ACSOL's Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online Next Call: May 5 (Int. Megan's Law) - Mar 8 Recording added Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459, Time: 5 pm PT

Monthly Meetings

Q2: 4/8 in Sac, 5/15 in SD, 6/16-17 in LA (Conference) [details]
.Action ItemsACSOLCalifornia

Assembly Bill 558 (ML Web Site Exclusion) – Hearing Postponed

Updated 3/15: The hearing scheduled for March 21 has been postponed indefinitely.

Update 3/10: March 21 at 9 a.m. in Room 126 of the State Capitol. Please join us to speak in opposition to the bill. Plan to spend the entire morning there as it is one of many bills to be considered that morning.

Assembly Bill 558, which would significantly reduce the number of people who quality for exemptions from the Megan’s Law website, is expected to be considered by the Public Safety Committee later this month. Therefore, it is time to send letters and make phone calls to the members of that committee. Attached are a letter sent to Committee Chairman Jones-Sawyer about AB 558 as well as a list of committee members that includes mailing addresses and phone numbers. Please send your letters no later than March 17 if possible.

Sample Letter in Opposition to AB 558 (pdf)

Assembly Public Safety Committee

Reginald B. Jones-Sawyer, Sr. (Chair)
Dem – 59
Contact Assembly Member Reginald B. Jones-Sawyer, Sr.
Capitol Office, Room 2117
P.O. Box 942849, Sacramento, CA 94249-0059; (916) 319-2059
Tom Lackey (Vice Chair)
Rep – 36
Contact Assembly Member Tom Lackey
Capitol Office, Room 2174
P.O. Box 942849, Sacramento, CA 94249-0036; (916) 319-2036
Jordan Cunningham
Rep – 35
Contact Assembly Member Jordan Cunningham
Capitol Office, Room 4102
P.O. Box 942849, Sacramento, CA 94249-0035; (916) 319-2035
Lorena S. Gonzalez Fletcher
Dem – 80
Contact Assembly Member Lorena S. Gonzalez Fletcher
Capitol Office, Room 2114
P.O. Box 942849, Sacramento, CA 94249-0080; (916) 319-2080
Bill Quirk
Dem – 20
Contact Assembly Member Bill Quirk
Capitol Office, Room 2163
P.O. Box 942849, Sacramento, CA 94249-0020; (916) 319-2020
Blanca E. Rubio
Dem – 48
Contact Assembly Member Blanca E. Rubio
Capitol Office, Room 5175
P.O. Box 942849, Sacramento, CA 94249-0048; (916) 319-2048
Miguel Santiago
Dem – 53
Contact Assembly Member Miguel Santiago
Capitol Office, Room 6027
P.O. Box 942849, Sacramento, CA 94249-0053; (916) 319-2053


Bill Would Eliminate Exclusions from Megan’s Law Website (AB 558)

Join the discussion

  1. AB

    Thanks so much for this info!
    Is there any official word yet on whether this would be retroactively applied?

  2. a mom

    I sent out my letters today! I hope for the best 🙂

  3. Harry

    Is there a MS Word version of this letter?

  4. Les

    I’m not a California resident but wanted to help in opposing the bill. I tried entering the jist of the sample letter on a web contact form for Sawyer, but it denied me based on zipcode.
    I welcome advice in how to help you oppose the bill. Keep up your efforts!

  5. TG

    I called the office today.

    The guy who answered said the best way to contact ALL the committee members is to email him.

    That email is:

    If you contact individual members, they won’t even listen to you if you’re not in their district.

    • Lake County

      I do believe this is true. They generally don’t read or consider anything sent from anyone not in their district. That goes for both federal and state government. Doesn’t make sense, they should represent the best interest of all effected citizens regardless of location once they are in office.

      • Fred

        To be able to enter web mail on a legislator’s website who is NOT your legislator, make up a street address and use same ZIP code that his DISTRICT (not Sacramento!) office uses.

    • TG

      While individual Assembly members listen only to their constituents, I think emailing them as members of the safety committee is the way to reach them.

  6. marie


    • Janice Bellucci

      Yes, Marie, this bill would be applied retroactively if it is passed by the legislature and signed by the Governor.

      • AB

        How soon would it come into effect if passed?
        What happens if the Tiered registry bill also passes?

      • ExpatRFSO

        Janice, this line seems encouraging:

        (IV) Notwithstanding paragraph (3), an exclusion application already granted prior to the effective date of the measure that adds this clause shall not be subject to recision pursuant to this clause.

        and then I think this is the paragraph (3) they reference which seems to negate the line above:

        (3) If the department determines that a person who was granted an exclusion under a former version of this subdivision would not qualify for an exclusion under the current version of this subdivision, the department shall rescind the exclusion, make a reasonable effort to provide notification to the person that the exclusion has been rescinded, and, no sooner than 30 days after notification is attempted, make information about the offender available to the public on the Internet Web site as provided in this section.

