experience in community advocacy and public policy to making Emeryville a stronger, safer and more prosperous community for all of us.  

Election 2016 Candidates Questionnaire: Ally Medina

Parks/Open Space &

Sherwin Williams Project:

Ally Medina

The Tattler presents the 2016 election candidates questionnaire.  Candidates for elected office will answer questions broken down into topical sections that effect Emeryville residents. Responses will be released section by section rotating through all the responding candidates representing the City Council and School Board hopefuls.  

The order of presentation was chosen randomly. Regular Tattler stories will be interspersed in the 2016 election questionnaire.  Readers wishing to peruse all the answers by an individual may use the search bar function by entering ”Election 2016 Candidates Questionnaire” with the name of the candidate and all of that candidate’s sections will be presented. Alternatively just typing in the name of the candidate will also work. 

There are six candidates running for three seats and all answered our questionnaire save candidate for City Council Brynnda Collins.  

Today, candidate for City Council Ally Medina answers questions on parks/open space and the Sherwin Williams development proposal (please check the previously posted section 1 answers for this candidate's bio):

Section 2 Parks/Open Space

Our General Plan says Emeryville is dramatically under-served in parks. The 26 acres we have now (includes “linear” parks, essentially glorified sidewalks) must be increased by 21-26 acres within twelve years if our General Plan is to be honored. However something must change in Emeryville if this is to be achieved because with each passing year, we drift farther away from our goal. Our park fees obtained from developers have not kept pace with our needs.

Tattler:  City planners use the metric of residents per acre of park land to measure how well a city’s residents are being served. Oakland is well served with park/open space at approximately 67 residents per acre. Emeryville currently has about 500 residents per acre. After peaking in the late 1970’s, Emeryville’s ratio of residents per acre of park/open space has gone down every year since then, despite a few small parks having been built. This disturbing downward trend has actually accelerated over the last 10 years. Increasing developers park fees is unlikely to help much moving forward owing to the limited amount of developable land left. Acknowledging all this, what can be done to build the amount of park land we say we want?

Ally Medina:  As a city, we can look to policies that mandate street level parks (much more usable by residents) be built in all new developments if the park fee fund exceeds the current amount of park space left to develop. We can also refuse to allow any new projects that lower our proportion of residents to parks/open space, which would automatically increase the proportion (albeit by very small measure).

Tattler:  Our General Plan is very clear on parks/open space; we need more than we have, twice as much. But the disconnect between what the people say they want and what they’re getting is extreme in Emeryville. There seems to be no political will to follow the General Plan once politicians get in office. Politicians routinely say they’re going to turn this around but they have not yet done so. And yet the voters keep voting for these politicians. Several council members have been re-elected over and over again. Does this tell you the people don’t really want parks, regardless of what they say? Are you willing to consider amending our General Plan to delete parks if you can’t or won’t deliver on your promise to build more so at least our guiding document will accurately reflect reality and not be a pie-in-the-sky fantasy meant to elect dishonest politicians? Considering all this, at what point should the General Plan be considered a failure?

Ally Medina:  I believe that our leaders are concerned about the amount of parks and open space, but there are significant challenges to reaching the goals outlined in the General Plan due to our size and density, and there are other pressing issues (economic, housing, etc) competing for prioritization. I am personally committed to taking the lead in working with my colleagues on the council, city staff and community leaders on tackling these challenges, which I realize is not going to be easy, but is possible with someone focused on driving solutions. Community feedback and support on this issue is key in moving forward - the council must be responsive to our constituents’ concerns and the more support we have from the community, the more power we have in working with developers and large businesses to ensure parks and open spaces are included in new developments and other urban planning projects.

Section 3 Sherwin Williams Project

The Sherwin Williams development project is a mostly residential proposal earmarked for the last large piece of fallow land left in Emeryville. This single project could easily increase Emeryville’s population by more than 10%. At 540 all rental residential units planned as well as some office space and a small amount of retail, this project promises to be very consequential for our town for better or worse.

Tattler:  The Sherwin Williams developers propose to add 2.08 acres of public park on the site. Using the standard formula of 2 people per unit (more if the project attracts families as the developers say it will), the project will come in at about 520 residents per acre and help bring down Emeryville’s already deplorable residents/park acre average. Should negative skewing of our park/residents ratio like this be a disqualifying condition for this project?

Ally Medina:  This project has already gone through extensive public input and review by the planning commission and city council, and will likely be approved before the election. I would support a policy of not allowing new development that brings down our parks/residents ratio in the future. 

Tattler:  The Sherwin Williams site is relatively cheap since it is fallow. Because our General Plan requires us to build many more acres of parks within 12 years and because it’s cheaper for the City to buy fallow land than land with buildings already on it for this purpose, and because the City of Emeryville has the capacity to pass a park bond to raise revenue for this, is making the Sherwin Williams site a large park a rational choice?

Ally Medina:  Again, the project has already undergone extensive community review. We need to look toward future developments with a critical eye with regard to the ratio of parks to residents.

Tattler:  With more than 500 parking spaces, this project can be fairly called another Emeryville ‘drive-in drive-out’ residential development. Do you see adding this many cars to our streets as being offset by any benefits to existing residents by the project’s amenities?

