Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBatch 18377 From:Wilbur, Naomi Sent:Monday, July 28, 2025 11:09 AM To:Patino, Mallory Subject:1236 Monte Vista Place - PRR Attachments:1236 Monte Vista.pdf; 1997 Zoning Regulations - Fraternity house (17.04.190).pdf; 1999 Zoning Regulations - Fraternity house (17.04.190).pdf; PC Hearing August 12, 1998.pdf; PC Resolution 5230-98.pdf Here are the documents I’ve gotten so far for 1236 Monte Vista Place. Let me know if there is anything else you need me to find for this PRR! Naomi Wilbur Planning Intern III Community Development 919 Palm, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E NWilbur@slocity.org T 805.783.7866 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications 378 From:Mezzapesa, John Sent:Monday, July 28, 2025 10:55 AM To:Tway, Timothea (Timmi) Cc:Corey, Tyler Subject:RE: Alpha Gamma Rho Does planning have a form letter that can be issued regarding the voiding of a use permit? This wasn’t voided per code enforcement activity. John From: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2025 4:26 PM To: Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org> Cc: Corey, Tyler <tcorey@slocity.org> Subject: FW: Alpha Gamma Rho Hi John, Lets talk when you are back. This permit is revoked because they are no longer in good standing, and the code automatically revokes a CUP when the fraternity is no longer in good standing. I would like to talk about next steps to inform the frat that it is revoked thanks, Timmi From: Jason Mockford <jmockfor@calpoly.edu> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2025 1:09 PM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Collins, Scott <SCollins@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org> Cc: Joy Pederson <jmpeders@calpoly.edu>; Terrance Leshae Harris <tharris@calpoly.edu>; Courtney Leigh Kienow <ckienow@calpoly.edu> Subject: RE: Alpha Gamma Rho Timmi – Great question. The suspension was eƯective immediately when the letter was sent on June 23, 2023. Jason Mockford (he, him, his) Senior Director, Leadership & Service | Student Affairs | Cal Poly | San Luis Obispo, CA 93407-0208 | leadandserve.calpoly.edu | 805-756- 2476 Futuristic • Strategic • Relator • Ideation • Adaptability From: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2025 1:07 PM To: Jason Mockford <jmockfor@calpoly.edu>; McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Collins, Scott <SCollins@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org> Cc: Joy M. Pedersen <jmpeders@calpoly.edu>; Terrance Leshae Harris <tharris@calpoly.edu>; Courtney Leigh Kienow <ckienow@calpoly.edu> Subject: RE: Alpha Gamma Rho Jason, 379 Thank you. Clarifying question – I see the letter was from June 2023. Did the suspension take place immediately on June 23, 2023, or kick in at some later date? I am asking because I believe our CUP provisions require a 2 year gap in active use, and I want to make sure we have our dates correct if we are going to call upon that provision of the code. Thanks, Timmi From: Jason Mockford <jmockfor@calpoly.edu> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2025 11:38 AM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Collins, Scott <SCollins@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org> Cc: Joy Pederson <jmpeders@calpoly.edu>; Terrance Leshae Harris <tharris@calpoly.edu>; Courtney Leigh Kienow <ckienow@calpoly.edu> Subject: Alpha Gamma Rho Hello all, Please find attached the outcome letter for Alpha Gamma Rho’s suspension in 2023. You will read in the letter that they were to be eligible to return in Fall 2025. However, we have been in communication with their headquarters that there are still a group of students living there that are operating as a fraternity, calling themselves AGR, recruiting, etc. Therefore, they are ineligible to return this Fall having not completed their sanctions. The national fraternity is trying to assist us from afar, and a repeal of the CUP may help them do that. We have been in regular contact with their CEO Rex Martin (rex@alphagammarho.org), who has been helpful, and might be a resource to you if needed. Thank you for the oƯer to assist, Jason Mockford (he, him, his) Senior Director, Leadership & Service | Student Affairs | Cal Poly | San Luis Obispo, CA 93407-0208 | leadandserve.calpoly.edu | 805-756- 2476 Futuristic • Strategic • Relator • Ideation • Adaptability 380 From:Petersen, Cecilia Sent:Monday, July 28, 2025 9:15 AM To:Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola Subject:Re: Fraternity and Sorority Fire Inspections You're right — only permitted houses have participated in fire inspections in the past. I apologize; this is my first year conducting the sorority/fraternity inspections. We can stick to the list of permitted houses from the previous year for now. As for scheduling, let's have the chapters sign up through you. I will keep October 14–16 and 21-23 open for these inspections, lets plan on an hour time slot per inspection. Please find the scheduling options below. October 14-16 & 21-23: 9am 10am 11am 1pm 2pm 3pm If we need to adjust the dates, let me know and we can figure something out. Thank you for your patience. Cecilia Petersen Fire Inspector I Fire Department E CPeterse@slocity.org T 805.783.7773 C 805.550.9633 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2025 10:21 AM To: Petersen, Cecilia <CPeterse@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Fraternity and Sorority Fire Inspections 381 Hi Cecilia, Thanks for reaching out! Quick question – these organizations you listed below don’t have permitted houses, and in the past only permitted houses have participated in fire inspections. Has that changed this year? I am not sure if some on this list even have a house. Alpha Sigma Phi Phi Delta Theta Pi Kappa Phi Phi Sigma Kappa Sigma Phi Epsilon Sigma Pi Theta Chi Zeta Beta Tau Additionally, in the past we have scheduled Fire Inspections for after school is back in session, so late September/early October. The majority of our students are gone until then, so I’m not sure if an August date would be best. As for scheduling, what works best is your team gives me time slots and dates, and then I have chapters sign up for a slot! Once I have the full schedule, I send it back to you all with the schedule and contact information. Last year we switched it up a little bit and the head of the fire inspections preferred the organizations schedule directly with him. Let me know which one you all would prefer this year! Best, Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola, M.A. pronouns she/her/hers Assistant Director, Fraternity & Sorority Life Leadership & Service | Student Affairs Cal Poly | San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 | 805-756-7263 Schedule a meeting with me From: Greek Life <greeklife@calpoly.edu> Date: Wednesday, July 16, 2025 at 9:40 AM To: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Subject: FW: Fraternity and Sorority Fire Inspections From: Petersen, Cecilia <CPeterse@slocity.org> Date: Wednesday, July 9, 2025 at 9:15 AM To: Greek Life <greeklife@calpoly.edu> Subject: Re: Fraternity and Sorority Fire Inspections Thank you for providing the contacts – I appreciate your help. In previous years, Cal Poly Greek Life has worked with each of the fraternities and sororities to coordinate and complete inspections within a week. We would like to follow the same approach this year and schedule inspections for all fraternity and sorority houses during a consolidated timeframe. 382 Please let us know your availability and any requirements on your end to begin coordinating the schedule. We are currently looking at the third or fourth week of August. Our goal is to streamline the process and ensure all inspections are completed efficiently and on time. Looking forward to working with you on this. Cecilia Petersen Fire Inspector I The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location. Fire Department E CPeterse@slocity.org T 805.783.7773 C 805.550.9633 slocity.org The linked image cannot be displayed. T… The linked image cannot be displayed. T… The linked image cannot be displayed. T… The linked image cannot be displayed. T… The linked image cannot be displayed. T… Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Greek Life <greeklife@calpoly.edu> Sent: Wednesday, July 2, 2025 1:44 PM To: Petersen, Cecilia <CPeterse@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Fraternity and Sorority Fire Inspections Good afternoon, Our apologies, below are the additional contacts requested: Alpha Epsilon Pi - aepi.presidentcalpoly@gmail.com Alpha Sigma Phi - president.cpalphasig@gmail.com Delta Sigma Phi - president.cpdeltachi@gmail.com Phi Delta Theta - phideltcalpolypres@gmail.com Pi Kappa Phi - archon.calpoly.pikappaphi@gmail.com Phi Sigma Kappa - pskslo.president@gmail.com Sigma Phi Epsilon - president.calpolysigep@gmail.com Sigma Pi - Theta Chi - president.cpthetachi@gmail.com Zeta Beta Tau - president@zbtcalpoly.org Best, FSL Staff From: Petersen, Cecilia <CPeterse@slocity.org> Date: Tuesday, July 1, 2025 at 2:22 PM To: Greek Life <greeklife@calpoly.edu> Subject: Re: Fraternity and Sorority Fire Inspections Hi, Thank you for sending that information over. We have the below fraternities/sororities on our list if you could please provide the additional contact information that would be very helpful! 383 Alpha Epsilon Pi Alpha Sigma Pi Delta Sigma Pi Pi Delta Theta Pi Kappa Phi Phi Sigma Kappa Sigma Phi Epsilon Sigma Pi Theta Chi Zeta Beta Tau Thank you, Cecilia Petersen Fire Inspector I The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location. Fire Department E CPeterse@slocity.org T 805.783.7773 C 805.550.9633 slocity.org The linked image cannot be displayed. T… The linked image cannot be displayed. T… The linked image cannot be displayed. T… The linked image cannot be displayed. T… The linked image cannot be displayed. T… Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Greek Life <greeklife@calpoly.edu> Sent: Tuesday, July 1, 2025 1:09 PM To: Petersen, Cecilia <CPeterse@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Fraternity and Sorority Fire Inspections Here is the contact list requested! Please let us know if you need anything else from us. Best, Alpha Chi Omega axo.president.cp@gmail.com Alpha Omicron Pi aoii.president.chipsi@gmail.com Alpha Phi sloaphipres@gmail.com Chi Omega chiopres.cp@gmail.com Delta Gamma dg.president.calpoly@gmail.com Gamma Phi Beta gphibpresident@gmail.com Kappa Alpha Theta cpthetapresident@gmail.com Kappa Kappa Gamma kkg.president.calpoly@gmail.com Sigma Kappa sigmakappaslo@gmail.com Beta Theta Pi cpbeta.president@gmail.com Delta Upsilon ducalpolypresident@gmail.com Lambda Chi Alpha slolca.alpha@gmail.com Pi Kappa Phi archon.calpoly.pikappaphi@gmail.com Sigma Nu Cpsnupresident@gmail.com 384 From: Petersen, Cecilia <CPeterse@slocity.org> Date: Wednesday, June 25, 2025 at 12:49 PM To: Greek Life <greeklife@calpoly.edu> Subject: Fraternity and Sorority Fire Inspections Good afternoon, I hope this message finds you well. It's time to begin scheduling the annual fire and life safety inspections for each of the fraternity and sorority houses. To start coordinating inspection times, could you please forward me a current list of contacts for each house? Thank you in advance for your assistance. Cecilia Petersen Fire Inspector I The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location. Fire Department E CPeterse@slocity.org T 805.783.7773 C 805.550.9633 slocity.org The linked ima ge cannot be displayed. T… The linked ima ge cannot be displayed. T… The linked ima ge cannot be displayed. T… The linked ima ge cannot be displayed. T… The linked ima ge cannot be displayed. T… Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications 385 From:New Times, SLO <website@newtimesslo.com> Sent:Thursday, July 24, 2025 10:01 AM To:Woods, Chris Subject:55 Fiction To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Thursday, July 24, 2025 To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. COVER PHOTO FROM ADOBE STOCK, DESIGN BY ALEX ZUNIGA THE MEDIUM Death is a feature of most of the stories entered into our annual 55 Fiction contest—and sometimes a character realizes that they’re actually talking to the dead or they are dead. Short and Sweet The winning stories of our annual 55 Fiction contest After going through hundreds of entries—too many to count—submitted to our annual 55 Fiction contest from all over the world, the winners are in. On-staff judges narrowed the publishable down to almost two dozen tales with characters, a beginning, middle, and end, often with a twist and some death thrown in there. We’re already taking entries for next year’s contest if you think you can write a better plot in 55 words or less. We accept entries year-round. Take a gander before you get out your pen and find a dark corner to be creative in. Also this week, read about how San Luis Obispo is responding to grand jury criticism about fraternities and sororities; Central Coast Shakespeare Fest; Los Yesterdays; and a different kind of apple beverage from San Miguel. 386 To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. SPONSORED To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. NEWS To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. SLO creates committee to respond to report on illegal parties The San Luis Obispo City Council appointed Mayor Erica Stewart and City Councilmember Jan Marx to an ad hoc committee to oversee the response to a county grand jury report alleging mismanagement of illegal college parties. “It’s my understanding that 20 percent of the Cal Poly students are in a fraternity or sorority,” Marx said at the July 15 City Council meeting. “Cuesta students don’t have any sororities or fraternities at all. What we’re talking about is a really small minority of students who are causing an outsized problem.” In 2022, continued disturbance from student neighbors compelled Marx to relocate to a quieter neighborhood in SLO. To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. THE SHREDDER Ready or not 387 ARTS To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Shakespeare Fest mounts terrific Merry Wives of Windsor Perhaps you remember Sir John Falstaff (here played by Mark Klassen), Shakespeare’s rotund, vain, boastful, and often drunken knight. He’s best known as companion to Prince Hal, future King Henry V of England, in Henry IV, Part 1 and Part 2. Witty and often charming, he’s reduced to a buffoonish albeit good-natured suitor in The Merry Wives of Windsor. The play is headlining this year’s Central Coast Shakespeare Festival at Filipponi Ranch. As it opens, Falstaff is short on funds but has a typically Falstaffian plan to reverse his misfortune by simultaneously courting two wealthy married women, Mistress Ford (Kristie Siebert) and Mistress Page (Isabel Skene). His plan goes predictably awry. To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. MUSIC To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. LA-based Chicano soul band Los Yesterdays plays the Fremont “Bad Vic” Benavides is unabashedly honest––he can’t really play an instrument. He would rather be making music in the studio than performing onstage. But what Benavides, lead singer of the LA-based Chicano soul band Los Yesterdays, can do–– and do well––is write songs. As a hopeless romantic, his many relationships-turned- heartbreaks have led to some of his best work. Take “Mr. Yesterday,” a song heavily inspired by the sound of Frankie Valli & The Four Seasons that he wrote in 2020 after a bad break with a woman he loved. Benavides chuckled as he recalled the story of a mutual friend of Los Yesterdays drummer and co-founder Gabriel Rowland hearing the track and ensuring that Rowland stayed around Benavides–– not to console him, necessarily, but to be there when his ideas were flowing. 388 To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. FLAVOR To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. SLO County apple farm releases a new beverage lineup Each apple picked at Fair Hills Farm has a purpose. “Half of our best, highest-quality fruit goes to local schools, restaurants, and independent grocers on the Central Coast, nourishing students and supporting a healthy community,” the farm’s website states. “The other half is lovingly crafted into our Signature Harvest Blend unfiltered apple juice and our tea line.” Released in July and featuring fruit from the San Miguel orchard’s 2024 harvest, Fair Hills Farm Organic’s freshly brewed teas and apple juices are now available. The teas “are gently sweetened with our organic apple juice, free from preservatives, contain minimal ingredients, and have no added sugar,” said Fair Hills Farm proprietor and entrepreneur Russel Steingold. To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. READ MORE @ NEWTIMESSLO.COM NEWS • OPINION • ARTS • MUSIC • FOOD AND DRINK Want to stay informed about No. Santa Barbara County? Our sister publication, the Sun, delivers breaking news, insightful opinions, and local event updates directly to your inbox every Thursday morning. SIGN ME UP To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. MORE FROM NEW TIMES Subscribe to the Events Wire newsletter and get highlights of local upcoming events in your mailbox every Friday morning. 389 Finding tickets to the various happenings on the Central Coast has never been easier. Get the Ticket Wire newsletter every Wednesday to see the latest tickets available for purchase at My805Tix.com … where the box office is always open. Advertise in News Wire: Reach over 16k readers. Drive hundreds of new customers. To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Local News: Committed to You, Fueled by Your Support. Local news strengthens SLO County. Help New Times continue delivering quality journalism with a contribution to our journalism fund today. To help protect your priv acy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. Copyright © 2025 New Times, San Luis Obispo, All rights reserved. You are receiving this email because you opted in at NewTimesSLO.com. You can unsubscribe at anytime by clicking unsubscribe at the bottom of this email. Our mailing address is: New Times, San Luis Obispo 1010 Marsh St San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3630 Add us to your address book Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list. 390 To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Email Marketing Powered by Mailchimp 391 From:Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Sent:Wednesday, July 23, 2025 2:57 PM To:Wallace, Christine Subject:RE: IFC presentations To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.laugh Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola reacted to your message: From: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2025 6:01:39 PM To: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Subject: RE: IFC presentations Ohhh good grief. Okay, thanks for the info. From: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2025 10:45 AM To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: Re: IFC presentations They are not! Not for the foreseeable future I'd say. They were caught operating underground which obviously violates their sanctions 뇤뇸뇹뇥뇦뇷 Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola, M.A. pronouns she/her/hers Assistant Director, Fraternity & Sorority Life Leadership & Service | Student Affairs Cal Poly | San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 | 805-756-7263 Schedule a meeting with me From: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2025 10:40:17 AM To: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Subject: RE: IFC presentations Another question, is AGR coming back in the fall or no? From: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2025 12:27 PM To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: Re: IFC presentations Hi, Yes I think that’s a great idea! Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola, M.A. pronouns she/her/hers Assistant Director, Fraternity & Sorority Life Leadership & Service | Student Affairs 392 Cal Poly | San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 | 805-756-7263 Schedule a meeting with me From: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Date: Monday, July 21, 2025 at 4:42 PM To: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Subject: IFC presentations Hi E, I’ve been thinking about our conversation last week and getting in front of all IFC chapters annually. If Cal Poly determines a presentation to be mandatory, could the chapters I haven’t presented to in the last year be identified to go in Fall quarter and then the rest in Winter and Spring? I can do a deep dive into my calendar to figure out who I presented to last year. I’m tracking things differently as of July 1 so I won’t have to dig but this one time. Thanks, Christine Wallace Police Public Affairs Manager Police Department 1042 Walnut Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-2729 E cwallace@slocity.org T 805.781.7186 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications This e-mail, and any files transmitted with it, are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential, protected, and/or privileged material. Any review, re-transmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient, is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. 393 From:Wallace, Christine Sent:Wednesday, July 23, 2025 11:02 AM To:Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola Subject:RE: IFC presentations Ohhh good grief. Okay, thanks for the info. From: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2025 10:45 AM To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: Re: IFC presentations They are not! Not for the foreseeable future I'd say. They were caught operating underground which obviously violates their sanctions 뇤뇸뇹뇥뇦뇷 Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola, M.A. pronouns she/her/hers Assistant Director, Fraternity & Sorority Life Leadership & Service | Student Affairs Cal Poly | San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 | 805-756-7263 Schedule a meeting with me From: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2025 10:40:17 AM To: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Subject: RE: IFC presentations Another question, is AGR coming back in the fall or no? From: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2025 12:27 PM To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: Re: IFC presentations Hi, Yes I think that’s a great idea! Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola, M.A. pronouns she/her/hers Assistant Director, Fraternity & Sorority Life Leadership & Service | Student Affairs Cal Poly | San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 | 805-756-7263 Schedule a meeting with me 394 From: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Date: Monday, July 21, 2025 at 4:42 PM To: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Subject: IFC presentations Hi E, I’ve been thinking about our conversation last week and getting in front of all IFC chapters annually. If Cal Poly determines a presentation to be mandatory, could the chapters I haven’t presented to in the last year be identified to go in Fall quarter and then the rest in Winter and Spring? I can do a deep dive into my calendar to figure out who I presented to last year. I’m tracking things differently as of July 1 so I won’t have to dig but this one time. Thanks, Christine Wallace Police Public Affairs Manager Police Department 1042 Walnut Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-2729 E cwallace@slocity.org T 805.781.7186 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications This e-mail, and any files transmitted with it, are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential, protected, and/or privileged material. Any review, re-transmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient, is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. 395 From:Tway, Timothea (Timmi) Sent:Wednesday, July 23, 2025 9:24 AM To:Stewart, Erica A; Marx, Jan Cc:Harnett, Natalie; Collins, Scott; McDonald, Whitney; Hermann, Greg Subject:Information gathered on University/Town overlays/enforcement Attachments:Working Document on research regarding overlay zones.docx Hello Mayor Stewart and Councilmember Marx, Please find attached my working document I referenced yesterday on the research I have done into overlay zones and other methods of regulating group housing around universities. Where possible, I have linked to helpful webpages for more information. Thanks, Timmi Timothea (Timmi) Tway Director of Community Development Community Development 919 Palm, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E TTway@slocity.org T 805.781.7187 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications 396 From:Tway, Timothea (Timmi) Sent:Wednesday, July 23, 2025 7:59 AM To:Carol Florence Cc:Emily Ewer Subject:Re: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Hi Carol, I can do 1130 to 12. If that works please send the invite. Thanks! Timmi From: Carol Florence <cmf@oasisassoc.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2025 5:10:50 PM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Cc: Emily Ewer <Emily@oasisassoc.com> Subject: RE: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Thanks for the accommodation. How about late morning on the 28 th? Is so, I’ll send a Teams invitation for 11:00 a.m., ok? As always, C.M. Florence, AICP Principal Planner OASIS ASSOCIATES, INC. 3427 Miguelito Court San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 P: 805.541.4509 I D: 805.548.1561 I M: www.oasisassoc.com From: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2025 4:50 PM To: Carol Florence <cmf@oasisassoc.com> Cc: Emily Ewer <Emily@oasisassoc.com> Subject: RE: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Hi Carol, I am out on Friday. I can give you a call Monday, what time are you available, Thanks, Timmi 397 From: Carol Florence <cmf@oasisassoc.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2025 3:49 PM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Cc: Emily Ewer <Emily@oasisassoc.com> Subject: RE: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Hello, Timmi! Emails go only so far, so do you have a few minutes on Friday to “ketchup”? Let me know your availability, please. Appreciate the consideration. As always, C.M. Florence, AICP Principal Planner OASIS ASSOCIATES, INC. 3427 Miguelito Court San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 P: 805.541.4509 I D: 805.548.1561 I M: www.oasisassoc.com From: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2025 2:15 PM To: Carol Florence <cmf@oasisassoc.com> Cc: Emily Ewer <Emily@oasisassoc.com> Subject: RE: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Hi Carol, I promise I have not forgotten about the Parker Street issue, I am awaiting a few more details from some of our topic area experts so we can have a complete discussion. It is probably best if we meet soon to discuss, what is your availability like next week or the week after? Thanks, Timmi From: Carol Florence <cmf@oasisassoc.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 8, 2025 5:09 PM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Cc: Emily Ewer <Emily@oasisassoc.com> Subject: RE: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Hello, Timmi! Will advise “the brothers”, accordingly. I do plan on having a more detailed appeal approach to you before week’s end. Thanks for the acknowledgement regarding Parker Street, as I believe that the former CBO had a reasonable approach. I’m meeting with the clients late afternoon this Friday, so if you have anything to share, please advise. Hope that you are enjoying these lovely, long, dog days of summer! Talk soon. As always, C.M. Florence, AICP Principal Planner 398 OASIS ASSOCIATES, INC. 3427 Miguelito Court San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 P: 805.541.4509 I D: 805.548.1561 I M: www.oasisassoc.com From: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 8, 2025 4:58 PM To: Carol Florence <cmf@oasisassoc.com> Cc: Emily Ewer <Emily@oasisassoc.com> Subject: RE: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Hi Carol, Understood. We are looking at October 21 as the date with availability to consider the appeal, please have your clients plan accordingly. Regarding Parker – I understand your concern, as soon as we regroup and have an agreed upon internal path forward I will let you know. Thanks, Timmi From: Carol Florence <cmf@oasisassoc.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 2, 2025 4:38 PM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Cc: Emily Ewer <Emily@oasisassoc.com> Subject: RE: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Afternoon, Timmi! My clients won’t be back from summer break/work obligations until mid-September, and their desire is to have a “full press court” at the hearing. I know that they would appreciate the accommodation. Feels like a long way off, especially since we just started summer! Quick thought…staff did an excellent job on their reports recommending amendments to the various fraternity’s CUPs, which apparently is how this has been handled in the very recent past. If the PC didn’t feel like they could make the appropriate findings for the amendments, how will they be able to make the same findings for a “new” CUP? Just asking… RE: Parker – I’ve expressed my sentiments below, so I am hopeful that the representations made by the former CBO will be honored. I’ll will admit that I am more than a little concerned for our clients. As always, C.M. Florence, AICP Principal Planner OASIS ASSOCIATES, INC. 3427 Miguelito Court San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 P: 805.541.4509 I D: 805.548.1561 I M: www.oasisassoc.com 399 From: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 2, 2025 3:32 PM To: Carol Florence <cmf@oasisassoc.com> Cc: Emily Ewer <Emily@oasisassoc.com> Subject: RE: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Hi Carol, thank you. I do have to ask, now that you are involved, if September 2 is still off the table (I imagine it still is, but please confirm). I have not heard anything about other fraternities appealing their respective revocations. Regarding Parker, I have an internal meeting set up to discuss next steps and then we will let you know where we have landed. Thanks, Timmi From: Carol Florence <cmf@oasisassoc.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 1, 2025 1:01 PM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Cc: Emily Ewer <Emily@oasisassoc.com> Subject: RE: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Good afternoon! Appreciate your response, Timmi, and the extension of time to submit additional information. If it helps, the clients are fine with a Council hearing after September 2nd. In addition, can you advise me whether appeals were also lodged by Sigma Nu and/or Delta Upsilon? On an unrelated note, can we discuss 2146 Parker Street/ARCH-0809-2024, please. I have recently been made aware that Mike Loew is no longer with the city, which concerns me, as he had been coordinating with Building and SLOFD staff on a few of the incomplete comments, in addition to championing the change from the previously lodged Moderate Development to a Minor Use Permit. I am hopeful that he shared his thoughts with you, as we had been waiting for a resolution from him. For your information, we received a follow up email from Walter in June that the application would be classified as “inactive” on August 4, 2025. Since we started discussing the project with you originally, I am hopeful that you can assist us. Thanks, in advance, for the consideration and response. As always, C.M. Florence, AICP Principal Planner OASIS ASSOCIATES, INC. 3427 Miguelito Court San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 P: 805.541.4509 I D: 805.548.1561 I M: www.oasisassoc.com 400 From: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 1, 2025 11:42 AM To: Carol Florence <cmf@oasisassoc.com> Cc: Emily Ewer <Emily@oasisassoc.com> Subject: RE: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Hi Carol, Thank you for the email. I will extend the time for submittal of information for consideration in a staff report to July 11. We are very challenged with finding an alternative time for the Council meeting, I do not yet have a date if the fraternity cannot do September 2. As soon as I have a tentative date I will let you know, Thank you, Timmi From: Carol Florence <cmf@oasisassoc.com> Sent: Monday, June 30, 2025 12:06 PM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Cc: Emily Ewer <Emily@oasisassoc.com> Subject: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Importance: High Good Morning, Community Development Director Tway! We have very recently been retained by Delta Chi to assist them with their appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision to revoke their conditional use permit. Based upon your recent email – June 24, 2025 to the current president, Chris Green, we are respectfully requesting additional time to prepare a more robust response to the details behind the appeal request. With that said, we assume that the City Council hearing would also be delayed to, perhaps, a later date in September. We will be coordinating with our clients this week and hope to have a date certain to submit the additional information. Will advise you, accordingly. Please contact us should you have any questions and/or if you have additional information to share. Thank you, as always, for your time, consideration, and accommodation. As always, C.M. Florence, AICP Principal Planner OASIS ASSOCIATES, INC. 3427 Miguelito Court San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 P: 805.541.4509 I D: 805.548.1561 I M: www.oasisassoc.com 401 From:Cohen, Rachel Sent:Tuesday, July 22, 2025 5:00 PM To:Patino, Mallory Subject:FW: Delta Chi Cal Poly Chapter - Appeal Attachments:2025-07-11.Final Delta Chi Cal Poly Chapter - Appeal Support Info.pdf FYI Rachel Cohen pronouns she/her/hers Principal Planner Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E rcohen@slocity.org T 805.781.7574 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Sent: Friday, July 11, 2025 3:56 PM To: Corey, Tyler <tcorey@slocity.org>; Cohen, Rachel <rcohen@slocity.org> Subject: FW: Delta Chi Cal Poly Chapter - Appeal Hi team, Please see what the applicants submitted for the appeal of the Delta Chi CUP item. Thank you, Timmi From: Carol Florence <cmf@oasisassoc.com> Sent: Friday, July 11, 2025 3:31 PM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Subject: Delta Chi Cal Poly Chapter - Appeal Dear Timmi, Thank you for the opportunity to provide you with the attached correspondence in support of the appeal. Please see the attached. I had an occasion to express our approach to the City Manager and look forward to working with her, you, your staff, Cal Poly, and my clients toward a resolution. Upon review of the attached, I would appreciate your thoughts. Perhaps, we can talk/meet soon. In the interim, have a lovely, long dog days of summer weekend. Yours, as always, C.M. Florence, AICP Principal Planner 402 OASIS ASSOCIATES, INC. 3427 Miguelito Court San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 P: 805.541.4509 I D: 805.548.1561 I M: www.oasisassoc.com 3427 Miguelito Court San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 805.541.4509 p 805.546.0525 f www.oasisassoc.com CP 018415 ● RLA 2248 ● CLARB 907 11 July 2025 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO c/o Ms. Timothea Tway, Community Development Director 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 via email - TTway@slocity.org RE: DELTA CHI CAL POLY CHAPTER, 1236 MONTE VISTA PLACE, SLO, CA APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION REVOCATION OF CUP U106-98 Dear Mayor and Council Members, We represent the Delta Chi Cal Poly Chapter (Delta Chi) who, on June, 20, 2025, lodged an appeal to set aside the Planning Commission’s June 11, 2025 decision to revoke their conditional use permit and to alternatively request that the permit to be amended to address community concerns. We appreciate the opportunity to provide a more robust discussion and relevant evidence to support the Council’s decision to uphold the appeal and enable the staff and the fraternity to work collaboratively to amend the conditional use permit. Thank you, in advance, for the consideration. Initially, there are a few high level ideas that we would like you to consider. 1. Partnership, not punishment. Delta Chi are partners in this community. The question isn’t whether there are problems, it’s whether they can be solved collaboratively. 2. Willingness to be accountable. Delta Chi does not want to avoid regulation. They do want clear, achievable, and enforceable conditions that ensure accountability, as they welcome the oversight. As importantly, Delta Chi currently works within their own defined governance framework.1 3. Track record of improvement. Delta Chi has worked systematically to reduce incidents. Over the past two years, documented violations have declined significantly, reflecting their commitment to improvements. While challenges remain, the trend is clear and positive. And finally, 4. S trong institutional support. Delta Chi is in active participation with Cal Poly’s Fraternity & Sorority Life/Leadership & Service/Student Affairs unit to ensure compliance with both the university 2 and City expectations. Context and Community Legacy San Luis Obispo is a proud and continually evolving town-and-gown community, home to decades of shared experiences between Cal Poly students and long-term residents. While these relationships have at times been challenging, they are also deeply rooted and resilient. Delta Chi has been a part 1 Attached is a list of additional reference materials that include descriptions of the local chapter bylaws, local property management, the alumni association, and national fraternity oversight. 2 Attached for ease of reference is the Cal Poly Fraternity & Sorority Life Event Registration Procedure, rev. March 25, 2025 which sets the framework for on and off campus events and is “designed to provide a safe social atmosphere for members of the Greek Community and their guests, while allowing them to exercise the personal responsibility expect of each of them”. OASIS ASSOCIATES, INC. 11 July 2025 DELTA CHI CAL POLY CHAPTER APPEAL Page 2 of 3 3427 Miguelito Court San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 805.541.4509 p 805.546.0525 f www.oasisassoc.com CP 018415 ● RLA 2248 ● CLARB 907 of this fabric for many years, and like many other fraternities and sororities, they operate off- campus due to the absence of a formal Greek Row. Over time, as both the university and the City have grown, the need for clear expectations, communication, and partnership has become increasingly vital. Good-Faith Reliance and Cooperative History Delta Chi has worked with City staff over the years to comply with permit conditions and to address neighborhood concerns in good faith. While they acknowledge there have been issues, particularly with occupancy and noise, they have also taken steps to respond to feedback and implement operational improvements. Delta Chi has relied on the City’s guidance, including direct communication and staff input, to understand expectations and make changes, accordingly. They have invested time and resources in mitigation measures, adjusted management practices, and have consistently sought to be a constructive member of the community. Notably, in this most recent CUP review, the City’s own staff report recommended amending the permit rather than revoking it, indicating a belief that continued operation under improved conditions is both possible and reasonable. Equity and Proportionality Revocation of the CUP at this stage, after years of interaction and reliance on City feedback, imposes a severe and, we believe, disproportionate penalty—particularly in light of staff’s recommendation for amendment. It also undermines the City’s stated goal of collaborative problem-solving with student organizations. While legal doctrines such as equitable estoppel may not strictly apply to municipal decisions, the underlying principles—fairness, reliance, and proportionality—are relevant here. Delta Chi acted in good faith based on the City’s past positions and now face significant hardship due to a sudden change in course. A Call for Constructive Resolution We are not asking the City Council to excuse past shortcomings. Instead, we are asking for a path forward that reflects the complexity of this issue and the opportunity for shared responsibility. The fraternity members, past and present, remain open and committed to working with City staff, neighbors, and university partners to strengthen permit conditions, improve accountability, and preserve Delta Chi’s place in the San Luis Obispo community. Accordingly, we respectfully request that the Council: 1. Uphold this appeal; 2. Reverse the Planning Commission’s decision to revoke the CUP; and 3. Direct staff to pursue amendments to the permit in coordination with Delta Chi.3 We thank the Council for its consideration and for continuing to foster thoughtful dialogue between student organizations and the broader community. On behalf of Delta Chi, the fraternity members remain committed to being part of the solution. 3 The second attachment to this correspondence represents preliminary comments on staff’s previous recommendations to the Planning Commission to amend the original CUP. These are offered to correct the record and as a starting point to thoughtfully amend the permit in light of existing and potential future circumstances. OASIS ASSOCIATES, INC. 11 July 2025 DELTA CHI CAL POLY CHAPTER APPEAL Page 3 of 3 3427 Miguelito Court San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 805.541.4509 p 805.546.0525 f www.oasisassoc.com CP 018415 ● RLA 2248 ● CLARB 907 Respectfully submitted, OASIS ASSOCIATES, INC. C.M. Florence, AICP Agent DELTA CHI CAL POLY CHAPTER Attachments – • 1 – List of Delta Chi Cal Poly Chapter’s Existing Internal Governance Framework • 2 – Event Registration Procedure, Cal Poly Fraternity & Sorority Life, March 2025 • 3 – Draft Comments to SLO Planning Commission Resolution no. XXX-25 cc: C. Green C. Nielsen E. Moffitt S. Pollock M. Holliday Delta Chi Members + Alumni 25-0053 ATTACHMENT 1 List of Delta Chi Cal Poly Chapter’s Existing Internal Governance Framework 11 July 2025 Local Chapter Bylaws and Governance The Cal Poly Chapter of Delta Chi operates under a formal set of local bylaws adopted by its membership. These bylaws govern the operations of the chapter, including leadership elections, financial procedures, conduct expectations, and adherence to university and national standards. They serve as a constitutionally binding document that ensures internal accountability, democratic leadership succession, and operational continuity from year to year. In addition, Delta Chi has adopted a Risk Management Plan that includes the following items: emergency contact list; event planning; harm reduction; code of conduct; crisis management; and fire safety. Local Housing Corporation Oversight Delta Chi’s physical property, located at 1236 Monte Vista Place, San Luis Obispo, CA, is managed by a dedicated local housing corporation. This entity, typically composed of alumni volunteers, is responsible for property maintenance, safety compliance, and financial oversight of the facility, in conjunction with our landlord. The housing corporation plays a critical role in ensuring that the chapter property is managed responsibly and that the property is safe and livable, in cooperation with the property owner, regardless of the changing undergraduate leadership. Active Alumni Association Involvement Delta Chi Cal Poly maintains an active alumni association that provides mentorship, guidance, and institutional memory. The alumni are deeply involved in supporting the chapter’s educational programs, leadership development, and operations, and frequently assist with transitional planning, risk management, and disciplinary concerns. This alumni network provides consistent intergenerational support and ensures continuity through leadership transitions. National Fraternity Oversight and Support As a chapter of the Delta Chi Fraternity, Inc., a nationally recognized fraternity established in 1890, the Cal Poly Chapter benefits from oversight and resources provided by the national headquarters. The national organization provides training, operational audits, risk management programs, leadership education, and crisis response protocols. They also ensure that all local chapters remain in good standing with respect to national policies and standards. In the event of a local leadership issue or disruption, the national fraternity has the capacity and authority to intervene and help restore structure and compliance. Revised March 2025 EVENT REGISTRATION PROCEDURE All members of Cal Poly-affiliated fraternities and sororities, and the Interfraternity Council, the Panhellenic Council, and the United Sorority & Fraternity Council at Cal Poly (collectively the “Fraternity and Sorority Community”), shall abide by all University policies and federal, state, and local laws and regulations, including those that govern the use, distribution, and consumption of alcohol. This Event Registration Procedure sets forth procedures designed to provide a safe social atmosphere for members of the Greek Community and their guests, while allowing them to exercise the personal responsibility expected of each of them. The following objectives are essential to achieving this aim: •To encourage social responsibility in all members, with emphasis on safety and risk management; •To encourage responsibility in the use of alcohol and thereby reduce the risks associated with alcohol misuse at parties; •To increase the safety of everyone in attendance at chapter -sponsored events with and without alcohol; •To support the ideals and values on which fraternities and sororities are founded; •To practice self-governance as a Fraternity and Sorority Life Community; •To educate the general membership of the Fraternity and Sorority Life community about the importance of risk management. 1 The University does not accept legal liability for the activities engaged in by fraternities and sororities, and their members. ATTACHMENT 2 Revised March 2025 Table of Contents Article I - What defines an event? Article II - Legal Article III - Events with Alcohol Present Article IV - Events without Alcohol Present Article V - Locations Article VI - Registration Process Article VII - Judicial Article VIII - Amnesty Article IX - Procedure Revision Revised March 2025 Article I - What defines an event? A. An “event” for the purposes of this document is any activity sponsored or endorsed by the organization/chapter including those that occur on and off chapter premises. Article II – Legal A. Any event as defined above must be compliant with all applicable laws, including but not limited to the below requirements: a. The organization, members and guests must comply with all federal, state, and local laws. No person under the legal drinking age my possess, consume, provide or be provided alcoholic beverages b. Organizations, members and guests must follow the federal law regarding illegal drugs and controlled substances. No persons may possess, use, provide, distribute, sell and or manufacture illegal drugs or other controlled substances while on organizational/ chapter premises or at any activity or event which is sponsored or endorsed by the chapter B. Laws local to San Luis Obispo are also enforced with events. The following is provided for convenience only and is not all-inclusive. Laws may change and it is up to the chapter to be aware of all applicable laws. Some relevant laws include: a. Noise Ordinance i. 7 A.M. to 10 P.M.: Noise that can be heard 50 feet from the source is a violation ii. 10 P.M. to 7 A.M.: Noise that can be heard across the property line is a violation b. Safety Enhancement Zones i. Fines are doubled for the following violations: 1. Noise 2. Unruly Gathering 3. Social Host Liability 4. Public Urination 5. Open Container ii. Designated times for Safety Enhancement Zones may vary, but typically occur during: 1. Mardi Gras (Thursday - Wednesday) 2. St. Patrick’s Day 3. Halloween Revised March 2025 4. “WOW’ Week Article III – Events with Alcohol Present A. Guest Lists and Sober Monitors a. Any event where alcohol is present is required to be a closed event, with guest lists submitted to the FSL office by the deadline (see Article VI) b. Attendance by non-members at any event where alcohol is present must be by invitation only by the organization. Chapters must utilize the guest list template provided by the FSL Office. Attendance at events where alcohol is present is limited to a guest-to-member ratio of 2:1 and must not exceed local fire or building code capacity of the organizational/chapter premises or host venue. c. Any event with alcohol present is also required to have sober monitors present, with quantity based on the number of guests in attendance. i. Three sober monitors (including one from the Executive committee or equivalent) are required at a minimum. ii. For every 40 guests invited to the event, another sober monitor will be required iii. First year members who have been in the chapter for at least one quarter and are initiated members, can serve as sober monitors if the following is in place: 1. Required attendance at one of the annual Social Risk Management workshops hosted the FSL office PRIOR to becoming eligible to serve as a sober monitor 2. Procedures in place attached to the risk management plan, that supports first year students during the event, should conflict arise 3. No more than 30 percent of sober monitors can be first year members B. Any event where alcohol is present can only occur from a. 5:00pm on Thursday until 1:00am on Friday, when Friday is an academic holiday b. 5:00pm on Friday until 1:00am on Saturday c. 9:00am on Saturday until 1:00am on Sunday d. 9:00am on Sunday until 1:00am on Monday, when Monday is an academic holiday C. Events with alcohol cannot occur until after the formal recruitment period is over (during quarters where there is a formal recruitment period) unless at a third - party venue and the event is closed with no potential new members in attendance and follows all event registration guidelines. D. Events with alcohol are prohibited from lasting longer than five hours continuously E. Sources of Alcohol a. Alcoholic beverages must either be: Revised March 2025 i. Provided and sold by a licensed and insured third-party vendor, e.g., restaurant, bar, caterer, etc.) or ii. Brought by the individual members and guests through a bring your own beverage system. b. Common sources of alcohol, including bulk quantities, which are not being served by a licensed and insured third-party vendor, are prohibited (i.e. amounts of alcohol greater than what a reasonable person should consume over the duration of the event) c. The presence of alcohol products above 15% alcohol by volume (ABV) is prohibited on any organizational/chapter premises or at any event, except when served at an event by a licensed and insured third party vendor. d. Alcoholic beverages must not be purchased with organizational/chapter funds or funds pooled by members or guests (e.g., admission fees, cover fees, collecting funds through digital apps, etc.) F. Bring Your Own Beverage a. Only those of legal drinking age in California may bring and consume alcohol b. Permitted alcohol can only be made available in central common living areas managed by sober monitors designated by the host chapter c. Individuals of legal drinking age may bring beer totaling no more than 72 ounces (equivalent to a six pack of 12 oz beers) or one bottle (750 ml) of wine to the event G. Drinking Games a. No shots, drinking games, or other activities that encourage inappropriate or other rapid consumption or high-risk drinking behaviors shall be allowed. i. The definition of drinking games includes but is not limited to the consumption of shots of alcohol, liquor or alcoholic beverages; the practice of consuming shots equating to one’s age;” beer pong,” “century club,” “beer die”,” dares;” or any other activity involving the consumption of alcohol which involves duress or encouragement related to the consumption of alcohol. H. Consent Talks a. All events with alcohol are required to have a Consent Talk after 30 minutes and no later than 1 hour of the event starting. The Consent Talk will be provided by the chapter’s Violence Prevention Chair (or a designated individual in the case that the Violence Prevention Chair isn’t present) and will be given to all participants at the event. If this is an exchange between two Revised March 2025 FSL organizations, both Violence Prevention Chairs should co-present the information. An example of the Consent Talk is below: “Hi everyone, my name is _____ and I am the Violence Prevention Chair for (insert chapter here). We want everyone to have a great time tonight and feel safe & respected! I am going to give a brief consent talk before we continue with the rest of the night! Remember: 1. Consent is freely given: consent can only be given without coercion, force, threats, or intimidation. It cannot be given by someone who is incapacitated, including due to drugs, alcohol, or medication. 