Two state legislative committees will soon consider bills that would allow, but not require, cities and counties to adopt “presence restrictions”. On April 28, the Senate Public Safety Committee will consider SB 267 at 9:30 a.m. in Room 3191. ***** Please note the change of date for SB 267 *******
“The Senate Governance and Finance Committee approved SB 267 on April 15 and if the bill is also approve by the Senate Public Safety Committee, it will move to the Senate floor for a vote,” stated California RSOL president Janice Bellucci. “This bill must be stopped.”
On April 29, the Assembly Local Government Committee will hear AB 201 at 1:30 p.m. in Room 447. This is the first consideration of the bill by an Assembly Committee. The Assembly bill is broader than the Senate bill because it would also authorize cities and counties to adopt residency restrictions.
“Senate and Assembly hearings are open to the public. Registered citizens as well as their loved ones are encouraged to attend the hearings on April 28 and 29,” stated California RSOL vice president Chance Oberstein.
now we wont be able to live anywhere!
Too bad one of the legislators up there, one who may be sympathetic to the constitution but, of course, does not want to appear as “soft” on sex offenders, does not add an amendment to the bill stating that any such presence restriction ordinance has to be based on FACTUAL EVIDENCE of EFFECTIVENESS.
I think people really need to wake up! FIrst, we had legislation that resulted in posting the names/addresses and even convictions of individuals who already paid their debt to society and in most cases, no longer on probation or parole. This initially began with the public being able to view this info at a Police Station ect. Then, this just wasn’t enough. I mean, when you have less than a 2 percent recidivism rate, something needs to be done. Stricter laws where instituted! Laws where instituted that created harsher punishments/longer prison sentences! Harsher parole/Ankle Braclets. People where banned from residing in certain residential areas? Banned from parks, beaches, parks and the list goes on and on. Then, we had certain cities banning individuals from participating in Halloween? Some states where even instituting sex offender drivers licenses. There are even some cities that ban individuals from visiting their children’s school? Or, what about the requirement that those individuals attending a college ect must register with the school? Then, we had the state create a requirement to register within 5 days of your birthday, rather than 30 or 15? I even believe that some states require you to post a sign on your front lawn if on parole and some cities even post your photos in the area? No offense, but this is nuts! We can drive (still) cars, visit the mall, go out at night, take the bus/I think, take a train/I think and even visit the mall! I believe we can even still visit amusement parks. So, the big question is this? Whats next? California still requires those individuals/some with expunged convictions/or even summary probation to still require! California needs and must do something that would benefit those living in this state rather then continue to harass and terrorize those people who have paid their debt to society so long ago.Don’t they believe in rehabilitation? Furthermore, study after study has confirmed these laws don’t work! WOuldn’t it be more beneficial to institute laws or changes that would put people to work and give them jobs! We have gang members, drug dealers and even prostitutes who take over cities and terrorize all those that enter parks that they deem theirs! Yet, whats worst? SOme guy convicted of something years ago or the local 3 strike gangster?
Janice, my Assembly representative sits on that Assembly Local Government Committee. Will it help to write to him? (I’m assuming it’s worth a try, but your comment/reply would be helpful.)
Important! I need a list of the names of CALIFORNIA law enforcement, prosecution, or judicial (parole, probation or judge) officals, who has publicly stated that residence restrictions have made it harder to SAFELY enforce the sex offenderr registry! The Anaheim PD chief comes to mind, but my idea is to consolidate as many officials as possible for a letter I’d like to write and post by Friday. Thanks.
Does AB 201apply to all registered citizens or is it the same as SB 267 … Wherein it applies to only those involved with a minor? There are so many questions and so much that is NOT right!
Whether In re…Bobby Lee or Kathy Lee…those probozos are a restraint on the Constitution …don’t you know you have to take people to court to restrain their liberty or freedom..its referred as due process ……….don’t you know you’re putting people in double jeopardy ………….You know Now…………. there’s more whats recklessly wrong with these probozos ….too much to detail here….but this is far out of bounds and Foul.
I have a feeling legislators will be too afraid to oppose any legislation that the public will find as beneficial to the community. Even if the proposed law isn’t based on facts it will unfortunately become law. I have a sickening feeling that these bills will become law and will have to some how be challenged in the supreme court. Our civil rights are continually being stripped from us.
I haven’t been visiting this site lately because it seems every time I visit I always read some bad news. Regardless, I need to be more proactive and get more involved. I need to do something. I think if all 90k plus registrants do something positive maybe we can get things to change for the better.
