ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (4/17 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings
ACSOL’s Online EPIC Conference: Empowered People Inspiring Change Sept 17-18, 2021


City of Orange Sued for Failure to Repeal Ordinance [updated with media]

A sex offender ordinance adopted by the City of Orange is the subject of a lawsuit filed today in federal district
court.  The lawsuit was filed after the City Council of Orange considered, but failed, to repeal its ordinance on June 10.

The City of Orange’s ordinance is broad and includes restrictions regarding where more than 105,000 individuals can be present.  Specifically, the ordinance prohibits registered citizens from being present in or within 500 feet of a wide range of locations including the public library, schools, parks, swimming pools, bus stops and playgrounds.  The Ordinance also prohibits registered citizens from staying in most hotels or motels within the city limits.  A registered citizen who violates the ordinance is subject to incarceration for a period of one year and/or a fine of $1,000.

“The City Council members of Orange, with the exception of Mayor Smith, acted without courage or common sense when they failed to repeal an ordinance which violates both the federal and state constitutions,” stated CA RSOL President and attorney Janice Bellucci.  “Those council members are wasting taxpayer dollars by ignoring recent relevant court decisions.”

The City of Orange ordinance is based upon the myth that the recidivism rate of convicted sex offenders is nearly half.  The true rates of re-offense, according to state and federal government reports, are 1.8 percent for registrants on parole and 5.3 percent for registrants overall.

“The presence restrictions within the City of Orange’s  ordinance are inconsistent with recent decisions of the California Court of Appeals which invalidated two ordinances – one by the City of Irvine and the other by the County of Orange – as being preempted by existing state law,” stated CA RSOL Vice  President and attorney Chance Oberstein. “The court held that the state statutory scheme imposing restrictions on a sex offender’s daily life fully occupied the field.”

California SOL sent a series of letters to the City of Orange and more than 70 additional ciies in California starting on January 20 notifying them of the recent Court of Apeal decisions and that the sex offender ordinances the cities had adopted
were inconsistent with those decisions.  California RSOL requested that the cities repeal their ordinances or face a potential legal challenge.

Subsequent to issuance of the California RSOL letters, a total of 26 cities have repealed or revised their sex offender ordinances.  The cities include Anaheim, Costa Mesa, Galt, Laguna Hills, Santee and Tustin.

“Future legal challenges by sex offenders can be expected of cities that have fail to repeal or revise their sex offender ordinances,” stated Bellucci.   “The lawsuit filed against Lompoc today is the twelfth in a series of such legal challenges.”

Following is a list of the first 11 lawsuits and the dates on which they were filed.  All lawsuits have been filed in federal district court.

  • Pomona – March 24
  • South Lake Tahoe – March 31
  • National City – April 8
  • Carson – April 11
  • Lompoc – April 21
  • Sacramento County – April 30
  • Santa Ana – May 7
  • Wasco – May 15
  • Ontario – May 21
  • Stockton – May 27
  • Taft – May 29

City of Orange’s Ban on Registered Sex Offenders in Parks Draws a Federal Lawsuit
Orange sued over sex-offender restrictions

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

Thank you !!!
The more laws that are remove the less stress RSO have!!

I was planning on going to a family function in Orange this Saturday and visiting with my 93 yo mother and family; but now I think I’ll stay away; it’s too uncomfortable and creepy knowing that one misstep in that town can land you in prison, and too many things can happen; like a flat tire close to a bus stop or one of the many other restricted locations, or getting pulled over because of the motorcycle I ride and the way I look next to a public library, school, parks, swimming pool, bus stops or playground. There’s too much… Read more »

93! Very impressive… who knows how many more birthday parties, family get-togethers, etc your mother has left? One would hate to have this be the last one and you missing it because of some absurd ordinance and a handful of delusional city council members.

