Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout8/27/2025 Item 4b, RQN of SLO RQN of SLO < To:Advisory Bodies Subject:Response to Recommendation #6, Grand Jury Report Attachments:AB 524 (2021-2022).doc Dear Planning Commissioners, Discussion In response to resident complaints, the impartial Grand Jurors spent months investigating, researching and conducting interviews before concluding that the city has failed to adequately enforce municipal codes that were created to protect residents from the ongoing disturbances caused primarily by fraternities located in residential neighborhoods, particularly Alta Vista and Monterey Heights. The comments you received when deciding whether a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) should be revised or revoked have provided snapshots of the disturbances fraternities and their satellite houses cause - primarily, though not exclusively, on weekends. Loud thumping of amplified music, yelling, screaming, shouting from hundreds of inebriated partiers inside and outside of fraternities, partiers roaming the streets throughout the neighborhood and vomiting/urinating in residents' yards. All until the wee hours of the morning, making it impossible to sleep and contributing to residents' concern for their safety and that of their properties. Many have moved from homes they have lived in for decades - to other parts of the city or away from the city entirely. You have responded to complaints brought before you by revising or revoking the CUP's of the offending fraternities. For that we are immensely grateful. Grand Jury Recommendation #6 The Grand Jury's recommendation included the following: 1. Adopting more uniform CUP conditions. You have done that. 2. Adopting more uniform enforcement of existing requirements. This is beyond your purview; it falls within the Community Development Department and the Police Department. 3. Consider using future CUP violations to determine if it is appropriate to revise the conditions to make them more relevant for today's environment. To date you have done this when reviewing CUP's brought before you. 4. Consider additional code enforcement staff or alternate work schedules. This is beyond your purview and falls within the Community Development Department. What could the city do to address the problems? Recommendations We suggest you make the following recommendations to city staff and the City Council. 1. Legal action. Recommend the City take Cal Poly to court for a judicial determination clarifying the AB 524 address requirement in order to compel them to provide the required AB 524 information. AB 524 (2021-2022) (see attachment) requires colleges/universities to publish the addresses of their fraternities and sororities for the previous year annually on October 1st. Although Cal Poly did so at first, once they realized the City was using that information to identify code violations, Cal Poly removed all addresses and replaced them with "San Luis Obispo, CA." This is contrary to the provisions of AB 524, and we believe the City has standing to sue in order to compel Cal Poly to provide the required AB 524 information, i.e., addresses. 1 2. Community Development Department (CDD)/Code Enforcement (CE). a. Insufficient personnel. Recommend to city staff and the City Council that a CDD position be allocated to address fraternity violations until a new or contract position is authorized (should occur in this budget cycle). This situation has gone on for far too long and will only worsen if not addressed. If current code enforcement staffing is insufficient to adequately enforce our zoning code regarding fraternities, then it's imperative that at least one additional code enforcement official be hired to get a handle on the zoning code violations of fraternity operations in R-1 and R-2 zones and to assist in creating a standardized CUP process and conditions. The city must find funding for this position or these zoning code violations will only spread further into other neighborhoods as Cal Poly continues to accept additional fraternities. There should be no excuse for the city's failure to resolve this problem. The city should instead do everything that's needed, including expending the necessary funds for enforcement purposes. A list of violations that CE addressed in 2024 is included in the staff report. Surely the repeated disruptions to residents caused by the fraternities is equally important, but it is getting far less attention. b. Flex hours/days. Recommend the use of flex/alternate hours and days for CE staff to the CDD Director. Disruptive fraternity events occur at night on weekdays (primarily Thursdays and Fridays) and during both day and night on weekends. Several years ago CE personnel did work weekends. c. Enforcement action. Recommend to the CDD director that she utilize CE and planning personnel to shut down special events such as Rush and partner with SLOPD for safety/security as needed. Sending one or two CE personnel to shut down Rush events may not be sufficient because the first fraternity contacts the other fraternities so they can all relocate the event to their back yards. This occurred in January 2025, although multiple citations were able to be issued. Final Comments For too long, city staff has allowed fraternity operations to get out of control due to