HomeMy WebLinkAbout9/16/2025 Item 7b, Walker
kathie walker <
To:Marx, Jan; Boswell, Mike; Francis, Emily; Stewart, Erica A; Shoresman, Michelle; E-mail
Council Website
Subject:City Council Meeting 9/16, Agenda 9b Grand Jury Response
Attachments:City of SLO Response to Grand Jury Findings.pdf
Dear Councilmembers,
The City has published a lot of information in its pushback against the Grand Jury report and denial of all
of the Grand Jury's Findings, including 27 pages of "clarifications" and a 14 page formal response to the
Grand Jury. It is difficult to adequately address the large amount of information without overwhelming
you but many of the City's claims are false, misleading, or do not tell the whole story. I have attached
some information and documentation so that it is on the record, and hope that you will consider it in
editing the City's response to the Grand Jury.
Thank you,
Kathie Walker
1
1
Dear City Councilmembers Stewart, Shoresman, Francis, Marx and Boswell,
It’s an understatement to say that I am disappointed in the City’s response to the Grand Jury’s
investigation and report. The Grand Jury’s Findings are an opportunity for learning and humility, with the
goal for improvement. Denying the facts of the current situation, outlined by the Grand Jury’s Findings,
does nothing to help the residents of San Luis Obispo. It’s not possible to address every issue in the
City’s 27 pages of “clarification” and 14-page response to the Grand Jury. I will try to be as brief as
possible to cover some of the main points, while including documentation.
Here is the first sentence and paragraph of one of the complaints to the Grand Jury about the City’s
lack of enforcement of the City’s laws pertaining to Cal Poly’s fraternities, which pondered that perhaps
money was the driving factor behind the City’s lack of enforcement:
“Dear Grand Jury of San Luis Obispo County,
Something is amiss in San Luis Obispo as the leadership of the city, the police department, the
community development and code enforcement department have failed to enforce the municipal
code and have ignored legitimate complaints related to non-enforcement of the law… One
wonders if there is a financial incentive, such as money received by the City from Cal
Poly, that has motivated the City to ignore its own laws and zoning regulations. There is
no other logical explanation.”
And here are recent statements from the City of San Luis Obispo and a key Cal Poly SLO staff member
about the relationship between the City and Cal Poly.
The first sentence on City’s website regarding the Grand Jury Report / Town -Gown relationship says:
“Cal Poly is a major contributor to the community's vibrancy and culture and is a major
economic engine on California’s Central Coast, according to a recent report by REACH that
assessed the economic impact of Cal Poly.” (link provided)
A s tatement of Courtney Kienow, Director of Relations and Economic Development, Office of Jeffrey
Armstong, President of Cal Poly, at a City Council meeting on 2/4/2025:
“As you all know, we are joined at the hip, the City and the university.”
It is apparent that the monetary gain from the City’s relationship with Cal Poly is a driving factor for the
City, even if Cal Poly’s actions within the city limits are detrimental to the City’s residents.
The Grand Jury is comprised of 19 impartial jurors who have nothing to gain or lose from Cal Poly or
the City of San Luis Obispo. They investigated the City of San Luis Obispo over the course of at least
six months. Prior to their service, all grand jurors take the following oath:
“I do solemnly swear and affirm that I will support the Constitution of the United States and the
State of California, and all laws made pursuant to and in conformity therewith, will diligently
inquire into, and true presentment make, of all public offenses against the people of this
state, committed or triable within this county, of which the grand jury shall have or can
obtain legal evidence…”
The investigation included gathering evidence through interviews, primarily with City staff. The City
Manager said the City provided thousands of documents to the Grand Jury. The jurors, without bias or
the influence of receiving any sort of benefit, pay, or relationship from the City or Cal Poly, and
considering all evidence, concluded their report with six Findings which were not favorable to the City.
2
The Findings boiled down to the fact that the City has not adequately enforced its laws which has
harmed the residents in the neighborhoods in the northern part of the City, and the City was not
completely cooperative or transparent with the Grand Jury.
In response, the City denies every Finding made by the Grand Jury.
I have included some of the Findings below and included some documented facts, and hope you will
reconsider the City’s denial, and adopt the Recommendations to actually SOLVE the issues rather than
scratching the surface and sweeping the matter under the rug because of the discomfort of doing the
right thing. Begin holding Cal Poly accountable for hiding the fraternity addresses, invest more in code
enforcement to competently handle this problem to restore the quality of life to City residents.
Finding 1. Prior to 2025, the city failed to effectively provide a multi-pronged, cohesive approach
to manage or shut down large unsanctioned, costly and unruly events such as St. Fratty’s Day.
This created an unsafe environment, with increasing size of unruly crowds, property damage,
injuries and public disturbances.
City Response: (F1) The City disagrees with this finding.
St. Fratty’s Day
The City’s response to the Grand Jury ignores the lack of enforcement for the illegal street parties
during St. Fratty’s Day beginning in 2022, when it re-emerged for the first time since 2015. That was the
only previous time that thousands of people overtook the streets of the San Luis Obispo neighborhood
for St. Fratty’s Day. In 2015, the event ended shortly after 6 a.m. because a roof collapsed, resulting in
a mass casualty incident.
The City’s response to the Grand Jury does not address the mayhem in 2022. A video of the event is
here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUH9wORd5ls
The City also does not address the mayhem in 2023. A video of the event is here:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EYkaOsCwBbA
The Grand Jury’s Findings included the City’s response to St. Fratty’s Day since 2022 yet the City does
not address those previous years, shown in the videos linked above. The Grand Jury was correct in
its Finding that SLOPD was not prepared for those events, and it created an unsafe environment
with increasing size of unruly crowds, etc. in 2022, 2023, and 2024.
Initially, the City claimed it was prepared for St. Fratty’s Day in 2024 but now admits that SLOPD did not
have an adequate plan that year. However, after the event in 2024, SLOPD Police Chief Rick Scott told
the City Council that SLOPD did have an adequate plan that the plan worked, and he downplayed the
chaos of what really happened.
The truth came out later when residents publicly shared their criticism of SLOPD through first-hand
accounts of being terrified, being trapped in their homes, being dismissed or hung up on when they
called 9-1-1, and SLOPD failing to render aid if/when officers finally arrived at a property. There was
significant property damage that cost more than the reported amount of damage of Cal Poly’s dorms,
but the cost to the neighborhood was never highlighted. Cars were vandalized, fences trampled,
gutters ripped off houses, a sewer line collapsed in the front yard of a property under the weight of so
many people, bushes and landscape were trampled. Multiple people hung on electrical lines which
were accessed after they trespassed on someone’s rooftop, and the electrical and cable lines were
ripped from the house. A person fell from the line and reportedly broke his arm. Yards were used as
toilets and littered with broken glass and trash. Local emergency rooms were filled with young adults
3
with alcohol intoxication. There were non-stop sirens in the neighborhood with City Fire responding to
emergencies in our neighborhoods, mostly related to alcohol poisoning, including unconscious people
on 1 and 2-story rooftops.