Plus, I would argue the exact opposite. Go. Let them arrest you if they must, and then sue the bejeesus out of them, as those laws have already been found to be unconstitutional. Go to the family party and / or get rich! Have your cake and eat it, too. Brilliant!

Joe: I’m from OC; borne and raised. My family history there goes back to the 20s and 30s. My mother actually went to Chapman U when it was only one building that was used for the kindergarten, elementary, jr high and high school students. I was born in St Josephs hospital. If anyone has ever noticed how I sound angry at times it is these laws that anger me (I have no respect for lies or liars) and that includes willful ignorance. These laws were never based on truth; if you ever get the chance grab the book by Alex… Read more »

From the time I started parole, I avoided this city like the plague. They have the worst city in the worst county when it comes to how they deal with registrants.

I’m actually very shocked by this. I mean, a Judge has ruled against this prejudicial ordinance. I think that being the organization RSOL is, I would sue the City of Orange for damages. I would state or request $1,000 dollars for each day this ordinance remains in affect and use the proceeds for future endeavors. Lets send both a fair and respectful message to cities. They clearly believe they are above the court/legal system. We have to respect the laws! Why don’t they?

USA: The city counsel of the city of Orange are fools, all you have to do is watch the video of their meeting and it becomes pretty obvious. The only one that seems to have a shred of common sense is the mayor; she wouldn’t recommend gutting their illegal laws if she didn’t have to and would impose even more immoral and unconstitutional restrictions on registrants if she could; so I would not call her an honest person, not by a long shot. There are different kinds of honesty, such as cash register honesty and moral honesty, and nobody on… Read more »

They are fools also because they believe lies to be truth. They and their kind refuse to seek out the truth. They just believe whatever they are told; just like the rest of citizenry fools.

Lie – noun

Definition of LIE
a :  an assertion of something known or believed by the speaker to be untrue with intent to deceive
b :  an untrue or inaccurate statement that may or may not be believed true by the speaker
:  something that misleads or deceives

Sadly, this could be a city council meeting in many US cities, not just Orange. The biggest problem, as it were, is that the instinctive (ergo, “irrational”) actiom of humans are to protect their children at all costs, which means suspending rational behavior. Couple that with knowing that their constituents that hold the levers to their power via the voting box, and they make their decisions. Very evident here in this recording. And THIS is why the ONLY recourse we have is Federal Court asserting our constitutional rights. To that end, I’ll go one step further: The most RELIEVED parson… Read more »

And then there are all the non SOs and those who support these ridiculous illegal “laws”, not realizing that their tax dollars are being spent. When they get sued, guess who will be paying. Hopefully, some people will realize that these so called laws do nothing but waste money and time that could be spent more wisely on much more important issues.

What a huge and costly legal blunder Tony orchestrated across virtually every jurisdiction in the county.

Thank goodness for the will and courage of Janice to take on this status quo network and bring sorely needed oxygen to the thousands of citizens gasping for at least a tinge of the air of freedom and justice.

Everyone needs to know that following Tony’s lead (and Runner’s) is a journey into the deep south of decades ago (if not centuries…)

J: It stands to reason that they will lose because the law is on our side. Their enactment of these laws they want to keep so bad was a slap in the face of truth and law, as well as the constitution and bill of rights, and other laws too. And now they slap the law and truth in the face again with their obstinacy. I was surprised to see an article in the OC Register about this, and that’s good, because everyone will see what is happening with their money by these fools. I hope it’s extra expensive for… Read more »

Helps to have a few reporters’ contact information on the ol’ Android 😛


One of the city councilmembers, Mike Alvarez, commented in the comments section (Facebook). I responded to him. I’m not sure if my own response was shown or has propagated yet. Mike Alvarez “As one of the Councilman that did not support this change, I could not support this action that removes the safe zones for children…Judges are not perfect nor are any of us…so we make laws in this case to protect the vulnerable….when a 61 year man performs lewd acts before a child, he should lose some his rights….I believe that the people who voted me into office will… Read more »

