HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-17-2017 Item 15 Voluntary Party Registration Meeting Date: 1/17/2017
FROM: Deanna Cantrell, Chief of Police
Prepared By: Christine Wallace, Neighborhood Outreach Manager
SUBJECT: VOLUNTARY PARTY REGISTRATION
RECOMMENDATION
1. Receive a presentation on voluntary party registration program options; and
2. Provide guidance to staff regarding initiation of a voluntary municipal party registration
pilot program.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF
On May 19, 2015 the City Council received the Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility
Report (“Civility Report”) which is included as Attachment A. The Civility Report is the final
product of a working group comprised of City staff, Cal Poly University staff, Cal Poly students,
Cuesta College staff, Cuesta college students and residents of San Luis Obispo. The vision for
the working was to “build a community in which year-round residents and students actively
collaborate to build community and communicate in an environment that fosters mutual respect
and understanding.”
The working group divided into subcommittees and each researched and prepared
recommendations for initiatives that the City, Cal Poly and Cuesta could address with programs
or policy to improve and/or maintain the quality of life in the neighborhoods. The objectives that
each subcommittee addressed are as follows:
Objective 1: Define short-term actions to enhance the quality of life
Objective 2: Define stakeholders’ needs and success
Objective 3: Identify university/city best practices
Objective 4: Review enforcement best practices
Objective 5: Engage stakeholders: review current education and informational efforts
Objective 6: Prepare for sustained engagement to achieve desired vision and goal
Since the delivery of the Civility Report to Council, many of the recommendations have been
implemented:
1. MOU with SLOPD and University Police (UPD) to allow UPD citation issuance power
for municipal ordinances (noise, open container, public urination, unruly gathering) –
Objective 4
2. Rental Housing Inspection Program – Objective 2 and Objective 3
3. Blight education – Objective 3
4. Walk and Talks (code enforcement and police outreach in the neighborhoods) –
Objective 3
Packet Pg. 283
15
5. Unruly gathering ordinance amendment to strengthen as enforcement tool – Objective 3
6. Creation of an annual communication plan to effectively communicate neighborhood
wellness information – Objective 5
Also recommended in the Civility Report is the development of a voluntary party registration
program. This report will examine several party registration programs currently being offered in
other college towns and how the programs are impacting noise in their respective communities.
DISCUSSION
Background
On May 19, 2015 the Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Report was presented to
Council (Attachment A). Within the report, many recommendations were made to adopt policy
or enact programs that would enhance the quality of life of residents in the neighborhoods. Under
“Objective 3: Identify university/city best practices”, one of the recommendations made was to
implement a party registration program that provides participants of the program; a window of
time to end a party and/or eliminate noise should a complaint be lodged with the police
department and thus possibly avoid warnings and citations. This report will provide information
on existing party registration programs in other communities and ask for direction on the creation
of a program in San Luis Obispo.
It should be noted that the City of San Luis Obispo, Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo, Cuesta
Community College, students and residents that volunteered their time towards the effort were
honored last summer by the International Town and Gown Association (ITGA) the Larry W.
Abernathy Award in Chicago. The Abernathy Award is given out annually to the city and
university that best exemplify the mission of the ITGA: "strengthening town/gown partnerships.”
The Civility Report was recognized for the collaborative roles in producing the San Luis Obispo
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort (Civility Report) and creating a framework
for consistent strengthening of these relationships, increased neighborhood vitality and student
success in the community.
Neighborhood Wellness and Noise
Prior to the presentation of the Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility recommendation,
Neighborhood Wellness was adopted by Council as a Major City Goal for FY 2011-2013, FY
2013-2015 and as an Other Important Objective for FY 2015-2017. In that time, Council has
adopted amendments to the noise ordinance, unruly gathering ordinance and safety enhancement
zone ordinance and approved a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with Cal Poly. The
MOU provides University Police the ability to enforce municipal code regulations (noise, open
container, public urination, and unruly gatherings) up to one mile off campus. Coupled with the
amendment made to the noise ordinance in 2010 which limited warnings, increased fines,
included landlord citations for noise and the focused education and outreach of the noise
ordinance and neighborhood expectations, there has been a notable decrease in the annual
number of noise complaints.
Packet Pg. 284
15
Noise complaints are approximately 6% of the police departments annual calls for service.
Individuals found to be in violation of the noise ordinance (SLMC 9.12.050) are issued either a
Disturbance Advisement Card (DAC) warning or a citation. Once issued a DAC or a citation, the
property is placed on a “no warning” list for a nine (9) month period. If further noise complaints
are verified during that time period, citations are issued. Student Neighborhood Assistance
Program (SNAP) employees and patrol officers are able to issue DACs however only patrol
officers are authorized to issue citations. The current administrative fine structure for noise
citations is as follows: $350 for first citation, $700 for second citation, $1,000 for third and
subsequent citations. Property owners are also cited and fined using the same fine structure but
only after they have been notified of tenant noise violations and the property is placed on the on
the “no warning” list During Safety Enhancement time periods (start of school, Halloween, St.
Patrick’s Day), fines for noise are doubled (but do not exceed $1,000.)
The data indicates a 31% decrease in overall noise party complaints from 2009 to 2015. This
trend is attributed to the change in fine structure, allowable warnings, landlord accountability,
focused outreach to the student age population, and outreach to residents on phoning in
complaints to assist patrol. Cal Poly University also began a student education program in 2013
which holds students accountability for off campus behavior which is also a component of the
decrease in overall complaints. As indicated by the chart below, patrol and SNAP took punitive
action by issuing DACs or citations an average of 45% annually.
Packet Pg. 285
15
NSPY
CALLS
DACs CITES DACs+CITES Enforcement Action
2009 2584 1148 206 1354 52%
2010 2238 785 263 1048 46%
2011 2013 638 206 844 41%
2012 1644 540 245 785 47.74%
2013 1729 513 245 832 49.76%
2014 1841 549 253 802 43%
2015 1779 448 235 683 38%
Party Registration Programs
Several universities and cities have established party registration programs for their students and
residents as a way to 1) educate hosts on responsible event planning; 2) offer an incentive based
approach to reduce the need for police interventions for noise disturbances; and 3) ultimately
have quieter neighborhoods. The chart below compares the key elements of party registration
programs currently in place in other communities in the United States.
Packet Pg. 286
15
Packet Pg. 28715
Program Review
Boulder, Colorado
The University of Colorado, Boulder provided the following party registration statistics:
21 24
0
24
46
2 3 4 2 30020 4
0
10
20
30
40
50
2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015 2015-2016
Warnings & Citations from Registered Parties
Warnings Citations Houses Banned from program
The City of Boulder does not separate out party noise from other types of noise related
complaints for statistical management.
The University of Boulder staff indicated the program was successful in the number of events
being registered had increase while the number of citations issued has stayed virtually the same
and at very low numbers. The houses banned from the program happened as the result of other
Packet Pg. 288
15
violations that were present during the parties. Per the staff of the Off Campus Life, the decrease
of registered parties in 2013-2014 is attributed to the major flooding incident that took place that
fall.
Fort Collins, Colorado
Fort Collins Police Department in collaboration with the University of Colorado, Fort Collins,
provided the following party registration statistics:
74
47
75
18
3 574 5
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
2013 2014 2015
Warnings & Citations from Registered Parties
warnings citation Citation issued w/o warning
Packet Pg. 289
15
Since the pilot program in 2009, a total of 3,742 parties have been registered. Party registration is
open to all residents but 95% of events registered are by students of the university.
The City of Fort Collins does separate out party noise from other types of noise complaints for
statistical management:
2013 - 2706
2014 - 2633
2015 - 2483
As the number of party registrations increased, the overall noise complaints have decreased.
Additionally, the program is being expanded to over registrations seven (7) days a week at
request of Fort Collins PD who have found the program successful as it allows patrol to focus on
higher priority calls for service.
Amherst, Massachusetts
The University of Massachusetts, Amherst provided the following party registration statistics:
Currently in the first semester of the party registration pilot program (program launched on
September 12, 2016):
175 registered parties
11 warning calls
No citations issued to registered parties
The City of Amherst does not separate out party noise for statistical management. The staff
managing the program will be completing a review at the conclusion of the second semester with
Amherst Police Department to determine success and program continuance.
Clemson, South Carolina
The City of Clemson, South Carolina provide the following party registration statistics.
Packet Pg. 290
15
69
86
76
86
35
10 14 14
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
100
2012 2013 2014 2015
Warnings & Citations for Registered Parties
Warnings Citation
The City of Clemson does separate out party noise from other types of noise complaints for
statistical management; the overall party noise complaints are quite low:
2012 – 182
2013 – 143
2014 – 270
2015 – 228
Similar to Fort Collins, the Clemson Police Department considers their program a success as the
warning call to registered parties allows patrol to focus on higher priority calls for service and
party registration motivates residents to take responsibility for planning well managed events.
Packet Pg. 291
15
Public Engagement
Staff conducted a survey with Cal Poly and Cuesta students to gather information on party
registration, met multiple times with student groups, neighborhood groups and also shared with
the attendees of the Neighborhood Forum on October 19th. Specific feedback was as follows:
Concern with the offering of warnings/DACs if a party registration program was offered.
Concern that a party registration program wouldn’t benefit the community unless Cal
Poly managed it
Concern that the time allowed to disperse an event would be too long, recommended 15
minutes
Concern that enforcement of noise would decrease if registration was offered
Concern that Negative Violations1 would increase
Concern that properties with chronic disturbance history would be allowed to be
registered
Concern that registered parties would be “targeted” by patrol
Concern that the registered party list would be given to Cal Poly
Concern that a 20-minute dispersal time would not allow hosts enough time to safely end
their events
General concern in the lack of neutrality in the public log with regard to noise warnings
and citations
General concern that the fine structure for noise violations is high
General concern that property owners pass on fines to tenants, request to consider
removing property owner citations from SLMC 9.12
Support for a program that allows for online registration
Support for party registration program as it could help build relationships with students
Support for party registration that is also offered during Safety Enhancement Zones
RECOMMENDATION
Through the research of the existing programs in other communities, staff recommends the
support of the creation of a police department managed voluntary party registration pilot
program. The police department would like to conduct a pilot program from April 2017 through
December of 2017 and return to Council at that time with a program assessment. The following
infographic shows how the process would work:
1 The police department uses specific codes for noise complaints to indicate how a call is adjudicated. A “negative
violation” is a noise complaint that the police department found to be not a violation of the municipal code.
Packet Pg. 292
15
Packet Pg. 293
15
FOCUS QUESTIONS FOR COUNCIL DIRECTION
YES NO
1. Direct staff to create a voluntary party registration pilot program
2. If yes, what features are important to be included?
a) 20-minute warning period to end noise?
b) Specific days of the week? If yes, which days?
c) Cost or fee for registration?
d) In person registration?
e) Person must live at property being registered?
f) Common areas may be registered?
g) Person must be 18 years of age or older?
3. Return to Council after specific period to report results?
4. Allow for program to be administratively managed through PD?
FISCAL IMPACT
The expected cost of a voluntary party registration program would be dependent on how it would
be structured. There would be staff time required to receive and process registration forms and
staff response in calling a party host if a noise complaint was received. In the research of the four
programs exhibited in this report, all of the program managers stated the administrative program
costs were “minimal” The recommended voluntary program would be free with no fees charged
to registrants with ongoing evaluation and review with the citywide service fee analysis.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Direct staff to request Cal Poly University and Cuesta College consider creating party
registration programs similar to that of University of Colorado at Boulder and UMass,
Amherst in collaboration with the police department. This is not recommended as a
program of this nature would be focused solely on students and disallow the opportunity
for all residents to register events.
2. Direct staff to not create a party registration pilot program.
Attachments:
a - Neighborhood Wellness Community Civility Report Final
Packet Pg. 294
15
May 12, 2015
The Honorable Jan Marx
Mayor
City of San Luis Obispo
990 Palm Street
San Luis Obispo, CA 93401
Dr. Gil Stork
Superintendent/President
Cuesta College
Highway 1
San Luis Obispo, CA 93403
Dr. Jeffrey D. Armstrong
President
Cal Poly State University
1 Grand Avenue
San Luis Obispo, CA 93407
Dear Mayor Marx, Drs. Stork and Armstrong:
On behalf of the Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort working group, we are pleased
to present our final report for acceptance. The report contained with this letter is the result of 18
months of collaboration and discussions among residents, students, university and college staff, and
City leadership.
The action plans and timelines for implementation contained within this report are the result of a
consensus agreement by all members of the working group, and these actions will result in
improved neighborhood wellness in San Luis Obispo. All groups are ready to begin
implementation, upon acceptance of this report.
We welcome your suggestions to the report’s action items. The Student Community Liaison
Committee is the body identified in this process to consider modifications during their oversight of
this plan’s implementation.
Thank you for the opportunity to serve the San Luis Obispo community!
Sincerely,
Keith B. Humphrey, Ph.D. Sandee L. McLaughlin
Vice President for Student Affairs Vice President for Student Services & College Centers
Cal Poly Cuesta College
Enc.