Each year, SLOPD leadership assured the neighborhood group that they had an adequate plan, but
unfortunately, they did not and there were extremely adverse impacts to the people who live in the
neighborhood for three years in a row due to inadequate planning and enforcement by SLOPD.
St. Fratty’s Day was not a novel event in 2022. It was previously celebrated on a smaller scale and has
always been the Saturday before Cal Poly’s winter finals. Yet SLOPD failed to monitor the situation
beforehand. There were many posts on the Friday before the St. Fratty’s Day event on Saturday,
3/12/2022 that showed a large scale would happen in the neighborhood. SLOPD did not anticipate the
event whatsoever and was not staffed for it. Deputy Chief Fred Mickel publicly spoke about this, and
how lucky SLOPD was because the event happened near shift change so they could hold over officers
while new officers came on duty.
The SLOPD Police Chief Rick Scott ignored the warnings sent to him in July 2022 about the perfect
storm scenario in 2023, where St. Fratty’s Day and St. Patrick’s Day were back-to-back on Friday and
Saturday in 2023.
This correspondence was also sent to the City Manager and the City Council, and residents later spoke
to the Council, warning that those two dates together, on a weekend, were going to result in huge
crowds and adversely affect the neighborhood. No one listened and the City was unprepared for that
chaos and illegal activity that year, which allowed the momentum to grown and carry forward in 2024.
The 2023 event was out of control and all-over social media, and there was no intervention from
SLOPD. It was painful to watch the non-stop climbing on utility poles, partying on rooftops, etc. and
nothing was done to stop it. The videos publicizing the lack of enforcement encouraged the event to
continue and increase in size in 2024.
Again, SLOPD was warned in 2024 and, again, was not adequately staffed as the event crowd doubled
for the third year in a row. People were trapped in their homes. Some residents in older homes thought
the roof was going to collapse on them because it was overtaken by trespassers. Video footage of the
crowd shows it was a realistic possibility. Panicked residents called 9-1-1 and were hung up on. It was
a disaster.
Meanwhile, SLOPD Police Chief Rick Scott made false representations about what really happened
during these St. Fratty’s Day events each year at various meetings, including Council, SCLC, and to the
local media. Recordings of his statements showed his inconsistent and untrue statements, as his
4
narrative changed depending on who he was talking to. He was likely caught off guard during his
interview with the Grand Jury and had to explain his inconsistent statements.
Following his testimony, the Grand Jury requested the testimony of two other SLOPD officers, and the
Police Chief likely felt uncomfortable with that proposition because he did not have control over what
they might say. Interviews are private, confidential, and don’t allow legal representation. Why else
would the requested testimony of two SLOPD officers be blocked by SLOPD leadership? If you have
nothing to hide, you hide nothing.
According to the Grand Jury, the City blocked the requested testimony of two SLOPD police officers. A
Grand Jury interview is 60-90 minutes. Those officers had that time to spare over the course of the long
investigation. There is simply no excuse for blocking the requested testimony. It is not transparent and
erodes the public’s trust at a time when it is critical for communities to trust law enforcement.
The City seems to suggest that the Grand Jury should have subpoenaed the officers if they really
wanted the officers’ testimony. The Grand Jury relies on the City’s voluntary cooperation and should not
have to issue subpoenas to force SLOPD officers to testify. Blocking the voluntary testimony of two
officers is not “cooperation”. The City’s assertion that it provided “unimpeded access” and “transparency
in good faith” is a misrepresentation. Everyone sees through the gaslighting, and it makes the City look
dishonest at a time when politicians are not honest or transparent, and people feel uneasy and unsafe.
It is also a fabrication for the City to claim that St. Fratty’s Day “involves hundreds of people walking up
and down neighborhood sidewalks – behavior that is generally constitutionally protected.”
In 2022, 2023, and 2024, the event involved thousands of people illegally overtaking the City streets,
and each year the City barricaded the streets to prevent vehicle traffic. In fact, in 2023 and 2024, the
barricades were pre-scheduled with the City utility department, and trucks pulled up before dawn to
install unmanned barricades that closed off streets to cars before people showed up. This enabled
thousands of people to use the City’s streets as promenades to and from the enormous street parties
that overflowed and trespassed into the yards and roofs of people who live in the neighborhood.
This could have been prevented if SLOPD had an adequate plan, based on the exponential growth of
the event from 2,000 people in 2022 to 3,000 4,000 people in 2023. Indeed, the event nearly doubled in
size again in 2024, which was predicted by residents who had witnessed the event in 2022 and 2023.
Those residents warned the City and asked for more support, and they were ignored.
Finally, St. Fratty’s Day which is a stand-alone event and is distinctly different from St. Patrick’s Day.
Referring to St. Fratty’s Day as St. Patrick’s will cause confusion. I realize Cal Poly has expressed
displeasure with the term. However, 22,000+ students at Cal Poly will use the term this year, including
Cal Poly fraternity and sorority members. “St. Fratty’s Day” at Cal Poly is all over social media if you
care to look, and it is not called St. Patrick’s Day.
In 2022, 2023, 2024, and 2025 banners hung on fraternity houses that said “St. Fratty’s Day”. Even
when Cal Poly banned Greek Life from having parties in 2025, Delta Chi and Sigma Nu had banners
made that said “St. Frattys” for parties that morning. Sigma Nu cancelled their party at the last minute,
but Delta Chi had a “St. Fratty’s” banner hanging in their courtyard while they hosted a party before the
2025 on-campus concert. People at the fraternity party posted videos of the party on Snapchat, and the
party was ultimately shut down by SLOPD.
TikTok videos from Greek life members and others referenced “St. Fratty’s Day”, not “St. Patrick’s Day”.
Most Cal Poly students also referred to the event at St. Fratty’s Day on YikYak.
5
So while some people may publicly complain about the term St. Fratty’s Day, the fraternities and
sororities are using the term themselves to describe the Saturday morning event that occurs the week
before winter finals at Cal Poly. It originated with Greek Life at 348 Hathway. Tens of thousands of other
college students and other people are also using the term. Conflating St. Fratty’s Day with St. Patrick’s
Day only causes confusion because they are not the same event and happen on completely different
dates.
More complete information and documentation about the history of St. Fratty’s Day in San Luis Obispo
and the events since 2022, is at StFrattys.com.
Halloweekend
Halloweekend is the three-night neighborhood takeover of thousands of people who walk down
sidewalks and the middle of the streets in Alta Vista and Monterey Heights to attend mostly fraternity
parties at fraternity houses. Pedestrians blocked the streets in the neighborhood and street parties
began to form in 2023. Most of the fraternities are operating illegally in R1 and R2 neighborhoods or
without Conditional Use Permits (CUPs) in R4 zones. And the maximum occupancy of a CUP for a
fraternity operating legally would not allow for a large party, but the fraternities ignore the max
occupancy limitations, in violation of their CUPs.