AB 201 – This bill would state that a local agency is not preempted by state law from enacting and enforcing an ordinance that restricts a registered sex offender from residing or being present at certain locations within the local agency’s jurisdiction. The bill would authorize a local agency to adopt ordinances, rules, or regulations that are more restrictive than state law relating to a registered sex offender’s ability to reside or be present at certain locations within the local agency’s jurisdiction.
On Monday, I mailed my SB267 letters. Today, I wrote – and tomorrow a.m. I will mail – my “oppose AB201” letter to my Assemblyman …. who happens to live just two blocks from me. Yeah, I’m a bit worried about the repercussions … Will he prevail upon our city council to drive me out of my home with new residency restrictions? (Do they have any idea how their laws affect us?? It’s hypocritical: they fund anti-bullying public services announcements on TV, when they themselves bully, torment & abuse us with their lies, laws & restrictions!)
I think this is where Runner will publicly attack those that oppose this bill.
If someone voted “No” then Leyva who is the author and her team can say.
“This congressperson want SEX OFFENDERS living next to YOU”
I am not sure how to upone this except..
“Leyva does NOT support the constitution because she is is promoting an unconstitutional law”
Anyone have a better idea how we can get around this?
It’s very disturbing to realize that the only thing that will re-direct lawmakers’ collective attention away from registered offenders will be some tragic event such as a major earthquake or terrorist attack in California. (And I certainly do not wish for either of those things!!). Slow-moving disasters like our severe water shortage won’t enthrall the public enough to entice lawmakers.
OrSo they going to force me and my kids t o be homeless after a 28 year crime I got probation
The only angle to address this issue is on the cost and enforcement side…Sadly the Constitutional argument falls on deaf ears. The child safety and rights of a registrant to be with their own child in public places is also a strong argument. A parent disallowed to be in a public place with their child violate theirs child’s safety. A parent is a child first line of defense for safety. Where are we in pre-1945 Germany? I have a means to fight these things at a grass roots level if there are any interested registrants off probation and parole. I’ll be at the LA meeting if anyone is interested.
The sad part is that this is a test! If someone had told you that your conviction 10-20 years ago would now ban you from a park/library or beach, would you have believed them? Banned from Halloween? Who thinks of these things? The scary part is whats next? Implant computer chips? Special drivers licenses? License plates? Sign must be posted in your yard? Can’t drive at night? I just read an article stating that the children of sex offenders are more prone to commit sex crimes? /lol. Maybe banned from marrying? Having children? What about special restrooms for registered citizens/so that you wont be exposed to children? Or, what about special seating areas in restaurants? People might laugh, but its becoming pretty obvious that these legislatures are out of control. I’m still sitting here and scratching my head. Is this a bad dream? Its time to take action and its time to pass a tiered system so that other states wont laugh at whats happening in California. Its really becoming a joke
I cannot be at the L.A. meeting, but I have been a RC for 16 years. I have a 12 year old son. He will be getting school award on Tuesday at his school. Should I go? Always been there for other awards. Also, I became permanently disabled after I suffered a brain tumor 14 years ago.
Want to harres me i got probation Y28 years after probation why you still messing with me and my kids why you say you going to make me and my kids homeless have not reoffend 28 years now all of sudden
AB 201 was recently amended to add former Carson council member Mike Gipson’s name to the list of co-authors. Here are a list of articles linking Mike Gipson to activist/registrant William Smalley from Carson, and articles which reveal that Gipson hired a convicted felon to falsify campaign photos against his opponent. Attack this man’s credibility and integrity because he has none. Be sure to read the comments sections of these articles. Gipson is overcompensating by appearing hard on registrants because of his affiliation with Mr. Smalley. Gipson is a two-faced hypocrite, pandering to and grandstanding in front of his constituency.
http://witnessla.com/contemplating-crime-consequence/2014/admin/last-minute-really-low-down-dirty-la-politics-in-the-64th-assembly-district/
http://www.randomlengthsnews.com/m-is-for-mayor-extended-version/
http://www.calnewsroom.com/2015/02/09/hoodie-mailer-mike-gipson-lied-to-his-lead-consultant-hired-convicted-criminal-for-prophet-walker-hit/
http://www.capitolbasement.com/index.php?id=12xmvse287fdsh1
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/carson-ca/T58789V1U93LIA4HK/p3
http://www.insidebayarea.com/california/ci_13511725
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/palos-verdes-peninsula-ca/TEHQIJJ3A8657TQVU
http://www.dailybreeze.com/general-news/20090228/sundays-letters-to-the-editor
http://www.topix.com/forum/us/politics/T83RADG6O0255IE8O
http://www.topix.com/forum/city/pasadena-ca/T58789V1U93LIA4HK/p3
http://blogs.dailybreeze.com/southbay/2009/03/02/its-election-eve-time-to-accus/
http://blogs.dailybreeze.com/southbay/tag/bill-smalley/
The sex offender registration and notification laws are completely irrational as applied to me in my case.