Packet Pg. 295
15
San Lui s Obi spo
Neighborhood Wellness/Community
Civility Effort
FINAL REPORT
Spring 2015
- Enhancing the quality of life for all residents -
Packet Pg. 296
15
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 2
TABLE OF CONTENTS
OVERVIEW ................................................................................................................................................. 3
PROCESS ..................................................................................................................................................... 4
OBJECTIVE ONE: Define short-term actions to enhance the quality of life .............................................. 5
OBJECTIVE TWO: Define stakeholders’ needs and success ....................................................................... 7
OBJECTIVE THREE: Identify university/city best practices ................................................................... 10
OBJECTIVE FOUR: Review enforcement best practices .......................................................................... 17
OBJECTIVE FIVE: Engage stakeholders: review current educational & information efforts .................. 23
OBJECTIVE SIX: Prepare for sustained engagement to achieve desired vision & goal ............................ 25
APPENDIX A: Working Group Membership ........................................................................................... 28
APPENDIX B: Council Agenda Report .................................................................................................... 29
APPENDIX C: Full Survey Report ........................................................................................................... 54
APPENDIX D: Matrix of All Action Items .............................................................................................. 70
APPENDIX E: Post March 7 Recommendations ...................................................................................... 76
APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Report .................................................................. 79
Packet Pg. 297
15
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 3
OVERVIEW
ith the focus of making San Luis Obispo an even more vibrant community for residents
and students to reside in, community representatives, Cal Poly and Cuesta College
administrators, students and San Luis Obispo city staff have worked side by side to coordinate
their efforts through the Neighborhood Wellness/ Community Civility Effort. The effort was
launched in May of 2013 with the support of the San Luis Obispo City Council, Cal Poly
President Jeffrey Armstrong, and Cuesta College President/Superintendent Gil Stork. This
initiative aimed to discuss the changing culture of neighborhoods in San Luis Obispo resulting
from the shifts of owner-occupied households to the increase in rental units, specifically by
student-aged individuals.
Collectively, the working group has a vision of building “a community in which year-round
residents and students actively collaborate to build community and communicate in an
environment that fosters mutual respect and understanding.”
The unified goal of the working group has been to develop ideas for stakeholder consideration
that are intended to “ enhance the quality of life for all residents.” The group responded to the
six objectives created by the San Luis Obispo City Council with subsequent recommendations,
desired outcomes, implementation leads and partners, and timelines for implementation.
The objectives are outlined below, and each is addressed thoroughly in this report.
Define short-term actions to enhance the quality of life
Define stakeholders’ needs and success
Identify university/city best practices
Review enforcement best practices
Engage stakeholders: review current educational and information efforts
Prepare for sustained engagement to achieve desired vision and goal
W
From the recommendations above and active collaboration within the working group, three
overall themes emerged:
Increase communications from Cal Poly and Cuesta College
Develop responses through solution-oriented initiatives
Set in motion proactive measures to avoid repeating past mistakes and preventing new
problems from occurring
Packet Pg. 298
15
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 4
PROCESS
Beginning work in October of 2013, the Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort
working group conducted a thoughtful study of the objectives outlined by the San Luis Obispo
City Council and created a process to efficiently move the community into action.
Champions were assigned to each objective, and the subsequent 13 meetings, hosted by Cuesta
College, were devoted to discussions of the objectives, led by the champions.
Champions for the objectives are presented below:
Not e: Names in parentheses denote past working group members.
During the robust discussions for each objective the entire working group offered feedback on
the work of the champions and direction on how to proceed. Each group returned to conduct
further studies based on the feedback and direction of this group. The champions provided
recommendations to the working group in late 2014. Each of the recommendations were
discussed and affirmed during the monthly meetings, which focused specifically on one
particular objective. It is those recommendations that are presented in this report.
OBJECTIVE ONE:
Karen Adler, Julie Towery
OBJECTIVE TWO:
Katie Lichtig, Joi Sullivan
(Jason Colombini), Dr. Anthony Gutierrez,
Ju v ent i no Or t i z
OBJECTIVE THREE:
Derek Johnson, Stephanie Teaford
(Justin Wellner, Betsy Kinsley)
OBJECTIVE FOUR:
Joe Arteaga, Steve Gesell, George Hughes,
Chris Staley, Brenda Trobaugh
OBJECTIVE FIVE:
Scott Chedester (Charles Scovell),
Dr. Anthony Gutierrez,
Kimberly Hampton, Joi Sullivan
(Jason Colombini), Christine Wallace
OBJECTIVE SIX:
Dr. Keith Humphrey,
Sandee McLaughlin
Packet Pg. 299
15
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 5
Goal
To define short-term actions that could be
implemented to enhance the quality of life for all
residents, particularly associated in the timeframe
around the start of Cal Poly’s fall term.
OBJECTIVE ONE: Define short-term actions
to enhance the quality of life
Champions
Karen Adler, Community
Julie Towery, Community
Background
Historically, there has been an increase in calls for
service around the neighborhood areas adjacent to
Cal Poly coinciding with start of the school year. This
objective is set to define what short-term actions
could lead to positive long-term effects during that
timeframe. Short-term actions are also distributed
among all objectives, thus are not exclusive to
objective one.
Recommendations
Schedule regular neighborhood tours with city council, mayor, neighbors, Cal Poly and
Cuesta College leaders, etc.
Investigate establishing Student Nighttime Auxiliary Patrol (S.N.A.P.) Ride-Along
program and promote current Police Ride Along program
Explore the option of creating a noise ordinance in public spaces on streets and
sidewalks for gatherings of more than 50 people by issuing citations or other alternative
options
Consider expanding tools to enforce ordinances for nuisance properties including, but not
limited to, “tagging” properties that meet a definition of a public nuisance or unruly
gatherings in terms of both property-maintenance concerns and behavior issues
Evaluate policies so that new development or redevelopment does not unduly impact
neighborhoods
Packet Pg. 300
15
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 6
Actions Desired Outcomes I mpl ement at i on
Leads & Partners
Timeline for
Implementation
Schedule regular neighborhood
tours with city council, mayor,
neighbors, Cal Poly and Cuesta
leaders, etc.
Allow neighbors to
point out
neighborhood
issues
Cal Poly Ongoing, began
Summer of 2014
Investigate establishing S.N.A.P.
Ride-Along program and
promote current Police Ride
Along program
Increase the
amount of support
to assist with
complaints and
allow officers to do
other police work
City of San Luis
Obispo
Fall 2015
Explore the option of creating a
noise ordinance in public spaces
on streets and sidewalks for
gatherings of more than 50
people by issuing citations or
other alternative options
Decrease number
of noise complaints
City of San Luis
Obispo
Spring 2016
Consider expanding tools to
enforce ordinances for nuisance
properties including, but not
limited to, “tagging” properties
that meet a definition of a public
nuisance or unruly gatherings in
terms of both property-
maintenance concerns and
behavior issues
Hold repeat noise
violators
accountable
City of San Luis
Obispo
Spring 2016
Evaluate policies so that new
development or redevelopment
does not unduly impact
neighborhoods.
Decrease properties
that allow for high
occupancy
City of San Luis
Obispo
Fall 2016
Packet Pg. 301
15
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 7
OBJECTIVE TWO: Define stakeholders’ needs and success
Champions
Dr. Anthony Gutierrez, Cuesta College
Katie Lichtig, City of San Luis Obispo
Juventino Ortiz, Community
Joi Sullivan (Jason Colombini), Cal Poly
Goal
For Cal Poly, Cuesta College and the City of San Luis Obispo to use the results of the
community-wide survey to suggest efforts for implementation to address community-defined
issues.
Background
The purpose of this objective is to identify the stakeholders’ needs and suggest solutions so that
the outcomes reflect a desired environment for the community.
To obtain a comprehensive assessment of the community’s needs and what success looked like,
a communitywide survey was mailed in May of 2014. A total of 3, 774 surveys were completed
and returned, physically and electronically. Of the completed surveys, 1,706 were from non-
student residents, 1,783 were from individuals identifying themselves as either Cal Poly or
Cuesta students, and 318 individuals did not associate themselves with any group. The full
survey results and discussion is offered in Appendix C.
Recommendations
The assessment results provided a clearer picture of the stakeholder perceptions, which helped
develop potential recommendations, such as:
Evaluate best practices and implement strategies to reduce the number of disruptions from
parties and noise in neighborhoods (as referenced in Objective Three)
Develop and implement a rental housing inspection program
Implement a range of strategies to change the relationship and culture between students
and non-students in neighborhoods
Explore and implement strategies to address the concentration of bars in the downtown
area and related safety issues. Consider using strategies identified in the Land Use and
Circulation Element (LUCE) update to achieve this objective
Implement educational programs to increase the number of student-aged residents who
bring in their trashcans on the same day the trash is picked up
Implement strategies to reduce traffic issues in neighborhoods. Consider using strategies
identified in the Land Use and Circulation Element update to achieve this objective
Packet Pg. 302
15
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 8
Continue to implement strategies to address homelessness in San Luis Obispo
(particularly in the downtown area)
Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation
Leads & Partners
Timeline for
I mpl ement at i on
Evaluate best practices and
implement strategies to reduce
the number of disruptions from
parties and noise in
neighborhoods (as referenced in
Objective Three)
Reduce noise
disruptions
Cal Poly and Cuesta
College
(programmatic) City
of San Luis Obispo
(enforcement)
Fall 2015
Develop and implement a rental
housing inspection program
Insure that rental units
comply with required
minimum health and
safety standards
City of San Luis
Obispo
Fall 2016
Implement a range of strategies
to change the relationship and
culture between students and
non-students in neighborhoods
(no specific recommendations
discerned from the survey
results)
Improve student and
community
relationships
Cal Poly Associated
Student, Inc. (ASI)
and Associate
Students for Cuesta
College (ASCC)
Spr i ng 2016
Explore and implement
strategies to address the
concentration of bars in the
downtown area and related
safety issues. Consider using
strategies identified in the Land
Use and Circulation Element
update to achieve this objective
Address and decrease
safety-related issues
City of San Luis
Obispo
Ongoing per
LUCE strategies
Implement educational programs
to increase the number of
student-aged residents who
bring in their trashcans on the
same day the trash is picked up
Increase the number
of student-age
residents to comply
with the 24-hour
ordinance
City of San Luis
Obispo
Ongoing
Continue to implement strategies
to address homelessness in San
Luis Obispo (particularly in the
downtown area)
A reduction in the
impacts of
homelessness on the
community
City of San Luis
Obispo
Ongoing
Packet Pg. 303
15
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 9
Implement strategies to reduce
traffic issues in neighborhoods.
Consider using strategies
identified in the Land Use and
Circulation Element update to
achieve this objective
Reduce traffic-related
issues in
neighborhoods
City of San Luis
Obispo
Ongoing
Packet Pg. 304
15
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 10
OBJECTIVE THREE: Identify university/city best practices
Champions
Derek Johnson, City of San Luis Obispo
Stephanie Teaford (Betsy Kinsley, Justin Wellner), Cal Poly
Goal
To identify best practices that can be undertaken by Cal Poly, in collaboration with the City of
San Luis Obispo, to enhance positive interactions between students and permanent residents.
Background
Universities and colleges across the nation impact the communities in which they exist in both
positive and negative ways. The impact of students in residential neighborhoods has prompted
higher education institutions to share best practices that can lead to improvements in
community relationships and mitigate negative impacts. The objective explored various
programs and efforts undertaken by universities and colleges nationwide. The following
recommendations could provide a framework for improving relations between student
residents and permanent residents of San Luis Obispo.
Packet Pg. 305
15
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 11
Recommendations
To address student rental properties
Create and implement a transition to Off-Campus Living Education Program, to be
shared with Cuesta College’s Student Life Office
Include expectations and responsibilities of living in neighborhoods in the City
of San Luis Obispo (e.g. local ordinances)
The successful completion of a culminating test will result in a Preferred Renter
Certification with potential benefits offered by landlords
Work with the city to generate a neighborhood map of housing rental properties and
provide outreach to student renters by funding welcome bags for neighbors to distribute
to establish positive interactions (University of Colorado, Boulder)
Create a Renter/Rental Housing Inspection Program. Students and landlords can work
together for preferred renter/rental designation
o Beautification Program: “Door Decal” or “Golden Arrow” for upkeep of
property and meeting standards for appearance and safety
o Student Affairs Awards: Awarded yearly to no-complaint housing (LaSalle
University)
o Preferred rental properties listed with the city
o Request the release of judicial information to off campus entities (Plymouth State
University)
Packet Pg. 306
15
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 12
To alleviate nighttime noise and to build compassion and understanding
Develop outreach and marketing efforts toward students (University of Massachusetts,
Amherst)
Implement a Party Registration Program. Develop a program to incentivize party
registration that provides the opportunity for the San Luis Obispo Police Department to
contact the party registrant and offer a 20-minute warning before dispatching S.N.A.P.
or a police officer. This provides the students a way to minimize impacts on enforcement
resources (University of Colorado, Boulder)
Initiate Dialog Dinners or Block Parties for students and residents to talk about what
they like most about their neighborhoods (University of Colorado, Boulder)
Promote the principles of the The Mustang Way in neighborhoods:
o Student Neighborhood Liaisons: Block parties/events for networking. (University
of Minnesota, Twin Cities & Towson University)
o Neighborhood Helping Hands: Volunteerism for neighbor assistance (e.g. fruit
picking, ladder needs, barn raising, etc.). Coordinate with campus departments
to provide Learn by Doing experiences within neighborhoods for senior projects
and other work-related majors such as horticulture, landscape architecture,
construction management and others.
o Peer-to-peer engagement for neighborhood policing; “Walk this Way Program”
(University of Massachusetts, Amherst)
Packet Pg. 307
15
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 13
To improve collaboration and understanding among students, non-students and city
groups, and to increase engagement in problem solving
Continue to engage and communicate collaboratively among students, non-students and
city groups. See Student Community Liaison Committee (SCLC), below.
