HomeMy WebLinkAbout7/15/2025 Item 8a, Walker, K. (3)
kathie walker <
To:Marx, Jan; Francis, Emily; Boswell, Mike; Shoresman, Michelle; Stewart, Erica A; E-mail
Council Website
Subject:Ad Hoc Committee (Item 8a.) and clarification of "Background" provided in the
agenda
Attachments:St. Frattys 2022 Calls from Police Log to jpg.pdf
Dear City Councilmembers,
I have been closely following the City Council and policy decisions in San Luis Obispo for over a decade and have a good
understanding of the historical context of several issues. There is value in understanding that history. When there is
turnover in City leadership and new Councilmembers are elected, or new staff leadership is hired, they usually do not
fully understand the complexities of the background that led to certain policies.
Jan Marx is the most knowledgeable about the subject investigated by the Grand Jury. I have watched her input be
dismissed at times, despite her expertise in these issues, which is unfortunate. When it comes to noise in the Alta Vista
neighborhood, Ms. Marx lived it firsthand. It got worse after she moved away, and a lot more illegal fraternities moved
into the neighborhood, but she is the most experienced person on the Council and is familiar with the relevant issues.
Ms. Marx should be on the Ad Hoc Committee to respond to the Grand Jury.
It appears that the mayor must comment according to California Penal Code 933. It’s not clear whether that means she
would also be on the Ad Hoc committee. If so, she would be an asset.
Otherwise, I recommend that the second member of the Ad Hoc Committee be Emily Francis or Mike Boswell. I feel that
Jan’s input should be considered for who she feels would be the best fit to work together for this important role.
Some of my reasons for not including Michelle Shoresman are included in the correspondence below. This is nothing
personal against Michelle, and I think she is a nice person. However, she has failed to recognize the issue, has not
supported Jan Marx’s attempt to have the item agendized (Erica Stewart did support the idea), has minimized the failure
of the City, including Code Enforcement, to respond to complaints, among several other things that seems to indicate
she is more aligned with City staff and Cal Poly than concerned about the constituents who elected her to represent
them.
The Council agenda for July 15, 2025, item 8a, lists the “Background” of the City’s efforts toward “neighborhood
wellness”. Some of the information provided on the agenda is false. I want to provide the correct information so that the
misinformation can be corrected. Also, I hope that you focus on the core issues that are relevant to the CURRENT
situation by acknowledging the extent to which it exists.
Programs and Policies
The Background in the agenda says, “many of the approaches have been intended to address the neighborhood impacts
of excessive noise from gatherings,” and lists various programs and policies.
We have lived in the neighborhood since the inception of these programs and policies, and can unequivocally tell you
that despite each of the listed items, the noise exponentially increased in the Fall of 2021. This correlates to the
significant increase in illegal fraternity houses in our neighborhood.
Several fraternities moved near our home in 2021, and many were the Main Chapter houses of Cal Poly's fraternities.
Even more moved in in the Fall of 2022, including one right next door and another directly across the street from our
1
home. More were established in 2023, also near our home on Kentucky and Stafford (496 Kentucky and 1350 Stafford)
and on Stafford (1271, 1273, and 1275 Stafford). And even more were added nearby in 2024, including 1276 Bond. That
does not include the dozens of others, which I will not list here, but I have previously provided the addresses. Each of
them held fraternity-related events throughout the year, including rush events and sorority exchanges.
The increased noise level in the Fall of 2021 was documented by first-hand accounts of long-term residents in several
“neighborhood group” email exchanges. That’s when I started sending videos of fraternity parties to the City because
loud parties at illegal fraternities that could be heard from a block away were being cleared by SLOPD as a negative
violation or unable to locate. Prior to the Fall of 2021, I had never contacted SLOPD about noisy parties because they
were not such a huge issue as they were beginning in the Fall of 2021. I never had any correspondence with SLOPD
Chief Cantrell or Chief Linden whatsoever, because it was not necessary. I only sent one email to Chief Gessell related to
the ongoing fireworks set off on Stafford at the rugby house, next to Sid and Isabel Marques. He was responsive and
respectful and went to the house with the Fire Marshall. There was never another fireworks incident from that property.
But since the Fall of 2021, the noise from the illegal fraternities has gotten progressively worse each year, and most of
the long-term residents on the original email chain have left the neighborhood. I have corresponded with SLOPD
leadership many, many times since then without resolution. It has been enormously frustrating. The issues have also
been brought up in public forums such as the City Council and the SCLC, and the pushback and dishonesty from Police
Chief Scott have been especially disheartening.
