CA Sex Offender Management Board Discusses Revisions to Tiered Registry Bill

Although the tiered registry bill has not yet been introduced in the state legislature, members of the CA Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) discussed today possible significant revisions to that bill. The deadline for the bill to be introduced is Friday, February 17.

First, CASOMB recommends that the bill be revised to allow some, but not all, individuals assigned to Tier 3 to petition for removal from the registry after 20 years. This opportunity would be limited to individuals whose offenses are Tier 1 or Tier 2 offenses, but who are considered high risk. The decision whether to allow removal would be made by a Superior Court judge.

Second, CASOMB recommends that no juvenile be required to register for a lifetime. Instead, juveniles would be required to register for 5, 10 or 15 years depending upon their tier level.

In addition to the two significant changes, CASOMB will request three clarifications in the tiered registry bill. The first clarification is that anyone convicted of either PC 269 or 288.7 would be placed in Tier 3. The second clarification is that juveniles would not be listed on the Megan’s Law website regardless of the offense for which they were convicted. The third clarification is that anyone convicted only once of PC 647.6 would be placed in Tier 1, however, anyone convicted of multiple PC 647.6 offenses would be moved to Tier 2.

The CASOMB recommendations and clarifications are expected to be discussed next week with the bill’s sponsor, Los Angeles District Attorney Jackie Lacey.

Also during the meeting, a CASOMB member reported that there are currently 104,027 registrants. Of that total, there are 6,385 registrants listed as transients which is 55 fewer people than last month. That number may or may not be attributed to the recent repeal of residency restrictions in several cities in southern California.

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

More BS a Jerk off judge would have to approve after 20 years ? like the Judge would know PERSONALLY a “offender” after 20 years and have a REASON to NOT let someone off. Reason he wouldn’t want someone off is to LINE his wallet with a RE-Election, after 20 years, LET IT GO !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Great work! I have to ask? How will individuals with expunged offenses be tiered? I have a Wobbler PC 243.4 (a) from 21 years ago/Summary Lrobation. The offense was reduced to s misdemeanor pursuant from 17 (B) and expunged 15 years ago?

So the deadline to introduce this bill is TOMORROW??????? Is someone going to introduce it?

No recommendation for tier one offenses to automatically expire off the registry after a given number of years? Its been mentioned that people in the first tier can petition to be no longer required to register, but that’s not good enough. Additionally it should be possible for everyone in tier two to be downgraded to tier one. Finally everyone even on tier three must have opportunities to stop registering after certain points in time and/or when certain facts are determined.

This CASOMB board really listens, studies and then acts accordingly. If only our politicians would do the same.

It’s a step forward.

However, if the Static-99R’s shelf life, as well as its alleged predictions, is/are only good for 10 years, and it is being used to denote someone as “high-risk,” then why does someone have to wait 20 years to petition a judge? At most, someone classified as ‘high-risk’ (who would otherwise fall into Tier I or II) should be able to petition at the 10-year mark. There is no logic to CASOMB’s premise.

I say this because if not for the Static-99R labeling me “high-risk,” my first-time/non-contact offense would fall squarely into a Tier I offense which would remain unpublished. Currently, I am not even published on the website. But if the CASOMB draft passes as-is, I will be classified as a Tier III offender (which I think is unfair). Furthermore, I would go from being unpublished to published.

I know that I am not alone here.

The Way I see it is once this first bill passes and people realize the sky doesn’t come crashing down on will open pathways to more common sense reform.

So Casomb has done nothing to address the fact that we would all still have to PETITION A JUDGE (and he or she would have to approve it) before we are taken off the registry? That means thousands of dollars towards attorney and psychology assessment tests that most of us 290s don’t have! Then on top of it all, no guarantee that a judge (who is elected by voters) will rule in our favor! This tiered registry isn’t a step forward… it’s a step sideways lol. Plus, it gives District Attorney offices more power (which is why the DAs want this bill). More power = more jobs and budget for the DAs to challenge our expensive petitions!! Open your eyes people!!

Yet at the same time we have California legislatures introducing legislation to make the registries more restrictive and even put EVERY registrant on the public website:

Please, everyone go to Quirk-Silva’s Facebook page and make her understand shes just fear mongering

I wonder what the chances are of them actually filing it today to meet the deadline. Then my next question would be what’s the timeline. I understand it has to go through a revisions process and to different committees however when would this take effect and we start seeing the changes personally?

Can we PLEASE get main-page post on AB 558?
This should have it’s own post and comment section!

The bill will have revisions. It is important not to let up (or agitate) those who tinker with the language that will make it to the final version. A lot can/will happen between now and the one that gets voted on…

Didnt a butt load of states say that juvinille SO registration is unconstitutional???

Hearing on 4/18 CANCELLED by author