There was a surge in the volume of people in the neighborhoods for Halloweekend in 2022, just like St.
Fratty’s Day in 2022. And the number of people doubled for Halloweekend in 2023. SLOPD did not
adequately handle the event either year, but 2023 was especially bad. SNAP students were dispatched
to most parties, which is shown in SLOPD’s dispatch log, indicated by a response from “P1” instead of
a four number SLOPD unit.
One enormous party at an illegal fraternity house for Theta Chi, near our home, was cleared by a senior
SLOPD officer as “unable to locate” even though there was video evidence of people spilling into the
street at the time the officer cleared the call as unable to locate. It was obvious that the officer did not
go to the property because the overflowing fraternity party could be heard and seen for blocks,
including from our home. Minutes after the SLOPD officer cleared the call, and after another call was
made to SLOPD, the party was cited by a different SLOPD officer with 200 people listed on the citation.
Over a dozen loud fraternity parties were not cited by SLOPD on Halloweekend 2023, even though
there was video documentation showing the noisy parties. When SLOPD Police Chief Rick Scott was
questioned about why this happened with the specific addresses listed, his response was that SLOPD
officers followed policy. That was his answer, without any explanation about why so many noisy parties,
were cleared as negative violations by SLOPD or SNAP, despite video documentation of the parties.
6
After enduring two nights of absolute hell, I emailed all Councilmembers on Saturday morning and
invited you over to see for yourselves on Saturday night. No one took me up on my offer and again,
Saturday night was a complete nightmare that could not be escaped if you lived in the neighborhood.
Although the City subsequently adopted a Safety Enhancement Zone in 2024 for weekends leading up
to Halloween, in 2024 the Halloweekend event took place over TWO weekends, before and after
Halloween. Therefore, the impact was split between two separate events.
This year, Halloween is on a Friday, which is the perfect storm for Halloweekend to be a three-night
hellscape for the neighborhood on Thursday 10/30/2025, Friday 10/31/2025 and Saturday 11/1/2025.
Yo u should take the time to visit the neighborhood and see what the residents must live through for
three nights every year. Hopefully, SLOPD has planned for extra staff, including bicycle officers and foot
patrol, and will not send SNAP students to the enormous parties at documented fraternity houses in the
neighborhoods. Proactive enforcement is the only way to prevent the event from being so disruptive
and gaining momentum in future years.
In 2023, St. Patrick’s Day and St. Fratty’s Day were back-to-back on a Friday and Saturday, and that
was a turning point that allowed the momentum of the event to double in size and become more out of
control in 2024. This year, 2025, the same could happen with Halloweekend if SLOPD is not proactive
in its enforcement, shutting down parties and people gathering in the streets, before the disturbances
adversely affect those living in the neighborhoods.
Finding 2. The city has not effectively engaged in working together with community
stakeholders to find solutions for ongoing off-campus issues that negatively impact
neighborhoods such as code enforcement, noise issues, trespassing, property damage, and
unruly events.
City Response: (F2) The City disagrees with this finding.
The City is (1) not facing reality or (2) being deceptive. As a stakeholder directly affected by the off-
campus issues that negatively affect our neighborhood, and a representative of many of my neighbors
who are too afraid to speak up because fraternity members have actually harmed neighbors’ pets and
property when they reported problems to the fraternity’s landlord, I can unequivocally say that the
Grand Jury is 100% correct in its Finding that the city has not EFFECTIVELY engaged in working
together with community stakeholders regarding the ongoing issues listed.
Citing city policy from a decade ago does not change the current facts of the matter, which was the
subject of the Grand Jury investigation. I realize that the Grand Jury report has now become political,
which is extremely unfortunate. If the Grand Jury report was positive for the City, I’m sure that
information would be announced and promoted by the City and there would be no denials about the
good news.
The Grand Jury spent many months investigating, gathering evidence mostly provided by the City itself,
including interviews with City Staff. As mentioned, the Grand Jury requested interviews with two police
officers and their appearance at the requested interview was blocked by SLOPD/City leadership. The
testimony of those officers would have clarified some matters outlined in one of the Grand Jury
complaints.
The jurors visited the neighborhood and witnessed the conditions firsthand. None of the City staff live in
the neighborhoods, and when I have invited you Councilmembers to visit multiple times, you have not
accepted my invitation.
7
During the Grand Jury’s investigation over the past year, no one had any idea what the report would
say until the report was released. Many residents are sickened to witness the City’s response and be
gaslighted by City administration. Rather than using this opportunity for growth and to turn the tide on a
horrible problem, the City is stubbornly digging in its heels and has disagreed with every single Finding
of the Grand Jury.
The City cites policies and data from 15 years ago, when dozens of illegal fraternity operations did not
exist in the neighborhoods. Our family lived in Alta Vista 15 years ago, and there were only a couple of
illegal fraternities down on Hathway Avenue. Now, there are over 50 full-fledged fraternities that hold
fraternity-related events in Alta Vista and Monterey Heights. Our home is literally surrounded by illegal
fraternity houses that hold fraternity-related events.
The noise complaint data from 15 years ago has nothing to do with the current problem that was
investigated by the Grand Jury. Things have become dire for the year-round and other residents in Alta
Vista and Monterey Heights due to the illegal fraternity operations. Noise complaints to SLOPD over the
past 10 years have remained consistent and for the past five years, there have been about 1400 noise
complaints per year. The large, disruptive parties with 50-200 people are mostly at fraternity houses.
Many year-round residents have moved out of the neighborhoods in the last 15 years because the
noise has become impossible to live with. We also no longer have a Neighborhood Outreach Manager,
as we did 15 years ago, where neighborhood meetings with her and the SLOPD Neighborhood Officers
were common. Current City policy and the way things are handled, including the cooperation with
neighborhood groups and RQN, has also changed significantly for the worse, especially since 2021
when I first began communicating with the City about the noise problems at fraternity houses.
Also, SLOPD’s data isn’t correct. There have been multiple times when my calls do not show up on the
SLOPD log. After I realized that my calls were missing from SLOPD logs, and being told that I must be
mistaken, I began taking screenshots of my calls to SLOPD. I also documented the date and time with
video of the fraternity party. There are multiple times when my documented calls to SLOPD for huge,
loud fraternity parties near our home were not shown on the SLOPD dispatch log.
Regardless of the data around noise complaints, the larger concern is that documented fraternities
illegally operating in the neighborhoods are still operating, and have increased since 2021, hosting
large fraternity-related events and creating an environment that makes it impossible to rest or sleep in
those neighborhoods every weekend of the academic year, beginning on Thursday each week. Those
are the facts. Watch the videos. Look at the addresses listed on Cal Poly’s AB 524 report published
10/1/2023 which I provided to the City numerous times. The fraternities are still operating at those
addresses.
