ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings: Nov 21, Dec 19 – Details / Recordings

Emotional Support Group Meetings 2020 (Phone only)

California

Amended Senate Bill 26 to be Heard on March 29 [updated with Education Committee Member List for calling]

Senate Education Committee Contact info below!

Like a phoenix rising from the ashes, Senate Bill 26 has been amended and is now scheduled for a March 29 hearing by the Senate Education Committee.  The hearing will begin at 9 a.m. and be held in Room 4203 of the Capitol Building.

“Similar to the original version, the amended version of Senate Bill 26 is inconsistent with state law and would banish registrants who are the parents of school children from the grounds of their child’s school when pupils are present,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci. “The amended bill would require school officials to escort registrant parents whenever they visit their children’s schools.”

In addition, the amended bill would prohibit anyone convicted of 12 offenses from visiting schools for any reason regardless of the amount of time has passed since the conviction or whether the person has re-offended.  The amended bill would allow registrants to access school grounds when “pupils are not present”.

If the Senate Education Committee approves the bill, the bill would next be considered by the Senate Public Safety Committee.  The date and location of that hearing is not yet known but will be posted on this website as soon as available.

Letter in Opposition to SB 26


Please call the members of the Senate Education Committee to oppose SB 26!

SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE

SEN. BEN ALLEN, CHAIRMAN
State Capitol, Room 2083
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 651-4026

SEN. SCOTT WILK, VICE CHAIRMAN
State Capitol, Room 4090
Sacramento, CA 94249
Phone: 916.651.4021

SEN. CATHLEEN GALGIANI
State Capitol, Room 5097
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 651-4005

SEN. TONY MENDOZA
State Capitol, Room 5100
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 651-4032

SEN. RICHARD PAN
State Capitol, Room 4070
Sacramento, CA 95814
Phone: (916) 651-4006

SEN. ANDY VIDAK
State Capitol, Room 3082
Sacramento, CA 95814-4900
Phone: (916) 651-4014

Join the discussion

  1. USA

    This is a very hateful and poorly thought out bill! For many people, both parents work and it’s difficult to pick children up on time etc. Furthermore, children are our future. For many, children are involved in sports, band and a variety of extracurricular activities. What about back to school night? Furthermore, as everyone is aware, you can’t generalize of clump all offenders together. There is a big difference between a multiple child related offender and the guy caught peeing in public or busted with a masseuse! As noted, we need people and especially lawmakers to wake up! Do you want a guy on campus with a decades old offense or the recently released gang banger or drug peddler?

    • David

      USA, don’t forget it also does not prohibit those convicted of [non-sexual] child abuse, neglect, or endangerment. Which suggests to me that this Bill is another attack on registrants – and not actually about child safety.

  2. American Detained in America

    This amendment is just as bad as the previous version. It is still enhancing the scarlet letter we already carry and draws even more unnecessary attention to registered citizens.

  3. TG

    While you can’t email Senator Leyva through her website, you can contact her through the following email. This guy works in her office, and also helped work on the bill.

    Phillip.VanderKlay@sen.ca.gov

    • TG

      Sorry, I meant that you can’t contact her unless you live in her district.

  4. Harry

    This bill is kin to installing railroad crossing warning devises on a roadway that has no railroad tracks for the purpose of the likely hood that railroad will never be built.
    It would be more important to have a law that bans teachers on school grounds, as there have been many incidents teachers sexually assaulting children vs no incidents of RC even entering school grounds unauthorized, let alone harming a child.

    • Harry

      I mailed a pointed letter to Mr. Allen…

      Senator Ben Allen
      Chairman, Senate Education Committee
      State Capitol, Room 2083
      Sacramento, CA 95814

      SB26 – OPPOSED

      Dear Senator Allen and Committee Members:

      It would be more important to have a law that bans teachers on school grounds, as there have been many incidents were teachers have sexually assaulted children as to no incidents of individuals on the sex offenders registry entering school grounds unauthorized, let alone harming a child.

      This bill is based on unfounded fears and lies for the sole purpose of harassing citizens that have paid for their misdeeds many years ago and have live a productive lives, ever since. Enough is enough vote NO on Senate Bill 26.

      Thank you for doing the right thing,
      Harry

      • Son of Liberty Child of Freedom

        Harry you speak Truth!

        If I may Posit & call attention to the lack of:

        Probability Judgements & The Consideration or Accounting for “Base Rates” of the issues at hand.

        I speak Truth

        As Yehovah Lives, so should we

        • Harry

          It is tiring to keep writing these letters and making phone calls. Instead of treating this task as grievous, we need to welcome it as an opportunity to educate. Every letter we write and every phone call we make do change minds and we will eat this elephant one bite at a time.