Utilize various on-campus departments and offices that support living off-campus (Off-
Campus Student Life; Cuesta College Student Life and Leadership; Student & Community
Relations; Office of Neighborhood Life; Student Neighborhood Relations; Neighborhood
University Relations and Neighbors; and Student Life and Leadership at Cuesta College) to:
o Support all students, non-students, and permanent residents in the communities
surrounding Cal Poly
o Educate students about university policies and local ordinances
o Continue to build and strengthen neighborhood relations by facilitating dialogue
o Promote civic citizenship to create a positive quality of life for everyone living in the
neighborhoods (Georgetown University)
o Specific communications and strategies could include:
A 100 percent response policy for any time, any issue, by enforcing a
prompt and meaningful response
The police provide a blueprint that lets students and neighbors
know exactly what to expect when a community concern is
registered with the university
The policy will establish a standard for reporting an incident
(through a university helpline); clear steps that would be taken for
follow-up with the student (through an updated sanction chart)
and community members; and what data would be collected to
create a metric to evaluate student success and outcomes
(Georgetown University)
Sustained conflict resolution services such as “ SLO Solutions,” a
jointly sponsored citywide conflict-resolution program specifically
designed to address student-neighbor issues and provide a means
for constructive resolution. Since 2004, this program has used the
services of Creative Mediation to resolve a variety of community
disputes at no cost to those seeking mediation
Sustained SCLC effort. For more than 20 years, Cal Poly’s Associated
Students, Inc. (ASI), Associated Students of Cuesta College (ASCC), and
the city have served as leaders on the committee. It was established to
further student and community communication and develop positive
relationships
Packet Pg. 308
15
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 14
Neighborhood Concerns Phone Line: Neighbors can call in with concerns.
Cal Poly and Cuesta College staff can recommend actions and contact
students (Colorado University, Boulder)
Quarterly walkabouts and coffee sessions with city residents and
representatives from Cal Poly, Cuesta College and the city
One-hour walkabouts will be scheduled, every third month and
will take place at various times throughout the neighborhoods
surrounding the campus. During these walks they will explore
student housing rentals, party atmosphere, traffic impacts and
Greek housing
One-hour coffee sessions or “listening sessions” will be scheduled
every third month, in the afternoon, at a local venue to discuss
such topics as the Cal Poly Master Plan and vision for the future,
diversity and inclusivity, students in the community, and year-
end accomplishments and challenges
Develop proactive engagement of law and code enforcement with visits to properties of
concern; “Knock and Talk” (University of Maryland).
Implement a Joint Letter Program. Police contact with students in off-campus housing
who generates letters signed by the university, police and city that outlines expectations.
It is sent to the resident and landlord (University of Oregon)
o Tagging for repeat offending or problem properties
Packet Pg. 309
15
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 15
Actions Desired Outcomes I mpl ement at i on
Leads & Partners
Timeline for
I mpl ement at i on
Create and implement a
transition to Off-Campus
Living Education Program, to
be shared with Cuesta
College’s Student Life Office
Set expectations and
responsibilities for
students living in
neighborhoods in the
City of San Luis Obispo
Cal Poly Summer 2015
Work with the city to generate
a neighborhood map of
housing rental properties and
provide outreach to student
renters by funding welcome
bags for neighbors to
distribute to establish positive
interactions
Establish positive
interaction with City
Cal Poly ASI ,
ASCC, City of San
Luis Obispo
Spr i ng 2016
Create a Renter/Rental
Housing Inspection Program
Rental properties that
meet minimum health
and safety standards
Cal Poly, City of San
Luis Obispo
Spr i ng 2016
Develop outreach and
marketing efforts toward
students
Raise awareness of the
impacts of noise on
neighborhood
Cal Poly Spring 2016
Implement a Party
Registration Program.
Develop a program to
incentivize party registration
that provides the opportunity
for the San Luis Obispo Police
Department to contact the
party registrant and offer a 20-
minute warning before
dispatching S.N.A.P. or a
police officer
Fewer noise citations City of San Luis
Obispo
Spr i ng 2016
Initiate Dialog Dinners or
Block Parties for students and
residents to talk about what
they like most about their
neighborhoods
Create positive
interactions between
students and year-
round residents
Cal Poly ASI, ASCC Ongoing
Promote the principles of the
The Mustang Way in
neighborhoods
Enhance a positive
culture of peer-to-peer
accountability in
neighborhoods
Cal Poly ASI Ongoing
Packet Pg. 310
15
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 16
Continue to engage and
communicate collaboratively
among students, non-students
and city groups
Improve collaboration
and understanding
among students, non-
students and city
groups
SCLC Ongoi ng
Utilize various on-campus
departments and offices that
support living off-campus to
support students, non-
students and permanent
residents living in
neighborhoods.
Educate students about
university policies and
ordinances, strengthen
neighborhood relations
by facilitating dialogs
Cal Poly & Cuesta
College
Fall 2015
Develop proactive
engagement of law and code
enforcement with visits to
properties of concern; “Knock
and Talk”.
Positive engagement
with law enforcement
and decrease repeat
offending properties
City of San Luis
Obispo
Ongoing
Implement a Joint Letter
Program.
Police contact with
students in off-campus
housing generates
letter signed by
university, police and
city that outlines
expectations sent to
resident and landlord
Cal Poly Fall 2015
Packet Pg. 311
15
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 17
Goal
That Cal Poly, Cuesta College and the City of San Luis Obispo police departments consider
implementing strategies to address community civility and quality-of-life matters.
OBJECTIVE FOUR: Revi ew enforcement best pract i ces
Champions
Joe Arteaga, Cuesta College
Steve Gesell, City of San Luis Obispo
George Hughes, Cal Poly
Chr i s Staley , Ci ty of San L ui s Obi spo
Brenda Trobaugh, Cal Poly
Packet Pg. 312
15
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 18
Background
In the past several years, both Cal Poly and the City of San Luis Obispo have engaged in
numerous programs to address quality of life and community wellness.
Both organizations have expanded professional staff dedicated to neighborhood wellness,
created and modified ordinances, and implemented new programs to address pubic disorder
and nuisance crimes including but not limited to:
Amendments to the noise ordinance
In 2010 the San Luis Obispo Police Department made recommendations to the city council
regarding changes to the existing noise ordinance to improve noise reduction efforts. The
modifications included reducing the number of allowable warnings to one every six months
and to hold residential property owners responsible for repeat noise violations. Many landlords
have since added language to their lease and rental agreements with penalties levied to their
tenants who receive noise violations. These modifications were accepted by city council and
noise complaints were significantly reduced by 30 percent for the following year and have been
maintained since (see Table 1 below).
Table 1: Total noise party violations reported from 2009 to 2014.
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
Noise Violations 2584 2238 2013 1644 1672 1729
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
Noise Party Violations
Packet Pg. 313
15
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 19
Unruly Gathering Ordinance
In 2010 the San Luis Obispo Police Department conducted research on Unruly Gathering
Ordinances. After extensive research and outreach to the community and Cal Poly, an Unruly
Gathering Ordinance was proposed and accepted by the city council. The ordinance was
intended to prevent substantial disturbances on private property in a neighborhood. This
included unlawful and disruptive behavior by large groups of people. On April 6, 2010, the city
council adopted section SLMC 9.13.030 Prohibition of Unruly Gatherings. A violation of the
Unruly Gathering Ordinance consists of hosting a gathering on private property that:
Involves 20 people or more; and
Involves unlawful conduct that creates a substantial disturbance in a significant segment
of a neighborhood.
“Unlawful conduct that results in a substantial disturbance can include such things as excessive noise,
public drunkenness, serving alcohol to minors, fighting, urinating in public, crowds overflowing into
yards, sidewalks, or streets, or similar unlawful behaviors.”
Neighborhood Officer Program
The San Luis Obispo Police Department initiated its Neighborhood Officer Program on
December 1, 2013. The goal of the Neighborhood Officer Program is to quickly identify
community issues, concerns, problems and crime trends that have long-term quality-of-life
impacts on a particular neighborhood. The Neighborhood Officer Program allows for officers to
coordinate resources to help solve these problems. This model of policing is both a philosophy
and an organizational strategy that allows police and community residents to work closely
together in new ways to solve problems associated with crime, fear of crime, social disorder and
neighborhood decay.
Attainable goals of this program include:
Maintain or increase public confidence in the Police Department
Decrease fear of crime
Listen to and address citizen concerns
Bring community resources together to solve problems
Impact specific crime problems
Reduce repetitive calls for service
Educate the public about its Police Department
Packet Pg. 314
15
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 20
Student Community Success Program
In 2013 Cal Poly hired a full-time off-campus student life coordinator to be both proactive and
reactive in supporting students and neighborhood residents with neighborhood wellness
initiatives. Responsibilities of the position include:
Coordinate the resolution of off-campus conduct with university administration, city
government and community members to find solutions for student’s problems or
concerns
Assist in mediating and resolving student/community conflicts
Effect change in the social climate and relationships with specific responsibility of
working with students and their neighbors within the local community
Implement training sessions, presentations, and educational programs regarding
substance abuse, civic and social responsibility
One goal of the program is to create a Student Community
Success Program with the mission to help students be successful
off campus and address community concerns. The program is
intended to change and encourage inappropriate behavior
through community and student meetings, workshops,
leadership panels, and peer-mentoring opportunities.
Cal Poly University Police Off-Campus Patrols
By authority of the California Penal Code, the University Police
Department has legal authority to exercise peace officer powers
within a one-mile radius of the exterior boundaries of campus
(see Appendix A). In 2014 Cal Poly hired two additional police
officers to expand proactive patrols within the neighborhoods
directly adjacent to campus. The focus of these patrols has been
to proactively discourage and enforce public disorder crimes.
Recommendations
City and Cal Poly officials should craft a Memorandum
of Understanding (MOU) agreement between the city and university regarding police
operational protocol
Partner Cal Poly and Cuesta police officers with San Luis Obispo Neighborhood Officers
to coordinate resources and achieve program goals
Packet Pg. 315
15
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 21
City should explore additional proactive educational opportunities with Cal Poly and
Cuesta College to change the student culture related to neighborhood wellness
Implement a keg registration program
Conduct an internal assessment of the San Luis Obispo Police Department staffing to
prepare for growth within the city and on the Cal Poly campus to ensure staffing needs
match the population
Conduct an internal assessment of the University Police Department staffing to meet the
growth on the Cal Poly campus
Explore the possibility of Cal Poly Police being able to issue City Municipal
Administrative Citations
Location of a university police substation within the new residence hall project to
coordinate law enforcement problem-solving efforts
Packet Pg. 316
15
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 22
Actions Desired Outcomes I mpl ement at i on
Leads & Partners
Timeline for
I mpl ement at i on
City and Cal Poly officials to craft
a Memorandum of Understanding
agreement between the city and
university regarding police
operational protocol within a one-
mile radius
Allows for
coordination of
resources to quickly
respond to
community concerns
Cal Poly, City of
San Luis Obispo
Fall 2015
Partner Cal Poly and Cuesta police
officers with San Luis Obispo
Neighborhood Officers to
coordinate resources and achieve
program goals
To coordinate
resources and obtain
program goals
City of San Luis
Obispo
Fall 2015
City should explore additional
proactive educational
opportunities with Cal Poly and
Cuesta College to change the
student culture related to
neighborhood wellness
Change student
culture related to
neighborhood
wellness
SCLC Fall 2016, and
with each annual
report
Implement a keg registration
program
A reduction in
underage alcohol use
and an accountability
mechanism for
persons who serve
minors
City of San Luis
Obispo
Fall 2016
Conduct an internal assessment of
the San Luis Obispo Police
Department staffing to prepare for
growth within the city and on the
Cal Poly campus to ensure staffing
needs match the population
Meet the needs of the
community as
population grows
City of San Luis
Obispo
Spring 2016
Conduct an internal assessment of
the University Police Department
staffing to meet the growth on the
Cal Poly campus
Meet the needs of Cal
Poly as student
population grows
Cal Poly Spring 2016
Explore the possibility of Cal Poly
Police being able to issue City
Municipal Administrative
Citations
To be able to patrol in
neighborhoods
adjacent to Cal Poly
campus
Addressed via
MOU identified
above
Location of a university police
substation within the new
residence hall project to coordinate
law enforcement problem-solving
efforts
Coordinate law
enforcement outreach
and problem solving
efforts
Cal Poly Fall 2018
Packet Pg. 317
15
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 23
Goal
To engage stakeholders: review current educational and informational efforts.
OBJECTIVE FIVE: Engage stakeholders: review current educational &
information efforts
Champions
Scott Chedester (Charles Scovell), Cuesta College
Dr. Anthony Gutierrez, Cuesta College
Kimberly Hampton, Cal Poly
Joi Sullivan (Jason Colombini), Cal Poly
Christine Wallace, City of San Luis Obispo
Background
This objective examines the methods, content and effectiveness of educational efforts put
forward by Cal Poly, Cuesta College, the City of San Luis Obispo, and student resident groups.
The inventory of channels of communication was compiled by representatives of Cal Poly,
Cuesta College, and the City of San Luis Obispo. Neighborhood wellness meeting attendees,
Cal Poly and Cuesta College student focus groups were presented with the inventory. An
additional student subcommittee met to discuss the effectiveness of current methods and
content. Suggestions for outreach changes made during the presentations based on the content
effectiveness are reflected in the recommendations of this report.
Recommendations
The recommendation is to collaboratively create an annual communications plan containing
neighborhood wellness messages and a process for communicating the information effectively
to maximize resources. The communication plan should be reassessed annually to evaluate
effectiveness and to ensure resources are not duplicated or wasted. Communications plan
participants could consist of representatives from Cal Poly, Cuesta College and the city.
Suggest i ons for t he Subcommi t t ee
Produce a variety of impactful electronic and print media to educate residents on
property maintenance standards, with a specific focus on repeat offenders in
neighborhoods
Packet Pg. 318
15
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 24
Revive the Off-Campus Housing Guide (University of Colorado, Boulder)
Produce video for new Cuesta College students to view as part of the required online
orientation on “how to be a good neighbor”
Produce “good neighbor” and Safety Enhancement Zone videos for
www.respectslo.com (Linked to Cal Poly websites and campus television stations)
Cal Poly University Housing bulletin boards made available for “ good neighbor” and
Safety Enhancement Zone messaging
Cuesta College bulletin boards are made available for “good neighbor” and Safety
Enhancement Zone messaging.
