UC Berkeley Lawsuit

[DubaiSis]

Utterly off topic, doesn't Berkeley have a sorority/fraternity housing shortage? Have they considered selling and moving further away from campus?

[agzg]

Originally Posted by DubaiSis

Utterly off topic, doesn't Berkeley have a sorority/fraternity housing shortage? Have they considered selling and moving further away from campus?

Why? Admitedly, I don't know much about UC Berkeley's housing situation, but on my campus there are groups that have owned their houses upwards of 50 years. Why uproot them and move them into a neighborhood that's not used to having it? It'd just open up the doors to more complaints, I would imagine.

[DubaiSis]

Originally Posted by agzg

Why? Admitedly, I don't know much about UC Berkeley's housing situation, but on my campus there are groups that have owned their houses upwards of 50 years. Why uproot them and move them into a neighborhood that's not used to having it? It'd just open up the doors to more complaints, I would imagine.

I don't mean the fraternities, I mean the complainer guy!

[WebGreek]

The "complainer guy" won't be moving. His wife's family has owned the house for over 90 years. I feel for the guy in that he's been in the neighborhood for a long time and has apparently been trying to work with the city and the university to curb their behavior. If we take his accusations at face value, he's had breakins, bulletholes in his window, urination, threats, and all kinds of other mean nasty things done to him over the years. If it were simply an issue of moving out of the way of the bulldozer, I suspect he would've done so sooner.

More to the point is that, assuming his accusations are true (and I suspect most of them are), the fraternities have been unable to be even decent neighbors. Being loud on a Friday night in a college town is one thing, but it would take something severe for him to spend many thousands of dollars on surveillance equipment, and then to put together a lawsuit.

Also, thanks for proofreading my writing.

[KSig RC]

Originally Posted by WebGreek

The "complainer guy" won't be moving. His wife's family has owned the house for over 90 years.

This has literally no effect on whether anything worthy of compensation has happened, or whether/not the guy is right. There's no "golden anniversary" judicial exception.

If we take his accusations at face value, he's had breakins, bulletholes in his window, urination, threats, and all kinds of other mean nasty things done to him over the years.

If we take his accusations at face value, there's no need for a judicial process. Come on.

More to the point is that, assuming his accusations are true (and I suspect most of them are),

Why do you assume this? Apparently your innocuous "for discussion" question had a motive, huh?

Being loud on a Friday night in a college town is one thing, but it would take something severe for him to spend many thousands of dollars on surveillance equipment, and then to put together a lawsuit.

Right, because you took his claims (WHICH AREN'T OUTLINED IN YOUR INITIAL ARTICLE) at face value. Also, everyone who files suit deserves compensation, right? Oh wait.

Also, thanks for proofreading my writing.

Someone has to.

You seem to have an agenda that wasn't initially disclosed . . . any conjecture on that?

[MysticCat]

Originally Posted by KSig RC

This has literally no effect on whether anything worthy of compensation has happened, or whether/not the guy is right. There's no "golden anniversary" judicial exception.

If we take his accusations at face value, there's no need for a judicial process. Come on.

Why do you assume [his allegations are true]? Apparently your innocuous "for discussion" question had a motive, huh?

Right, because you took his claims (WHICH AREN'T OUTLINED IN YOUR INITIAL ARTICLE) at face value. Also, everyone who files suit deserves compensation, right? Oh wait.

Someone has to [proofread the OP's blog].

You seem to have an agenda that wasn't initially disclosed . . . any conjecture on that?

You win at lawyering today. Er . . . you won yesterday.

[WebGreek]

I suspect most of his claims are true because he's gone to the trouble of documenting them on a website.

In terms of compensation, I'm not saying he and/or his wife deserve anything, with the possible exception of a new window. What I'm saying is that, assuming he's not a pathological liar who went to great lengths to fabricate a lot of evidence to back all of his claims, nobody deserves to live with those kind of neighbors.

I appreciate all of the legal advice, and I understand now that there isn't anything to this case in terms of judicial precedent. I can set that aside, but I am still curious about neighborly relations in other college towns.

My experience was at UCSB, where virtually the entirety of the town of Isla Vista, where all of the fraternities and sororities are located, is inhabited by college students. Everyone expects a lot of noise on Thursday-Saturday nights, from Greek and non-Greek houses alike. In other words, it's not an issue...there are rarely noise complaints.

The problem at Berkeley is not that the Greeks are loud on weekends, it's that the chapters that are further from campus and nestled among non-student residents are loud and raucous.

Did anyone on Greekchat have a chapter house that was similarly nestled among the neighbors? Did your chapter butt heads with them, or were you on friendly terms? Were any agreements or compromises made regarding weekends and/or large events? I'm curious to learn about other campuses.

I don't have any conjecture on my agenda or undisclosed motive. I don't know the couple. I do know that if I were in their situation, I'm not sure what I'd do. What would you do?

[AZTheta]

Originally Posted by DubaiSis

Utterly off topic, doesn't Berkeley have a sorority/fraternity housing shortage? Have they considered selling and moving further away from campus?

I know a LOT about Berkeley and the SF Bay Area, and the real estate there.

There's no place to move to.

And, in response to the OP:

con·jec·ture   
[kuhn-jek-cher]
noun, verb, -tured, -tur·ing.
–noun
1.
the formation or expression of an opinion or theory without sufficient evidence for proof.
2.
an opinion or theory so formed or expressed; guess; speculation.

Dislike conjecture and speculation; I'm too much of a scientist. I do enjoy reading the legal GCers' comments, however.