Civility Report
The City references the “Neighborhood Wellness Community Civility Working Group,” which worked on a plan for a
couple of years to promote neighborhood wellness and produced a 90-page Final Report published in Spring 2015. There
were six objectives in the Final Report. I have attached a condensed version, which was attached to a City Council
Agenda on 12/1/2025, when the Council recommended expanding the SCLC to include two more residents who were
“most directly involved with neighborhood wellness.”
The Chair of the Alta Vista Neighborhood Association (AVNA), Karen Adler, was one of two people on the working group
to address Objective One. She is still the Chair of AVNA, and her home is also now surrounded by illegal fraternities. She
has expressed her extreme displeasure with the lack of enforcement by the City of illegal fraternity houses in our
neighborhood. It is ridiculous for the City to continue to minimize the problem and not take meaningful action to fix it.
Below are the six objectives from the Civility Report.
None of the recommendations for Objective One, shown below, are currently implemented:
2
I am fairly certain that none of the recommendations in Objective Two related to neighborhood wellness are currently
implemented, except maybe the City sends information to college students about trash collection.
3
Of all the recommendations listed in Objective Three, the only item that I know is currently implemented is the party
registration program. It should be noted that RQN opposed that policy when it was adopted and is still opposed to the
program. When a party is registered, SLOPD does not respond, and the reporting party is told to call back in 20 minutes
if the party is still going. Fraternities were registering parties with over 100 people, and the nearby neighbors were
woken by the party, then had to call SLOPD, and there were no consequences. It’s essentially a ‘free pass’ to have a loud
party. Also, live bands are sometimes registered, even though they are not allowed by the program, but they get a
warning call, and there are no consequences. The neighborhood is still disturbed by the loud music and guests leaving
after the party is broken up, which can last an hour.
The SCLC is also listed as a collaborative measure; however, the MOU for SCLC was recently revised to dilute the original
purpose of addressing issues between college students and nearby neighborhoods, and the neighborhood
representatives for geographical neighborhoods and member-at-large are now elected rather than appointed by the
Neighborhood Associations. Last year, two SCLC members brought up the illegal fraternity issue at every single meeting,
and it was never addressed within the SCLC.
4
5
Objective Four mostly relates to law enforcement between Cal Poly and the City. One item related to neighborhood
wellness was assigned to SCLC to “change the student culture related to neighborhood wellness”. As discussed, the most
significant issue related to noise issues in the neighborhoods near campus, spreading to other neighborhoods in
northern SLO, has not been discussed at the SCLC despite being brought up during every meeting.
6
Objective Five has one item, and I am not convinced that the City has “effectively informed the community on matters of
neighborhood wellness” in an annual communications plan, especially related to illegal fraternity operations, which are
the largest negative impact on affected neighborhoods.
Objective Six is solely about SCLC. The action item of shifting memberships “to directly involve those individuals most
directly involved in neighborhood wellness” is not currently happening. Aside from one RQN representative, there are
only two 'neighborhood representatives', including the neighborhood-at-large representative, Abe Lincoln. He does not
7
live in an affected neighborhood, does not belong to any group related to neighborhood wellness, and has criticized
other representatives and community members for bringing up problems with noise and the illegal fraternity operations
in the neighborhoods. Abe is a nice guy, but does not meet the qualifications intended for the seat he is occupying, and
the proposed representative by the Neighborhood Groups was rejected, even though they did meet the qualifications of
the seat, and the MOU said that the Neighborhood Groups shall appoint that member. The perspective from
neighborhoods most directly involved with noise is extremely diluted by the larger membership of Cal Poly and City
representatives.
The other two action items of an annual report and a town hall are not currently implemented.
The SCLC meetings are subject to the Brown Act, but are not recorded and archived for the public, but they should be.
Cal Poly Did Not Enforce the Zoning Ordinance When It Knew of the Illegal Fraternities in 2015
The City Council, City Manager, and other leadership knew about the small number of illegal fraternities on Hathway
Avenue in 2015 because after the roof collapse on St. Fratty’s Day that year, Cal Poly hired an independent agency to
investigate the incident. The report cited fraternities at 348 Hathway and “others” also on Hathway. That report was
presented to the City Council and is included in an Agenda in 2015.
