City of Carson Charged With Fraud, Breach of Contract

The City of Carson has been charged with fraud and breach of contract due to its failure to significantly revise the city’s sex offender ordinance despite a settlement agreement in which the City promised to do so no later than August 24, 2014. A lawsuit was filed in Los Angeles Superior Court on October 1, 2014, requesting that the court require the City revise its ordinance in accordance with the settlement agreement. In addition, a government claim was filed with the City Clerk on the same day requesting monetary damages.

The settlement agreement at issue was signed by both the City Manager and the City Attorney and a provision in that agreement stated the individuals who signed the agreement had authority to bind the party they represent. After the City Council failed to revise the ordinance, the City Attorney stated that the City Manager lacked authority to bind the City of Carson.

“The City of Carson continues to act in bad faith,” stated CA RSOL President Janice Bellucci. “First, they adopted an ordinance that violates the state and federal constitutions. Second, they refused to honor a settlement agreement signed by the City Manager and instead “declared war” upon registered citizens. Third, they are choosing to ignore court decisions which determined that the city’s ordinance is preempted by state law.”

A lawsuit was filed in federal district court on April 11, 2014, challenging Carson’s ordinance which prohibits all registered citizens from being present in or within 300 feet of many public and private locations, including the public library. The parties entered into a settlement agreement on July 25, 2014. which stated that the City of Carson would revise its ordinance to be consistent with existing state law which prohibits only registered citizens while on parole whose offense involved a child 13 years or younger from entering a public park.

The City Council failed to revise the city’s ordinance during a meeting on August 5, 2014, despite recommendations by staff to do so. During that meeting, the City Council members acknowledged both the court decisions and the settlement agreement, however, they chose to ignore both. Instead, City Councilwoman, Lula Davis-Holmes, declared war upon registered citizens and the City Council voted unanimously to “push for state legislation” that would allow the City to retain its ordinance. A similar effort was tried and defeated in the state legislature in 2013.

Also see:

City of Carson Fails to Repeal or Revise Ordinance [updated with CC Video]

Carson vows to ‘go to war’ to keep sex offender restrictions

Related posts

Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...


  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t
  4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  8. 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.
  9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  10. Please do not post in all Caps.
  11. 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. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
  15. Please do not solicit funds
  16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  19. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
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

The City of Carson City Council’s failure to abide by the terms of its settlement agreement between the Plaintiff and Defendants in the federal civil rights lawsuit filed in this case and its subsequent failure to repeal its unconstitutional ordinance is a direct defiance of these elected officials’ sworn oath to preserve, support and defend the Constitution of California and the Constitution of the United States.

Accordingly, since every City of Carson City Council member voted to reject repeal of Carson’s ordinance even though duly informed that the ordinance is preempted by existing state law as decided in the case of People v. Nguyen (Cal. Court of Appeals, Jan. 10, 2014, review denied), and instead “declare war” against registrant citizens, every City of Carson City Council member is in contempt of constitution, has violated the terms of his or her elected office and should voluntarily resign his or her position or face immediately recall.

Their elected duty is to uphold the law…not do what is popular. They failed. They need to be removed from office to protect the integrity of the electoral process and so that justice for all prevails, equally, without exception. Allowing them to stay in office is sanctioned corruption and intolerable in these United States.

Shame on you, Carson.

It’s getting so bad now thaat I can’t even get a return call to scheduled appointment so that I can reregister for the year 2015!!!!!!

Does this include a massive financial lawsuit on behalf of all registered california citizens ..?…this city (along with orange county ) need a be the financial liability of How Not To Treat People.

McBride is definitely on target with his comments. Not only should those people he mentions resign, but appropriate fines and penalties should be assessed. The people he has mentioned are in my opinion engaged in mugging registered citizens and robbing them of the freedoms to which they are entitled under state and federal laws.

Janice Bellucci For The Win!

GO Janice ! Let me know what I can do to help !

Well, this is truly an unfortunate situation. It’s sad to hear that the tax payers of Carson will probably be required to pay for the few unintelligent leaders of Carson ! I wonder if this would have occurred if this where their money? Now, if I somehow owed Carson money, I would probably be brought into court/sued/wage garnishments and maybe arrested ? It’s time City Employees wake up and realize they aren’t above the law! I just hope this will be a wake up call for other cities.

Actually, I really do hope that this is NOT JUST BLUSTER on the part of the Carson city council. As I hoped the Hesperia city council would not have backed down.

For it seems obvious to me the defeat of the criminal case in Orange County, which I believe started the fall of all these ordinances, and gave Tony Rackauckas an egg facial, is not enough to teach a lesson to some of these holier-than-thou hypocrites at the city level.

So, I hope they are foolish enough to fight it all the way. And then, after they lose and have to pay a large award, MAYBE the lesson will be driven home to other local holdouts.

Out of curiosity, did the City Manager send the settlement agreement through the US Mail? If so, and if he did commit fraud, he also committed Mail Fraud, a federal offense. I know that this is a ridiculous application of the law, but no more so that what RSO face every single day.

It seems to me that the message these city “Leaders” are sending to their constituents is ‘If you don’t like the law, don’t obey it!’. If they repealed their ordinance and respectively sought to create a new bill, that would be one thing, But to obstinately go on record and tell the state of California that they’re not going to obey the law is kinda illegal. At least it would be if I did it.