2. Consent is reversible: you can change your mind about anything at any time during sex. 3. Consent is informed: you must know what you are consenting to in order to give consent. 4. Consent is enthusiastic: when it comes to sex you should want to have it. 5. Consent is specific: saying yes to one thing, like making out, does not mean saying yes to everything, like having sex. [Add in values of chapter here, e.g. “we are men /women of high integrity”] If you are interested in hooking up with someone tonight, check in with them and make sure to respect whatever answer they give you. If you see someone crossing a line, making others feel uncomfortable or someone in a vulnerable position, please come up t o me or [insert the name of Chapter President or Risk Manager, whoever is comfortable] if you need absolutely anything at all, we will be at the door (or wherever you stand)! Thank you and have fun!” I. Registration a. Events with alcohol are required to be registered with the FSL office prior to their occurrence and with documents submitted prior to the required deadlines (further outlined in Article VI) Article IV – Events without Alcohol Present A. Guest Lists and Sober Monitors a. Guest lists and sober monitors are not required for events where alcohol is not present, but are encouraged B. Registration Revised March 2025 a. Events without alcohol are required to be registered with the FSL office prior to their occurrence and with documents submitted prior to the required deadlines (further outlined in Article VI) Article V – Locations A. All off-campus events with alcohol must be held at a residence, including a chapter facility, or at a venue under third party management that is not legally associated with the chapter in any capacity (“third-party venue”). B. For all events with alcohol that are located at a third-party venue, a copy of the contract with the chapter and event management company or third -party venue must be submitted with the party registration. Article VI – Registration Process A. The process of online events with alcohol registration must begin at least 10 days before the date of the event. B. Deadlines for completion of registration are every Thursday by 12:00 pm, the weekend of the event. C. A final follow up guest list must be submitted by 12:00 noon Monday following the event with alcohol, with the full names of all attendees and birthdates of all guests who received wristbands for alcohol consumption. a. No future events with alcohol will be reviewed until this requirement is fulfilled D. The chapter’s risk manager must complete a post -event review, which is to be submitted to Cal Poly Fraternity and Sorority Life by 12:00 noon the Wednesday following the event with alcohol. All sober monitors and sober executive members will contribute to this review. For events with alcohol where there may be more than one chapter acting as the event host, each chapter must complete a post- event form. a. No future events with alcohol will be reviewed until this requirement is fulfilled E. Failure to follow these requirements may subject the chapter and/or its individual members to student discipline. Article VII – Judicial A. Failure to follow these procedures will be reviewed by the Office of Student Rights & Responsibilities (OSRR) and may be subject to sanctions. Revised March 2025 B. It is recognized that this procedure cannot address, in specific fashion, all possible social situations that may occur. When this procedure is not specific on a particular point, the Interfraternity Council, Panhellenic Council, and United Sorority & Fraternity Council chapters and their members are expected to conduct their events and themselves in the spirit of social responsibility expressed in this procedure. C. Council judicial boards can also adjudicate if deemed necessary by the OSRR. Article VIII – Amnesty A. The university’s primary concern is for the health, welfare, and safety of all students. As such, in cases of significant intoxication as a result of alcohol or other substances, the university encourages students to seek medical assistance for themselves and/or others. Any student who assists in seeking medical attention for a person in need will not be subject to disciplinary action for conduct in violation of this policy. Article IX – Procedure Revision A. This procedure may be revised at any time by the Fraternity & Sorority Life office, OSRR and Dean of Students. B. This procedure will be reviewed during summer quarter, or at the discretion of the Dean of Students staff, and any revisions will be sent to members of fraternities and sororities immediately and will be effective the first day of the following fall quarter. C. In the event of a mid-academic year review, any revisions will be sent to members of fraternities and sororities immediately upon implementation. ATTACHMENT 3 DRAFT Comments to SLO Planning Commission Resolution No. XXX-25 Amending CUP 5230-98 – Proposed Conditions of Approval (USE-0332-2025) 11 July 2025 The following are a few of the Community Development Department staff proposed conditions of approval, along with our comments, offered as examples of areas that warrant additional consideration and collaboration between the Delta Chi fraternity and the City of San Luis Obispo. We recognize that there may at times be differences of opinion regarding the best way to address certain issues, but there remains a shared goal and objective: to craft clear, reasonable, and enforceable conditions that support the fraternity’s continued operation in a manner that is safe, responsible, and compatible with the surrounding community. Through thoughtful dialogue and partnership, we believe these conditions can be refined to achieve that balance. C ondition of Approval 2. The Conditional Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission as soon as practical if conduct on the permitted premises results in three (3) citations within any 12-month period for a violation of law or permit condition that (a) are not contested or are upheld on appeal, and (b) the conduct for which the citations were issued resulted in adverse impacts to, or complaints from, residents or occupants of the surrounding neighborhood. At the time of the Conditional Use Permit review, to ensure ongoing compatibility with nearby uses, conditions of approval may be added, modified, and/or removed, or the Conditional Use Permit may be revoked. The City shall notify Cal Poly if the Use Permit is revoked. A re-review by the Planning Commission shall be accompanied by the appropriate fee. COMMENT: (a clarification for the record) Delta Chi had received three (3) "violations" in the past twelve 12 months, although one was successfully appealed by the time of the May 28, 2025 Planning Commission hearing. This is an important clarification, as the condition of approval wording clearly states that the permit can be up for review if three (3) (emphasis added) citations are received within a twelve (12) months period and (again, emphasis added) the conduct for which the citations were issued resulted in adverse impacts to, or complaints from, residents or occupants of the surrounding neighborhood. While nuanced, this distinction may have prevented the Planning Commission’s revocation decision. C onditional of Approval 4. Routine meetings and gatherings for the fraternity shall be limited to a maximum of 54 people (rounded down from 54.45 = 36.3 people x 1.5), except as otherwise approved by the Community Development Director for special events. If the fraternity hosts special events involving more than 54 people, a transportation management plan to reduce impacts to the surrounding neighborhood shall be submitted to the Community Development Department, at least 30 days prior to the event taking place, for review and approval. No exception from the Noise Ordinance shall be approved by the Director as Part of the special event. Presence of more than 54 people at the property without valid approval from the Community Development Director shall be considered a violation of this Conditional Use Permit. COMMENT: We believe that the focus should not be on the quantity of the people on the property, but on the impact of the gathering on the community, as regulated by objective standards, such as MC Title 9 Chapter 9.12 Noise Control, Chapter 9.13 Unruly gatherings, and Chapter 9.22 Safety Enhancement Zones. Attachment 3 Page 2 of 2 Interestingly, we agree with the City’s response to the recent Grand Jury report regarding standard conditions, "Setting constraints like a uniform set of conditions on the exercise of discretion diminishes the usefulness of the review process to address specific needs over time or for unique circumstances that may exist at specific properties or with particular groups or organizations." Creating a CUP with a custom set of conditions of approval for each fraternity would recognize the differences in the size of the property, number of building occupants allowed, number of parking spaces, and even its location, such as the proximity to Cal Poly. Currently, the one-size-fits-all calculation takes none of the aforementioned into consideration. An example of the need for more customized conditions of approval is found in the revised COA no. 4, that limits the maximum number of residents to thirty five (35) people living on the property, while limiting the maximum number of routine meetings and gatherings to 1.5 times the number of residents or fifty-four (54) people. This is unrealistic and flawed, as there is no consideration of the very site and fraternity specific aspects. For the sake of comparison, and to underscore the need to eliminate the “one size fits all” CUP conditions of approval, the 1.5 formula has been used for other fraternity CUPs, e.g., 2024 Lamda Chi and the 2021 Delta Gamma. Unfortunately, the calculation does not factor in the number of residents, interior building square footage (SF), parking and alternative modes of transportation, both on- and off-site. For example, • Delta Chi accommodates 370 SF per resident, which is higher ratio than Lambda Chi's 240 SF per resident. • Delta Chi has far more residents than Delta Gamma – where they have six (6) residents Delta Chi has thirty five (35) residents. • The Alpha Gamma Delta 2016 CUP was calculated at 2.1 times their residents. • Delta Chi maintains thirty two (32) parking spaces, a fair amount greater than other fraternities, and because of the proximity to the Cal Poly campus, there is no less than forty (40) additional and available parking spaces on campus within 200 feet of the Delta Chi property. In closing, it is essential to move beyond a “one size fits all” approach to fraternity conditional use permit conditions of approval and instead adopt a framework that is tailored to the specific circumstances of each house and organization. This does not diminish the City’s discretionary authority over permit review and approval; rather, it acknowledges that each fraternity operates within its own context, with unique physical constraints, membership structures, and operational goals. By crafting site- and fraternity-specific conditions, the City can more effectively ensure lasting compatibility with surrounding neighborhoods, encourage accountability, and support solutions that are practical, enforceable, and responsive to genuine community concerns. 403 From:Tway, Timothea (Timmi) Sent:Tuesday, July 22, 2025 4:50 PM To:Carol Florence Cc:Emily Ewer Subject:RE: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Hi Carol, I am out on Friday. I can give you a call Monday, what time are you available, Thanks, Timmi From: Carol Florence <cmf@oasisassoc.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2025 3:49 PM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Cc: Emily Ewer <Emily@oasisassoc.com> Subject: RE: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Hello, Timmi! Emails go only so far, so do you have a few minutes on Friday to “ketchup”? Let me know your availability, please. Appreciate the consideration. As always, C.M. Florence, AICP Principal Planner OASIS ASSOCIATES, INC. 3427 Miguelito Court San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 P: 805.541.4509 I D: 805.548.1561 I M: www.oasisassoc.com From: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 22, 2025 2:15 PM To: Carol Florence <cmf@oasisassoc.com> Cc: Emily Ewer <Emily@oasisassoc.com> Subject: RE: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Hi Carol, I promise I have not forgotten about the Parker Street issue, I am awaiting a few more details from some of our topic area experts so we can have a complete discussion. It is probably best if we meet soon to discuss, what is your availability like next week or the week after? Thanks, 404 Timmi From: Carol Florence <cmf@oasisassoc.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 8, 2025 5:09 PM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Cc: Emily Ewer <Emily@oasisassoc.com> Subject: RE: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Hello, Timmi! Will advise “the brothers”, accordingly. I do plan on having a more detailed appeal approach to you before week’s end. Thanks for the acknowledgement regarding Parker Street, as I believe that the former CBO had a reasonable approach. I’m meeting with the clients late afternoon this Friday, so if you have anything to share, please advise. Hope that you are enjoying these lovely, long, dog days of summer! Talk soon. As always, C.M. Florence, AICP Principal Planner OASIS ASSOCIATES, INC. 3427 Miguelito Court San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 P: 805.541.4509 I D: 805.548.1561 I M: www.oasisassoc.com From: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 8, 2025 4:58 PM To: Carol Florence <cmf@oasisassoc.com> Cc: Emily Ewer <Emily@oasisassoc.com> Subject: RE: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Hi Carol, Understood. We are looking at October 21 as the date with availability to consider the appeal, please have your clients plan accordingly. Regarding Parker – I understand your concern, as soon as we regroup and have an agreed upon internal path forward I will let you know. Thanks, Timmi From: Carol Florence <cmf@oasisassoc.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 2, 2025 4:38 PM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Cc: Emily Ewer <Emily@oasisassoc.com> Subject: RE: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Afternoon, Timmi! 405 My clients won’t be back from summer break/work obligations until mid-September, and their desire is to have a “full press court” at the hearing. I know that they would appreciate the accommodation. Feels like a long way off, especially since we just started summer! Quick thought…staff did an excellent job on their reports recommending amendments to the various fraternity’s CUPs, which apparently is how this has been handled in the very recent past. If the PC didn’t feel like they could make the appropriate findings for the amendments, how will they be able to make the same findings for a “new” CUP? Just asking… RE: Parker – I’ve expressed my sentiments below, so I am hopeful that the representations made by the former CBO will be honored. I’ll will admit that I am more than a little concerned for our clients. As always, C.M. Florence, AICP Principal Planner OASIS ASSOCIATES, INC. 3427 Miguelito Court San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 P: 805.541.4509 I D: 805.548.1561 I M: www.oasisassoc.com From: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 2, 2025 3:32 PM To: Carol Florence <cmf@oasisassoc.com> Cc: Emily Ewer <Emily@oasisassoc.com> Subject: RE: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Hi Carol, thank you. I do have to ask, now that you are involved, if September 2 is still off the table (I imagine it still is, but please confirm). I have not heard anything about other fraternities appealing their respective revocations. Regarding Parker, I have an internal meeting set up to discuss next steps and then we will let you know where we have landed. Thanks, Timmi From: Carol Florence <cmf@oasisassoc.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 1, 2025 1:01 PM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Cc: Emily Ewer <Emily@oasisassoc.com> Subject: RE: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Good afternoon! 406 Appreciate your response, Timmi, and the extension of time to submit additional information. If it helps, the clients are fine with a Council hearing after September 2nd. In addition, can you advise me whether appeals were also lodged by Sigma Nu and/or Delta Upsilon? On an unrelated note, can we discuss 2146 Parker Street/ARCH-0809-2024, please. I have recently been made aware that Mike Loew is no longer with the city, which concerns me, as he had been coordinating with Building and SLOFD staff on a few of the incomplete comments, in addition to championing the change from the previously lodged Moderate Development to a Minor Use Permit. I am hopeful that he shared his thoughts with you, as we had been waiting for a resolution from him. For your information, we received a follow up email from Walter in June that the application would be classified as “inactive” on August 4, 2025. Since we started discussing the project with you originally, I am hopeful that you can assist us. Thanks, in advance, for the consideration and response. As always, C.M. Florence, AICP Principal Planner OASIS ASSOCIATES, INC. 3427 Miguelito Court San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 P: 805.541.4509 I D: 805.548.1561 I M: www.oasisassoc.com From: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 1, 2025 11:42 AM To: Carol Florence <cmf@oasisassoc.com> Cc: Emily Ewer <Emily@oasisassoc.com> Subject: RE: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Hi Carol, Thank you for the email. I will extend the time for submittal of information for consideration in a staff report to July 11. We are very challenged with finding an alternative time for the Council meeting, I do not yet have a date if the fraternity cannot do September 2. As soon as I have a tentative date I will let you know, Thank you, Timmi From: Carol Florence <cmf@oasisassoc.com> Sent: Monday, June 30, 2025 12:06 PM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Cc: Emily Ewer <Emily@oasisassoc.com> Subject: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Importance: High Good Morning, Community Development Director Tway! We have very recently been retained by Delta Chi to assist them with their appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision to revoke their conditional use permit. Based upon your recent email – June 24, 2025 to the current president, Chris Green, we are respectfully requesting additional 407 time to prepare a more robust response to the details behind the appeal request. With that said, we assume that the City Council hearing would also be delayed to, perhaps, a later date in September. We will be coordinating with our clients this week and hope to have a date certain to submit the additional information. Will advise you, accordingly. Please contact us should you have any questions and/or if you have additional information to share. Thank you, as always, for your time, consideration, and accommodation. As always, C.M. Florence, AICP Principal Planner OASIS ASSOCIATES, INC. 3427 Miguelito Court San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 P: 805.541.4509 I D: 805.548.1561 I M: www.oasisassoc.com 408 From:Tway, Timothea (Timmi) Sent:Tuesday, July 22, 2025 2:15 PM To:Carol Florence Cc:Emily Ewer Subject:RE: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Hi Carol, I promise I have not forgotten about the Parker Street issue, I am awaiting a few more details from some of our topic area experts so we can have a complete discussion. It is probably best if we meet soon to discuss, what is your availability like next week or the week after? Thanks, Timmi From: Carol Florence <cmf@oasisassoc.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 8, 2025 5:09 PM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Cc: Emily Ewer <Emily@oasisassoc.com> Subject: RE: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Hello, Timmi! Will advise “the brothers”, accordingly. I do plan on having a more detailed appeal approach to you before week’s end. Thanks for the acknowledgement regarding Parker Street, as I believe that the former CBO had a reasonable approach. I’m meeting with the clients late afternoon this Friday, so if you have anything to share, please advise. Hope that you are enjoying these lovely, long, dog days of summer! Talk soon. As always, C.M. Florence, AICP Principal Planner OASIS ASSOCIATES, INC. 3427 Miguelito Court San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 P: 805.541.4509 I D: 805.548.1561 I M: www.oasisassoc.com From: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 8, 2025 4:58 PM To: Carol Florence <cmf@oasisassoc.com> Cc: Emily Ewer <Emily@oasisassoc.com> Subject: RE: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Hi Carol, Understood. We are looking at October 21 as the date with availability to consider the appeal, please have your clients plan accordingly. 409 Regarding Parker – I understand your concern, as soon as we regroup and have an agreed upon internal path forward I will let you know. Thanks, Timmi From: Carol Florence <cmf@oasisassoc.com> Sent: Wednesday, July 2, 2025 4:38 PM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Cc: Emily Ewer <Emily@oasisassoc.com> Subject: RE: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Afternoon, Timmi! My clients won’t be back from summer break/work obligations until mid-September, and their desire is to have a “full press court” at the hearing. I know that they would appreciate the accommodation. Feels like a long way off, especially since we just started summer! Quick thought…staff did an excellent job on their reports recommending amendments to the various fraternity’s CUPs, which apparently is how this has been handled in the very recent past. If the PC didn’t feel like they could make the appropriate findings for the amendments, how will they be able to make the same findings for a “new” CUP? Just asking… RE: Parker – I’ve expressed my sentiments below, so I am hopeful that the representations made by the former CBO will be honored. I’ll will admit that I am more than a little concerned for our clients. As always, C.M. Florence, AICP Principal Planner OASIS ASSOCIATES, INC. 3427 Miguelito Court San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 P: 805.541.4509 I D: 805.548.1561 I M: www.oasisassoc.com From: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 2, 2025 3:32 PM To: Carol Florence <cmf@oasisassoc.com> Cc: Emily Ewer <Emily@oasisassoc.com> Subject: RE: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Hi Carol, thank you. I do have to ask, now that you are involved, if September 2 is still off the table (I imagine it still is, but please confirm). I have not heard anything about other fraternities appealing their respective revocations. Regarding Parker, I have an internal meeting set up to discuss next steps and then we will let you know where we have landed. 410 Thanks, Timmi From: Carol Florence <cmf@oasisassoc.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 1, 2025 1:01 PM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Cc: Emily Ewer <Emily@oasisassoc.com> Subject: RE: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Good afternoon! Appreciate your response, Timmi, and the extension of time to submit additional information. If it helps, the clients are fine with a Council hearing after September 2nd. In addition, can you advise me whether appeals were also lodged by Sigma Nu and/or Delta Upsilon? On an unrelated note, can we discuss 2146 Parker Street/ARCH-0809-2024, please. I have recently been made aware that Mike Loew is no longer with the city, which concerns me, as he had been coordinating with Building and SLOFD staff on a few of the incomplete comments, in addition to championing the change from the previously lodged Moderate Development to a Minor Use Permit. I am hopeful that he shared his thoughts with you, as we had been waiting for a resolution from him. For your information, we received a follow up email from Walter in June that the application would be classified as “inactive” on August 4, 2025. Since we started discussing the project with you originally, I am hopeful that you can assist us. Thanks, in advance, for the consideration and response. As always, C.M. Florence, AICP Principal Planner OASIS ASSOCIATES, INC. 3427 Miguelito Court San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 P: 805.541.4509 I D: 805.548.1561 I M: www.oasisassoc.com From: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 1, 2025 11:42 AM To: Carol Florence <cmf@oasisassoc.com> Cc: Emily Ewer <Emily@oasisassoc.com> Subject: RE: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Hi Carol, Thank you for the email. I will extend the time for submittal of information for consideration in a staff report to July 11. We are very challenged with finding an alternative time for the Council meeting, I do not yet have a date if the fraternity cannot do September 2. As soon as I have a tentative date I will let you know, Thank you, Timmi 411 From: Carol Florence <cmf@oasisassoc.com> Sent: Monday, June 30, 2025 12:06 PM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Cc: Emily Ewer <Emily@oasisassoc.com> Subject: Delta Chi - PC Appeal to CC Importance: High Good Morning, Community Development Director Tway! We have very recently been retained by Delta Chi to assist them with their appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision to revoke their conditional use permit. Based upon your recent email – June 24, 2025 to the current president, Chris Green, we are respectfully requesting additional time to prepare a more robust response to the details behind the appeal request. With that said, we assume that the City Council hearing would also be delayed to, perhaps, a later date in September. We will be coordinating with our clients this week and hope to have a date certain to submit the additional information. Will advise you, accordingly. Please contact us should you have any questions and/or if you have additional information to share. Thank you, as always, for your time, consideration, and accommodation. As always, C.M. Florence, AICP Principal Planner OASIS ASSOCIATES, INC. 3427 Miguelito Court San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 P: 805.541.4509 I D: 805.548.1561 I M: www.oasisassoc.com 412 From:Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Sent:Tuesday, July 22, 2025 12:27 PM To:Wallace, Christine Subject:Re: IFC presentations Hi, Yes I think that’s a great idea! Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola, M.A. pronouns she/her/hers Assistant Director, Fraternity & Sorority Life Leadership & Service | Student Affairs Cal Poly | San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 | 805-756-7263 Schedule a meeting with me From: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Date: Monday, July 21, 2025 at 4:42 PM To: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Subject: IFC presentations Hi E, I’ve been thinking about our conversation last week and getting in front of all IFC chapters annually. If Cal Poly determines a presentation to be mandatory, could the chapters I haven’t presented to in the last year be identified to go in Fall quarter and then the rest in Winter and Spring? I can do a deep dive into my calendar to figure out who I presented to last year. I’m tracking things differently as of July 1 so I won’t have to dig but this one time. Thanks, Christine Wallace Police Public Affairs Manager Police Department 1042 Walnut Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-2729 E cwallace@slocity.org T 805.781.7186 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications This e-mail, and any files transmitted with it, are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential, protected, and/or privileged material. Any review, re-transmission, 413 dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient, is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. 414 From:Francis, Emily Sent:Monday, July 21, 2025 5:28 PM To:McDonald, Whitney Subject:Re: Weekly Update Have a good vacation Whitney! Hope it's relaxing and refreshing:) Emily Emily Francis pronouns she/her/hers Council Member Office of the City Council 990 Palm, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E EFrancis@slocity.org On Fri, Jul 18, 2025 at 8:03 PM, McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org> wrote: BCC: Mayor and Council Good evening, Mayor and Council. Just a quick reminder at the outset that this will be my last weekly update until I return from vacation the first week of August. Here are updates from this week:  415  Greek Housing Meeting with Cal Poly – On Wednesday, Scott, Greg, Timmi, and I met with Cal Poly staff, including Courtney Kienow, Terrence Harris, Joy Pederson, and Jason Mockford, to discuss the impacts of Greek housing and activity in the City, as well as potential solutions. Attached is an email from Courtney with some notes of our discussion. We are working to schedule another meeting in August, in addition to a meeting we have on the books for September, to continue our discussions. The meeting was positive and productive, with each of us committing to evaluate a number of ideas. My main request to Cal Poly was for them to intercede in the events that fraternities and sororities are hosting, and registering with Cal Poly, to shift them to more appropriate locations than our residential neighborhoods. We also discussed overlay zone concepts, the role of landlords, different enforcement tools (such as criminal citations for noise violations), and the development of a Greek row. More to come on these efforts!  416 Hope everyone has a wonderful weekend! Whitney Whitney McDonald pronouns (she/hers) City Manager City Administration 990 Palm, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3934 E WMcDonal@slocity.org T 805.781.7114 C 805.550.8349 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications 417 From:Tway, Timothea (Timmi) Sent:Monday, July 21, 2025 4:26 PM To:Mezzapesa, John Cc:Corey, Tyler Subject:FW: Alpha Gamma Rho Hi John, Lets talk when you are back. This permit is revoked because they are no longer in good standing, and the code automatically revokes a CUP when the fraternity is no longer in good standing. I would like to talk about next steps to inform the frat that it is revoked thanks, Timmi From: Jason Mockford <jmockfor@calpoly.edu> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2025 1:09 PM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Collins, Scott <SCollins@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org> Cc: Joy Pederson <jmpeders@calpoly.edu>; Terrance Leshae Harris <tharris@calpoly.edu>; Courtney Leigh Kienow <ckienow@calpoly.edu> Subject: RE: Alpha Gamma Rho Timmi – Great question. The suspension was eƯective immediately when the letter was sent on June 23, 2023. Jason Mockford (he, him, his) Senior Director, Leadership & Service | Student Affairs | Cal Poly | San Luis Obispo, CA 93407-0208 | leadandserve.calpoly.edu | 805-756- 2476 Futuristic • Strategic • Relator • Ideation • Adaptability From: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2025 1:07 PM To: Jason Mockford <jmockfor@calpoly.edu>; McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Collins, Scott <SCollins@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org> Cc: Joy M. Pedersen <jmpeders@calpoly.edu>; Terrance Leshae Harris <tharris@calpoly.edu>; Courtney Leigh Kienow <ckienow@calpoly.edu> Subject: RE: Alpha Gamma Rho Jason, Thank you. Clarifying question – I see the letter was from June 2023. Did the suspension take place immediately on June 23, 2023, or kick in at some later date? I am asking because I believe our CUP provisions require a 2 year gap in active use, and I want to make sure we have our dates correct if we are going to call upon that provision of the code. Thanks, Timmi 418 From: Jason Mockford <jmockfor@calpoly.edu> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2025 11:38 AM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Collins, Scott <SCollins@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org> Cc: Joy Pederson <jmpeders@calpoly.edu>; Terrance Leshae Harris <tharris@calpoly.edu>; Courtney Leigh Kienow <ckienow@calpoly.edu> Subject: Alpha Gamma Rho Hello all, Please find attached the outcome letter for Alpha Gamma Rho’s suspension in 2023. You will read in the letter that they were to be eligible to return in Fall 2025. However, we have been in communication with their headquarters that there are still a group of students living there that are operating as a fraternity, calling themselves AGR, recruiting, etc. Therefore, they are ineligible to return this Fall having not completed their sanctions. The national fraternity is trying to assist us from afar, and a repeal of the CUP may help them do that. We have been in regular contact with their CEO Rex Martin (rex@alphagammarho.org), who has been helpful, and might be a resource to you if needed. Thank you for the oƯer to assist, Jason Mockford (he, him, his) Senior Director, Leadership & Service | Student Affairs | Cal Poly | San Luis Obispo, CA 93407-0208 | leadandserve.calpoly.edu | 805-756- 2476 Futuristic • Strategic • Relator • Ideation • Adaptability 419 From:Buckley, Nick Sent:Monday, July 21, 2025 3:29 PM To:Petersen, Cecilia Cc:Salem, Rami; Mezzapesa, John; Sheats, Steven Subject:RE: Fraternity/Sorority Inspections Greetings, It is likely that Rami Salem would be the one to attend as he is the safe housing coordinator. I have included code enforcement supervisor John Mezzapesa on this response for further direction and comment. Sincerely, Nick Buckley Code Enforcement Officer II Community Development Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E nbuckley@slocity.org T 805.783.7872 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Petersen, Cecilia <CPeterse@slocity.org> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2025 1:54 PM To: Buckley, Nick <nbuckley@slocity.org> Subject: Fraternity/Sorority Inspections Good afternoon, I’m beginning to coordinate Cal Poly Greek Life’s annual fire and life safety inspections for the fall semester. I wanted to see if you, or anyone from Code Enforcement, would be interested in participating in the process this year. I’ll be sending proposed dates to the chapters for the first week of October. If you have any input or preferences regarding timing or involvement, I’d be happy to incorporate that into the planning. Additionally, would you be able to provide an updated list of fraternities and sororities that currently hold active Conditional Use Permits? It would be helpful to have that information as part of our compliance review. Thank you! Cecilia Petersen Fire Inspector I 420 Fire Department E CPeterse@slocity.org T 805.783.7773 C 805.550.9633 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications 421 From:Armas, Sara Sent:Monday, July 21, 2025 2:44 PM To:Stowe, Lala Cc:LaFreniere, Matt; Tway, Timothea (Timmi); CityClerk Subject:Public Records Request – PRR25231 Ewer - Records relating to U106-98 Attachments:PRR25231 Ewer - Records relating to U106-98.pdf; Public Records Request Hi Lala, Attached is a Public Records request from Emily Ewer for various records relating to the establishment of a CUP at 1236 Monte Vista Place (U106-98), due by 07/31/2025. If you are not able to meet that deadline, please advise. Otherwise, please send the requested responsive documents to cityclerk@slocity.org. Note that our online public archive of PC Staff Reports/Minutes only go back to 2004. We do not have a physical copy of the staff reports/minutes/agendas from that time period in our vault either. Thanks! Sara Armas pronouns she/her/hers Deputy City Clerk I City Administration 990 Palm, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E SArmas@slocity.org T 805.781.7110 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications pdated 05/2023 City of San Luis Obispo Request for Public Records The California Public Records Act (Government Code 7921. et set.) was enacted to ensure public records are available for inspection by members of the public. Completion of this form will assist staff in identifying related records to accurately complete your request. Requested records will be distributed to the email address that is listed on this form, unless directed otherwise by City staff. Requests for printed records will require payment subject to the City’s Comprehensive Fee Schedule. Payment must be rendered prior to production of printed materials. Name: _______________________________________________ Date: ______________________ Last First Address: ________________________________________________________________________ Street & Unit # City State Zip Email: _____________________________________________ Phone: _______________________ Release Forms Requests for certain public records legally require release forms to be submitted for records to be distributed to the requestor. To help expedite your request, please read below and ensure additional information is submitted along with this public records request form. Personal health information Records containing personal health information require a HIPAA Release Form. Examples include fire incident reports, worker’s compensation claims, etc. o HIPAA Release Form Printed residential and/or commercial building plans The Public Records Act does not allow the release of printed copies of this material without the permission of the architect/engineer copyright owner. The public records requestor is responsible for obtaining said authorization by completing all three release forms listed below. You may call the Community Development Department at (805) 781 - 7170 to find out the name of the copyright owner. In-person viewing of plans do not require release forms. o Copies of Plans Affidavit o Plan Request Architect/Engineer Authorization o Plan Request Owner Authorization Continued YOUR REQUEST WILL BE PROCESSED IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT (PRA). California Government Code Section 7921. An Agency shall notify the requestor within 10 days from receipt of request with a Determination which states if the Agency is in possession, in whole or in part, of the requested documents, and possible lega l exemptions which prohibit the release of non-disclosable documents, as outlined per the PRA. In some instances, an Agency may require an extension of up to 14 days to provide a Determination, as authorized by the PRA. A notice will be provided to the requestor setting forth the reasons for the extension and the date on which a Determination is expected to be supplied. Record Information: List the records you are requesting. Specify relevant information such as: subject, title, incident number, location/address, person(s) involved, project name, etc. Date and Time: Specify the incident date or date and time range of the requested records Questions may be directed to the City Clerk’s Office at (805) 781-7100. Submit Completed Forms To: cityclerk@slocity.org OR City Clerk’s Office 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 422 From:Emily Ewer <Emily@oasisassoc.com> Sent:Monday, July 21, 2025 2:17 PM To:CityClerk Subject:Public Records Request Attachments:Public Records Request Form.pdf Hello, Please see attached for a public records request. Please let me know if you have any questions. Regards, Emily Ewer, AICP O A S I S A S S O C I A T E S, I N C. LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE + PLANNING 3427 Miguelito Court, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Office: 805.541.4509 Direct: 805-548-1564 www.OASISASSOC.COM Updated 05/2023 City of San Luis Obispo Request for Public Records The California Public Records Act (Government Code 7921. et set.) was enacted to ensure public records are available for inspection by members of the public. Completion of this form will assist staff in identifying related records to accurately complete your request. Requested records will be distributed to the email address that is listed on this form, unless directed otherwise by City staff. Requests for printed records will require payment subject to the City’s Comprehensive Fee Schedule. Payment must be rendered prior to production of printed materials. Name: _______________________________________________ Date: ______________________ Last First Address: ________________________________________________________________________ _______________________ Release Forms Requests for certain public records legally require release forms to be submitted for records to be distributed to the requestor. To help expedite your request, please read below and ensure additional information is submitted along with this public records request form. •Personal health information Records containing personal health information require a HIP AA Release Form. Examples include fire incident reports, worker’s compensation claims, etc. o HIPAA Release Form •Printed residential and/or commercial building plans The Public Records Act does not allow the release of printed copies of this material without the permission of the architect/engineer copyright owner. The public records requestor is responsible for obtaining said authorization by completing all three release forms listed below. You may call the Community Development Department at (805) 781 - 7170 to find out the name of the copyright owner. In-person viewing of plans do not require release forms. o Copies of Plans Affidavit o Plan Request Architect/Engineer Authorization o Plan Request Owner Authorization Continued YOUR REQUEST WILL BE PROCESSED IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT (PRA). California Government Code Section 7921. An Agency shall notify the requestor within 10 days from receipt of request with a Determination which states if the Agency is in possession, in whole or in part, of the requested documents, and possible lega l exemptions which prohibit the release of non-disclosable documents, as outlined per the PRA. In some instances, an Agency may require an extension of up to 14 days to provide a Determination, as authorized by the PRA. A notice will be provided to the requestor setting forth the reasons for the extension and the date on which a Determination is expected to be supplied. Record Information: List the records you are requesting. Specify relevant information such as: subject, title, incident number, location/address, person(s) involved, project name, etc. Date and Time: Specify the incident date or date and time range of the requested records Questions may be directed to the City Clerk’s Office at (805) 781-7100. Submit Completed Forms To: cityclerk@slocity.org OR City Clerk’s Office 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 423 From:Petersen, Cecilia Sent:Monday, July 21, 2025 1:54 PM To:Buckley, Nick Subject:Fraternity/Sorority Inspections Good afternoon, I’m beginning to coordinate Cal Poly Greek Life’s annual fire and life safety inspections for the fall semester. I wanted to see if you, or anyone from Code Enforcement, would be interested in participating in the process this year. I’ll be sending proposed dates to the chapters for the first week of October. If you have any input or preferences regarding timing or involvement, I’d be happy to incorporate that into the planning. Additionally, would you be able to provide an updated list of fraternities and sororities that currently hold active Conditional Use Permits? It would be helpful to have that information as part of our compliance review. Thank you! Cecilia Petersen Fire Inspector I Fire Department E CPeterse@slocity.org T 805.783.7773 C 805.550.9633 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications 424 From:Jason Mockford <jmockfor@calpoly.edu> Sent:Monday, July 21, 2025 1:09 PM To:Tway, Timothea (Timmi); McDonald, Whitney; Collins, Scott; Hermann, Greg Cc:Joy Pederson; Terrance Leshae Harris; Courtney Leigh Kienow Subject:RE: Alpha Gamma Rho Timmi – Great question. The suspension was eƯective immediately when the letter was sent on June 23, 2023. Jason Mockford (he, him, his) Senior Director, Leadership & Service | Student Affairs | Cal Poly | San Luis Obispo, CA 93407-0208 | leadandserve.calpoly.edu | 805-756- 2476 Futuristic • Strategic • Relator • Ideation • Adaptability From: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2025 1:07 PM To: Jason Mockford <jmockfor@calpoly.edu>; McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Collins, Scott <SCollins@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org> Cc: Joy M. Pedersen <jmpeders@calpoly.edu>; Terrance Leshae Harris <tharris@calpoly.edu>; Courtney Leigh Kienow <ckienow@calpoly.edu> Subject: RE: Alpha Gamma Rho Jason, Thank you. Clarifying question – I see the letter was from June 2023. Did the suspension take place immediately on June 23, 2023, or kick in at some later date? I am asking because I believe our CUP provisions require a 2 year gap in active use, and I want to make sure we have our dates correct if we are going to call upon that provision of the code. Thanks, Timmi From: Jason Mockford <jmockfor@calpoly.edu> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2025 11:38 AM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Collins, Scott <SCollins@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org> Cc: Joy Pederson <jmpeders@calpoly.edu>; Terrance Leshae Harris <tharris@calpoly.edu>; Courtney Leigh Kienow <ckienow@calpoly.edu> Subject: Alpha Gamma Rho Hello all, Please find attached the outcome letter for Alpha Gamma Rho’s suspension in 2023. You will read in the letter that they were to be eligible to return in Fall 2025. However, we have been in communication with their headquarters that there are still a group of students living there that are operating as a fraternity, calling themselves AGR, recruiting, etc. Therefore, they are ineligible to return this Fall having not completed their sanctions. 425 The national fraternity is trying to assist us from afar, and a repeal of the CUP may help them do that. We have been in regular contact with their CEO Rex Martin (rex@alphagammarho.org), who has been helpful, and might be a resource to you if needed. Thank you for the oƯer to assist, Jason Mockford (he, him, his) Senior Director, Leadership & Service | Student Affairs | Cal Poly | San Luis Obispo, CA 93407-0208 | leadandserve.calpoly.edu | 805-756- 2476 Futuristic • Strategic • Relator • Ideation • Adaptability 426 From:Tway, Timothea (Timmi) Sent:Monday, July 21, 2025 1:08 PM To:Corey, Tyler Cc:Cohen, Rachel Subject:FW: Alpha Gamma Rho Attachments:AGR Outcome Letter.pdf FYI, Let’s talk. They have not been a “recognized” fraternity for two years, so we should talk about next steps to pull the CUP. Thanks T From: Jason Mockford <jmockfor@calpoly.edu> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2025 11:38 AM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Collins, Scott <SCollins@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org> Cc: Joy Pederson <jmpeders@calpoly.edu>; Terrance Leshae Harris <tharris@calpoly.edu>; Courtney Leigh Kienow <ckienow@calpoly.edu> Subject: Alpha Gamma Rho Hello all, Please find attached the outcome letter for Alpha Gamma Rho’s suspension in 2023. You will read in the letter that they were to be eligible to return in Fall 2025. However, we have been in communication with their headquarters that there are still a group of students living there that are operating as a fraternity, calling themselves AGR, recruiting, etc. Therefore, they are ineligible to return this Fall having not completed their sanctions. The national fraternity is trying to assist us from afar, and a repeal of the CUP may help them do that. We have been in regular contact with their CEO Rex Martin (rex@alphagammarho.org), who has been helpful, and might be a resource to you if needed. Thank you for the oƯer to assist, Jason Mockford (he, him, his) Senior Director, Leadership & Service | Student Affairs | Cal Poly | San Luis Obispo, CA 93407-0208 | leadandserve.calpoly.edu | 805-756- 2476 Futuristic • Strategic • Relator • Ideation • Adaptability Recognized Student Organization Outcome Letter June 23, 2023 To: , President, Alpha Gamma Rho, Cal Poly Sent Electronically To: Dear , Per the investigatory meeting on May 2, 2023, and based on the evidence gathered to date, Student Rights & Responsibilities has reached a decision about the outcome of the case. The investigation yielded that: Alpha Gama Rho hosted an event on Friday, April 21, 2023 at their main property, located at 132 California Blvd in San Luis Obispo. At this event, students under the legal drinking age had access to or were provided alcohol (beer and hard seltzer), resulting in two students being medically transported to a local hospital due to their intoxication. Additionally, it was determined that Alpha Gamma Rho has been serving hard alcohol (vodka) to students under the legal drinking age, further putting students and their well-being at risk. Alpha Gamma Rho is currently on probation status for a previous investigation, which uncovered another instance where guests were provided or had access to alcohol in fall quarter 2022. Further, documentation provided to the Fraternity & Sorority Life (FSL) office demonstrates that the risk- management policies were not followed, as required by the party registration policy. Specifically, attendees were not documented upon arriving to the event, accurate dates of birth were not recorded, and the fraternity did not check identification. As part of the Outcome Letter issued for the December 2022 incident, Alpha Gamma Rho was to host two “dry” events (completed during winter quarter 2023) while following all party registration policies. As such, the fraternity was expected to be well-informed of the party registration and risk-management policies for the event on April 21, 2023. A copy of the full Investigation Report can be found by accessing the following link: As a result, your chapter is charged with the following subsections of the Recognized Student Organization Code of Conduct: 1. Dishonesty, including: b - Furnishing false information to a University official, faculty member, or campus office. 7. Health & Safety - Conduct that threatens or endangers the health or safety of any person within or related to the University community, including physical abuse, threats, intimidation, harassment, sexual misconduct, throwing bottles or objects that could result in personal injury, or where three or more members of a student organization engage in group violence or taunt others to engage in violence. 10. Alcohol - Use, possession, manufacture, or distribution of alcoholic beverages (except as expressly permitted by law and University policy) or public intoxication while on campus or at a University related activity. (See Cal Poly’s Alcohol Policy regarding on and off campus use, service, sale, and consumption for more detailed information.) 15. Violation of Policies - Violation of any University policy, rule, regulation or presidential order. 18. Violations of Law - Any organization-related act chargeable as a violation of federal, state, or local law that poses a substantial threat to the safety or well-being of members of the University community, to property within the University community, or poses a significant threat of disruption or interference with University operations. 22. Student Organization Events: a - Failure to comply with event approval conditions imposed by the Clubs & Organizations office or other University offices. 22. Student Organization Events: b - Failure to comply with the policies governing student organization events held on campus or funded by the University or a University auxiliary organization. 