Eric Knight: That was a really good response. Apparently Mike Alvarez doesn’t know much about registrants, and how most of what people; like him, think they know is is usually the exact opposite of the reality/truth. I have to wonder what county counsel Nicholas Chrisos is thinking right about now. You said in no uncertain terms “I guarantee you this law will be taken down.” I wonder if he, and all the other anti America people like Tony Rackauckas and Shawn Nelson remember what you said on that day in 2011. I sincerely hope your words are ringing in their… Read more »

Alvarez doesn’t know much about anything but mob rule and reaction based on fear mongering and exaggerated statistics – and votes!

He drank the OC Kool Aid – and everything just happened – in his fact starved mind – according to plan…

For some reason, my reply did not show up, EXCEPT when I am logged into Facebook. If you don’t know what I mean, Facebook has an annoying habit of suppressing certain comments from public viewing, although the author can see the response if the author is logged in.

Note with regard to “cloaked” url: I’m sorry, when I copied the facebook post, I forgot to revert the cloaked link to the full link that this site requires. I’ll make sure to remember in the future.

Eric Knight; that’s just more censorship by Face Book, along with their ban on registrants. How is it you can have an account? If I wanted one; would I use an alias?

I’m not a registrant so Facebook TOS doesn’t apply. But the TOS is currently toothless. As Facebook can technically bar ANYONE from its site, there is no pragmatic penalty for a registrant to be on Facebook. (Sex offenders are usually outed out on Facebook by “antis” who recognize Facebook members, then submit the form to Facebook they provide for such a purpose.) Only states with laws on the books against registrant ownership or management of social network accounts (or with laws modifying terms like full disclosure of registration status) can do anything about it. That said, I don’t recommend one… Read more »

The TOS says “convicted sex offender” vague enough that someone with a COR or never having to register can be excluded with a background check.

Thank you. That’s interesting. I’ve thought of trying Facebook a number of times, but never did because I’ve always heard they didn’t wan’t registrant’s on their site, and the risk of being exposed, which would really put a damper on things, is too great for me; it’s too risky for me. Around here it’s a number of small cities and towns, unless you go down to the Palm Springs area; I’ve already been outed by a busy body neighbor in the community of 3,500 people where I live, so any kind of a life is now out if the question… Read more »

It is important to note, they are a PUBLIC company now, since they offered their IPO. A private company may have some leeway in banning groups of people, but a publicly traded company cannot.

Is there any action we can take in this regard? The reality is Facebook is so prevalent, that I am loosing business not using it. It is become like not being able to put an ad in the newspaper used to be. I’m sorry about the mothers of teenage girls who are afraid of loved ones falling prey to someone, but you know it is the teenagers themselves, that are posting the illegal pictures and you have to some real parenting and not rely on a false sense of security. . I’m not thrilled about using it myself, but I… Read more »

Jason Wilson:

I wonder if Face Book is aware of this; I’m sure they are. Perhaps that’s why there are so many registrants on their site.

Eric Knight: I posted this on the article page. I couldn’t resist, since the city’s decision to not repeal their illegal ordinance has a direct and negative affect on me and my family. I plagiarized a small portion of your response to city councilman Mike Alvarez. I apologize if this offends you, but you wrote it so well I felt it would detract from it’s impact if I changed it. “Jean Short; your assessment of the issue is very accurate. Each time someone gives an approving nod to these preemptive measures another piece of America dies. What you say is… Read more »

Q… I just want to say… Excellent!

We highly recommend that you listen to the Orange City Council discuss whether or not to repeal its ordinance. The discussion took only 10 minutes and included a statement by the City Attorney that the city was “legally bound to do so”. The council noted that they had already been threatened with a lawsuit if they didn’t change the ordinance. Most shocking was the council’s disregard for an appellate court decision in the same jurisdiction which determined that similar city ordinances are preempted by state law. Perhaps the council members didn’t learn in school about the separation of powers.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x