Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2/17/2026 Item Public Comment, Walker kathie walker < To:Marx, Jan; Francis, Emily; Shoresman, Michelle; Boswell, Mike; Stewart, Erica A; E-mail Council Website Subject:Request for Allocation of Budget Surplus Funds to Code Enforcement - Fraternity Zoning Violations Attachments:Jan Marx letter to Albert Drive residents.pdf; Code Enforcement Officer.pdf Mayor and Councilmembers, I am writing to request that the City allocate a portion of the approximately $4 million budget surplus toward hiring qualified Code Enforcement Officer I/II staff to enforce zoning laws against illegal fraternity operations in residential neighborhoods. This request is grounded in the June 2025 findings of the San Luis Obispo County Civil Grand Jury, years of documented violations, and the lived experience of residents who have watched their neighborhoods become, in the Grand Jury's words, "almost unlivable." The Budget Opportunity The City now has the resources to act. However, funding alone is insufficient if the City continues to avoid obtaining the information necessary for effective enforcement. I urge the Council to take two simultaneous actions: 1. Allocate surplus funds to hire qualified Code Enforcement Officer I/II staff to handle fraternity land-use cases. 2. Require Cal Poly to provide street addresses of fraternity operations and events as documented in their AB 524 reports. Historical Context: A Rapid Collapse In 2009, former Mayor and current Councilmember Jan Marx circulated a letter to student renters on Albert Drive, explaining that student rentals first appeared on her block only about ten years earlier. She described a stable, mixed neighborhood and articulated clear expectations for peaceful coexistence between students and long-term residents. Her letter is attached. My husband and I purchased our home on Fredericks Street that same year to be near my aging parents and to raise our children in what we believed would remain a diverse residential neighborhood. At the time, we had no college students living immediately adjacent to us, and several nearby homes were owner-occupied. What followed was not a generational shift, it was a rapid collapse. Within approximately fifteen years, most long-term residents, including Ms. Marx, had moved away. Their homes were purchased by investors and converted to high-density student rentals. Many now operate as fraternity houses despite being located in residential zones where such use is illegal. 1 The Grand Jury's Findings Confirm Years of Resident Reports The June 2025 Civil Grand Jury report, Round & Round with Town & Gown, confirmed documentation sent to the City since 2021:  Dozens of fraternity houses operating illegally in R-1/R-2 residential zones  Chronic noise, property damage, and displacement of families  Neighborhoods rendered "almost unlivable for most residents"  Failure of City enforcement despite years of notice and opportunity to act The Grand Jury found that "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." In its September 2025 response, the City denied all six Grand Jury findings, asserting that enforcement is adequate and deflecting responsibility to Cal Poly. However, this response contradicts the documented evidence:  The problem persists: Fraternity houses continue operating illegally in residential zones and has actually expanded, with more fraternity locations. Dozens of illegal fraternity events were cited by the City during the last weekend of September 2025. There has not been any follow-up and those properties continue to operate illegally as fraternity houses. If anything, the problem has grown since the Grand Jury investigation, with even more houses operating illegally as fraternities.  Follow-up failed: Properties that received notices beginning in March 2024 continued operating illegally, with SLOPD continuing to respond to fraternity events at those addresses through the present time. The dates and times of those events are listed in the AB 524 reports.  Complaints dismissed improperly: Nearly every complaint filed with code enforcement was dismissed as "unfounded" or "unable to verify", despite adequate proof under the preponderance of evidence standard. The dates and times of those events at the specific fraternities reported are listed in the current AB 524 report, confirming the ongoing illegal use of the properties as fraternity houses. (This is covered in a report I am currently preparing.)  