SLOPD has also been aware of the illegal fraternity houses on Hathway since that time. Christine Wallace has said that
the police department was very familiar with the identified Greek houses on Hathway dating back many years.
Nonetheless, the City failed to enforce the zoning regulations in 2015 and set the stage for an explosion of more illegal
fraternity houses moving into the neighborhood. The fraternity members probably thought it was legal for them to
operate because the City never took any proactive measures to stop their operations. Today, there are over 40 illegal
fraternities in Alta Vista, and several others in Monterey Heights. There are also some west of Santa Rosa/Hwy 1.
Cal Poly and Its Fraternities are Intentionally Breaking the Law
For the past two academic years, Cal Poly administration, Greek Life staff, and IFC leadership have known it is not legal
for them to operate in R1/R2 neighborhoods, but they have ignored the City’s laws. They host rush events to recruit new
members and regularly hold blow-out fraternity events at their illegal fraternities in residential neighborhoods. We
8
know these events are “fraternity-related” because they follow certain protocols, as required by Cal Poly Greek Life’s
Event Registration Policy.
Some indicators are fraternity member 'guards' at the front door wearing construction vests or shirts that say “security”,
and they check in guests with laptops. I am certain that SLOPD is also familiar with these practices. The guests that go to
the parties are 90% female and often are dressed in similar colors or themes, which indicates they are "exchanges" and
registered beforehand with Cal Poly. The fraternities also post photos of events on Instagram at the illegal fraternity
houses, whose addresses have been previously documented by the City and which have identifiable features on their
homes that are seen in the photos. Most of the Main Chapter Houses for Cal Poly’s 19 fraternities are in R1/R2
neighborhoods.
Decrease in Noise vs. Increase in Illegal Fraternities
The Background in the agenda cites a 45% decrease in noise complaints to SLOPD since 2010. This argument is a red
herring to divert attention from the current issue and attempts to distract from the fact that the problem is ongoing and
unresolved in the neighborhoods in the northern part of SLO, which is the subject of the Grand Jury’s report.
In 2010, there were not 50+ illegal fraternity houses, and the noise complaints to SLOPD did not regularly include
parties of 100-300 people in single-family neighborhoods, as they do today! Context matters. Some weekends, nearly
50% of all noise calls citywide are from fraternities, mostly illegally operating in the single-family neighborhoods. Also,
many of the long-term residents have moved from these neighborhoods because they could not tolerate the noise from
these illegal fraternity operations.
It is disingenuous to minimize the immense problem that the residents of these neighborhoods endure every weekend
that Cal Poly is in session, which was witnessed firsthand by the members of the Grand Jury. The City should admit
there’s a problem, accept the recommendations, and move forward. Let’s work to solve the issue and hold those who
are responsible accountable so the people who live in the neighborhoods can have the quiet enjoyment of their homes.
DACs & Citations Are Usually Not Accurate
When a DAC or noise citation is issued, the number of guests at a party is self-reported to SNAP or SLOPD by the person
receiving the DAC or noise citation. For example, Delta Upsilon has an illegal fraternity house at 281 Albert Drive, and
they hosted a concert there in May 2025. There were HUNDREDS of people in the backyard. You can see the party in a 1-
minute video on their Instagram page here: https://www.instagram.com/p/DJXia7Uh8kO/?img_index=1 or
here: https://vimeo.com/1094575248?share=copy#t=0 I
SLOPD issued a noise citation to a Delta Upsilon fraternity member at 281 Albert Drive, and the citation said there were
50 people at that concert/party when there were actually at least 300 people. Law enforcement does not enter yards or
count people. They ask the person getting the citation how many people are at the event, so the number on the citation
is often not accurate, as people will say there is a lower number than the actual number of guests. It also does not
reflect the impact of the event on the neighborhood. If the City is using this “data,” just know that it is self-reported by
the offender and is not necessarily accurate.
One other important point is that parties like the one shown in the video are common in the neighborhood and are
rarely cited as unruly gatherings. There are parties that meet the legal standard of unruly gatherings every weekend
that Cal Poly is in session, but very few are cited as unruly gatherings. Sometimes, SNAP responds to documented illegal
fraternity houses that received letters from Code Enforcement, so a citation can’t even be issued unless SNAP calls
SLOPD, but they usually don’t. If SLOPD were to cite these parties as unruly gatherings (which they are, according to the
SLOMC), it would likely make an impact to stop them from continuing.