lack of enforcement. The only reason the recent CUPs came up for review is in response to resident complaints that provided statistical information that demonstrated the CUP violations. Otherwise, there would have been no CUP reviews. These CUPs should have annual reviews by code enforcement staff to assure they're operating within their conditions. As you know, creating any code or policy is half the task—enforcement is the other half in order for it to be effective. Therefore, it is vital for Code Enforcement Staff to work during the times when the fraternities are hosting their parties and events which is generally on weekends. It would allow them to respond to resident complaints and take appropriate enforcement actions. In addition, coordination between Code Enforcement and the Police Department is vital to assist in support of gathering evidence for enforcement action. However, despite assurances this is being done, this supposed coordination is inefficient. It is disappointing and disturbing to see the city try to justify their failure to prevent Cal Poly's fraternities, both with or without CUPs, from disrupting our residents' lives. It appears as though their own city doesn't care enough about their peace and safety to expend the time, effort, and funding to stop these illegal activities in their once peaceful neighborhood. Thank you for your time and attention to this glaring neighborhood problem. It is appreciated. Sincerely, Sandra Rowley Chairperson, RQN 2 Assembly Bill No. 524 CHAPTER 268 An act to add Chapter 5.2 (commencing with Section 66310) to Part 40 of Division 5 of Title 3 of the Education Code, relating to postsecondary education. [ Approved by Governor September 13, 2022. Filed with Secretary of State September 13, 2022. ] LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST AB 524, Rodriguez. Postsecondary education: Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act. Existing law establishes the University of California, the California State University, the California Community Colleges, independent institutions of higher education, and private postsecondary educational institutions as the segments of postsecondary education in this state. Existing law requests the Trustees of the California State University, the Regents of the University of California, and the governing board of each community college district to adopt and publish policies on harassment, intimidation, and bullying to be included within the rules and regulations governing student behavior. This bill would establish the Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act, which would require each institution of higher education to include in the institution’s requirements for campus recognition of a campus-recognized sorority or fraternity, as defined, a requirement that the sorority or fraternity submit to the institution on or before July 1, 2023, and annually thereafter, specified information concerning the sorority’s or fraternity’s members and their conduct. The bill would require the institution to suspend the campus recognition of any campus-recognized sorority or fraternity that does not comply with the reporting requirements. The bill would require each institution with sororities or fraternities to compile and maintain the collected information into a publicly accessible report posted, and archived, on each respective campus’ Greek Life internet homepage or its equivalent for a minimum of 10 years and sent through a campuswide email to all enrolled students on or before October 1, 2023, and annually thereafter. To the extent this bill would impose new duties on community college districts, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that, if the Commission on State Mandates determines that the bill contains costs mandated by the state, reimbursement for those costs shall be made pursuant to the statutory provisions noted above. Bill Text THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Chapter 5.2 (commencing with Section 66310) is added to Part 40 of Division 5 of Title 3 of the Education Code, to read: CHAPTER 5.2. Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act 66310. This chapter shall be known, and may be cited, as the Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act. 66312. (a) As used in this chapter, the following definitions apply: (1) “Academic year” has the same meaning as in Section 69432.7. (2) (A) “Campus-recognized sorority or fraternity” means a sorority or fraternity that has officially met the formal chartering and recognition requirements at the institution where it operates. (B) As used in this chapter, this definition does not include a collegiate honor society. (3) “Chapter house” means any residence located on or off campus that is owned by the institution of higher education but occupied by a campus-recognized sorority or fraternity, or any residence located on or off campus that is owned and occupied by the campus-recognized sorority or fraternity. (4) “Institution of higher education” or “institution” means a campus of the California Community Colleges, the California State University, or the University of California, a private postsecondary educational institution, or an independent institution of higher education. (5) “Misconduct” means any conduct in violation of institutional policies