HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/15/2024 Item 6b, Walker, S. (2)
Steven Walker <stevewalkerslo@gmail.com>
Sent:Tuesday, October
To:E-mail Council Website
Subject:Fwd: Clarification for 6b
This message is from an External Source. Use caution when deciding to open attachments, click links, or respond.
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Steven Walker <
Date: Tue, Oct 15, 2024 at 1:46 PM
Subject: Clarification for 6b
To: <jmarx@slocity.org>, <efrancis@slocity.org>, <apease@slocity.org>, Shoresman, Michelle
<mshoresm@slocity.org>, <estewart@slocity.org>
Dear Council,
I am working and unable to attend tonight's meeting but his subject is important.
I have read some responses from Ms. Tway and Ms. Hahn and want to clarify something.
My first written complaint was sent to Community Development on February 5, 2024, after enduring a
year of loud parties and unruly gatherings at the fraternity. It has been over 8 months since that
complaint was made.
The response claims "Upon receipt of this written complaint, staff worked to verify the complaints and
began the code enforcement process to gain compliance. In addition, staff reached out to the property
owner, manager, and fraternity in question to discuss the written complaint and explain the process
involved in taking the CUP to Planning Commission for review."
1. Each violation was outlined in the complaint and verification could have happened quickly.
2. The fraternity was not made aware of the complaint for many months, presumably until this academic
year. That's why they continued to have loud parties and SLOPD issued another five noise citations,
which necessitated another written complaint to Community Development in June 2024.
The fraternity members were not "out of town" during February 5, 2024, and June 15, 2024.
My main point, and the same point made by others, is that Community Development is not proactive
when enforcing violations against fraternity CUPs, although they could be. Having a threshold of
violations that trigger a review does not prevent staff from taking action after one violation if they choose.
The threshold guarantees that a review will happen if there is a certain number of violations within a time
1
period, like two in six months, or four in twelve months. It's an important condition that should be
included in the CUP.
Thank you,
Steve
2