Create and play radio public service announcements on KCPR
Conduct annual presentations to Block P – Cal Poly Athletics
Develop an information distribution plan with off-campus housing providers and
property management; request Safety Enhancement and good neighbor materials be
posted
Housing resident assistant training to include off-campus impacts
Create better avenues of communication with Greek Life house owners
Produce Safety Enhancement Zone door hangers
Produce banners and sandwich boards to be displayed in the Cal Poly and Cuesta
College university unions about community and neighborhood wellness issues
Produce table tents in Cal Poly University Union and Cuesta College cafeteria
Involve off-campus housing providers (property management companies, housing
complex managers) in outreach efforts
Actions Desired Outcomes I mpl ement at i on
Leads & Partners
Timeline for
Implementation
Create an annual
communications plan
containing neighborhood
wellness messages and a
process for
communicating the
information effectively to
maximize resources
Effectively inform the
community on matters of
neighborhood wellness
City of San Luis
Obispo
Winter 2015
Packet Pg. 319
15
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 25
Goal
The purpose of objective six of the report is to ensure that the plans developed in objectives one
through five are implemented, assessed, and folded into the regular operations of the
appropriate agency (for ongoing efforts). Additionally, the goal is to sustain regular
communications between Cal Poly, Cuesta College, the City of San Luis Obispo, residents and
students.
OBJECTIVE SIX: Prepare for sustained engagement to achieve desired vision & goal
Champions
Dr. Keith Humphrey, Cal Poly
Sandee McLaughlin, Cuesta College
Background
Neighborhood wellness issues in San Luis Obispo have historically been fragmented within
each agency by implementing its own projects, causing confusion among year-round residents,
and limiting the effectiveness of each individual effort. There is a unified desire among all
constituencies in San Luis Obispo to see the quality of life improve in neighborhoods, and a
structure to coordinate these efforts was missing. For almost three decades, the Student-
Community Liaison Committee (SCLC) has brought the students of Cal Poly and Cuesta
College together with city officials and residents for communication and discussion. This forum
has been valuable to all parties, as any culture change related to neighborhood wellness rests
with the students.
Recommendations
Re-invest in the Student-Community Liaison Committee
The Student-Community Liaison Committee should assess the effectiveness of each
recommendation once they have been implemented
Shi f t SCLC member shi ps
Host an annual town hall meeting
Packet Pg. 320
15
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 26
Actions Desired Outcomes I mpl ement at i on
Leads & Partners
Timeline for
Implementation
Re-invest in the Student-
Community Liaison
Committee
Become the coordinating
body responsible for
monitoring the
recommendations, once
adopted by the city council,
Cal Poly and Cuesta
College
SCLC Fal l 2015, ongoi ng
The Student-Community
Liaison Committee should
assess the effectiveness of
each recommendation
once they have been
implemented
Recommend the
appropriate changes, and
produce an annual report
on the state of
neighborhood wellness in
the City of San Luis Obispo
SCLC Ongoing
Shift SCLC memberships SCLC memberships should
be reevaluated to directly
involve those individuals
(by their position) most
directly involved in
neighborhood wellness
SCLC Spr i ng 2016
Host an annual town hall
meeting
Present their report to the
community, receive
feedback and suggestions
from the broader San Luis
Obispo community
SCLC Spr i ng 2016,
ongoing
Packet Pg. 321
15
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 27
Packet Pg. 322
15
Appendix A: Working Group Membership Page 28
APPENDIX A: Working Group Membership
Dr. Keith Humphrey, Co-Chair Cal Poly
Sandee McLaughlin, Co-Chair Cuesta College
Karen Adler Community
Joe Arteaga Cuesta College
Scott Chedester (Charles Scovell) Cuesta College
Steve Gesell City of San Luis Obispo
Dr. Anthony Gutierrez Cuesta College
George Hughes Cal Poly
Kimberly Hampton Cal Poly
Derek Johnson City of San Luis Obispo
Katie Lichtig City of San Luis Obispo
Juventino Ortiz Community
Chris Staley City of San Luis Obispo
Joi Sullivan (Jason Colombini) Cal Poly
Stephanie Teaford (Betsy Kinsley, Justin Wellner) Cal Poly
Julie Towery Community
Brenda Trobaugh Cal Poly
Christine Wallace City of San Luis Obispo
Sharon Spatafora, Administrative Support Cuesta College
Daisy Chavez, Copy Writing Cal Poly
Yukie Murphy, Graphic Design & Editing Cal Poly
Jo Ann Lloyd, Copy Editing Cal Poly
Packet Pg. 323
15
APPENDIX B: Council Agenda Report
Packet Pg. 324
15
Packet Pg. 325
15
Packet Pg. 326
15
Packet Pg. 327
15
Packet Pg. 328
15
Packet Pg. 329
15
Packet Pg. 330
15
Packet Pg. 331
15
Packet Pg. 332
15
Packet Pg. 333
15
Packet Pg. 334
15
Packet Pg. 335
15
Packet Pg. 336
15
Packet Pg. 337
15
Packet Pg. 338
15
Packet Pg. 339
15
Packet Pg. 340
15
Packet Pg. 341
15
Packet Pg. 342
15
Packet Pg. 343
15
Packet Pg. 344
15
Packet Pg. 345
15
Packet Pg. 346
15
Packet Pg. 347
15
Packet Pg. 348
15
Neighborhood Wellne ss and Community Civility Initiative:
Summary Report from the
City of San Luis Obispo Opinion Survey
Peter B. Chi, Ph.D.
Department of Statistics
California Polytechnic State University
San Luis Obispo, CA 93407
1 Intro duction
On May 21, 2013, the Neighborhood Wellne ss / Community Civility Effort was launched in order to
foster and improve the relationship between year round residents of San Luis Obispo, and students of
California Polytechnic State University (Cal Poly), and Cuesta College. Specifically, there has been
a growing concern regarding student partying and disruptive behavior across the city of San Luis
Obispo. This has been highlighted by particular incidents of recent years, such as Cal Poly’s Week
of Welco me (WOW) in 2012, when an estimated 2000+ students congregated in the residential area
just directly south of campus, causing disruption and safety concerns as roads became impassable
(City of San Luis Obispo, 2013)
In addition to implementing particular strategies aimed at addressing WOW scheduling to at-
tempt to keep students occupied on campus instead of disrupting neighborhoods surrounding cam-
pus, the Neighborhood Wellness / Community Civility Effort implemented an opinion survey across
the city of San Luis Obispo. This survey was meant to capture feedback from permanent residents
and students, with the aim of identifying strategies to produce outcomes towards the overall goal of
neighborhood wellness.
In this report, data from the survey a re analyzed and reported in order to identify any notable
trends. With no specific a priori hypotheses, this exploratory data analysis aims to capture anything
that may be revealed from the data. A particular focus of the analyses, however, will be on identifying
potential sources of conflict between Cal Poly students and non-student residents of San Luis Obispo.
APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 54
Packet Pg. 349
15
2 Metho dology
The City of San Luis Obispo Opinion Survey was distributed with utility bills and across campus at
Cal Poly. A total of 3,807 responses were received, and entered into SurveyMonkey (SurveyMonkey
Inc., 2014). For analyses, the entire dataset was exported from SurveyMonkey as a comma-separated
text file and imported into the statistical analys is p latform called R (R Development Core Team,
2011).
Questions were written to either gain identifying information on an individual (such as “With
what ethnicity do you most identify?”), or to gain content regarding how the individual feels about
a particular topic or situation (such as a Likert-scale response to “I feel as though my neighbors are
respectful of my property.”). For this report, these will be referred to as “identifying questions” and
“content questions,” respectively. Figures 1 and 2 below are the actual survey, where the identifying
questions can be seen in Figure 1: Questions 1 through 12, and the content questions are Questions
13 through the end, across both Figures 1 and 2.
1. Do you live in San Luis Obispo city limits?
O Yes. I am eligible to continue with the survey.
O No. If you do not currently live in San Luis Obispo we
would appreciate your willingness to fill out the survey.
However, our primary initial focus is to target relations
within San Luis Obispo city limits and we are limiting
survey participants to this area.
2. What is your age?
O 18-24 years old O 59-65 years old O 25-31 years old O 66-71 years old
O 32-38 years old O 72-78 years old
O 39-45 years old O 79-85 years old
O 46-51 years old O 86+ years old
O 52-58 years old
3. With what gender do you identify?
O Male O Transgender
O Female O No response.
4. Are you currently attending Cal Poly San Luis Obispo,
Cuesta College, or Allan Hancock College?
O Yes. I am attending Cal Poly San Luis Obispo.
O Yes. I am attending Cuesta College.
O Yes. I am attending Allan Hancock College.
O No. I am not currently attending any of these schools.
If you are attending one of these schools, what year are you
and what is your major?
5. With what ethnicity do you most identify?
O African American/Black
O American Indian/Alaska Native
O Asian
O Latino
O Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander
O White/Caucasian
O Other (please specify):
6. Where is your current residence located? Please use
your best judgement when picking a neighborhood
O On Cal Poly’s campus.
O Laguna area.
O Cal Poly area.
O Tank Farm/Broad area.
O Johnson/Sinsheimer area.
O Downtown area.
O Foothill/N. Chorro area.
7. How many years have you lived in San Luis Obispo?
8. Were you born in San Luis Obispo?
O Yes
O No
9. How many people live in your household (include
yourself in the number)?
O 1 O 3 O 5 O 7
O 2 O 4 O 6 O 8+
10. In what age group are the people who live in your
household (mark all that apply)?
O 0-17 years old O 52-58 years old
O 18-24 years old O 59-65 years old
O 25-31 years old O 66-71 years old
O 32-38 years old O 72-78 years old
O 39-45 years old O 79-85 years old
O 46-51 years old O 86+ years old
11. How many more years do you see yourself staying in
San Luis Obispo?
O I have no plans of leaving.
O 1 year O 5 years O
2 years O 6 years O
3 years O 7 years O
4 years O 8+ years
12. If you are renting your residence, please mark all that
apply:
O I am renting a room in a shared residence.
O My residence is managed by a property management
company.
O My landlord lives outside San Luis Obispo.
O My landlord lives in San Luis Obispo.
O My landlord lives in my residence.
O I am not renting my residence.
O Other (please specify):
13. When I return to my house after school or work:
O I can assume that there will be parking relatively
close to my house.
O I frequently have trouble finding parking relatively
close to my house.
O I rarely find parking relatively close to my house.
Comments:
14. After the garbage companies empty the trashcans, I
usually bring in my household’s trashcans off of the
street:
O The same evening.
O Sometime the next day.
O Within the next 2 – 3 days.
O Within the next week.
Comments:
15. After the garbage companies empty the trashcans,
my neighbors usually bring in their household’s
trashcans off of the street:
O The same evening.
O Sometime the next day.
O Within the next 2 – 3 days.
O Within the next week.
Comments:
16. I frequently observe the following conditions in my
neighborhood (check all that apply)?
O Parking on the front yard.
O Parking in the driveway with the vehicle extending over
the sidewalk.
O Fences with missing boards or that is not structurally
sound.
O Indoor furniture used outside or placed on rooftops.
O Storage of inoperable vehicles or equipment.
O Storage of building materials or other debris not
associated with a valid building permit.
O Illegally parked cars (i.e. opposite direction, red curb,
etc.)
Other (Please specify):
17. I feel my neighborhood should be quiet on a
weeknight (Sunday – Thursday) by approximately:
O 7 p.m. – 8 p.m.
O 8 p.m. – 9 p.m. O
9 p.m. – 10 p.m. O
10 p.m. – 11 p.m. O
11 p.m. or later
Comments:
18. I typically notice my neighborhood is quiet on a
weeknight (Sunday – Thursday) by approximately:
O 7 p.m. – 8 p.m.
O 8 p.m. – 9 p.m. O
9 p.m. – 10 p.m. O
10 p.m. – 11 p.m. O
11 p.m. or later
Comments:
19. I feel my neighborhood should be quiet on a
weekend night (Friday – Saturday) by approximately:
O 7 p.m. – 8 p.m. O
8 p.m. – 9 p.m. O 9
p.m. – 10 p.m.
O 10 p.m. – 11 p.m.
O 11 p.m. or later
Comments:
20. I typically notice my neighborhood is quiet on a
weekend night (Friday - Saturday) by approximately:
O 7 p.m. – 8 p.m.
O 8 p.m. – 9 p.m. O
9 p.m. – 10 p.m. O
10 p.m. – 11 p.m. O
11 p.m. or later
Comments:
21. I feel comfortable addressing my neighbor if a
concern arises.
Strongly Disagree Disagree N eutral Agree Strongly Agr ee
O O O O O
Comments:
22. I feel as though my neighbors are respectful of my
property.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
O O O O O
Comments:
23. I think there is enough unsolicited police presence (not
responding to a call) in my neighborhood.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
O O O O O
Comments:
24. I would like to see more unsolicited police presence
(not responding to a call) in my neighborhood. St r o n gl y
Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree O
O O O O
Comments:
25. Please mark all that apply in regards to the following
statement: If one of my neighbors hosts a social
gathering, I often notice…
O Parking becomes unavailable quickly.
O Garbage is left on my or other neighbors’ property.
O Vomit on my or other neighbors’ property.
O Other unwanted objects on my property.
O Loud and disruptive activity on the street.
O Little or no problems.
Comments:
26. When I first moved to San Luis Obispo, the quality of
life within the San Luis Obispo residential community
was:
Strongly Unfavorable Neutral Favorable Strongly
Unfavorable Favorable
O O O O O
Comments:
27. Currently, I feel the quality of life within the San Luis
Obispo residential community is:
Strongly Unfavorable Neutral Favorable Strongly
Unfavorable Favorable
O O O O O
Comments:
28. If there is a discrepancy between your answers to
Questions 26 and 27, please comment on the shift of
your view on community climate.
