The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About9/16/2025 Item 7b, Smith carolyn smith < To:E-mail Council Website Subject:Agenda Item 7.b. Grand Jury Report Response Mayor Stewart and Council members, The response from the city to the Grand Jury Report is very disappointing. NOISE COMPLAINTS: There are so many inaccuracies and misleading comments in this response regarding noise complaints it's difficult to know where to begin. Citing ordinances that were made over 10 years ago is an attempt to claim something is being done when nothing is being done. Noise complaints have remained nearly the same level for 10 years. After they initially dropped in 2010 and 2011, after the revised noise ordinance and landlord citations were created (see the PD Report link below), they've hoovered between 1400-1500 each year. The line showing a downward trend on the chart is misleading since reduction is only by a few and in 2024 they went up with 1,422 calls. Additionally, so far this year there are 70 more noise complaints than last year per the PD police log. So, the complaint numbers haven't really improved, resulting in the city's statements being very misleading and disingenuous. Expanding the Safety Enhancement Zone ordinance for Halloween and St. Fratty's Day have had minimal effect, if any, since the citation rate is so low. The vast majority of noise complaints are issued negative violations which doesn't deter future parties-- many very large parties--from occurring. Additionally, parties with amplified music (and there are many) often don't even get a noise citation, perpetuating this problem. Many residences in the Alta Vista area have now become "concert venues" and "event venues" with amplified music, large crowds, and some even charging admission. The city has failed to do anything effective over the past 10+ years to mitigate these problems. Residents have requested that CSO's be utilized for noise complaints from Thursday through Sunday but the PD refuses to do so. Why? They were very effective in issuing noise citations before this year's St. Fratty's Day event using a zero tolerance policy. Why can't that be done every weekend and please don't just accept feeble excuses from the PD for not utilizing them in this way. SNAP personnel can't issue citations and aren't supposed to be responding to fraternity parties or repeat offenders, but they are being sent to these parties, oftentimes intimidated by the large number of drunken attendees so the party is not cited. Why not make a policy that CSO's, using a zero tolerance policy, be utilized for noise complaints every weekend, particularly in the Alta Vista and Monterey Heights areas. More citations would send a clear message that these disturbing behaviors are not acceptable in our residential neighborhoods where residents and their children need to sleep. https://www.slocity.org/home/showpublisheddocument/35863/638598504467930000 ILLEGAL FRATERNITY OPERATIONS: Further, the city is not making any significant effort to deal with the illegal fraternity operations activities in R-1 and R-2 neighborhoods citing insufficient money to hire the needed help to appropriately enforce our zoning code not allowing for this activity in R-1 and R-2 neighborhoods. It's insulting and a slap in the face to residents when their elected representatives says they have no money to help them with a severely disturbing problem in their neighborhoods. It's especially upsetting when the city constantly sends out announcements that they're providing funding for so many other less important issues in the city. Your residents' peace and safety should be a top priority, and lack of funding should not be an excuse to perform your 1 fiduciary duty to protect your residents from this illegal activity in residential neighborhoods. There is no "right to party," so these activities should not be allowed per our Municipal Code. It's very disappointing that the city is so intent in defending itself, that no one will suggest any viable solutions that would help resolve the undocumented fraternity operations from which residents in the Alta Vista and Monterey Heights areas are experiencing. Any efforts that the city has made over the years has failed to even make a dent in the problem. In fact, there are more and more homes being operated as fraternities in R-1 and R-2 neighborhoods each year. If they're not stopped, why wouldn't they continue and get worse. The fine schedule for any violations that have been issued is so low, the property owner has no problem with paying a $100 fine and then allowing the fraternity to continue to operaton on their property. How about revamping the fine schedule so that when a property owner receives a zoning code violation for allowing a fraternity to illegally operate on their property the fine is $1,000 or more? Why isn't that effort even mentioned in your response to the Grand Jury? ST. FRATTY'S DAY: While the city FINALLY addressed the problem of the annual St. Fratty's Street party this year, the neighborhood in which the event took place suffered for several years before the police department and the city worked with Cal Poly to come up with a viable solution. Even the City Council had demanded that a solution be found to no avail. It appears the majority of the solution was created only after the Grand Jury contacted the city about the complaints from residents. The city's response celebrates this solution without admitting that they let it go on for 3 years before they finally created an effective plan. Each year prior to 2025, the police chief indicated their response to the event was "successful" because no one got severely hurt or died. It certainly wasn't successful to the residents who suffered through the full day and night of drunken activities and parties. After the event in 2024 which was bigger than ever due to the lack of an effective deterrent in previous years, the police chief announced to the city council that there would be a city task force, with residents included, to try to come up with an effective solution to stop the event. That never happened and in fact, the police chief joined the Cal Poly task force, which had no resident input. While residents in the affected area are hoping that the same or similar solution to resolve this event will continue next year, they're already concerned that it may not, resulting in the event reemerging in full force. NEIGHBORHOOD INVOLVEMENT: The city claims in this report that they meet "regularly" with city neighborhood and residents' groups. That is not correct. While there have been a few meetings with RQN and city staff over the past couple of years, they have been primarily instigated by RQN. I'm unaware of any city meetings with Alta Vista and Monterey Heights residents. When suggestions and requests are made for help in neighborhoods by residents and asked to be included, they're often given excuses as to why the city can't help. Regular meetings with residents and the city that existed in previous years have since disappeared. SCLC has morphed into a "do nothing" committee and in fact now discourages resident representatives on the committee to keep quiet about the town/gown problems the neighborhoods are experiencing. CAL POLY: The city blaming Cal Poly for not helping and Cal Poly defending themselves doesn't help the situation. While residents keep hearing that the city and Cal Poly are in constant discussions and meetings, nothing seems to get resolved. That should not be acceptable to the city. In particular, when Cal Poly refused to abide by AB 524, like the majority of other CSU's have done, why hasn't the city tried to adjudicate this issue for a judicial decision since Cal Poly thinks they are abiding by the law even when our city attorney has said in public that she disagrees. The city has standing to do so, but has failed to file a Writ. These are your residents, your constituents, and they're asking for help and the city should do whatever is necessary to make Cal Poly cooperate, if they refuse to do so. It's obvious, from the lack of progress, that meetings and discussions with Cal Poly aren't going to resolve this problem and one has to wonder why they continue to fail. Perhaps this symbiotic relationship with Cal Poly has gotten to the point where it doesn't matter to the city that 2 they're committing illegal activities in our neighborhoods as long as they bring much financial benefit to the city. If so, that's an utter failure to residents, your constituents. The city's Grand Jury response is so defensive that it fails to address solutions that could help these neighborhood problems. Please revise your response to include some constructive efforts to help those living in these nearly unlivable neighborhoods. Thank you. Carolyn Smith 3