Ally Medina:  I understand that there will be extensive community benefits in terms of a bike/pedestrian pathway as well as bike parking and increased affordable housing. I do not necessarily support designing developments with cars as the primary mode of transportation, studies have shown that putting public transit by affordable housing is a best practice in city design and I hope that we can increase alternative transportation options to this site to decrease the number of residents who rely on cars for their primary mode of transit.  

Tattler:  Is Emeryville right now not up to snuff, a less-than-desirable place to live that can only be improved by the Sherwin Williams project going in as proposed? Do we ‘need’ the Sherwin Williams development?

Ally Medina:  As stated above, I think there are significant community benefits that will come out of this project. Instead of debating the drawbacks of a project that has already gone through the public process, we need to look at how we can make future developments prioritize affordable housing, public transit, pedestrian safety and parks.

Tattler:  The project is hemmed in on the west by the rail road tracks and on the north by land slated for future development by Novartis, to the east is the Horton Street Bike Boulevard that our General Plan forbids adding more traffic to. How will the retail there be viable with these constraints let alone the office space and the residential units? 

Ally Medina:  By adding a dense population of new residents and bike/pedestrian infrastructure, we should see an influx of pedestrian traffic that is more likely to shop at small local businesses.

Election 2016 Candidates Questionnaire: Ally Medina

Housing Affordability: 

Ally Medina

The Tattler presents the 2016 election candidates questionnaire.  Candidates for elected office will answer questions broken down into topical sections that effect Emeryville residents. Responses will be released section by section rotating through all the responding candidates representing the City Council and School Board hopefuls.  

The order of presentation was chosen randomly. Regular Tattler stories will be interspersed in the 2016 election questionnaire.  Readers wishing to peruse all the answers by an individual may use the search bar function by entering ”Election 2016 Candidates Questionnaire” with the name of the candidate and all of that candidate’s sections will be presented. Alternatively just typing in the name of the candidate will also work. 

There are six candidates running for three seats and all answered our questionnaire save candidate for City Council Brynnda Collins.  

Today candidate for City Council Ally Medina who answers questions on affordable housing:

Ally Medina

Bio:

I have been working on progressive organizing and advocacy campaigns for nearly 10 years. I believe my community engagement skills would be an asset on the city council. I'd like to use my background in voter outreach to engage our city on issues concerning residents- specifically focusing on affordability, availability of parks and open space, and safe transit options

Section 1 Housing Affordability

With each passing year, Emeryville becomes less affordable, regardless of the epic residential building spree over the last 20 years here. Emeryville has never built housing at a pace even close to what we have done recently. And yet, affordable housing remains Emeryville’s most intractable problem most people agree.

Tattler:  Emeryville’s affordability rate right now is approximately 11% city-wide according to City Hall using their metrics. We had more than 30 years of the Emeryville Redevelopment Agency (RDA) who’s primary function was providing affordable housing and 11% is the sum total we could muster with all the largess that agency could bring to bear. How do you see us raising the 11% average appreciably in the post Redevelopment Agency era?

Ally Medina:  Emeryville is almost completely built out, it’s a very small city that has undergone a period of rapid growth. If elected, I would negotiate for higher percentages of affordable housing recognizing that it is extremely desirable to developers to make sure we get the most out of new housing. However, I don’t think we will build enough housing stock to appreciable raise that average in a short period of time. As a city, we need to focus on maximizing the community benefit of the space we do have.

Tattler:  Emeryville, formerly an industrial wasteland with lots of abandoned warehouses and factories in the 1980’s has been almost completely rebuilt now with lots of housing and shopping centers. Seeing so little fallow land left and the housing stock that we have is mostly less than 25 years old, where will we build the affordable housing that we need?

Ally Medina:  As I noted in my previous answer, there is very little land left. I certainly don’t believe we need more stock retail and vast parking lots. Any new development should be heavily geared towards parks and local business.

Tattler:  Urban density is generally recognized as a net positive thing. However, increasing density also comes with its own problems, overcrowding of parks and traffic being among them. Emeryville right now has more than 200% of recommended market rate housing according to the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG). How do you suggest we increase affordability without increasing our existing 200% of market rate housing more? Is ABAG wrong?

Ally Medina:  Increasing density can increase traffic issues, but it also allows the possibility for innovation in public transit. With denser neighborhoods we can have better, faster public transit and a denser tax base for bike/pedestrian infrastructure projects. Emeryville has been a leader in building market rate housing, but should negotiate for higher levels of affordable housing in any new developments as well as continuing to address income inequality that makes it difficult for many Emeryville workers to live near their employment. Affordability is a factor of both wages and the cost of living, and policy should address both sides of that.

Tattler:  'Supply and demand' is central to classical economics as everyone knows. Here in Emeryville, developers and some others are using this argument to forward a position that the problem in Emeryville is that we haven't been building enough housing and that's why its so expensive here. Yet at 200% ABAG recommendations for market rate housing (and going higher), the more we build, the higher the housing costs go. Neighboring cities have built less than 100% of  ABAG recommendations. Does Emeryville have to be a sacrifice zone for the greater region to satiate the supply and demand axiom posited by some?

Ally Medina:  Outpaced demand and rapid growth is a regional issue, Emeryville should not be razed and turned into high rises. I believe to mitigate the displacement that has been rampant in the region, Emeryville must enact stronger tenant protections immediately, as well as incentivize home ownership to encourage more permanent residents.