Comments:
Figure 1: Opinion Survey, page 1
APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 55
Packet Pg. 350
15
29. I believe the relationship between college-age students
and permanent residents is important.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
O O O O O
Comments:
30. I believe college-age students provide value to the San
Luis Obispo community.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
O O O O O
Comments:
31. I believe permanent residents provide value to the San
Luis Obispo community.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
O O O O O
Comments:
32. I believe a meaningful relationship between the college-
age students and permanent residents should be a
priority of the local government.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
O O O O O
Comments:
33. I feel as if I am welcome to participate in discussions
about improving community relationships.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
O O O O O
Comments:
34. I feel as if I should be included in discussions about
improving community relationships.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
O O O O O
Comments:
35. I believe college-age students provide an important role
in facilitating economic growth within the San Luis
Obispo community.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
O O O O O
Comments:
36. I would recommend living in my neighborhood to a
friend.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
O O O O O
Comments:
37. I support a rental inspection program for commercial
and residential housing.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
O O O O O
Comments:
38. I believe property owners of rental properties are
responsible for ensuring tenants are not disruptive
to neighbors.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
O O O O O
Comments:
39. I believe property owners can be proactive with their
tenants about not being disruptive in residential
neighborhoods.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
O O O O O
Comments:
40. I believe city leaders have enacted ordinances and
programs to improve neighborhood civility.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
O O O O O
Comments:
41. I believe Cal Poly and Cuesta have enacted policies
and regulations for standards of conduct for their
students to improve neighborhood civility.
Strongly Disagree Disagree Neutral Agree Strongly Agree
O O O O O
Comments:
42. Have you ever been invited to be a participant in a
discussion that involved Cal Poly and/or Cuesta and
permanent residents?
O Yes
O No
Other (Please specify):
43. Have you ever participated in a discussion that
involved Cal Poly/Cuesta and permanent residents?
O Yes
O No
Other (Please specify):
44. If invited to participate in a discussion that involved
Cal Poly/Cuesta and permanent residents, would you
participate?
O Yes
O No
Other (Please specify):
45. At what times of the year, if any, do you notice the
most disturbances in community neighborhoods?
O Winter
O Spring
O Summer
O Fall
Comments:
46. If you could fix one issue in San Luis Obispo, what
would it be?
47. What suggestions do you have to improve the
relations between the college-age students and
permanent residents?
48. Are you interested in being contacted to share your
opinions on these community related issues in the
future?
O Yes, my e-mail is:
O No
Neighborhood Wellness
and
Community Civility
Initiative
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
OPINION SURVEY
In May of 2013, community representatives, Cuesta and Cal
Poly administrators, students, and San Luis Obispo officials
convened and ultimately launched a Neighborhood W ellness
and Community Civility Initiative. Collectively, the group has
a vision of a community in which year round residents and
students actively collaborate to build community and
communicate in an environment that fosters mutual respect
and understanding. With this vision comes a goal of
enhancing the quality of life for all residents, with particular
emphasis on building positive relations between residential
and student–aged neighbors through a cultural shift in social
behaviors.
To learn more about this initiative, please visit
www.slocity.org/police/communitycivility.asp
The following survey is an integral s t e p i n this initiative. In
order to assess the current conditions of neighborhood
wellness, surveying residents of all ages and backgrounds
will provide guidance for future actions taken by officials of
San Luis Obispo, Cal Poly San Luis Obispo, and Cuesta
College. Please answer honestly and explain when you
feel necessary. Should you have concerns arise about the
survey, please contact Christine Wallace at
cwallace@slocity.org.
You have two options. You may complete the enclosed
survey and return it in the postage-paid envelope OR
you may complete the survey on-line at:
https://www.surveymonkey.com/ s/PPNJHF6. Only one
survey per person and only one survey per official
postage-paid envelope please.
Figure 2: Opinion Survey, page 2
Where appropriate, distributions of variables were compared using a standard statistical proce-
dure known as a χ2 goodness-of-fit test (Pearson, 1900). As this pro ject was exploratory in nature,
however, few formal statistical tests were actually performed. The ma jority of trends were simply
shown in a qualitative manner, in graphical or tabular form. Additionally, a regular expression search
was performed for certain free response questions, to isolate any common words that appeared most
frequently.
3 Results
3.1 Descriptive Statistics
An overview of our dataset, resulting from 3807 survey responses, is shown in Table 1. As expected,
the vast ma jority of those between 18-24 years old are Cal Poly students (1591 out of 1672). Also,
approximately 23% of non-students live in two areas that have a substantial student population: the
APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 56
Packet Pg. 351
15
All residents Non-students Cal Poly Students Cuesta Students
Characteristic Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent
Age 18-24 years o ld 1672 47.913 0.81591 95.86051.7
25-31 years o ld 144 4.168 4 54 3.32118.1
32-38 years o ld 117 3.4101 6 10 0.6 5 4.3
39-45 years o ld 119 3.4107 6.33 0.2 8 6.9
46-51 years o ld 114 3.3109 6.50 0 5 4.3
52-58 years o ld 264 7.6 256 15.21 0.1 6 5.2
59-65 years o ld 346 9.9 336 19.90 0 7 6
66-71 years o ld 275 7.9 273 16.20 0 1 0.9
72-78 years o ld 205 5.9 196 11.60 0 2 1.7
79-85 years o ld 148 4.2144 8.50 0 1 0.9
86+ years o ld 87 2.583 4.92 0.1 0 0
Ethnicity
African American/Black 17 0.5 4 0.2 12 0.7 1 0.9
American Indian/Alaska Native 12 0.370.4 2 0.1 3 2.6
Asian 167 4.835 2.1128 7.7 3 2.6
Latino 162 4.732 1.9113 6.8 15 13
Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 14 0.480.5 5 0.3 1 0.9
White/Caucasian 2951 85.21518 91.11329 80.2 85 73.9
Other (please specify) 140 4 62 3.7 69 4.2 7 6.1
Neighborhood
Cal Poly area. 746 21.6 134 8 592 35.7 18 18
Downtown area. 427 12.3 281 16.7 127 7.7 19 19
Foothill/N. Chorro area. 629 18.2 252 15 354 21.4 16 16
Johnson/Sinsheimer area. 372 10.8 305 18.2 52 3.1 11 11
Laguna area. 469 13.6 333 19.8 115 6.9 16 16
On Cal Poly’s campus. 376 10.9 0 0 374 22.6 1 1
Tank Far m/Broad area. 441 12.7 373 22.2 43 2.6 19 19
Table 1: Descriptive Statistics for the entire dataset
“Cal Poly area” and the “Foothill/N. Chorro area.” Among these non-student residents of these
two areas, roughly 90% of them are above the age of 38, pointing towards the possibility of conflict
between these residents and Cal Poly students.
To determine the extent to which our study sample may have been biased with respect to the
target population of all San Luis Obispo citizens, a comparison of the distributions of age and eth-
nicity from our survey was made to that of 2010 Census data (U.S. Census Bureau, 2010). The
χ2 goodness-of-fit test revealed that our age and ethnicity distributions were indeed statistically
significantly different from those of the Census data. Specifically, 18-24 year olds were overrep-
resented in our sample (47.9% compared to 39.6% in Census data), and African Americans were
APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 57
Packet Pg. 352
15
underrepresented in our sample (0.5% compared to 1.2% in Census data). Additionally, Hispanic o r
Latino ethnicities were not explicitly recorded in the 2010 Census data, so our accuracy with this
population is unknown.
3.2 Strong Majority Opinion Exploration
Our first analysis was to examine whether any content questions had a strong ma jority responding
in any particular way. We scanned through the entire survey responses, with a threshold of 80%
indicating a strong ma jority. Also, we looked at this within subgroups of the dataset, with subgroups
defined by combinations of the identifying questions.
Among all of the content questions, only two questions surfaced as having strong ma jority opin-
ions through this exploration. They were (with majority response bolded):
• W hen I return to my house after school or work:
– I can assume that there will be parking relatively close to my house
– I frequently have trouble finding parking relatively close to my house
– I rarely find parking relatively close to my house
• After the garbage companies empty the trashcans, I usually bring in my household’s trashcans
off of the street:
– The same evening
– Sometime the next day
– Within the next 2-3 days
– Within the next week
In the entire dataset, 81.1% responded that they can find parking relatively close to their house,
and 80.9% responded that they bring in their trashcans on the same evening. Among subgroups
defined by age, gender, ethnicity and all other identifying questions, plus combinations thereof,
many subgroups identified these same two questions/responses at a greater than 80% rate. No other
content question surfaced as having at least 80% of responses matching.
APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 58
Packet Pg. 353
15
Proportion 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 3.3 Contrasting Questions Exploration
3.3.1 Trashcans
As observed in the previous section, 80.9% of the study sample reported that they bring their
trashcans in on the same day. While this does not directly point to any possible conflict, we
can compare this to the responses of the next question: “After the garbage companies empty the
trashcans, my neighbors usually bring in their household’s trashcans off of the street. . . ” Specifically,
we can examine the distribution of responses among those who stated that they bring in their
trashcans on the same day. Any of these individuals who report that their neighbors do anything
other than bring their trashcans in on the same day will form a group who are potentially upset by
this situation. This is summarized in Figure 3.
Neighbors bring in their trashcans...
(among those who responded that they bring in their trashcans the same evening)
The same
Sometime the
Within the
Within the
evening next day next 2−3 days next week
Response
Figure 3: Distribution of responses about their neighbors, by people who reported bringing in their
own trashcans on the same evening as the garbage companies empty them
Since this is only among those who responded that they themselves bring in their trashcans on
APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 59
Packet Pg. 354
15
Proportion 0.0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0 the same evening that the garbage companies empty them, it is plausible that they might expect
the same from their neighbors. Thus, we observe that just over 30% of these individuals might
potentially be upset by this situation.
Additionally, we explored whether this dichotomy was driven by a differing attitude between
students and non-students. That is, when do students b ring in their trashcans, and when do non-
students b ring in their trashcans? This is summarized in Figure 4.
After the garbage companies empty the trashcans, I usually bring in my trashcans off the street:
Non−students
CP students
The same Sometime the Within the Within the
evening next day next 2−3 days next week
Response
Figure 4: Student vs. non-student responses regarding when they bring in their own trashcans
As we observe above, Cal Poly students tend to bring their trashcans in at a later time than the
non-student population. In particular, only about 60% of Cal Poly students report that they bring
their trashcans in on the same evening.
Finally, we examined the free responses attached to this question. Among a total of 156 non-
students who left a free response, approximately 35 of them left a comment that voiced frustration
at the situation, such as:
• “But some NEVER bring them in!”
• “The adults do. Students not so much.”
• “Po ly students don’t understand trash rules.”
APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 60
Packet Pg. 355
15
Proportion 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 7−8pm 8−9pm 9−10pm 10−11pm 11pm or later In contrast, approximately 10 of the comments appeared to indicate that this should not be a
concern of the city, e.g.:
“I actually have no idea, I don’t care what my neighbors do with their trash cans as
long as they don’t block my driveway.”
The remaining comments appeared to be either neutral or of undeterminable tone. Also, an exam-
ination of the student comments to this question revealed virtually zero who voiced frustration at
the situation. It is important to note, however, that all of these counts are quite imprecise, as it was
left entirely up to human judgement of a written phrase.
3.3.2 Time that it should b e quiet
Questions 17 and 18 asked contrasting questions about what time it should be, and actually is, quiet
on a weeknight. The overall distributions are summarized in Figure 5.
I feel my neighborhood should be/is quiet on a weeknight (Sunday −Thursday) by approximately:
should be
is
Figure 5: Side-by-side distributions of when it should be and is quiet on a weeknight.
To determine the proportion who might potentially be upset at the situation surrounding this ques-
tion, we categorized people as “potentially upset” if they responded that it usually is quiet at a later
time than what they stated for when it should be quiet. In the entire dataset, 16.8% responded
that it is quiet at a later time than they feel that it should be, on a weeknight. When separated
APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 61
Packet Pg. 356
15
Proportion 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 7−8pm 8−9pm 9−10pm 10−11pm 11pm or later into Cal Po ly students and non-students, the percentage potentially upset was 17.0% and 16.4%,
respectively.
Questions 19 and 20 were similar to Questions 17 and 18, but posed for the weekend nights. The
overall distributions are summarized in Figure 6.
I feel my neighborhood should be/is quiet on a weekend (Friday−Satu rday) by approximately:
should be
is
Figure 6: Side-by-side distributions of when it should be and is quiet on a weekend.
To determine the proportion who might potentially be upset at the situation surrounding this ques-
tion, we categorized people as “potentially upset” if they responded that it usually is quiet at a later
time than what they stated for when it should be quiet. In the entire dataset, 14.8% responded that
it is quiet at a later time than they feel that it should be, on a weekend night. When separated
into Cal Poly students and non-students, the percentages potentially upset were 9.9% and 18.0%,
respectively.
3.3.3 Quality of life at first vs. currently
Questions 26 and 27 asked about the quality of life in San Luis Obispo, when first moved to the town,
and currently. The overall distributions are summarized in Figure 7. Overall, it appears that people
are reporting a declining quality of life after living in San Luis Obispo for some amount of tim e.
Specifically, 28.8% of all respondants reported that their current quality of life is worse than when
they first moved to San Luis Obispo. W hen separated into Cal Poly students and non-students, the
percentages reporting a worse quality of life currently were 13.0% and 40.4%, respectively.
APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 62
Packet Pg. 357
15
Proportion 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 Quality of live when first moved to / currently in San Luis Obispo:
When first moved
Currently
Strongly
Favorable
Neutral Unfavorable Strongly
Favorable Unfavorable
Figure 7: Side-by-side distributions of quality of life when first m oved to San Luis Obispo vs.
currently.
An examination of the written comments, however, revealed no obvious trend or cause of the
decline. Among non-students, comments ranged from
“crime, drugs, late nite partys, housing authority trash/noise”
to
“Too much nit-picking while real problems go unresolved.”
