ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (3/20 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings

ACSOLAction ItemsCalifornia

California State Senate Bill Would Allow Cities, Counties to Enact Park Bans [UPDATED with Reasons to Oppose]

[See UPDATE below]

State senator Lou Correa of Orange County introduced a bill on February 20 that would allow cities and counties to enact laws that ban registrants from public places such as parks, museums and libraries.  The bill, SB 386, was initially sent to the Senate Rules Committee and is expected to be referred to the Senate Public Safety Committee next week.
“The bill, if passed, could allow ordinances, such as the Orange County park ban, to continue,” stated Janice Bellucci, President of California Reform Sex Offender Laws.  “It must be stopped.”
There are currently more than 300 sex offender laws passed by cities and counties.  The laws are inconsistent and pose significant challenges to law-abiding registrants who wish to avoid penalties including fines up to $1,000 and jail up to six months or both.  For example, a registrant may lawfully visit a pier in one city, but not in another.
“Passage of this law would result in total chaos within the state of California,” stated Bellucci.  “Existing state law is sufficient to ensure public safety.”
Many of the existing city and county laws are based upon misinformation such as an alleged high recidivism rate.  The fact is that only 1.9 percent of registrants commit a second sex-related offense, according to a report from the California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation issued in October 2012.
“These laws also ignore the fact that most sexual assaults upon children are committed not by a registrant but by a person they already know such as a family member, teacher, coach or member of the clergy,” stated Bellucci.  
California RSOL recommends that registrants, family members and supporters call or write letters to their state senators stating their opposition to SB 386.  California RSOL will meet with state senators in Sacramento on March 12 to discuss the proposed bill.  Contact information regarding state senators is available online at

Bill Information (Language / History)

Update (3/10/2013)


  • Bill would allow cities and counties to pass presence restrictions that prohibit registered sex offenders from going to public parks, beaches, museums and libraries
    • Presence restrictions do not increase public safety
    • Presence restrictions violate the state and federal constitutions
    • Existing presence restrictions in cities and counties have created chaos
    • Current state law adequately safeguards public safety
  • Presence restrictions do not increase public safety
    • Children are sexually assaulted by family members, teachers, coaches and clergy in more than 90 percent of such assaults
    • Registered sex offenders commit a subsequent sex-related offense at a rate of only 1.9 percent
    • Many registered sex offenders have never harmed a child
    • Only 3 percent of sexual assaults occur in public places like parks; most occur in private places like homes, schools and churches
  • Presence restrictions violate state and federal constitutions
    • Denied access to public libraries violates 1st Amendment
    • Denied access to public parks, beaches, etc. violates 14th Amendment
    • Taxation without representation
    • Local law adopted after conviction constitutes ex post facto law
  • Presence restrictions already passed by cities and counties are inconsistent and do not provide registered sex offenders to be law abiding citizens
    • One city allows registrants to use dog park while another city does not
    • One county allows hiking on public trails while another county does not
  • Existing state law provides adequate safeguards against those who present current danger to society
    • CA Penal Code 3053.8 prohibits some registered sex offenders on parole from entering public parks
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 refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  • Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  • We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  • We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  • 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 or other website issues to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Wow! The old one sentence addition, an author.

all I can say is WTF..

I see the debate in the capitol already. You vote for our park ban, well vote for your tiered registry.

I guess Senator Correa does NOT RECOGNIZE that 290 registrants are TAXPAYERS AS WELL! Perhaps SUIING HIM would get his attention on the unconstitutionality of his proposed law!

You are correct. As tax paying American citizens with full constitutional rights we have every legal right to utilize public tax funded and run areas and facilities. Until we are stripped of our American citizenship laws like this are illegal.

Each one of us should sue each and every city that discriminates against RSO using their public tax funded resources.


Has anyone tried suing for monetary damages yet?

Chaos is an understatement. When web disclosure was first introduced, local jurisdictions were creating their own versions and that was reigned in by state law except in cases of offenders out of compliance or other high risk scenarios. At some point Parra introduced legislation that would allow apartment owners to evict registrants, even those that were supporting their own children. That was thankfully overridden. She apparently had not stopped to think that a registrant might by coming and going to work to support his children. Now, again another piece of senseless legislation that was undoubtedly spurred on by the Crow-range… Read more »

Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t this essentially the same thing that has been getting the local ordinances overturned as being unconstitutional?