22. Student Organization Events: c - Failure by a fraternity or sorority to comply with the Party Registration Policy. The sanctions are as follows: Suspension Alpha Gamma Rho will be suspended from Cal Poly Clubs & Organizations (including Fraternity & Sorority Life) for a period of, at minimum, two (2) years. Alpha Gamma Rho will return to active status on campus for fall quarter 2025. During the suspension period, Alpha Gamma Rho will not be approved to recruit new members, use university facilities, use the Cal Poly name associated with the fraternity, or use of the Associated Students Inc. (ASI) facilities. You are hereby instructed to immediately remove any and all reference or affiliation with Cal Poly, its name, likeness, brand or affiliation in any form, whether written or oral, from all communications, documents, bylaws, charters, policies and publications, including, but not limited to, local and national printed materials, social media, and/or website information. Failure to comply with the conditions of a suspended organization will be considered noncompliance with this Outcome Letter. Organizations found to be out of compliance with the suspension status will not have their time counted towards their suspension period. Additionally, failure to comply with the suspension time period may subject the organization to additional time until they will be eligible to return to the university. Any attempt to operate as an active organization will affect the timeline for recognition and the eligibility of the chapter to return to campus. This includes, but is not limited to, recruiting potential new members during the suspension period or operating as Alpha Gamma Rho under the guise of a different club or organization on campus. Risk-Management Training Upon return to campus, Alpha Gamma Rho must complete the appropriate risk-management training program hosted through Cal Poly. The fraternity must have, at minimum, 80% of all members attend and successfully complete the risk-management training. All executive board, or leadership, positions must complete the training, with no exception. The training must be completed within six (6) months of returning to Cal Poly’s campus. This is a serious violation of University policy. If Alpha Gamma Rho further violates the Recognized Student Organization Code of Conduct, you should expect that your chapter could receive increased sanctions, including additional time of suspension. Signing the Resolution Agreement: To acknowledge and memorialize the Resolution Agreement, you may sign and return this agreement to Student Rights & Responsibilities in Building 81 (Hillcrest) or to osrr@calpoly.edu.Outcome letters are not required to be memorialized in writing by chapter presidents for the sanction(s) to take effect. Please be advised that a record of this/these incidents will constitute a disciplinary record for your chapter with the Office of Student Rights & Responsibilities. The chapter file will remain, and can be viewed, in our office. Any further violation(s) of the Recognized Student Organization Code of Conduct for which your organization is found responsible will be regarded as an additional offense and will be treated accordingly. If you have questions, you can contact the office by emailing osrr@calpoly.edu or by calling 805.756.2794. For additional information, please visit the link to the Student Rights & Responsibilities website. Sincerely, Matthew Armas, Assistant Director Student Rights & Responsibilities Cc: File Dr. Keith Humphrey, Vice President for Student Affairs, Cal Poly Dr. Joy Pedersen, Dean of Students, Cal Poly Dr. Jo Campbell, Associate Vice President for Student Affairs & Executive Director of University Housing, Cal Poly Dr. David Groom, Senior Associate Dean of Students, Cal Poly Dr. Brad Pulcipher, Director for Student Rights & Responsibilities, Cal Poly Jason Mockford, Senior Director of Leadership & Service, Cal Poly Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola, Assistant Director, Fraternity & Sorority Life, Cal Poly Rex Martin, Chief Executive Officer, Alpha Gamma Rho President, Alpha Gamma Rho, Cal Poly 427 From:Tway, Timothea (Timmi) Sent:Monday, July 21, 2025 1:07 PM To:Jason Mockford; McDonald, Whitney; Collins, Scott; Hermann, Greg Cc:Joy Pederson; Terrance Leshae Harris; Courtney Leigh Kienow Subject:RE: Alpha Gamma Rho Jason, Thank you. Clarifying question – I see the letter was from June 2023. Did the suspension take place immediately on June 23, 2023, or kick in at some later date? I am asking because I believe our CUP provisions require a 2 year gap in active use, and I want to make sure we have our dates correct if we are going to call upon that provision of the code. Thanks, Timmi From: Jason Mockford <jmockfor@calpoly.edu> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2025 11:38 AM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Collins, Scott <SCollins@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org> Cc: Joy Pederson <jmpeders@calpoly.edu>; Terrance Leshae Harris <tharris@calpoly.edu>; Courtney Leigh Kienow <ckienow@calpoly.edu> Subject: Alpha Gamma Rho Hello all, Please find attached the outcome letter for Alpha Gamma Rho’s suspension in 2023. You will read in the letter that they were to be eligible to return in Fall 2025. However, we have been in communication with their headquarters that there are still a group of students living there that are operating as a fraternity, calling themselves AGR, recruiting, etc. Therefore, they are ineligible to return this Fall having not completed their sanctions. The national fraternity is trying to assist us from afar, and a repeal of the CUP may help them do that. We have been in regular contact with their CEO Rex Martin (rex@alphagammarho.org), who has been helpful, and might be a resource to you if needed. Thank you for the oƯer to assist, Jason Mockford (he, him, his) Senior Director, Leadership & Service | Student Affairs | Cal Poly | San Luis Obispo, CA 93407-0208 | leadandserve.calpoly.edu | 805-756- 2476 Futuristic • Strategic • Relator • Ideation • Adaptability 428 From:Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Sent:Monday, July 21, 2025 12:31 PM To:Wallace, Christine Subject:RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC Hi Christine, Thank you for clarifying, we appreciate it! Best Regards, Mary Sanchez bothwellco.com Mary Sanchez Executive Assistant at Bothwell Co. E mary@bothwellco.com O: (858) 764-1963 C: ( From: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2025 10:27 AM To: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Subject: RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC Absolutely we will issue a refund. I have a call into the finance supervisor to get that expedited. Coming off the list means the fine structure resets to zero and the tenants are eligible for a warning. The no-warning list is on a 9 month cycle; if a property doesn’t have any violations after being on the list for those 9 months, it will come off. CW From: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2025 10:14 AM To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC Importance: High Hi Christine, Thank you for the update. Regarding 274.5 Hathway, I previously paid the $1,000 fine, would that be eligible for reimbursement? Also, I wanted to update you that I’ve spoken with all of the tenants. We’re taking the matter seriously and have made it clear that all partying must stop until they are removed from the warning list. 429 Regarding the warning list, once the main house - 274 Hathway is removed, what does that actually mean? They still have two noise violations on record, so I’d like to clarify what the next steps would be if a third violation were to occur. Best Regards, Mary Sanchez bothwellco.com Mary Sanchez Executive Assistant at Bothwell Co. E mary@bothwellco.com O: (858) 764-1963 C: ( From: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2025 9:45 AM To: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Subject: RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC Hi Mary, Kieran did reach out and I’m going to be amending the information that was sent to the owner. He explained that the party was associated to the ADU and that they met with the officer at the entrance to the backyard. He fully owned that the party was not associated to the front house. Thus, 274 Hathway will be on the list until 8/8/25 and then 274.5 will be on the list until 3/6/26. The property owner citation issued will be rescinded and the invoice voided for the 6/6/25 violation. There will not be a property owner citation associated with the violation as it is the first one associated to the ADU. My clerical staff will be here later this week and get the new letter sent out. Thanks for your patience with this one, Christine From: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Sent: Friday, July 18, 2025 7:55 AM To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC Importance: High Hi Christine, Thank you! I had the boys follow up with you directly, and it sounds like Kieran has already reached out. I just wanted to confirm one detail: you mentioned that the 274 Main house is on the warning list through March 2026. Is that still accurate, or has there been an update? Best Regards, Mary Sanchez 430 bothwellco.com Mary Sanchez Executive Assistant at Bothwell Co. E mary@bothwellco.com O: (858) 764-1963 C: ( From: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 3:36 PM To: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Subject: RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC The ADU is not on the no-warning list. The main house is on the list until 3.6.26. I’ve attached a copy of the citation with the officer’s notes, it appears the party was taking place in the backyard. This property is complicated because the front house is where the officers are naturally going to go but I don’t know what they experience each time there is a noise complaint. If noise was clearly identified as coming from the ADU, that’s when the officers would address the residents there. Our system shows as two separate units on the same parcel so treated as separate residences but we are also working off information that these residents are all part of the same fraternity which then causes us to refer to the property as a possible satellite fraternity house. It doesn’t change anything except we don’t send SNAP to noise complaints, only patrol. Best, CW From: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 3:13 PM To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC HI Christine, Thank you for your prompt response. Could you please confirm if there’s any additional context regarding the recent incident? For example, did the oƯicer knock on the front door of the yellow house and the individual who was cited simply happen to answer? Or was the citation specifically issued for the ADU? I’m also wondering how these homes are typically classified, are citations issued collectively to both the ADU and main house, or are they treated as two separate residences? I understand they share a backyard, which may complicate things. I also noticed the citation mentioned around 40 people. Can you confirm whether the kids were actually gathered in front of the main house when the oƯicer arrived? Lastly, could you clarify when the kids will be removed from the 9-month warning list? Best Regards, Mary Sanchez 431 bothwellco.com Mary Sanchez Executive Assistant at Bothwell Co. E mary@bothwellco.com O: (858) 764-1963 C: ( From: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 3:00 PM To: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Subject: RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC Hi Mary, For the ADU, I have zero noise calls since 2023. For the main house, I’ve got the following: Ghazanfari cited on 8.17.24 Turpin cited on 11.8.24 Bendersky cited on 6.6.25 Let me know how else I can help. Thanks, Christine From: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 2:43 PM To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: 274 HATHWAY LLC Importance: High Hi Christine, Hope all is well. I’m reaching out to provide you with an update on the tenancy of the two homes. Could you please forward me any violations you have on file for the properties and the tenants listed below? Thank you in advance and let me know if you need any additional information. 274.5 Hathway – ADU:  These tenants moved in 06/25/2024 and renewed through 06/21/2026  Azen D. Bendersky  Kieran J. Govoni 274 Hathway - Main House:  All tenants moved in 06/25/2024 and renewed through 06/21/2026.  Carter A. Quartararo 432  Jacob D. Weingarten  Arian Ghazanfari  Joshua D. Turpin  Cole J. Turpin Best Regards, Mary Sanchez bothwellco.com Mary Sanchez Executive Assistant at Bothwell Co. E mary@bothwellco.com O: (858) 764-1963 C: ( 433 From:Jason Mockford <jmockfor@calpoly.edu> Sent:Monday, July 21, 2025 11:38 AM To:Tway, Timothea (Timmi); McDonald, Whitney; Collins, Scott; Hermann, Greg Cc:Joy Pederson; Terrance Leshae Harris; Courtney Leigh Kienow Subject:Alpha Gamma Rho Attachments:AGR Outcome Letter.pdf Hello all, Please find attached the outcome letter for Alpha Gamma Rho’s suspension in 2023. You will read in the letter that they were to be eligible to return in Fall 2025. However, we have been in communication with their headquarters that there are still a group of students living there that are operating as a fraternity, calling themselves AGR, recruiting, etc. Therefore, they are ineligible to return this Fall having not completed their sanctions. The national fraternity is trying to assist us from afar, and a repeal of the CUP may help them do that. We have been in regular contact with their CEO Rex Martin (rex@alphagammarho.org), who has been helpful, and might be a resource to you if needed. Thank you for the oƯer to assist, Jason Mockford (he, him, his) Senior Director, Leadership & Service | Student Affairs | Cal Poly | San Luis Obispo, CA 93407-0208 | leadandserve.calpoly.edu | 805-756- 2476 Futuristic • Strategic • Relator • Ideation • Adaptability Recognized Student Organization Outcome Letter June 23, 2023 To: , President, Alpha Gamma Rho, Cal Poly Sent Electronically To: Dear , Per the investigatory meeting on May 2, 2023, and based on the evidence gathered to date, Student Rights & Responsibilities has reached a decision about the outcome of the case. The investigation yielded that: Alpha Gama Rho hosted an event on Friday, April 21, 2023 at their main property, located at 132 California Blvd in San Luis Obispo. At this event, students under the legal drinking age had access to or were provided alcohol (beer and hard seltzer), resulting in two students being medically transported to a local hospital due to their intoxication. Additionally, it was determined that Alpha Gamma Rho has been serving hard alcohol (vodka) to students under the legal drinking age, further putting students and their well-being at risk. Alpha Gamma Rho is currently on probation status for a previous investigation, which uncovered another instance where guests were provided or had access to alcohol in fall quarter 2022. Further, documentation provided to the Fraternity & Sorority Life (FSL) office demonstrates that the risk- management policies were not followed, as required by the party registration policy. Specifically, attendees were not documented upon arriving to the event, accurate dates of birth were not recorded, and the fraternity did not check identification. As part of the Outcome Letter issued for the December 2022 incident, Alpha Gamma Rho was to host two “dry” events (completed during winter quarter 2023) while following all party registration policies. As such, the fraternity was expected to be well-informed of the party registration and risk-management policies for the event on April 21, 2023. A copy of the full Investigation Report can be found by accessing the following link: As a result, your chapter is charged with the following subsections of the Recognized Student Organization Code of Conduct: 1. Dishonesty, including: b - Furnishing false information to a University official, faculty member, or campus office. 7. Health & Safety - Conduct that threatens or endangers the health or safety of any person within or related to the University community, including physical abuse, threats, intimidation, harassment, sexual misconduct, throwing bottles or objects that could result in personal injury, or where three or more members of a student organization engage in group violence or taunt others to engage in violence. 10. Alcohol - Use, possession, manufacture, or distribution of alcoholic beverages (except as expressly permitted by law and University policy) or public intoxication while on campus or at a University related activity. (See Cal Poly’s Alcohol Policy regarding on and off campus use, service, sale, and consumption for more detailed information.) 15. Violation of Policies - Violation of any University policy, rule, regulation or presidential order. 18. Violations of Law - Any organization-related act chargeable as a violation of federal, state, or local law that poses a substantial threat to the safety or well-being of members of the University community, to property within the University community, or poses a significant threat of disruption or interference with University operations. 22. Student Organization Events: a - Failure to comply with event approval conditions imposed by the Clubs & Organizations office or other University offices. 22. Student Organization Events: b - Failure to comply with the policies governing student organization events held on campus or funded by the University or a University auxiliary organization. 22. Student Organization Events: c - Failure by a fraternity or sorority to comply with the Party Registration Policy. The sanctions are as follows: Suspension Alpha Gamma Rho will be suspended from Cal Poly Clubs & Organizations (including Fraternity & Sorority Life) for a period of, at minimum, two (2) years. Alpha Gamma Rho will return to active status on campus for fall quarter 2025. During the suspension period, Alpha Gamma Rho will not be approved to recruit new members, use university facilities, use the Cal Poly name associated with the fraternity, or use of the Associated Students Inc. (ASI) facilities. You are hereby instructed to immediately remove any and all reference or affiliation with Cal Poly, its name, likeness, brand or affiliation in any form, whether written or oral, from all communications, documents, bylaws, charters, policies and publications, including, but not limited to, local and national printed materials, social media, and/or website information. Failure to comply with the conditions of a suspended organization will be considered noncompliance with this Outcome Letter. Organizations found to be out of compliance with the suspension status will not have their time counted towards their suspension period. Additionally, failure to comply with the suspension time period may subject the organization to additional time until they will be eligible to return to the university. Any attempt to operate as an active organization will affect the timeline for recognition and the eligibility of the chapter to return to campus. This includes, but is not limited to, recruiting potential new members during the suspension period or operating as Alpha Gamma Rho under the guise of a different club or organization on campus. Risk-Management Training Upon return to campus, Alpha Gamma Rho must complete the appropriate risk-management training program hosted through Cal Poly. The fraternity must have, at minimum, 80% of all members attend and successfully complete the risk-management training. All executive board, or leadership, positions must complete the training, with no exception. The training must be completed within six (6) months of returning to Cal Poly’s campus. This is a serious violation of University policy. If Alpha Gamma Rho further violates the Recognized Student Organization Code of Conduct, you should expect that your chapter could receive increased sanctions, including additional time of suspension. Signing the Resolution Agreement: To acknowledge and memorialize the Resolution Agreement, you may sign and return this agreement to Student Rights & Responsibilities in Building 81 (Hillcrest) or to osrr@calpoly.edu.Outcome letters are not required to be memorialized in writing by chapter presidents for the sanction(s) to take effect. Please be advised that a record of this/these incidents will constitute a disciplinary record for your chapter with the Office of Student Rights & Responsibilities. The chapter file will remain, and can be viewed, in our office. Any further violation(s) of the Recognized Student Organization Code of Conduct for which your organization is found responsible will be regarded as an additional offense and will be treated accordingly. If you have questions, you can contact the office by emailing osrr@calpoly.edu or by calling 805.756.2794. For additional information, please visit the link to the Student Rights & Responsibilities website. Sincerely, Matthew Armas, Assistant Director Student Rights & Responsibilities Cc: File Dr. Keith Humphrey, Vice President for Student Affairs, Cal Poly Dr. Joy Pedersen, Dean of Students, Cal Poly Dr. Jo Campbell, Associate Vice President for Student Affairs & Executive Director of University Housing, Cal Poly Dr. David Groom, Senior Associate Dean of Students, Cal Poly Dr. Brad Pulcipher, Director for Student Rights & Responsibilities, Cal Poly Jason Mockford, Senior Director of Leadership & Service, Cal Poly Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola, Assistant Director, Fraternity & Sorority Life, Cal Poly Rex Martin, Chief Executive Officer, Alpha Gamma Rho President, Alpha Gamma Rho, Cal Poly 434 From:Wallace, Christine Sent:Monday, July 21, 2025 10:27 AM To:Mary Sanchez Subject:RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC Absolutely we will issue a refund. I have a call into the finance supervisor to get that expedited. Coming off the list means the fine structure resets to zero and the tenants are eligible for a warning. The no-warning list is on a 9 month cycle; if a property doesn’t have any violations after being on the list for those 9 months, it will come off. CW From: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2025 10:14 AM To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC Importance: High Hi Christine, Thank you for the update. Regarding 274.5 Hathway, I previously paid the $1,000 fine, would that be eligible for reimbursement? Also, I wanted to update you that I’ve spoken with all of the tenants. We’re taking the matter seriously and have made it clear that all partying must stop until they are removed from the warning list. Regarding the warning list, once the main house - 274 Hathway is removed, what does that actually mean? They still have two noise violations on record, so I’d like to clarify what the next steps would be if a third violation were to occur. Best Regards, Mary Sanchez bothwellco.com Mary Sanchez Executive Assistant at Bothwell Co. E mary@bothwellco.com O: (858) 764-1963 C: ( From: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2025 9:45 AM To: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Subject: RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC 435 Hi Mary, Kieran did reach out and I’m going to be amending the information that was sent to the owner. He explained that the party was associated to the ADU and that they met with the officer at the entrance to the backyard. He fully owned that the party was not associated to the front house. Thus, 274 Hathway will be on the list until 8/8/25 and then 274.5 will be on the list until 3/6/26. The property owner citation issued will be rescinded and the invoice voided for the 6/6/25 violation. There will not be a property owner citation associated with the violation as it is the first one associated to the ADU. My clerical staff will be here later this week and get the new letter sent out. Thanks for your patience with this one, Christine From: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Sent: Friday, July 18, 2025 7:55 AM To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC Importance: High Hi Christine, Thank you! I had the boys follow up with you directly, and it sounds like Kieran has already reached out. I just wanted to confirm one detail: you mentioned that the 274 Main house is on the warning list through March 2026. Is that still accurate, or has there been an update? Best Regards, Mary Sanchez bothwellco.com Mary Sanchez Executive Assistant at Bothwell Co. E mary@bothwellco.com O: (858) 764-1963 C: ( From: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 3:36 PM To: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Subject: RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC The ADU is not on the no-warning list. The main house is on the list until 3.6.26. I’ve attached a copy of the citation with the officer’s notes, it appears the party was taking place in the backyard. This property is complicated because the front house is where the officers are naturally going to go but I don’t know what they experience each time there is a noise complaint. If noise was clearly identified as coming from the ADU, that’s when the officers would address the residents there. Our system shows as two separate units on the same parcel so treated as separate residences but we are also working off information that these residents are all part of the 436 same fraternity which then causes us to refer to the property as a possible satellite fraternity house. It doesn’t change anything except we don’t send SNAP to noise complaints, only patrol. Best, CW From: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 3:13 PM To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC HI Christine, Thank you for your prompt response. Could you please confirm if there’s any additional context regarding the recent incident? For example, did the oƯicer knock on the front door of the yellow house and the individual who was cited simply happen to answer? Or was the citation specifically issued for the ADU? I’m also wondering how these homes are typically classified, are citations issued collectively to both the ADU and main house, or are they treated as two separate residences? I understand they share a backyard, which may complicate things. I also noticed the citation mentioned around 40 people. Can you confirm whether the kids were actually gathered in front of the main house when the o Ưicer arrived? Lastly, could you clarify when the kids will be removed from the 9-month warning list? Best Regards, Mary Sanchez bothwellco.com Mary Sanchez Executive Assistant at Bothwell Co. E mary@bothwellco.com O: (858) 764-1963 C: ( From: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 3:00 PM To: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Subject: RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC Hi Mary, For the ADU, I have zero noise calls since 2023. For the main house, I’ve got the following: Ghazanfari cited on 8.17.24 437 Turpin cited on 11.8.24 Bendersky cited on 6.6.25 Let me know how else I can help. Thanks, Christine From: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 2:43 PM To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: 274 HATHWAY LLC Importance: High Hi Christine, Hope all is well. I’m reaching out to provide you with an update on the tenancy of the two homes. Could you please forward me any violations you have on file for the properties and the tenants listed below? Thank you in advance and let me know if you need any additional information. 274.5 Hathway – ADU:  These tenants moved in 06/25/2024 and renewed through 06/21/2026  Azen D. Bendersky  Kieran J. Govoni 274 Hathway - Main House:  All tenants moved in 06/25/2024 and renewed through 06/21/2026.  Carter A. Quartararo  Jacob D. Weingarten  Arian Ghazanfari  Joshua D. Turpin  Cole J. Turpin Best Regards, Mary Sanchez bothwellco.com Mary Sanchez Executive Assistant at Bothwell Co. E mary@bothwellco.com O: (858) 764-1963 C: ( 438 From:Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Sent:Monday, July 21, 2025 10:14 AM To:Wallace, Christine Subject:RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC Importance:High Hi Christine, Thank you for the update. Regarding 274.5 Hathway, I previously paid the $1,000 fine, would that be eligible for reimbursement? Also, I wanted to update you that I’ve spoken with all of the tenants. We’re taking the matter seriously and have made it clear that all partying must stop until they are removed from the warning list. Regarding the warning list, once the main house - 274 Hathway is removed, what does that actually mean? They still have two noise violations on record, so I’d like to clarify what the next steps would be if a third violation were to occur. Best Regards, Mary Sanchez bothwellco.com Mary Sanchez Executive Assistant at Bothwell Co. E mary@bothwellco.com O: (858) 764-1963 C: ( From: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Sent: Monday, July 21, 2025 9:45 AM To: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Subject: RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC Hi Mary, Kieran did reach out and I’m going to be amending the information that was sent to the owner. He explained that the party was associated to the ADU and that they met with the officer at the entrance to the backyard. He fully owned that the party was not associated to the front house. Thus, 274 Hathway will be on the list until 8/8/25 and then 274.5 will be on the list until 3/6/26. The property owner citation issued will be rescinded and the invoice voided for the 6/6/25 violation. There will not be a property owner citation associated with the violation as it is the first one associated to the ADU. My clerical staff will be here later this week and get the new letter sent out. Thanks for your patience with this one, 439 Christine From: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Sent: Friday, July 18, 2025 7:55 AM To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC Importance: High Hi Christine, Thank you! I had the boys follow up with you directly, and it sounds like Kieran has already reached out. I just wanted to confirm one detail: you mentioned that the 274 Main house is on the warning list through March 2026. Is that still accurate, or has there been an update? Best Regards, Mary Sanchez bothwellco.com Mary Sanchez Executive Assistant at Bothwell Co. E mary@bothwellco.com O: (858) 764-1963 C: ( From: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 3:36 PM To: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Subject: RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC The ADU is not on the no-warning list. The main house is on the list until 3.6.26. I’ve attached a copy of the citation with the officer’s notes, it appears the party was taking place in the backyard. This property is complicated because the front house is where the officers are naturally going to go but I don’t know what they experience each time there is a noise complaint. If noise was clearly identified as coming from the ADU, that’s when the officers would address the residents there. Our system shows as two separate units on the same parcel so treated as separate residences but we are also working off information that these residents are all part of the same fraternity which then causes us to refer to the property as a possible satellite fraternity house. It doesn’t change anything except we don’t send SNAP to noise complaints, only patrol. Best, CW From: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 3:13 PM To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC 440 HI Christine, Thank you for your prompt response. Could you please confirm if there’s any additional context regarding the recent incident? For example, did the oƯicer knock on the front door of the yellow house and the individual who was cited simply happen to answer? Or was the citation specifically issued for the ADU? I’m also wondering how these homes are typically classified, are citations issued collectively to both the ADU and main house, or are they treated as two separate residences? I understand they share a backyard, which may complicate things. I also noticed the citation mentioned around 40 people. Can you confirm whether the kids were actually gathered in front of the main house when the oƯicer arrived? Lastly, could you clarify when the kids will be removed from the 9-month warning list? Best Regards, Mary Sanchez bothwellco.com Mary Sanchez Executive Assistant at Bothwell Co. E mary@bothwellco.com O: (858) 764-1963 C: ( From: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 3:00 PM To: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Subject: RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC Hi Mary, For the ADU, I have zero noise calls since 2023. For the main house, I’ve got the following: Ghazanfari cited on 8.17.24 Turpin cited on 11.8.24 Bendersky cited on 6.6.25 Let me know how else I can help. Thanks, Christine From: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 2:43 PM To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> 441 Subject: 274 HATHWAY LLC Importance: High Hi Christine, Hope all is well. I’m reaching out to provide you with an update on the tenancy of the two homes. Could you please forward me any violations you have on file for the properties and the tenants listed below? Thank you in advance and let me know if you need any additional information. 274.5 Hathway – ADU:  These tenants moved in 06/25/2024 and renewed through 06/21/2026  Azen D. Bendersky  Kieran J. Govoni 274 Hathway - Main House:  All tenants moved in 06/25/2024 and renewed through 06/21/2026.  Carter A. Quartararo  Jacob D. Weingarten  Arian Ghazanfari  Joshua D. Turpin  Cole J. Turpin Best Regards, Mary Sanchez bothwellco.com Mary Sanchez Executive Assistant at Bothwell Co. E mary@bothwellco.com O: (858) 764-1963 C: ( 442 From:Wallace, Christine Sent:Monday, July 21, 2025 9:47 AM To:Peter Adams Subject:RE: Noise Violation Early Removal I am so confused by that. Thanks for letting me know, I’ll ask IT to investigate. Best, Christine From: Peter Adams < Sent: Monday, July 21, 2025 9:42 AM To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Noise Violation Early Removal Ah, I think they are in the same fraternity. So, never mind. Just fyi though, when I went on line to the link, it required a username and password - so I wasn’t able to use it. Sent from my iPhone On Jul 21, 2025, at 9:08 AM, Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> wrote: Hi Peter, No account is needed to submit the e-form: https://forms.slocity.org/Forms/Early_Removal Before submittal, are your new renters members of the same fraternity that have just moved out? If they are, SLOPD is no longer offering early removal from the list. Best, Christine Wallace Police Public Affairs Manager <image001.png> Police Department 1042 Walnut Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-2729 E cwallace@slocity.org T 805.781.7186 slocity.org <image002.png> <image003.png> <image004.png> <image005.png> <image006.png> Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications 443 This e-mail, and any files transmitted with it, are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential, protected, and/or privileged material. Any review, re-transmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient, is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. From: Peter Adams < Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2025 3:29 PM To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: Noise Violation Early Removal Hello. I tried to do this on line but don't have an account so was not able to do so. I am the owner of 281 Albert Drive, SLO, CA 93405. You sent me a letter dated May 12, 2025 regarding noise violation citations issued to my tenants there. All of those individuals have moved out and their leases have expired, as of June 30, 2025. I have all new people now leasing the property. Accordingly I am requesting the property be removed from the "No Warning List". Thank you for your consideration of this request. Peter Adams 444 From:Wallace, Christine Sent:Monday, July 21, 2025 9:45 AM To:Mary Sanchez Subject:RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC Hi Mary, Kieran did reach out and I’m going to be amending the information that was sent to the owner. He explained that the party was associated to the ADU and that they met with the officer at the entrance to the backyard. He fully owned that the party was not associated to the front house. Thus, 274 Hathway will be on the list until 8/8/25 and then 274.5 will be on the list until 3/6/26. The property owner citation issued will be rescinded and the invoice voided for the 6/6/25 violation. There will not be a property owner citation associated with the violation as it is the first one associated to the ADU. My clerical staff will be here later this week and get the new letter sent out. Thanks for your patience with this one, Christine From: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Sent: Friday, July 18, 2025 7:55 AM To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC Importance: High Hi Christine, Thank you! I had the boys follow up with you directly, and it sounds like Kieran has already reached out. I just wanted to confirm one detail: you mentioned that the 274 Main house is on the warning list through March 2026. Is that still accurate, or has there been an update? Best Regards, Mary Sanchez bothwellco.com Mary Sanchez Executive Assistant at Bothwell Co. E mary@bothwellco.com O: (858) 764-1963 C: ( From: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 3:36 PM 445 To: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Subject: RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC The ADU is not on the no-warning list. The main house is on the list until 3.6.26. I’ve attached a copy of the citation with the officer’s notes, it appears the party was taking place in the backyard. This property is complicated because the front house is where the officers are naturally going to go but I don’t know what they experience each time there is a noise complaint. If noise was clearly identified as coming from the ADU, that’s when the officers would address the residents there. Our system shows as two separate units on the same parcel so treated as separate residences but we are also working off information that these residents are all part of the same fraternity which then causes us to refer to the property as a possible satellite fraternity house. It doesn’t change anything except we don’t send SNAP to noise complaints, only patrol. Best, CW From: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 3:13 PM To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC HI Christine, Thank you for your prompt response. Could you please confirm if there’s any additional context regarding the recent incident? For example, did the oƯicer knock on the front door of the yellow house and the individual who was cited simply happen to answer? Or was the citation specifically issued for the ADU? I’m also wondering how these homes are typically classified, are citations issued collectively to both the ADU and main house, or are they treated as two separate residences? I understand they share a backyard, which may complicate things. I also noticed the citation mentioned around 40 people. Can you confirm whether the kids were actually gathered in front of the main house when the o Ưicer arrived? Lastly, could you clarify when the kids will be removed from the 9-month warning list? Best Regards, Mary Sanchez bothwellco.com Mary Sanchez Executive Assistant at Bothwell Co. E mary@bothwellco.com O: (858) 764-1963 C: ( From: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 3:00 PM 446 To: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Subject: RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC Hi Mary, For the ADU, I have zero noise calls since 2023. For the main house, I’ve got the following: Ghazanfari cited on 8.17.24 Turpin cited on 11.8.24 Bendersky cited on 6.6.25 Let me know how else I can help. Thanks, Christine From: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 2:43 PM To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: 274 HATHWAY LLC Importance: High Hi Christine, Hope all is well. I’m reaching out to provide you with an update on the tenancy of the two homes. Could you please forward me any violations you have on file for the properties and the tenants listed below? Thank you in advance and let me know if you need any additional information. 274.5 Hathway – ADU:  These tenants moved in 06/25/2024 and renewed through 06/21/2026  Azen D. Bendersky  Kieran J. Govoni 274 Hathway - Main House:  All tenants moved in 06/25/2024 and renewed through 06/21/2026.  Carter A. Quartararo  Jacob D. Weingarten  Arian Ghazanfari  Joshua D. Turpin  Cole J. Turpin Best Regards, Mary Sanchez 447 bothwellco.com Mary Sanchez Executive Assistant at Bothwell Co. E mary@bothwellco.com O: (858) 764-1963 C: ( 448 From:Peter Adams < Sent:Monday, July 21, 2025 9:42 AM To:Wallace, Christine Subject:Re: Noise Violation Early Removal Ah, I think they are in the same fraternity. So, never mind. Just fyi though, when I went on line to the link, it required a username and password - so I wasn’t able to use it. Sent from my iPhone On Jul 21, 2025, at 9:08 AM, Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> wrote: Hi Peter, No account is needed to submit the e-form: https://forms.slocity.org/Forms/Early_Removal Before submittal, are your new renters members of the same fraternity that have just moved out? If they are, SLOPD is no longer offering early removal from the list. Best, Christine Wallace Police Public Affairs Manager <image001.png> Police Department 1042 Walnut Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-2729 E cwallace@slocity.org T 805.781.7186 slocity.org <image002.png> <image003.png> <image004.png> <image005.png> <image006.png> Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications This e-mail, and any files transmitted with it, are intended only for the person or entity to which it is addressed and may contain confidential, protected, and/or privileged material. Any review, re-transmission, dissemination or other use of, or taking of any action in reliance upon this 449 information by persons or entities other than the intended recipient, is prohibited. If you received this in error, please contact the sender and delete the material from any computer. From: Peter Adams < Sent: Sunday, July 20, 2025 3:29 PM To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: Noise Violation Early Removal Hello. I tried to do this on line but don't have an account so was not able to do so. I am the owner of 281 Albert Drive, SLO, CA 93405. You sent me a letter dated May 12, 2025 regarding noise violation citations issued to my tenants there. All of those individuals have moved out and their leases have expired, as of June 30, 2025. I have all new people now leasing the property. Accordingly I am requesting the property be removed from the "No Warning List". Thank you for your consideration of this request. Peter Adams 450 From:Shoresman, Michelle Sent:Saturday, July 19, 2025 7:52 AM To:McDonald, Whitney Subject:Re: Weekly Update Sounds like a very productive meeting with Cal Poly. Some of those ideas have been brought up before (obviously, like a Greek row on campus), but when I it brought up at the last campus planning meeting, there was a pretty “no go” attitude toward it, mostly because the sentiment was that this type of housing wasn’t dense enough. They said they needed more density with the space they have on campus, basically. That they would be interested maybe in floors of buildings dedicated to F&S, but that was it. Sounds like there is more room for discussion. Anyway, thanks again for the updates. From: McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org> Sent: Friday, July 18, 2025 8:03:27 PM To: Collins, Scott <SCollins@slocity.org>; Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Dietrick, Christine <cdietric@slocity.org> Subject: Weekly Update BCC: Mayor and Council Good evening, Mayor and Council. Just a quick reminder at the outset that this will be my last weekly update until I return from vacation the first week of August. Here are updates from this week:  451  Greek Housing Meeting with Cal Poly – On Wednesday, Scott, Greg, Timmi, and I met with Cal Poly staff, including Courtney Kienow, Terrence Harris, Joy Pederson, and Jason Mockford, to discuss the impacts of Greek housing and activity in the City, as well as potential solutions. Attached is an email from Courtney with some notes of our discussion. We are working to schedule another meeting in August, in addition to a meeting we have on the books for September, to continue our discussions. The meeting was positive and productive, with each of us committing to evaluate a number of ideas. My main request to Cal Poly was for them to intercede in the events that fraternities and sororities are hosting, and registering with Cal Poly, to shift them to more appropriate locations than our residential neighborhoods. We also discussed overlay zone concepts, the role of landlords, different enforcement tools (such as criminal citations for noise violations), and the development of a Greek row. More to come on these efforts!  452 Hope everyone has a wonderful weekend! Whitney Whitney McDonald pronouns (she/hers) City Manager City Administration 990 Palm, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3934 E WMcDonal@slocity.org T 805.781.7114 C 805.550.8349 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications 453 From:McDonald, Whitney Sent:Friday, July 18, 2025 8:03 PM To:Collins, Scott; Hermann, Greg; Dietrick, Christine Subject:Weekly Update Attachments:3CE Update Re: H.R. 1 and Senate Bill 540 (Becker - Regional Markets); 3CE Board Update for 7/11; Action Items: City of SLO Fraternity and Sorority Life Housing Challenges; Letters to the Mayor & City Council ; California Consensus Forecast 1Q 2025 - HdL Companies.pdf; San Luis Obispo 1Q25 Newsletter.pdf BCC: Mayor and Council Good evening, Mayor and Council. Just a quick reminder at the outset that this will be my last weekly update until I return from vacation the first week of August. Here are updates from this week:   Greek Housing Meeting with Cal Poly – On Wednesday, Scott, Greg, Timmi, and I met with Cal Poly staff, including Courtney Kienow, Terrence Harris, Joy Pederson, and Jason Mockford, to discuss the impacts of Greek housing and activity in the City, as well as potential solutions. Attached is an email from Courtney with some notes of our discussion. We are working to schedule another meeting in August, in addition to a meeting we have on the books for September, to continue our discussions. The meeting was positive and productive, with each of us committing to evaluate a number of ideas. My main request to Cal Poly was for them to intercede in the events that fraternities and sororities are hosting, and registering with Cal Poly, to shift them to more appropriate locations than our residential neighborhoods. We also discussed overlay zone concepts, the role of landlords, different enforcement tools (such as criminal citations for noise violations), and the development of a Greek row. More to come on these efforts!  454 Hope everyone has a wonderful weekend! Whitney Whitney McDonald pronouns (she/hers) City Manager City Administration 990 Palm, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3934 E WMcDonal@slocity.org T 805.781.7114 C 805.550.8349 455 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications 1 From:Courtney Leigh Kienow <ckienow@calpoly.edu> Sent:Thursday, July 17, 2025 7:19 AM To:McDonald, Whitney; Hermann, Greg; Collins, Scott; Tway, Timothea (Timmi); Jo Campbell; Joy Pederson; Jason Mockford; Terrance Leshae Harris Subject:Action Items: City of SLO Fraternity and Sorority Life Housing Challenges Good morning, Thank you for the thoughtful conversation regarding certain student behaviors and the related neighborhood challenges. We appreciate your partnership and shared commitment to finding eƯective solutions for our community. City oƯered to identify and bring back: **data by individual neighborhoods where are calls for service responding to? who is calling? City considerations: Noise ordinance changes? Criminal charges instead of administrative citation? City asks of Cal Poly/CP commits to exploring: **Greek row **Asking to know where Fraternity and sorority sponsored events are taking place? **host alcohol events on campus **what on campus venues are available to them? Option to host more events on campus? **request to require F&S to not hold events in places where city zoning laws don’t allow **stronger language in event responses for R-1 and R-2 zones when hosting events. OƯering other good options for them. **more police enforcement oƯ campus Collective ideas to explore: **mediation, potential funding from Cuesta, City, CP Cal Poly asks of the City/City commits to explore: **CUPs: what do they look like, what’s needed, what does the city need to consider that works for fraternities? **Overlay zone exploration **Greek row or zoning **Re-evaluate codes relevant to the conversation **OƯer to help with the event form – zoning specifics **Colin and small cohort of presidents that meet and talk about what they need and then work with CDD on shaping CUPs and other related poilicies Future meeting: **Didn’t get to talk about consequences through IFC judicial council and OSRR – escalating consequences for noise ordinances. **SCLC **Role of landlords Overlay zone examples: Neighborhood stabilization zones Santa Clara Berkeley 2 Chico Please fill in and respond to all on anything I may have missed. Thanks again! Warmly, Courtney Courtney Kienow pronouns she/hers (why is this important?) Director of Community Relations and Economic Development Office of the President Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo, CA _____ office 805-756-6000 direct 805-756-6098 www.calpoly.edu 456 From:Genevieve Czech < Sent:Friday, July 18, 2025 12:39 PM To:Shoresman, Michelle Subject:Re: Item 8a of meeting by City Council on 07/15/25 Thank you for your gracious and encouraging reply. Genevieve On Wed, Jul 16, 2025 at 5:16 PM Shoresman, Michelle <mshoresm@slocity.org> wrote: Hi Genevieve, Hope you have had a lovely week. In case you didn’t know, the council did (as noticed in the agenda) entertain an item on the agenda last night to form an ad hoc committee to respond to the grand jury report. That was the sole purpose of the item, so there wasn’t much discussion besides that. There will be another opportunity for discussion though, when the ad hoc’s recommendations come back to the full council. In response to several emails requesting that Jan be nominated to the committee, I was happy to oblige that request. I too thought, with her personal experience, she would be a good addition to the committee. I look forward to seeing the ad hoc committee’s suggestions come back in September. Thank you, Michelle From: Genevieve Czech < Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 11:42 AM To: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org> Subject: Item 8a of meeting by City Council on 07/15/25 Dear Lady Mayoress and City Council: 457 The correspondence you have received already is sufficient for you to both study and assimilate the serious concerns of SLO city residents, long standing and productive residents whose concerns deserve your humble and earnest consideration. Among some of those issues raised are the failure by Cal Poly to release the addresses of satellite fraternities and sororities. In effect they violate our zoning codes. One suggestion that has been made is for Cal Poly to provide Greek houses on campus as is the practice of most Universities. Another recommendation is for the owners/landlords of student housing to enforce the rental agreements, imposing fines for students holding loud and overcrowded parties beyond the curfew, evern becoming excessively loud before the curfew when the party starts in early afternoon. Registering parties has not been a suitable strategy as the Police tend to ignore noise complaints once the party would have been registered. Registering implies a permit to abuse any noise ordinance in a residential neighborhood. One correspondent has made the considerable effort to log the history of the problems, including the SCLC committee's initial founding/purpose/composition and limitations, including making the minutes of their meetings available to the public. I do indeed support former Mayor Jan Marx's inclusion on that committee to enable the full understanding of the history and successes and failures of neighborhood wellness in current and future discussion. Two decades ago Cal Poly made some efforts to participate in reducing the town/gown issues in building more campus housing, in having students view a video of their responsibilities when living in residential neighborhoods. Their declared intention of having not only Freshmen and Sophomores live on campus, but gradually even the Juniors and Seniors is not consonant with their objective of increased growth. Further, it denies the adult students the opportunity to live together in harmony and experience and establish home management. Our street which has over 50% student rental housing has witnessed some very good examples of responsible student tenancy, while other examples of insensitive behavior regarding the longtime residents. In such cases we have been compelled to intervene personally after suffering the disturbance, or reporting the violation beyond curfew. 