Although far fewer Cal Poly students reported a decline in quality of life over the time that they
have lived here, there was a modest trend towards comments that expressed disdain for increasing
rules/restrictions and police presence among those who did (16 out of 37 total written comments
from Cal Po ly students).
3.4 Cal Poly and Footh ill / N. Chorro area residents
As mentioned in Section 3.1, the Cal Poly and Foothill / N. Chorro area are two locations in San
Luis Obispo with a high mixing of students and non-students. A summary of responses to the Likert
scale questions, separated by students and non-students in these areas, is shown in Table 2.
APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 63
Packet Pg. 358
15
Table 2: Likert scale questions for residents of the Cal Poly and Foothill / N. Chorro area residents, separated by
Cal Poly students and non-students.
Strongly Strongly
Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Disagree
I feel as though my neighbors are respectful of my property.
Cal Poly Students 0.21 0.46 0.18 0.11 0.05
Non-students 0.29 0.41 0.14 0.11 0.05
I would like to see more unsolicited police presence (not responding to a call) in my neighborhood.
Cal Poly Students 0.03 0.11 0.27 0.25 0.33
Non-students 0.20 0.29 0.36 0.11 0.05
I believe the relationship between college age students and permanent residents is important.
Cal Poly Students 0.34 0.53 0.10 0.02 0.01
Non-students 0.540.39 0.05 0.01 0.01
I believe college age students provide value to the San Luis Obispo community.
Cal Poly Students 0.51 0.39 0.07 0.02 0.01
Non-students 0.26 0.510.18 0.04 0.02
I believe permanent residents provide value to the San Luis Obispo community.
Cal Poly Students 0.39 0.49 0.10 0.02 0.01
Non-students 0.71 0.26 0.01 0.01 0.01
I believe a meaningful relationship between the college age students and permanent residents should be a priority of the local government.
Cal Poly Students 0.19 0.40 0.26 0.11 0.05
Non-students 0.42 0.40 0.13 0.02 0.02
I feel as if I am welcome to participate in discussions about improving community relationships.
Cal Poly Students 0.07 0.28 0.33 0.22 0.10
Non-students 0.14 0.510.26 0.07 0.02
I feel as if I should be included in discussions about improving community relationships.
Cal Poly Students 0.20 0.46 0.29 0.05 0.00
Non-students 0.17 0.510.29 0.02 0.01
I believe college age students provide an important role in facilitating economic growth within the San Luis Obispo community.
Cal Poly Students 0.60 0.33 0.05 0.01 0.00
I would recommend living in my neighborhood to a friend.
Non-students 0.29 0.44 0.19 0.06 0.02
Cal Poly Students 0.39 0.45 0.11 0.03 0.02
Non-students 0.32 0.33 0.14 0.10 0.11
I support a rental inspection program for commercial and residential rental housing.
Cal Poly Students 0.20 0.32 0.27 0.14 0.08
Non-students 0.37 0.31 0.16 0.08 0.07
I believe property owners of rental properties are responsible for ensuring tenants are not disruptive to neighbors.
Cal Poly Students 0.09 0.27 0.24 0.26 0.14
Non-students 0.53 0.31 0.05 0.06 0.05
I believe property owners can be proactive with their tenants about not being disruptive in residential neighborhoods.
Cal Poly Students 0.11 0.500.25 0.09 0.06
Non-students 0.55 0.37 0.06 0.02 0.01
I believe city leaders have enacted ordinances and programs to improve neighborhood civility.
Cal Poly Students 0.05 0.30 0.38 0.13 0.14
Non-students 0.10 0.45 0.32 0.10 0.03
I believe Cal Poly and Cuesta have enacted policies and regulations for standards of conduct for their students to improve neighborhood civility.
Cal Poly Students 0.06 0.35 0.38 0.13 0.08
Non-students 0.04 0.28 0.41 0.20 0.09
11
Packet Pg. 359
15
Notably, the distribution of responses for Cal Po ly students vs. Non-students differed at a
statistically significant level for all of the questions in the table above, except for the question:
“I feel as if I should be included in discussions about improving community relation-
ships.”
That is, every other Likert scale question in the above table points to a dichotomy of attitudes when
comparing students vs. non-students who live in the Cal Poly and Foothill / N. Chorro areas.
One specific contrast of interest is the differing of attitudes about who should be responsible
for whether tenants are disruptive to their neighbors o r not. Among non-students, roughly 80-
90% believe (either “Strongly Agree” or “Agree”) that property owners should be responsible for
their tenants regarding their disruptiveness to neighbors, whereas only about 30% of students feel
similarly. On the other hand, when asked if property owners can be proactive about the same issue,
approximately 60% of students responded with either “Strongly Agree” or “Agree,” pointing to at
least some degree of openness to communication with their landlords regarding noise issues.
Additionally, the trashcan and quiet time issues from Sections 3.3.1 and 3.3.2 are at an increased
level in the Cal Poly and Foothill / N. Chorro areas. Using the same “potentially upset” definition
as in the previous sections, approximately 37.0% of non-students living in these areas fall into this
categorization. By comparison, in Section 3.3.1 we saw that approximately 30% of all citizens (that
is, all students and non-students) fell into this categorization; in fact, this percentage is the same
for non-students across all neighborhoods, indicating an increase in the proportion in this category
for the Cal Poly and Foothill / N. Chorro areas. Regarding the tim e that it should be quiet on a
weekday night, approximately 28.0% of non-students are categorized as potentially upset, and 31.2%
are potentially upset for the weekend nights (compared to 17.0% and 18.0% as stated in Section
3.3.2).
3.5 Issues and Suggestions: written comments
Question 46 asked:
“If you could fix one issue in San Luis Obispo, what would it be?”
APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 65
Packet Pg. 360
15
Using a regular expression search, Table 3 shows the most common words found in the responses,
separated by students and non-students.
non-students Cal Poly students
word count word count
downtown 110 students 142
homeless 90 college91
traffic 87 residents 53
rental 72 noise52
Poly 58 campus 47
street 42 parking 46
noise 41 housing 46
bars 40 police42
residents 39 permanent 41
cars 35 Poly 39
Table 3: Most common words found in written responses to the question, “If you could fix one issue
in San Luis Obispo, what would it be?”
All short words such as prepositions, conjunctions, and other low-content words (such as “more”)
were removed from the list. Some words that do appear on the list may not be that revealing, such
as the usage of “students” or “college” by Cal Poly students in their comments. On the other hand,
an examination of the non-student comments containing the word “downtown” showed comments
that mainly focused on homelessness (overlapping with #2) and disruptive behavior associated with
the bars (overlapping with #8).
Question 47 asked:
“W hat suggestions do you have to improve the relations between the college-age
students and permanent residents?”
Again using a regular expression search, Table 4 shows the most common words found in the
responses to this question, separated by students and non-students.
APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 66
Packet Pg. 361
15
non-students Cal Poly students
word count word count
students 335 students 192
neighbors 103 residents 153
residents 93 college 137
Poly 80 permanent 111
college 80 community 71
campus 75 campus 55
respect 70 neighbors 45
community 60 noise36
landlords 45 people 35
behavior 44 think 35
Table 4: Most common words found in written responses to the question, “W hat suggestions do you
have to improve the relationship between the college-age students and permanent residents?”
Again, not all words are extremely revealing. Of note, however, is the fact that the words “rule(s),”,
“regulation(s),” and “fine(s)” do not appear on either list, suggesting that neither students nor
non-students tend to believe that an increase in city ordinances is the answer. In contrast, we see
words such as “respect,” “community” and “neighbors,” suggesting that ultimately, students and
non-students would like to co-exist in a harmonious manner. A specific response to this question
that exemplifies this sentiment is one from a non-student living in the Foothill / N. Chorro area
that states:
“Have a beer with them - as long as they are of legal drinking age. Otherwise, you
might have to buy them a fountain drink.”
4 Discussion and Conclusions
In this report, we summarize the results f rom the City of San Luis Obispo Opinion Survey. Certain
trends were explored, with a focus on potential sources of conflict between Cal Poly students and non-
student residents of San Luis Obispo. It is important to note that, since this analysis was exploratory
in nature, all of the findings must be treated as suggestive, rather than as strong evidence in favor
or in opposition of any notion.
Additionally, there is a slight concern for bias in the dataset, as noted in Section 3.1. The
distributions of age and ethnicity in our survey dataset were statistically significantly different from
APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 67
Packet Pg. 362
15
that of the Census data. However, the differences were not drastic; although this may indeed be a
concern, it is relatively minor.
Among all potential sources of conflict in San Luis Obispo, the one with the largest indication
is the time that neighbors bring their trashcans in, with approxim ately 30% of all residents being
potentially upset. Noise at night does not appear to be as much of an issue, except specifically in
the Cal Poly and Foothill / N. Chorro areas, where non-students are potentially upset at a rate of
approximately 30% on both weeknights and weekends.
The survey also revealed a vast dichotomy of attitudes between non-students and Cal Poly
students. This is exposed in the responses to the Likert Scale questions in Table 2, and also with
regard to when each group tends to bring their trashcans in. It does not appear likely that this
systematic difference in attitude could be corrected by specific fines and ordinances. Rather, any
strategy to remedy this must be aimed at addressing this broadly, both am ong students who plan
to live off-campus, and for non-students who live in heavily student-populated areas.
Future work could examine the question of whether any implemented strategies are working. In
particular, certain increases in fines have indeed been in place since May 2010, aimed specifically at
Halloween and St. Patrick’s Day (City of San Luis Obispo, 2013). Fr om a statistical standpoint,
the data up to this point do not suggest that the increase in fines have been an effective deterrent
of citable offenses. It is of course possible that, with more data, the evidence could arise, and this
question could possibly be addressed properly at that time.
However, as mentioned above, this report does not support the notion that specific increases
in fines will achieve outcomes consistent with neighborhood wellness. As student and non-student
attitudes and expectations about residential life in San Luis Obispo are so dichotomous at this time,
this must be addressed systematically, rather than by attempting to deter specific behaviors.
APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 68
Packet Pg. 363
15
References
City of San Luis Obispo. Council agenda report, 2013.
K. Pearson. On the criterion that a given system of deviations from the probable in the case of
a correlated system of variables is such that it can be reasonably supposed to have arisen from
random sampling. Philosophical Magazine Series, 50:157–175, 1900.
R Development Core Team. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. R Foun-
dation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria, 2011. ISBN 3-900051-07-0.
SurveyMonkey Inc. Surveymonkey. http://www.surveymonkey.com, 2014.
U.S. Census Bureau. Census 2010, 2010.
APPENDIX C: Full Survey Results Page 69
Packet Pg. 364
15
APPENDIX D: Matrix of all action items
Objective One:
Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation
Leads & Partners
Timeline for
Implementation
Schedule regular neighborhood
tours with city council, mayor,
neighbors, Cal Poly and Cuesta
leaders, etc.
Allow neighbors to
point out
neighborhood
issues
Cal Poly Ongoing, began
Summer of 2014
Investigate establishing S.N.A.P.
Ride-Along program and
promote current Police Ride
Along program
Increase the
amount of support
to assist with
complaints and
allow officers to do
other police work
City of San Luis
Obispo
Fall 2015
Explore the option of creating a
noise ordinance in public spaces
on streets and sidewalks for
gatherings of more than 50
people by issuing citations or
other alternative options
Decrease number
of noise complaints
City of San Luis
Obispo
Spring 2016
Consider expanding tools to
enforce ordinances for nuisance
properties including, but not
limited to, “tagging” properties
that meet a definition of a public
nuisance or unruly gatherings in
terms of both property-
maintenance concerns and
behavior issues
Hold repeat noise
violators
accountable
City of San Luis
Obispo
Spring 2016
Evaluate policies so that new
development or redevelopment
does not unduly impact
neighborhoods.
Decrease properties
that allow for high
occupancy
City of San Luis
Obispo
Fall 2016
Appendix D: Matrix of all action items Page 70
Packet Pg. 365
15
Objective Two:
Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation
Leads & Partners
Timeline for
Implementation
Evaluate best practices and
implement strategies to reduce
the number of disruptions from
parties and noise in
neighborhoods (as referenced in
Objective Three)
Reduce noise
disruptions
Cal Poly and
Cuesta College
(programmatic)
City of San Luis
Obispo
(enforcement)
Fall 2015
Develop and implement a rental
housing inspection program
Insure that rental units
comply with required
minimum health and
safety standards
City of San Luis
Obispo
Fall 2016
Implement a range of strategies
to change the relationship and
culture between students and
non-students in neighborhoods
(no specific recommendations
discerned from the survey
results)
Improve student and
community
relationships
Cal Poly Associated
Student, Inc. (ASI)
and Associate
Students for Cuesta
College (ASCC)
Spring 2016
Explore and implement
strategies to address the
concentration of bars in the
downtown area and related
safety issues. Consider using
strategies identified in the Land
Use and Circulation Element
update to achieve this objective
Address and decrease
safety-related issues
City of San Luis
Obispo
Ongoing per
LUCE strategies
Implement educational programs
to increase the number of
student-aged residents who
bring in their trashcans on the
same day the trash is picked up
Increase the number
of student-age
residents to comply
with the 24-hour
ordinance
City of San Luis
Obispo
Ongoing
Continue to implement strategies
to address homelessness in San
Luis Obispo (particularly in the
downtown area)
A reduction in the
impacts of
homelessness on the
community
City of San Luis
Obispo
Ongoing
Implement strategies to reduce
traffic issues in neighborhoods.
