The Fullerton City Council voted 4 to 1 to revise its sex offender ordinance by removing all presence restrictions. The vote took place on May 21 and a second vote is required to finalize the Council’s decision.
“The City of Fullerton is to be commended for its decision to remove presence restrictions from its ordinance,” stated CA RSOL President Janice Bellucci. “After the revisions become effective, registered citizens will be free to visit parks and other recreational areas within the city without the fear of arrest.”
Fullerton is 1 of 22 cities that have either agreed to repeal or already repealed their presence restrictions. The additional cities include Apple Valley, Anaheim, Claremont, Costa Mesa, Downey, El Centro, Galt, Highland, Holtville, Huntington Beach, Laguna Hills, Lancaster, Placerville, Porterville, Rancho Santa Margarita, Santee, Shafter, Suisun City, Tehachapi, Tustin and 29 Palms. Most repeal actions occurred after a series of letters from CA RSOL during the period January 20 through April 30.
Is that what they call complying with the law; revise? It sounds like the bottom line is they repealed their illegal presence restriction ordinance. I suppose they think it makes them look like they actually has some sort of control and a choice; I think this can be seen as pride. I believe definition #3 & #4 apply here. Whatever!
pride (prīd)
n.
1. A sense of one’s own proper dignity or value; self-respect.
2. Pleasure or satisfaction taken in an achievement, possession, or association: parental pride.
3. Arrogant or disdainful conduct or treatment; haughtiness.
4. An excessively high opinion of oneself; conceit.
What about residency restrictions?? I spent 6 Months in county jail and got out and couldnt live in fullerton when I got out because of the absurd ordonance.
We can thankfully add South Lake Tahoe to the growing list who’ve voted to repeal their presence restriction law.
http://www.tahoedailytribune.com/southshore/11497436-113/offenders-sex-south-california
However the compliance may be viewed, I give my 3 cheers to Janice and her team at rsol. I further more would like to say a BIG Thank You to all of you!!!!!!!!!!!!!
… has “revised” its ordinance. With the recent rulings they shouldn’t have an ordinance to begin with since they all seem to lead to chaos ultimately and effectively sidetrack the intention of the state management and oversight duties.
Any local ordinance is essentially a conflict of interest and the introduction of superfluous data with questionable integrity and intentions always seems the be at the heart and spirit of these local ordinances. This suggests a clear intention to punish again and again without proper jurisdiction.
It says that a second vote is needed to finalize the coucils decision, has that happened?