Wary of lawsuits, Downey rolls back restrictions on sex offenders

DOWNEY – The City Council on Tuesday reluctantly but unanimously voted to roll back its residency restrictions on registered sex offenders after the state Supreme Court ruled that similar restrictions in San Diego County are unconstitutional. …

Councilman Sean Ashton instructed Garcia to investigate whether the city can bill sex offenders to cover the costs of police supervision. “I don’t want sex offenders here. I don’t care where else they have to go, I just don’t want them here,” he said.    Full Article

City Council Video     at 1:31:30

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

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

 

  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. 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 that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. 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.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. 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.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
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.  
 

8 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

YOU wanna send sex offenders a “bill for to cover the costs of police supervision.”

How about we sue and bill YOU for denying our RIGHT after all those years?

You’re right Cool Cal –

Sounds like the councilman needs to have a bill sent to him by 100,00 registrants for damages. What an outright dunderhead.

Sean Ashton said, “…but with the victims who face a lifetime of therapy,” If this is true, I feel sorry for the victims being re-victimized by these so-called, therapists.

The comments / questions are valid and to the point these cities counties owe us all money for they have violated our rights under color of law and at the same time has shown registration can be used against you…..not only a money issue but to be OFF registry issue…….public policy has shown registration was used to discriminate ..segregate ..violate…rights of free people …………and is being used against us under color of law.

PC 290.012(d) No entity shall require a person to pay a fee to register or
update his or her registration pursuant to this section.

Sean Ashton’s Facebook page says:
“Please let me know of any concerns that you might have. I would like to be responsive to the needs of all of the residents of our great city. Thank you.”
You can find Sean’s Facebook page by typing “Sean Ashton Downey City Councilmember” in your search engine.

This is the email I sent to Downey Councilmember Ashton at sashton@downeyca.org

Hi Sean –
I’m writing to express my concern over your lack of knowledge as to how the police department in Downey is funded. Local police protection is funded in great part by property, business, and sales taxes which are paid by people who own homes, operate businesses and/or have jobs in the community. This means registered citizens on megan’s list who own homes, operate businesses and/or have jobs in Downey are already paying for police surveillance.
Or perhaps I misunderstood what you meant when you instructed city attorney Yvette Abich Garcia to “investigate whether the city can bill sex offenders to cover the costs of police supervision” and what you really meant is that you are interested in how the city can help registered citizens buy homes, open businesses and/or find good paying jobs in Downey thus increasing the percentage of taxes paid by registered citizens to the city.
If so I apologize for my misinterpretation of your recent quote in the Downey Registry and I really hope you receive a lot of resumes from citizens on the registry.
Yours truly –