        It’s like saying “It isn’t unless it is.”

        What I can not discern is that if it will effect people that are already excluded, like myself (federal possession of CP in 2003) I am not sure why I am not on the website, I assume it has to do with being essentially an “out of state” conviction equivalent to a state misdemeanor at the time.

        • pgm111

          I was convicted of one count of CP in federal court (San Jose) back in 2008. I was not on the CA registry until September 2016. What explains this? Can anyone explain why I was not on for three years after lock-up and now I am on the site? I am happy you are not on the public registry but why not? Any info is helpful. Thanks.

          • Mr. D

            So is this proposed bill dead and no longer a concern or it simply postponed to a later date ?

  7. AB

    Will there be an opportunity to speak against this bill with the Public Safety Committee?

    • Janice Bellucci

      Yes, those who attend the hearing on March 21 will be able to speak against the bill. However, their statements will be limited to name, city and whether they support or oppose the bill.

      • JCrsn

        It’s unfortunate that we won’t be allowed to speak. Will there be any main statements that are allowed to be made in opposition during the meeting?

  8. B

    A similar version of this bill AB2569 apparently died on the floor. Does anyone know the circumstance of how that bill died/was defeated?

    It seems that AB558 is not getting the same attention AB2569 did but it’s even worse due to being retroactively applied. I will be making my calls and sending many letters and hope others supporting this cause do the same!

  9. Someone who cares

    So this bill would clutter the already unmanageable Megan’s law list even more? I will send letters soon.

  10. someone who cares

    Janice’s sample letter is really good, of course, but it would not sound like anything I could or would write and I want it to be more suited to my style of writing. Does anyone have a sample letter they sent? Thanks.

  11. JCrsn

    As someone noted before, will there be a chance to speak against this Bill?
    If the PSC passes when will it likely be scheduled to be put before the Legislature? Will there be time to lobby for at least amending the Bill so that it isn’t retroactive?

    This is a terrible Bill that only punishes the extended families of those already dealing with the registry in a needless, cruel and overly-punitive manner. It’s a move by Sharon Quirk-Silva to pad her political resume but she isn’t taking into account that it will immediately harm thousands and thousands of people.
    When will it be understood that the registry and the website causes more harm and ultimately more danger to society than it does any good?

    • Janice Bellucci

      The Public Safety Committee will consider this bill in a hearing to be held on March 21 starting at 9 a.m. in Room 126 of the State Capitol. Please join us to speak in opposition to the bill. Plan to spend the entire morning there as it is one of many bills to be considered that morning.

      • AB

        Janice, thanks so much for this info.

        I am planning to show up to show support.
        What is the standard procedure? Is everyone allowed to speak?
        Is everyone expected to speak, or can support be shown just by attending?

      • Tom

        Why aren’t you challenging the soars as illegal and unconstitutional presumptively and predetermined mental health laws and diagnosis that provides no mental health due process or treatment of any kind

      • Tom

        I would like to know why lawyers are not challenging these illegal soras by using the state and federal mental health laws. Clearly they are Appling presumptively and predetermined mental health diagnosis and conditions upon these persons.
        It is well establish ed law that when a person is subjected to conditional releases involving custody and control, supervision, management, and guardianship, and have control over a persons mental health the state must inform them, must give them an opportunity to be heard, and a means to challenge them.
        But here in soras they don’t tell you that you are being mentally diagnosed, or that you are under a regulatory mental health law, you don’t get a fair and impartial probable cause or jury trial or an individualized psychiatric evaluation or even an actual certified mental health diagnosis.
        This isn’t a registration law, it’s an illegal mental health law. Complete with a conditional release, custody, management, and far more restrictions than any other form of conditional release. It’s a scam of huge proportions and unconstitutional in every respect. These are the facts. Please help these people, as this so called justice system has destroyed enough people already.

  12. USA

    Let’s Make America Great Again! When I had my legal issue 20 some years ago, I respected the DA! She was very professional. I served some time in county and I was shocked by what I say! I witnessed officer abuse, harassment, officers lying and I was eventually put in protective custody! I possess a graduate degree and my minor is in Psych/Soc! Some years later, LA County jail was investigated by the FBI and the rest is history! The Judicial System her in California is overwhelmed. Many return year after year. The Courts sentence the individual, put them behind bars, treat the inmates like animals and later wonder why many return to a life of crime (jobless, harassment, lack of education/housing). I had never met someone incapable of reading/or writing until I went to jail. Society needs to change. I had always believed the US was a country of compassion. These lawmakers need to get with the program, educate themselves and think before they act! Changes like this could destroy a family! Wake up America!

  13. Eric Knight

    There is precedent from a Massachusetts Supreme Court decision that states that adding individuals to a registry after the fact may be construed as “additional punishment.” This should be a major factor to defeating this bill, especially through Legal.

    • Timmr

      That is a great find. Include that with studies that show the public registries cause crime, and you reveal this bill to be particularly onerous.

