Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5/26/2026 Item 5a, Parthasarathy Neal Raghav Parthasarathy <nrpartha@calpoly.edu> Sent:Thursday, May 21, 2026 9:54 To:E-mail Council Website Cc:Purrington, Teresa Subject:IFC Recommendations for May 26 Code Enforcement Study Session (Item 5A) Attachments:IFC Proposed Solutions - May 26th Study Session.pdf Dear Council Members, On behalf of the Cal Poly Interfraternity Council(IFC), thank you for taking the time to engage with IFC and allow us the opportunity to share our thoughts and ideas throughout this process. We appreciate the City’s willingness to maintain open communication and hear directly from the student community as discussions continue regarding fraternity housing, code enforcement, and related policies. Ahead of the May 26 Special Meeting and Code Enforcement Study Session (Item 5A), IFC has prepared an attached document outlining the changes and recommendations we would like the City Council to consider. We appreciate your willingness to review our ideas in advance and consider student perspectives as part of these discussions. In addition to the attached document, seven-chapter presidents will also be providing verbal public comment during the meeting, sharing their experiences with code enforcement and the current municipal code. Thank you again for your time, consideration, and continued engagement with IFC. Best, Neal Parthasarathy Cal Poly IFC President 1 Dear Mayor Stewart and City Council Members, My name is Neal Parthasarathy and I am the Cal Poly Interfraternity Council (IFC) President. Thank you for letting me share my thoughts and ideas. Our fraternity chapters should not be exempt from City rules. If a chapter violates the noise ordinance or creates a legitimate public safety issue, enforcement should absolutely follow. Interfraternity Council (IFC) fully supports enforcement when there are repeated incidents of noncompliance or situations where neighboring residents are genuinely impacted. Our concern is whether enforcement is being applied fairly, equally and consistently across the community. During Fall 2025 recruitment, Interfraternity Council (IFC) chapters on one side of East Foothill Boulevard received citations. At the same time, Panhellenic Association (PHA) chapters were having their recruitment activities in a nearby area but they did not receive similar citations. This created the appearance of unequal treatment between similar student organizations. Because of concerns like this, IFC believes enforcement related to gatherings should primarily be complaint driven unless there is a clear and immediate threat for public safety. IFC also believes enforcement standards should be applied consistently across all organizations and residences rather than through fraternity specific oversight structures. IFC also has concerns about how the City uses chapter apparel, flags, composites, recruitment materials, guest list systems, public recruitment dates, and social media as indicators for enforcement. IFC members were told visible Greek Life materials could be used to identify what the City considers an “illegal fraternity.” Because of this, IFC recommends that citations should not be based solely on symbols, apparel, recruitment activity, social media, or assumptions tied to organizational affiliation. Enforcement should instead focus on verified conduct and actual violations. IFC acknowledges that historically much of the City’s enforcement has been complaint driven and responsive to neighborhood concerns. However, many student organizations feel enforcement has increasingly shifted toward a more proactive and targeted strategy focused on monitoring fraternity related activity before any actual complaint, neighborhood disruption, or public safety concern occurs. One related concern we have has to do with the DoorList app which IFC uses as a guest-list management tool: a critical safety function for our events, ensuring only intended guests are allowed entry and that a verifiable log of attendees is in place for any post-event questions or needs. In late Winter Quarter 2025, a Code Enforcement Officer accessed the DoorList app in order to view fraternity guest lists and identify social events connected to specific addresses. Although the app’s guest list settings were not properly restricted and allowed individuals outside the Cal Poly environment to join, many students were uncomfortable with guest list information being used in this way for enforcement purposes. Administrative citations and land use violations were later issued, with some fines exceeding $2,600. IFC believes administrative event management tools and guest list systems should not themselves become the basis for enforcement action. Student organizations should be able to use risk management and guest management systems without concern that those tools are being monitored in ways that discourage lawful organizational activity. IFC also has concerns regarding delayed and escalating enforcement processes. In Winter 2025, Delta Chi reportedly received a noise citation approximately three minutes after quiet hours began during a situation involving only a small number of students playing basketball. That citation later became the basis for a CUP review process costing the organization more than $8,000 in legal fees. Because San Luis Obispo is a college town with a large student population surrounding California Polytechnic State University, IFC believes noise enforcement policies should realistically reflect the nature of student life while still protecting neighboring residents and addressing legitimate public safety concerns. IFC therefore recommends maintaining