'Tis true that the Police have not always been responsive, or sufficiently punitive when they have intervened. The earlier practice of "good renter certificates" was apparently stopped due to claims of discrimination of student tenants, which is unfounded, as landlords have the right to even evict tenants who violate the rental agreement. You were invited before the grand jury report was published to visit neighborhoods to witness firsthand the disruption satellite fraternities caused to a residential neighborhood. Apparently, no members of the Council accepted the invitation to actually experience the problem. The effort the grand jury report represents cannot be dismissed as NIMBY whining, but more than justified concerns and issues by the SLO residents who wish to preserve gracious and respectful community living in SLO with the full support of th e City staff elected by them, and the interaction of Cal Poly whose declared aim is to teach learning by doing, including responsible citizenship in the community. May you reflect on all the issues raised in your correspondence with a sincere and resolved discussion and action to model a town who works with gown and landlords to ensure more harmony and mutual respect. Yours sincerely, Genevieve Czech, 458 459 From:Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Sent:Friday, July 18, 2025 7:55 AM To:Wallace, Christine Subject:RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC Importance:High Hi Christine, Thank you! I had the boys follow up with you directly, and it sounds like Kieran has already reached out. I just wanted to confirm one detail: you mentioned that the 274 Main house is on the warning list through March 2026. Is that still accurate, or has there been an update? Best Regards, Mary Sanchez bothwellco.com Mary Sanchez Executive Assistant at Bothwell Co. E mary@bothwellco.com O: (858) 764-1963 C: ( From: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 3:36 PM To: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Subject: RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC The ADU is not on the no-warning list. The main house is on the list until 3.6.26. I’ve attached a copy of the citation with the officer’s notes, it appears the party was taking place in the backyard. This property is complicated because the front house is where the officers are naturally going to go but I don’t know what they experience each time there is a noise complaint. If noise was clearly identified as coming from the ADU, that’s when the officers would address the residents there. Our system shows as two separate units on the same parcel so treated as separate residences but we are also working off information that these residents are all part of the same fraternity which then causes us to refer to the property as a possible satellite fraternity house. It doesn’t change anything except we don’t send SNAP to noise complaints, only patrol. Best, CW From: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 3:13 PM 460 To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC HI Christine, Thank you for your prompt response. Could you please confirm if there’s any additional context regarding the recent incident? For example, did the oƯicer knock on the front door of the yellow house and the individual who was cited simply happen to answer? Or was the citation specifically issued for the ADU? I’m also wondering how these homes are typically classified, are citations issued collectively to both the ADU and main house, or are they treated as two separate residences? I understand they share a backyard, which may complicate things. I also noticed the citation mentioned around 40 people. Can you confirm whether the kids were actually gathered in front of the main house when the oƯicer arrived? Lastly, could you clarify when the kids will be removed from the 9-month warning list? Best Regards, Mary Sanchez bothwellco.com Mary Sanchez Executive Assistant at Bothwell Co. E mary@bothwellco.com O: (858) 764-1963 C: ( From: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 3:00 PM To: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Subject: RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC Hi Mary, For the ADU, I have zero noise calls since 2023. For the main house, I’ve got the following: Ghazanfari cited on 8.17.24 Turpin cited on 11.8.24 Bendersky cited on 6.6.25 Let me know how else I can help. Thanks, Christine 461 From: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 2:43 PM To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: 274 HATHWAY LLC Importance: High Hi Christine, Hope all is well. I’m reaching out to provide you with an update on the tenancy of the two homes. Could you please forward me any violations you have on file for the properties and the tenants listed below? Thank you in advance and let me know if you need any additional information. 274.5 Hathway – ADU:  These tenants moved in 06/25/2024 and renewed through 06/21/2026  Azen D. Bendersky  Kieran J. Govoni 274 Hathway - Main House:  All tenants moved in 06/25/2024 and renewed through 06/21/2026.  Carter A. Quartararo  Jacob D. Weingarten  Arian Ghazanfari  Joshua D. Turpin  Cole J. Turpin Best Regards, Mary Sanchez bothwellco.com Mary Sanchez Executive Assistant at Bothwell Co. E mary@bothwellco.com O: (858) 764-1963 C: ( 462 From:Collins, Scott Sent:Thursday, July 17, 2025 4:29 PM To:Tway, Timothea (Timmi) Subject:FW: July 15 Council Meeting Recap FYI. From: Laura Emerson < Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2025 4:28 PM To: City Communications <communications@slocity.org> Subject: Re: July 15 Council Meeting Recap Hello, I just finished reading about the Grand Jury report matter. What a mess! Shame on them for not publishing the corrected version. Too bad the issue couldn’t have been settled on a smaller scale by having the residents and City representatives meet with the fraternities and Cal Poly representatives. Thank you, Laura Emerson On Jul 17, 2025, at 1:29 PM, City of San Luis Obispo <communications@slocity.org> wrote: View this email in your browser July 15 Council Meeting Recap Post Date: 07/17/2025 1:00 PM 463 On July 15, the San Luis Obispo City Council held its regular meeting with an agenda focused on community investment, local partnerships, climate planning, and accountability. Highlights from the meeting are summarized below (watch or listen to the full meeting on the City’s YouTube channel). The meeting opened with the annual update from Central Coast Community Energy (3CE), followed by the City Manager’s report on key initiatives and upcoming City programs. The City Council then approved several items with a single vote as part of the Consent Agenda, including  Approving police department grant applications totaling nearly $300,000 to support alcohol enforcement, youth tobacco prevention, and officer wellness.  Authorizing nearly $2.3 million in tourism and community promotions funding through the Tourism Business Improvement District (TBID) and Promotional Coordinating Committee (PCC).  Approving an agreement with Downtown SLO to continue to provide City support for events and services that support Downtown businesses.  Approving Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) High Impact Grant funding priorities for the 2025–27 financial plan. Study Session: Building Energy Retrofit Policy (Item 7a) The City Council held a study session on potential policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from existing buildings, which are the second largest sources of emissions in the community. Staff presented options to expand building energy upgrades (e.g., insulation, new windows, electric heat pump water heaters, and battery energy storage) beyond current voluntary programs. The Council directed staff to continue developing strategies that are equitable, scalable, and aligned with the City’s 2035 carbon neutrality goals, including updating the existing 464 policy on energy efficient renovations, completing foundational work for a local large building performance standard, and creating a new home energy score pilot program. Get more information at slocity.org/SustainableSLO Grand Jury Report Response – “Round & Round with Town & Gown” (Item 8a) The City Council appointed Mayor Erica A. Stewart and Council Member Jan Marx to an Ad Hoc Committee to collaborate with staff in preparing formal responses to the San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury’s report on Town and Gown relations. The report, titled “Round & Round with Town & Gown,” discusses concerns from residents about neighborhood impacts related to fraternity housing near Cal Poly. During the investigation, the City fully cooperated with the Grand Jury, as senior staff and a Council Member testified before the Grand Jury and provide significant amounts of information in response to requests. City staff expressed concerned with both factual inaccuracies and conclusions drawn in the report. It’s important to know that the City of San Luis Obispo has a long history of innovative approaches to addressing neighborhood wellness and we will continue to work with our community to maintain and improve our neighborhoods. The City’s response will address the report’s findings and recommendations and will be discussed 465 further by the City Council at one of its regular meetings in September. This step reinforces the City’s commitment to transparency, responsiveness, and constructive public engagement. Get the details at slocity.org/TownGown Council Compensation Committee Appointments (Item 8b) The City Council appointed seven community members to serve on the 2026 Council Compensation Committee, which will review and recommend adjustments to compensation for the City Council, Planning Commission, and Architectural Review Commission. The committee will also explore whether stipends should be extended to other advisory body members. In line with the City Charter and Council Policies, the committee includes a previously elected official, a Personnel Board member, and citizens-at-large. Appointed through a public and transparent voting process, this committee will conduct its work through publicly noticed meetings and present its recommendations to the Council by May 1, 2026. This process helps ensure compensation remains fair, transparent, and aligned with the responsibilities of civic service and supports inclusive access to leadership roles in local government. Looking Ahead The next regular City Council meeting will be held Tuesday, August 19, 2025, at 5:30 p.m. in Council Chambers at City Hall, 990 Palm Street. Attendees of City Council or Advisory Body meetings are eligible for one hour of complimentary parking in designated City garages. Learn more at Parking for Public Meetings. To provide input or view upcoming agendas, visit www.slocity.org/agendas. Media Contact: Whitney Szentesi, Public Communications Manager, 805.783.7716 | wszentes@slocity.org 466 Copyright © 2025 City of San Luis Obispo, All rights reserved. You are receiving this message because you provided your email address via a city service, event, or program. Our mailing address is: City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Add us to your address book Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list. 467 From:Laura Emerson < Sent:Thursday, July 17, 2025 4:28 PM To:City Communications Subject:Re: July 15 Council Meeting Recap Hello, I just finished reading about the Grand Jury report matter. What a mess! Shame on them for not publishing the corrected version. Too bad the issue couldn’t have been settled on a smaller scale by having the residents and City representatives meet with the fraternities and Cal Poly representatives. Thank you, Laura Emerson On Jul 17, 2025, at 1:29 PM, City of San Luis Obispo <communications@slocity.org> wrote: View this email in your browser To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. July 15 Council Meeting Recap Post Date: 07/17/2025 1:00 PM On July 15, the San Luis Obispo City Council held its regular meeting with an agenda focused on community investment, local partnerships, climate planning, and accountability. Highlights from the meeting are summarized below (watch or listen to the full meeting on the City’s YouTube channel). The meeting opened with the annual update from Central Coast Community Energy (3CE), followed by the City Manager’s report on key initiatives and upcoming City programs. The City Council then approved several items with a single vote as part of the Consent Agenda, including  Approving police department grant applications totaling nearly $300,000 to support alcohol enforcement, youth tobacco prevention, and officer wellness.  Authorizing nearly $2.3 million in tourism and community promotions funding through the Tourism Business Improvement District (TBID) and Promotional Coordinating Committee (PCC). 468  Approving an agreement with Downtown SLO to continue to provide City support for events and services that support Downtown businesses.  Approving Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) High Impact Grant funding priorities for the 2025–27 financial plan. Study Session: Building Energy Retrofit Policy (Item 7a) To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. The City Council held a study session on potential policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from existing buildings, which are the second largest sources of emissions in the community. Staff presented options to expand building energy upgrades (e.g., insulation, new windows, electric heat pump water heaters, and battery energy storage) beyond current voluntary programs. The Council directed staff to continue developing strategies that are equitable, scalable, and aligned with the City’s 2035 carbon neutrality goals, including updating the existing policy on energy efficient renovations, completing foundational work for a local large building performance standard, and creating a new home energy score pilot program. Get more information at slocity.org/SustainableSLO Grand Jury Report Response – “Round & Round with Town & Gown” (Item 8a) 469 To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. The City Council appointed Mayor Erica A. Stewart and Council Member Jan Marx to an Ad Hoc Committee to collaborate with staff in preparing formal responses to the San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury’s report on Town and Gown relations. The report, titled “Round & Round with Town & Gown,” discusses concerns from residents about neighborhood impacts related to fraternity housing near Cal Poly. During the investigation, the City fully cooperated with the Grand Jury, as senior staff and a Council Member testified before the Grand Jury and provide significant amounts of information in response to requests. City staff expressed concerned with both factual inaccuracies and conclusions drawn in the report. It’s important to know that the City of San Luis Obispo has a long history of innovative approaches to addressing neighborhood wellness and we will continue to work with our community to maintain and improve our neighborhoods. The City’s response will address the report’s findings and recommendations and will be discussed further by the City Council at one of its regular meetings in September. This step reinforces the City’s commitment to transparency, responsiveness, and constructive public engagement. Get the details at slocity.org/TownGown Council Compensation Committee Appointments (Item 8b) The City Council appointed seven community members to serve on the 2026 Council Compensation Committee, which will review and recommend adjustments to compensation for the City Council, Planning Commission, and Architectural Review Commission. The committee will also explore whether stipends should be extended to other advisory body members. In line 470 with the City Charter and Council Policies, the committee includes a previously elected official, a Personnel Board member, and citizens-at-large. Appointed through a public and transparent voting process, this committee will conduct its work through publicly noticed meetings and present its recommendations to the Council by May 1, 2026. This process helps ensure compensation remains fair, transparent, and aligned with the responsibilities of civic service and supports inclusive access to leadership roles in local government. Looking Ahead The next regular City Council meeting will be held Tuesday, August 19, 2025, at 5:30 p.m. in Council Chambers at City Hall, 990 Palm Street. Attendees of City Council or Advisory Body meetings are eligible for one hour of complimentary parking in designated City garages. Learn more at Parking for Public Meetings. To provide input or view upcoming agendas, visit www.slocity.org/agendas. Media Contact: Whitney Szentesi, Public Communications Manager, 805.783.7716 | wszentes@slocity.org To help protect y our privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Facebook To help protect y our privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Instagram To help protect y our privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Twitter To help protect y our privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.YouTube To help protect y our privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.LinkedIn To help protect y our privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Website Copyright © 2025 City of San Luis Obispo, All rights reserved. You are receiving this message because you provided your email address via a city service, event, or program. Our mailing address is: City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Add us to your address book Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list. 473 From:City of San Luis Obispo <communications@slocity.org> Sent:Thursday, July 17, 2025 1:30 PM To:Maggio, Rodger Subject:July 15 Council Meeting Recap View this email in your browser To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. July 15 Council Meeting Recap Post Date: 07/17/2025 1:00 PM On July 15, the San Luis Obispo City Council held its regular meeting with an agenda focused on community investment, local partnerships, climate planning, and accountability. Highlights from the meeting are summarized below (watch or listen to the full meeting on the City’s YouTube channel). The meeting opened with the annual update from Central Coast Community Energy (3CE), followed by the City Manager’s report on key initiatives and upcoming City programs. The City Council then approved several items with a single vote as part of the Consent Agenda, including  Approving police department grant applications totaling nearly $300,000 to support alcohol enforcement, youth tobacco prevention, and officer wellness.  Authorizing nearly $2.3 million in tourism and community promotions funding through the Tourism Business Improvement District (TBID) and Promotional Coordinating Committee (PCC).  Approving an agreement with Downtown SLO to continue to provide City support for events and services that support Downtown businesses.  Approving Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) High Impact Grant funding priorities for the 2025–27 financial plan. Study Session: Building Energy Retrofit Policy (Item 7a) 474 To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. The City Council held a study session on potential policies to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from existing buildings, which are the second largest sources of emissions in the community. Staff presented options to expand building energy upgrades (e.g., insulation, new windows, electric heat pump water heaters, and battery energy storage) beyond current voluntary programs. The Council directed staff to continue developing strategies that are equitable, scalable, and aligned with the City’s 2035 carbon neutrality goals, including updating the existing policy on energy efficient renovations, completing foundational work for a local large building performance standard, and creating a new home energy score pilot program. Get more information at slocity.org/SustainableSLO Grand Jury Report Response – “Round & Round with Town & Gown” (Item 8a) 475 To help protect your privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet. The City Council appointed Mayor Erica A. Stewart and Council Member Jan Marx to an Ad Hoc Committee to collaborate with staff in preparing formal responses to the San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury’s report on Town and Gown relations. The report, titled “Round & Round with Town & Gown,” discusses concerns from residents about neighborhood impacts related to fraternity housing near Cal Poly. During the investigation, the City fully cooperated with the Grand Jury, as senior staff and a Council Member testified before the Grand Jury and provide significant amounts of information in response to requests. City staff expressed concerned with both factual inaccuracies and conclusions drawn in the report. It’s important to know that the City of San Luis Obispo has a long history of innovative approaches to addressing neighborhood wellness and we will continue to work with our community to maintain and improve our neighborhoods. The City’s response will address the report’s findings and recommendations and will be discussed further by the City Council at one of its regular meetings in September. This step reinforces the City’s commitment to transparency, responsiveness, and constructive public engagement. Get the details at slocity.org/TownGown Council Compensation Committee Appointments (Item 8b) The City Council appointed seven community members to serve on the 2026 Council Compensation Committee, which will review and recommend adjustments to compensation for the City Council, Planning Commission, and Architectural Review Commission. The committee will also explore whether stipends should be extended to other advisory body members. In line 476 with the City Charter and Council Policies, the committee includes a previously elected official, a Personnel Board member, and citizens-at-large. Appointed through a public and transparent voting process, this committee will conduct its work through publicly noticed meetings and present its recommendations to the Council by May 1, 2026. This process helps ensure compensation remains fair, transparent, and aligned with the responsibilities of civic service and supports inclusive access to leadership roles in local government. Looking Ahead The next regular City Council meeting will be held Tuesday, August 19, 2025, at 5:30 p.m. in Council Chambers at City Hall, 990 Palm Street. Attendees of City Council or Advisory Body meetings are eligible for one hour of complimentary parking in designated City garages. Learn more at Parking for Public Meetings. To provide input or view upcoming agendas, visit www.slocity.org/agendas. Media Contact: Whitney Szentesi, Public Communications Manager, 805.783.7716 | wszentes@slocity.org To help protect y our privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Facebook To help protect y our privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Instagram To help protect y our privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Twitter To help protect y our privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.YouTube To help protect y our privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.LinkedIn To help protect y our privacy, Microsoft Office prevented automatic download of this picture from the Internet.Website Copyright © 2025 City of San Luis Obispo, All rights reserved. You are receiving this message because you provided your email address via a city service, event, or program. Our mailing address is: City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Add us to your address book Want to change how you receive these emails? You can update your preferences or unsubscribe from this list. 477 From:Symens, Sadie Sent:Thursday, July 17, 2025 11:12 AM To:Holcomb, Kelly; McDonald, Whitney; Dietrick, Christine; Collins, Scott; Tway, Timothea (Timmi); Corey, Tyler; Mezzapesa, John; Scott, Rick; Amoroso, Brian; Mickel, Fred; Wallace, Christine Cc:Zion, Sarah Subject:RE: Fraternity issue update from City Attorney's Office Hello all, As a quick update for your awareness: an administrative citation was upheld on appeal on July 17th for a noise violation issued against 1335 E. Foothill (Phi Kappa Psi.) An appeal of an admin citation issued for a noise violation against Lambda Chi Alpha (at their 1264 E Foothill location) has been continued until September (Lampda Chi Alpha’s Conditional Use Permit was reviewed and modified by the Planning Commission in 2024.) Thank you, Sadie Symens Deputy City Attorney City Attorney's Office E ssymens@slocity.org slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the CONFIDENTIAL use of the designated addressee named above. The information transmitted is subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or represents confidential attorney work product. Recipients should not file copies of this email with publicly accessible records. If you are not the designated addressee named above or the authorized agent responsible for delivering it to the designated addressee, you received this document through inadvertent error and any further review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication by you or anyone else is strictly prohibited. IF YOU RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY TELEPHONING THE SENDER NAMED ABOVE AT (805) 781-7140. Thank you. From: Symens, Sadie Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2025 8:54 AM To: Holcomb, Kelly <kholcomb@slocity.org>; McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Dietrick, Christine <cdietric@slocity.org>; Collins, Scott <SCollins@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Corey, Tyler <tcorey@slocity.org>; Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org>; Scott, Rick <rscott@slocity.org>; Amoroso, Brian <bamoroso@slocity.org>; Mickel, Fred <fmickel@slocity.org>; Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: Fraternity issue update from City Attorney's Office Good morning all, 478 In an effort to keep this group in the loop of all things fraternity, we wanted to provide you with an update on recent Administrative Citation appeals, CUP revocations involving fraternities, and Public Records Act Requests. There is a lot of information below, and this is for awareness only so feel free to review at your convenience. Please reach out with any questions. Administrative Citation Appeals  Three appeals of noise violation citations issued to fraternities on June 19 th were upheld o 280 California Blvd (Alpha Epsilon Pi) o 1327 E. Foothill Blvd – Beta Theta Pi (two citations issued for noise violations on 6/19)  This fraternity has never had a valid use permit for this location but is in the process of obtaining one. Conditional Use Permit Revocations  The Planning Commission revoked the Conditional Use Permits for Delta Chi (1236 Monte Vista) and Sigma Nu (1304 Foothill Blvd/190 Crandall Way) on June 11th o Delta Chi timely appealed the revocation on 6/20 (hearing date not set)  The Planning Commission revoked the Conditional Use Permit for Delta Upsilon (720 Foothill Blvd.) on June 25th o Staff anticipates an appeal of this revocation. Planning Commission action on Grand Jury Report  The Planning Commission has been made aware of their role in responding to the Grand Jury report. They will hear staff’s recommendations on response in a September meeting. PRRs related to fraternities for the last 18 months. Links are to the Clerk’s internal Laserfiche folders, which contain produced records and correspondence. Please let me know if you have any troubles accessing these. 2024 PRR24059 Walker - Noise calls for 348/350 Hathway & 1908 Loomis https://slolf.slocity.org/laserfiche/Browse.aspx?repo=CityClerk#?id=189071 PRR24170 Walker - SLOPD calls for fraternity addresses https://slolf.slocity.org/laserfiche/Browse.aspx?repo=CityClerk#?id=194704 PRR24179 Walker - Special event permits https://slolf.slocity.org/laserfiche/Browse.aspx?repo=CityClerk#?id=195027 PRR24265 Walker - Fraternity correspondence/records 11/8/23 - present https://slolf.slocity.org/laserfiche/Browse.aspx?repo=CityClerk#?id=199481 PRR24285 Walker - Noise calls at multiple properties https://slolf.slocity.org/laserfiche/Browse.aspx?repo=CityClerk#?id=200078 PRR24328 Dittenber - Records Regarding Fraternities Jan 2022 to Current https://slolf.slocity.org/laserfiche/Browse.aspx?repo=CityClerk#?id=201572 2025 PRR25089 Jones - St Fratty's Day Data https://slolf.slocity.org/laserfiche/Browse.aspx?repo=CityClerk#?id=205905 PRR25095 Coetzee - Records relating to "No Park/Tow" signs https://slolf.slocity.org/laserfiche/Browse.aspx?repo=CityClerk#?id=206125 PRR25098 Garza - St. Patty's Day and SEZ Information https://slolf.slocity.org/laserfiche/Browse.aspx?repo=CityClerk#?id=206242 479 PRR25099 Jones - St. Fratty's Enforcement Costs https://slolf.slocity.org/laserfiche/Browse.aspx?repo=CityClerk#?id=206251 PRR25110 Shapiro - St. Fratty's Enforcement cost & recovery https://slolf.slocity.org/laserfiche/Browse.aspx?repo=CityClerk#?id=207007 PRR25146 Hanson - St. Fratty's Day Data 2024 and 2025 https://slolf.slocity.org/laserfiche/Browse.aspx?repo=CityClerk#?id=208601 PRR25162 Walker - Early Removal Program records https://slolf.slocity.org/laserfiche/Browse.aspx?repo=CityClerk#?id=209000 PRR25189 Luo - Delta Upsilon Use Permit Records https://slolf.slocity.org/laserfiche/Browse.aspx?repo=CityClerk#?id=210705 Sadie Symens pronouns she/her/hers Deputy City Attorney City Attorney's Office E ssymens@slocity.org slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the CONFIDENTIAL use of the designated addressee named above. The information transmitted is subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or represents confidential attorney work product. Recipients should not file copies of this email with publicly accessible records. If you are not the designated addressee named above or the authorized agent responsible for delivering it to the designated addressee, you received this document through inadvertent error and any further review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication by you or anyone else is strictly prohibited. IF YOU RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY TELEPHONING THE SENDER NAMED ABOVE AT (805) 781-7140. Thank you. From: Holcomb, Kelly <kholcomb@slocity.org> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2025 4:24 PM To: McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Dietrick, Christine <cdietric@slocity.org>; Collins, Scott <SCollins@slocity.org>; Symens, Sadie <ssymens@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Corey, Tyler <tcorey@slocity.org>; Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org>; Scott, Rick <rscott@slocity.org>; Amoroso, Brian <bamoroso@slocity.org>; Mickel, Fred <fmickel@slocity.org>; Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Confidential: Grand Jury report on Town & Gown issued PDF is attached. Kelly Holcomb Senior Legal Analyst 480 E kholcomb@slocity.org T 805.781.7060 From: Holcomb, Kelly Sent: Friday, June 20, 2025 4:07 PM To: McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Dietrick, Christine <cdietric@slocity.org>; Collins, Scott <SCollins@slocity.org>; Symens, Sadie <SSymens@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Corey, Tyler <tcorey@slocity.org>; Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org>; Scott, Rick <rscott@slocity.org>; Amoroso, Brian <bamoroso@slocity.org>; Mickel, Fred <fmickel@slocity.org>; Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Confidential: Grand Jury report on Town & Gown issued Of course. I’ll remove any remaining comment threads (and anything else I spot) and send you a clean PDF. Kelly Holcomb Senior Legal Analyst E kholcomb@slocity.org T 805.781.7060 From: McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org> Sent: Friday, June 20, 2025 4:04 PM To: Holcomb, Kelly <kholcomb@slocity.org>; Dietrick, Christine <cdietric@slocity.org>; Collins, Scott <SCollins@slocity.org>; Symens, Sadie <ssymens@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Corey, Tyler <tcorey@slocity.org>; Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org>; Scott, Rick <rscott@slocity.org>; Amoroso, Brian <bamoroso@slocity.org>; Mickel, Fred <fmickel@slocity.org>; Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Confidential: Grand Jury report on Town & Gown issued Hi everyone, First, THANK YOU!!!! This is an amazing work product to pull together in less than a week; I am so grateful for your hard work and support. Second, I have reviewed and made edits to the document and I think it is now ready to finalize. Kelly, are by chance able to scrub it for anything we might not want it to contain and turn it into a PDF? (I ran it through spell check and accepted all changes.) I can then send it via email. Thank you, all!! Whitney Whitney McDonald pronouns (she/hers) City Manager City Administration 990 Palm, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3934 E WMcDonal@slocity.org T 805.781.7114 C 805.550.8349 slocity.org 481 Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Holcomb, Kelly <kholcomb@slocity.org> Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2025 5:03 PM To: McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Dietrick, Christine <cdietric@slocity.org>; Collins, Scott <SCollins@slocity.org>; Symens, Sadie <ssymens@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Corey, Tyler <tcorey@slocity.org>; Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org>; Scott, Rick <rscott@slocity.org>; Amoroso, Brian <bamoroso@slocity.org>; Mickel, Fred <fmickel@slocity.org>; Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Confidential: Grand Jury report on Town & Gown issued The content that was provided in May for the potential “fact check” response has now been incorporated into the chart. 20250618_Memo to GJ_Town & Gown.docx I reoriented the pages to landscape to allow our response column to be wider, but otherwise have no further adjustments to make. Kelly Holcomb Senior Legal Analyst E kholcomb@slocity.org T 805.781.7060 From: Holcomb, Kelly Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2025 4:25 PM To: McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Dietrick, Christine <cdietric@slocity.org>; Collins, Scott <SCollins@slocity.org>; Symens, Sadie <SSymens@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Corey, Tyler <tcorey@slocity.org>; Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org>; Scott, Rick <rscott@slocity.org>; Amoroso, Brian <bamoroso@slocity.org>; Mickel, Fred <fmickel@slocity.org>; Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Confidential: Grand Jury report on Town & Gown issued Folks – I’ve been directed to incorporate most if not all of the content you provided to the “fact check” response. I’ll start working on that now and let you know when it’s been combined. Kelly Holcomb Senior Legal Analyst E kholcomb@slocity.org T 805.781.7060 From: Holcomb, Kelly Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2025 4:00 PM To: McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Dietrick, Christine <cdietric@slocity.org>; Collins, Scott <SCollins@slocity.org>; Symens, Sadie <SSymens@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Corey, Tyler <tcorey@slocity.org>; Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org>; Scott, Rick <rscott@slocity.org>; Amoroso, Brian <bamoroso@slocity.org>; Mickel, Fred <fmickel@slocity.org>; Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Confidential: Grand Jury report on Town & Gown issued Sorry for the delay. I had a few distractions but the rough draft of the chart is ready. I still need to pull material that w as referenced as being in the earlier response to the “fact check” request, but everything that was noted in the draft report itself should now be pulled over. 20250618_Memo to GJ_Town & Gown.docx 482 Highlighted language was just pasted in. It was either questions that still need an answer or rough language that I though it best for someone more knowledgeable to refine. More can be added, and things can be removed however anyone sees fit so I’ve turned on track changes just to manage those contributions. If my assistance is needed to further move material over, please let me know, but otherwise I will assume everyone will return to making direct edits/contributions to the chart. Kelly Holcomb Senior Legal Analyst E kholcomb@slocity.org T 805.781.7060 From: Holcomb, Kelly Sent: Wednesday, June 18, 2025 11:11 AM To: McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Dietrick, Christine <cdietric@slocity.org>; Collins, Scott <SCollins@slocity.org>; Symens, Sadie <SSymens@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Corey, Tyler <tcorey@slocity.org>; Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org>; Scott, Rick <rscott@slocity.org>; Amoroso, Brian <bamoroso@slocity.org>; Mickel, Fred <fmickel@slocity.org>; Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Confidential: Grand Jury report on Town & Gown issued All – I am going to begin moving the flagged issues into a chart, so will turn on track changes in the Word document of the report so I know if anything new is added. Once the chart is ready, I’ll let you all know and the accurate/contradictory information column can be filled in. I’ll transfer over anything that has already been provided. The chart should be ready to start working on after lunch. Kelly Holcomb Senior Legal Analyst E kholcomb@slocity.org T 805.781.7060 From: McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org> Sent: Monday, June 16, 2025 1:53 PM To: Dietrick, Christine <cdietric@slocity.org>; Holcomb, Kelly <kholcomb@slocity.org>; Collins, Scott <SCollins@slocity.org>; Symens, Sadie <ssymens@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Corey, Tyler <tcorey@slocity.org>; Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org>; Scott, Rick <rscott@slocity.org>; Amoroso, Brian <bamoroso@slocity.org>; Mickel, Fred <fmickel@slocity.org>; Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Confidential: Grand Jury report on Town & Gown issued Importance: High Thank you, Christine and Kelly Here’s the plan, everyone. Please go into the word version of the report and identify any of the factual statements that are incorrect via comments. Kelly will then compile those statements into a table that will include a column for the corrected facts, which you will be tagged in to help fill out. I have asked the Grand Jury for a week to provide this information, though they haven’t agreed to this yet. With this timeline in mind, please review the word version and tag the incorrect statements in comments by the end of the day tomorrow. We will then aim to complete the table and send the factual corrections to the Grand Jury by Friday. 483 Thank you, all! Whitney Whitney McDonald pronouns (she/hers) City Manager City Administration 990 Palm, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3934 E WMcDonal@slocity.org T 805.781.7114 C 805.550.8349 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Dietrick, Christine <cdietric@slocity.org> Sent: Monday, June 16, 2025 1:37 PM To: Holcomb, Kelly <kholcomb@slocity.org>; Collins, Scott <SCollins@slocity.org>; Symens, Sadie <ssymens@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Corey, Tyler <tcorey@slocity.org>; Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org>; Scott, Rick <rscott@slocity.org>; Amoroso, Brian <bamoroso@slocity.org>; Mickel, Fred <fmickel@slocity.org>; Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Cc: McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Confidential: Grand Jury report on Town & Gown issued I converted and saved a word version for easier collective comments/editing here as sell: 2025 Grand Jury Word version.docx From: Holcomb, Kelly <kholcomb@slocity.org> Sent: Monday, June 16, 2025 11:31 AM To: Collins, Scott <SCollins@slocity.org>; Symens, Sadie <ssymens@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Corey, Tyler <tcorey@slocity.org>; Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org>; Scott, Rick <rscott@slocity.org>; Amoroso, Brian <bamoroso@slocity.org>; Mickel, Fred <fmickel@slocity.org>; Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Cc: McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Dietrick, Christine <cdietric@slocity.org> Subject: Confidential: Grand Jury report on Town & Gown issued Good morning, Christine asked that you all be linked to the “early release” materials issued by the Grand Jury: 2025 June, Town & Gown Report As noted in the “Agency 2Day Advance” letter, the information remains confidential for two business days, so please maintain the confidentiality until the report is made public. Kelly Holcomb Senior Legal Analyst E kholcomb@slocity.org T 805.781.7060 484 From: Holcomb, Kelly Sent: Thursday, May 29, 2025 2:31 PM To: Collins, Scott <SCollins@slocity.org>; Symens, Sadie <SSymens@slocity.org>; Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org>; Corey, Tyler <tcorey@slocity.org>; Mezzapesa, John <JMezzape@slocity.org>; Scott, Rick <rscott@slocity.org>; Amoroso, Brian <bamoroso@slocity.org>; Mickel, Fred <fmickel@slocity.org>; Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Cc: McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Dietrick, Christine <cdietric@slocity.org> Subject: Confidential: Review and Response Needed, urgent deadline June 4th Importance: High Good afternoon, The people on this email have been given access to a draft response to the SLO County Grand Jury. 2025 May, Fact Check Requests Please review, edit, and comply with the confidentiality requirements as described in the document. Kelly Holcomb Senior Legal Analyst City Attorney's Office 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E kholcomb@slocity.org T 805.781.7060 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the CONFIDENTIAL use of the designated addressee named above. The information transmitted is subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or represents confidential attorney work product. Recipients should not file copies of this email with publicly accessible records. If you are not the designated addressee named above or the authorized agent responsible for delivering it to the designated addressee, you received this document through inadvertent error and any further review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication by you or anyone else is strictly prohibited. IF YOU RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY TELEPHONING THE SENDER NAMED ABOVE AT (805) 781-7140. Thank you. 485 From:Tway, Timothea (Timmi) Sent:Thursday, July 17, 2025 10:26 AM To:McDonald, Whitney Cc:Collins, Scott Subject:RE: Grand Jury Response Form Attachments:Working Document on research regarding overlay zones.docx Hi Whitney, Attached are my current notes about potential overlay zones or other regulations for town/gown issues and Greek housing. Please feel free to pass on to the ad hoc committee if you would like. I do not have much information about Berkeley yet (I have tried to find information online but I don’t think their regulations are as straightforward as an “overlay”) but I have a conversation scheduled with their Director on Friday afternoon. I will keep poking around to see if there are other examples. Thanks, Timmi From: McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2025 9:25 AM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Subject: FW: Grand Jury Response Form Hi Timmi, Here’s an additional request related to the overlay information… Thanks much! Whitney From: Stewart, Erica A <estewart@slocity.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2025 9:24 AM To: Marx, Jan <jmarx@slocity.org>; McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org> Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Purrington, Teresa <TPurring@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Grand Jury Response Form Thank you, Whitney. I look forward to looking at the overlay. Please make sure Timmi’s team looks at Berkeley too. I believe they had some similar challenges with Greek life. I have flexibility next week through 7/30. I look forward to meeting. Thanks, Erica Erica A. Stewart pronouns she/her/hers 486 Mayor Office of the City Council 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 estewart@slocity.org 805.540.1154 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications The best way to report general issues within City limits or to request City services during this time is via Ask SLO, www.slocity.org/Ask. From: Marx, Jan <jmarx@slocity.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2025 8:35:48 AM To: McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Stewart, Erica A <estewart@slocity.org> Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Purrington, Teresa <TPurring@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Grand Jury Response Form Thank you. My schedule is fairly flexible for the next week or so, then tightens up with family and travel. Please give me some possible times to block out. Best wishes Jan Get Outlook for iOS From: McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2025 8:00:00 AM To: Marx, Jan <jmarx@slocity.org>; Stewart, Erica A <estewart@slocity.org> Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Purrington, Teresa <TPurring@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Grand Jury Response Form Sure thing. I’ve asked Timmi to gather together some samples, which I believe CDD started looking at several months ago. Get Outlook for iOS From: Marx, Jan <jmarx@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 9:53:48 PM To: McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org>; Stewart, Erica A <estewart@slocity.org> Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Purrington, Teresa <TPurring@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Grand Jury Response Form Thanks Whitney. Please send us any overlay information that staff might have on hand. I recall Derek looking into that concept a ways back. Best Jan 487 Get Outlook for iOS From: McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 9:07:42 PM To: Stewart, Erica A <estewart@slocity.org>; Marx, Jan <jmarx@slocity.org> Cc: Hermann, Greg <GHermann@slocity.org>; Purrington, Teresa <TPurring@slocity.org> Subject: Grand Jury Response Form Erica and Jan, Thank you for volunteering to join the ad hoc committee that will be helping us prepare responses to the Grand Jury report. Attached is the form that I received from the Foreperson before the report was published. The date of the report indicated at the top of the form is not correct based on when they actually published the report on June 23 rd. We will work to get an initial meeting scheduled as soon as possible. We may want to go ahead and do that within the next couple weeks when I am out on vacation, in which case Greg will be here to assist in that first discussion. Thanks much! Whitney Whitney McDonald pronouns (she/hers) City Manager City Administration 990 Palm, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3934 E WMcDonal@slocity.org T 805.781.7114 C 805.550.8349 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications 488 From: Sent:Thursday, July 17, 2025 9:17 AM To:Shoresman, Michelle Subject:RE: Grand Jury Report Thanks. Just wanted to let you know of some of the historical background of the neighborhood. Also, a bit of trivia, when we were living on campus in the early ‘50’s there was no Alta Vista neighborhood. It was just a big hill with lots of oak trees and cattle grazing that little kids living on campus could explore and make forts on :-} Terry W. Conner (This is a non-texting number) Dream Big, Pursue Your Dreams From: Shoresman, Michelle <mshoresm@slocity.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2025 10:34 PM To: Subject: Re: Grand Jury Report Hi Terry, Thanks and I understand there are lots of issues in the neighborhoods surrounding Cal Poly. We have similar issues in other neighborhoods, (parking, speeding, etc.), but not all the same, of course. Unfortunately, at this time, with this item, we are answering specific questions from the grand jury on specific issues. But I am taking note of some of your other concerns and would be happy to forward your concerns about speeding and traffic to our traffic staff so they can evaluate the possibility for humps or other potential solutions. Thank you again and good night for now, Michelle From: Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2025 10:09:15 PM To: Shoresman, Michelle <mshoresm@slocity.org> Cc: 'RQN of SLO' <rqn.board@yahoo.com> Subject: RE: Grand Jury Report You’re welcome and thanks, Michelle. In point #1 of my comments, I mentioned the “un-safe” driving conditions. It is just as accurate to mention the un-safe pedestrian conditions. One of the reasons that the Alta Vista Neighborhood was the first neighborhood to establish a “permit” parking ordinance was that during the late ‘70’s when there were many grade school kids in the neighborhood, was that at 7:45 AM these kids were walking to school at the original Pacheco Elementary (corner of Slack and Grand) while at the same time CP faculty/staff and students were driving into the neighborhood and parking in front of our houses (for free) instead of PAYING for 489 parking on campus. These same “illicit” parkers would then unload their bicycles from their vehicles and pedal down to campus. Albert Dr. and the surrounding streets were just too narrow for the early morning “rush”. Now the parking spots are so rare on the neighborhood because many of the houses are occupied, not necessarily by the “frats”, but also by 7-9 students of all types, with a “need” for individual cars. That means 7-9 cars per household. Thees CP kids could leave their cars at their out-of-town parents’ houses…thus freeing up some of the congestion. Not all of the streets in the neighborhood have sidewalks…so the CP students who live there walk down the middle of the street….three and four abreast. It’s dangerous !!! In 2004, before I had an unsuccessful run at Council (2006), I circulated a petition (signed by 99% of the residents of Albert Dr, all of which were long-term residents), The petition was to ask for the City to install “speed humps.” The “City” in their infinite wisdom denied the humps. This is all water- under-the bridge. at this time. But it could still happen, as the City has installed “humps” on Slack St. This conversation all relates back to the last sentence of yesterday’s email… regular students AND “frats” should be housed on Campus. In the ‘80’s I had this specific discussion with local housing developers, city staff and CP administrators…with a response of “good idea Terry, but it just won’t work” Finally, but working backwards, in the early ‘50’s many of the students at CP were post- WW2 and Korean Conflict veterans….WITH FAMILIES, along with some instructors with families who lived in on-campus housing including (25-foot long trailers called Silver City and Vet Ville clapboard-siding “dwellings’), and apartments. I hope this clarifies some things for you and your co-council members. It might not be too late to go back to some earlier solid ideas put forth by myself and other long-term residents who suggest more adequate campus housing…and over-all town-gown relations. Sincerely Terry W. Conner (This is a non-texting number) Dream Big, Pursue Your Dreams From: Shoresman, Michelle <mshoresm@slocity.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2025 5:18 PM To: Subject: RE: Grand Jury Report Thank you for your email Terry. 