Many of the illegal fraternity houses have egregious histories of noise complaints and citations, yet
there are no consequences except for citation fines, which don’t seem to matter to the fraternities as
the situation has become worse. Fraternities have financial resources, and their Nationals help pay
those fines. (See the “Deferred Recruitment Compromise” reached after Carson Starkey’s hazing death
and President Armstrong deferred freshmen from joining a fraternity for three months, until winter
quarter. Lobbyists from the North American Interfraternity Conference flew to San Luis Obispo to
convince Cal Poly to revert back to allowing freshmen to rush in the fall. The bottom line was that it was
about money. Fraternities have money and citation fines don’t impact them much. More information is
here: https://howtoruinaneighborhood.com/illegal-fraternity-houses/)
Documented fraternity houses are allowed to clear their citation history through SLOPD’s Early
Removal Program and start over with a warning and $0 DAC - or two - before they are again cited for
noise with progressively increasing fines. That is not acceptable. The City should have a program that
flags these egregious offenders and, most importantly, shuts down the illegal fraternity operations.
8
The City, including SLOPD and Community Development, and even you, have been provided with
mountains of documentation of the problems, and yet the City has failed to stop the operation of the
documented illegal fraternity houses. They are all still operating! The neighborhoods are, as the Grand
Jury found, nearly unlivable for most people. That is the truth. The City has not effectively worked with
the residents to solve this ongoing problem.
SLOPD has not cooperated in working with the residents. I sent you video footage from our security
surveillance that showed SLOPD Officer John Stevens criticizing the year-round residents for being
oversensitive about noise, as he told the noisemaker (who got a citation because he was, indeed,
violating the noise ordinance and woke us up) that a “neighbor who is a frequent reporter” called about
the noise. Officer Stevens specifically stated that SLOPD’s policy is that they don’t look for noise
violations. Officer Stevens also falsely told the noisemaker that RQN goes out looking for noise
violations to call into SLOPD. Officer Stevens has never met me or anyone in my family. RQN is also
not familiar with him. But his narrative came from somewhere. Where did he get these negative
impressions about the caller or about RQN? How did he know who made the noise complaint and/or
classify them as a “frequent reporter”? And why would he tell that to the offender? SLOPD officers
criticizing residents who call in noise complaints for legitimate noise violations or making false
statements about RQN is not consistent with the City’s claims that it is working with community
members and/or finding solutions for issues that negatively impact neighborhood, such as noise issues.
SLOPD Police Chief Rick Scott has changed his narrative about various issues, including noise and St.
Fratty’s Day, depending upon who he is speaking with. He was not honest during his briefings to
Council after St. Fratty’s Day in previous years. He also lied, denying he made statements after an
SCLC meeting that were witnessed by multiple people, when he claimed someone would have to die or
have catastrophic damage to their property (e.g. roof collapse) before St. Fratty’s Day would be shut
down. During the same conversation, he told the homeowner that it was their responsibility to protect
their own property from trespassers and damage, and the City had immunity.
Police Chief Rick Scott also threatened the Neighborhood Representative on the Student Community
Liaison Committee (SCLC), Mila Vujovich-LaBarre, because she brought up SLOPD’s lack of
enforcement of noisy parties at illegal fraternity houses in the neighborhood during an SCLC meeting.
He was apparently offended and perceived Ms. Vujovich-LaBarre’s statements about the lack of
enforcement and calls not showing up on the SLOPD log as personal criticism in front of the SCLC,
whose membership includes Cal Poly leadership and the City Manager.
SLOPD Public Affairs Manager Christine Wallace followed Ms. Vujovich-LaBarre out of the SCLC
meeting and told her to never bring up the lack of enforcement by SLOPD at the SCLC meetings again.
The next day, Police Chief Rick Scott sent a “complaint” to the chair of RQN, who has nothing to do
with Ms. Vujovich-LaBarre’s representation as the Geographical Neighborhood Representative. He
inferred that SLOPD wouldn’t be as cooperative with RQN if the narrative about the lack of enforcement
did not stop. In his email, he tells the chair of RQN that the matter was addressed with Ms. Vujovich-
LaBarre after the SCLC meeting, but that the RQN Representative, Brett Cross, left early so SLOPD
was not able to tell him to stop criticizing SLOPD.
SLOPD Police Chief Rick Scott incorrectly stated that Ms. Vujovich-LaBarre was “ill informed” and that
she was “NOT correct” when she said that SLOPD did not cite a party at 348 Hathway. In fact, her
account of what happened was 100% correct. On Friday, 2/9/2024, there was a large, loud party at 348
Hathway which was called into SLOPD dispatch. Video evidence showed that the illegal fraternity
operation at 348 Hathway (Phi Sigma Kappa) was hosting a very loud party with the Delta Gamma
sorority, and there were banners for the sorority hung at the party. That call was missing from the
SLOPD log and SLOPD did not respond to the party.
9
The following day, Saturday 2/10/2024, there was another fraternity party at 348 Hathway and the
fraternity members did not answer the door to SLOPD, so they were issued a $1000 fine.
In his email, SLOPD Police Chief Rick Scott was referring to the call on Saturday, 2/10/2024, saying
that SLOPD spent a great deal of time resolving the issue. But Ms. Vujovich-LaBarre was referring
to the call on Friday, 2/9/2024, when SLOPD never responded to the noisy fraternity party at 348
Hathway when Phi Sigma Kappa was hosting the Delta Gamma sorority.
It was later discovered that SLOPD Officer Sandoval saw a party near 348 Hathway, at 274 Hathway,
and cancelled the call made for 348 Hathway without responding because she assumed the call was
meant for 274 Hathway. However, she did not cite the party she witnessed at 274 Hathway. She never
went to 348 Hathway and the party continued for some time after she left the neighborhood.
In any event, Ms. Vujovich-LaBarre’s assertions were correct but Police Chief Rick Scott never admitted
the mistake or apologized for attacking her in such an unprofessional manner. People should be able to
bring up legitimate problems with enforcement, and one of the purposes of SCLC is to resolve issues
between the college-student community and the neighborhoods. Now, Police Chief Scott’s bias against
Ms. Vujovich-LaBarre and the RQN Representative, Brett Cross, at the SCLC meetings is obvious.
Here is SLOPD Police Chief Rick Scott’s email:
10
Indeed, Police Chief Rick Scott has stopped cooperating with RQN and other residents since this
incident. He has specifically refused meetings that were requested.
The City claims that City Leadership Team members regularly attend RQN meetings to provide updates
and gather feedback. I would like the City to define “regularly”. I have attended RQN meetings for
years, and there were very few meetings with the City Leadership Team members. The City claims it
has a productive and cooperative relationship with RQN, which is not true. Don’t take it from me. Ask
the Board Members of RQN for yourself. And believe the Grand Jury report.