Street Closure During St. Fratty’s Day 2022
In the agenda for 7/15/2025, the City claims, “It was not until 2023 that any extended street closure occurred in
response to the party…”
9
That is false. The neighborhood streets were barricaded by SLOPD in 2022 when about 2,000 people overtook the
streets near our home.
On March 12, 2022, St. Fratty’s Day, we were woken by fireworks at 4 a.m. Loud music was coming from MANY houses
in the neighborhood because the party was pre-planned, according to many social media posts made on Friday, March
11, 2022, that talked about the St. Fratty’s Day party on Hathway in the early morning hours the next day.
By 6 a.m., the intersection at Bond and Hathway was completely overtaken by the illegal street party, and people
spanned from Fredericks to Carpenter and up Bond toward Kentucky Street. It was still dark outside, and I took a video
of the crowd with my phone.
By around 7 a.m., SLOPD officers had blocked off the neighborhood with their vehicles. SLOPD had barricaded
Hathway Avenue from Fredericks Street to Carpenter, and Bond Street was barricaded from Hathway Avenue to
Kentucky Street. Officers at Fredericks and Hathway told me they had called their supervisor to the scene.
I sent a timeline to the City Council of the SLOPD log from that morning to show the number of calls to our
neighborhood. Some calls went unanswered for hours because there were not enough officers on duty to respond. Two
of the calls I made to SLOPD did not even show up on the police log, including for a party at 348 Hathway, where many
people were partying on the roof. It was one of the worst offenders that morning, and there was no response from
SLOPD. My neighbor on Hathway also told me he called SLOPD, and his call was not listed. The log is attached to this
email.
Michelle Shoresman’s response to my email seemed to indicate that my “standards” were not realistic and that SLOPD
had adequately handled the matter:
“Thanks for the call log. I know you are frustrated and probably don’t think it’s sufficient, but I do happen to
note that there are a large number of citations that were made, and even several arrests. I would think this is
likely an improvement over past years, even if not still “enough” by your standards.”
The truth is that the response in 2022 was not an improvement over past years because our neighborhood was not
overtaken by thousands of people for an illegal street party before or after St. Fratty’s Day 2015, when a roof collapsed
and ended the party by 6:30 a.m.
In any event, the neighborhood streets were barricaded by SLOPD during St. Fratty’s Day in 2022, so hopefully the
record is corrected.
SLOPD Chief Rick Scott’s Statements to the Council Were Not True
Since 2022, the SLOPD Chief Rick Scott has often falsely claimed that this event was “historically” large, as though it had
happened in previous years after the roof collapse, but that is not true. We have lived in the neighborhood since St.
Fratty’s Day was “founded” in 2009 by a fraternity at 348 Hathway Ave. It was not a street party until 2015, when the
roof collapsed at around 6:15 a.m.
It seems the Police Chief makes blanket statements, as though there have been illegal street parties during St. Fratty’s
Day all along, to deflect the responsibility that, under his leadership, the neighborhood was taken over by thousands of
people in 2022, 2023, and 2024.
At a Council meeting on 3/15/2022, after St. Fratty’s Day, Chief Scott debriefed the Council: “We have been planning for
St. Patrick’s Day for some time now…” and he minimized the magnitude of the event. He said it took “a couple of hours
to get the situation under control,” when it actually lasted almost 6 hours, beginning at 4 a.m. He claimed SLOPD was
“staffed up” for the event, anticipating crowds similar to numbers before the COVID-19 shutdown.
SLOPD did not have additional staff that morning, and Deputy Chief Mickel explained that they were lucky that it
happened near shift change, so they could hold over the night officers as the day officers came on duty. (DC Mickel
was honest and transparent about the situation, and we appreciate him very much.)
10
St. Fratty’s Day reemerged in 2022 and progressively got worse until it was finally stopped in 2025. The Grand Jury was
correct in its finding that the event was not handled appropriately in 2022, 2023, and 2024 because SLOPD did not have
enough staff to adequately handle the event. DC Mickel admitted that SLOPD was not prepared in 2023 during an RQN
meeting. He also referenced the mistakes and failure of SLOPD to fully prepare in previous years (2022-2024) during his
presentation to the Council on SLOPD’s plans for 2025.
Council Meeting on March 15, 2022, after St. Fratty’s Day 2022 (before St. Patrick’s Day on March 17)
During the Council meeting on 3/15/2022, Jan Marx asked that the Council agendize St. Fratty’s Day for discussion.
