ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (7/10 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings

Click here to sign up now for ACSOL’s Online EPIC Conference: Empowered People Inspiring Change Sept 17-18
Download a PDF of the schedule


Senator Leyva Introduces Bill to Keep Registered Sex Offenders off School Campuses

On the first day of the 2017-2018 legislative session, Senator Connie M. Leyva (D-Chino) today introduced important legislation to protect school children from dangerous sex offenders.  Specifically, SB 26 would prohibit registered sex offenders from entering school campuses in California. Full Article


Bill Info

Sen. Leyva Announcement

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.
    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
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.  
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

For all those worried that republicans are the most anti-registrant, note that all the California senators involved in this latest attack through legislation are Democrats. Neither party is friendly towards registrants (period).

Looks like Democrats trying to earn some points in their heavily suburban Republican districts. I think location, location, location has more to do with this than party affiliation. But you are right the disease permeates both parties.

Wow. Insightful writing by Con-Con. Just whipped out the old red pen and deleted anything in the existing law that she didn’t like. I guess she didn’t hear about the recent CALIFORNIA decisions which prohibit “blanket” applications of residence restrictions or presence restrictions, which is pretty much exactly what this is. A law was already in place, and ALREADY BEING ABUSED (see: Fontana), and Con-Con wants to go back up the blanket restriction hill. I would have actually given her a little credit for a well thought out bill (emphasis on the word, “little”), but this is just a hack job. HEAR THE BELLS, Connie! The courts have spoken on blanket restrictions already. As the comments to the news article stated far better than I, where is the empirical evidence of ANY RSO going through the hassle of getting approval to be on school grounds and then cornering some child in a secluded place and molesting them? Look hard, and let me know when you’re done. I can save you the time and give you the answer right now, but I know you’re a hard-working politico, so I’ll let you have at it. Here’s a thought. Ban the teachers, coaches, etc. Want to know what they all have in common? They ARE NOT ON A REGISTRY! That’s right, the crimes you are working SO HARD to prevent are not being perpetrated by registrations, but by the actual employees of the school. You might actually have to open a newspaper to find that out, though. Give it a try sometime.

Anyway, I hope your little bill makes you popular over there in Fontucky. Maybe the Republicans will keep you around a little longer now.

Wow! No exception to allow a parent/grandparent to meet with his/her child’s teacher, school administrator, etc? No provision for attending a high school graduation? Clearly unconstitutional on so many levels.

Even worse: No exception to allow us to attend our polling place to vote misinformed and narrow-minded public “servants” like her out of office as quickly as possible. We must all vote and spread the word! (Now that there are three to five million RSOs and family members in the US, we can make a difference).

Clearly another bill pandering to public fears based on urban myth statistics.

Senator Leyva is up for re-election in two years. Hmmm…she’s got my attention.

Why wait. A recall is definitely in her future, sooner than later.

Make her show compelling evidence as to why this bill is needed (as per federal court orders in the 4th circuit). As we all know, this is in response to a nonexistent problem.

She is making a huuuuuge push for reelection as seen below. Time to shoot down this bill and show the taxpayers the fraud, waste and abuse of the system she participates in, e.g. knowing spending state tax money unwisely on efforts that will be turned back in committee. Obviously, since Fontana is in her area, she was following the school situation closely there.

Elected to represent the 20th State Senate District on November 4, 2014, Senator Connie M. Leyva is serving her first term in the California State Senate.  The district includes the cities and communities of Bloomington, Chino, Colton, Fontana, Grand Terrace, Montclair, Muscoy, Ontario, Pomona, Rialto and San Bernardino.

She is seeking reelection in two years based upon this: Those elected in or after 2012 are allowed to serve 12 years in the legislature in any combination of four-year state senate or two-year state assembly terms.

Need to work extra hard for her opponent in two years during reelection so she can be only a one-term state senator.

Maybe she is redeemable. Her district is majority latino, and they are supposed to care about family. After looking at all the excellent posts on this article, she may see another side.
What is the bad law reoffense rate for politicians with first offenses? There should be a test developed based on a group of former bad law offenders, measuring 10 separate characteristics as existing at introduction of said bad law. Then make it a requirement of office to assess that risk.

“In 2006, voters passed Proposition 83 to prohibit a person who is required to register as a sex offender from living in specified places, including within 2,000 feet of a school or park where children regularly gather.”

Nothing like quoting a law that has been struck down as unconstitutional. What a crock of crap!

I can’t find the text of this bill anywhere, just the PR blurbs from her office. Does anyone know if she is attempting to cover higher education campuses, too? That would be interesting, wouldn’t it? Actually, I would really enjoy that as in “Come on, come on, come on, just TRY it!”

Why does the article say it is “important legislation”. Says who?

I think it is a typo. It should read “impotent” legislation. No sane person would think this important.

Another Elected official that will do any thing but tell the true facts, she and the media have all been the cause of so many problems for RCs. The media has distorted facts and exploited the myths for so long most of the public believe all this bull. I really think sometimes with the New prez coming in someone need to explain the real facts to his staff, hell he hates the media as much as I do. I hope he drains the swamp and kicks many of these lying media nuts and lawmakers to the ground whether it helps us or not.

You mean the guy who believes everthing said on the internet is true, and who on CNN repeats the myth that child molesters can never be “cured”? That guy is going to save us?

It does seem unlikely, doesn’t it? I do think it is humorous how people have mapped all of their hopes onto someone as bereft of human decency and as transparently insincere as Donald Trump, though. He’s become all things to all people, kind of like Kim Il Jong was or as his son Kim Jong Un is becoming. I can’t wait to see his court appointments. He will probably try to appoint a general.


