Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout9/16/2025 Item 7b, Walker (2) kathie walker <kathiewalkerslo@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, To:Marx, Jan; Stewart, Erica A; Francis, Emily; Boswell, Mike; Shoresman, Michelle; E-mail Council Website Subject:Clarification re: Kienow correspondence for 7.b. Courtney Kienow the Director of Community Relations and Economic Development for President Armstrong's Office at Cal Poly sent you some correspondence for tonight's Council meeting. She admits that Cal Poly erased the addresses where Cal Poly's fraternities were holding fraternity events, which are mostly at illegal fraternity houses in residential neighborhoods. She claims this was done for (1) Privacy of students and (2) to be in alignment with many other CSUs. 1. Providing addresses where Cal Poly's fraternities are operating by holding fraternity-related events is not considered a violation of privacy under the law. In fact, there are many cases where addresses are released for more concerning reasons, yet they were ordered to be released under the California Public Records Act. Cal Poly is using "privacy" as an excuse that is not supported by the law. Further, Cal Poly only removed the addresses after they learned that it is illegal for fraternities to hold events in R-1 and R-2 residential neighborhoods. They removed the addresses to hide them from the city and the residents. 2. If all 23 CSUs, only five did not publish the addresses of fraternity events. Further, Cal Poly has the largest number of Greek Life members of any other CSU in California. And BY FAR the most impact on the community relative to the population of the city where they are located. I will provide the documentation later, when you have a chance to review it since this email is so close to the meeting time this evening. Just know that no other CSU in California has illegal fraternity operations overtaking the neighborhoods on such a scale as Cal Poly, SLO. This is a highly unique situation that has been allowed to get out of control to the point where residents are having to leave their homes and move away. That is not acceptable. The "outcomes" cited by Ms. Kienow are 1. There is now coordination with City officials to speak with students on the subject. e.g. Code Enforcement making a presentation to Greek Life. As you know, four days after that presentation, fraternities held events illegally in the residential neighborhoods, so it did not make a difference. 2. Call Poly is preparing fraternity members in the City's re-review of their Conditional Use Permits or how to get a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). 3. Cal Poly now has copies of the CUPs. There are 19 fraternities at Cal Poly and only 4 have CUPs. One of those 4 was revoked and is under appeal and another is up for re-review. 4. The City sends noise violations to Cal Poly (which is has always done) and those at fraternity houses are sent to the IFC for "peer accountability". 1 5. Cal Poly has offered to consult with the City's Community Development Dept on the wording of the City-issued CUPs... This sounds like a terrible idea. Please do not allow Cal Poly to be involved in this process. Thank you for allowing me to clarify these comments. -Kathie Walker 2