ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings: September 21 – Phone meeting details

Emotional Support Group Meetings (Los Angeles, Sacramento, Phone)

ACSOLAction ItemsCalifornia

Assembly Local Government Committee passes AB 201

*** Please read Janice’s Journal: Courage and Effort do Pay Off… ***

Despite testimony from ACLU and California RSOL, a second legislative committee today approved a bill (AB 201) that would allow cities and counties to pass laws prohibiting registered citizens from being present in or near public and private places. Ten individuals, including registered citizens, also testified in opposition to that bill.

The Assembly Local Government Committee approved the bill in a vote of 5 to 0. One member of the committee, Richard Gordon (Democrat, Los Altos), abstained from voting.

“There is still time to stop this bill,” stated California RSOL president Janice Bellucci. “In order to do so, we must increase the number of phone calls made and letters sent.”

The next legislative step is consideration of the Senate version of this bill, SB 267, by the Public Safety Committee on May 12. No date has yet been set by the same committee in the Assembly.

Get Involved

Write Letters

[Attached is a draft letter (Senate Letter – SB 267 – April 2015 (MS Word or Plain Text)) to the Senate Public Safety Committee and below a list of its members including mailing addresses and phone numbers].

Make Phone Calls

Making your opinion known is Sacramento is easy via telephone.  Call the office of the Senator or Assembly Member and a receptionist will answer the phone.  Give that person the following information.  It usually only takes 1 or 2 minutes.
  • the bill #
  • your position on the bill
  • your name
  • your city

CALIFORNIA STATE SENATE
COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC SAFETY

Senator Loni Hancock, Chair
State Capitol, Room 2082
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 651-4009

Senator Joel Anderson, Co-Chair
State Capitol, Room 5052
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 651-4038

Senator Mark Leno
State Capitol, Room 5100
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 651-4011

Senator Carol Liu
State Capitol, Room 5097
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 651-4025

Senator Mike McGuire
State Capitol, Room 5064
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 651-4002

Senator Bill Monning
State Capitol, Room 313
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 651-4017

Senator Jeff Stone
State Capitol, Room 4062
Sacramento, CA 95814
(916) 651-4028

 

 

Join the discussion

  1. someone who cares

    How can they do this? It is all based on lies and the public is being deceived by untrue and false information. How can the public not be outraged that they are being lied to by these politicians. Are all registered citizens affected by this? Isn’t this another blanket restriction similar to the one in San Diego that was deemed unconstitutional? This is crazy.

    • John

      Please make the calls and send the letters. It takes less than 10 minutes to all and state your position (opposed!), give your name and zip code (or city).

      Please call and make your voices heard!

  2. USA

    I’m confused. FIrst, the bill states that sex offenders all pose a high risk of re-offending? Thats a lie! Then, it mentioned or mentions that certain high risk offenders info will be released? Can you clarify this? I have a battery charge from 20 years ago expunged? How will I be affected? This lawmakers are very dishonest!

  3. Harry

    War on RC by CA.

  4. mike

    The only way to stop this is in the courts after it passes noone is going to oppose these bills. I think its great that people are speaking up and writyng letters but gear up rso this is happening here ob cali just like Florida. Hope someone has the resources a.d ability to challenge these laws as soon as they are enacted. Continue calling and writing but gear up.

    • Harry

      Writing letters, making phone calls, speaking-up is a very good practice for us all. The more we do it the more we become effective.

    • Timmr

      I’m giving $100 to go towards that lawsuit. Heck I want to be able to go with my wife on our annual vacation to discover the vast natural beauty of this State, without the fear of being fined or imprisoned if I have use the restrooms at a local park along the way or stop and get some grub. These legislators only make it more urgent that I see this state before it becomes a true desert, both physically and constitutionally, a land in a natural and moral state of decline and drought.

  5. andrewd01

    I wonder if RSOL’s support is why they passed it? They know who we are and why we protest these stupid-ass laws so maybe that’s why they passed it. Anybody else got a thought on this?

    • wonderin

      “I wonder if RSOL’s support is why they passed it? They know who we are and why we protest these stupid-ass laws so maybe that’s why they passed it. Anybody else got a thought on this?”

      Yes I do!
      I posted a long time ago that if you thwart the cities efforts to protect their children from RSOs’ hanging out at parks and etc., expect them to change the state law.
      It’s understandable that the police need the power to arrest and or detain known sex offenders who are behaving suspiciously in areas such as parks, swimming pools, libraries and etc.
      I think the crucial difference should only be determining threatening behavior as opposed to physical presence.

      • brunello

        Since time immemorial the police have had the power to detain someone exhibiting threatening behavior near a school, etc. This pertains to anyone, not just to someone on the registry. This new legislation is not needed for the rational action you cited. The fact that they passed it unanimously tells me that any consideration of simple fact paled in comparison with political expediency. Tyranny of the majority, definitely.

        • wonderin

          “Since time immemorial the police have had the power to detain someone exhibiting threatening behavior near a school, etc. This pertains to anyone, not just to someone on the registry. This new legislation is not needed for the rational action you cited.”

          Apparently this legislative committee believe it is.
          Tyranny? Hardly. Just a counter punch in their endeavour to protect children from people who apparently haven’t accepted the fact that they no longer deserve to be trusted unconditionally in the presence of someone else’s children.

        • brunello

          By discounting the reams of evidence showing that presence restrictions for registrants are not productive of children’s safety and likely counterproductive, the committee has failed to act in the interest of children’s safety. My take on it – they voted to save their jobs.
          Do read James Madison on tyranny of the majority.