Timmr, I did not say HE would save us, I said I hope he drains the swamp of the media and the lawmakers that lie. I also said I wish someone would reach out to his staff and explain the TRUE FACTS. Also he can not do any worst than has already been done. I for one think both of our choices were nuts but he has helped the market for now. The TRUTH would set RCs free if the facts were told and not the lie. In the mean time I will continue working, hunting and fishing in that order. Peace to you.

The only thing that Connie Leyva will be known for is proclaiming that the children of Former Citizen Detainees have now been stripped of their American citizenship like their parents.

Children of sex offenders do not matter to Connie Leyva, she feels they are as filthy, perverted and disgusting as their parents and are not worthy of the same benefits as the good kids in California schools.

We must do everything we can to educate the children of sex offenders to show them how unwanted and disgusting they are and how the government and the people of California are their enemies.

The time to groom the next generation of revolutionists is now and Connie Leyva is helping us by proclaiming that our children no longer matter.

Just found this bill, SB18 that was introduced this last week that might do us some good to support (

I think this can add to the argument that the children of registrants need to be allowed to have their parents involved in their schooling. It says that these rights have to be applied “evenly and equitably” to all children. Here is the text:

SECTION 1. (a) The Legislature finds and declares that all children and youth, regardless of gender, class, race, ethnicity, national origin, culture, religion, immigration status, sexual orientation, or ability, have inherent rights that entitle them to protection, special care, and assistance, including, but not limited to, the following:
(1) The right to parents, guardians, or caregivers who act in their best interest.
(2) The right to form healthy attachments with adults responsible for their care and well-being.
(3) The right to live in a safe and healthy environment.
(4) The right to social and emotional well-being.
(5) The right to opportunities to attain optimal cognitive, physical, and social development.
(6) The right to appropriate, quality education and life skills leading to self-sufficiency in adulthood.
(7) The right to appropriate, quality health care.
(b) It is the intent of the Legislature in enacting this act to expand and codify the Bill of Rights for Children and Youth of California created by Assembly Concurrent Resolution No. 80 (Res. Ch. 101, Stats. 2009), to establish a comprehensive framework that governs the rights of all children and youth in California, outlines the research-based essential needs of California’s children, and establishes standards relating to the health, safety, well-being, early childhood and educational opportunities, and familial supports necessary for all children to succeed.
SEC. 2. It is the intent of the Legislature, by January 1, 2022, to enact appropriate legislation to accomplish all of the following:
(a) Develop and put forth research-based policy solutions that will ensure the Bill of Rights for Children and Youth of California, in its totality, is applied evenly, equitably, and appropriately to all children and youth across the state.
(b) Determine the amount of revenue and resources necessary to ensure that the Bill of Rights for Children and Youth of California, in its totality, is applied evenly, equitably, and appropriately to all children and youth across the state.
(c) Identify and obtain the revenue and resources necessary to ensure that the Bill of Rights for Children and Youth of California, in its totality, is applied evenly, equitably, and appropriately to all children and youth across the state.

“The right to parents, guardians, or caregivers who act in their best interest.” Thus could be dangerous. The state may see this as a mandate to replace parents who in their view, don’t make the grade as good parents. It all depends on who decides what is best interest.

Timmer – they already do this if Child Service is called in, etc….a true nanny state in the right sense of the word. As you aptly pointed out, it is up to another being to decide the measure.

Speaking from my own experience.

Clearly, this bill has not been written by a constitutional law scholar. The sloppy use of the term “right” belies an ignorance of rights already accorded everyone and, by laundry-listing “rights” as has now become fashionable by progressives and victimists, as if every instance of a “right” must be exquisitely delineated in order to make it true, threatens to undermine both the concept and integrity of fundamental rights already frequently denied us and, especially, children.

It’s time to call out these sanctimonious, high-minded virtue-signallers.

Everyone has a right to their own fears despite that they are – in most cases – based on distortions such as the ones Con-Con latches on to.

There is no right, however, to taking these distortions, fears and panic and use them as a foundation for more useless legislation that is clearly unconstitutional.

I repeat ad nauseum – if ignorance were a crime, folks like Con-Con would be in deep doo-doo!

Here is what you put out there to counter this:

The ONLY stories I hear about people molesting or having sex with students involve teachers and coaches and teacher aides etc.
I hear NO stories about anyone who is a currently registered sex offender or not, much less a parent of a student on that campus, coming on the campus to attack students.
Case closed.

Unfortunately, this can be used as a counterargument to your claim. The assaults occurred at college campuses here in the Bay Area. He is an RC. I guess he’s among those less than 3-5% who reoffend.

These stories are what hurt our cause. Even if the guy is innocent, he should’ve known the risk of being an RC and working with juveniles. Easy target for accusations.

Nothing has, or ever will be 100%.

I never claimed anything was 100%. But I agree with you. Nothing is absolute Zero either, and the person I responded to made that claim. The case I posted is a reminder of that. And it’s cases like these that desperate politicians like Leyva use to validate their bills.

I agree with you. Please don’t get me wrong. Peace✌️

So Con-Con is pushing this which she knows is against reasoning and recent court decisions that render
these laws unconstitutional . She is doing this because she does not have the wits to educate the
Fon-tucky school board which is an oxymoron of its own doing. She will go down as a martyr praised by the group for giving it a good college try.

She is unfit to serve in a public service capacity but really good at the tenets of mob rule. She will find her place among those who use lies and distortions to further their causes, but it won’t be to her liking in the end.

No, I am pretty sure she isn’t that smart. I think all she is doing is taking a page, a VERY dog-eared page, out of the politician’s handbook on how to look tough on crime without actually doing anything.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x