Consider using strategies
identified in the Land Use and
Circulation Element update to
achieve this objective
Reduce traffic-related
issues in
neighborhoods
City of San Luis
Obispo
Ongoing
Appendix D: Matrix of all action items Page 71
Packet Pg. 366
15
Objective Three:
Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation
Leads & Partners
Timeline for
Implementation
Create and implement a
transition to Off-Campus
Living Education Program, to
be shared with Cuesta
College’s Student Life Office
Set expectations and
responsibilities for
students living in
neighborhoods in the
City of San Luis Obispo
Cal Poly Summer 2015
Work with the city to generate
a neighborhood map of
housing rental properties and
provide outreach to student
renters by funding welcome
bags for neighbors to
distribute to establish positive
interactions
Establish positive
interaction with City
Cal Poly ASI ,
ASCC, City of San
Luis Obispo
Spring 2016
Create a Renter/Rental
Housing Inspection Program
Rental properties that
meet minimum health
and safety standards
Cal Poly, City of San
Luis Obispo
Spring 2016
Develop outreach and
marketing efforts toward
students
Raise awareness of the
impacts of noise on
neighborhood
Cal Poly Spring 2016
Implement a Party
Registration Program.
Develop a program to
incentivize party registration
that provides the opportunity
for the San Luis Obispo Police
Department to contact the
party registrant and offer a 20-
minute warning before
dispatching S.N.A.P. or a
police officer
Fewer noise citations City of San Luis
Obispo
Spring 2016
Initiate Dialog Dinners or
Block Parties for students and
residents to talk about what
they like most about their
neighborhoods
Create positive
interactions between
students and year-
round residents
Cal Poly ASI, ASCC Ongoing
Promote the principles of the
The Mustang Way in
neighborhoods
Enhance a positive
culture of peer-to-peer
accountability in
neighborhoods
Cal Poly ASI Ongoing
Appendix D: Matrix of all action items Page 72
Packet Pg. 367
15
Continue to engage and
communicate collaboratively
among students, non-students
and city groups
Improve collaboration
and understanding
among students, non-
students and city
groups
SCLC Ongoing
Utilize various on-campus
departments and offices that
support living off-campus to
support students, non-
students and permanent
residents living in
neighborhoods.
Educate students about
university policies and
ordinances, strengthen
neighborhood relations
by facilitating dialogs
Cal Poly & Cuesta
College
Fall 2015
Develop proactive
engagement of law and code
enforcement with visits to
properties of concern; “Knock
and Talk”.
Positive engagement
with law enforcement
and decrease repeat
offending properties
City of San Luis
Obispo
Ongoing
Implement a Joint Letter
Program.
Police contact with
students in off-campus
housing generates
letter signed by
university, police and
city that outlines
expectations sent to
resident and landlord
Cal Poly Fall 2015
Objective Four:
Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation
Leads & Partners
Timeline for
Implementation
City and Cal Poly officials to craft
a Memorandum of Understanding
agreement between the city and
university regarding police
operational protocol within a one-
mile radius
Allows for
coordination of
resources to quickly
respond to
community concerns
Cal Poly, City of
San Luis Obispo
Fall 2015
Partner Cal Poly and Cuesta police
officers with San Luis Obispo
Neighborhood Officers to
coordinate resources and achieve
program goals
To coordinate
resources and obtain
program goals
City of San Luis
Obispo
Fall 2015
City should explore additional
proactive educational
opportunities with Cal Poly and
Change student
culture related to
neighborhood
SCLC Fall 2016, and
with each annual
report
Appendix D: Matrix of all action items Page 73
Packet Pg. 368
15
Cuesta College to change the
student culture related to
neighborhood wellness
wellness
Implement a keg registration
program
A reduction in
underage alcohol use
and an accountability
mechanism for
persons who serve
minors
City of San Luis
Obispo
Fall 2016
Conduct an internal assessment of
the San Luis Obispo Police
Department staffing to prepare for
growth within the city and on the
Cal Poly campus to ensure staffing
needs match the population
Meet the needs of the
community as
population grows
City of San Luis
Obispo
Spring 2016
Conduct an internal assessment of
the University Police Department
staffing to meet the growth on the
Cal Poly campus
Meet the needs of Cal
Poly as student
population grows
Cal Poly Spring 2016
Explore the possibility of Cal Poly
Police being able to issue City
Municipal Administrative
Citations
To be able to patrol in
neighborhoods
adjacent to Cal Poly
campus
Addressed via
MOU identified
above
Location of a university police
substation within the new
residence hall project to coordinate
law enforcement problem-solving
efforts
Coordinate law
enforcement outreach
and problem solving
efforts
Cal Poly Fall 2018
Objective Five:
Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation
Leads & Partners
Timeline for
Implementation
Create an annual
communications plan
containing neighborhood
wellness messages and a
process for
communicating the
information effectively to
maximize resources
Effectively inform the
community on matters of
neighborhood wellness
City of San Luis
Obispo
Winter 2015
Appendix D: Matrix of all action items Page 74
Packet Pg. 369
15
Objective Six:
Actions Desired Outcomes Implementation
Leads & Partners
Timeline for
Implementation
Re-invest in the Student-
Community Liaison
Committee
Become the coordinating
body responsible for
monitoring the
recommendations, once
adopted by the city council,
Cal Poly and Cuesta
College
SCLC Fall 2015, ongoing
The Student-Community
Liaison Committee should
assess the effectiveness of
each recommendation
once they have been
implemented
Recommend the
appropriate changes, and
produce an annual report
on the state of
neighborhood wellness in
the City of San Luis Obispo
SCLC Ongoing
Shift SCLC memberships SCLC memberships should
be reevaluated to directly
involve those individuals
(by their position) most
directly involved in
neighborhood wellness
SCLC Spring 2016
Host an annual town hall
meeting
Present their report to the
community, receive
feedback and suggestions
from the broader San Luis
Obispo community
SCLC Spring 2016,
ongoing
Appendix D: Matrix of all action items Page 75
Packet Pg. 370
15
APPENDIX E: Post March 7 Recommendations
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Working Group
Ideas to Investigate arranged by Objective
*NOTE: These ideas were generated by the City of San Luis Obispo (e.g. public comment at March 17, 2015 City
Council Meeting) and Cal Poly staff through a number of forums after the March 7, 2015 roof collapse on Hathway
Street. These ideas were not discussed by the Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort working group and
their inclusion in this report should not be considered an endorsement by the working group.
Objective 1: Define short-term actions that could be implemented to enhance quality of life for
all residents particularly associated in the timeframe around the opening of the Cal Poly and
Cuesta College campuses at the beginning of the school year.
1 Develop smoother lines of communication between the city, Cal Poly and Cuesta both
proactively and reactively.
2 Students need to be informed of the consequences of their actions off campus and
perhaps have responses strengthened to moderate behavior.
3 Quicker administrative response is needed to violations of behavior off campus by the
city, Cal Poly and Cuesta.
Objective 2: Define Stakeholders’ Needs and Success
4 Create a tip line where anyone (students, neighbors, etc.) can report potential problems
before they have negative impact on the community.
Objective 3: Identify University/City Best Practices
5 Advance the effort to house Greek organizations on the Cal Poly campus.
6 Create a student ambassador program that has two components. The first component
should be to promote positive relations in the community. The second component
should be an anonymous social event attendee to report unsafe behavior to the
appropriate authority.
7 Improve response time by SLOPD and UPD to reports of noise off campus.
8 Bring alternative social/entertainment opportunities on campus to reduce the reliance on
off campus events for socialization.
9 Reach out to universities who consistently host regulated tailgate parties, with monitored
alcohol distribution. Learn what works well for them and bring their best practices to
Cal Poly tailgates.
10 Increase the methods to hold landlords accountable for the negative behavior of their
tenants including court appearances by the landlord or denial of business license.
11 Suggest that landlords add clause in rental agreements that prevents any activity on roof.
Appendix E: Post March 7 Recommendations Page 76
Packet Pg. 371
15
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Working Group
Ideas to Investigate arranged by Objective
*NOTE: These ideas were generated by the City of San Luis Obispo (e.g. public comment at March 17, 2015 City
Council Meeting) and Cal Poly staff through a number of forums after the March 7, 2015 roof collapse on Hathway
Street. These ideas were not discussed by the Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort working group and
their inclusion in this report should not be considered an endorsement by the working group.
12 Aggressively advance the Rental Inspection ordinance to identify unsafe and unhealthy
properties.
13 Evaluate “Neighborhood Specialists” like in Davis (Maybe adjust hours/days of existing
Neighborhood Specialists.
14 Continue to develop strategies that promote more diverse neighborhoods, including
more owner-occupied and long-term rentals (ie workers and family rentals, not short
term academic year rentals)
15 SLOPD and UPD should collaborate on methods to deter large crowds from migrating
from area to area.
16 Implement programs that create peer to peer pressure, that help students own their
actions and accept responsibility for behavior that does not promote neighborhood
wellness.
Objective 4: Review Enforcement Best Practices
17 Consider the size and scope of a party to help determine what safety and hazard city
ordinances can be created/enforced? Perhaps double or triple fines during peak hours or
holidays where large parties/events are expected.
18 Limit the number of student rental properties to one per street.
19 Create and enforce a 10:00 pm noise curfew with escalating noise fines by the hour.
20 More visible UPD presence on campus and in the residential neighborhoods immediately
surrounding campus (an MOU is currently being finalized to allow UPD to issue
municipal citations off campus).
21 Issue a citation to the leadership figure of the organization responsible for hosting an out-
of-control party. Consider exploring ways to hold the national organization responsible
as well.
22 Consider installing more security cameras to effectively monitor activity.
23 Create a staff position to investigate potential dangerous student activity before events
take place.
24 Enforce limits on the size of parties at residential addresses.
25 Create a culture change regarding informants. Students offer information to a point, but
stop divulging information for fear of implicating themselves. Re-work current policy to
ensure informants will not be reprimanded to encourage future sharing.
26 Citations should be issued to those students who participated in negative events.
27 City approval should be required for individuals or organizations hosting a party over a
Appendix E: Post March 7 Recommendations Page 77
Packet Pg. 372
15
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Working Group
Ideas to Investigate arranged by Objective
*NOTE: These ideas were generated by the City of San Luis Obispo (e.g. public comment at March 17, 2015 City
Council Meeting) and Cal Poly staff through a number of forums after the March 7, 2015 roof collapse on Hathway
Street. These ideas were not discussed by the Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort working group and
their inclusion in this report should not be considered an endorsement by the working group.
certain number of people.
28 Red tag ordinance for houses that have unruly gatherings/noise citations should be
implemented and last longer than the academic year.
29 Find a way to hold property managers or management companies accountable for the
negative behavior at properties they manage.
30 Serious academic consequences up to suspension and expulsion should be on the table
for Students who engage in activities that do not promote neighborhood wellness.
31 Immediately suspend or permanently ban fraternities who allow in any way illegal
activities to happen via their instigation: rapes, underage drinking, hazing deaths, racist
displays, unruly gatherings. Second chances seem to mean “go ahead” to this crowd.
32 Parental notification should be explored for off campus behavior.
33 Higher fines, double fines, longer fines, fines able to be raised at certain time of day.
Objective 5: Engage Stakeholders: Review Current Educational And Information Efforts
34 Require students to complete an alcohol/safety education program before being allowed
rush for a Greek organization (we should also consider limiting Greek organization
recruitment to the first quarter of attendance).
35 Monitor Yik Yak and other social mediums used by our student population as a resource
to inform us of potential dangerous situations.
36 SLOPD should consider utilizing social media scanning software to be more aware of
activities planned off campus.
37 The city should inform the landlord every time the police are called to a rental property,
even if no violation is found.
38 Enhance education on the dangers of large crowds: students need to learn this is as bad
as drinking too much, nonconsensual sex and other immature or inappropriate or illegal
behaviors.
39 Evaluate systems & structures in dorms to prevent mass exodus to mega social gathering
and complement protocols to inform authorities (student affairs UPD SLOPD) of
eminent threat of unruly gathering (mega social gathering).
40 Targeted patrolling by city and university police. Wider area for UPD patrols.
Objective 6: Prepare for Sustained Engagement to Achieve Desired Vision and Goal
41 None.
Appendix E: Post March 7 Recommendations Page 78
Packet Pg. 373
15
MAINTAINING BALANCED NEIGHBORHOODS
A Research Paper presented to the San Luis Obispo Civility W orking Group on
Different Approaches to Students Living in Established Residential Areas
July 18, 2014
APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Page 79
Packet Pg. 374
15
I . .
APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Page 80
Packet Pg. 375
15
""'
CITY OF S.flll LUIS OBISPO
Civilit y W orking Group
The City of San Luis Obispo Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort is a working
group comprised of City residents and representatives of Cal Poly State University (Cal Poly),
Cuesta College and the City of San Luis Obispo (City). The goal of the working group is to
enhance the quality of life for all residents, with particular emphasis on building positive
relations between residential and student-aged neighbors through a cultural shift in social
behavior. This goal is to be reached by identifying the needs of those involved and the short-
term actions, long-term best practices and engagement efforts required by the City and schools
to successfully meet those needs.
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort
Cal Pol y
President City Council Cuesta College
President
CUESTA 11LtJ COLLEGE
...- - ,•._.._,...,,..»..p. ublic lnput----lllllliiiiii
Mission:
Rf!s Mr.h, ill ntffy
and implement Cal
..,...,..i--..;;::;r;;....,
_..Recommend"'"•'"""""-''"'""""'"'"''"'.,...,_..,"",.a.
Poly, Council, and
Cvl!staJtrategies to
l.'nh.m[ethequality
of life for all
residents with an
emphasis on
builtUngposltive
relations between
resldentiilland
student-aced
neighbors through
COmmliltlllt'( De opment Deparl nt foWe DrD tl li'NI"I
PubUcWor
De:::: nl
t1t
Cal Poly
l'rflld«llf'•
v M.m.: grr omcr
Cal Poly-City- Cuesta Working Group
7
( LICOifii• ( NTI (I)iMIJ•
Vir.ePfl.'SIJ:lNII Studuttufe l
Smd""\' S•I'II M & qd .......,Hp
A.!.todf{fd
Slli OO""
PrM.Idt"nt
acullurill!.hiltiu '------------------;r"'
social behaviors
Public
/ . _/\_\
Neighborhood Services Team
Mission:
EKChange
.jei wJ -,; jl1 c.WHI c Y
Neighborhood CM'M <i!.I YdMU C<Jifloty!>twh•JJl'> Cl f'oJyA I C.lll'olyHnu< "i Group\ Rfowdi' •Tf
Information
and Ideas to
Implement
nel&hborhood
1fllj21.Jl
APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Page 81
Packet Pg. 376
15
CITY OF S.fill LUIS OBISPO
FROM: Katie Lichtig, City Manager, City of San Luis Obispo
Prepared By: James David, Principal Analyst
Lisa Letteriello, Administration Intern
SUBJECT: MAINTAINING BALANCED NEIGHBORHOODS
PURPOSE
Review current local town-gown neighborhood issues and provide alternative practices in other
communities that face similar student housing challenges in residential areas.