Anon, the ordinances in OC (county’s model) were voided by an appellate panel’s decision because they are pre-empted by state law which only prohibits sex offender parolees from parks, so it is an issue with the state constitution. Separate from this, four cities in OC were sued in federal court on U.S. constitutional issues. If the plaintiffs are successful in winning their case, then even if this bill were to pass it would become void. BUT… it is better to stop a bad law before it becomes law than to try and fight it in court after it has been… Read more »

The legislature doesn’t even follow the recommendations of it’s own board of experts. Here is the California Sex Offender Management board’s response in 2010 to another “victim” inspired law, AB 1844:

Bottom line, California RSOL should align more closely with casomb to provide a unified voice of reason and fiscal responsibility.

I have an idea that would make most of this moot. We petition for and get passed a law that states that all language in law be validated as fact by proof of statistical evidence and unless provided, all subsequent laws based on unproven texts be stricken from the books. For example, in penal code section 290.03 it reads: 290.03. (a) The Legislature finds and declares that a comprehensive system of risk assessment, supervision, monitoring and containment for registered sex offenders residing in California communities is necessary to enhance public safety and reduce the risk of recidivism posed by these… Read more »

Would it be ok for us to use bits and pieces (many of them, lol!) in our own letters?

Most of the laws passed via local ordinance have failed in the courts. How is it that politicians think passing a law that is clearly in violation of the state and US Constitution will hold up? To me it’s just a grand standing move that will cost a great deal of money to defend. Excuse me but isn’t our state in a financial bind?

As I recall, the local laws were NOT overruled on Constitutional basis, but on the basis that state law preempted them. Now they are making it so state law does not preempt them.

When a local law is declared preempted by state law, the reason is it violates Article XI, Section 7 of the California constitution which has been interpreted in court to mean that “If otherwise valid local legislation conflicts with state law, it is preempted by such law and is void. A void law is unenforceable.

Thank you, Jeff! You have provided very practical advice for those ready to show up, stand up and speak up. It’s time to be heard everyone. We must stop SB 386!!

I doubt that they are hoping very hard that it will hold up to scrutiny. What they are hoping for is to (yet again) pass another badly conceived, prejudicial law that panders to the public’s irrational fear, and hope that it won’t be challenged, or that, once it is challenged and overturned (hopefully causing the people it abuses a great deal of money in the process), they’ll have reaped the reward of public adoration and can move on to the next bad law they wish to pass. Until we change our legal system to force laws to pass an examination… Read more »

Yes…use information here that is common sense to you and
puts forth possibly your position on the issues or somehow
reflects your thought too…….this site to be able to read and
somehow understand the issues is through an angel and
her staff…thank you for helping give a voice to INJUSTICE.

Methinks thou misseth the point. It matters not that the Constitution says thus-and-such. The Constitution exists only to prove that laws are to be written and not spoken, I give you the Second Amendment as an example. Tom and Richard and Harold think the Second Amendment enfranchises private ownership and totage of firearms; the right to “keep and bear arms”…but it doesn’t. The Second Amendment exists to prove that firearms fall under the control of the see, there is something called the “Second Amendment” and vague as it is, if the Founding Fathers hadn’t wanted to control guns they… Read more »

Thank you, Jeff, for preparing a sample letter that others can follow. We encourage everyone to send a letter to the state senator that represents them as elected officials listen most closely to their constituents. Why? Because constituents can vote for or against them. Let your voices be heard. We must defeat this bill!

Read the LA Times this morning, a coordinated attack? Remember the OCDA said all it takes is “one sentence” at the Lake Forrest meeting. The article is being used to sway misinformed people whipping up hysteria. The article is good as I would be watching for the mentioned people as well “AS” the considered good people with violent fantasies dropping off their comments. A lot of dangerous people out their (read the comments), that would fantasize violence against a non registrant also solely for being misinformed on another matter, you know stupid people needing something to distract for their own… Read more »

I already sent into the Times to complain about that story. What a horror that is! How unprofessional. Just FYI, here is what I sent in: I’m writing to complain about the hyped up story run at the very top of Page 1 of today’s (Sunday) edition: “PAROLEES DITCHING THEIR GPS.” And all capital letters! This is just a hyped up, twisted terrorization piece. Not only is this way over played, it is mixing apples and oranges, and it is lacking details to justify the twisted analysis. The headline screams SEX OFFENDERS disarming their GPS tracking devices. And the first… Read more »

Damn the statistics and facts! Politicians have an agenda they want passed and will do so at great expense to all taxpayers. All they have to say is this law protects the children and chances are it gets passed; never mind that the local municipalities get sued or the state gets sued, they’ve got plenty of taxpayer money to pay for that. After all, what’s the constitution got to do with this?

