ACSOL’s Conference Calls

Conference Call Recordings Online
Dial-in number: 1-712-770-8055, Conference Code: 983459

Monthly Meetings

Q4: 10/14 in Los Angeles, 11/18 by phone [details]

ACSOLCalifornia

Registrants Sue City of San Diego in Federal Court

Two registrants challenged in federal court today residency restrictions within the City of San Diego that prohibit registrants from living within virtually all of the city.  The lawsuit was filed after the San Diego City Council refused to repeal the city’s residency restrictions despite a recommendation from the City Attorney because the restrictions are “likely not enforceable”.

During the City Council’s meeting on August 1, Councilmembers defended the city’s residency restrictions and stated that they “don’t like them (registrants) living in our communities” as well as falsely stated that registrants cannot be rehabilitated.  One Council member added that rejecting repeal of the city’s residency restrictions contravened “our form of democracy and constitutional justice.”

“The San Diego City residency restrictions are unlawful because they violate the state and federal constitutions,” stated ACSOL executive director Janice Bellucci.  “They are also inconsistent with recent court decisions, including a decision by the California Supreme Court that similar restrictions in San Diego County were unreasonable, arbitrary and oppressive.”

 In that decision, the California Supreme Court determined that registrants were prohibited from residing in 97 percent of available rental housing in San Diego County which led to increased homelessness as well as restricted access to job opportunities, medical treatment and other social services.  According to materials provided by city staff to the San Diego City Council, the city’s residency restrictions prohibit registrants from living in many more places as compared to the law under review in that case.  

 Before the lawsuit was filed, ACSOL sent a letter to the City of San Diego warning that the city’s residency restrictions were unlawful and threatening legal action if the restrictions were not repealed.  During the City Council meeting, the City Council member who made the unsuccessful motion to repeal the city’s residency restrictions predicted that if the restrictions were not repealed, they would be challenged in court.

 A total of 26 lawsuits have been filed so far challenging residency restrictions in 26 cities within California.  The first lawsuit, challenging residency restrictions in the City of Grover Beach, was filed in June 2015.   

Related Media Articles

http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/news/public-safety/sd-me-offender-lawsuit-20170807-story.html

http://www.kpbs.org/news/2017/aug/07/federal-lawsuit-challenges-san-diego-sex-offender/

http://fox5sandiego.com/2017/08/07/lawsuit-filed-after-council-upholds-residency-restrictions-for-sex-offenders/

http://www.kpbs.org/news/2017/aug/08/san-diego-sex-offender-residency-law-faces-uphill-/

Join the discussion

  1. cool RC

    and Yet 2 years later Janice and her teams are still suing. I guess some city can’t take a clue.

  2. Harry

    “don’t like them (registrants) living in our communities”. With this statement it constituted harassment according PC 290, Janice should add another $50,000 plus to the lawsuit, if she can not get the DA or AG to send them to jail.

    • AlexO

      Agreed. It certainly does resemble banishment, especially when it comes directly coming from an elected public official who has the power on the matter.

      Give them hell, Janice!

  3. Record to date is what now?

    what is the record for these 26 filings currently?

  4. Registry Rage

    Good. This is the only thing they seem to understand. It’s time to stop treating humans like livestock and lepers!

  5. Tired Of Hiding

    This thrills me down to my toenails! The ONLY way to kill this bullshit once and for all is in Federal court. Otherwise it remains a tangled mishmash of stupidity that they can manipulate locally forever!

    Attack and never surrender. We will fight in the courts we will fight online and we will prevail!

    Lee

  6. Lake County

    But why do they act so stupid when we all know the outcome? I can only hope this will cost them as much as possible. Maybe their voters will take note of the money they are going to donate to ACSOL.

    • AJ

      @LC
      Because then they can still claim they were doing all they could to protect the good citizens from “them.” (Them is universal, but here applied to RCs.) They can then point to “activist judges legislating from the bench,” as the reason and problem. Darn those judges and their constitutional high road!

      • David

        The City Council should have protected the citizens from them-avoidable-tax-revenue-payouts that will result from the lawsuits! 😆

      • Eric Knight

        It’s called “re-election cred.”

  7. Eric

    The city council with it’s arrogance, ignorance, and peevish personal resentments believes they are above the law of the Superior Court. And who exactly is “them.” To categorically classify every person with the SO label clearly shows the absolute ignorance of the city council members. And to state that “they” can’t be rehabilitated would be laughable if it was so pathetic. 50% of the so called offenders never touched anyone, and a large percentage did a one time error behind poor judgment. I was 50 years old at the time of my offense, never been in any trouble, had an impeccable teaching career, and I never touched anyone. I doubt I need to be “rehabilitated.” The city council members obviously have never had any sexual fantasies, never a single deviant thought in their lives, never entertained a lustful idea, were pure and upright their entire lives, and have always had total control over any and every sexual urge; unlike the rest of the world population. Have they actually researched a cross section of the SO population to understand who these people really are–I can answer that–NO! It is clear why our city has so many problems facing it and so much public corruption; with a city council with such skewed priorities you can’t expect anything less.

    • Timmr

      ” The city council members obviously have never had any sexual fantasies, never a single deviant thought in their lives, never entertained a lustful idea, were pure and upright their entire lives, and have always had total control over any and every sexual urge; unlike the rest of the world population.”
      I know you are saying this with good ol’ sarcasm, but I am sure that is exactly what they are afraid of in themselves. Instead of owning those fantasies and dealing them in a proper manner, they project their own fear of themselves onto others and maybe act out in secret. Psychology 101.
      ” Projection is a form of defense in which unwanted feelings are displaced onto another person, where they then appear as a threat from the external world. A common form of projection occurs when an individual, threatened by his own angry feelings, accuses another of harbouring hostile thoughts.”
      https://www.britannica.com/topic/projection-psychology.
      I presume that a great percentage of the population have embarrassing and/or illegal sexual thoughts, and sex laws provides a great defense mechanism against an honest airing out of those feelings. Re: Hastert, Foley, Walsh, Weiner.

  8. G4Change

    Attention: All San Diego Taxpayers…

    Thank you for bankrolling our cause! Because of the 5 people who you elected into your city council who don’t seem to get what The Constitution is, your hard-earned money will soon be paying for our organization to teach them. We’re sorry, but we hope that come election time you will vote accordingly and elect people who realize that they are not above the law.

    PS: If one of your sons, daughters, dads, moms, or yourself is ever required to become a registered citizen, we will fight for them/you too!

  9. mike t

    Just a couple of years ago Carson made this mistake in defense of their presence and residency restrictions:
    “We have to go to war,” Councilwoman Lula Davis-Holmes said. “And, when we step out, we want (other cities) to join us in this fight because this is going to be a big fight. We want to keep this at the forefront.”

    Who won? Who’s next?

    “History is a vast early warning system.” – Norman Cousins

  10. michael

    LOL I read the lawsuit…i’m not on parole, am a so called “290” I goto the ZOO and SEAWORLD all the time !!!
    Even the RH Fleet science center and balboa park !!!

    Im not changing anytime soon !!!
    San Diego City (and COUNTY)=THE AXIS OF EVIL !!!!

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 *