DISCUSSION
Situation
The City of San Luis Obispo (City) is in close proximity to two colleges; Cuesta College and Cal
Poly. Cuesta College is a commuter school without campus housing, and Cal Poly does not have
sufficient on-campus housing for all enrolled students (there are plans to create more housing
opportunities on-campus in the next five years). Furthermore, college students often prefer to
live off-campus in their junior and senior years. These factors mean students seek housing in
the City limits, and the most predominant housing type in the City is low-density single-family
housing in established neighborhoods.
A number of issues have been reported over the years related to students living in low-density
residential neighborhoods:
1. Students tend to live in certain areas close to campus, which affects neighborhood
diversity. High concentrations of student renters living in neighborhoods compounds
and intensifies issues like partying, noise and parking. Renter-occupancy estimates for
census tracts immediately adjacent to Cal Poly range from 59 to 95 percent renters:
Selected Housing Characteristics from U.S. Census 1
CHARACTERISTIC
CENSUS
TRACT 109.01
CENSUS
TRACT 109.02
CENSUS
TRACT 112
TOTAL
{ALL 3 TRACTS)
CITYWIDE
Total Housing Units 1,032 1,561 3,033 5,626 20,553
Single-Family Residences 10% 40% 62% 46% 54%
Units Built 1950 to 1979 53% 64% 62% 61% 48%
Owner-occupied Units 5% 13% 41% 26% 38%
Renter-occupied Units 95% 87% 59% 74% 62%
1 Estimates do not include on-campus housing units, which are classified as "group quarters" by the U.S. Census.
Source: 2008-12 American Community Survey, 2010 U.S. Census
APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Page 82
Packet Pg. 377
15
CITY OF SHU LUIS OBISPO
Reference Map of Census Tracts near Cal Poly
2. Rental costs are high, which drives more students (smaller incomes) to live together in
one single family home. Most single-family homes are not designed for four to five
adults, especially in terms of bathroom facilities and parking.
3. The City's code enforcement data shows a correlation between high rental areas and
reported violations of municipal codes. Some repeated reported violations include:
a. Noise, public drunkenness, vandalism and crime
b. Property maintenance issues
c. Parking
4. Local housing costs are inflated because four to five students can and will pay more for
rental housing than the majority of the local workforce, especially those workers in
industries with lower wages. This causes many workers to commute, which affects
infrastructure (roads), environment (emissions) and society (less owner-
occupancy/pride of ownership).
These issues are common in many town-gown communities when large student populations
move . in to residential neighborhoods; sometimes referred to as "studentification".
Studentification is a term coined by Dr. Darren Smith (2002) and is defined as the social and
environmental changes caused by a very large number of students living in particular areas of a
APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Page 83
Packet Pg. 378
15
CITY OF S.Hn LUIS OBISPO
town or city. It is not necessarily students living in the community, but instead the substitution
of a local community by a student community. 1
The City desires to avoid "studentification" in its low-density residential neighborhoods. The
following sections identify ideas for potential solutions -including best management practices
from nationwide research- to be considered by the Civility Working Group.
Potential Solutions
Two main focus areas should be (1) increasing neighborhood diversity and (2) enhancing
affordable housing options.
1. Increasing Neighborhood Diversity
Diversifying neighborhoods means creating a healthy balance of renters and owner-occupants,
as well as a mix of resident types (families, students, couples, singles, etc.). Within the context
of student housing, limiting concentration of student rentals increases neighborhood diversity.
A. Consider a Neighborhood Stabilization Program (NSP). The U.S. Department of Housing
and Urban Development, and many other communities facing foreclosure and
abandonment issues, instituted an NSP to help troubled neighborhoods rebound. 2 Using
a revolving NSP fund, abandoned and foreclosed homes were purchased and then
resold at a discounted price to homebuyers in need of assistance. The same philosophy
could be implemented in residential neighborhoods to create more opportunities for
owner-occupied housing units. Potential NSP elements may include:
a. Establish a revolving fund to be used exclusively to purchase single-family homes
within targeted neighborhoods (such as Alta Vista and Monterey Heights) as they
become available on the open market.
b. Resell all homes purchased with the revolving fund within a reasonable time to
likely owner-occupants; university staff, faculty or other workforce buyers.
c. Evaluate legally permissible mechanisms to perpetuate owner-occupancy, such
as a homeowners association (HOA), that are consistent with fair housing
provisions of State and Federal laws. Developing a HOA for NSP homes is
preferable because the HOA can impose conditions, covenants and agreements
that require owner-occupancy of the primary residence for a minimum length of
time.
d. Proceeds from all home sales would go to replenish the revolving fund.
e. Maintain "right of first refusal" granting the NSP the right to re-purchase the
home when it is offered for sale.
f. The NSP could be established on a limited-term basis, or terminated when
owner-occupancy rates for single-family units within targeted neighborhoods
reach a certain level that could be seen as self-sustaining.
1 Town and Gown Glossary. http://www.towngownworld.com/towngownglossary.html
2 http: //portal.hud.gov/hudportai/HUD?sr c=/program offices/comm plannlng/communitydevelopment/programs/neighborhoodspg.
APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Page 84
Packet Pg. 379
15
CITY OF S.flnLUIS OBISPO
This alternative has complicated legal issues surrounding real property rights, equal
protection, and privacy that will require more research if the Civility W orking Group
supports further development of a NSP.
B. Look for opportunities to create faculty and staff housing in student areas. The College
of San Mateo, California, has an award winning 44-unit rental housing development for
faculty and staff (College Vista), which offers a first-class living environment with rents
at half the market average.3 A local example is the 69-unit Bella Montana workforce
housing project located in a neighborhood that is impacted with student rentals
immediately adjacent to Cal Poly campus. The ground sublease has a ranking priority
hierarchy that encourages purchase by Cal Poly faculty and staff, with a back-up market
priority for public education, public agency, other CSU employees, and the general
public. In all, there are 24 priority rankings in the sublease with newly recruited Cal Poly
faculty receiving the highest priority and the general public receiving the lowest. Bella
Montana is different from most condominiums in that the structures are owned by the
buyers, while Cal Poly remains the owner of the ground upon which the structure sits
and has greater control over the conditions of sale of the condos.
C. Evaluate strengthening occupancy restrictions to avoid single-family residential
overcrowding. The City of Fort Collins, home to Colorado State University, restricts
occupancy in all residential dwelling units (single-family, duplex, and multifamily) to one
family and not more than one additional person; or two adults and their dependents,
and not more than one additional person, or up to four unrelated persons in a dwelling
unit located in an apartment complex containing units which were approved to house
four unrelated persons.4 The City of San Luis Obispo's Zoning Regulations prohibit six or
more adult occupants in the low-density residential zone without a High Occupancy Use
Permit.
D. Develop a rental inspection program that checks occupancy. The City of Bloomington,
home to Indiana University Bloomington, implemented a Rental Occupancy Program
that requires rental property inspection every three to five years to validate current
occupancy permits. Occupancy permits allow up to three unrelated adults in single-
family zoning districts, and up to five in multi-family zoning districts. 5 The City of Santa
Cruz, California adopted a 2010 ordinance that requires all owners of one or more
residential rental dwelling units to register with the city and participate in an annual
inspection. The Santa Cruz program aims to address unpermitted dwelling units and the
renting of spaces not intended for habitation, as well as substandard, overcrowded,
unsanitary and unsafe housing conditions that render a housing _unit unfit or unsafe for
occupancy.6 The City of San Luis Obispo is currently developing a multifamily rental
inspection program to be presented to the public and City Council in late 2014.
'.h ttp://www.smccd .edy/accounis/smccd/department s/faclllt les/BestAmerlca nllvlngAwa rd.shtml.
'http://www.fcgov.com/neighborhoodservices/occupancy. php
'http://www.ltgau.org/userAies/flles/CityBrochure-Bioomi ngton.pdf
6 Santa Cruz Residential Rental Inspection Program. http:l!www.cityofsantacruz.com/index.aspx?page=1536.
APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Page 85
Packet Pg. 380
15
CITY OF S.fin LUIS OBISPO
E. Work with common interest developments on restrictive leases. In California, courts
have allowed homeowners associations to limit or ban rentals in private condominium
projects or planned developments. Restrictions against leasing in a common interest
development must be shown to be reasonable in order to be enforceable per California
Civil Code Sections 711 and 1354. In the case City of Oceanside v. McKenna (1989), the
Oceanside court found that restrictions on a publicly subsidized condominium project to
require owner-occupancy and forbid the leasing of units was valid. The justification
offered by the City and its Community Development Commission was found reasonable
since prohibiting leasing would foster the redevelopment goals of providing a stabilized
community of owner-occupied units for low and moderate income persons.7
F. Create more on-campus housing. Giving students more opportunities to live on-campus
may reduce concentration of students living in nearby low-density residential
neighborhoods. Cal Poly and the City have adopted policies that support student
housing on-campus, and Cal Poly is planning to build a new 1475-bed campus housing
facility soon. Other universities require all freshmen to live on-campus, and some also
require that freshmen leave their cars at home the first year. In addition to providing
new campus housing, Cal Poly could formally adopt a goal to house a certain percentage
of students on campus b y a specified date.
2. Enhancing Affordable Housing Options
Creating affordable housing is a local, regional and national objective. Within the context of
student housing, creating affordable options means offering more housing types with different
cost profiles so that students may avoid overcrowding in single-family residences.
A. Create partnerships to achieve common affordable housing goals. Northeastern
University, Massachusetts, provides a good example of this approach in its Davenport
Commons. The project consists of 125 units of housing for students and staff, 60
affordable owner-occupied townhouses, and 2,100 square feet of retail space. 8 It was a
complex project, involving many stakeholders and negotiations including a community
benefits package of affordable housing, helping homeowners start a condominium
association and providing both technical assistance and education for first-time
homebuyers.
B. Continue to distribute Good Neighbor guides and update off-campus housing outreach
materials. The University of Virginia 9 and the City of Fort Collins10 have developed
guides that include tips for finding affordable off-campus housing, advice about the
financial responsibilities of living on their own, and behavior expected of a good
neighbor and community member. Cal Poly, Cuesta College and the City should update
their off-campus housing guides to include affordable housing options in the region. The
7 The Case for Rental Restrictions. http://www.hoa-iaw.com/publicalions/case--rental-restridions.shtml
'http://www.dhkinc.com/Housing/affordable/9703.asp
• http://www.itgau.org/userfiles/files/off grounds guide.pdf
10 http://www.fcgov.com/nelghborhoodservlces/pdf/lthandbook.pdf?20081224
APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Page 86
Packet Pg. 381
15
CITY OF SHU LUIS OBISPO
guides should also list reasons why overcrowding in low-density residential housing can
adversely affect health and safety of tenants, impact available parking, arid contribute
to noise and privacy conflicts.
Additional Resources
The following four resources come from other town-gown communities that have formed
public-private task forces with a similar mission to the Civility W orking Group. Each document
contains recommended actions to address issues that often arise from off-campus student
living in residential neighborhoods.
1. Central Austin Community Development Corporation. 2005. What Other College
Communities Have Done: Examples of Regulatory Actions to Preserve the Single-Family,
Residential Character of a Campus Neighborhood.
http://centralaustincdc.org/fair affordable housing/west urbana na ccupancy.pdf
2. Rutgers University. 2013. Task Force for Off Campus Issues and Concerns: Final Report and
Recommendations.
http://studentconduct.rutgers.edu/files/documents/OffCampusTas kForceReport.pdf
3. St. Paul P lanning Commission. May 2012. Student Housing Zoning Study: Report and
Recommendations. http://www.stpaul.gov/DocumentCenter/Home/View/20436
4. Temple University. 2012. Final Report of the Community and Student Off Campus Issues and
Concerns Task Force.
http://w ww.temple.edu/studentaffairs/deanofstudents/documents/StudentComm unityOff
CampuslssuesTaskForceFina1ReportforW ebsiteNov2012.pdf
The remaining four resources listed below are academic studies and white papers on the issues
of studentification and town-gown collaborations.
5. Smith, Darren P. 2005. Studentification: the gentrification factory?
http://southwarknotes.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/studentification-darren-smith.pdf
6. Smith, Darren P. 2008. The Politics of Studentification and (Un)balanced Urban Populations:
Lessons for Gentrification and Sustainable Communities?
http://usj.sagepub.com/content/45/12/2541.full.pdf+html
7. U.K. National HMO Lobby. 2008. Balanced Communities & Studentification: Problems and
Solutions. http://www.itgau.org/userfiles/files/Nationai%20HM0%20Lobby.pdf
8. Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. 2009. Town-Gown Collaboration in Land Use and
Development. http://community-wealth.org/ pdfs/news/recent-articles/11-09/report-
sungu-eryilmaz.pdf
APPENDIX F: Maintaining Balanced Neighborhoods Page 87
Packet Pg. 382
15
Neighborhood Wellness/Community Civility Effort, Final Report | San Luis Obispo, CA Page 28
- Enhancing the quality of life for all residents -
Packet Pg. 383
15
Page intentionally left
blank.
Packet Pg. 384
15