The problem with a lie is it takes multiple lies and expense to cover it up. Truth is the sex offender registry and everything tied to it is a lie and simply wrong. That being said, the preemption of state law for local municipalities is just one hole in this sinking ship (the sex offender registry). While the OCDA and others are spooning water out with more laws truth keeps poking more and more holes into it by virtue of the light of truth and people beginning to be educated and aware. It’s really not about saving children because in… Read more »

A Lie Told a Thousand Times Becomes The Truth. That is what we are facing and that is rule number one in the playbook of bottom feeding politicians like Correa.

should you have any doubts in your mind about what is at stake here.

@anonymous Nobody et al… Your observations are quite correct and illustrate the reality of the situation, but do not point to a solution. We are all upset and afraid; the trend is more malevolent than encouraging even though current research is revealing that pedophiles may well be as hard-wired as homosexuals in their sexual orientation. (Beware of left-handed priests.) The American Culture has declared all-out war on Registered (S)Ex Offenders. Get used to it and prepare yourself accordingly. It’s becoming sort of like trying to squeeze a balloon in that the darn thing keeps popping out somewhere else no matter… Read more »

I can’t argue with your logic. The problem with leaving the country is finding somewhere to go. Most of the ‘western world’ will not allow someone to immigrate from the US if they have a felony of any kind, let along a sex offense. It can even be difficult for someone without any criminal past to immigrate to many countries unless they are wealthy or have job training in highly sought-after fields. Most countries that will consider someone with a conviction require a large sum of money as investment. Perhaps, like the section for international travel, we could all share… Read more »

Here’s an interesting though. What if someone tried to defect to another country based on human rights violations? It would be interesting to see how that played out. One country, it might have been England, refused to extradite someone to Minnesota because of the possibility of civil commitment. The court said it would violate their human rights.

I have thought the same thing. Yes it was England.

Yes, I’ve thought of that scenario too: seek political asylum in a country on the grounds of civil rights. I would think being constantly marginalized and subjected to new and frequent laws that are applied retroactively that infringe on civil rights would be good grounds. The normal reply of ‘ignorance of the law is no excuse for breaking it’ kind of loses it’s moral high ground when it becomes ‘ignorance of laws that will be passed in the future’. Laws are supposed to be contracts between a government and its people: don’t do this or this is what happens to… Read more »

It is all in how you look at it…

Here – a sex criminal not allowed to set foot in a public park and shunned for the rest of his life.

There – very likely Prime Minister, for the umpteenth time.

Who – Il Cavaliere

@R.Curtis…yes their m/o is to spew deception..misrepresent
..spew false information on free…free citizens ….consider the
source orange crow-t y and now a puppet from oc ..that dude
North corea..I mean ..loucorea ..the people in northkorea have
no freedom……north corea ..I mean loucorea also wants people
to have NO freedom ….oc seems to not want to defend or supper
the Constitution for all Californians …therein lies their errors
of judgment ……….Hitlers m/o was the bigger the lie…the more
people will believe it……………….hello orange crow.


Well, the conclusion to all of this is that this bill would never stick. It would clearly be overturned in court, create more chaos then good and simply cost the tax payers money with regards to tying up the courts for both a baseless and truly prejudicial joke! In summary, this is simply a Senator trying to make a name for himself and trying to look good in for the media. Anyone with any intellectual capital would realize it just wouldnt stick. I might recommend for the senator to focus more on gangs, drug offenders and those who repeatedly violate… Read more »

Rather than the humiliation and kow-tow-ing the children and families would have to endure licking the boots of the Public Safety committee while testifying in front of the public, maybe some of these legislators would – without a photo op and press self-indulgence – visit privately and work with the children of ex offenders who have been devastated by these laws. Maybe the legislators could understand what family values are at that point. These children are victims also, ones that the legislature created implicitly by making these laws retroactive after sentences were completed, counseling was finished and supposed “debt to… Read more »

Below is another sample letter regarding SB 386. Please feel free to use language in this letter, which will be mailed today (Feb. 25), in the letter you send to your state senator. Thanks! Senator Loni Hancock, Chair Senate Public Safety Committee State Capitol – Room 2031 Sacramento, CA 95814 Dear Senator Hancock: The purpose of this letter is to request that you and members of the Senate Public Safety Committee vote in opposition to SB 386, which was introduced by Senator Lou Correa on February 20. Senator Correa’s bill, if adopted, could result in ordinances which violate the state… Read more »

Letter sent to both Correa and Hancock today.

When I went to the link you referenced above ( … it stated that any bill that was authored by that individual would be listed. I know Correa introduced it on 2/20/13 … however, it’s not listed on his home page that I could see. The only bill on the 20th is regarding manufacturing in California and below that is something else from the 19th?