Since I am a non-violent, first time offender from a incident that occurred over a decade ago there is no rational basis to continue to subject me to these sex offender registration and notification laws that have consequences that destabilize my life and my abilities to reintegrate into society and actually increases my risk of re-offense while not achieving any legislative objective of preventing sexual abuse or increasing public safety. Since these laws have been seen as strictly regulatory in nature and not considered part of the punishment for an offense, there must be some evidence that the regulations actually achieve some legislative objective. These laws were originally designed to give law enforcement a tool to track and apprehend sexually violent predators, child abducters/rapist and habitual repeat offenders when such acts have been committed in the community but have since been expanded to the point to make the registration and notification laws useless to law enforcement or the general public. In light of all the findings and conclusions by the leading authorities that have been assigned by the various governmental agencies to study and report on the sex offender registration and notification laws, (conclusions that state that the registration and notification laws have become overburdened, ineffective and actually counterproductive,) the court can and should question the legislative intent on all the changes made by the legislature to add more restrictions and requirements to the registration and notification laws since the laws were first enacted. The court should question if the intent of the individual legislators who create and introduce such bills, or the legislature as a whole are simply using such legislation as a tool to further their own personal agendas or are using such legislation as a pretext to further punish this specific class of offenders. The California Sex Offender Management Board and all the other leading authorities on sex offender management throughout the country conclude that sex offender registration and notification laws have become overburdened, ineffective and counterproductive in cases such as mine. Just because these laws are so popular within the legislature or the public does not mean that there is a rational basis for such laws. With the facts and evidence of all the destabilizing collateral consequences I endure and all the recent research done on this subject there is overwhelming evidence that these laws are completely irrational when applied to non-violent first time offenders such as myself.
Still, in light of the court’s recent ruling in the San Diego case, wouldn’t any such laws be easily challenged as ARBITRARY and bearing NO RATIONAL RELATIONSHIP to the goal of protecting children?
Seems to me that that ruling established some sort of legal precedent it this regard.
Exactly that ruling needs to be exploited and use aggressively just as they exploite and use children and fears to get these laws passed.
I live about 1 block from where ground is being broken for the high speed rail project. The stop will be about 2 city blocks from where i live. I can’t help but think that because children will be present there, i’ll eventually be faced with a new law preventing me from using the rail line to get between San Francisco to Los Angeles, as i am a software developer and am looking forward for trips that don’t require the use of my van, rental car etc.
I am prepping myself for that day when i’m told i cannot operate my business. I’m pretty sure this idiots do not want to test me on that. If this happens, i will spend the rest of my life ensuring their lives are absolutely miserable.
In my opinion passing more punitive unconstitutional legislation regarding RSO’s is so wrong. What these legislative ego centered individuals do not understand is that before an individual that has been convicted of a crime of a sexual nature is released from a California State Prison, is this, that prior to their release they are evaluated. In California all prisoners with sexual assault or pedophilia crimes are flagged and reviewed six months prior to parole. To be labeled under the category of SVP an individual must have at least one identified victim, have a serious mental illness (most commonly paraphilia NOS or pedophilia), and must have established a relationship with a person with the intent to cause victimization. Paraphilia NOS is a catch-all diagnosis used to describe most individuals who have committed sexual assault (i.e., rape). Prior to parole, the designation of SVP is assessed by two independent evaluators (licensed mental health professionals). If both evaluators agree that the prisoner meets the criteria he is sent to CSH for treatment. If one agrees and the other does not, an additional two evaluators review the prisoner’s history. If those final two reach agreement, the prisoner is then a ward of the state and civilly committed to CSH.
The State Hospital in Coalinga opened in 2005 and now houses over 850 Sex Offenders. To the tune of $157,894 per year. The Coaling facility is not at capacity. So my point being is that the individuals that are evaluated are deemed the most likely to reoffend they are not released anyway!
Those that are released are under supervision and monitored by the Department of Corrections and while on Parole they are in treatment programs, with the goal for them to be intergraded back into society, it is not for them to be ostracized and continued to be punished for a crime that they have served their time for.
The only legislation that needs to be endorsed, supported and passed is a Tier System in California, lower the age of consent like the majority of other states in the United States to 16 years of age and lastly eliminate the registry.
Our elected officials need to be held accountable and they need to be doing their homework, learn the facts and not be swayed by the media scare tactics and by those like the Runners with their own agendas.
Something similar to this is what I am sending my assemble person. We all need to stand strong and let our voices heard.
How long do I have to suffer for a 28 year crime I got probation for
Good info ms