490 Have a good evening and I am sorry I wasn’t able to get back to you before the meeting, but I DID read your email. Thanks again, for sharing your thoughts. Michelle From: Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 11:34 AM To: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org> Cc: 'RQN of SLO' <rqn.board@yahoo.com> Subject: Grand Jury Report Dear Mayor Stewart and City Council. I lived with my family for 44 years on Albert Drive (Alta Vista Neighborhood one block from Cal Poly)…1978-2002. While the noise and parties; and general lack of respect by the encroaching short-term students towards the long-term residents escalated during that time, there are two specific issues that drove our family from our “forever home” to the south side of town. 1. With the overcrowding by students in the other houses on Albert Dr., there was also a huge increase in numbers of cars parking on the streets…as many students were living in converted garages; and the visitors to the neighborhood took up more spots...thus causing un-safe driving conditions. 2. One night there was a party in the house across from our house (in the house once occupied by my parents, Wes and Doty Conner). The party overflowed from the house into the street, and I went outside to ask the partiers to take it back inside. One of the non-resident partiers threatened to “beat” me up and to mind my own business !!! Good-bye Albert Drive! This was an extremely emotional experience, as I had lived in the “party house” in the ‘60’s while a student at San Luis Obispo High School and first year Poly student. The City and CP Administration need to come to grips with getting the bulk of their students (not just the Frat’s and Sororities) on Campus. Sincerely, Terry W. Conner (This is a non-texting number) Dream Big, Pursue Your Dreams 491 From:Zion, Sarah Sent:Thursday, July 17, 2025 8:54 AM To: Subject:Notice of Decision- Chorbajian Attachments:20250717_Notice-Decision_Chorbajian.pdf Christian Chorbajian, Please see the attached. Sarah Zion pronouns she/her/hers Legal Assistant II City Attorney's Office 990 Palm, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3249 E szion@slocity.org T 805.783.7856 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the CONFIDENTIAL use of the designated addressee named above. The information transmitted is subject to the attorney-client privilege and/or represents confidential attorney work product. Recipients should not file copies of this email with publicly accessible records. If you are not the designated addressee named above or the authorized agent responsible for delivering it to the designated addressee, you received this document through inadvertent error and any further review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication by you or anyone else is strictly prohibited. IF YOU RECEIVED THIS COMMUNICATION IN ERROR, PLEASE NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY BY TELEPHONING THE SENDER NAMED ABOVE AT (805) 781-7140. Thank you. City of San Luis Obispo, City Attorney’s Office, 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA, 93401-3249, 805.781.7140, slocity.org July 17, 2025 Christian Chorbajian 1335 E Foothill Blvd. San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 Via First Class and Certified Mail Email: Re: NOTICE OF DECISION Appeal of Administrative Citation #40854- CITATION UPHELD To Christian Chorbajian, On or after July 17, 2025, Hearing Officer Sharon Whitney reviewed your administrative citation appeal, considered the evidence, and made the determination indicated above. Hearing Officer Whitney’s findings are attached. Pursuant to Government Code section 53069.4, you may seek judicial review of this decision by filing a further appeal with the San Luis Obispo Superior Court within twenty calendar days after service of this notice of decision and paying the filing fee as required by Government Code section 70615 to the San Luis Obispo Superior Court. If you file an appeal pursuant to Government Code section 53069.4(b)(1), you must serve either in person or via first-class mail on the City a copy of the notice of appeal. If no appeal is filed with the San Luis Obispo Superior Court within the time period set forth above, this notice of decision shall be deemed final. Unless you file an appeal with the San Luis Superior Court, your fine amount of $350 is due to be paid no later than thirty (30) days from the date of this letter. If paying by check, make the check or money order out to “City of San Luis Obispo” and mail to: Finance Department, 990 Palm St, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401. You may also call in a debit/credit card payment to Finance at (805) 781-7124. Make sure to have the citation number ready when you call. If the fine remains unpaid after thirty days, the matter will be turned over to the City’s collection agency. Sincerely, Sarah Zion Legal Assistant City Attorney’s Office Attachment: Hearing Officer Decision Decision Without Hearing on Administrative Citation Appeal City of San Luis Obispo, California In the Matter of Christian Chorbajian 1. Citation number: 40854 2. Location of cited violation: 1335 E. Foothill Blvd, San Luis Obispo, California 3. Date and time of cited violation: 15 May 2025 at or about 9:57 PM. 4. Name of person cited: Christian Chorbajian 5. Description of cited violation: a. SLO City Municipal Code 9.12.50 A/B b. Description of charged violation: Noise c. Fine Assessed: $350 6. Date of Hearing. Mr. Chorbajian waived the in-person hearing and elected to have the matter decided based on the written record in the file. 7. Name of Hearing Officer: Sharon G. Whitney 8. EVIDENCE IN THE RECORD Evidence in the administrative record includes the citation where San Luis Obispo Police Officer D. LaDow states that he could hear excessive music and noises from more than 50 feet away. The evidence also included the audio/video recording from the body camera worn by Officer LaDow that confirms that music and yelling and shrieking came from the premises beyond the 50 feet from property line. In it. Mr. Chorbajian mentions that the fraternity hasn’t had an event since February and he successfully appealed it. He was apparently expecting a “warning.” He said that the City’s quiet hours begin at 10 PM. Officer Herrera interjected that fraternities should know that the warning rules don’t apply to fraternities, and the bass and noise can be heard from 50 feet away, which is the relevant rule. Mr. Chorbajian said, “Oh.” In the video, he admits that the music shouldn’t have been that loud. He says that he spoke with the neighbor who complained about the noise/music, just before the officers arrived and in anticipation of their arrival. He stated they are on good terms and are in good communication with the neighbor he believed made the noise complaint. The evidence also includes the written appeal by Mr. Chorbajian. It says in pertinent part that whereas the citation was issued at 9:57 pm (2157), this is before the City of San Luis Obispo’s “quiet hours officially begin,” which begins at 10 p.m. (2200). Their event was a registered gathering in compliance with registration requirements and the gathering consisted of about 40 guests, which they allege is reasonable for the property and neighborhood. He reiterated that they are on good neighbor terms with the person they believe made the call and the caller only wanted the music turned down by 10, not a citation to result. The residence is a fraternity house with a Conditional Use Permit (CUP), which allows events to be held in a structured and regulated manner and which they take seriously. He stated that the party was not out of control, it was an organized event with a manageable crowd. He also stated that they were respectful during the citation event. All of this they ask adds up to a request that the citation be reviewed and dismissed. 9. ANALYSIS AND CONCLUSION The statements by Officers LaDow and Herrera together with the body cam evidence and recordings worn by Officers LaDow and Herrera prove that music and loud voices were coming from the premises and could be heard at least 50 feet away from the property line, in violation of 9.12.50 A/B of the City’s Municipal Code. The specific prohibition of 9.12.50 B (1) (a) against radios, televisions, musical instruments or similar devices occurring between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. is consistent with the fifty feet rule for public space articulated in 9.12.050. The fact that this was a fraternity with a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) does not entitle the fraternity to violate the 50 feet rule specified in Code Noise ordinance. Nor does the CUP entitle the fraternity to a warning before a citation is issued for a Noise ordinance violation. Based on the evidence and statements provided by all parties, the Administration Citation and the $350 fine is upheld and must be paid as stipulated by the City. Signed by Hearing Officer Sharon G. Whitney on 17 July 2025. PROOF OF SERVICE - 1 - PROOF OF SERVICE STATE OF CALIFORNIA; COUNTY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO I am employed in the County of San Luis Obispo, State of California. I am over the age of 18, and not a party to the within action. My business address is 990 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, California 93401. On July 17, 2025, I caused the foregoing document described as NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL DECISION to be served on the interested parties in this action by placing true copies thereof enclosed in sealed envelopes, addressed as follows: Christian Chorbajian 1335 E Foothill Blvd. San Luis Obispo, CA 93405 Email: [X] By United States Mail: I enclosed the documents in a sealed envelope addressed as indicated above. I am readily familiar with the office’s practice of collection and processing documents for mailing. It is deposited with the U.S. postal service on that same day in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if the postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after the date of service. [X] By Certified United States Mail: I enclosed the documents in a sealed envelope addressed as indicated above. I completed and attached to the envelope the additional form required for this type of delivery. I am readily familiar with the office’s practice of collection and processing documents for mailing. It is deposited with the U.S. postal service on that same day in the ordinary course of business. I am aware that on motion of the party served, service is presumed invalid if the postal cancellation date or postage meter date is more than one day after the date of deposit for mailing in affidavit. [X] Courtesy Copy by E-mail: I caused this document to be transmitted via e-mail to the e- mail address listed above. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on July 17, 2025, at San Luis Obispo, California. _____________________________ Sarah Zion 492 From:Cohen, Rachel Sent:Thursday, July 17, 2025 8:48 AM To:Patino, Mallory Subject:FW: Delta Chi Cal Poly Chapter - Appeal Attachments:2025-07-11.Final Delta Chi Cal Poly Chapter - Appeal Support Info.pdf Hi Mallory- Just sending this along for your information. Right now we have a tentative date to go to Council on October 21, 2025. Thanks, Rachel Cohen pronouns she/her/hers Principal Planner Community Development 919 Palm Street, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E rcohen@slocity.org T 805.781.7574 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Sent: Friday, July 11, 2025 3:56 PM To: Corey, Tyler <tcorey@slocity.org>; Cohen, Rachel <rcohen@slocity.org> Subject: FW: Delta Chi Cal Poly Chapter - Appeal Hi team, Please see what the applicants submitted for the appeal of the Delta Chi CUP item. Thank you, Timmi From: Carol Florence <cmf@oasisassoc.com> Sent: Friday, July 11, 2025 3:31 PM To: Tway, Timothea (Timmi) <TTway@slocity.org> Subject: Delta Chi Cal Poly Chapter - Appeal Dear Timmi, Thank you for the opportunity to provide you with the attached correspondence in support of the appeal. Please see the attached. I had an occasion to express our approach to the City Manager and look forward to working with her, you, your staff, Cal Poly, and my clients toward a resolution. Upon review of the attached, I would appreciate your thoughts. Perhaps, we can talk/meet soon. In the interim, have a lovely, long dog days of summer weekend. Yours, as always, 493 C.M. Florence, AICP Principal Planner OASIS ASSOCIATES, INC. 3427 Miguelito Court San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 P: 805.541.4509 I D: 805.548.1561 I M: www.oasisassoc.com 3427 Miguelito Court San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 805.541.4509 p 805.546.0525 f www.oasisassoc.com CP 018415 ● RLA 2248 ● CLARB 907 11 July 2025 Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO c/o Ms. Timothea Tway, Community Development Director 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 via email - TTway@slocity.org RE: DELTA CHI CAL POLY CHAPTER, 1236 MONTE VISTA PLACE, SLO, CA APPEAL OF PLANNING COMMISSION REVOCATION OF CUP U106-98 Dear Mayor and Council Members, We represent the Delta Chi Cal Poly Chapter (Delta Chi) who, on June, 20, 2025, lodged an appeal to set aside the Planning Commission’s June 11, 2025 decision to revoke their conditional use permit and to alternatively request that the permit to be amended to address community concerns. We appreciate the opportunity to provide a more robust discussion and relevant evidence to support the Council’s decision to uphold the appeal and enable the staff and the fraternity to work collaboratively to amend the conditional use permit. Thank you, in advance, for the consideration. Initially, there are a few high level ideas that we would like you to consider. 1. Partnership, not punishment. Delta Chi are partners in this community. The question isn’t whether there are problems, it’s whether they can be solved collaboratively. 2. Willingness to be accountable. Delta Chi does not want to avoid regulation. They do want clear, achievable, and enforceable conditions that ensure accountability, as they welcome the oversight. As importantly, Delta Chi currently works within their own defined governance framework.1 3. Track record of improvement. Delta Chi has worked systematically to reduce incidents. Over the past two years, documented violations have declined significantly, reflecting their commitment to improvements. While challenges remain, the trend is clear and positive. And finally, 4. S trong institutional support. Delta Chi is in active participation with Cal Poly’s Fraternity & Sorority Life/Leadership & Service/Student Affairs unit to ensure compliance with both the university 2 and City expectations. Context and Community Legacy San Luis Obispo is a proud and continually evolving town-and-gown community, home to decades of shared experiences between Cal Poly students and long-term residents. While these relationships have at times been challenging, they are also deeply rooted and resilient. Delta Chi has been a part 1 Attached is a list of additional reference materials that include descriptions of the local chapter bylaws, local property management, the alumni association, and national fraternity oversight. 2 Attached for ease of reference is the Cal Poly Fraternity & Sorority Life Event Registration Procedure, rev. March 25, 2025 which sets the framework for on and off campus events and is “designed to provide a safe social atmosphere for members of the Greek Community and their guests, while allowing them to exercise the personal responsibility expect of each of them”. OASIS ASSOCIATES, INC. 11 July 2025 DELTA CHI CAL POLY CHAPTER APPEAL Page 2 of 3 3427 Miguelito Court San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 805.541.4509 p 805.546.0525 f www.oasisassoc.com CP 018415 ● RLA 2248 ● CLARB 907 of this fabric for many years, and like many other fraternities and sororities, they operate off- campus due to the absence of a formal Greek Row. Over time, as both the university and the City have grown, the need for clear expectations, communication, and partnership has become increasingly vital. Good-Faith Reliance and Cooperative History Delta Chi has worked with City staff over the years to comply with permit conditions and to address neighborhood concerns in good faith. While they acknowledge there have been issues, particularly with occupancy and noise, they have also taken steps to respond to feedback and implement operational improvements. Delta Chi has relied on the City’s guidance, including direct communication and staff input, to understand expectations and make changes, accordingly. They have invested time and resources in mitigation measures, adjusted management practices, and have consistently sought to be a constructive member of the community. Notably, in this most recent CUP review, the City’s own staff report recommended amending the permit rather than revoking it, indicating a belief that continued operation under improved conditions is both possible and reasonable. Equity and Proportionality Revocation of the CUP at this stage, after years of interaction and reliance on City feedback, imposes a severe and, we believe, disproportionate penalty—particularly in light of staff’s recommendation for amendment. It also undermines the City’s stated goal of collaborative problem-solving with student organizations. While legal doctrines such as equitable estoppel may not strictly apply to municipal decisions, the underlying principles—fairness, reliance, and proportionality—are relevant here. Delta Chi acted in good faith based on the City’s past positions and now face significant hardship due to a sudden change in course. A Call for Constructive Resolution We are not asking the City Council to excuse past shortcomings. Instead, we are asking for a path forward that reflects the complexity of this issue and the opportunity for shared responsibility. The fraternity members, past and present, remain open and committed to working with City staff, neighbors, and university partners to strengthen permit conditions, improve accountability, and preserve Delta Chi’s place in the San Luis Obispo community. Accordingly, we respectfully request that the Council: 1. Uphold this appeal; 2. Reverse the Planning Commission’s decision to revoke the CUP; and 3. Direct staff to pursue amendments to the permit in coordination with Delta Chi.3 We thank the Council for its consideration and for continuing to foster thoughtful dialogue between student organizations and the broader community. On behalf of Delta Chi, the fraternity members remain committed to being part of the solution. 3 The second attachment to this correspondence represents preliminary comments on staff’s previous recommendations to the Planning Commission to amend the original CUP. These are offered to correct the record and as a starting point to thoughtfully amend the permit in light of existing and potential future circumstances. OASIS ASSOCIATES, INC. 11 July 2025 DELTA CHI CAL POLY CHAPTER APPEAL Page 3 of 3 3427 Miguelito Court San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 805.541.4509 p 805.546.0525 f www.oasisassoc.com CP 018415 ● RLA 2248 ● CLARB 907 Respectfully submitted, OASIS ASSOCIATES, INC. C.M. Florence, AICP Agent DELTA CHI CAL POLY CHAPTER Attachments – • 1 – List of Delta Chi Cal Poly Chapter’s Existing Internal Governance Framework • 2 – Event Registration Procedure, Cal Poly Fraternity & Sorority Life, March 2025 • 3 – Draft Comments to SLO Planning Commission Resolution no. XXX-25 cc: C. Green C. Nielsen E. Moffitt S. Pollock M. Holliday Delta Chi Members + Alumni 25-0053 ATTACHMENT 1 List of Delta Chi Cal Poly Chapter’s Existing Internal Governance Framework 11 July 2025 Local Chapter Bylaws and Governance The Cal Poly Chapter of Delta Chi operates under a formal set of local bylaws adopted by its membership. These bylaws govern the operations of the chapter, including leadership elections, financial procedures, conduct expectations, and adherence to university and national standards. They serve as a constitutionally binding document that ensures internal accountability, democratic leadership succession, and operational continuity from year to year. In addition, Delta Chi has adopted a Risk Management Plan that includes the following items: emergency contact list; event planning; harm reduction; code of conduct; crisis management; and fire safety. Local Housing Corporation Oversight Delta Chi’s physical property, located at 1236 Monte Vista Place, San Luis Obispo, CA, is managed by a dedicated local housing corporation. This entity, typically composed of alumni volunteers, is responsible for property maintenance, safety compliance, and financial oversight of the facility, in conjunction with our landlord. The housing corporation plays a critical role in ensuring that the chapter property is managed responsibly and that the property is safe and livable, in cooperation with the property owner, regardless of the changing undergraduate leadership. Active Alumni Association Involvement Delta Chi Cal Poly maintains an active alumni association that provides mentorship, guidance, and institutional memory. The alumni are deeply involved in supporting the chapter’s educational programs, leadership development, and operations, and frequently assist with transitional planning, risk management, and disciplinary concerns. This alumni network provides consistent intergenerational support and ensures continuity through leadership transitions. National Fraternity Oversight and Support As a chapter of the Delta Chi Fraternity, Inc., a nationally recognized fraternity established in 1890, the Cal Poly Chapter benefits from oversight and resources provided by the national headquarters. The national organization provides training, operational audits, risk management programs, leadership education, and crisis response protocols. They also ensure that all local chapters remain in good standing with respect to national policies and standards. In the event of a local leadership issue or disruption, the national fraternity has the capacity and authority to intervene and help restore structure and compliance. Revised March 2025 EVENT REGISTRATION PROCEDURE All members of Cal Poly-affiliated fraternities and sororities, and the Interfraternity Council, the Panhellenic Council, and the United Sorority & Fraternity Council at Cal Poly (collectively the “Fraternity and Sorority Community”), shall abide by all University policies and federal, state, and local laws and regulations, including those that govern the use, distribution, and consumption of alcohol. This Event Registration Procedure sets forth procedures designed to provide a safe social atmosphere for members of the Greek Community and their guests, while allowing them to exercise the personal responsibility expected of each of them. The following objectives are essential to achieving this aim: •To encourage social responsibility in all members, with emphasis on safety and risk management; •To encourage responsibility in the use of alcohol and thereby reduce the risks associated with alcohol misuse at parties; •To increase the safety of everyone in attendance at chapter -sponsored events with and without alcohol; •To support the ideals and values on which fraternities and sororities are founded; •To practice self-governance as a Fraternity and Sorority Life Community; •To educate the general membership of the Fraternity and Sorority Life community about the importance of risk management. 1 The University does not accept legal liability for the activities engaged in by fraternities and sororities, and their members. ATTACHMENT 2 Revised March 2025 Table of Contents Article I - What defines an event? Article II - Legal Article III - Events with Alcohol Present Article IV - Events without Alcohol Present Article V - Locations Article VI - Registration Process Article VII - Judicial Article VIII - Amnesty Article IX - Procedure Revision Revised March 2025 Article I - What defines an event? A. An “event” for the purposes of this document is any activity sponsored or endorsed by the organization/chapter including those that occur on and off chapter premises. Article II – Legal A. Any event as defined above must be compliant with all applicable laws, including but not limited to the below requirements: a. The organization, members and guests must comply with all federal, state, and local laws. No person under the legal drinking age my possess, consume, provide or be provided alcoholic beverages b. Organizations, members and guests must follow the federal law regarding illegal drugs and controlled substances. No persons may possess, use, provide, distribute, sell and or manufacture illegal drugs or other controlled substances while on organizational/ chapter premises or at any activity or event which is sponsored or endorsed by the chapter B. Laws local to San Luis Obispo are also enforced with events. The following is provided for convenience only and is not all-inclusive. Laws may change and it is up to the chapter to be aware of all applicable laws. Some relevant laws include: a. Noise Ordinance i. 7 A.M. to 10 P.M.: Noise that can be heard 50 feet from the source is a violation ii. 10 P.M. to 7 A.M.: Noise that can be heard across the property line is a violation b. Safety Enhancement Zones i. Fines are doubled for the following violations: 1. Noise 2. Unruly Gathering 3. Social Host Liability 4. Public Urination 5. Open Container ii. Designated times for Safety Enhancement Zones may vary, but typically occur during: 1. Mardi Gras (Thursday - Wednesday) 2. St. Patrick’s Day 3. Halloween Revised March 2025 4. “WOW’ Week Article III – Events with Alcohol Present A. Guest Lists and Sober Monitors a. Any event where alcohol is present is required to be a closed event, with guest lists submitted to the FSL office by the deadline (see Article VI) b. Attendance by non-members at any event where alcohol is present must be by invitation only by the organization. Chapters must utilize the guest list template provided by the FSL Office. Attendance at events where alcohol is present is limited to a guest-to-member ratio of 2:1 and must not exceed local fire or building code capacity of the organizational/chapter premises or host venue. c. Any event with alcohol present is also required to have sober monitors present, with quantity based on the number of guests in attendance. i. Three sober monitors (including one from the Executive committee or equivalent) are required at a minimum. ii. For every 40 guests invited to the event, another sober monitor will be required iii. First year members who have been in the chapter for at least one quarter and are initiated members, can serve as sober monitors if the following is in place: 1. Required attendance at one of the annual Social Risk Management workshops hosted the FSL office PRIOR to becoming eligible to serve as a sober monitor 2. Procedures in place attached to the risk management plan, that supports first year students during the event, should conflict arise 3. No more than 30 percent of sober monitors can be first year members B. Any event where alcohol is present can only occur from a. 5:00pm on Thursday until 1:00am on Friday, when Friday is an academic holiday b. 5:00pm on Friday until 1:00am on Saturday c. 9:00am on Saturday until 1:00am on Sunday d. 9:00am on Sunday until 1:00am on Monday, when Monday is an academic holiday C. Events with alcohol cannot occur until after the formal recruitment period is over (during quarters where there is a formal recruitment period) unless at a third - party venue and the event is closed with no potential new members in attendance and follows all event registration guidelines. D. Events with alcohol are prohibited from lasting longer than five hours continuously E. Sources of Alcohol a. Alcoholic beverages must either be: Revised March 2025 i. Provided and sold by a licensed and insured third-party vendor, e.g., restaurant, bar, caterer, etc.) or ii. Brought by the individual members and guests through a bring your own beverage system. b. Common sources of alcohol, including bulk quantities, which are not being served by a licensed and insured third-party vendor, are prohibited (i.e. amounts of alcohol greater than what a reasonable person should consume over the duration of the event) c. The presence of alcohol products above 15% alcohol by volume (ABV) is prohibited on any organizational/chapter premises or at any event, except when served at an event by a licensed and insured third party vendor. d. Alcoholic beverages must not be purchased with organizational/chapter funds or funds pooled by members or guests (e.g., admission fees, cover fees, collecting funds through digital apps, etc.) F. Bring Your Own Beverage a. Only those of legal drinking age in California may bring and consume alcohol b. Permitted alcohol can only be made available in central common living areas managed by sober monitors designated by the host chapter c. Individuals of legal drinking age may bring beer totaling no more than 72 ounces (equivalent to a six pack of 12 oz beers) or one bottle (750 ml) of wine to the event G. Drinking Games a. No shots, drinking games, or other activities that encourage inappropriate or other rapid consumption or high-risk drinking behaviors shall be allowed. i. The definition of drinking games includes but is not limited to the consumption of shots of alcohol, liquor or alcoholic beverages; the practice of consuming shots equating to one’s age;” beer pong,” “century club,” “beer die”,” dares;” or any other activity involving the consumption of alcohol which involves duress or encouragement related to the consumption of alcohol. H. Consent Talks a. All events with alcohol are required to have a Consent Talk after 30 minutes and no later than 1 hour of the event starting. The Consent Talk will be provided by the chapter’s Violence Prevention Chair (or a designated individual in the case that the Violence Prevention Chair isn’t present) and will be given to all participants at the event. If this is an exchange between two Revised March 2025 FSL organizations, both Violence Prevention Chairs should co-present the information. An example of the Consent Talk is below: “Hi everyone, my name is _____ and I am the Violence Prevention Chair for (insert chapter here). We want everyone to have a great time tonight and feel safe & respected! I am going to give a brief consent talk before we continue with the rest of the night! Remember: 1. Consent is freely given: consent can only be given without coercion, force, threats, or intimidation. It cannot be given by someone who is incapacitated, including due to drugs, alcohol, or medication. 2. Consent is reversible: you can change your mind about anything at any time during sex. 3. Consent is informed: you must know what you are consenting to in order to give consent. 4. Consent is enthusiastic: when it comes to sex you should want to have it. 5. Consent is specific: saying yes to one thing, like making out, does not mean saying yes to everything, like having sex. [Add in values of chapter here, e.g. “we are men /women of high integrity”] If you are interested in hooking up with someone tonight, check in with them and make sure to respect whatever answer they give you. If you see someone crossing a line, making others feel uncomfortable or someone in a vulnerable position, please come up t o me or [insert the name of Chapter President or Risk Manager, whoever is comfortable] if you need absolutely anything at all, we will be at the door (or wherever you stand)! Thank you and have fun!” I. Registration a. Events with alcohol are required to be registered with the FSL office prior to their occurrence and with documents submitted prior to the required deadlines (further outlined in Article VI) Article IV – Events without Alcohol Present A. Guest Lists and Sober Monitors a. Guest lists and sober monitors are not required for events where alcohol is not present, but are encouraged B. Registration Revised March 2025 a. Events without alcohol are required to be registered with the FSL office prior to their occurrence and with documents submitted prior to the required deadlines (further outlined in Article VI) Article V – Locations A. All off-campus events with alcohol must be held at a residence, including a chapter facility, or at a venue under third party management that is not legally associated with the chapter in any capacity (“third-party venue”). B. For all events with alcohol that are located at a third-party venue, a copy of the contract with the chapter and event management company or third -party venue must be submitted with the party registration. Article VI – Registration Process A. The process of online events with alcohol registration must begin at least 10 days before the date of the event. B. Deadlines for completion of registration are every Thursday by 12:00 pm, the weekend of the event. C. A final follow up guest list must be submitted by 12:00 noon Monday following the event with alcohol, with the full names of all attendees and birthdates of all guests who received wristbands for alcohol consumption. a. No future events with alcohol will be reviewed until this requirement is fulfilled D. The chapter’s risk manager must complete a post -event review, which is to be submitted to Cal Poly Fraternity and Sorority Life by 12:00 noon the Wednesday following the event with alcohol. All sober monitors and sober executive members will contribute to this review. For events with alcohol where there may be more than one chapter acting as the event host, each chapter must complete a post- event form. a. No future events with alcohol will be reviewed until this requirement is fulfilled E. Failure to follow these requirements may subject the chapter and/or its individual members to student discipline. Article VII – Judicial A. Failure to follow these procedures will be reviewed by the Office of Student Rights & Responsibilities (OSRR) and may be subject to sanctions. Revised March 2025 B. It is recognized that this procedure cannot address, in specific fashion, all possible social situations that may occur. When this procedure is not specific on a particular point, the Interfraternity Council, Panhellenic Council, and United Sorority & Fraternity Council chapters and their members are expected to conduct their events and themselves in the spirit of social responsibility expressed in this procedure. C. Council judicial boards can also adjudicate if deemed necessary by the OSRR. Article VIII – Amnesty A. The university’s primary concern is for the health, welfare, and safety of all students. As such, in cases of significant intoxication as a result of alcohol or other substances, the university encourages students to seek medical assistance for themselves and/or others. Any student who assists in seeking medical attention for a person in need will not be subject to disciplinary action for conduct in violation of this policy. Article IX – Procedure Revision A. This procedure may be revised at any time by the Fraternity & Sorority Life office, OSRR and Dean of Students. B. This procedure will be reviewed during summer quarter, or at the discretion of the Dean of Students staff, and any revisions will be sent to members of fraternities and sororities immediately and will be effective the first day of the following fall quarter. C. In the event of a mid-academic year review, any revisions will be sent to members of fraternities and sororities immediately upon implementation. ATTACHMENT 3 DRAFT Comments to SLO Planning Commission Resolution No. XXX-25 Amending CUP 5230-98 – Proposed Conditions of Approval (USE-0332-2025) 11 July 2025 The following are a few of the Community Development Department staff proposed conditions of approval, along with our comments, offered as examples of areas that warrant additional consideration and collaboration between the Delta Chi fraternity and the City of San Luis Obispo. We recognize that there may at times be differences of opinion regarding the best way to address certain issues, but there remains a shared goal and objective: to craft clear, reasonable, and enforceable conditions that support the fraternity’s continued operation in a manner that is safe, responsible, and compatible with the surrounding community. Through thoughtful dialogue and partnership, we believe these conditions can be refined to achieve that balance. C ondition of Approval 2. The Conditional Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Commission as soon as practical if conduct on the permitted premises results in three (3) citations within any 12-month period for a violation of law or permit condition that (a) are not contested or are upheld on appeal, and (b) the conduct for which the citations were issued resulted in adverse impacts to, or complaints from, residents or occupants of the surrounding neighborhood. At the time of the Conditional Use Permit review, to ensure ongoing compatibility with nearby uses, conditions of approval may be added, modified, and/or removed, or the Conditional Use Permit may be revoked. The City shall notify Cal Poly if the Use Permit is revoked. A re-review by the Planning Commission shall be accompanied by the appropriate fee. COMMENT: (a clarification for the record) Delta Chi had received three (3) "violations" in the past twelve 12 months, although one was successfully appealed by the time of the May 28, 2025 Planning Commission hearing. This is an important clarification, as the condition of approval wording clearly states that the permit can be up for review if three (3) (emphasis added) citations are received within a twelve (12) months period and (again, emphasis added) the conduct for which the citations were issued resulted in adverse impacts to, or complaints from, residents or occupants of the surrounding neighborhood. While nuanced, this distinction may have prevented the Planning Commission’s revocation decision. C onditional of Approval 4. Routine meetings and gatherings for the fraternity shall be limited to a maximum of 54 people (rounded down from 54.45 = 36.3 people x 1.5), except as otherwise approved by the Community Development Director for special events. If the fraternity hosts special events involving more than 54 people, a transportation management plan to reduce impacts to the surrounding neighborhood shall be submitted to the Community Development Department, at least 30 days prior to the event taking place, for review and approval. No exception from the Noise Ordinance shall be approved by the Director as Part of the special event. Presence of more than 54 people at the property without valid approval from the Community Development Director shall be considered a violation of this Conditional Use Permit. COMMENT: We believe that the focus should not be on the quantity of the people on the property, but on the impact of the gathering on the community, as regulated by objective standards, such as MC Title 9 Chapter 9.12 Noise Control, Chapter 9.13 Unruly gatherings, and Chapter 9.22 Safety Enhancement Zones. Attachment 3 Page 2 of 2 Interestingly, we agree with the City’s response to the recent Grand Jury report regarding standard conditions, "Setting constraints like a uniform set of conditions on the exercise of discretion diminishes the usefulness of the review process to address specific needs over time or for unique circumstances that may exist at specific properties or with particular groups or organizations." Creating a CUP with a custom set of conditions of approval for each fraternity would recognize the differences in the size of the property, number of building occupants allowed, number of parking spaces, and even its location, such as the proximity to Cal Poly. Currently, the one-size-fits-all calculation takes none of the aforementioned into consideration. An example of the need for more customized conditions of approval is found in the revised COA no. 4, that limits the maximum number of residents to thirty five (35) people living on the property, while limiting the maximum number of routine meetings and gatherings to 1.5 times the number of residents or fifty-four (54) people. This is unrealistic and flawed, as there is no consideration of the very site and fraternity specific aspects. For the sake of comparison, and to underscore the need to eliminate the “one size fits all” CUP conditions of approval, the 1.5 formula has been used for other fraternity CUPs, e.g., 2024 Lamda Chi and the 2021 Delta Gamma. Unfortunately, the calculation does not factor in the number of residents, interior building square footage (SF), parking and alternative modes of transportation, both on- and off-site. For example, • Delta Chi accommodates 370 SF per resident, which is higher ratio than Lambda Chi's 240 SF per resident. • Delta Chi has far more residents than Delta Gamma – where they have six (6) residents Delta Chi has thirty five (35) residents. • The Alpha Gamma Delta 2016 CUP was calculated at 2.1 times their residents. • Delta Chi maintains thirty two (32) parking spaces, a fair amount greater than other fraternities, and because of the proximity to the Cal Poly campus, there is no less than forty (40) additional and available parking spaces on campus within 200 feet of the Delta Chi property. In closing, it is essential to move beyond a “one size fits all” approach to fraternity conditional use permit conditions of approval and instead adopt a framework that is tailored to the specific circumstances of each house and organization. This does not diminish the City’s discretionary authority over permit review and approval; rather, it acknowledges that each fraternity operates within its own context, with unique physical constraints, membership structures, and operational goals. By crafting site- and fraternity-specific conditions, the City can more effectively ensure lasting compatibility with surrounding neighborhoods, encourage accountability, and support solutions that are practical, enforceable, and responsive to genuine community concerns. 494 From:Daniel, Josh Sent:Thursday, July 17, 2025 6:14 AM To:Tuggle, Todd Subject:Re: Fire prevention update You are welcome! Josh Get Outlook for iOS From: Tuggle, Todd <ttuggle@slocity.org> Sent: Thursday, July 17, 2025 5:18:35 AM To: Daniel, Josh <JDaniel@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Fire prevention update Thanks for the piece of good news. This is great to hear that we are on track and is testimony to your leadership and the focus of the team. Thanks for the time yesterday. I appreciate your approach and that we can have discussions that about more than the nuts and bolts of getting stuff done. Thanks for being a sounding board yesterday and staying focused on the job at hand. Todd Tuggle Fire Chief City of San Luis Obispo 805 858-0435 From: Daniel, Josh <JDaniel@slocity.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2025 5:58:22 PM To: Tuggle, Todd <ttuggle@slocity.org> Subject: Fire prevention update Chief, The annual state-mandated inspections are looking great. We are on track to finish all R2 inspections by mid-December. The Hotels and Motels are 37 complete, two under construction, and three are pending first inspection. Of the three pending, only one is not returning our calls. The other two are scheduled. The education facilities are being scheduled as we speak. The Fraternities and Sororities are also scheduled as we speak. Just some good news update! Josh Daniel Fire Marshal Fire Department 495 2160 Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3934 E JDaniel@slocity.org T 805.781.7386 C 805.431.4446 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications 496 From:Shoresman, Michelle Sent:Wednesday, July 16, 2025 10:34 PM To: Subject:Re: Grand Jury Report Hi Terry, Thanks and I understand there are lots of issues in the neighborhoods surrounding Cal Poly. We have similar issues in other neighborhoods, (parking, speeding, etc.), but not all the same, of course. Unfortunately, at this time, with this item, we are answering specific questions from the grand jury on specific issues. But I am taking note of some of your other concerns and would be happy to forward your concerns about speeding and traffic to our traffic staff so they can evaluate the possibility for humps or other potential solutions. Thank you again and good night for now, Michelle From: Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2025 10:09:15 PM To: Shoresman, Michelle <mshoresm@slocity.org> Cc: 'RQN of SLO' <rqn.board@yahoo.com> Subject: RE: Grand Jury Report You’re welcome and thanks, Michelle. In point #1 of my comments, I mentioned the “un-safe” driving conditions. It is just as accurate to mention the un-safe pedestrian conditions. One of the reasons that the Alta Vista Neighborhood was the first neighborhood to establish a “permit” parking ordinance was that during the late ‘70’s when there were many grade school kids in the neighborhood, was that at 7:45 AM these kids were walking to school at the original Pacheco Elementary (corner of Slack and Grand) while at the same time CP faculty/staff and students were driving into the neighborhood and parking in front of our houses (for free) instead of PAYING for parking on campus. These same “illicit” parkers would then unload their bicycles from their vehicles and pedal down to campus. Albert Dr. and the surrounding streets were just too narrow for the early morning “rush”. Now the parking spots are so rare on the neighborhood because many of the houses are occupied, not necessarily by the “frats”, but also by 7-9 students of all types, with a “need” for individual cars. That means 7-9 cars per household. Thees CP kids could leave their cars at their out-of-town parents’ houses…thus freeing up some of the congestion. Not all of the streets in the neighborhood have sidewalks…so the CP students who live there walk down the middle of the street….three and four abreast. It’s dangerous !!! 497 In 2004, before I had an unsuccessful run at Council (2006), I circulated a petition (signed by 99% of the residents of Albert Dr, all of which were long-term residents), The petition was to ask for the City to install “speed humps.” The “City” in their infinite wisdom denied the humps. This is all water- under-the bridge. at this time. But it could still happen, as the City has installed “humps” on Slack St. This conversation all relates back to the last sentence of yesterday’s email… regular students AND “frats” should be housed on Campus. In the ‘80’s I had this specific discussion with local housing developers, city staff and CP administrators…with a response of “good idea Terry, but it just won’t work” Finally, but working backwards, in the early ‘50’s many of the students at CP were post- WW2 and Korean Conflict veterans….WITH FAMILIES, along with some instructors with families who lived in on-campus housing including (25-foot long trailers called Silver City and Vet Ville clapboard-siding “dwellings’), and apartments. I hope this clarifies some things for you and your co-council members. It might not be too late to go back to some earlier solid ideas put forth by myself and other long-term residents who suggest more adequate campus housing…and over-all town-gown relations. Sincerely Terry W. Conner (This is a non-texting number) Dream Big, Pursue Your Dreams From: Shoresman, Michelle <mshoresm@slocity.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2025 5:18 PM To: Subject: RE: Grand Jury Report Thank you for your email Terry. Have a good evening and I am sorry I wasn’t able to get back to you before the meeting, but I DID read your email. Thanks again, for sharing your thoughts. Michelle From: Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 11:34 AM To: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org> Cc: 'RQN of SLO' <rqn.board@yahoo.com> Subject: Grand Jury Report Dear Mayor Stewart and City Council. I lived with my family for 44 years on Albert Drive (Alta Vista Neighborhood one block from Cal Poly)…1978-2002. 498 While the noise and parties; and general lack of respect by the encroaching short-term students towards the long-term residents escalated during that time, there are two specific issues that drove our family from our “forever home” to the south side of town. 1. With the overcrowding by students in the other houses on Albert Dr., there was also a huge increase in numbers of cars parking on the streets…as many students were living in converted garages; and the visitors to the neighborhood took up more spots...thus causing un-safe driving conditions. 2. One night there was a party in the house across from our house (in the house once occupied by my parents, Wes and Doty Conner). The party overflowed from the house into the street, and I went outside to ask the partiers to take it back inside. One of the non-resident partiers threatened to “beat” me up and to mind my own business !!! Good-bye Albert Drive! This was an extremely emotional experience, as I had lived in the “party house” in the ‘60’s while a student at San Luis Obispo High School and first year Poly student. The City and CP Administration need to come to grips with getting the bulk of their students (not just the Frat’s and Sororities) on Campus. Sincerely, Terry W. Conner (This is a non-texting number) Dream Big, Pursue Your Dreams 499 From: Sent:Wednesday, July 16, 2025 10:09 PM To:Shoresman, Michelle Cc:'RQN of SLO' Subject:RE: Grand Jury Report You’re welcome and thanks, Michelle. In point #1 of my comments, I mentioned the “un-safe” driving conditions. It is just as accurate to mention the un-safe pedestrian conditions. One of the reasons that the Alta Vista Neighborhood was the first neighborhood to establish a “permit” parking ordinance was that during the late ‘70’s when there were many grade school kids in the neighborhood, was that at 7:45 AM these kids were walking to school at the original Pacheco Elementary (corner of Slack and Grand) while at the same time CP faculty/staff and students were driving into the neighborhood and parking in front of our houses (for free) instead of PAYING for parking on campus. These same “illicit” parkers would then unload their bicycles from their vehicles and pedal down to campus. Albert Dr. and the surrounding streets were just too narrow for the early morning “rush”. Now the parking spots are so rare on the neighborhood because many of the houses are occupied, not necessarily by the “frats”, but also by 7-9 students of all types, with a “need” for individual cars. That means 7-9 cars per household. Thees CP kids could leave their cars at their out-of-town parents’ houses…thus freeing up some of the congestion. Not all of the streets in the neighborhood have sidewalks…so the CP students who live there walk down the middle of the street….three and four abreast. It’s dangerous !!! In 2004, before I had an unsuccessful run at Council (2006), I circulated a petition (signed by 99% of the residents of Albert Dr, all of which were long-term residents), The petition was to ask for the City to install “speed humps.” The “City” in their infinite wisdom denied the humps. This is all water- under-the bridge. at this time. But it could still happen, as the City has installed “humps” on Slack St. This conversation all relates back to the last sentence of yesterday ’s email… regular students AND “frats” should be housed on Campus. In the ‘80’s I had this specific discussion with local housing developers, city staff and CP administrators…with a response of “good idea Terry, but it just won’t work” Finally, but working backwards, in the early ‘50’s many of the students at CP were post- WW2 and Korean Conflict veterans….WITH FAMILIES, along with some instructors with families who lived in on-campus housing including (25-foot long trailers called Silver City and Vet Ville clapboard-siding “dwellings’), and apartments. 500 I hope this clarifies some things for you and your co-council members. It might not be too late to go back to some earlier solid ideas put forth by myself and other long-term residents who suggest more adequate campus housing…and over-all town-gown relations. Sincerely Terry W. Conner (This is a non-texting number) Dream Big, Pursue Your Dreams From: Shoresman, Michelle <mshoresm@slocity.org> Sent: Wednesday, July 16, 2025 5:18 PM To: Subject: RE: Grand Jury Report Thank you for your email Terry. Have a good evening and I am sorry I wasn’t able to get back to you before the meeting, but I DID read your email. Thanks again, for sharing your thoughts. Michelle From: Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 11:34 AM To: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org> Cc: 'RQN of SLO' <rqn.board@yahoo.com> Subject: Grand Jury Report Dear Mayor Stewart and City Council. I lived with my family for 44 years on Albert Drive (Alta Vista Neighborhood one block from Cal Poly)…1978-2002. While the noise and parties; and general lack of respect by the encroaching short -term students towards the long-term residents escalated during that time, there are two specific issues that drove our family from our “forever home” to the south side of town. 1. With the overcrowding by students in the other houses on Albert Dr., there was also a huge increase in numbers of cars parking on the streets…as many students were living in converted garages; and the visitors to the neighborhood took up more spots...thus causing un -safe driving conditions. 