The City cites SCLC as a resource, but I urge you to speak with the two Neighborhood Representatives
on SCLC (Mila Vujovich-LaBarre and Brett Cross) about how SCLC is addressing neighborhood
problems. Last year both Ms. Vujuvich-LaBarre and Mr. Cross asked that someone from the
neighborhood be included on the St. Fratty’s Day task force, and that never happened. The
resident/neighborhood representatives on SCLC are mostly ignored. The new Memorandum of
Understanding (MOU) proposes up to five more community members be added to SCLC who are not
necessarily impacted by neighborhood issues and the college-student community. Recruitment of new
representatives was presented to Chamber of Commerce members at Good Morning SLO. The
“mission” of SCLC was eliminated, and the “purpose” of SCLC has morphed with the new MOU.
For clarity, the MOU for the SCLC was rewritten by SLOPD Police Chief Rick Scott and Cal Poly
administrator Michelle Crawford over a year ago. It feels and appears that SCLC has become a political
PR committee that does not welcome conversations about problems in the neighborhoods, including
the illegal fraternity operations and SLOPD’s lack of enforcement of the noise ordinance. SCLC has
become more about information sharing and promoting Cal Poly or the City than ever before and less
about resolving issues brought forward by the neighborhood representative/RQN. The problem issues
are not discussed, and the neighborhood and RQN representatives are criticized or ignored. Cuesta
College was not included in the Google document when the MOU was rewritten by Rick Scott and
Michelle Crawford. Also, the County had not been involved in SCLC for years, until Steve emailed the
Supervisor last Spring and requested that she come to the meetings. Her assistant attended initially,
and then the Supervisor attended once.
The SCLC is subject to the Brown Act, but meetings are not recorded, and the Minutes are often
skewed, so there is no permanent record of what is actually said during the meetings. The City cites
SCLC as helping form policy within the City, and for this reason, those meetings should be recorded for
the public to access for transparency.
The City also claims it meets with Cal Poly leadership and gave presentations to Greek Life in January
and March 2025. During those presentations, Code Enforcement told Greek Life, including Cal Poly
staff that oversees Greek Life, that it is illegal for fraternities to hold fraternity events in the residential
neighborhoods. Just a few days after the presentation, the fraternities held events – illegally - in the
residential neighborhoods. They do not care about the City’s laws. They do not care about the impact
on the residents who live in the neighborhoods. You should believe what they do, not what they say.
Additionally, those events in the residential neighborhoods were registered with Cal Poly Greek Life
beforehand, so Cal Poly staff members Jason Mockford and Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola knew that the
fraternities were holding illegal events in the City when the presentations were made. Mr. Mockford
continued to defend the fraternities during SCLC meetings and objected to the term “illegal fraternities”
while, at the same time, enabling those illegal fraternity operations to wreak havoc on the City’s
neighborhoods and the residents who live here. When is enough, enough?
11
During the entire 2024-2025 academic year of SCLC meetings, which were recorded, not a single
representative from the City, including the mayor and councilmembers, backed up Ms. Vujovich-
LaBarre (Geographical Neighborhood Representative) or Brett Cross (RQN Representative). It was
especially troubling with Mr. Vujovich-LaBarre was unfairly criticized by the Cal Poly Interfraternity
Council president and no one came to her defense.
The City says that the code enforcement process is complicated by the annual turnover of residents at
properties, and the nature of complaints “which may range from small gatherings, such as a few people
having dinner or playing basketball, to large, disruptive parties.”
Let’s focus on the matter at hand that was investigated by the Grand Jury: ongoing large, noisy parties
at illegal fraternity operations of Cal Poly’s 19 fraternities – including Main Chapter Houses - in dozens
of documented illegal fraternity houses. Those documented addresses have not changed since they
were published by Cal Poly’s AB 524 report for the 2022-2023 academic year, except more illegal
fraternity houses have been added to the neighborhood. Every Main Chapter House for each fraternity
is at the same address today, in the Fall of 2025, as they were during the 2022-2023 academic year,
and they are continuing to operate illegally. It is not complicated. The City has not enforced its laws and
has allowed the illegal fraternity operations to continue, unabated, just as the Grand Jury report stated.
The basketball games cited in the City’s response likely refers to Delta Chi appealing a noise citation
for what they claim was a basketball game late at night, and the citation was dismissed by the SLO
hearing officer. Regarding that matter, the SLOPD Deputy Chief Brian Amoroso told the Planning
Commission that the SLO hearing officer was wrongly dismissing noise citations that were legitimate
noise violations because SLOPD’s body cameras minimize outside noise and focus on the one-to-one
conversation between the officer and the person they are talking to. For example, he said an extremely
loud gunshot will sound muffled on SLOPD’s body cam video. Noise from parties is not recorded
accurately on SLOPD’s body cam video.
According to Deputy Chief Amoroso, the SLO hearing officer has been “educated” by SLOPD since the
hearing officer dismissed Delta Chi’s noise citation. I don’t know how many legitimate noise citations for
noisy parties were dismissed by the hearing officer based on the issue with SLOPD’s body cam videos.
It’s still not clear whether SLOPD has a new system that records the actual noise, if they are using
decibel meters to accurately determine noise levels, or what guideline is used by the hearing officer
when someone appeals a noise citation.
I want to emphasize that my family and I enjoy our college student neighbors, watch out for them, and
help them whenever possible. We opened our home to them, offered our kitchen when they did not
have access to one, and allowed them to stay on our property when they didn’t have a roof over their
head. We also are not opposed to standard parties and are tolerant of noise to an extent. However, our
lives have been ruined by the enormous out-of-control fraternity parties at the dozens of illegal fraternity
houses in the neighborhood and their guests who loudly come and go and keep us awake throughout
each weekend when Cal Poly is in session. We also witness things that no one should have to see
because the Greek party culture is so toxic.
Recently, a group of young women on their way to a fraternity party stopped in front of our house and
forced one of the females in their group, a highly intoxicated female named Paige, onto her knees while
another one of the females put her fingers down Paige’s throat to force her to vomit in our yard, calling
it “pulling trig”. Paige said “no” multiple times and was groaning. The other girls ganged up and
intimidated Paige while one said, “Choke her.” Paige could barely stand up and they said they were
getting her ready to go hook up with a guy at the Phi Kappa Psi fraternity that is operating illegally near
our home. They told Paige she needed to look pretty to meet up with the guy while she was literally
unable to walk on her own. The entire incident is on video from our surveillance cameras. During the
same weekend, multiple people trespassed onto our property to use our front yard as a toilet.
12
These are not isolated incidents and have no place in residential neighborhoods! The neighborhood
has been ruined by illegal fraternity operations and the City has not made any progress in quelling the
problem. It is infuriating!!
Finding 3: The city has failed to effectively enforce municipal codes that prohibit fraternity and
sorority activity in R-1/R-2 zones in part due to the difficulty in identifying houses that are
hosting fraternity-type events, such as rush events and repeated parties. This inaction has
resulted in an increase in illegal fraternities holding events in residential neighborhoods making
these areas almost unlivable for most residents.