While Erica Stewart supported a future conversation on an agenda, Michelle Shoresman did not support Ms. Marx’s
suggestion. Ms. Shoresman said she didn’t want to agendize discussion on the expansion of the Safety Enhancement
Zone to include St. Fratty’s Day and said “putting it in the bike rack” would work best for her.
It was disappointing that Ms. Shoresman did not give credit to Ms. Marx’s first-hand experience with the event and did
not support even a discussion of the matter on a future agenda. Carlyn Christianson was also adamant in not agendizing
the item, saying the trend was downwards and was of no concern. Emily Francis and Mike Boswell were not on the City
Council then.
Warning Before St. Fratty’s 2023 That Was Ignored and SLOPD Was Not Prepared
St. Fratty’s Day is typically held on the Saturday before winter finals, and not necessarily the Saturday before St. Patrick’s
Day. The event is centered around finals because many students leave town during the week of finals, and the students
want to party while most are still in town. This should be noted for future years, since Cal Poly is converting to a
semester system.
In July 2022, I warned the City and SLOPD about St. Patrick’s Day and St. Fratty’s Day occurring on Friday/Saturday on
the same weekend in 2023 and sent the graphic below to show the perfect-storm scenario that would likely result in an
expansion and surge of partiers for St. Fratty’s Day.
I thought that the failure to have an aggressive plan would result in legitimizing the event, which would cause the event
to continue to gain traction and grow. Looking back, I believe the failure of SLOPD to have an adequate plan in 2023 set
in motion the exponential growth of the event the following year. At that point, in 2024, it was too late for a Safety
Enhancement Zone to have any meaningful effect.
St. Fratty’s Day 2023
11
During the morning of St. Fratty’s Day 2023, SLOPD was not prepared for the incredibly large crowd of 3,000-4,000
people that showed up. You can watch a video from the event
here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYkaOsCwBbA
Again, during his debrief to the City Council after the event, Chief Scott did not admit that SLOPD was understaffed and
caught off guard by a larger crowd than expected. He told the Council that it “wasn’t unexpected” that 3,000-4,000
people showed up in the neighborhood and that SLOPD was “staffed accordingly to address the concerns.” That was not
true.
He also said there would be an after-action analysis and would have ongoing dialogue with neighbors who live in the
affected neighborhood. That also did not happen.
He also said there would be an after-action report brought back to the Council, and Emily Francis asked about the
timeline for the after-action report, but Chief Scott was evasive and did not have a timeline. Erica also asked about the
after-action report. In fact, there was never an after-action report brought back to the Council for the public to hear.
It was obvious to observers of St. Fratty’s Day 2023 that SLOPD was unprepared to handle the event. Videos of the event
also show dangerous, illegal behavior that morning. EMS could not navigate the crowd. Dozens of people climbed utility
poles. People were openly carrying and drinking alcohol. SLOPD officers stood around the perimeter and observed.
Later, DC Fred Mickel admitted on a couple of occasions that SLOPD was understaffed during the St. Fratty’s Day events
before 2025 because they did not anticipate the number of people who showed up in the neighborhood.
The ”Background” information provided in the Agenda further states:
“As the crowds in 2024 grew even larger, the City’s departmental staffing became no longer sufficient to safely
address and disperse the crowds gathered in the streets and properties near campus…”
This implies that the staffing was sufficient in 2022 and 2023, which it was not. The Grand Jury investigated the City’s
response from 2022 to 2024 and found that it was not sufficient, and the finding was correct.
When someone (or an agency) is not honest about one thing, it makes people question their honesty about other things
and hurts their overall credibility. The City should accept responsibility for the mistakes and celebrate the successes and
lessons learned. Failing to take responsibility and making excuses makes the city look dishonest and erodes public
confidence.
Code Enforcement Failed to Investigate Complaints
I sent an email to the Council and Community Development citing complaints I filed before fraternity rush events that
were advertised on social media with specific dates, times, and addresses of the upcoming events. The fraternities held
those events at the exact date, time, and address listed in my complaint, and none of them were cited by Code
Enforcement.
Michelle Shoresman said in an email that "the city can’t have eyes and ears everywhere", which seemed to excuse the
City’s lack of enforcement. Her response was disheartening.
Code Enforcement has continued to dismiss complaints of fraternity events at illegal fraternities in our neighborhood as
unfounded, even when they are posted on the fraternity’s social media pages and we observe them happening. I’ve
asked SLOPD for help to document the event as a fraternity-related event, and to cite it under the applicable code of
illegal land use, but SLOPD leadership said they don’t handle that type of report and referred me to Code Enforcement.
