HomeMy WebLinkAboutPRR26064 Walker - All code enforcement cases opened for 280 California Blvd between August 1, 2022 and present.
Attachments:Alpha Epsilon Pi 2025 events.pdf
From: kathie walker <
Sent: Friday, February 13, 2026 1:34 PM
To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Corey, Tyler <tcorey@slocity.org>; Mezzapesa, John
<JMezzape@slocity.org>; E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org>
Cc: McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Sandra Rowley <macsar99@yahoo.com>; Carolyn Smith
<cjsmith_107@yahoo.com>; Brett Cross <brettcross@yahoo.com>; Stewjenkins Info <info@stewjenkins.com>
Subject: Alpha Epsilon Pi - re-review March 11, 2026
Dear Timmi, Tyler and John,
I write regarding the upcoming re-review of Alpha Epsilon Pi's Conditional Use Permit scheduled for
March 11, 2026.
Request for Code Enforcement Records
I request copies of all code enforcement cases opened for 280 California Blvd between August 1, 2022
and present. Public records indicate multiple cases involving trash and debris violations that do not
appear to have been included in the staff presentation to the Planning Commission on November 13,
2024 and I came across them in someone else's records request.
Planning Commission Record from November 13, 2024
The deliberation of the Planning Commissioers between timestamps 42:00 and 1:20:00 contains several
key findings relevant to this re-review:
1. Tyler Corey acknowledged that inadequate departmental resources resulted in fraternity issues not
receiving attention due to prioritization of "health and safety" matters (42:00 mark). I note the City
Council currently has a $3.4 million surplus under consideration on February 17, 2026, so the
resources are available to protect the health, safety and well-being of the neighborhood residents
who are increasingly affected by the fraternity operations which are now spreading into other
neighborhoods.
2. Staff confirmed that noise violations constitute a "public nuisance" under Condition 12, triggering CUP
re-review authority with a single noise violation.
3. Commissioner Houghton identified the lack of coordination between SLOPD and Community
Development as requiring improvement to address this issue.
4. Commissioners Kahn and Munoz-Morris stated future violations should result in
recommended revocation, with due process.
1
5. Commissioner Tolle explicitly warned the fraternity: "If another violation occurs, you're going to be
right back in here... you're in a neighborhood, you're not in a Greek row."
6. Commissioner Houghton stated approval would be "kicking the can down the road" and questioned its
appropriateness.
Motion passed 4-2 (with reprimand to the fraternity members)
Documented CUP Violations in 2025
Attached records demonstrate a pattern of violations:
1. Noise Citations: Three citations issued (April 16, April 18, October 29) with 150, 100, and 100
attendees respectively, each far exceeding the 25-person occupancy limit in the CUP. I am not sure if
there are other noise complaints for 280 California Blvd. I notified your office of each noise citation as
they occurred (emails dated April 17, May 16, and October 30, 2025). Your responses indicated staff
would "circle back" and review records, but I received no follow-up.
2. Registered Events: At least 21 parties registered with Cal Poly in 2025, with nine alcohol events listing
guest counts. Seven events reported 160 guests, exceeding the CUP limit by 540%. It should be noted
that Alpha Epsilon Pi registered parties that exceeded the limitations of their CUP less than three
months after stern warnings from the Planning Commissioners. In February 2025, there were nine
parties, five with alcohol - one with 65 guests and four with 160 guests. I have attached the registered
parties from Cal Poly's records and the page number in the records (IFC 2025) so you are able to find
them more easily with the downloaded records.
CUP conditions apply to land use continuously, not solely during registered events. Any noise violation,
whether it was registered or not, constitutes a CUP violation.
Given the Planning Commission's explicit warning that a single violation would trigger re-review, and the
documented pattern of multiple serious violations, I respectfully request Copies of all code enforcement
cases for 280 California Blvd (August 2022-present) and confirmation of what enforcement actions were
taken following the three noise citations previously sent to you.
Is SLOPD communicating those violations to Code Enforcement, as was requested by Commissioner
Houghton?
I appreciate the challenges you face with limited resources and Cal Poly's insufficient cooperation.
Resources are currently available in the City's surplus funds, and the documented violations and the
Commission's clear directives should have serious consequences and the first noise violation with 150
people was 10 months ago. I look forward to continuing to work toward a solution to this problem
together with our neighborhood groups.
Sincerely,
Kathie Walker
2