        • NPS

          Agreed. I made all my phone calls this afternoon. I stated that I no longer was vehemently against the bill, but I also informed them that AB26 violates parental rights.

      • NPS

        Why not just ban students? The sex offense laws they violate far outweigh what teachers may be accused of. These “kids” are having sex with each other (some are 18 with a younger girlfriend), sending out nude selfies, peeing around campus (and not in the restrooms), groping each other, etc.

  5. Timmr

    This bill makes a mental health diagnosis on registrants, broadly classifying them as mentally juvenial and without control of will, requiring them to be supervised as children when on school grounds, just like a misbehaving kid. How would this appear to the children of registrants? Well let me see. Let’s go back to another time when a group of people were classed as inferior and permanently juvenile, way back when. Daddy, why do you have to let all the others get on the bus before you? Why do they call you boy? You are a man, Daddy.

  6. ExpatRFSO

    This bill presents a disturbing problem. If it is worded like AWA in regards to these 12 offenses, then it doesn’t matter if you are registered or not. I.E. even you were relieved of your duty to register from the forthcoming tiered registry bill, this law would still apply to you. Laws like this which circumvent the registry seen to be getting popular. I’d have to read the bill to be sure.

    • Nondescript

      (B) A person may not enter into a school building or upon school grounds pursuant to this paragraph if he or she is REQUIRED TO REGISTER for a conviction in violation of Section ……….

      As the bill is written, those 12 or 13 offenses would be forbidden from entering school grounds, only for the duration of time they are on the registry ( in this State or any other)

      • Nondescript

        It is interesting that this bill adds this part in the beginning:

        “A person who is required to register as a sex offender pursuant to Section 290, for the duration of the time he or she is required to register,

        Perhaps I’m wrong, but most of the bills introduced in California regarding more restrictions for registrants over the years have not included ” for the duration of the time he or she is required to register” . There would have been no reason considering registration has always been for life, anyways (with the rare exception of COR’s)

        Perhaps this is a clue ( whether this passes or not) that they are already including different language into new “sex offender” bills because they know a tiered registry is going to be passed.

        I’m also noticing a pattern. It’s looking very AWAish .

        • KM

          I noticed this exact same thing.

        • Jack

          It is, guaranteed. They’ve pretty much thought this all out behind closed doors. The tiered registry is coming. No question.

        • Timmr

          One law to rule them all, one law to find them, One law to bring them all and in the SORNA bind them.

        • Son of Liberty Child of Freedom

          Timmr good form!

          I believe you have unearthed and revealed for us one of the three Silmarils*

          At what point the analogy & allegory is defused, I can not say with certainty. It’s projection to this realm is I’m certain what Tolkien intended for his labors & when redeemed from dust will surely approve of you Timmr.

          * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Silmarillion

          The Father Most High be with you & us all, May He shine for us all.

        • New Person

          Nondescript identified this:
          ………………………………………………………………………………….
          It is interesting that this bill adds this part in the beginning:

          “A person who is required to register as a sex offender pursuant to Section 290, for the duration of the time he or she is required to register,

          Perhaps I’m wrong, but most of the bills introduced in California regarding more restrictions for registrants over the years have not included ” for the duration of the time he or she is required to register” . There would have been no reason considering registration has always been for life, anyways (with the rare exception of COR’s)
          ……………………………………………………………………………..

          This identification is what I have been harping upon. You inherently, by law, are registered for life. There is no standardized way off the registry, but exceptions. In the California Constitution, it states that the Californians have the inalienable right to obtain and pursue privacy. Registration is based upon having your privacy exposed as per 2003 Smith decision as “your conviction is public” record.

          Lifetime registration is inherently contrary to California Constitution of the inalienable right to pursue and obtain privacy. The language identified by Nondescript supports this notion explicitly.

          Also, extrapolating from that, 1203.4 case dismissal includes language that:
          1) Your conviction does not exist
          2) Removes all penalties and disabilities stemming from conviction
          3) Exceptions for these benefits are denoted “and as noted below” in 1203.4 and nowhere in this statute states that registrants must continue to register.

          Lifetime registration inherently removes all venues to pursue and obtain privacy.

          Lifetime registration inherently removes all venues to pursue and obtain privacy as well as removes all venues to pursue and obtain privacy from 1203.4.

          That means registration does not recognize the difference between registrants. The only difference is the frequency of reporting. Aside from frequency, everything is the same for all registrants. If we refer to the 2003 decision, it states that the duration of registration should be corresponding to the offense/risk assessment. So lifetime registration runs contrary to the 2003 decision.

          California’s lifetime registration runs contrary to its own Constitution as well as goes above and beyond what the 2003 Smith decision on what is regulatory and what is punishment. Blanket lifetime registration is punishment under 2003 Smith decision. In-person annual update is punishment under 2003 Smith decision. Registrants whose cases are dismissed are not supposed to be on the registry under 2003 Smith decision.