Unqualified staff assigned: A Code Enforcement Tech II was tasked with fraternity land-use cases despite lacking the qualifications required for such work according to the City’s own documentation presented to the Council on 10/3/2023, attached. Zoning and land use issues must be handled by a Code Enforcement Officer I/II because they have the qualifications to handle zoning and land use matters, while a Code Enforcement Tech II does not. The City's claim that it already enforces the laws is inconsistent with both the Grand Jury's findings and the City's own documented failures. Moreover, the City's deflection to Cal Poly ignores a fundamental jurisdictional reality that these fraternity houses are located within City limits, not on Cal Poly property. Land-use enforcement within the City is the City's responsibility, not the university's. The Central Enforcement Failure: Missing Address Information 2 At the core of this enforcement failure is the City's refusal to compel Cal Poly to provide the addresses where fraternities operate. California law (AB 524, California Education Code § 66312) requires universities to publish annual fraternity and sorority event reports on or before October 1 for the previous academic year. When Cal Poly published its first report on October 1, 2023, it included street addresses, clearly identifying dozens of illegal fraternity houses in the City. On July 1, 2024, Cal Poly removed those addresses. The two subsequent AB 524 reports list only "San Luis Obispo" rather than specific locations. Without addresses, land-use enforcement is impossible. The City has legal tools to obtain this information but has chosen not to use them. Legal Authority to Compel Disclosure When Cal Poly denied the City's request for addresses, citing FERPA and privacy concerns, the City had recourse. FERPA protects individual student education records that specifically identify a particular student. It does not protect property addresses or event locations, particularly when sought by local government for zoning enforcement. The City could have pursued a writ of mandate under California Code of Civil Procedure § 1085 to compel disclosure of information necessary to perform its ministerial duties. Courts have consistently held that:  Writs are appropriate where a public entity fails to act or where another entity's refusal prevents required enforcement.  Generalized privacy claims do not outweigh a local government's obligation to enforce land-use laws.  Address information for regulated activities is not protected student data. The City did not pursue available legal mechanisms, hindering enforcement not by lack of authority but by decision not to exercise it. Inadequate Staffing Compounds the Problem Even when addresses were available, enforcement was inadequate. According to City documentation:  Only Code Enforcement Officer I/II staff are qualified to handle land-use violations, including cases related to fraternities.  A Code Enforcement Tech II was assigned to this work in late 2023 despite lacking the necessary qualifications. He wrongfully dismissed nearly every complaint.  Many addresses from the AB 524 report were missed and notices were not sent beginning in March 2024.  Many of notices were subsequently lost by the Community Development Department, some were not dated. Follow-up information provided to the City that outlined the missing addresses was not acted upon so those addresses did not receive Notices. 3  Notices of Violation sent beginning in March 2024 were not followed up and properties continued operating illegally.  Most of the many complaints filed with Code Enforcement through 2025 were dismissed as "unfounded" or "unable to verify" despite sufficient evidence of the land use violation. The Path Forward The General Plan and Land Use Element explicitly prioritize neighborhood livability and compatibility of uses. The transformation of Alta Vista and lower Monterey Heights into an off-campus fraternity district represents a failure of enforcement, not a failure of planning. I am currently compiling an updated report documenting ongoing fraternity operations throughout the City using records from SLOPD, Code Enforcement, Cal Poly's AB 524 reports, and public records requests. I will provide this to the Council upon completion. I request that the Council take the following actions: 1. Allocate a small portion of the budget surplus funds to hire qualified Code Enforcement Officer I/II staff dedicated to fraternity land-use enforcement 2. Require Cal Poly to provide street addresses of fraternity operations through interagency cooperation, formal demand, or other legal mechanisms 3. Actively enforce zoning laws against property owners allowing fraternities to operate illegally in residential zones The City has both the authority and the obligation to act. The resources are now available. Please use them to restore livability to these neighborhoods. Respectfully, Kathie Walker 4 ��������►�������������»��� m E m o tza n b u m C1tY of sanl LUIS OBISPO aamiiii-s ation depaRtmEnt DATE: September 29, 2009 RECEIVED TO: City Council SEP 2.9 2009 FROM: Jan Howell Marx, Council Member SLO CITY CLERK SUBJECT: Additional Information for September 29, 2009 Meeting Please find attached information that Jan Marx would like to share with the other