    • Timmr

      I believe that may be true. Nonetheless, the objections are on record now and it appears these particular lawmakers wish to ignore the evidence and allow each local community to exact its own form of punishment on the registered and their families. By ignoring the facts, they are unwittingly making a case that these laws have nothing to do with regulation, but more to do with retribution and punishment.

  6. Steve

    Prison without the walls.

  7. Avig

    Well, this is highly irritating of course. However:
    1) I looked up both Senate and Assembly versions of the bill. Assembly allows locals to limit residence, but Senate bill does not, it was removed.
    2) both allow restrictions on presence, and Senate enumerates examples: day care centers, parks, schools.
    3) Schools are already a no-no.
    4) In my county, Kern, there is one restriction on the books already: you cannot be present on the premises of a licensed day care center. You can’t live there either, it says.
    5) The judgment of the supreme court already got rid of residence restrictions. So I am hoping that doesn’t change.
    The problems these politicians are trying to solve seem to me to be purely imaginary. I wish they would turn there attention back to the real world and get to work on jobs and income for the average person. Crusading against witches and demons may grip the public imagination, but it does nothing to improve real life.

    • David

      Avig, #1 is unclear to me. Yes, the Senate Bill removed the “residency” restriction wording, but I’m confused – wouldn’t “presence” include residency? That is, how can I “reside” at my residence without being “present” there at the same time. Sorry, it’s just that the Bill’s wording has me scratching my head.

  8. Molly

    I don’t know how to formally form a group to go on record opposed to a bill but maybe there is a way we could we start a group called “Californians Against Segregation” or “Californians Opposed to Segregation” and then publically voice opposition for both bills on the record…It might be harder for members to vote for a bill opposed by an anti-segregationist group…

  9. USA

    Well, I think this is terrible! We have other government agencies are requesting increased leniency/tiered system and new parole board rules! To be honest with you, these proposed laws are becoming out of control. First, its becoming increasingly difficult to function. I’m 20 years after a battery charge/not child related/expunged. So, the thought of this affecting me is rather overwhelming me. I’m in the top 5 percent of earners and I pay a lot of taxes! So, how can I continue to support a state thats so messed up?

  10. Harry

    There is bad case of stupid in this country about RC issues. Stupid is defined as:

    : not intelligent : having or showing a lack of ability to learn and understand things
    : not sensible or logical
    : not able to think normally because you are drunk, tired, etc.
    Merriam-Webster

    stu•pid
    (sto͞o′pĭd, styo͞o′-)
    adj.stu•pid•er, stu•pid•est
    1. Slow to learn or understand; obtuse.
    2. Tending to make poor decisions or careless mistakes.
    3. Marked by a lack of intelligence or care; foolish or careless: a stupid mistake.
    4. Dazed, stunned, or stupefied: felt stupid after taking the pain medication.
    5. Used to express disparagement or exasperation: Take your stupid notebook and go home.
    American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition. Copyright © 2011 by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company.

    Adjective
    stupid (comparative stupider or more stupid, superlative stupidest or most stupid)
    1. Lacking in intelligence or exhibiting the quality of having been done by someone lacking in intelligence.
    Because it’s a big stupid jellyfish!
    2. To the point of stupor.
    Neurobiology bores me stupid.
    3. (archaic) Characterized by or in a state of stupor; paralysed. [quotations ▼]
    4. (archaic) Lacking sensation; inanimate; destitute of consciousness; insensate. [quotations ▼]
    5. (slang) Amazing.
    That dunk was stupid! His head was above the rim!
    6. (slang) damn, annoying, darn
    I fell over the stupid wire.
    Synonyms
    • dense, dumb, retarded, unintelligent
    • (especially in the Caribbean) stupidy
    Wiktionary

  11. David

    Excuse my rant, but I don’t see any of these “concerned” legislators proposing life-long registration AND park & school bans for convicted drug dealers or gang members! These two groups have much higher recidivism rates and do a great deal more harm to children, youth, and the public in general. Consider how much drug use and gang activities cost the public every year? Oh, don’t let me forget that they get to be “EX-gang members” and “FORMER drug dealers”, whereas we are always and without qualification called “sex offenders”, never EX-sex offender or FORMER sex offfender (as if our offenses are current, constant and never-ending.) They are lauded for their turn-arounds such as when a “former gang member starts an after school program for underserved youth”. All is forgiven, you’re a role model now! But once a registered citizen …… Well, you get my point. (Thanks for letting me vent my frustration, folks.)
    (BTW: I’m frustrated with the unfairness of our societal norms, but I’m glad that at least some folks are allowed to rehabilitate and start new lives.)

    • Harry

      My wife and I attended a church service, about l year ago. A person announce he was drug free for a year. The place broke out in cheers. That same day an RC, whom I knew and is blind, which depending on riding the church bus to service was told he could not ride the bus anymore, thus could not attend service anymore. The guy was member there over 15 years, without incident and was crime free for over 25 years.

  12. mike

    Herer here David its sick how the real problems like you pointed out are ignored and all rso are targets for these law makers. It’s disgusting.

  13. mike

    Hey USA if your in the top 5 percenters why don’t you sponser my boilerplate motion so that all low or moderate risk offenders could use including you. I’ve worked countless hours on it perfecting it and gathering relevant info. I’ve researched extensively on the elements for a motion for injunction relief I believe all we need is a attorney to refine it ad case law and format it into a proper court doc. I’ll send you a copy if you want and you can have an attorney give you price. No one seems to wa.t to listen to me but if you research you will find that similar motions have been granted for a multitude of reasons.

  14. 28 years ago

    I have lewd act of minor 14 got probation I was 18 if these
    Bill passed will I have to fight to stay in my house.with my wife
    And kids

Leave a Reply

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.  
 

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Please answer this question to prove that you are not a robot *

.