It's been a circular exercise that has not brought results, and the illegal fraternities continue to operate.
The Grand Jury Findings
12
During the City Council meeting in February 2025, DC Mickel gave the presentation for the plans for St. Fratty’s/St.
Patrick’s Day 2025, he said SLOPD was reactive during previous years but had learned from their mistakes. Members of
the Grand Jury were in the audience.
The Jurors also had links to the Police Chief’s previous statements before and after St. Fratty’s Day in 2022, 2023 and
2024; recordings of the SCLC meetings where the Chief also made conflicting statements and Mila’s and Brett’s concerns
were continually ignored and even criticized by other members of SCLC; and videos of St. Fratty’s Day in 2022, 2023, and
2024. They also had information about SLOPD policies and procedures, and statements made by two officers related to
their response to noisy parties, which likely would not have been known to Christine Wallace. This may be why
interviews with two police officers were requested by the Grand Jury, which was blocked by SLOPD, according to the
Grand Jury report.
The City also claims to have provided documentation, as requested by the Jurors. The findings in the Grand Jury report
were based on everything that was provided to them and their observations of the neighborhood during weekends, over
at least six months. The City had an ample opportunity to give them all the relevant information throughout the
investigation.
The City did not “fully cooperate” with the Grand Jury. The report says that the investigation was hampered because the
Grand Jury was blocked from interviewing two police officers, despite repeated requests for interviews. The Jurors
wanted answers relevant to some specific issues they were investigating that may not have been clear to the City, and it
was not appropriate for the City to presume the Grand Jury did not need the testimony.
I included the names of two officers in my complaint, and it was related to policy decisions and operations within SLOPD
that would likely not be known to Christine Wallace, so that may have been the information they were seeking. The City
claimed it would have taken up valuable time from the officers’ schedules, which is ludicrous. SLOPD leadership and
officers sit in the audience during Council meetings and Planning Commission meetings, in case there are questions.
They certainly had an hour to sit for an interview with the Grand Jury. It is disappointing that SLOPD did not fully
cooperate with the Grand Jury, and two officers were prevented from testifying.
Beginning on Monday, June 16, 2025, there was a huge surge in activity on my husband's website
HowToRuinANeighborhood.com, as multiple people origninating from SLO City (probably staff) went onto the website to
search through all the tabs for information, presumably to prepare the response to the Grand Jury by June 20, 2025. I'm
not sure what they were looking for, but the website contains video and other documentation related to the issues that
were investigated by the Grand Jury. I am not sure if the Grand Jury even looked at the website.
Finally, it is obvious that I have been invested in solving this problem for several years and have put my heart and soul
into finding solutions.
The reason I have made these efforts is because I DEEPLY love my home and property, with our beautiful view of
Cerro San Luis from our kitchen and back deck, gardens we’ve cultivated over many years, and an ADU that was to
provide income so we could retire. We did not want to be displaced and thought my efforts would result in
enforcement and allow my husband and me to stay in our home. I felt as though I was fighting for our lives.
When the City did not respond to help solve the issue, I went to the news, and they covered the story. Even the Editorial
Board subsequently wrote an Editorial, urging the City to take action, but it has not. The story was picked up by the Daily
Mail, and many people contacted us, including legitimate production companies who wanted to film a documentary
about the issue. We did not want that sort of publicity and hoped the problem would be solved by the City.
We also wrote to the Grand Jury, and they investigated the matter. The Grand Jury report gave us hope, but that was
lost when we read the City's 27-page response. We gave up and decided to use our entire life savings for a down
payment on a house in a quiet neighborhood, and needed co-signers to qualify for the payments. We do not have any
retirement and will now try to get by month-to-month, with payments that exceed 70% of our income.
Meanwhile, we, and others in the affected neighborhoods, have been damaged by the inaction of the City for several
years. The City should own up to that.
13
Please appoint Jan Marx and Emily Francis (or Mike Boswell) to the Ad Hoc Committee. The public deserves to provide
input on this important issue.