  14. j

    so when was done done with my 6 months in county I was given the form to be relieved from megans website, that was 20 years ago, but I never submitted that form, my local PD submitted the same form last year on my yearly update but the officer said they are way backed up, so my question for Janet if i was available back 20 years why wouldn’t i be able to be excluded from the site now? this was a 1 time incident in my life, was not forced, i knew the girl, I just took the deal to register because I was 19 and completely naive and new into the system.

  15. JCrsn

    Janice or Moderator,
    If this gets passed through by the Public Safety Comm. what will be our options from that point and the timeline involved?
    Would AB 558 get effectively negated by the Tiered Registry bill if it gets passed?

  16. Jack

    I just saw a hearing by this committee on the California channel. The chairman is incredibly weak. He sides with the republicans on every single issue, even bills considering disorderly conduct. It will probably pass this committee for that reason. We need to pay even closer attention to Ms. Skinner on the senate side.

  17. Harry

    My letter was mailed today. They are not wordy and direct to the point.

  18. JCrsn

    So the hearing date is postponed indefinitely? What does this mean? Is this good news?

    The “Bill Status” of AB 558 on the California Legislative Information Page has no new info, where was the postponement posted?

    • Lake County

      And another one bites the dust. This is great news. I figured this bill would not go anywhere especially with ACSOL and so many of us advocating against it. Maybe politicians will start to realize that passing laws against us is no longer a sure thing.

    • Timmr

      Where did you here this? If this is true, then I can’t indulge in the fantasy that my one letter killed the bill, har, har — because I haven’t mailed it yet. I have the copies and will mail them tomorrow, even if the meeting is postponed. I spent about three hours on them. Don’t trust the phrase “postponed indefinitely.”

      • AB

        Hopefully we can get a little more clarification soon on what this means and whether we should still be sending in letters and calls at this time. I have friends and family calling in so it would be helpful to know whether I should tell them to hold off for now.

        Perhaps it’s due to conflict with the upcoming tiered registry bill?

      • Lake County

        Janice or someone posted this info at the top of this page. Updated today. I’ve found that “postponed indefinitely” is a nice way to say the author of the bill was told this will not pass and they withdrew it to save face. It’s not good for a politician to publicly have their bills rejected. Most bills die like this.

  19. AB

    Should we still make calls and send letters?

    • Janice Bellucci

      There is no need to send letters and make calls at this time.

      • AB

        Thank you for the reply, Janice.

        Hopefully the above statement is correct and this means that this heinous bill has/will be withdrawn.

  20. FactsoverFiction

    On the California Legislative website it still has no word on the postponement – it says the hearing is on 3/28/17.
    Should this be disregarded?

  21. TG

    So, is it on the 28th or has it been postponed indefinitely?

    • JCrsn

      It’s looking like it was just moved to March 28th, or at least March 28th is a “placeholder” date for now.
      So keep those letters and phone-calls ready.

  22. TG

    OK, everyone.

    I emailed the Public Safety Committee office today, March 20. Arnell, the guy who works there, said the bill is going to be heard on the 28th.

  23. Ab

    This is terrible news but thanks for getting official word.
    I wonder why this had been postponed at all but I suppose it doesn’t matter at this point.

    When should we get our letters and calls in by?
    Will there be a gathering on the 28th to state our opposition to the Bill?

  24. Timmr

    Glad I mailed my letters in anyway. Which brings up a thought. Maybe we shouldn’t wait for laws to come out before sending letters to legislators. We should send the thoughts we share here to their offices all the time. Send questions to the departments tha run this registry and demand answers. Sure, we should go to Sacramento for formal lobbying if we can, but many can’t for various legitimate reasons. Therefore write letters to the people making decisions. Send videos? Influence the dialogue with many registrant voices. Throw in a few references to studies or personal experiences. Keep it going andmake the registry a burden to those who favor it, as it has been a torment to us. Hey, many here write several paragraphs with great arguments. The legislators aren’t going to this site or the others for ex offenders and they need to hear this. The sites need to go to them.

  25. Son of Liberty Child of Freedom

    In this Match, Surprises are expected.

  26. AB

    Can we get the main post update so that people know to make their calls, letters, and opposition votes on the Committee Member’s websites?

  27. Roger

    When we lobbied this week, it was encouraging to see how none of the legislator’s staffs reacted positively to this bill. That is a nice change in attitude!

    As KM mentioned, it was cancelled during our lobbying. Coincidence? Maybe, but the attitude change we saw was real, and our long-term efforts no doubt contributed strongly to that.

Leave a Reply

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...  
  • Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  • Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  • Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  • Please take personal conversations off this forum. Feel free to leave your contact info here.
  • Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  • Please do not post in all Caps.
  • If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links.
  • We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  • We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  • Please choose a user name that does not contain links to other web sites
  • Please send any input regarding moderation to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please answer this question to prove that you are not a robot *