2. One night there was a party in the house across from our house (in the house once occupied by my parents, Wes and Doty Conner). The party overflowed from the house into the street, and I went outside to ask the partiers to take it back inside. One of the non-resident partiers threatened to “beat” me up and to mind my own business !!! Good-bye Albert Drive! This was an extremely emotional experience, as I had lived in the “party house” in the ‘60 ’s while a student at San Luis Obispo High School and first year Poly student. The City and CP Administration need to come to grips with getting the bulk of their students (not just the Frat’s and Sororities) on Campus. 501 Sincerely, Terry W. Conner (This is a non-texting number) Dream Big, Pursue Your Dreams 502 From:Daniel, Josh Sent:Wednesday, July 16, 2025 5:58 PM To:Tuggle, Todd Subject:Fire prevention update Chief, The annual state-mandated inspections are looking great. We are on track to finish all R2 inspections by mid-December. The Hotels and Motels are 37 complete, two under construction, and three are pending first inspection. Of the three pending, only one is not returning our calls. The other two are scheduled. The education facilities are being scheduled as we speak. The Fraternities and Sororities are also scheduled as we speak. Just some good news update! Josh Daniel Fire Marshal Fire Department 2160 Santa Barbara, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3934 E JDaniel@slocity.org T 805.781.7386 C 805.431.4446 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications 503 From:Shoresman, Michelle Sent:Wednesday, July 16, 2025 5:18 PM To: Subject:RE: Grand Jury Report Thank you for your email Terry. Have a good evening and I am sorry I wasn’t able to get back to you before the meeting, but I DID read your email. Thanks again, for sharing your thoughts. Michelle From: Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 11:34 AM To: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org> Cc: 'RQN of SLO' <rqn.board@yahoo.com> Subject: Grand Jury Report Dear Mayor Stewart and City Council. I lived with my family for 44 years on Albert Drive (Alta Vista Neighborhood one block from Cal Poly)…1978-2002. While the noise and parties; and general lack of respect by the encroaching short -term students towards the long-term residents escalated during that time, there are two specific issues that drove our family from our “forever home” to the south side of town. 1. With the overcrowding by students in the other houses on Albert Dr., there was also a huge increase in numbers of cars parking on the streets…as many students were living in converted garages; and the visitors to the neighborhood took up more spots...thus causing un -safe driving conditions. 2. One night there was a party in the house across from our house (in the house once occupied by my parents, Wes and Doty Conner). The party overflowed from the house into the street, and I went outside to ask the partiers to take it back inside. One of the non-resident partiers threatened to “beat” me up and to mind my own business !!! Good-bye Albert Drive! This was an extremely emotional experience, as I had lived in the “party house” in the ‘60 ’s while a student at San Luis Obispo High School and first year Poly student. The City and CP Administration need to come to grips with getting the bulk of their students (not just the Frat’s and Sororities) on Campus. Sincerely, Terry W. Conner (This is a non-texting number) Dream Big, Pursue Your Dreams 504 From:Shoresman, Michelle Sent:Wednesday, July 16, 2025 5:16 PM To:Genevieve Czech Subject:RE: Item 8a of meeting by City Council on 07/15/25 Hi Genevieve, Hope you have had a lovely week. In case you didn’t know, the council did (as noticed in the agenda) entertain an item on the agenda last night to form an ad hoc committee to respond to the grand jury report. That was the sole purpose of the item, so there wasn’t much discussion besides that. There will be another opportunity for discussion though, when the ad hoc’s recommendations come back to the full council. In response to several emails requesting that Jan be nominated to the committee, I was happy to oblige that request. I too thought, with her personal experience, she would be a good addition to the committee. I look forward to seeing the ad hoc committee’s suggestions come back in September. Thank you, Michelle From: Genevieve Czech < Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 11:42 AM To: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org> Subject: Item 8a of meeting by City Council on 07/15/25 Dear Lady Mayoress and City Council: The correspondence you have received already is sufficient for you to both study and assimilate the serious concerns of SLO city residents, long standing and productive residents whose concerns deserve your humble and earnest consideration. Among some of those issues raised are the failure by Cal Poly to release the addresses of satellite fraternities and sororities. In effect they violate our zoning codes. One suggestion that has been made is for Cal Poly to provide Greek houses on campus as is the practice of most Universities. Another recommendation is for the owners/landlords of student housing to enforce the rental agreements, imposing fines for students holding loud and overcrowded parties beyond the curfew, evern becoming excessively loud before the curfew when the party starts in early afternoon. Registering parties has not been a suitable strategy as the Police tend to ignore noise complaints once the party would have been registered. Registering implies a permit to abuse any noise ordinance in a residential neighborhood. One correspondent has made the considerable effort to log the history of the problems, including the SCLC committee's initial founding/purpose/composition and limitations, including making the minutes of their meetings available to the public. I do indeed support former Mayor Jan Marx's inclusion on that committee to enable the full understanding of the history and successes and failures of neighborhood wellness in current and future discussion. Two decades ago Cal Poly made some efforts to participate in reducing the town/gown issues in building more campus housing, in having students view a video of their responsibilities when living in residential neighborhoods. Their declared intention of having not only Freshmen and Sophomores live on campus, but gradually even the Juniors and Seniors is not consonant with their objective of increased growth. Further, it 505 denies the adult students the opportunity to live together in harmony and experience and establish home management. Our street which has over 50% student rental housing has witnessed some very good examples of responsible student tenancy, while other examples of insensitive behavior regarding the longtime residents. In such cases we have been compelled to intervene personally after suffering the disturbance, or reporting the violation beyond curfew. 'Tis true that the Police have not always been responsive, or sufficiently punitive when they have intervened. The earlier practice of "good renter certificates" was apparently stopped due to claims of discrimination of student tenants, which is unfounded, as landlords have the right to even evict tenants who violate the rental agreement. You were invited before the grand jury report was published to visit neighborhoods to witness firsthand the disruption satellite fraternities caused to a residential neighborhood. Apparently, no members of the Council accepted the invitation to actually experience the problem. The effort the grand jury report represents cannot be dismissed as NIMBY whining, but more than justified concerns and issues by the SLO residents who wish to preserve gracious and respectful community living in SLO with the full support of the City staff elected by them, and the interaction of Cal Poly whose declared aim is to teach learning by doing, including responsible citizenship in the community. May you reflect on all the issues raised in your correspondence with a sincere and resolved discussion and action to model a town who works with gown and landlords to ensure more harmony and mutual respect. Yours sincerely, Genevieve Czech, 506 From:Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Sent:Wednesday, July 16, 2025 10:22 AM To:Petersen, Cecilia Subject:Re: Fraternity and Sorority Fire Inspections Follow Up Flag:Flag for follow up Flag Status:Completed Hi Cecilia, Thanks for reaching out! Quick question – these organizations you listed below don’t have permitted houses, and in the past only permitted houses have participated in fire inspections. Has that changed this year? I am not sure if some on this list even have a house. Alpha Sigma Phi Phi Delta Theta Pi Kappa Phi Phi Sigma Kappa Sigma Phi Epsilon Sigma Pi Theta Chi Zeta Beta Tau Additionally, in the past we have scheduled Fire Inspections for after school is back in session, so late September/early October. The majority of our students are gone until then, so I’m not sure if an August date would be best. As for scheduling, what works best is your team gives me time slots and dates, and then I have chapters sign up for a slot! Once I have the full schedule, I send it back to you all with the schedule and contact information. Last year we switched it up a little bit and the head of the fire inspections preferred the organizations schedule directly with him. Let me know which one you all would prefer this year! Best, Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola, M.A. pronouns she/her/hers Assistant Director, Fraternity & Sorority Life Leadership & Service | Student Affairs Cal Poly | San Luis Obispo, CA 93407 | 805-756-7263 Schedule a meeting with me From: Greek Life <greeklife@calpoly.edu> Date: Wednesday, July 16, 2025 at 9:40 AM To: Elizabeth Aiello-Coppola <eaielloc@calpoly.edu> Subject: FW: Fraternity and Sorority Fire Inspections 507 From: Petersen, Cecilia <CPeterse@slocity.org> Date: Wednesday, July 9, 2025 at 9:15 AM To: Greek Life <greeklife@calpoly.edu> Subject: Re: Fraternity and Sorority Fire Inspections Thank you for providing the contacts – I appreciate your help. In previous years, Cal Poly Greek Life has worked with each of the fraternities and sororities to coordinate and complete inspections within a week. We would like to follow the same approach this year and schedule inspections for all fraternity and sorority houses during a consolidated timeframe. Please let us know your availability and any requirements on your end to begin coordinating the schedule. We are currently looking at the third or fourth week of August. Our goal is to streamline the process and ensure all inspections are completed efficiently and on time. Looking forward to working with you on this. Cecilia Petersen Fire Inspector I The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location. Fire Department E CPeterse@slocity.org T 805.783.7773 C 805.550.9633 slocity.org The linked image cannot be displayed. T… The linked image cannot be displayed. T… The linked image cannot be displayed. T… The linked image cannot be displayed. T… The linked image cannot be displayed. T… Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Greek Life <greeklife@calpoly.edu> Sent: Wednesday, July 2, 2025 1:44 PM To: Petersen, Cecilia <CPeterse@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Fraternity and Sorority Fire Inspections Good afternoon, Our apologies, below are the additional contacts requested: Alpha Epsilon Pi - aepi.presidentcalpoly@gmail.com Alpha Sigma Phi - president.cpalphasig@gmail.com Delta Sigma Phi - president.cpdeltachi@gmail.com Phi Delta Theta - phideltcalpolypres@gmail.com Pi Kappa Phi - archon.calpoly.pikappaphi@gmail.com Phi Sigma Kappa - pskslo.president@gmail.com Sigma Phi Epsilon - president.calpolysigep@gmail.com Sigma Pi - Theta Chi - president.cpthetachi@gmail.com Zeta Beta Tau - president@zbtcalpoly.org Best, FSL Staff 508 From: Petersen, Cecilia <CPeterse@slocity.org> Date: Tuesday, July 1, 2025 at 2:22 PM To: Greek Life <greeklife@calpoly.edu> Subject: Re: Fraternity and Sorority Fire Inspections Hi, Thank you for sending that information over. We have the below fraternities/sororities on our list if you could please provide the additional contact information that would be very helpful! Alpha Epsilon Pi Alpha Sigma Pi Delta Sigma Pi Pi Delta Theta Pi Kappa Phi Phi Sigma Kappa Sigma Phi Epsilon Sigma Pi Theta Chi Zeta Beta Tau Thank you, Cecilia Petersen Fire Inspector I The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location. Fire Department E CPeterse@slocity.org T 805.783.7773 C 805.550.9633 slocity.org The linked image cannot be displayed. T… The linked image cannot be displayed. T… The linked image cannot be displayed. T… The linked image cannot be displayed. T… The linked image cannot be displayed. T… Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Greek Life <greeklife@calpoly.edu> Sent: Tuesday, July 1, 2025 1:09 PM To: Petersen, Cecilia <CPeterse@slocity.org> Subject: Re: Fraternity and Sorority Fire Inspections Here is the contact list requested! Please let us know if you need anything else from us. Best, Alpha Chi Omega axo.president.cp@gmail.com Alpha Omicron Pi aoii.president.chipsi@gmail.com Alpha Phi sloaphipres@gmail.com Chi Omega chiopres.cp@gmail.com Delta Gamma dg.president.calpoly@gmail.com 509 Gamma Phi Beta gphibpresident@gmail.com Kappa Alpha Theta cpthetapresident@gmail.com Kappa Kappa Gamma kkg.president.calpoly@gmail.com Sigma Kappa sigmakappaslo@gmail.com Beta Theta Pi cpbeta.president@gmail.com Delta Upsilon ducalpolypresident@gmail.com Lambda Chi Alpha slolca.alpha@gmail.com Pi Kappa Phi archon.calpoly.pikappaphi@gmail.com Sigma Nu Cpsnupresident@gmail.com From: Petersen, Cecilia <CPeterse@slocity.org> Date: Wednesday, June 25, 2025 at 12:49 PM To: Greek Life <greeklife@calpoly.edu> Subject: Fraternity and Sorority Fire Inspections Good afternoon, I hope this message finds you well. It's time to begin scheduling the annual fire and life safety inspections for each of the fraternity and sorority houses. To start coordinating inspection times, could you please forward me a current list of contacts for each house? Thank you in advance for your assistance. Cecilia Petersen Fire Inspector I The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. Verify that the link points to the correct file and location. Fire Department E CPeterse@slocity.org T 805.783.7773 C 805.550.9633 slocity.org The linked image cannot be displayed. T… The linked image cannot be displayed. T… The linked image cannot be displayed. T… The linked image cannot be displayed. T… The linked image cannot be displayed. T… Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications 510 From:McDonald, Whitney Sent:Tuesday, July 15, 2025 8:38 PM To:Purrington, Teresa Subject:FW: Grand Jury Report Attachments:Agency 2Day Advance ltr - SLO City Manager.pdf; Agency Response to Report Form - Round & Round with Town & Gown - SLO City Mgr.docx; Penal Code 933.pdf; Round & Round with Town & Gown.pdf Sorry, I meant the Word doc From: McDonald, Whitney Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 8:34 PM To: Purrington, Teresa <TPurring@slocity.org> Subject: FW: Grand Jury Report Would it be possible to pull up and show the agency response to report form on the screen? From: Grand Jury <grandjury@co.slo.ca.us> Sent: Friday, June 13, 2025 2:30 PM To: McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org> Subject: Grand Jury Report Ms. McDonald. Attached please find a letter from the Grand Jury, as well as attachments to the letter and the final report. Thank you, Reggie, for Bonnie McKrill, Foreperson P HONE: (805) 781-5188 ~ E MAIL : grandjury@co.slo.ca.us P.O. BOX 4910, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA 93403 www.slo.courts.ca.gov/general-information/jury-service/grand-jury June 13, 2025 Via Email wmcdonald@slocity.org Confidential Whitney McDonald, City Manager City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Re: Grand Jury Report: “Round & Round with Town & Gown” Dear Ms. McDonald: The San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury has completed the attached report titled “Round & Round with Town & Gown” This copy of the report is being provided to you two days in advance of its public release, as required by California Penal Code §933.05 (f), which states: A grand jury shall provide to the affected agency a copy of the portion of the grand jury report relating to that person or entity two working days prior to its public release and after the approval of the presiding judge. No officer, agency, department, or governing body of a public agency shall disclose any contents of the report prior to the public release of the final report. Responses are due pursuant to California Penal Code section 933(c). Sections 933 through 933.05 of the Penal Code are attached for your reference. Also attached is a form for your responses to Grand Jury findings and recommendations. Please keep in mind that this report must be kept confidential until its public release by the Grand Jury. Respectfully, Bonnie McKrill, Foreperson 2024-25 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury BM:rr Attachments RESPONSE TO GRAND JURY REPORT Report Title: “Round & Round with Town & Gown” Report Date: June 18, 2025 Response by: Title: FINDINGS 1. I (we) agree with the findings numbered: 2. I (we) disagree wholly or partially with the findings numbered: (Attach a statement specifying any portions of the findings that are disputed; include an explanation of the reasons.) RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Recommendations numbered have been implemented. (Attach a summary describing the implementation actions.) 2. Recommendations numbered have not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future. (Attach a timeframe for the implementation.) 3. Recommendations numbered require further analysis. (Attach an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or director of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report.) 4. Recommendations numbered will not be implemented because they are not warranted or are not reasonable. (Attach an explanation.) Date: Signed: Number of pages attached: 1 California Penal Code Sections 933 through 933.05 Section 933 – Final Reports (a) Each grand jury shall submit to the presiding judge of the superior court a final report of its findings and recommendations that pertain to county government matters during the fiscal or calendar year. Final reports on any appropriate subject may be submitted to the presiding judge of the superior court at any time during the term of service of a grand jury. A final report may be submitted for comment to responsible officers, agencies, or departments, including the county board of supervisors, when applicable, upon finding of the presiding judge that the report is incompliance with this title. For 45 days after the end of the term, the foreperson and his or her designees shall, upon reasonable notice, be available to clarify the recommendations of the report. (b) One copy of each final report, together with the responses thereto, found to be in compliance with this title shall be placed on file with the clerk of the court and remain on file in the office of the clerk. The clerk shall immediately forward a true copy of the report and the responses to the State Archivist who shall retain that report and all responses in perpetuity. (c) No later than 90 days after the grand jury submits a final report on the operations of any public agency subject to its reviewing authority, the governing body of the public agency shall comment to the presiding judge of the superior court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body, and every elected county officer or agency head for which the grand jury has responsibility pursuant to Section 914.1 shall comment within 60 days to the presiding judge of the superior court, with an information copy sent to the board of supervisors, on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of that county officer or agency head and any agency or agencies which that officer or agency head supervises or controls. In any city and county, the mayor shall also comment on the findings and recommendations. All of these comments and reports shall forthwith be submitted to the presiding judge of the superior court who impaneled the grand jury. A copy of all responses to grand jury reports shall be placed on file with the clerk of the public agency and the office of the county clerk, or the mayor when applicable, and shall remain on file in those offices. One copy shall be placed on file with the applicable grand jury final report by, and in the control of the currently impaneled grand jury, where it shall be maintained for a minimum of five years. (d) As used in this section "agency" includes a department. 933.05. Findings and Recommendations (a) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding. (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefore. (b) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. 2 (2)The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a timeframe for implementation. (3)The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report. (4)The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. (c) However, if a finding or recommendation of the grand jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the board of supervisors shall respond if requested by the grand jury, but the response of the board of supervisors shall address only those budgetary or personnel matters over which it has some decision making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department. (d)A grand jury may request a subject person or entity to come before the grand jury for the purpose of reading and discussing the findings of the grand jury report that relates to that person or entity in order to verify the accuracy of the findings prior to their release. (e) During an investigation, the grand jury shall meet with the subject of that investigation regarding the investigation, unless the court, either on its own determination or upon request of the foreperson of the grand jury, determines that such a meeting would be detrimental. (f)A grand jury shall provide to the affected agency a copy of the portion of the grand jury report relating to that person or entity two working days prior to its public release and after the approval of the presiding judge. No officer, agency, department, or governing body of a public agency shall disclose any contents of the report prior to the public release of the final report. Submitted June 18, 2025 1 ROUND & ROUND WITH TOWN & GOWN San Luis Obispo (SLO) is a quaint town with a rich history and is home to a rapidly growing university that has become a vital part of the community. However, the expansion of the university has led to significant challenges in housing availability, both on and off campus. Affordability issues have exacerbated these challenges, created a shortage of student housing, and have pushed students into neighborhoods traditionally occupied by families. Many students now reside in single-family homes, often exceeding their intended occupancy. This shift has brought new complexities, as noise and frequent partying have disrupted these once-quiet residential areas. The situation underscores the delicate balance needed to ensure that all residents—students, families, and long-time locals can coexist harmoniously and thrive. INTRODUCTION/PURPOSE Over the past two decades, SLO has experienced significant growth, driven in part by the expansion of its university, California Polytechnic State University (Cal Poly), and the increasing student population. While this growth has contributed to the city's vibrancy and economic development, it has also introduced a range of challenges for the surrounding neighborhoods. Residents have voiced concerns over noise disturbances, large unauthorized street parties, and fraternity and sorority (referred to as “fraternities” for this report) events being hosted in residential areas not zoned for such gatherings. These issues have led to tensions between some long-term residents and the student community. SLO has experienced steady population growth, mirroring broader urban expansion trends across California. In 2005, the city’s population stood at approximately 44,380, and, by 2025, it had risen to 50,612, reflecting a 14% increase. During this same period, Cal Poly’s total enrollment grew from 18,278 to 23,016, marking a 26% increase. As a result, university students now comprise Submitted June 18, 2025 2 nearly 46% of the city's total population, significantly influencing housing availability both on and off campus, infrastructure demands, and neighboring residential community dynamics. Year Cal Poly Total Enrollment San Luis Obispo Population Student % of Population 2005 18,278 44,380 41.2% 2015 20,944 46,906 44.7% 2025 23,016 50,612 45.5% While Cal Poly’s expansion has bolstered the local economy and enriched San Luis Obispo’s cultural landscape, it has also reshaped the dynamics of some of the residential neighborhoods that border the campus. Many long-term residents, particularly families, cherish the stability and tranquility of their neighborhoods but now face the challenge of residing in an increasingly student-centered neighborhood. Striking a balance between fostering Cal Poly’s continued success and that of its students with neighborhood integrity is and will be an ongoing challenge for the city. This report explores these concerns focusing on four topics: large, unsanctioned street parties, ongoing noise from student parties, fraternity zoning issues, and fraternity permitting requirements. ORIGIN The investigation was initiated in response to multiple complaints filed by residents. These complaints cited disruptive activities associated with college students, including excessive noise during late hours, unauthorized fraternity houses operating in zoning -restricted residential areas, and large, unsanctioned street parties that escalate into public disturbances , injuries, and property damage. The complaints alleged that the City of SLO and Cal Poly officials were failing to enforce existing rules and municipal ordinances, that citizen complaints were ignored, and neither took sufficient action to restore order. The San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury (SLOCGJ) sought to objectively assess the extent of these issues and determine whether city officials were implementing timely and sufficient countermeasures to address them effectively. Submitted June 18, 2025 3 It should be noted that the SLOCGJ does not hold jurisdiction over Cal Poly. However, SLOCGJ would like to express its appreciation to Cal Poly for its willingness to engage in discussions. Their cooperation was invaluable in providing insights allowing the SLOCGJ to better understand their perspective on the issues at hand as well as the actions they were undertaking to partner with the city and the community. AUTHORITY California Penal Code section 933 requires that “Each grand jury shall submit to the presiding judge of the superior court a final report of its findings and recommendations that pertain to county government matters during the fiscal or calendar year.” Section 933.05 further prescribes responses to those findings and recommendations. Responding agencies are directed to report whether they agree or disagree (either partially or wholly) with a finding and whether a recommendation has been implemented, will be implemented, will not be implemented, or requires further analysis. An agency may reject a Grand Jury recommendation provided they include an explanation of why the recommendation is either unwarranted or unreasonable. If a recommendation requires further analysis, it must be conducted within six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report. All Grand Jury reports and each agency’s responses are posted online each year at https://www.slo.courts.ca.gov/gi/jury-grandjury.htm METHOD/PROCEDURE The SLOCGJ used the following methods for its investigation: • conducted fifteen interviews with San Luis Obispo city residents, city leadership (including City Council members, Community Development and Police Department officials), city personnel (such as Code Enforcement), and leadership from Cal Poly, • conducted site inspection of impacted neighborhoods, Submitted June 18, 2025 4 • reviewed documents such as Conditional Use Permits (CUPs) issued to fraternities, municipal codes, City Council and Planning Commission meeting agendas and minutes, as well as outreach plans for previous St. Patrick’s Day events, • conducted analyses of policies and laws, including The Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act, Assembly Bill (AB524), SLO and Cal Poly party registration regulations, and Cal Poly’s General Plan, • conducted comparative research, including an investigation of cities with overlay zones to understand their implementation and impact. Explored various policing models, such as the “Do No Harm” approach, examined strategies used by other cities addressing similar university-related challenges, and analyzed party ordinances from other municipalities. NARRATIVE CHAPTER 1: UNSANCTIONED ILLEGAL STREET PARTIES The concept of St. Fratty’s Day began in 2009 originally as a fraternity party to celebrate St. Patrick's Day and the end of the school term. After the initial party in 2009, the party grew and by 2015 the event drew over 1,000 attendees. During the 2015 event, the garage roof adjacent to 348 Hathway Street collapsed because 30 or more students were partying on the rooftop. Ten students were injured with one young woman narrowly escaping a potentially life -threatening injury. This incident made national news and sparked conversations between the City of SLO and Cal Poly regarding how to manage the event and encourage the students to party safely. From 2016 to 2019 the event was smaller and there were no rooftop activities or serious injuries. In 2020 and 2021, with pandemic laws limiting large social gatherings, the event was so small as to be negligible. In 2022, with pandemic restrictions lifted, the event grew to 2,000 attendees. In 2023, through social media, and news coverage, the event doubled in size to approximately 4,000 attendees. In Submitted June 18, 2025 5 2023, the SLO City Council expanded an existing Safety Enhancement Zone (SEZ) ordinance to cover a period of time before and after St. Patrick’s Day. The SEZ allows authorities to double fines for noise, alcohol, and other unruly behavior. In 2024, the crowd nearly doubled in size once again to an estimated 7,000 attendees. The SLO City Police Chief used a containment enforcement strategy that resulted in officers being staged along the outskirts of the crowd in the neighborhood adjoining the university. The “Do No Harm” approach was adopted not only due to concern for officer safety but because a more aggressive officer presence could incite a riot. This practice was in line with the department’s enforcement policy of “Do No Harm” to keep violators, other participants and officers safe. They implemented a strike team strategy where a team of officers entered the crowd to address a violation, issued a citation, and returned to the perimeter to keep everyone safe and avoid an escalation. In 2024 the SLO City Chief of Police deemed their efforts a success as no harm was done to officers or attendees. However, the residents in the area experienced property damage to their residences and personal property. Some intoxicated partiers trespassed onto their property, climbed up on rooftops and power poles, and vandalized cars. The SLOCGJ wanted to determine the validity of the alleged citizen complaints against the SLOPD as well as verify statements received from others during our investigation. We also wanted to confirm the success of SLOPD’s efforts, and possible changes in light of any perceived failings. We were blocked in this effort by two senior police official’s unwillingness to grant an interview. This hampered our fact-finding efforts. The reason for these denials remains inadequate and may stem from a misunderstanding of the role of the SLO CGJ in improving governmental functions within this county. It has become a tradition for the students to start partying at midnight the prior night in their Cal Poly dorms and nearby housing, with the party moving into the surrounding neighborhoods to kick off St. Fratty’s Day at 3:17 a.m. (to acknowledge St. Patrick’s Day, March 17th). In 2024 Submitted June 18, 2025 6 fireworks were set off in the Alta Vista neighborhood between 3:00 a.m. and 4:00 a.m., jolting some residents and their families awake. Thousands of students descended on Hathway and Bond Streets (in the Alta Vista neighborhood) fueled by alcohol, disturbing the peace by playing loud music, screaming and yelling. The heavy alcohol consumption resulted in dangerous activities such as climbing utility poles, partying on rooftops, urinating and vomiting in public, passing out in residents’ yards and on rooftops, and leaving trash throughout the neighborhoods. In 2024, the Cal Poly dorms also experienced extensive damage as the students began partying at midnight and damaged the dorms on their way out to the street party. The damage was so extensive that Cal Poly had to close some dorms for two days to repair the damage. After the 2024 St. Fratty’s Day event, it became apparent to the City of SLO and the administration at Cal Poly that St. Fratty’s Day in its current format could no longer be tolerated. Cal Poly administration, with concern for the safety of their students, property damage to the university, and surrounding neighborhoods, as well as the request of city officials, formed a task force to strategize how to deal with the unsanctioned event. The task force was made up of Cal Poly Administration, student advisory groups, students, members of the Greek Li fe Community, and SLO City representatives. No representatives from the surrounding neighborhoods were invited to participate in the task force. One outcome of the task force was to provide the students with a safe alternative event. The event was scheduled for Saturday, March 15, 2025, and included a concert on campus starting at 4:00 a.m. The event was free and up to 5,000 students were able to secure tickets to the event. The event provided entertainment, beer vendors for those over 21, free food, security, and a sobering center. Cal Poly police, Cal Poly staff, SLO Emergency Medical Technicians and private security companies were on campus to ensure a safe and secure environment. Cal Poly’s messaging to the students prior to St. Patrick’s Day was that past behaviors would no longer be tolerated. Due to the damage experienced in 2024, several security measures were Submitted June 18, 2025 7 deployed, including no guests being allowed to stay on campus. Parking on campus was limited to Cal Poly students and staff starting Friday, March 14, 2025, through Monday, March 17, 2025 . The City of SLO, concerned about the safety of their neighborhoods, the disruptions to the residents, and the negative image of the City of SLO, developed their own task force headed up by the SLO City Police Department. The messaging developed by the City of SLO was “Do Not Come, the party is over.” In 2024 there were approximately 140 to 160 law enforcement personnel overseeing the event in the neighborhood. In 2025, the SLO Police Department activated the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) and the SLO County District Attorney’s Office announced they would not offer pre-filing misdemeanor diversion (see Glossary) to any person charged with a misdemeanor stemming from criminal conduct during St. Patrick's Day celebrations in San Luis Obispo. There were an estimated 300 law enforcement officers representing 25 different local, state and federal agencies. Officers patrolling the area stopped the students from entering the streets and kept their movement on the sidewalks. The students were encouraged to keep moving out of the neighborhood and to the event on campus. Due to the increased law enforcement presence, the neighborhood of Alta Vista did not experience damage to property and there was no unsanctioned street party. The SLO Chief of Police Department estimated costs to the city will be approximately $125,000. The concert at Cal Poly was deemed a success as over 6,000 students attended the event. The event was limited to 5,000 students; however, un-ticketed students pushed through the temporary fencing so they could get into the event. Though this is concerning, no one was seriously injured. Overall, the students remained on campus, attended the alternative event, and no damage was reported in the dorms or the nearby neighborhoods. The alternative activity on campus ended around 10:30 a.m. It is the stated goal of Cal Poly and the City of SLO that the St. Patrick’s Day unsanctioned street parties come to an end. They have advised that it may take two to three years to completely end the unruly St. Patrick’s Day celebrations. The City of SLO and Cal Poly are no strangers to Submitted June 18, 2025 8 controlling and ending large events. After a 1990 riot during Poly Royal, Cal Poly ended the event and created a new activity that is safe for students, their families, and the community to enjoy. After a popular Mardi Gras event (2004) was no longer controllable, the City of SLO was successful in bringing an end to that event. The 2024-2025 collaboration between the City of SLO and Cal Poly proved successful in providing a safe alternative event for the students and residents of San Luis Obispo. A communication received from Cal Poly indicated that Cal Poly is currently evaluating what programming will look like in future years, especially given the transition from quarters to semesters; however, planning will begin for another event next academic year, 2025-26. CHAPTER 2: NOISY NEIGHBORS SLO Municipal Code 9.12 (see Bibliography) provides that “…it shall be unlawful for any person to willfully or negligently make or continue to make or continue, or cause to be made or continued, or permit or allow to be made or continued any noise which disturbs the peace and quiet of any neighborhood or which causes any discomfort or annoyance to any reasonable person of normal sensitivity in the area.” Notwithstanding this ordinance, the citizens in the immediate vicinity of Cal Poly, have regularly complained of excessive noise coming from nearby houses that are occupied by students. It has therefore fallen to the SLO Police Department (SLOPD) and the SLO Noise Control Officer (Code Enforcement) to answer such complaints as may be made. The specific code violation encompassed in the above-mentioned Code states that the hours between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. the following morning are to remain quiet. According to complaints received by the SLOCGJ, this has not been fully enforced. It should also be noted that the Noise Control Officer may grant exceptions to this restriction . The SLOCGJ received complaints that loud parties, located directly adjacent to Cal Poly and in violation of the above code have forced citizens to file SLOPD noise complaints. The SLOCGJ reviewed copies of the noise citations issued by the SLOPD during th e 2023-2024 school session (the most recent information available) and found that noise citations in neighborhoods near the Submitted June 18, 2025 9 campus were issued an average of more than 3 times per week during the school session. This totaled 139 citations in the Alta Vista neighborhood, with one house alone receiving 17 citations. Unfortunately, there is reason to believe that this situation remains - to this date - unabated. Such is the irritation of area residents, that many have fled the area. To aid in noise ordinance enforcement the SLOPD employs the assistance of Cal Poly students who are enrolled in a program called the Student Neighborhood Assistance Program (SNAP). These students interface with groups of partiers in residences in the affected area who are violating the noise ordinance. These unarmed SNAP students speak to the offending parties and attempt to get them to comply with the city’s noise standards. There are, however, only a handful of SNAP students. They wear civilian uniforms and work in pairs. They also have radios so that they may contact the police when required. These students may, at their discretion, issue Disturbance Advisement Cards (DACs). Such issuance falls short of an actual fine or a conventional ticket and is meant to serve as a first warning, so that an additional violation may, at the officers' discretion, warrant a police citation. Complainants indicated that weekend parties can mean up to 100 or more students at one address and often continue after visits by police. SNAP students do not go to lettered fraternity houses; such visits are reserved for sworn officers. Additionally, through a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), Cal Poly Police have the authority to operate within one mile outside of campus grounds. This allows, at least theoretically, greater and more rapid enforcement of SLO city laws. SLO Municipal Code 9.12.050 is specific about excessive noise. It provides a detailed list of prohibited acts between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. While it does not specifically prohibit noise from parties, it does speak to the use of loudspeakers and other electronic devices, including: “radio, television set, phonograph, drum, musical instrument, or similar device which produces or reproduces sound…” Submitted June 18, 2025 10 CHAPTER 3: ZONING VIOLATIONS / CONCERNS – IS SLO CITY IN THE TWILIGHT ZONE ABOUT ZONING ISSUES? As outlined previously, the SLOCGJ reviewed citizen complaints reporting “Illegal Fraternities” operating in residential zones (R-1/R-2). During interviews with City officials, five individuals confirmed their knowledge of the existence of illegal fraternities. City officials stated that identifying illegal fraternities is difficult but usually starts with a citizen complaint reported to law enforcement about a noisy event or party in an R-1/R-2 residential zone, which is the top citizen complaint happening most weekends while school is in session. Noise issues and complaints are usually handled by the police department. Municipal Code guidelines that address noise issues and enforcement are outlined in the “Exterior Noise Limits” section MC 9.12.060 and the “Enforcement” section MC 9.12.110. If found to be out of compliance, SLOPD may issue a warning or citation. Fines for cited noise violations escalate for each subsequent violation. Code enforcement gets involved if SLOPD or citizen complaints identify the location may be operating as a fraternity. It is illegal per the Municipal Code for fraternities to operate in an R-1/R-2 neighborhood. Due to the lack of on-campus student housing, some students must live off-campus. In some cases, fraternity members will rent houses in R-1/R-2 zones and may hold fraternity-sponsored events, which is not allowed by the Municipal Code. In 2023, using extensive citizen-generated data from a Cal Poly-generated report required by AB524, code enforcement started an investigation into the illegal fraternities. Based on the investigation, 30-40 Advisory Notices, and 22 Notice of Violations (NOVs) were sent to property owners. In response to the NOVs, the city advised that many of the property owners reported they were unaware of the fraternity events that were being held at their property. At the time, Cal Poly and code enforcement were working together on the illegal fraternity issue. However, due to changes in policies, Cal Poly stopped assisting the city, stating privacy concerns, and revised their AB 524 report to remove some of the addresses that were previously provided in the document. Submitted June 18, 2025 11 The current policies and enforcement approach is not conducive to a real time solution. Based on the SLOCGJ investigation, the number of illegal fraternities may be more than 40 locations currently operating in the city. In addition, citizens have reported that several Cal Poly recognized fraternities listed in AB524 have multiple illegal fraternity locations operating within the city: some with as many as 7 separate locations. In January 2025, due to detailed information received by code enforcement , from members of the public and several complaint calls, the code enforcement team was sent out on a Saturday night to the neighborhood adjacent to Cal Poly specifically looking for illegal fraternity activities. It is not the usual practice for code enforcement to be working on a weekend, at night, and on overtime, but due to the increasing attention to the problems, city officials believed it was appropriate. Results from the neighborhood review resulted in identifying and citing 12 locations that were found to be operating as fraternity houses in R-1/R-2 zones. The city is taking steps to address these violations. The city plans to continue working on the issues using the existing municipal codes and modifying them as needed. With the current fiscal situation and funding constraints, city officials plan to provide enforcement with current staff and resources and ensure they have a clear and concise process to use. Based on comments from city officials, identifying illegal fraternity party houses is labor intensive since code enforcement has to prove that the party or activity is sponsored by a fraternity in a n R-1/R-2 zone, which is a land use violation. Some indicators are Greek letters posted out front, social media posts advertising fraternity events, and citizen complaints. After investigating, if enough evidence exists, code enforcement will issue an NOV and if they are in an R-1/R-2 zone, tell them to cease all fraternity-related activities. Code enforcement will follow-up within 30 days to verify compliance. Unfortunately, the city is regulated to reactive rather than proactive enforcement of municipal codes. Code enforcement complaints are often received after business hours or the following Submitted June 18, 2025 12 day. The result is that they are limited in their ability to verify the code violation, as it is after the fact or violators are not easily identified. CHAPTER 4: FRATERNITY PERMIT REQUIREMENTS The City of SLO Municipal Code regulates land use, developments, and operations within the city. That Municipal Code restricts fraternities to zones R-3 and R-4 and requires a CUP (Municipal Code Section 17.10.020, Table 2-1) to operate. CUPs that allow fraternities are regulated by Municipal Code Section 17.86.130 which defines the standard conditions that shall apply to all: 1. “Occupancy” shall be limited to not more than one resident per sixty square feet of building area. The landlord shall allow the city to verify occupancy by allowing an inspection of the records or by a visual inspection of the premises. Any inspection shall be at a reasonable time and shall be preceded by a twenty-four-hour notice to the residents, 2. The maximum number of persons allowed on site for routine meetings and gatherings shall not exceed the limit established by the applicable conditional use permit, 3. The fraternity or sorority shall remain affiliated and in good standing with the Interfraternity Council of Student Life and Leadership at California Polytechnic University, San Luis Obispo. If the fraternity or sorority becomes unaffiliated or no longer held in good standing with California Polytechnic University, the conditional use permit shall be revoked, 4. The landlord shall provide names and telephone numbers of responsible persons to the community development department and SLOPD neighborhood services manager on an annual basis. Responsible persons shall be available during all events and at reasonable hours to receive and handle complaints Additional conditions may be imposed by the planning commission when they approve the CUP. The permit stays with the parcel as long as the approved use continues, and the conditions are Submitted June 18, 2025 13 adhered to. If the parcel is no longer used for the approved purpose, then the permit expires after one year. If the occupants of the parcel violate the conditions of the CUP, the planning commission may revoke the permit. In January 2025, the SLOCGJ requested and received a copy of each CUP granted by the city to a fraternity or sorority; Appendix A is a summary of the 16 conditional use permits provided by the city. It should be noted that the Cal Poly website lists 36 recognized fraternities and sororities. The SLOCGJ double checked with the city, and it was confirmed that the 16 conditional use permits were all that are in place at this time. AB524; Sections 66310-66312 of California Education Code requires each institution of higher education to include in the institution’s requirements for campus recognition of a campus- recognized sorority or fraternity, a requirement that the sorority or fraternity submit to the institution on or before July 1, 2023, and annually thereafter, specified information concerning the sorority’s or fraternity’s members and their conduct. Cal Poly assembles this information and submits it in a public report to the State each year. The report also provides the address of each “affiliated chapter house” which AB 524 defines as those located on -campus or on land owned or leased by the fraternity or sorority. The list submitted in 2024 did have 16 fraternities and sororities the same as the number of CUPs in force. Evidently, this means that of the 36 recognized fraternities and sororities, 20 either do not have a chapter house or are in chapter houses that are off-campus and not owned or leased by the fraternity or sorority and therefore do not meet the definition of an affiliated chapter house. Any of these chapter houses that hold fraternity activities such as meetings, rush events, or parties, are still required by the SLO municipal code to have a CUP. It is not clear why they have not applied for a permit. It could be the cost (In FY 2024-25, the application fee for a CUP is $10,932.57) or effort required, or it may be that they are located in an R-1 or R-2 zone, in which case the fraternity activity would not be allowed. Since Cal Poly is not required to provide the addresses of these recognized fraternities, the city has no easy way to verify the location to Submitted June 18, 2025 14 determine the reason that the fraternity does not have a CUP. This makes it difficult for the city to enforce the code. As shown in Appendix A, not all required conditions are the same for each permit holder. In addition to the standard conditions required by code, some permit holders have other conditions such as: • restrictions on the time of day that meetings and gatherings can be held without city approval, • a neighborhood relations program with evidence of implementation to be submitted annually, • a list of planned events for the year to be submitted annually, • complaints received by the city are to be forwarded to the Cal Poly interfraternity council prior to being forwarded to the planning commission, • notice must be provided to residents within 300 feet prior to special events, and • a transportation and parking plan must be submitted prior to each event. These CUPs were approved over an extended period of time by planning commissions with different members; the earliest is dated in 1971 and the latest in 2024. That may explain why additional conditions were imposed on some fraternities and sororities and not others. It may also have to do with specific characteristics of the individual parcel. Interviews with City staff have revealed that many of the conditions, such as submittals of planned events and neighborhood relations programs have not been adhered to or enforced. The planning commission has the authority to enforce these conditions, add new conditions if the existing conditions are not met, and ultimately revoke a fraternity’s CUP. Citizens can also appeal for a use permit to be revoked or request that a permit not be approved. The current cost to make such an appeal is $2,583.46, (in 2017 the appeal fee was $281.00). A complainant noted that the cost to appeal discourages this practice. While these appeal fees may be justifiable for major development projects that demand substantial city resources like legal reviews, public Submitted June 18, 2025 15 hearings, or environmental impact assessments, they place an undue burden on ordinary citizens. Residents raising concerns about local issues like noise or safety issues may find these costs prohibitively high, limiting their ability to participate in community decision-making. FINDINGS F1. Prior to 2025, the city failed to effectively provide a multi-pronged, cohesive approach to manage or shut down large unsanctioned, costly and unruly events such as St. Fratty’s Day. This created an unsafe environment, with increasing size of unruly crowds, property damage, injuries and public disturbances. F2. The city has not effectively engaged in working together with community stakeholders to find solutions for ongoing off-campus issues that negatively impact neighborhoods such as code enforcement, noise issues, trespassing, property damage, and unruly events. F3. 