Try looking it up at You can search by the bill number (SB 386) or by author. You can also do a keyword search, which I’ve been doing for years every Spring to see what crazy jump-through-the-hoop stuff they’ve dreamed up for former offenders to abide by this year.

If I recall correctly, when the Supreme Court ruled in 2002 about sex offender registries they left it open and said three things would have to happen to make registries UN-constitutional. They never stated what those three things were but I would imagine some of things surely are happening.

One would think so. It started out as being for law enforcement only, and only for the most dangerous offenders. It has morphed into something that anybody with a working brain cell can see as being added punishment. It would definitely be interesting to know what those three things are.

@Steve..the supreme court did draw the line…restrictions …booya!!
I’ve been saying ..I’ve been saying…broken record……..these restrictions
are proof…are proof…registries used for further punishment …
That’s against the law…the Constitution …civil rights …human rights…..their GREED to punish and discriminate
can really downfall the current registry list…they would have to start a new list to new crime from that day forward.

I might recommend using reverse psychology. Contact the senator and inform him your a sex offender and tell him you hope that this bill passes so a huge class action lawsuit can be filed or let him know that this bill will create more focus upon the unconstitutional laws in OC! I’ve personally spoken to the attorney who has filed the initial suit in OC! The laws in a variety of the cities will be overturned and none of the cities will prevail.

Might one suggest that you inform your senator that you are an “American Citizen (Resident), required to register under PC 290”?

Semantics, true. Small change, huge difference.

Correa has a long history of using RSOs for his political gain, so this should be no surprise to anyone. He, like so many other politicians, is simply doing what politicians do…finding an unliked minority and sensationalizing them to create a public hysteria to exploit for his political gain. Unfortunately, the media likes any sensationalization and jumps on board. What we need is to find a way to get the truth out in a way the public would actually pay attention, such as informing the general public of the 1.9 percent recidivism rate. Imagine the outcry when the public realizes… Read more »

How about paid public service announcements? I don’t know how much that would cost, but it would be a way to reach a lot of people over television. If there is a website where all of the “true” facts are centralized, a link could be included on the announcement.

Unfortunately people do not want to know nor particularly care about the truth. If they did there would be no one attending church but just look at that. Facts have very little to do with the reality most people live in. Facts only get the way for most people. Why have to think of the complexities of nature and physics when it’s easier to read a book that tells you a big man in the sky made everything. No, people are stupid tribal animals and most are very happy to be told how to think and what to think by… Read more »

When 83 was introduced a Democratic legislator said it was “politics at its worst”. It passed by initiative because runner could probably not get the legislative body to do it. You cited that correa has a history of advancing his “legacy” using these types of tactics. I’d like to know more specifics of this history and hopefully the press would too. It might be good, though unlikely, if an investigative reporter actually had the stones to unearth the lies, fear mongering and mob rule tactics that has caused the evolution of these laws – especially those in Crow-range county –… Read more » is her online
you can contact her there as well’

“When a local law is declared preempted by state law, the reason is it violates Article XI, Section 7 of the California constitution which has been interpreted in court to mean that “If otherwise valid local legislation conflicts with state law, it is preempted by such law and is void. A void law is unenforceable.” And how many angels can dance on the head of a pin? What we’re facing is a ‘cowboy’ government that allows the Enforcers a free and heavy hand when it comes to the protection of citizens from abuse. The local policewoman will become Crusader Rabbit… Read more »

This just defies all logic. So by making a misdemeanor law it will stop someone from committing a felony? If someone is hell bent on abducting a child, raping and killing them there is not a law that can be written that will stop it. It’s like putting a piece of foam on the tip of a bullet and saying it will stop the bullet! It seems that to a politician the answer to everything is to make a new law. It’s against the law to kill people yet people are still killing people. There are drugs that are illegal… Read more »

If this law passes, then could the Cali courts strike it down on the same principles as the decision in New Jersey that struck residency restrictions on the basis of the state’s Megan’s law pre-empting city ordinances? New Jersey’s state court in GH v Township of Galloway (2009) [56] ruled they “hold that Cherry Hill Township’s and Galloway Township’s ordinances, establishing residency restrictions that formed buffer zones for convicted sex offenders living within their communities, are precluded by the present, stark language of Megan’s Law. It is that language which controls.” In other words, local ordinances were pre-empted by the… Read more »

Frank Lindsay and I will meet on March 12 with members of the Senate Public Safety Committee and/or their senior staff to discuss SB 386 and why it would not increase public safety as well as violate the state and/or federal constitutions. We thank you in advance for letters sent and phone calls already made and will have a report for you on March 13 regarding those meetings.

how did this turned out ?

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x