Council members. - RED FILE - MEETING AGENDA DATE `j�p�uy ITEM DrCOUNCIL C--M /4-/4-- r'FcIoN oACIR Q'6ke �` rry 4r6n LC� "n'c� FfRE CHIEFIR ETATTORN3TDfR�IEORIG ; CHF HEADS 1)PT 3-EEC IFJ C�1'l1Tll-dIR �h/C�LtJ i7i`Vl�S � Ce�uvC� (. C c-r+p �Y16/Z DocumenQ Jan Howell Marx 265 Albert Drive San Luis Obispo CA 93405 September 19, 2009 Dear Fellow Albert Drive Residents, Since some of you may be new on the block, welcome! I would like to tell you a bit about your neighborhood and your neighbors. Albert Drive was built as faculty and staff housing in the 1960's. About ten years ago, a few homes were rented out to students for the first time. This student/long time resident mixed neighborhood has been harmonious by and large, as long as students have remained mature and respectful. So, who are your neighbors on Albert Drive? Besides a number of students who were smart, motivated and capable enough to get into Cal Poly, several of your neighbors are Cal Poly professors or staff members, current or retired. Several are business owners, operating out of their homes. There is a law practice, a CPA, a sound expert, a towing service, a landscape service and construction company doing business from homes on our street. People come from a variety of backgrounds. One of your neighbors is the son of University President Warren Baker, three are high school teachers or administrators, one is on the Board of Residents for Quality Neighborhoods, another -is on the City's Promotional Coordinating Committee. On the next block are a city firefighter, a workers compensation analyst, an airplane pilot and a surgeon, among others. There are dozens of families with children in this immediate area. Generally, we have all gotten along very well in this mixed student/permanent resident neighborhood. Occasionally, however, conflicts have arisen, due primarily to large, drunken, loud student parties and trash left behind on our street. This kind of rowdy party is disruptive, unsafe and disrespectful. Such parties usually result in police action, with large fines to residents and landlords, plus criminal sanctions when warranted. Students have suffered alcohol poisoning, death, or even gone missing after such parties. Such parties are not good for anyone. Your neighbors have worked hard to buy their homes, raise their families and make this neighborhood a safe, clean, peaceful environment for everyone to enjoy. They are committed to maintaining that environment on Albert Drive and will protect their neighborhood, if the need arises. Rowdy parties are not appropriate on Albert Drive. If students have parties, they need to be small, quiet, and indoors to control noise. They must exclude minors if alcohol is served; they need to end early, and leave no trash behind. If students abide by this standard, there will be peace in this neighborhood. Otherwise, there will be problems. Thank you for being part of the solution. Give Peace a Chance, Jan Howell Marx, your neighbor and " ° 1! D San Luis Obispo City Council Member SEP 2 9 mom SLO CITY CLERr Only a Code Enforcement Officer I/II can handle Land Use issues, including fraternities. The City’s chart presented on 10/3/2023(left), lists the title of each Code Enforcement staff and their responsibilities based on qualifications. A Code Enforcement Officer I/II is qualified to handle more comprehensive issues than a Code Enforcement Tech I/II. A Code Enforcement Tech II was hired in late 2023 as a “Safe Housing Specialist”butwas tasked with overseeing the fraternity zoning and land use issue, including going through all the fraternity addresses listed in Cal Poly’s AB 524 Report published on 10/1/2023. Code Enforcement somehow missed many addresses listed on the AB 524 Reports (including 348 Hathway).Notices were notsent to those property owners, even after a follow-up reportwas given to Community Development by a community member that outlined the missingfraternity addresses. In March 2024, Code Enforcement began sending Notices to property owners regarding unlawful fraternity operations at their properties.The City did not follow up on Noticesand SLOPD continued to respond to fraternity events at the identified addresses, whichcontinued operating illegallyup to the present, 2026. A public records request for the Notices resulted in the City Clerk explaining that many of the Notices were lost by the Community Development Department. Other letters / Notices produced were not dated. Most complaints of illegal fraternity events at houses in R-1 / R-2 neighborhoods submitted to Code Enforcement, were dismissed by Code Enforcement Tech II as “unfounded” or “unable to verify” despite adequate proof using the preponderance of the evidence legal standard (e.g.links to the fraternity’s Instagram with photos of event) What Code Enforcement Staff Members Are Qualified to Investigate a Land Use Complaint for Illegal Fraternity Operations?