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, such as rush events and repeated parties. This inaction has resulted in an increase of illegal fraternities holding events in residential neighborhoods making these areas almost unlivable for most residents. F4. The city has failed to consistently enforce CUPs such as the requirements for an annual list of parties and events, notification to neighbors, and parking plans. Strict enforcement of these conditions would contribute to a reduction of the disturbances in the neighborhoods. Submitted June 18, 2025 16 F5. The current planning appeal fee structure in SLO disproportionately impacts ordinary citizens, as the high costs create barriers for those raising concerns about community issues such as noise or safety. While these fees may be justifiable for large-scale development appeals requiring additional city resources, they hinder equitable participation in local decision-making processes. F6. The Grand Jury encountered a lack of cooperation from the San Luis Obispo City Police Department. While one sworn officer did participate in an interview, efforts to interview two additional sworn officers were unsuccessful. This unwillingness to engage hindered the Grand Jury’s ability to corroborate statements, obtain essential information, and maintain transparency in its oversight role. RECOMMENDATIONS R1. The SLO City Council should continue to work with Cal Poly to develop a multi-year plan to ensure that the illegal street parties known as St. Fratty’s Day is completely eliminated. R2. The SLO City Council, in collaboration with Cal Poly and other stakeholders, should implement proactive measures to address future unsanctioned illegal street parties as they arise. Taking immediate action can prevent these gatherings from escalating over time due to prolonged non-enforcement. This approach would foster a safer community while promoting shared accountability among all parties involved. R3. The SLO City Manager should develop and implement an ongoing formal process to identify illegal fraternities to bring them into compliance. R4. The SLO City Council should initiate a task force to explore the creation of a “Student Overlay Zone” near the campus that would allow for municipal code requirements to be introduced that would differentiate it from the rest of the city and recognize the needs of Submitted June 18, 2025 17 a dynamic university environment. This could facilitate changes to such things as density, parking, noise and fraternity activities. R5. The SLO City Council should consider adopting a tiered planning appeal fee structure to promote accessibility of community concerns by individual residents. Such a structure could ensure that financial burdens do not deter public involvement. R6. The SLO City Manager and the Planning Commission should move toward adopting more uniform conditions for CUP’s and enforcement of existing requirements. Due to the time span (1971-2024) in which these CUPs were approved, the requirements are inconsistent. The City should consider using future CUP violations to determine if it is appropriate to revise the conditions to make them more relevant for today’s environment. This may require consideration of additional code enforcement staff or alternative work schedules. R7. The SLOCGJ recommends that the SLO City Manager create formal guidelines and provide training outlining how the SLO City Police Department will respond to requests from the SLOCGJ and other oversite bodies. COMMENDATIONS The SLOCGJ commends Cal Poly and the City of SLO for their efforts and collaboration in keeping the students and the community of SLO safe during the 2025 St. Patrick’s Day weekend. REQUIRED RESPONSES The San Luis Obispo City Council is required to respond to R1, R2. R4, and R5 within 90 days. The San Luis Obispo City Manager is required to respond to R3 , R6, and R7 within 90 days. Submitted June 18, 2025 18 The San Luis Obispo City Planning Commission is required to respond to R6 within 90 days. All responses shall be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the San Luis Obispo County Superior Court. A paper copy and an electronic version of all responses shall be provided to the Gran d Jury. 933.05. Findings and Recommendations (a) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding. (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor. (b) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a timeframe for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated o r reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation, therefor. Presiding Judge Grand Jury Presiding Judge Rita Federman Superior Court of California 1035 Palm Street Room 355 San Luis Obispo, CA 93408 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury P.O. Box 4910 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 Submitted June 18, 2025 19 APPENDIX A Submitted June 18, 2025 20 Submitted June 18, 2025 21 Submitted June 18, 2025 22 GLOSSARY 1. Fraternities and Sororities. Municipal Code (MC) 17.156.014 “F definitions.” - Residence for college or university students who are members of a social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with the California Polytechnic State University (Cal Poly) and where such an association also holds meetings or gatherings. 2. Illegal fraternities – Similar to the “Fraternities and Sororities” defined in the MC, except the residence is located in an R-1/R-2 residential zone instead of R-3/R-4 zones and hold fraternity sponsored activities and parties, which is not allowed by the MC. Sometimes referred to as a satellite Greek house. 3. Zoning Regulations - Zoning regulations are rules designed to help guide the growth of a city in an organized way. They are based on a general plan that aims to protect and improve the environment, both natural and man -made. Zoning regulations help keep communities safe, healthy, and well-organized by controlling how land and buildings are used, as well as where and how structures are built. Examples of different zones are: Residential Zones are where homes can be built, and Commercial Zones are where businesses or stores may be built. 4. Residential Zones definition R-1 through –R-4 (MC 17.16 – 17.22) - The city is divided into zones to allow for orderly, planned development and to implement the general plan. a. The R-1 zone provides for low-density residential development and supporting compatible uses that have locations and development forms that provide a sense of both individual identity and neighborhood cohesion, and that provide private outdoor space for the households occupying individual units. b. The R-2 zone is intended to provide housing opportunities that have locations and development forms that provide a sense of both individual identity and neighborhood Submitted June 18, 2025 23 cohesion for the households occupying them, but in a more compact arrangement than in the R-1 zone, and near commercial and public services. c. The R-3 zone is intended primarily to provide housing opportunities for attached dwellings with common outdoor areas and compact private outdoor spaces. The R -3 zone is generally appropriate near employment centers and major public facilities, along transit corridors and nodes, and close to commercial and public facilities serving the whole community. d. The R-4 zone is intended primarily to provide for attached dwellings with common outdoor areas and compact private outdoor spaces, and to accommodate various types of group housing. Further, the R-4 zone intended to allow for dense housing close to concentrations of employment and college enrollment, in the downtown core, along transit corridors and nodes, and in areas largely committed to high-density residential development. 5. Exterior Noise Limits MC 9.12.060 - Defines the Maximum Permissible Sound Levels at Receiving Land Use for all zoning categories (see table 1 in MC for details.) 6. Overlay Zone MC 17.06.020.C - An overlay zone supplements the base zone for the purpose of establishing special use or development regulations for a particular area in addition to the provisions of the underlying base zone. In the event of conflict between the base zone regulations and the overlay zone regulations, the provisions of the overlay zone shall apply. Submitted June 18, 2025 24 BIBLIOGRAPHY 2019 Shelter Force – The Role Student Housing Plays in Communities https://shelterforce.org/2019/09/06/the-role-student-housing-plays-in-communities/ 2019 Terner Center for Housing and Innovation – UC Berkley Affordable Housing Overlay Zones. https://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/wp- content/uploads/2020/10/Affordable_Housing_Overlay_Zones_Oakley.pdf 2022 MCRC Using Affordable Housing Overlay Zones to Reduce the Risk of Displacement by Steven Butler. https://mrsc.org/stay-informed/mrsc-insight/april-2022/using-affordable- housing-overlay-zones City of Ann Arbor. Noise Ordinance and Housing Density Regulations. https://www.a2gov.org. City of Boulder. Student Housing Zoning and Overlay Districts. https://bouldercolorado.gov. City of Austin. Land Development Code on Student Housing. https://www.austintexas.gov. City of Syracuse. Housing and Land Use Planning Near Universities. https://www.syracuse.ny.us. American Planning Association. Best Practices for Student Housing Overlay Zones. https://www.planning.org. National League of Cities. Managing Noise and Density in University Towns. https://www.nlc.org. Submitted June 18, 2025 25 2024 – U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing – Operationalizing Proactive Community Engagement by Roberto Santos and Rachel Santos. https://portal.cops.usdoj.gov/resourcecenter/content.ashx/cops-r1145-pub.pdf City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Codes https://sanluisobispo.municipal.codes/Code City of Santa Barbara Municipal Codes https://santabarbaraca.gov/government/city-hall/city-charter-municipal-code California State Assembly Bill 524 - Postsecondary education: Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act https://legiscan.com/CA/text/AB524/id/2606489 City of San Luis Obispo Voluntary Party Registration https://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/police-department/party- registration California Polytechnic University Party Registration https://content-calpoly- edu.s3.amazonaws.com/greeklife/1/images/Party%20Registration%20Procedure%202018.pdf San Luis Obispo City Council Agendas and Minutes https://www.slocity.org/government/mayor-and-city-council/agendas-and-minutes California Polytechnic University Enrollment https://ir.calpoly.edu/content/publications_reports/polyview/index https://content-calpoly-edu.s3.amazonaws.com/ir/1/images/2025- 26%20Enrollment%20Projections.pdf Submitted June 18, 2025 26 Cal Poly Greek Fraternity and Sorority Life – Reports and Assessments – AB524 Fraternity Sorority Transparency Act Reports https://greeklife.calpoly.edu/reports 511 From:McDonald, Whitney Sent:Tuesday, July 15, 2025 8:34 PM To:Purrington, Teresa Subject:FW: Grand Jury Report Attachments:Agency 2Day Advance ltr - SLO City Manager.pdf; Agency Response to Report Form - Round & Round with Town & Gown - SLO City Mgr.docx; Penal Code 933.pdf; Round & Round with Town & Gown.pdf Would it be possible to pull up and show the agency response to report form on the screen? From: Grand Jury <grandjury@co.slo.ca.us> Sent: Friday, June 13, 2025 2:30 PM To: McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org> Subject: Grand Jury Report Ms. McDonald. Attached please find a letter from the Grand Jury, as well as attachments to the letter and the final report. Thank you, Reggie, for Bonnie McKrill, Foreperson P HONE: (805) 781-5188 ~ E MAIL : grandjury@co.slo.ca.us P.O. BOX 4910, SAN LUIS OBISPO, CALIFORNIA 93403 www.slo.courts.ca.gov/general-information/jury-service/grand-jury June 13, 2025 Via Email wmcdonald@slocity.org Confidential Whitney McDonald, City Manager City of San Luis Obispo 990 Palm Street San Luis Obispo, CA 93401 Re: Grand Jury Report: “Round & Round with Town & Gown” Dear Ms. McDonald: The San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury has completed the attached report titled “Round & Round with Town & Gown” This copy of the report is being provided to you two days in advance of its public release, as required by California Penal Code §933.05 (f), which states: A grand jury shall provide to the affected agency a copy of the portion of the grand jury report relating to that person or entity two working days prior to its public release and after the approval of the presiding judge. No officer, agency, department, or governing body of a public agency shall disclose any contents of the report prior to the public release of the final report. Responses are due pursuant to California Penal Code section 933(c). Sections 933 through 933.05 of the Penal Code are attached for your reference. Also attached is a form for your responses to Grand Jury findings and recommendations. Please keep in mind that this report must be kept confidential until its public release by the Grand Jury. Respectfully, Bonnie McKrill, Foreperson 2024-25 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury BM:rr Attachments RESPONSE TO GRAND JURY REPORT Report Title: “Round & Round with Town & Gown” Report Date: June 18, 2025 Response by: Title: FINDINGS 1. I (we) agree with the findings numbered: 2. I (we) disagree wholly or partially with the findings numbered: (Attach a statement specifying any portions of the findings that are disputed; include an explanation of the reasons.) RECOMMENDATIONS 1. Recommendations numbered have been implemented. (Attach a summary describing the implementation actions.) 2. Recommendations numbered have not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future. (Attach a timeframe for the implementation.) 3. Recommendations numbered require further analysis. (Attach an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or director of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of the publication of the Grand Jury report.) 4. Recommendations numbered will not be implemented because they are not warranted or are not reasonable. (Attach an explanation.) Date: Signed: Number of pages attached: 1 California Penal Code Sections 933 through 933.05 Section 933 – Final Reports (a) Each grand jury shall submit to the presiding judge of the superior court a final report of its findings and recommendations that pertain to county government matters during the fiscal or calendar year. Final reports on any appropriate subject may be submitted to the presiding judge of the superior court at any time during the term of service of a grand jury. A final report may be submitted for comment to responsible officers, agencies, or departments, including the county board of supervisors, when applicable, upon finding of the presiding judge that the report is incompliance with this title. For 45 days after the end of the term, the foreperson and his or her designees shall, upon reasonable notice, be available to clarify the recommendations of the report. (b) One copy of each final report, together with the responses thereto, found to be in compliance with this title shall be placed on file with the clerk of the court and remain on file in the office of the clerk. The clerk shall immediately forward a true copy of the report and the responses to the State Archivist who shall retain that report and all responses in perpetuity. (c) No later than 90 days after the grand jury submits a final report on the operations of any public agency subject to its reviewing authority, the governing body of the public agency shall comment to the presiding judge of the superior court on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of the governing body, and every elected county officer or agency head for which the grand jury has responsibility pursuant to Section 914.1 shall comment within 60 days to the presiding judge of the superior court, with an information copy sent to the board of supervisors, on the findings and recommendations pertaining to matters under the control of that county officer or agency head and any agency or agencies which that officer or agency head supervises or controls. In any city and county, the mayor shall also comment on the findings and recommendations. All of these comments and reports shall forthwith be submitted to the presiding judge of the superior court who impaneled the grand jury. A copy of all responses to grand jury reports shall be placed on file with the clerk of the public agency and the office of the county clerk, or the mayor when applicable, and shall remain on file in those offices. One copy shall be placed on file with the applicable grand jury final report by, and in the control of the currently impaneled grand jury, where it shall be maintained for a minimum of five years. (d) As used in this section "agency" includes a department. 933.05. Findings and Recommendations (a) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding. (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefore. (b) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. 2 (2)The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a timeframe for implementation. (3)The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated or reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report. (4)The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation therefor. (c) However, if a finding or recommendation of the grand jury addresses budgetary or personnel matters of a county agency or department headed by an elected officer, both the agency or department head and the board of supervisors shall respond if requested by the grand jury, but the response of the board of supervisors shall address only those budgetary or personnel matters over which it has some decision making authority. The response of the elected agency or department head shall address all aspects of the findings or recommendations affecting his or her agency or department. (d)A grand jury may request a subject person or entity to come before the grand jury for the purpose of reading and discussing the findings of the grand jury report that relates to that person or entity in order to verify the accuracy of the findings prior to their release. (e) During an investigation, the grand jury shall meet with the subject of that investigation regarding the investigation, unless the court, either on its own determination or upon request of the foreperson of the grand jury, determines that such a meeting would be detrimental. (f)A grand jury shall provide to the affected agency a copy of the portion of the grand jury report relating to that person or entity two working days prior to its public release and after the approval of the presiding judge. No officer, agency, department, or governing body of a public agency shall disclose any contents of the report prior to the public release of the final report. Submitted June 18, 2025 1 ROUND & ROUND WITH TOWN & GOWN San Luis Obispo (SLO) is a quaint town with a rich history and is home to a rapidly growing university that has become a vital part of the community. However, the expansion of the university has led to significant challenges in housing availability, both on and off campus. Affordability issues have exacerbated these challenges, created a shortage of student housing, and have pushed students into neighborhoods traditionally occupied by families. Many students now reside in single-family homes, often exceeding their intended occupancy. This shift has brought new complexities, as noise and frequent partying have disrupted these once-quiet residential areas. The situation underscores the delicate balance needed to ensure that all residents—students, families, and long-time locals can coexist harmoniously and thrive. INTRODUCTION/PURPOSE Over the past two decades, SLO has experienced significant growth, driven in part by the expansion of its university, California Polytechnic State University (Cal Poly), and the increasing student population. While this growth has contributed to the city's vibrancy and economic development, it has also introduced a range of challenges for the surrounding neighborhoods. Residents have voiced concerns over noise disturbances, large unauthorized street parties, and fraternity and sorority (referred to as “fraternities” for this report) events being hosted in residential areas not zoned for such gatherings. These issues have led to tensions between some long-term residents and the student community. SLO has experienced steady population growth, mirroring broader urban expansion trends across California. In 2005, the city’s population stood at approximately 44,380, and, by 2025, it had risen to 50,612, reflecting a 14% increase. During this same period, Cal Poly’s total enrollment grew from 18,278 to 23,016, marking a 26% increase. As a result, university students now comprise Submitted June 18, 2025 2 nearly 46% of the city's total population, significantly influencing housing availability both on and off campus, infrastructure demands, and neighboring residential community dynamics. Year Cal Poly Total Enrollment San Luis Obispo Population Student % of Population 2005 18,278 44,380 41.2% 2015 20,944 46,906 44.7% 2025 23,016 50,612 45.5% While Cal Poly’s expansion has bolstered the local economy and enriched San Luis Obispo’s cultural landscape, it has also reshaped the dynamics of some of the residential neighborhoods that border the campus. Many long-term residents, particularly families, cherish the stability and tranquility of their neighborhoods but now face the challenge of residing in an increasingly student-centered neighborhood. Striking a balance between fostering Cal Poly’s continued success and that of its students with neighborhood integrity is and will be an ongoing challenge for the city. This report explores these concerns focusing on four topics: large, unsanctioned street parties, ongoing noise from student parties, fraternity zoning issues, and fraternity permitting requirements. ORIGIN The investigation was initiated in response to multiple complaints filed by residents. These complaints cited disruptive activities associated with college students, including excessive noise during late hours, unauthorized fraternity houses operating in zoning -restricted residential areas, and large, unsanctioned street parties that escalate into public disturbances , injuries, and property damage. The complaints alleged that the City of SLO and Cal Poly officials were failing to enforce existing rules and municipal ordinances, that citizen complaints were ignored, and neither took sufficient action to restore order. The San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury (SLOCGJ) sought to objectively assess the extent of these issues and determine whether city officials were implementing timely and sufficient countermeasures to address them effectively. Submitted June 18, 2025 3 It should be noted that the SLOCGJ does not hold jurisdiction over Cal Poly. However, SLOCGJ would like to express its appreciation to Cal Poly for its willingness to engage in discussions. Their cooperation was invaluable in providing insights allowing the SLOCGJ to better understand their perspective on the issues at hand as well as the actions they were undertaking to partner with the city and the community. AUTHORITY California Penal Code section 933 requires that “Each grand jury shall submit to the presiding judge of the superior court a final report of its findings and recommendations that pertain to county government matters during the fiscal or calendar year.” Section 933.05 further prescribes responses to those findings and recommendations. Responding agencies are directed to report whether they agree or disagree (either partially or wholly) with a finding and whether a recommendation has been implemented, will be implemented, will not be implemented, or requires further analysis. An agency may reject a Grand Jury recommendation provided they include an explanation of why the recommendation is either unwarranted or unreasonable. If a recommendation requires further analysis, it must be conducted within six months from the date of publication of the Grand Jury report. All Grand Jury reports and each agency’s responses are posted online each year at https://www.slo.courts.ca.gov/gi/jury-grandjury.htm METHOD/PROCEDURE The SLOCGJ used the following methods for its investigation: • conducted fifteen interviews with San Luis Obispo city residents, city leadership (including City Council members, Community Development and Police Department officials), city personnel (such as Code Enforcement), and leadership from Cal Poly, • conducted site inspection of impacted neighborhoods, Submitted June 18, 2025 4 • reviewed documents such as Conditional Use Permits (CUPs) issued to fraternities, municipal codes, City Council and Planning Commission meeting agendas and minutes, as well as outreach plans for previous St. Patrick’s Day events, • conducted analyses of policies and laws, including The Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act, Assembly Bill (AB524), SLO and Cal Poly party registration regulations, and Cal Poly’s General Plan, • conducted comparative research, including an investigation of cities with overlay zones to understand their implementation and impact. Explored various policing models, such as the “Do No Harm” approach, examined strategies used by other cities addressing similar university-related challenges, and analyzed party ordinances from other municipalities. NARRATIVE CHAPTER 1: UNSANCTIONED ILLEGAL STREET PARTIES The concept of St. Fratty’s Day began in 2009 originally as a fraternity party to celebrate St. Patrick's Day and the end of the school term. After the initial party in 2009, the party grew and by 2015 the event drew over 1,000 attendees. During the 2015 event, the garage roof adjacent to 348 Hathway Street collapsed because 30 or more students were partying on the rooftop. Ten students were injured with one young woman narrowly escaping a potentially life -threatening injury. This incident made national news and sparked conversations between the City of SLO and Cal Poly regarding how to manage the event and encourage the students to party safely. From 2016 to 2019 the event was smaller and there were no rooftop activities or serious injuries. In 2020 and 2021, with pandemic laws limiting large social gatherings, the event was so small as to be negligible. In 2022, with pandemic restrictions lifted, the event grew to 2,000 attendees. In 2023, through social media, and news coverage, the event doubled in size to approximately 4,000 attendees. In Submitted June 18, 2025 5 2023, the SLO City Council expanded an existing Safety Enhancement Zone (SEZ) ordinance to cover a period of time before and after St. Patrick’s Day. The SEZ allows authorities to double fines for noise, alcohol, and other unruly behavior. In 2024, the crowd nearly doubled in size once again to an estimated 7,000 attendees. The SLO City Police Chief used a containment enforcement strategy that resulted in officers being staged along the outskirts of the crowd in the neighborhood adjoining the university. The “Do No Harm” approach was adopted not only due to concern for officer safety but because a more aggressive officer presence could incite a riot. This practice was in line with the department’s enforcement policy of “Do No Harm” to keep violators, other participants and officers safe. They implemented a strike team strategy where a team of officers entered the crowd to address a violation, issued a citation, and returned to the perimeter to keep everyone safe and avoid an escalation. In 2024 the SLO City Chief of Police deemed their efforts a success as no harm was done to officers or attendees. However, the residents in the area experienced property damage to their residences and personal property. Some intoxicated partiers trespassed onto their property, climbed up on rooftops and power poles, and vandalized cars. The SLOCGJ wanted to determine the validity of the alleged citizen complaints against the SLOPD as well as verify statements received from others during our investigation. We also wanted to confirm the success of SLOPD’s efforts, and possible changes in light of any perceived failings. We were blocked in this effort by two senior police official’s unwillingness to grant an interview. This hampered our fact-finding efforts. The reason for these denials remains inadequate and may stem from a misunderstanding of the role of the SLO CGJ in improving governmental functions within this county. It has become a tradition for the students to start partying at midnight the prior night in their Cal Poly dorms and nearby housing, with the party moving into the surrounding neighborhoods to kick off St. Fratty’s Day at 3:17 a.m. (to acknowledge St. Patrick’s Day, March 17th). In 2024 Submitted June 18, 2025 6 fireworks were set off in the Alta Vista neighborhood between 3:00 a.m. and 4:00 a.m., jolting some residents and their families awake. Thousands of students descended on Hathway and Bond Streets (in the Alta Vista neighborhood) fueled by alcohol, disturbing the peace by playing loud music, screaming and yelling. The heavy alcohol consumption resulted in dangerous activities such as climbing utility poles, partying on rooftops, urinating and vomiting in public, passing out in residents’ yards and on rooftops, and leaving trash throughout the neighborhoods. In 2024, the Cal Poly dorms also experienced extensive damage as the students began partying at midnight and damaged the dorms on their way out to the street party. The damage was so extensive that Cal Poly had to close some dorms for two days to repair the damage. After the 2024 St. Fratty’s Day event, it became apparent to the City of SLO and the administration at Cal Poly that St. Fratty’s Day in its current format could no longer be tolerated. Cal Poly administration, with concern for the safety of their students, property damage to the university, and surrounding neighborhoods, as well as the request of city officials, formed a task force to strategize how to deal with the unsanctioned event. The task force was made up of Cal Poly Administration, student advisory groups, students, members of the Greek Li fe Community, and SLO City representatives. No representatives from the surrounding neighborhoods were invited to participate in the task force. One outcome of the task force was to provide the students with a safe alternative event. The event was scheduled for Saturday, March 15, 2025, and included a concert on campus starting at 4:00 a.m. The event was free and up to 5,000 students were able to secure tickets to the event. The event provided entertainment, beer vendors for those over 21, free food, security, and a sobering center. Cal Poly police, Cal Poly staff, SLO Emergency Medical Technicians and private security companies were on campus to ensure a safe and secure environment. Cal Poly’s messaging to the students prior to St. Patrick’s Day was that past behaviors would no longer be tolerated. Due to the damage experienced in 2024, several security measures were Submitted June 18, 2025 7 deployed, including no guests being allowed to stay on campus. Parking on campus was limited to Cal Poly students and staff starting Friday, March 14, 2025, through Monday, March 17, 2025 . The City of SLO, concerned about the safety of their neighborhoods, the disruptions to the residents, and the negative image of the City of SLO, developed their own task force headed up by the SLO City Police Department. The messaging developed by the City of SLO was “Do Not Come, the party is over.” In 2024 there were approximately 140 to 160 law enforcement personnel overseeing the event in the neighborhood. In 2025, the SLO Police Department activated the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) and the SLO County District Attorney’s Office announced they would not offer pre-filing misdemeanor diversion (see Glossary) to any person charged with a misdemeanor stemming from criminal conduct during St. Patrick's Day celebrations in San Luis Obispo. There were an estimated 300 law enforcement officers representing 25 different local, state and federal agencies. Officers patrolling the area stopped the students from entering the streets and kept their movement on the sidewalks. The students were encouraged to keep moving out of the neighborhood and to the event on campus. Due to the increased law enforcement presence, the neighborhood of Alta Vista did not experience damage to property and there was no unsanctioned street party. The SLO Chief of Police Department estimated costs to the city will be approximately $125,000. The concert at Cal Poly was deemed a success as over 6,000 students attended the event. The event was limited to 5,000 students; however, un-ticketed students pushed through the temporary fencing so they could get into the event. Though this is concerning, no one was seriously injured. Overall, the students remained on campus, attended the alternative event, and no damage was reported in the dorms or the nearby neighborhoods. The alternative activity on campus ended around 10:30 a.m. It is the stated goal of Cal Poly and the City of SLO that the St. Patrick’s Day unsanctioned street parties come to an end. They have advised that it may take two to three years to completely end the unruly St. Patrick’s Day celebrations. The City of SLO and Cal Poly are no strangers to Submitted June 18, 2025 8 controlling and ending large events. After a 1990 riot during Poly Royal, Cal Poly ended the event and created a new activity that is safe for students, their families, and the community to enjoy. After a popular Mardi Gras event (2004) was no longer controllable, the City of SLO was successful in bringing an end to that event. The 2024-2025 collaboration between the City of SLO and Cal Poly proved successful in providing a safe alternative event for the students and residents of San Luis Obispo. A communication received from Cal Poly indicated that Cal Poly is currently evaluating what programming will look like in future years, especially given the transition from quarters to semesters; however, planning will begin for another event next academic year, 2025-26. CHAPTER 2: NOISY NEIGHBORS SLO Municipal Code 9.12 (see Bibliography) provides that “…it shall be unlawful for any person to willfully or negligently make or continue to make or continue, or cause to be made or continued, or permit or allow to be made or continued any noise which disturbs the peace and quiet of any neighborhood or which causes any discomfort or annoyance to any reasonable person of normal sensitivity in the area.” Notwithstanding this ordinance, the citizens in the immediate vicinity of Cal Poly, have regularly complained of excessive noise coming from nearby houses that are occupied by students. It has therefore fallen to the SLO Police Department (SLOPD) and the SLO Noise Control Officer (Code Enforcement) to answer such complaints as may be made. The specific code violation encompassed in the above-mentioned Code states that the hours between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. the following morning are to remain quiet. According to complaints received by the SLOCGJ, this has not been fully enforced. It should also be noted that the Noise Control Officer may grant exceptions to this restriction . The SLOCGJ received complaints that loud parties, located directly adjacent to Cal Poly and in violation of the above code have forced citizens to file SLOPD noise complaints. The SLOCGJ reviewed copies of the noise citations issued by the SLOPD during th e 2023-2024 school session (the most recent information available) and found that noise citations in neighborhoods near the Submitted June 18, 2025 9 campus were issued an average of more than 3 times per week during the school session. This totaled 139 citations in the Alta Vista neighborhood, with one house alone receiving 17 citations. Unfortunately, there is reason to believe that this situation remains - to this date - unabated. Such is the irritation of area residents, that many have fled the area. To aid in noise ordinance enforcement the SLOPD employs the assistance of Cal Poly students who are enrolled in a program called the Student Neighborhood Assistance Program (SNAP). These students interface with groups of partiers in residences in the affected area who are violating the noise ordinance. These unarmed SNAP students speak to the offending parties and attempt to get them to comply with the city’s noise standards. There are, however, only a handful of SNAP students. They wear civilian uniforms and work in pairs. They also have radios so that they may contact the police when required. These students may, at their discretion, issue Disturbance Advisement Cards (DACs). Such issuance falls short of an actual fine or a conventional ticket and is meant to serve as a first warning, so that an additional violation may, at the officers' discretion, warrant a police citation. Complainants indicated that weekend parties can mean up to 100 or more students at one address and often continue after visits by police. SNAP students do not go to lettered fraternity houses; such visits are reserved for sworn officers. Additionally, through a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), Cal Poly Police have the authority to operate within one mile outside of campus grounds. This allows, at least theoretically, greater and more rapid enforcement of SLO city laws. SLO Municipal Code 9.12.050 is specific about excessive noise. It provides a detailed list of prohibited acts between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. While it does not specifically prohibit noise from parties, it does speak to the use of loudspeakers and other electronic devices, including: “radio, television set, phonograph, drum, musical instrument, or similar device which produces or reproduces sound…” Submitted June 18, 2025 10 CHAPTER 3: ZONING VIOLATIONS / CONCERNS – IS SLO CITY IN THE TWILIGHT ZONE ABOUT ZONING ISSUES? As outlined previously, the SLOCGJ reviewed citizen complaints reporting “Illegal Fraternities” operating in residential zones (R-1/R-2). During interviews with City officials, five individuals confirmed their knowledge of the existence of illegal fraternities. City officials stated that identifying illegal fraternities is difficult but usually starts with a citizen complaint reported to law enforcement about a noisy event or party in an R-1/R-2 residential zone, which is the top citizen complaint happening most weekends while school is in session. Noise issues and complaints are usually handled by the police department. Municipal Code guidelines that address noise issues and enforcement are outlined in the “Exterior Noise Limits” section MC 9.12.060 and the “Enforcement” section MC 9.12.110. If found to be out of compliance, SLOPD may issue a warning or citation. Fines for cited noise violations escalate for each subsequent violation. Code enforcement gets involved if SLOPD or citizen complaints identify the location may be operating as a fraternity. It is illegal per the Municipal Code for fraternities to operate in an R-1/R-2 neighborhood. Due to the lack of on-campus student housing, some students must live off-campus. In some cases, fraternity members will rent houses in R-1/R-2 zones and may hold fraternity-sponsored events, which is not allowed by the Municipal Code. In 2023, using extensive citizen-generated data from a Cal Poly-generated report required by AB524, code enforcement started an investigation into the illegal fraternities. Based on the investigation, 30-40 Advisory Notices, and 22 Notice of Violations (NOVs) were sent to property owners. In response to the NOVs, the city advised that many of the property owners reported they were unaware of the fraternity events that were being held at their property. At the time, Cal Poly and code enforcement were working together on the illegal fraternity issue. However, due to changes in policies, Cal Poly stopped assisting the city, stating privacy concerns, and revised their AB 524 report to remove some of the addresses that were previously provided in the document. Submitted June 18, 2025 11 The current policies and enforcement approach is not conducive to a real time solution. Based on the SLOCGJ investigation, the number of illegal fraternities may be more than 40 locations currently operating in the city. In addition, citizens have reported that several Cal Poly recognized fraternities listed in AB524 have multiple illegal fraternity locations operating within the city: some with as many as 7 separate locations. In January 2025, due to detailed information received by code enforcement , from members of the public and several complaint calls, the code enforcement team was sent out on a Saturday night to the neighborhood adjacent to Cal Poly specifically looking for illegal fraternity activities. It is not the usual practice for code enforcement to be working on a weekend, at night, and on overtime, but due to the increasing attention to the problems, city officials believed it was appropriate. Results from the neighborhood review resulted in identifying and citing 12 locations that were found to be operating as fraternity houses in R-1/R-2 zones. The city is taking steps to address these violations. The city plans to continue working on the issues using the existing municipal codes and modifying them as needed. With the current fiscal situation and funding constraints, city officials plan to provide enforcement with current staff and resources and ensure they have a clear and concise process to use. Based on comments from city officials, identifying illegal fraternity party houses is labor intensive since code enforcement has to prove that the party or activity is sponsored by a fraternity in a n R-1/R-2 zone, which is a land use violation. Some indicators are Greek letters posted out front, social media posts advertising fraternity events, and citizen complaints. After investigating, if enough evidence exists, code enforcement will issue an NOV and if they are in an R-1/R-2 zone, tell them to cease all fraternity-related activities. Code enforcement will follow-up within 30 days to verify compliance. Unfortunately, the city is regulated to reactive rather than proactive enforcement of municipal codes. Code enforcement complaints are often received after business hours or the following Submitted June 18, 2025 12 day. The result is that they are limited in their ability to verify the code violation, as it is after the fact or violators are not easily identified. CHAPTER 4: FRATERNITY PERMIT REQUIREMENTS The City of SLO Municipal Code regulates land use, developments, and operations within the city. That Municipal Code restricts fraternities to zones R-3 and R-4 and requires a CUP (Municipal Code Section 17.10.020, Table 2-1) to operate. CUPs that allow fraternities are regulated by Municipal Code Section 17.86.130 which defines the standard conditions that shall apply to all: 1. “Occupancy” shall be limited to not more than one resident per sixty square feet of building area. The landlord shall allow the city to verify occupancy by allowing an inspection of the records or by a visual inspection of the premises. Any inspection shall be at a reasonable time and shall be preceded by a twenty-four-hour notice to the residents, 2. The maximum number of persons allowed on site for routine meetings and gatherings shall not exceed the limit established by the applicable conditional use permit, 3. The fraternity or sorority shall remain affiliated and in good standing with the Interfraternity Council of Student Life and Leadership at California Polytechnic University, San Luis Obispo. If the fraternity or sorority becomes unaffiliated or no longer held in good standing with California Polytechnic University, the conditional use permit shall be revoked, 4. The landlord shall provide names and telephone numbers of responsible persons to the community development department and SLOPD neighborhood services manager on an annual basis. Responsible persons shall be available during all events and at reasonable hours to receive and handle complaints Additional conditions may be imposed by the planning commission when they approve the CUP. The permit stays with the parcel as long as the approved use continues, and the conditions are Submitted June 18, 2025 13 adhered to. If the parcel is no longer used for the approved purpose, then the permit expires after one year. If the occupants of the parcel violate the conditions of the CUP, the planning commission may revoke the permit. In January 2025, the SLOCGJ requested and received a copy of each CUP granted by the city to a fraternity or sorority; Appendix A is a summary of the 16 conditional use permits provided by the city. It should be noted that the Cal Poly website lists 36 recognized fraternities and sororities. The SLOCGJ double checked with the city, and it was confirmed that the 16 conditional use permits were all that are in place at this time. AB524; Sections 66310-66312 of California Education Code requires each institution of higher education to include in the institution’s requirements for campus recognition of a campus- recognized sorority or fraternity, a requirement that the sorority or fraternity submit to the institution on or before July 1, 2023, and annually thereafter, specified information concerning the sorority’s or fraternity’s members and their conduct. Cal Poly assembles this information and submits it in a public report to the State each year. The report also provides the address of each “affiliated chapter house” which AB 524 defines as those located on -campus or on land owned or leased by the fraternity or sorority. The list submitted in 2024 did have 16 fraternities and sororities the same as the number of CUPs in force. Evidently, this means that of the 36 recognized fraternities and sororities, 20 either do not have a chapter house or are in chapter houses that are off-campus and not owned or leased by the fraternity or sorority and therefore do not meet the definition of an affiliated chapter house. Any of these chapter houses that hold fraternity activities such as meetings, rush events, or parties, are still required by the SLO municipal code to have a CUP. It is not clear why they have not applied for a permit. It could be the cost (In FY 2024-25, the application fee for a CUP is $10,932.57) or effort required, or it may be that they are located in an R-1 or R-2 zone, in which case the fraternity activity would not be allowed. Since Cal Poly is not required to provide the addresses of these recognized fraternities, the city has no easy way to verify the location to Submitted June 18, 2025 14 determine the reason that the fraternity does not have a CUP. This makes it difficult for the city to enforce the code. As shown in Appendix A, not all required conditions are the same for each permit holder. In addition to the standard conditions required by code, some permit holders have other conditions such as: • restrictions on the time of day that meetings and gatherings can be held without city approval, • a neighborhood relations program with evidence of implementation to be submitted annually, • a list of planned events for the year to be submitted annually, • complaints received by the city are to be forwarded to the Cal Poly interfraternity council prior to being forwarded to the planning commission, • notice must be provided to residents within 300 feet prior to special events, and • a transportation and parking plan must be submitted prior to each event. These CUPs were approved over an extended period of time by planning commissions with different members; the earliest is dated in 1971 and the latest in 2024. That may explain why additional conditions were imposed on some fraternities and sororities and not others. It may also have to do with specific characteristics of the individual parcel. Interviews with City staff have revealed that many of the conditions, such as submittals of planned events and neighborhood relations programs have not been adhered to or enforced. The planning commission has the authority to enforce these conditions, add new conditions if the existing conditions are not met, and ultimately revoke a fraternity’s CUP. Citizens can also appeal for a use permit to be revoked or request that a permit not be approved. The current cost to make such an appeal is $2,583.46, (in 2017 the appeal fee was $281.00). A complainant noted that the cost to appeal discourages this practice. While these appeal fees may be justifiable for major development projects that demand substantial city resources like legal reviews, public Submitted June 18, 2025 15 hearings, or environmental impact assessments, they place an undue burden on ordinary citizens. Residents raising concerns about local issues like noise or safety issues may find these costs prohibitively high, limiting their ability to participate in community decision-making. FINDINGS F1. Prior to 2025, the city failed to effectively provide a multi-pronged, cohesive approach to manage or shut down large unsanctioned, costly and unruly events such as St. Fratty’s Day. This created an unsafe environment, with increasing size of unruly crowds, property damage, injuries and public disturbances. F2. The city has not effectively engaged in working together with community stakeholders to find solutions for ongoing off-campus issues that negatively impact neighborhoods such as code enforcement, noise issues, trespassing, property damage, and unruly events. F3. 