The Grand Jury Told the Mayor “Confidential.” The Mayor Told Cal Poly “Coming Your Way.”

Public Interest File No. 1

Update — June 15, 2026

During a public appearance on the Dave Congalton radio program, Mayor Erica Stewart stated that she does not believe she violated the law by disclosing the confidential Grand Jury report to Cal Poly before its public release nearly one year ago, and indicated she would make the same decision again. The confidentiality requirement is set forth in Penal Code § 933.05(f), which prohibits recipients from disclosing a Grand Jury report before its public release. The documents published in this file allow readers to review the underlying records and reach their own conclusions.

Overview

On June 13, 2025, the San Luis Obispo County Civil Grand Jury emailed an advance confidential copy of its completed report, Round & Round with Town & Gown, to the City of San Luis Obispo.

The Grand Jury’s cover letter was marked “Confidential” in bold. It quoted California Penal Code § 933.05(f), which provides:

“No officer, agency, department, or governing body of a public agency shall disclose any contents of the report prior to the public release of the final report.”

The Grand Jury further instructed recipients:

“Please keep in mind that this report must be kept confidential until its public release by the Grand Jury.”

The report would not be publicly released until June 23, 2025 — ten days later.

The documents published in this file show that approximately two hours after receiving the confidential report, Mayor Erica Stewart forwarded the report and accompanying materials to Courtney Kienow in Cal Poly’s Office of the President. Cal Poly was not a respondent, therefore was not entitled to an advance copy of the report. The Grand Jury had noted it held no jurisdiction over the university.

The records further show that over the following weekend, Kienow reviewed the report, coordinated with City officials regarding its contents, prepared a rebuttal to findings contained within the report, and submitted a formal corrections letter directly to the Grand Jury — before the report’s public release.

These events are documented through emails, text messages, Grand Jury records, and other public documents published in this file.

What the Documents Show

The records establish the following chronology:

June 13, 2025

The Grand Jury emailed the confidential report to Mayor Erica Stewart at 2:29 PM. The transmittal letter quoted Penal Code § 933.05(f) in full and instructed recipients to maintain confidentiality until public release. The Penal Code sections were included as attachments in the same email.

At 4:24 PM, Stewart texted Courtney Kienow at Cal Poly’s Office of the President: “Did you get the grand jury report?”.

Kienow replied that she had not. “Is it out?? I checked yesterday and it wasn’t posted yet. Will look now. Not seeing it.”

Stewart responded: “They emailed it to me today. I guess it gets posted in two days.”

Kienow asked: “Okay to share it?”

Stewart replied: “Coming your way.” Kienow responded with a heart emoji.

At approximately 4:38 PM — roughly two hours receiving the confidential report — Stewart forwarded the entire package to Kienow: the report, the Grand Jury’s cover letter containing the statutory confidentiality language, the Penal Code section itself, and the agency response form.

Stewart and Kienow exchanged text messages reflecting their views of the report’s findings. Stewart wrote: “It (sic) as though some of our local friends wrote it.” Kienow replied: “It really is like the anti-student neighbors wrote it.”

The Grand Jury’s investigation had been initiated in response to complaints from community members about fraternity activity and the City’s enforcement response. The Grand Jury, made up of volunteer residents from across the County, spent nearly a year investigating, conducting 15 interviews, reviewing documents, and visiting the neighborhoods.

June 14, 2025

By 7:44 AM on Saturday, June 14 — Cal Poly’s Commencement day — Kienow was already working on a rebuttal. She texted Stewart that she had emailed the Grand Jury’s representative requesting an official advance copy for Cal Poly’s review, framing a contingency: “If she doesn’t send it to me, are you comfortable with me emailing them my corrections based on you sharing it?”

Stewart replied: “Happy to share your responses. I have so many problems with this thing as well.”

Kienow provided Stewart with off-campus enrollment data she believed the report had misrepresented. Stewart responded with her own critique of the report’s framing, adding: “I can’t wait to get Whitney, Christine & Rick’s take. There’s so much wrong and left out in this report.”

Whitney McDonald is the SLO City Manager. Christine Wallace is the Public Affairs Manager for SLOPD. Rick Scott is the Chief of Police. All three had participated in the Grand Jury’s investigation and provided testimony.

At 9:56 AM that same Saturday morning, Kienow texted City Manager Whitney McDonald directly: “Working on a rebuttal to some of the grand jury ‘findings.’ I’ll send once we’re done with it. Happy Commencement Saturday!”

McDonald responded: “Thank you!! We will need to have our council and planning commission discuss the report in some way at a public meeting because of the findings that they are directed to respond to.”

June 16, 2025

At 9:29 AM, Kienow texted Stewart:

“So many people have the advance copy of the report now… they’ll never know it came from you. Still greatly appreciate you stepping out for what’s right!”

Five minutes later, at 9:35 AM, Kienow sent a corrections letter directly to the Grand Jury and its representative. The letter addressed specific language and findings contained in the confidential report, citing page numbers and quoting directly from a document that had not yet been released to the public. It included the off-campus enrollment data presented in a formal spreadsheet attachment.

The letter acknowledged Cal Poly’s lack of standing directly: “Cal Poly is not considered an interested party by the Grand Jury in this report. However, due to the data inaccuracies, we submitted the following to the Grand Jury and asked that they make the corrections.”

Stewart later replied to Kienow’s text: “So interesting. I told Whitney that I had assumed the university was going to be asked to respond and therefore I gave it to you. So if it ever comes up, I’m fine with being outed if I have to.”

The exchange followed Kienow’s reassurance to Stewart that “so many people have the advance copy of the report now… they’ll never know it came from you.” The records do not reveal who the “many people” were. They do, however, show that a confidential Grand Jury report that had been provided to the City under explicit confidentiality instructions, was circulating among individuals outside the Grand Jury’s official distribution process before its public release.

June 23, 2025

The Grand Jury publicly released Round & Round with Town & Gown.

Subsequent Developments

On April 27, 2026, the 2025–2026 San Luis Obispo County Grand Jury published a Compliance Report reviewing responses to the original report.

The Compliance Report noted that Cal Poly submitted correspondence dated June 16, 2025, addressing the Grand Jury report a full week before its public release. The Compliance Report stated:

“Evidently Cal Poly was given a copy of the final report prior to its release date. This action is not in compliance with the procedure prescribed in the Penal Code.”

The documents published below provide the underlying records that explain how Cal Poly obtained the report prior to its public release.

Why This File Exists

The purpose of this Public Interest File is not to tell readers what conclusions they should reach.

It is to preserve and organize the documentary record so that members of the public, journalists, and researchers can review the underlying evidence for themselves.

The records include the Grand Jury’s confidentiality notice, the mayor’s forwarding email, text message exchanges, correspondence with the Grand Jury, and subsequent public records documenting the matter.

Together, they provide a contemporaneous record of events surrounding the disclosure of a confidential Grand Jury report prior to its public release.