reportable under Section 1092(f)(1)(F)(i)(II) and (IX) of Title 20 of the United States Code, as it read on January 1, 2022, or hazing as defined in subdivision (b) of Section 245.6 of the Penal Code. (6) “Participating sorority or fraternity” means a sorority or fraternity described in subdivision (c). (7) “Sanctioned event” means any event in which one of the following occurs: (A) The institution deems the event to be sanctioned by a fraternity or sorority according to their campus policies and practices. (B) The name of a campus-recognized sorority or fraternity or participating sorority or fraternity is used to market or publicize the event. (C) The name of a campus-recognized sorority or fraternity or participating sorority or fraternity is displayed at the event. (D) Official funds of a campus-recognized sorority or fraternity or participating sorority or fraternity are used for the purchase and reimbursement of food, beverages, supplies, venue-related costs, publicity, party rentals, damages or cleanup fees, or any other costs associated with the event. (E) A campus-recognized sorority or fraternity or participating sorority or fraternity, or a benefactor officially affiliated with the sorority or fraternity, receives any portion of funds raised from attendance fees, ticket sales, or other forms of admission fees associated with the event. (b) Notwithstanding Section 67400, each institution of higher education shall include in the institution’s requirements for campus recognition of each campus-recognized sorority or fraternity, both of the following requirements: (1) (A) A requirement that the campus-recognized sorority or fraternity shall submit to the institution on or before July 1, 2023, and annually thereafter, all of the following: (i) The number of active members in the campus-recognized sorority or fraternity. (ii) The number of new members added to the campus-recognized sorority or fraternity. (iii) The average grade point average of the membership of the campus-recognized sorority or fraternity. (iv) The average grade point average of new members of the campus-recognized sorority or fraternity. (v) The number of community service hours the campus-recognized sorority or fraternity completed as an organization. (vi) The total amount of money fundraised by the campus-recognized sorority or fraternity. (vii) The current recognition status of the campus-recognized sorority or fraternity, as determined by the institution. (viii) The current conduct status of the campus-recognized sorority or fraternity, as determined by the institution. (ix) The addresses of all chapter houses affiliated with the campus-recognized sorority or fraternity. (x) The location, date, and time of any sanctioned event. (xi) Any additional information the institution may require. (B) Unless otherwise specified, the information collected pursuant to subparagraph (A) shall be for the academic year immediately preceding the reporting deadline. (2) A requirement that any campus-recognized sorority or fraternity that does not comply with paragraph (1) be suspended from campus recognition. (c) A sorority or fraternity that satisfies both of the following is encouraged to comply with the reporting requirements of subdivision (b): (1) The sorority or fraternity has more than 50 percent of its members enrolled at the institution of higher education. (2) The sorority or fraternity is not recognized as an affiliated sorority or fraternity of the institution by the official authorizing body of that institution. (d) (1) (A) The institution shall compile and maintain the information collected pursuant to subdivisions (b) and (c) into a publicly accessible report published on each campus Greek Life internet homepage or its equivalent in a prominent location on or before October 1, 2023, and annually thereafter. The report shall include a list of available mental health resources and the residence addresses of all campus- recognized sorority and fraternity chapter houses. Each annual report shall be available on the campus Greek Life internet homepage or its equivalent for a minimum of 10 years. (B) The institution shall send the report for the academic year immediately preceding the reporting deadline through a campuswide email to all enrolled students on or before October 1, 2023, and annually thereafter. (2) An institution that does not have any campus-recognized sorority or fraternity or participating sorority or fraternity shall be exempt from the reporting requirement of this subdivision. (3) The institution of higher education shall include in the annual report the following for each campus-recognized sorority and fraternity and participating sorority or fraternity described in subdivision (c) for the academic year immediately preceding the reporting deadline: (A) The number of citations, or disciplinary actions taken, relating to misconduct at a chapter house or sanctioned event. (B) The addresses of chapter houses and sanctioned events and names of sororities and fraternities where misconduct occurred. (4) Notwithstanding any other requirement of this section, a report required pursuant to this subdivision shall comply with all applicable state and federal privacy laws, including, but not limited to, the federal Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (20 U.S.C. Sec. 1232g).