City Response: (F2) The City disagrees with this finding.
Grand Jury Recommendation 3: The SLO City Manager should develop and implement an
ongoing formal process to identify illegal fraternities to bring them into compliance.
The City claims this recommendation has been implemented but evidence shows that it isn’t true.
Every single Main Chapter House that was identified as illegally operating during the academic
year 2022-2023 is still operating today in Fall 2025. Not a single illegal fraternity operation has
been brought into compliance by the City. In fact, more illegal fraternity operations have been added
to the neighborhoods since Cal Poly’s first AB 524 Report in 2023.
The people who live in the neighborhoods continue to suffer the consequences of insanely disruptive
fraternity parties, screaming crowds passing by our homes throughout the night to and from those
fraternity parties, constant rideshare traffic, slamming doors, etc. It is like living near multiple nightclubs
in a residential neighborhood and is not an environment which is “livable” for most people. That’s the
reason there has been a mass exodus of year-round residents from the neighborhood.
• Are you able to recognize that?
• Can you admit the neighborhood is no longer an acceptable living environment?
• Do you think it’s okay for residents to have to endure constant noisy fraternity parties and the
peripheral problems with roving, intoxicated crowds coming and going from those parties?
• Have you considered what it must feel like to try to get rest or live in such an environment?
• What are you willing to do right now to change it?
If your answer is that you will continue to do what you’ve been doing for the past two years, which has
not changed anything, then you should not be sitting on the City Council because that does not
represent the best interest of your constituents.
The Grand Jury visited the neighborhood to see the situation for themselves. Have you gone to the
neighborhood during weekends when Cal Poly is in session? It has become increasingly worse since I
first noticed an increase in noise in Fall of 2021 and contacted the City after communicating with other
year-round residents in the neighborhood who also shared my experience. The noisy parties are mostly
attributed to illegal fraternity operations.
To be clear, there is no problem with the homes where fraternity members live that do not host
fraternity-related events. But for those that do, the City can legally compel Cal Poly to disclose those
addresses to the City per the CPRA. Cal Poly has refused to provide the addresses, despite the City’s
request, and the City has refused to hold Cal Poly accountable to the detriment of the City’s residents.
Cal Poly has the legal obligation to provide the addresses where fraternity events are held within the
City’s neighborhoods. The City Attorney, Christine Dietrick, agrees that Cal Poly has that legal
13
obligation. There is no exemption available to Cal Poly under the CPRA that allows Cal Poly to withhold
the addresses where fraternity-related events are held. An address does not contain any personally
identifiable information that would specifically identify a particular person and providing an address
does not violate privacy laws. There is substantial case law on this matter.
Please remember that Cal Poly is intentionally and actively hiding these addresses from the City and it
is harming the City’s neighborhoods! The failure of the City to use the tools that are available to protect
the residents of the City is wrong. The problem is long-standing, and it seems that you are siding with
Cal Poly against the residents when you, as our elected representatives, have failed to compel action to
protect us, especially considering the mountain of evidence, videos, etc. that have been provided to you
that prove the addresses and the continued disruptions at illegal fraternity operations.
Further, it seems the Code Enforcement is acting against the best interests of its residents. Every
fraternity advertises their fraternity events on social media with the addresses of the events and photos
of the events at their properties. This information has repeatedly been submitted to Code Enforcement,
and the complaints have repeatedly been dismissed as unfounded. The required standard of proof is
low and merely needs to show it is more likely than not a fraternity event. Why does the City dismiss
complaints where the fraternity has posted photos of the event at the documented fraternity address,
backed up with other videos and photos that also show the event happened?
The Grand Jury found these illegal fraternity operations to be unacceptable, yet you have not done
anything to stop them, and the problem has continued for years. I have sent noise reports to you with
the SLOPD logs showing the incredible resources expended to respond to these huge parties at illegal
fraternity houses, videos of the parties, and an enormous amount of documentation, but the problem
has only grown worse since 2021. I have asked for your assistance, and you have not helped. Some of
you have never responded to a single email I’ve sent. Those who did said that you’re having
conversations with Cal Poly, while Cal Poly continues to enable illegal fraternity operations and
disruptive events to invade our neighborhoods. These events are registered with Cal Poly beforehand,
according to Greek Life Event Registration Policy.
Cal Poly knows the addresses of these events, and they know it is illegal for the fraternities to hold
these events, but they are sanctioning these illegal events anyway. Meanwhile, you are “working” with
them by having conversations while nothing changes. It is insane. Other people, including the Grand
Jury, see how crazy this is. Please be more proactive in protecting the neighborhoods from this illegal
activity. The problem is extreme and has negatively altered the lives of residents in the neighborhoods.
The City claims it has investigated “over 100 complaints and opened 42 enforcement cases related to
unpermitted fraternity activity or conditional use permit violations.” To clarify, each individual address
that was listed on Cal Poly’s AB 524 Report is a separate “complaint”. The city sent out over 60 in the
Spring of 2024. These 100+ complaints are not complaints made by separate people. Residents
generally complain to SLOPD about the noise from fraternity parties. No one was aware that
Community Development and Code Enforcement oversee fraternity operations, or that fraternities are
illegal in R-1 and R-2 neighborhoods. SLOPD officers don’t even know that they are illegal in R-1 and
R-2 neighborhoods, and do not know which properties in R-4 neighborhoods have permits and which
don’t! There has not been effective communication between SLOPD and Code Enforcement related to
the fraternity issue, including legal and illegal fraternities.
For example, Code Enforcement never asked SLOPD for records for fraternities with CUPs to track
their citation history or number of people at parties that were cited, in accordance with their CUPs.
Code Enforcement began reviewing the records after they became aware of the Grand Jury
investigation at the end of 2024. I am not sure if Code Enforcement will continue to proactively get
those records from SLOPD since it was never done prior to the investigation.
14
After Code Enforcement sent letters to property owners about their properties operating illegally as
fraternities in R-1 and R-2 neighborhoods or without CUPs in Spring 2024, there was no follow up. The
fraternities are still illegally operating at those addresses! Events at those addresses are still
advertised on the fraternities’ social media pages, photos of events at the properties are posted on
social media, and events at those addresses continue to disrupt the peace of the neighborhoods every
weekend that Cal Poly is in session. As mentioned, I have reported several events, including
screenshots of events from the fraternities’ Instagram pages and photos of the events, and my
complaints are routinely dismissed by Code Enforcement as unfounded.
Code Enforcement does not work evenings and weekends, when these events are happening,
therefore they are not citing them. And when a complaint is made, it is dismissed unless City staff
personally witness the event or the fraternity admits that it happened. Under the present circumstances,
the fraternities will never be shut down by the City. The neighborhood residents will continue to suffer.