unrestricted activity standards from 7 AM to 10 PM on weekdays and until 12 AM on Fridays and Saturdays while continuing overnight property line enforcement standards from 10 PM to 7 AM on weekdays and 12 AM to 7 AM on Fridays and Saturdays. IFC also recommends encouraging officers to issue verbal warnings and provide a reasonable 15 to 30 minute correction window before issuing citations when there is no immediate safety threat. Organizations that proactively cooperate with officers and immediately correct issues should receive consideration before escalating penalties are imposed. IFC also recommends limiting enforcement to one citation for a single ongoing violation at a time. Fines should be capped and sequenced to give fraternities a reasonable opportunity to comply, before more penalties are imposed. In practice, this would mean: ● A backyard BBQ with music playing at a moderate level during the afternoon would not automatically risk a citation just because it is audible from the sidewalk or a nearby yard. ● A birthday party hosted by students with people talking, laughing, and music during early evening hours would not be treated as a violation unless it becomes genuinely disruptive or excessive. ● A fraternity hosting a philanthropy or recruitment-related social event during the day could operate without constant concern that routine activity will trigger enforcement based solely on audibility at the property line. ● Normal weekend activities like people coming and going, music at reasonable levels, and social interaction would be treated as normal and expected things in a college-town residential environment. Also, land use notices related to Fall 2025 recruitment were reportedly posted during winter break when most students were out on winter break, and nearly three months after the alleged incidents occurred, with multiple citations placed on single notices. IFC believes citations should be issued within a reasonable timeframe, such as 48 to 72 hours after the alleged violation, so organizations have a fair opportunity to respond and correct issues. IFC also believes the City should eliminate fraternity specific CUP requirements and the current fraternity definition within municipal code. IFC members were told that any organization meeting the City’s definition could theoretically be treated similarly to a fraternity, yet IFC has not seen this applied consistently in practice. This creates confusion for both Greek Life and other student organizations. No student organization should be presumed responsible for unrelated conduct simply because activity involves students near campus. Rather than maintaining a separate long term oversight structure tied specifically to fraternity identity, IFC believes the City should focus on consistent behavior based enforcement standards applied equally across the community, similar to cities like Santa Barbara where fraternities are referenced more generally within broader zoning definitions. From our review of different municipal code structures, San Luis Obispo seems to have a more ongoing fraternity specific CUP oversight system than some other California college communities, including Santa Barbara and Isla Vista near University of California, Santa Barbara. IFC believes SLO should continue moving toward a more behavior focused approach that still protects residents while recognizing the realities of a college town. Finally, IFC encourages the City to evaluate whether zoning and land use policies around California Polytechnic State University realistically reflect the presence of a large 18 to 22 year old student population. Approximately one third of San Luis Obispo residents are Cal Poly students, representing roughly 14,000 people living within the community. A college town functions differently from a traditional suburban neighborhood, and land use policy should recognize that reality while still protecting residents and addressing legitimate safety concerns. Student oriented areas should support a positive and realistic college environment within reasonable community standards. For example, California State University, Chico utilizes a fraternity and sorority housing overlay approach near campus that recognizes the unique realities of student living patterns and university adjacent housing. IFC recommends that the City explore similar planning tools, including the potential creation of a broader student overlay zone in appropriate areas near campus. A student overlay zone could establish tailored standards and expectations that better reflect the realities of a college community, while still addressing neighborhood compatibility, safety, noise, and accountability concerns. Looking at approaches like Chico’s could help San Luis Obispo better balance long term neighborhood interests with the realities of a large student population. Taken together, IFC’s recommendations are intended to promote fair, consistent, and behavior based enforcement standards across the community. These recommendations include prioritizing complaint driven enforcement, encouraging warnings and opportunities for corrective action before escalating penalties, limiting identity based enforcement practices, eliminating fraternity specific CUP oversight structures, and ensuring zoning and land use policies realistically reflect the realities of a college community while still protecting residents and addressing legitimate public safety concerns. At the end of the day, IFC is simply asking for fairness, consistency, and equal application of the rules. Enforcement should be based on conduct, not identity. Thank you, Neal Parthasarathy Cal Poly Interfraternity Council (IFC) President