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, such as rush events and repeated parties. This inaction has resulted in an increase of illegal fraternities holding events in residential neighborhoods making these areas almost unlivable for most residents. F4. The city has failed to consistently enforce CUPs such as the requirements for an annual list of parties and events, notification to neighbors, and parking plans. Strict enforcement of these conditions would contribute to a reduction of the disturbances in the neighborhoods. Submitted June 18, 2025 16 F5. The current planning appeal fee structure in SLO disproportionately impacts ordinary citizens, as the high costs create barriers for those raising concerns about community issues such as noise or safety. While these fees may be justifiable for large-scale development appeals requiring additional city resources, they hinder equitable participation in local decision-making processes. F6. The Grand Jury encountered a lack of cooperation from the San Luis Obispo City Police Department. While one sworn officer did participate in an interview, efforts to interview two additional sworn officers were unsuccessful. This unwillingness to engage hindered the Grand Jury’s ability to corroborate statements, obtain essential information, and maintain transparency in its oversight role. RECOMMENDATIONS R1. The SLO City Council should continue to work with Cal Poly to develop a multi-year plan to ensure that the illegal street parties known as St. Fratty’s Day is completely eliminated. R2. The SLO City Council, in collaboration with Cal Poly and other stakeholders, should implement proactive measures to address future unsanctioned illegal street parties as they arise. Taking immediate action can prevent these gatherings from escalating over time due to prolonged non-enforcement. This approach would foster a safer community while promoting shared accountability among all parties involved. R3. The SLO City Manager should develop and implement an ongoing formal process to identify illegal fraternities to bring them into compliance. R4. The SLO City Council should initiate a task force to explore the creation of a “Student Overlay Zone” near the campus that would allow for municipal code requirements to be introduced that would differentiate it from the rest of the city and recognize the needs of Submitted June 18, 2025 17 a dynamic university environment. This could facilitate changes to such things as density, parking, noise and fraternity activities. R5. The SLO City Council should consider adopting a tiered planning appeal fee structure to promote accessibility of community concerns by individual residents. Such a structure could ensure that financial burdens do not deter public involvement. R6. The SLO City Manager and the Planning Commission should move toward adopting more uniform conditions for CUP’s and enforcement of existing requirements. Due to the time span (1971-2024) in which these CUPs were approved, the requirements are inconsistent. The City should consider using future CUP violations to determine if it is appropriate to revise the conditions to make them more relevant for today’s environment. This may require consideration of additional code enforcement staff or alternative work schedules. R7. The SLOCGJ recommends that the SLO City Manager create formal guidelines and provide training outlining how the SLO City Police Department will respond to requests from the SLOCGJ and other oversite bodies. COMMENDATIONS The SLOCGJ commends Cal Poly and the City of SLO for their efforts and collaboration in keeping the students and the community of SLO safe during the 2025 St. Patrick’s Day weekend. REQUIRED RESPONSES The San Luis Obispo City Council is required to respond to R1, R2. R4, and R5 within 90 days. The San Luis Obispo City Manager is required to respond to R3 , R6, and R7 within 90 days. Submitted June 18, 2025 18 The San Luis Obispo City Planning Commission is required to respond to R6 within 90 days. All responses shall be submitted to the Presiding Judge of the San Luis Obispo County Superior Court. A paper copy and an electronic version of all responses shall be provided to the Gran d Jury. 933.05. Findings and Recommendations (a) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury finding, the responding person or entity shall indicate one of the following: (1) The respondent agrees with the finding. (2) The respondent disagrees wholly or partially with the finding, in which case the response shall specify the portion of the finding that is disputed and shall include an explanation of the reasons therefor. (b) For purposes of subdivision (b) of Section 933, as to each grand jury recommendation, the responding person or entity shall report one of the following actions: (1) The recommendation has been implemented, with a summary regarding the implemented action. (2) The recommendation has not yet been implemented, but will be implemented in the future, with a timeframe for implementation. (3) The recommendation requires further analysis, with an explanation and the scope and parameters of an analysis or study, and a timeframe for the matter to be prepared for discussion by the officer or head of the agency or department being investigated o r reviewed, including the governing body of the public agency when applicable. This timeframe shall not exceed six months from the date of publication of the grand jury report. (4) The recommendation will not be implemented because it is not warranted or is not reasonable, with an explanation, therefor. Presiding Judge Grand Jury Presiding Judge Rita Federman Superior Court of California 1035 Palm Street Room 355 San Luis Obispo, CA 93408 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury P.O. Box 4910 San Luis Obispo, CA 93403 Submitted June 18, 2025 19 APPENDIX A Submitted June 18, 2025 20 Submitted June 18, 2025 21 Submitted June 18, 2025 22 GLOSSARY 1. Fraternities and Sororities. Municipal Code (MC) 17.156.014 “F definitions.” - Residence for college or university students who are members of a social or educational association that is affiliated and in good standing with the California Polytechnic State University (Cal Poly) and where such an association also holds meetings or gatherings. 2. Illegal fraternities – Similar to the “Fraternities and Sororities” defined in the MC, except the residence is located in an R-1/R-2 residential zone instead of R-3/R-4 zones and hold fraternity sponsored activities and parties, which is not allowed by the MC. Sometimes referred to as a satellite Greek house. 3. Zoning Regulations - Zoning regulations are rules designed to help guide the growth of a city in an organized way. They are based on a general plan that aims to protect and improve the environment, both natural and man -made. Zoning regulations help keep communities safe, healthy, and well-organized by controlling how land and buildings are used, as well as where and how structures are built. Examples of different zones are: Residential Zones are where homes can be built, and Commercial Zones are where businesses or stores may be built. 4. Residential Zones definition R-1 through –R-4 (MC 17.16 – 17.22) - The city is divided into zones to allow for orderly, planned development and to implement the general plan. a. The R-1 zone provides for low-density residential development and supporting compatible uses that have locations and development forms that provide a sense of both individual identity and neighborhood cohesion, and that provide private outdoor space for the households occupying individual units. b. The R-2 zone is intended to provide housing opportunities that have locations and development forms that provide a sense of both individual identity and neighborhood Submitted June 18, 2025 23 cohesion for the households occupying them, but in a more compact arrangement than in the R-1 zone, and near commercial and public services. c. The R-3 zone is intended primarily to provide housing opportunities for attached dwellings with common outdoor areas and compact private outdoor spaces. The R -3 zone is generally appropriate near employment centers and major public facilities, along transit corridors and nodes, and close to commercial and public facilities serving the whole community. d. The R-4 zone is intended primarily to provide for attached dwellings with common outdoor areas and compact private outdoor spaces, and to accommodate various types of group housing. Further, the R-4 zone intended to allow for dense housing close to concentrations of employment and college enrollment, in the downtown core, along transit corridors and nodes, and in areas largely committed to high-density residential development. 5. Exterior Noise Limits MC 9.12.060 - Defines the Maximum Permissible Sound Levels at Receiving Land Use for all zoning categories (see table 1 in MC for details.) 6. Overlay Zone MC 17.06.020.C - An overlay zone supplements the base zone for the purpose of establishing special use or development regulations for a particular area in addition to the provisions of the underlying base zone. In the event of conflict between the base zone regulations and the overlay zone regulations, the provisions of the overlay zone shall apply. Submitted June 18, 2025 24 BIBLIOGRAPHY 2019 Shelter Force – The Role Student Housing Plays in Communities https://shelterforce.org/2019/09/06/the-role-student-housing-plays-in-communities/ 2019 Terner Center for Housing and Innovation – UC Berkley Affordable Housing Overlay Zones. https://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/wp- content/uploads/2020/10/Affordable_Housing_Overlay_Zones_Oakley.pdf 2022 MCRC Using Affordable Housing Overlay Zones to Reduce the Risk of Displacement by Steven Butler. https://mrsc.org/stay-informed/mrsc-insight/april-2022/using-affordable- housing-overlay-zones City of Ann Arbor. Noise Ordinance and Housing Density Regulations. https://www.a2gov.org. City of Boulder. Student Housing Zoning and Overlay Districts. https://bouldercolorado.gov. City of Austin. Land Development Code on Student Housing. https://www.austintexas.gov. City of Syracuse. Housing and Land Use Planning Near Universities. https://www.syracuse.ny.us. American Planning Association. Best Practices for Student Housing Overlay Zones. https://www.planning.org. National League of Cities. Managing Noise and Density in University Towns. https://www.nlc.org. Submitted June 18, 2025 25 2024 – U.S. Department of Justice Office of Community Oriented Policing – Operationalizing Proactive Community Engagement by Roberto Santos and Rachel Santos. https://portal.cops.usdoj.gov/resourcecenter/content.ashx/cops-r1145-pub.pdf City of San Luis Obispo Municipal Codes https://sanluisobispo.municipal.codes/Code City of Santa Barbara Municipal Codes https://santabarbaraca.gov/government/city-hall/city-charter-municipal-code California State Assembly Bill 524 - Postsecondary education: Campus-Recognized Sorority and Fraternity Transparency Act https://legiscan.com/CA/text/AB524/id/2606489 City of San Luis Obispo Voluntary Party Registration https://www.slocity.org/government/department-directory/police-department/party- registration California Polytechnic University Party Registration https://content-calpoly- edu.s3.amazonaws.com/greeklife/1/images/Party%20Registration%20Procedure%202018.pdf San Luis Obispo City Council Agendas and Minutes https://www.slocity.org/government/mayor-and-city-council/agendas-and-minutes California Polytechnic University Enrollment https://ir.calpoly.edu/content/publications_reports/polyview/index https://content-calpoly-edu.s3.amazonaws.com/ir/1/images/2025- 26%20Enrollment%20Projections.pdf Submitted June 18, 2025 26 Cal Poly Greek Fraternity and Sorority Life – Reports and Assessments – AB524 Fraternity Sorority Transparency Act Reports https://greeklife.calpoly.edu/reports 512 From:Stewart, Erica A Sent:Tuesday, July 15, 2025 4:48 PM To:Genevieve Czech Subject:RE: Item 8a of meeting by City Council on 07/15/25 Thank you, Genevieve. I appreciate your thoughtful input. Best, Erica From: Genevieve Czech < Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 11:42 AM To: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org> Subject: Item 8a of meeting by City Council on 07/15/25 Dear Lady Mayoress and City Council: The correspondence you have received already is sufficient for you to both study and assimilate the serious concerns of SLO city residents, long standing and productive residents whose concerns deserve your humble and earnest consideration. Among some of those issues raised are the failure by Cal Poly to release the addresses of satellite fraternities and sororities. In effect they violate our zoning codes. One suggestion that has been made is for Cal Poly to provide Greek houses on campus as is the practice of most Universities. Another recommendation is for the owners/landlords of student housing to enforce the rental agreements, imposing fines for students holding loud and overcrowded parties beyond the curfew, evern becoming excessively loud before the curfew when the party starts in early afternoon. Registering parties has not been a suitable strategy as the Police tend to ignore noise complaints once the party would have been registered. Registering implies a permit to abuse any noise ordinance in a residential neighborhood. One correspondent has made the considerable effort to log the history of the problems, including the SCLC committee's initial founding/purpose/composition and limitations, including making the minutes of their meetings available to the public. I do indeed support former Mayor Jan Marx's inclusion on that committee to enable the full understanding of the history and successes and failures of neighborhood wellness in current and future discussion. Two decades ago Cal Poly made some efforts to participate in reducing the town/gown issues in building more campus housing, in having students view a video of their responsibilities when living in residential neighborhoods. Their declared intention of having not only Freshmen and Sophomores live on campus, but gradually even the Juniors and Seniors is not consonant with their objective of increased growth. Further, it denies the adult students the opportunity to live together in harmony and experience and establish home management. Our street which has over 50% student rental housing has witnessed some very good examples of responsible student tenancy, while other examples of insensitive behavior regarding the longtime residents. In such cases we have been compelled to intervene personally after suffering the disturbance, or reporting the violation beyond curfew. 'Tis true that the Police have not always been responsive, or sufficiently punitive when they have intervened. The earlier practice of "good renter certificates" was apparently stopped due to claims of discrimination of student tenants, which is unfounded, as landlords have the right to even evict tenants who violate the rental agreement. You were invited before the grand jury report was published to visit neighborhoods to witness firsthand the disruption satellite fraternities caused to a residential neighborhood. Apparently, no members of the Council accepted the invitation to actually experience the problem. The effort the grand jury report represents cannot be 513 dismissed as NIMBY whining, but more than justified concerns and issues by the SLO residents who wish to preserve gracious and respectful community living in SLO with the full support of the City staff elected by them, and the interaction of Cal Poly whose declared aim is to teach learning by doing, including responsible citizenship in the community. May you reflect on all the issues raised in your correspondence with a sincere and resolved discussion and action to model a town who works with gown and landlords to ensure more harmony and mutual respect. Yours sincerely, Genevieve Czech, 514 From:Stewart, Erica A Sent:Tuesday, July 15, 2025 4:47 PM To:Sandra Rowley Subject:RE: Item 8a, Ad Hoc Committee Hi Sandra, Thank you for providing some history and feedback on tonight’s ad hoc committee. I hope the task force creation goes smoothly. We have lots to do in this next year to work even closer together to hold Cal Poly accountable and update some of the city’s processes. Hope all is well with you. Erica From: Sandra Rowley < Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 11:53 AM To: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org> Subject: Item 8a, Ad Hoc Committee Dear Mayor Stewart and Members of the Council, An ad hoc committee is a good idea, not to refute the Grand Jury findings, but to use them as a basis to formulate actions to address the findings and recommendations delineated in the report. In addition to council members and city staff, it should include residents from the Alta Vista and Monterey Heights neighborhoods (illegal fraternities are there, too), and other interested groups - such as RQN and owners/property managers whose property and/or tenants have been negatively affected by fraternity activities and events. The Civility Report, begun in 2013 and finalized in Spring 2015, was used by SCLC for two or three years but is no longer - even though many of the Desired Outcomes identified in the report have not been accomplished. With the exception of the 2024 update to the Safety Enhancement Zone (originated in 2004) and the 2015 update to the Unruly Gathering Ordinance (originated in 2010) most actions, i.e., ordinances addressing negative behaviors in the neighborhoods, are 15 years old. Some things have changed since then - like the proliferation of fraternities in neighborhoods (with more being approved) and the reduced cooperation and support of Cal Poly to take responsibility for and assist in correcting student actions that negatively affect the city - but do not affect the campus. The council, city staff and residents need to get together and to renew the innovative approaches mentioned in the staff report to address today's problems. Hopefully, an ad hoc committee composed as suggested above will be able to do so. Additional actions for Council to consider: - Doing whatever is necessary, including taking legal action, to require Cal Poly to conform to the AB 528 guidelines by publis hing the addresses for fraternity main and satellite houses. - Establishing specific guidelines to follow for declaring a property a nuisance when x number of disruptive/illegal events are held. - Reconsidering/restructuring appeal fees so that residents are not out-priced. For example: few, if any, resident appeals concern all of the intricacies of a large development project. - Reconsidering funding additional code enforcement staff and alternative work schedules. - Supporting the equivalent of SLOPD's 2025 St Fratty's Day Enforcement Plan until the event is eliminated. Thank you for your time and consideration of these comments. Sincerely, 515 Sandra Rowley SLO Resident 516 From:Stewart, Erica A Sent:Tuesday, July 15, 2025 4:43 PM To:Odile Ayral Subject:RE: Item 8 a Hi Odile, Thanks for your input. I agree, sometimes the French come up with some pretty good expressions :) I hope we can come together to create the ad-hoc committee tonight. Going forward, I hope this report can push the university and the city to work a closer together for some better solutions. I do believe the solutions will take a little longer than some people would like. The university is currently building more housing and the 2027 spring break will be at a different time as they switch over to semesters. I believe both of these will be helpful. However, there are some additional issues that I see from the recommendations that can be addressed from the city and the university. Hope all is well with you and yours! Erica From: Odile Ayral < Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 2:38 PM To: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org> Subject: Item 8 a Mayor Stewart and Council Members, “Plus ça change et plus c’est la même chose” (the more things change, the more they are the same). Sometimes the French come up with some pretty good expressions. I have watched the situation between Cal Poly students and City residents deteriorate for many years. The basic problem was always there: not enough university lodging for students, no fraternity or sorority rows, out-of-control student parties, frustrated neighbors who never seem to be heard. When problems are not handled at the top, they get worse. Sometimes it takes drastic measures: President Baker cancelled the very popular Poly Royal, and it hurt everybody, residents and good students as well. Mardi Gras that used to be so much fun at the beginning when it was in the hands of residents was overtaken by crass students who cared nothing for healthy fun and preferred to mess everything up. Mardi Gras was also cancelled, but the problem remains the same: a small number of misbehaving students ruin everything for everybody else. Why does this happen? Because the adults around them—including SLO city and police—are not taking the right measures. 1) Fraternities and sororities should not be mixed with family housing. They don’t belong in R1 or R2 zones. 2) When students misbehave, there should be serious consequences. These consequences should not simply hit the students, but also the owners of the property where they live. 3) When neighbors file complaints, the city should immediately react to help them, not play “no hear no see” as it is too often the case. The present Grand Jury Report ought to be a very useful tool for the City Council. Please, appoint a committee in response to the Grand Jury Report. Make sure that the findings of the Grand Jury are addressed, and that affected residents are part of this committee. Give an especially important role to Jan Marx, who understands the situation better than the rest of the Council considering that she lived among students for years. And please, even if you don’t 517 live near Cal Poly and have little knowledge of the situation, make a big effort to understand the residents’ frustrations with this much too long unaddressed problem, and do everything to finally solve it. Thank you. Sincerely, Odile Ayral 518 From:Wallace, Christine Sent:Tuesday, July 15, 2025 3:36 PM To:Mary Sanchez Subject:RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC Attachments:ADM29719.pdf The ADU is not on the no-warning list. The main house is on the list until 3.6.26. I’ve attached a copy of the citation with the officer’s notes, it appears the party was taking place in the backyard. This property is complicated because the front house is where the officers are naturally going to go but I don’t know what they experience each time there is a noise complaint. If noise was clearly identified as coming from the ADU, that’s when the officers would address the residents there. Our system shows as two separate units on the same parcel so treated as separate residences but we are also working off information that these residents are all part of the same fraternity which then causes us to refer to the property as a possible satellite fraternity house. It doesn’t change anything except we don’t send SNAP to noise complaints, only patrol. Best, CW From: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 3:13 PM To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC HI Christine, Thank you for your prompt response. Could you please confirm if there’s any additional context regarding the recent incident? For example, did the oƯicer knock on the front door of the yellow house and the individual who was cited simply happen to answer? Or was the citation specifically issued for the ADU? I’m also wondering how these homes are typically classified, are citations issued collectively to both the ADU and main house, or are they treated as two separate residences? I understand they share a backyard, which may complicate things. I also noticed the citation mentioned around 40 people. Can you confirm whether the kids were actually gathered in front of the main house when the o Ưicer arrived? Lastly, could you clarify when the kids will be removed from the 9-month warning list? Best Regards, Mary Sanchez 519 bothwellco.com Mary Sanchez Executive Assistant at Bothwell Co. E mary@bothwellco.com O: (858) 764-1963 C: ( From: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 3:00 PM To: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Subject: RE: 274 HATHWAY LLC Hi Mary, For the ADU, I have zero noise calls since 2023. For the main house, I’ve got the following: Ghazanfari cited on 8.17.24 Turpin cited on 11.8.24 Bendersky cited on 6.6.25 Let me know how else I can help. Thanks, Christine From: Mary Sanchez <mary@bothwellco.com> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 2:43 PM To: Wallace, Christine <cwallace@slocity.org> Subject: 274 HATHWAY LLC Importance: High Hi Christine, Hope all is well. I’m reaching out to provide you with an update on the tenancy of the two homes. Could you please forward me any violations you have on file for the properties and the tenants listed below? Thank you in advance and let me know if you need any additional information. 274.5 Hathway – ADU:  These tenants moved in 06/25/2024 and renewed through 06/21/2026  Azen D. Bendersky  Kieran J. Govoni 274 Hathway - Main House:  All tenants moved in 06/25/2024 and renewed through 06/21/2026.  Carter A. Quartararo  Jacob D. Weingarten 520  Arian Ghazanfari  Joshua D. Turpin  Cole J. Turpin Best Regards, Mary Sanchez bothwellco.com Mary Sanchez Executive Assistant at Bothwell Co. E mary@bothwellco.com O: (858) 764-1963 C: ( 521 From:Armas, Sara Sent:Tuesday, July 15, 2025 2:47 PM To:Odile Ayral Cc:CityClerk Subject:RE: Item 8 a Hi Odile, Thank you for your input, it has been sent to the City Council members. It is now placed in the public archive for tonight’s meeting. Regards, Sara Armas pronouns she/her/hers Deputy City Clerk I City Administration 990 Palm, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3218 E SArmas@slocity.org T 805.781.7110 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Odile Ayral < Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 2:38 PM To: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org> Subject: Item 8 a Mayor Stewart and Council Members, “Plus ça change et plus c’est la même chose” (the more things change, the more they are the same). Sometimes the French come up with some pretty good expressions. I have watched the situation between Cal Poly students and City residents deteriorate for many years. The basic problem was always there: not enough university lodging for students, no fraternity or sorority rows, out-of-control student parties, frustrated neighbors who never seem to be heard. When problems are not handled at the top, they get worse. Sometimes it takes drastic measures: President Baker cancelled the very popular Poly Royal, and it hurt everybody, residents and good students as well. Mardi Gras that used to be so much fun at the beginning when it was in the hands of residents was overtaken by crass students who cared nothing for healthy fun and preferred to mess everything up. Mardi Gras was also cancelled, but the problem remains the same: a small number of misbehaving students ruin everything for everybody else. Why does this happen? Because the adults around them—including SLO city and police—are not taking the right measures. 1) Fraternities and sororities should not be mixed with family housing. They don’t belong in R1 or R2 zones. 522 2) When students misbehave, there should be serious consequences. These consequences should not simply hit the students, but also the owners of the property where they live. 3) When neighbors file complaints, the city should immediately react to help them, not play “no hear no see” as it is too often the case. The present Grand Jury Report ought to be a very useful tool for the City Council. Please, appoint a committee in response to the Grand Jury Report. Make sure that the findings of the Grand Jury are addressed, and that affected residents are part of this committee. Give an especially important role to Jan Marx, who understands the situation better than the rest of the Council considering that she lived among students for years. And please, even if you don’t live near Cal Poly and have little knowledge of the situation, make a big effort to understand the residents’ frustrations with this much too long unaddressed problem, and do everything to finally solve it. Thank you. Sincerely, Odile Ayral 523 From:Odile Ayral < Sent:Tuesday, July 15, 2025 2:38 PM To:E-mail Council Website Subject:Item 8 a Mayor Stewart and Council Members, “Plus ça change et plus c’est la même chose” (the more things change, the more they are the same). Sometimes the French come up with some pretty good expressions. I have watched the situation between Cal Poly students and City residents deteriorate for many years. The basic problem was always there: not enough university lodging for students, no fraternity or sorority rows, out-of-control student parties, frustrated neighbors who never seem to be heard. When problems are not handled at the top, they get worse. Sometimes it takes drastic measures: President Baker cancelled the very popular Poly Royal, and it hurt everybody, residents and good students as well. Mardi Gras that used to be so much fun at the beginning when it was in the hands of residents was overtaken by crass students who cared nothing for healthy fun and preferred to mess everything up. Mardi Gras was also cancelled, but the problem remains the same: a small number of misbehaving students ruin everything for everybody else. Why does this happen? Because the adults around them—including SLO city and police—are not taking the right measures. 1) Fraternities and sororities should not be mixed with family housing. They don’t belong in R1 or R2 zones. 2) When students misbehave, there should be serious consequences. These consequences should not simply hit the students, but also the owners of the property where they live. 3) When neighbors file complaints, the city should immediately react to help them, not play “no hear no see” as it is too often the case. The present Grand Jury Report ought to be a very useful tool for the City Council. Please, appoint a committee in response to the Grand Jury Report. Make sure that the findings of the Grand Jury are addressed, and that affected residents are part of this committee. Give an especially important role to Jan Marx, who understands the situation better than the rest of the Council considering that she lived among students for years. And please, even if you don’t live near Cal Poly and have little knowledge of the situation, make a big effort to understand the residents’ frustrations with this much too long unaddressed problem, and do everything to finally solve it. Thank you. Sincerely, Odile Ayral 524 From: Sent:Tuesday, July 15, 2025 1:35 PM To:Colunga-Lopez, Andrea Subject:FW: Grand Jury Report Andrea. I just caught my mathematical error. We lived on Albert 1978-2022 (not 2002) Terry W. Conner (This is a non-texting number) Dream Big, Pursue Your Dreams From: Colunga-Lopez, Andrea <AColunga@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 11:49 AM To: Cc: CityClerk <CityClerk@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Grand Jury Report Hi Terry, Thank you for your input, it has been sent to the City Council members. It is now placed in the public archive for tonight’s meeting. Best, Andrea Colunga-Lopez pronouns she/her/hers Administrative Assistant II City Administration E AColunga@slocity.org T 805.781.7105 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 11:34 AM To: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org> Cc: 'RQN of SLO' <rqn.board@yahoo.com> Subject: Grand Jury Report Dear Mayor Stewart and City Council. I lived with my family for 44 years on Albert Drive (Alta Vista Neighborhood one block from Cal Poly)…1978-2002. 525 While the noise and parties; and general lack of respect by the encroaching short -term students towards the long-term residents escalated during that time, there are two specific issues that drove our family from our “forever home” to the south side of town. 1. With the overcrowding by students in the other houses on Albert Dr., there was also a huge increase in numbers of cars parking on the streets…as many students were living in converted garages; and the visitors to the neighborhood took up more spots...thus causing un -safe driving conditions. 2. One night there was a party in the house across from our house (in the house once occupied by my parents, Wes and Doty Conner). The party overflowed from the house into the street, and I went outside to ask the partiers to take it back inside. One of the non-resident partiers threatened to “beat” me up and to mind my own business !!! Good-bye Albert Drive! This was an extremely emotional experience, as I had lived in the “party house” in the ‘60 ’s while a student at San Luis Obispo High School and first year Poly student. The City and CP Administration need to come to grips with getting the bulk of their students (not just the Frat’s and Sororities) on Campus. Sincerely, Terry W. Conner (This is a non-texting number) Dream Big, Pursue Your Dreams 526 From:Sandra Rowley < Sent:Tuesday, July 15, 2025 12:45 PM To:Colunga-Lopez, Andrea Subject:Re: Item 8a, Ad Hoc Committee Thank you, Andrea! On Tuesday, July 15, 2025 at 11:59:39 AM PDT, Colunga-Lopez, Andrea <acolunga@slocity.org> wrote: Hi Sandra, Thank you for your input, it has been sent to the City Council members. It is now placed in the public archive for tonight’s meeting. Best, Andrea Colunga-Lopez pronouns she/her/hers Administrative Assistant II City Administration E AColunga@slocity.org T 805.781.7105 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Sandra Rowley < Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 11:53 AM To: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org> Subject: Item 8a, Ad Hoc Committee Dear Mayor Stewart and Members of the Council, An ad hoc committee is a good idea, not to refute the Grand Jury findings, but to use them as a basis to formulate actions to address the findings and recommendations delineated in the report. In addition to council members and city staff, it should include residents from the Alta Vista and Monterey Heights neighborhoods (illegal fraternities are there, too), and other interested 527 groups - such as RQN and owners/property managers whose property and/or tenants have been negatively affected by fraternity activities and events. The Civility Report, begun in 2013 and finalized in Spring 2015, was used by SCLC for two or three years but is no longer - even though many of the Desired Outcomes identified in the report have not been accomplished. With the exception of the 2024 update to the Safety Enhancement Zone (originated in 2004) and the 2015 update to the Unruly Gathering Ordinance (originated in 2010) most actions, i.e., ordinances addressing negative behaviors in the neighborhoods, are 15 years old. Some things have changed since then - like the proliferation of fraternities in neighborhoods (with more being approved) and the reduced cooperation and support of Cal Poly to take responsibility for and assist in correcting student actions that negatively affect the city - but do not affect the campus. The council, city staff and residents need to get together and to renew the innovative approaches mentioned in the staff report to address today's problems. Hopefully, an ad hoc committee composed as suggested above will be able to do so. Additional actions for Council to consider: - Doing whatever is necessary, including taking legal action, to require Cal Poly to conform to the AB 528 guidelines by publis hing the addresses for fraternity main and satellite houses. - Establishing specific guidelines to follow for declaring a property a nuisance when x number of disruptive/illegal events are held. - Reconsidering/restructuring appeal fees so that residents are not out-priced. For example: few, if any, resident appeals concern all of the intricacies of a large development project. - Reconsidering funding additional code enforcement staff and alternative work schedules. - Supporting the equivalent of SLOPD's 2025 St Fratty's Day Enforcement Plan until the event is eliminated. Thank you for your time and consideration of these comments. Sincerely, Sandra Rowley SLO Resident 528 From:McDonald, Whitney Sent:Tuesday, July 15, 2025 12:42 PM To:Tway, Timothea (Timmi); Hermann, Greg; Collins, Scott Subject:FW: Updated agenda Attachments:2507 Student Housing Issues Meeting.docx Hi everyone, What are your thoughts on this proposed agenda? From my standpoint, I’d probably let Courtney know that this looks fine, as long as we spend most of our time on the last item, discussing potential solutions. Thanks much! Whitney Whitney McDonald pronouns (she/hers) City Manager City Administration 990 Palm, San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-3934 E WMcDonal@slocity.org T 805.781.7114 C 805.550.8349 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Courtney Leigh Kienow <ckienow@calpoly.edu> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 12:35 PM To: McDonald, Whitney <WMcDonal@slocity.org> Cc: James, Dillon <djames@slocity.org> Subject: Updated agenda Hi Whitney, Hope you’re well. We made some updates to the agenda for our 1:30 meeting tomorrow. If you can please add this version to the calendar event once you approve that would be appreciated. Warmly, Courtney Courtney Kienow pronouns she/hers (why is this important?) Director of Community Relations and Economic Development Office of the President 529 Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo, CA _____ office 805-756-6000 direct 805-756-6098 www.calpoly.edu Student Housing Challenges Meeting Cal Poly and City of San Luis Obispo City Hall, Council Hearing Room 990 Palm Street Wednesday, July 16th | 1:30pm-2:50pm Purpose: to collaboratively address ongoing challenges related to fraternities, sororities, and student housing, particularly where student behaviors are incompatible with the quality of life of long-term residents in San Luis Obispo neighborhoods. Attendees City of SLO Whitney McDonald, City Manager Scott Collins, Assistant City Manager Greg Hermann, Deputy City Manager Timmi Tway, Community Development Director Cal Poly Terrance Harris, Vice President of Student Affairs and Strategic Enrollment Management Joy Pederson, Dean of Students Jason Mockford, Senior Director, Leadership & Service Courtney Kienow, Director of Community Relations and Economic Development Agenda • Welcome & Introductions – Courtney leads  Brief round of introductions  Purpose of the meeting • Quick Overview of FSL at Cal Poly – Jason leads  Current landscape (membership statistics, council breakdowns, staffing) • Fraternity Housing Challenges – Whitney and Terrance lead  Background and context of issue • Progress Made to Date – Timmi and Jason lead • Discuss Proposed Solutions – all 530 From:Courtney Leigh Kienow <ckienow@calpoly.edu> Sent:Tuesday, July 15, 2025 12:35 PM To:McDonald, Whitney Cc:James, Dillon Subject:Updated agenda Attachments:2507 Student Housing Issues Meeting.docx Hi Whitney, Hope you’re well. We made some updates to the agenda for our 1:30 meeting tomorrow. If you can please add this version to the calendar event once you approve that would be appreciated. Warmly, Courtney Courtney Kienow pronouns she/hers (why is this important?) Director of Community Relations and Economic Development Office of the President Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo, CA _____ office 805-756-6000 direct 805-756-6098 www.calpoly.edu Student Housing Challenges Meeting Cal Poly and City of San Luis Obispo City Hall, Council Hearing Room 990 Palm Street Wednesday, July 16th | 1:30pm-2:50pm Purpose: to collaboratively address ongoing challenges related to fraternities, sororities, and student housing, particularly where student behaviors are incompatible with the quality of life of long-term residents in San Luis Obispo neighborhoods. Attendees City of SLO Whitney McDonald, City Manager Scott Collins, Assistant City Manager Greg Hermann, Deputy City Manager Timmi Tway, Community Development Director Cal Poly Terrance Harris, Vice President of Student Affairs and Strategic Enrollment Management Joy Pederson, Dean of Students Jason Mockford, Senior Director, Leadership & Service Courtney Kienow, Director of Community Relations and Economic Development Agenda • Welcome & Introductions – Courtney leads  Brief round of introductions  Purpose of the meeting • Quick Overview of FSL at Cal Poly – Jason leads  Current landscape (membership statistics, council breakdowns, staffing) • Fraternity Housing Challenges – Whitney and Terrance lead  Background and context of issue • Progress Made to Date – Timmi and Jason lead • Discuss Proposed Solutions – all 531 From: Sent:Tuesday, July 15, 2025 12:18 PM To:Colunga-Lopez, Andrea Subject:RE: Grand Jury Report You bet ! Terry W. Conner (This is a non-texting number) Dream Big, Pursue Your Dreams From: Colunga-Lopez, Andrea <AColunga@slocity.org> Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 11:49 AM To: Cc: CityClerk <CityClerk@slocity.org> Subject: RE: Grand Jury Report Hi Terry, Thank you for your input, it has been sent to the City Council members. It is now placed in the public archive for tonight’s meeting. Best, Andrea Colunga-Lopez pronouns she/her/hers Administrative Assistant II City Administration E AColunga@slocity.org T 805.781.7105 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 11:34 AM To: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org> Cc: 'RQN of SLO' <rqn.board@yahoo.com> Subject: Grand Jury Report Dear Mayor Stewart and City Council. I lived with my family for 44 years on Albert Drive (Alta Vista Neighborhood one block from Cal Poly)…1978-2002. 532 While the noise and parties; and general lack of respect by the encroaching short -term students towards the long-term residents escalated during that time, there are two specific issues that drove our family from our “forever home” to the south side of town. 1. With the overcrowding by students in the other houses on Albert Dr., there was also a huge increase in numbers of cars parking on the streets…as many students were living in converted garages; and the visitors to the neighborhood took up more spots...thus causing un -safe driving conditions. 2. One night there was a party in the house across from our house (in the house once occupied by my parents, Wes and Doty Conner). The party overflowed from the house into the street, and I went outside to ask the partiers to take it back inside. One of the non-resident partiers threatened to “beat” me up and to mind my own business !!! Good-bye Albert Drive! This was an extremely emotional experience, as I had lived in the “party house” in the ‘60 ’s while a student at San Luis Obispo High School and first year Poly student. The City and CP Administration need to come to grips with getting the bulk of their students (not just the Frat’s and Sororities) on Campus. Sincerely, Terry W. Conner (This is a non-texting number) Dream Big, Pursue Your Dreams 533 From:Colunga-Lopez, Andrea Sent:Tuesday, July 15, 2025 12:00 PM To:Sandra Rowley Cc:CityClerk Subject:RE: Item 8a, Ad Hoc Committee Hi Sandra, Thank you for your input, it has been sent to the City Council members. It is now placed in the public archive for tonight’s meeting. Best, Andrea Colunga-Lopez pronouns she/her/hers Administrative Assistant II City Administration E AColunga@slocity.org T 805.781.7105 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Sandra Rowley < Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 11:53 AM To: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org> Subject: Item 8a, Ad Hoc Committee Dear Mayor Stewart and Members of the Council, An ad hoc committee is a good idea, not to refute the Grand Jury findings, but to use them as a basis to formulate actions to address the findings and recommendations delineated in the report. In addition to council members and city staff, it should include residents from the Alta Vista and Monterey Heights neighborhoods (illegal fraternities are there, too), and other interested groups - such as RQN and owners/property managers whose property and/or tenants have been negatively affected by fraternity activities and events. The Civility Report, begun in 2013 and finalized in Spring 2015, was used by SCLC for two or three years but is no longer - even though many of the Desired Outcomes identified in the report have not been accomplished. With the exception of the 2024 update to the Safety Enhancement Zone (originated in 2004) and the 2015 update to the Unruly Gathering Ordinance (originated in 2010) most actions, i.e., ordinances addressing negative behaviors in the neighborhoods, are 15 years old. Some things have changed since then - like the proliferation of fraternities in neighborhoods (with more being approved) and the reduced cooperation and support of Cal Poly to take responsibility for and assist in correcting student actions that negatively affect the city - but do not affect the campus. The council, city staff and residents need to get together and to renew the innovative approaches mentioned in the staff report to address today's problems. Hopefully, an ad hoc committee composed as suggested above will be able to do so. 534 Additional actions for Council to consider: - Doing whatever is necessary, including taking legal action, to require Cal Poly to conform to the AB 528 guidelines by publis hing the addresses for fraternity main and satellite houses. - Establishing specific guidelines to follow for declaring a property a nuisance when x number of disruptive/illegal events are held. - Reconsidering/restructuring appeal fees so that residents are not out-priced. For example: few, if any, resident appeals concern all of the intricacies of a large development project. - Reconsidering funding additional code enforcement staff and alternative work schedules. - Supporting the equivalent of SLOPD's 2025 St Fratty's Day Enforcement Plan until the event is eliminated. Thank you for your time and consideration of these comments. Sincerely, Sandra Rowley SLO Resident 535 From:Sandra Rowley < Sent:Tuesday, July 15, 2025 11:53 AM To:E-mail Council Website Subject:Item 8a, Ad Hoc Committee Dear Mayor Stewart and Members of the Council, An ad hoc committee is a good idea, not to refute the Grand Jury findings, but to use them as a basis to formulate actions to address the findings and recommendations delineated in the report. In addition to council members and city staff, it should include residents from the Alta Vista and Monterey Heights neighborhoods (illegal fraternities are there, too), and other interested groups - such as RQN and owners/property managers whose property and/or tenants have been negatively affected by fraternity activities and events. The Civility Report, begun in 2013 and finalized in Spring 2015, was used by SCLC for two or three years but is no longer - even though many of the Desired Outcomes identified in the report have not been accomplished. With the exception of the 2024 update to the Safety Enhancement Zone (originated in 2004) and the 2015 update to the Unruly Gathering Ordinance (originated in 2010) most actions, i.e., ordinances addressing negative behaviors in the neighborhoods, are 15 years old. Some things have changed since then - like the proliferation of fraternities in neighborhoods (with more being approved) and the reduced cooperation and support of Cal Poly to take responsibility for and assist in correcting student actions that negatively affect the city - but do not affect the campus. The council, city staff and residents need to get together and to renew the innovative approaches mentioned in the staff report to address today's problems. Hopefully, an ad hoc committee composed as suggested above will be able to do so. Additional actions for Council to consider: - Doing whatever is necessary, including taking legal action, to require Cal Poly to conform to the AB 528 guidelines by publis hing the addresses for fraternity main and satellite houses. - Establishing specific guidelines to follow for declaring a property a nuisance when x number of disruptive/illegal events are held. - Reconsidering/restructuring appeal fees so that residents are not out-priced. For example: few, if any, resident appeals concern all of the intricacies of a large development project. - Reconsidering funding additional code enforcement staff and alternative work schedules. - Supporting the equivalent of SLOPD's 2025 St Fratty's Day Enforcement Plan until the event is eliminated. Thank you for your time and consideration of these comments. Sincerely, Sandra Rowley SLO Resident 536 From:Colunga-Lopez, Andrea Sent:Tuesday, July 15, 2025 11:48 AM To:Genevieve Czech Cc:CityClerk Subject:RE: Item 8a of meeting by City Council on 07/15/25 Hi Genevieve, Thank you for your input, it has been sent to the City Council members. It is now placed in the public archive for tonight’s meeting. Best, Andrea Colunga-Lopez pronouns she/her/hers Administrative Assistant II City Administration E AColunga@slocity.org T 805.781.7105 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Genevieve Czech < Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 11:42 AM To: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org> Subject: Item 8a of meeting by City Council on 07/15/25 Dear Lady Mayoress and City Council: The correspondence you have received already is sufficient for you to both study and assimilate the serious concerns of SLO city residents, long standing and productive residents whose concerns deserve your humble and earnest consideration. Among some of those issues raised are the failure by Cal Poly to release the addresses of satellite fraternities and sororities. In effect they violate our zoning codes. One suggestion that has been made is for Cal Poly to provide Greek houses on campus as is the practice of most Universities. Another recommendation is for the owners/landlords of student housing to enforce the rental agreements, imposing fines for students holding loud and overcrowded parties beyond the curfew, evern becoming excessively loud before the curfew when the party starts in early afternoon. Registering parties has not been a suitable strategy as the Police tend to ignore noise complaints once the party would have been registered. Registering implies a permit to abuse any noise ordinance in a residential neighborhood. One correspondent has made the considerable effort to log the history of the problems, including the SCLC committee's initial founding/purpose/composition and limitations, including making the minutes of their meetings available to the public. I do indeed support former Mayor Jan Marx's inclusion on that committee to 537 enable the full understanding of the history and successes and failures of neighborhood wellness in current and future discussion. Two decades ago Cal Poly made some efforts to participate in reducing the town/gown issues in building more campus housing, in having students view a video of their responsibilities when living in residential neighborhoods. Their declared intention of having not only Freshmen and Sophomores live on campus, but gradually even the Juniors and Seniors is not consonant with their objective of increased growth. Further, it denies the adult students the opportunity to live together in harmony and experience and establish home management. Our street which has over 50% student rental housing has witnessed some very good examples of responsible student tenancy, while other examples of insensitive behavior regarding the longtime residents. In such cases we have been compelled to intervene personally after suffering the disturbance, or reporting the violation beyond curfew. 'Tis true that the Police have not always been responsive, or sufficiently punitive when they have intervened. The earlier practice of "good renter certificates" was apparently stopped due to claims of discrimination of student tenants, which is unfounded, as landlords have the right to even evict tenants who violate the rental agreement. You were invited before the grand jury report was published to visit neighborhoods to witness firsthand the disruption satellite fraternities caused to a residential neighborhood. Apparently, no members of the Council accepted the invitation to actually experience the problem. The effort the grand jury report represents cannot be dismissed as NIMBY whining, but more than justified concerns and issues by the SLO residents who wish to preserve gracious and respectful community living in SLO with the full support of the City staff elected by them, and the interaction of Cal Poly whose declared aim is to teach learning by doing, including responsible citizenship in the community. May you reflect on all the issues raised in your correspondence with a sincere and resolved discussion and action to model a town who works with gown and landlords to ensure more harmony and mutual respect. Yours sincerely, Genevieve Czech, 538 From:Colunga-Lopez, Andrea Sent:Tuesday, July 15, 2025 11:49 AM To: Cc:CityClerk Subject:RE: Grand Jury Report Hi Terry, Thank you for your input, it has been sent to the City Council members. It is now placed in the public archive for tonight’s meeting. Best, Andrea Colunga-Lopez pronouns she/her/hers Administrative Assistant II City Administration E AColunga@slocity.org T 805.781.7105 slocity.org Stay connected with the City by signing up for e-notifications From: Sent: Tuesday, July 15, 2025 11:34 AM To: E-mail Council Website <emailcouncil@slocity.org> Cc: 'RQN of SLO' <rqn.board@yahoo.com> Subject: Grand Jury Report Dear Mayor Stewart and City Council. I lived with my family for 44 years on Albert Drive (Alta Vista Neighborhood one block from Cal Poly)…1978-2002. While the noise and parties; and general lack of respect by the encroaching short -term students towards the long-term residents escalated during that time, there are two specific issues that drove our family from our “forever home” to the south side of town. 1. With the overcrowding by students in the other houses on Albert Dr., there was also a huge increase in numbers of cars parking on the streets…as many students were living in converted garages; and the visitors to the neighborhood took up more spots...thus causing un -safe driving conditions. 2. One night there was a party in the house across from our house (in the house once occupied by my parents, Wes and Doty Conner). The party overflowed from the house into the street, and 539 I went outside to ask the partiers to take it back inside. One of the non-resident partiers threatened to “beat” me up and to mind my own business !!! Good-bye Albert Drive! This was an extremely emotional experience, as I had lived in the “party house” in the ‘60 ’s while a student at San Luis Obispo High School and first year Poly student. The City and CP Administration need to come to grips with getting the bulk of their students (not just the Frat’s and Sororities) on Campus. Sincerely, Terry W. Conner (This is a non-texting number) Dream Big, Pursue Your Dreams