The City Claims it Fines Illegal Fraternity Properties
The City’s response says “When events occur at these houses that violation the Municipal Code, the
code enforcement team follows the City standards and practices to notify the occupants and property
owners of violations and assess fines for non-compliance, as directed by City regulations. Fines and
enforcement actions escalate if repeat events occur that are found to violate the Municipal
Code.”
Below is a list of documented fraternity houses, listed in Cal Poly’s AB 524 Report and on Cal Poly
fraternities’ social media pages. Of 19 fraternities, there are four CUPs noted in bold font, including
Delta Chi. Delta Chi’s CUP was revoked by the Planning Commission but has appealed to the City
Council to be heard next month.
The Main Chapter Houses for each fraternity are the first address shown after each fraternity name,
underlined, and all of them are still operating today. Please ask the City staff to provide
documentation showing the actual fines assessed for non-compliance and repeat violations of
illegal fraternity operations.
• How many of the 50+ properties that continue to operate illegally as fraternities have actually
been fined by Code Enforcement for illegal fraternity operations?
• How much has the City collected in fines for illegal fraternity operations?
• Why are these illegal fraternities continuing to operate if they have been documented as illegal?
As mentioned, none of the documented Main Chapter Houses have stopped operating, and 95%
of the documented satellite fraternity houses continue to operate. A couple have been sold since
2021 and are no longer fraternities, so they are no longer on the list. If the properties are being fined,
why haven’t the property owners stopped the fraternity operations? I don’t believe that the City is
holding these property owners accountable because the fraternities have never stopped holding
fraternity events at those addresses, and they are openly advertised on social media.
Here is one example: Jerry Lenthall, a former SLOPD officer, owns Zeta Beta Tau’s (ZBT) Main Chapter
Houses at 654 & 658 Graves Avenue and a ZBT satellite house at 1928 Garfield. The addresses are
zoned R-4 so Mr. Lenthall could apply for a CUP. In Spring 2024, Code Enforcement sent Notice to Mr.
Lenthall for illegal fraternity operations at these addresses. He responded that he did not want the
fraternity to operate at those locations and would not apply for a CUP. However, the fraternity has
continued to operate and hold fraternity-related events at each of these addresses. Some
documentation includes posts on ZBT’s social media advertising events at the addresses, photos of the
events on ZBT’s Instagram page that clearly show the events happening at those properties, etc. ZBT
never stopped operating at these addresses but there are no consequences.
15
This same scenario is true over and over again for over 50 other properties within the City but most are
in R-1, single family neighborhoods are not legally allowed to get a CUP or operate there. How many
have been fined? If the City is truly assessing fines, they aren’t working because the properties are still
holding fraternity-related events.
Also, why do SNAP students continue to be dispatched by SLOPD to documented fraternity
addresses? If the City has identified the illegal fraternity operations, have they shared that list of
addresses with SLOPD?
Over a year ago, the Planning Commissioners suggested that Community Development and SLOPD
need to communicate better and share information with one another. Up until the present time, SLOPD
continues to dispatch SNAP students to many of these addresses, including Main Chapter Houses,
therefore is not using Code Enforcement’s list of documented illegal fraternities to instruct their calls for
noise complaints and ensure that SNAP is not sent to documented fraternity addresses.
SLOPD also clears the citation history of documented illegal fraternities through the “Early Removal
Program” which allows the fraternity members and the property owner to escape accountability and
financial consequences for their continuing, disruptive and illegal fraternity events. These property
owners received letters from Code Enforcement, notifying them of the illegal fraternity operations at
their properties. But they ignored the City’s warnings, continued operating illegal fraternities, and were
subsequently allowed to clear their citation history through Christine Wallace at SLOPD.
This is the crux of the matter. The City claims it has developed a formal process to identify the
illegal operations and has brought them into compliance, but that is false. None of the illegal
fraternity houses have been brought into compliance. Each of the documented illegal fraternity
operations continue to operate, hosting fraternity-related events and disrupting the
neighborhood on a continual basis, and residents who live in these neighborhoods do not have
the peaceful enjoyment of their property or ability to rest on weekends when Cal Poly is in
session.
Most of the addresses listed below have a history of noise complaints to SLOPD because they are
fraternity houses in residential neighborhoods where people need to rest and sleep.
Fraternity Address Zone/Notes re: CUP violations last academic year 1. Alpha Gamma Rho 132 California Blvd R-4, NO CUP
2. Alpha Epsilon Pi 280 California Blvd 2 Noise Citations, 150 ppl, 100 ppl (CUP allows 25)
331 Hathway Ave R-2 Zone
3. Alpha Sigma Phi 1218/1220 Bond St R-2 Zone
299 Albert Dr R-1 Zone
4. Beta Theta Pi 1327 E. Foothill Blvd R-4, NO CUP
1220 Fredericks St R-2 Zone
377 Albert Dr R-1 Zone
5. Delta Chi 1236 Monte Vista CUP Revoked & Revocation Appealed to Council
6. Delta Sigma Phi 1684/1688 Mill St R-2 Zone
Note: Delta Sigma Phi has moved to 244 California Blvd this academic year. The property was
formerly Kappa Kappa Gamma sorority and I am not sure the conditions of the CUP.
16
7. Delta Upsilon 720 E. Foothill Blvd CUP Revoked
1700 Fredericks St R-1 Zone
281 Albert Dr R-1 Zone
388 Chaplin Ln R-1 Zone
1861 Slack St R-1 Zone
1868 Loomis R-1 Zone
8. Kappa Sigma 281 Hathway Ave R-1 Zone
322 Hathway Ave R-2 Zone
108 Crandall Wy R-4, NO CUP
1900 McCollum R-1
293 Albert Dr R-1
1861 Hope St R-1
9. Lambda Chi Alpha 1264 E. Foothill 5 Noise Citations, 1 w/200 ppl (CUP allows 48 ppl)
1241 Monte Vista Pl Included in CUP
1243 Monte Vista Pl Included in CUP
1245 Monte Vista Pl Included in CUP
1251 Monte Vista Pl Included in CUP
171 Orange Dr R-1 Zone
12 Hathway Ave R-1 Zone
253 Albert Dr R-1 Zone
278 Albert Dr R-1 Zone
285 Chaplin Ln R-1 Zone
178 Chaplin Ln R-1 Zone
220 Kentucky St R-1 Zone
10. Phi Delta Theta 260 Chaplin Ln R-1 Zone
251 Highland R-1 Zone
568 Ellen Wy R-2 Zone
11. Phi Gamma Delta (FIJI)1229 Fredericks St R-2 Zone
12. Phi Kappa Psi 1335 E. Foothill Blvd 2 Noise Citations (CUP allows 15 ppl)
237 Albert Dr R-1 Zone
2061 Hope St R-1 Zone
1271 Stafford R-2 Zone
1273 Stafford R-2 Zone
1275 Stafford R-2 Zone
346 Grand Ave R-1 Zone
1740 Fredericks R-1 Zone
1276 Bond R-1 Zone
13. Phi Sigma Kappa 348/350 Hathway Ave R-2 Zone
1908 Loomis R-1 Zone
14. Pi Kappa Phi 740 W. Foothill Blvd County
66 Rafael Way R-1 Zone
15. Sigma Nu 1304 E. Foothill Blvd CUP Revoked
1292 Foothill Blvd R-4, NO CUP
1621 McCollum R-1 Zone
17
290 Chaplin Ln R-1 Zone
1841 Slack St R-1 Zone
1632 Fredericks St R-1 Zone
1541 Slack St R-1 Zone
385 Chaplin Ln R-1 Zone
16. Sigma Phi Epsilon 2090 Hays Street R-1 Zone
17. Sigma Pi 1525 Slack Street R-1 Zone
124 Stenner St R-4 Zone, NO CUP
1555 Slack Street R-1 Zone
18. Theta Chi 248/250 Grand Ave R-1 Zone
1844 McCollum R-1 (Shares backyard with 248/250 Grand)
496 Kentucky R-2 Zone
1350 Stafford St R-2 Zone
1820 Hope St R-1 Zone
1238 Foothill Blvd R-4, NO CUP
1441 Slack St R-1 Zone
1661 McCollum R-1 Zone
19. Zeta Beta Tau 654 & 658 Graves Ave R-4 Zone, NO CUP
1928 Garfield R-4, same owner as Graves (Jerry Lenthall)
1626 Fredericks St R-1 Zone
244 Albert Dr R-1 Zone
2044 Loomis R-1 Zone
212 Albert Dr R-1 Zone
2044 McCollum R-1 Zone
205 Albert Dr R-1 Zone
The City claims it is not going to formally address this issue for a year from now. Why is the City waiting
for another academic year before addressing this issue with the public? The matter is urgent and is
affecting the health, safety and welfare of the City’s residents.