Thank you,
Kathie Walker
To
help
prot
ect
your
priva
12-01-2015 Item 14 - Action for Civility Report Recommendations.pdf
cy, …
14
Call time Arrived Cleared Response time Address Type Outcome
4:21 4:39 4:42 18 min 208 Hathway Loud party/Fireworks No violation
4:38 4:42 4:52 4 min 260 Santa Lucia*Fireworks No report
4:51 4:57 5:15 6 min 146 Stenner*Loud yelling/music Citation
5:09 5:22 5:22 13 min 561 Luneta*Loud music Unable to Locate
5:11 5:18 5:33 7 min 322 Hathway Music & Fireworks DAC
5:50 5:54 6:03 4 min Hathway Alley Gathering per YikYak Unable to Locate
6:11 6:12 6:23 1 min 281 Hathway Noise/Party Citation
6:12 n/a 6:25 canceled 1784 McCollum*Noisy crowd in street Canceled
6:30 6:31 6:35 1 min 1218 Bond Noise/Party Citation
6:30 10:02 3 hr 32 min 451 Chorro*Noise/Party No violation
6:39 6:39 6:47 0 min**274 Hathway Noise/Party Citation
6:52 0 min**281 Hathway Noise/Party Citation
6:56 7:07 7:47 11 min 306 Hathway Noise/Party Citation
7:08 7:08 7:29 0 min**Bond & Hathway Intoxicated Person Arrest PC647(F)
7:13 7:13 7:29 0 min**1213 Bond Intoxicated Person Arrest PC647(F)
7:20 9:15 9:18 1 hr 55 min 1441 Slack*Noisy people No report
7:26 7:26 7:33 0 min**208 Hathway Noise/Party Citation
7:47 7:48 7:53 1 min 281 Hathway Noise/Party Citation
7:50 7:50 7:57 0 min**Hathway & Fredericks UIP Citation
8:00 8:00 8:16 0 min**Hathway & Carpenter Intoxicated Person Arrest PC647(F)
8:01 9:49 9:51 1 hr 48 min 175 Hathway Large Party 100+ UIP No violation
8:07 9:22 9:22 1 hr 15 min Loomis & Graves*Noisy people Unable to Locate
8:15 8:15 8:38 0 min**291 Hathway Noise/Party Citation
8:21 8:21 8:42 0 min**200 Block Hathway Assault/Oth Weapon Report to follow
8:25 8:25 8:35 0 min**291 Hathway Noise/Party Citation
8:38 10:09 10:10 1 hr 31 min 334 Foothill*Noisy people No violation
7:00 AM -Multiple police vehicles posted at intersections in neighborhood (3 hours after initial disturbances)
Officers standing at Fredericks/Hathway say they've called their supervisor to respond to the scene
Timeline of events on 3/12/2022 "St. Fratty's Day"
College student-aged people have begun to gather in street at Hathway/Bond and loud parties are throughout neighborhood
Large crowds have overtaken Hathway Ave from Carpenter to Fredericks overflowing onto Bond
SLOPD POLICE LOG - 3/12/2022
5:15 AM - Police increasing presence in lower Alta Vista neighborhood (1 hour after initial disturbances)
KAPPA SIGMA
KAPPA SIGMA
ALPHA SIGMA PHI
KAPPA SIGMA
KAPPA SIGMA
9:02 9:03 9:07 1 min 208 Hathway Noise/Party Citation
9:03 9:07 9:17 4 min 133 Orange Noise/Party Citation
9:19 9:19 9:29 0 min**191 Orange Noise/Party Citation
9:26 9:28 9:41 2 min 1220 Fredericks Noise/Party-ppl on roof Citation
10:02 10:13 10:26 11 min 1050 Foothill - The SLO Apts*Noise/Party Citation
10:26 12:03 12:07 1 hr 36 min 200 Block Kentucky Large Party-ppl on roof Unable to Locate
11:01 11:01 11:35 0 min**Longview DUI Arrest
11:11 11:42 11:43 31 min Kentucky Alley Males kicking…No report
12:09 12:18 12:22 9 min 1700 Kentucky Large Party-ppl on roof No violation
12:13 13:19 13:27 1 hr 6 min 1050 Foothill - The SLO Apts*Noise/Party No violation
***St. Fratty's Day is meant to start at 4am and be over by mid-mornnig (i.e. 4am - 10am)
By 10:00 AM - 6 hours after the initial disturbances - the lower Alta Vista neighborhood has mostly quieted down***
Police are back in their vehicles and "mopping up" after crowd dispersed
*Outside of the lower-Alta Vista neighborhood which is the area targeted for St. Fratty's Day
**zero (0) min response could be officer observation and not a "call" for service