Imagine if the effort and urgency that the City has put into responding to the Grand Jury report was,
instead, used to bring illegal fraternity operations into compliance. We would not be in this dire situation
if those resources were used to solve the issue.
Cal Poly has taken the position that it is up to the City to enforce its laws. The illegal fraternity
operations are happening within the city limits, not on Cal Poly’s campus, therefore Cal Poly does not
believe it is its problem. Cal Poly staff who oversee fraternities told me that I should report the illegal
operations to Code Enforcement or SLOPD. Here is an email from Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola, Cal Poly
staff that oversees the fraternities at Cal Poly:
18
I have reported these problems since 2021, yet they have only become worse, with more fraternities
renting homes in the neighborhoods and converting them to full-fledged fraternity houses, hosting
fraternity-related events at those properties. There is no accountability for Cal Poly and the City’s
residents are paying the price.
Finally, it is strange that the City is now rejecting the term “illegal fraternities” when they are, indeed,
legally defined as “fraternities” per SLO’s laws and regulations, and they are operating “illegally”,
according to those same laws and regulations. In my email correspondence with the City Attorney,
she also referred to the illegal fraternity operations as “illegal fraternities”.
19
Why is the City now choosing to make the term “illegal fraternities” an issue? Is it because Cal Poly
administration overseeing Greek Life has said they don’t like that term? Would you prefer “illegal
fraternity houses”? Many of these are Main Chapter Houses, not so-called satellite houses. The City’s
laws do not differentiate between the two and consider them all “fraternities” if members live there and
they host fraternity-related events. The properties are illegal fraternities if they are operating in R-1 and
R-2 zones, where it is illegal to operate, or without a CUP.
During an SCLC meeting in the Spring 2025, a Cal Poly representative, Jason Mockford, said he
wanted people to stop saying “illegal fraternities”. Mr. Mockford oversees Cal Poly’s Greek Life and
approves the illegal parties and events in the City’s neighborhoods that are registered by fraternities
with the Greek Life office 5-10 days beforehand. He knows all the addresses of the illegal fraternity
operations, and understands that these events are illegal, yet they are “sanctioned” by him anyway.
(See “Sanctioned Events” in Cal Poly’s AB 524 Report) Mr. Mockford also refused to discuss the
ongoing negative impact on the City’s neighborhoods by those fraternities during the SCLC meetings
when it was brought up by the Neighborhood Representative and the RQN Representative.
It appears the City now claims it doesn’t use the term “illegal fraternities” because Mr. Mockford and Cal
Poly don’t like that term. Are you now siding with Cal Poly? Please stop doing that. Please put the
wellbeing on the City’s residents first and stop accommodating the nonsensical demands of Cal Poly.
We - your constituents - desperately need you to focus on the extremely adverse impacts that these
illegal fraternity operations are having on the neighborhoods and DO SOMETHING to stop them.
It is not accurate for you to claim that Recommendation 3 has been implemented. Please cite the facts
rather than responding to the Grand Jury with irrelevant and misleading information.
Finding 4. The city has failed to consistently enforce CUPs such as the requirements for an
annual list of parties and events, notification to neighbors, and parking plans. Strict
enforcement of these conditions would contribute to a reduction of the disturbances in the
neighborhoods.
City Response: (F4) The City disagrees with this finding.
The City has not proactively enforced the CUP requirements. Community Development oversees the
CUPs for fraternity operations, but was not familiar with the conditions of the CUPs and was not aware
that most fraternities do not have CUPs. SLOPD has a list of “premised” fraternity properties that are
not eligible for a DAC, but many of those do not have CUPs to operate.
The City does not work proactively to determine if violations of conditions are happening based on
SLOPD’s records of noise citations, which also list the number of people at the event. CUPs have
maximum occupancy limitations that are often violated, as shown on noise citations received by
fraternity members at those that have CUPs.
The City’s response says it enforces the conditions of CUPs when violations are reported and
substantiated. They do not proactively oversee the CUPs and whether the conditions are violated.
Community Development knows what the conditions are listed in the CUPs that allow a fraternity to
operate. Downtown bars also have conditions for operation, such as maximum occupancy, and those
things are monitored by the City. Yet violations of conditions for fraternity CUPs have been ignored
which have led to a permissive environment and a lack of accountability.
The City, including Code Enforcement and SLOPD, have never reported violations of conditions of the
CUPs. It was the residents who reported them. In fact, every fraternity CUP had multiple violations of
20
the conditions of their CUPs when this issue was first reported to the City in fall 2023. But some
fraternity CUPs were not reviewed, even though they had 4 or more recent violations of their CUPs.
Before that, for at least 20 years, the City had never looked at the CUPS and fraternities were operating
even though they had many violations of the conditions of their CUPs.
Community Development should be proactive in enforcing the conditions of the CUPs, and also citing
illegal fraternity operations in the neighborhoods to allow residents to have the peaceful enjoyment of
their properties. To that end, please take real action to implement measures, including the Grand Jury’s
Recommendations, that will make meaningful change in the neighborhoods and shut down the illegal
fraternity operations.
Thank you for taking the time to sort out this issue We are counting on you to do the right thing.
Sincerely,
Kathie Walker