          All LE wants every registrant to follow the law and state that ignorance of the law is your problem. Well, why can’t we reinforce what the laws are on the book to refute parts or all of the registration? The government’s ignorance of the law is their problem. I’m serious about following the letter of the law in 1203.4, the California constitutions, and the 2003 Smith decision. Michigan’s Snyder is the only case where it cites the 2003 Smith decision as to depict what was set as regulatory and anything above that is punishment.

  7. jm

    I think there should be a class action lawsuit on behalf of the children of registrants.

    The state is putting up stumbling blocks in their education that other children don’t have. Parents missing teacher conferences, plays, graduations, and any other events. I’m sure there are lots of examples.

    Unfortunately I think this would be difficult to do… it would take a brave family to join the class.

  8. Roger

    Below are the Senate Education Committee members. Please call by next Tuesday, March 28 to state your opposition SB 26. Letters may not arrive in time, but if you have the time to put one in the mail today, please do so.

    SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE

    SEN. BEN ALLEN, CHAIRMAN
    SENATE EDUCATION COMMITTEE
    STATE CAPITOL, ROOM 2083
    SACRAMENTO, CA 95814
    PHONE: (916) 651-4026

    SEN. SCOTT WILK, VICE CHAIRMAN
    State Capitol, Room 4090
    Sacramento, CA 94249
    Phone: 916.651.4021

    SEN. CATHLEEN GALGIANI
    State Capitol, Room 5097
    Sacramento, CA 95814
    Phone: (916) 651-4005

    SEN. TONY MENDOZA
    State Capitol, Room 5100
    Sacramento, CA 95814
    Phone: (916) 651-4032

    SEN. RICHARD PAN
    State Capitol, Room 4070
    Sacramento, CA 95814
    Phone: (916) 651-4006

    SEN. ANDY VIDAK
    State Capitol, Room 3082
    Sacramento, CA 95814-4900
    Phone: (916) 651-4014

  9. NPS

    Well, this law would apply to me even though I no longer have a conviction on my record. However, my continued 290 requirement bars me from campuses. This is the conundrum of the registry and its tiered proposal. Anyone with a 1203.4 should be automatically dropped from the registry. I don’t have children, but I hope to one day experience the joy of motherhood. Mothers are the primary caregiver and decision maker for their children’s lives. This proposal essentially harms my future children from my taking part in their lives. The only hope I have is that by the time my children are school age, I will have already fallen off the registry with a tiered registry.

    • TiredAlready

      I wanted to say as a fellow female registrant, with expunged conviction and mother of two, that I feel this with you. I am frightened over 558 as I haven’t been on the website, and then this one will take away so many things I picture participating in once they are school-aged.

  10. Jojo

    I emailed the Senator in my district:
    I oppose Senate Bill 26,(March 29 hearing by the Senate Education Committee) because it damages families, especially the children, of ex-offenders. It was very meaningful to my sons for me to have attended their schools for Open Houses, pick them up from the nurse’s office when they became ill or injured, and to have come to their school auditorium to vote. Registered citizens have about a 1% recidivism rate; however, they are all very aware that people mistakenly think they will impulsively offend any minor within grabbing distance around them, so they carefully live their lives in rigid behavior to avoid even an allegation of wrongdoing. I had my husband escort me to events for that reason. Being banished from school grounds or escorted by faculty is additional punishment to those who really don’t need any more of it, and robs their kids the pride of showing their work/performances to a parent.

  11. USA

    I’m almost amused by some of these laws. It’s disturbing to see how lawmakers think of laws when other laws are already in place? I can truly understand the need for laws, but when California and I believe only 3 other states require lifelong registration, that’s disturbing and thought provoking. Furthermore, I might suggest focusing on other lawbreakers when there is currently a 3 percent recidivism rate! As I’ve noted in the past, my hope is that the goal with the legal system is to rehabilitate individuals and turn them into model citizens. Putting them online, preventing them to live in all areas and instituting a multitude of laws that make no sense makes it increasingly difficult to live, work, raise families and simply function in society! This is why lawmakers should be focusing on rehabilitating individuals and providing some form of outlet for those so deserving. I’ve always thought the US is a country of compassion!

  12. Robert Curtis

    Really more of the same. The modifications of the bill (AB-26) actually by it’s affects and application would be the same. Who would want to escort a registrant while they are on school grounds? This is an easy method of giving the schools a method of NOT having ANY registrant able to attend events on school grounds…all the staff has to say is, “well, we don’t have any AVAILABLE staff to escort you for THE/ANY event. The effects being the same…NO registrants allowed on campus! Those so called changes are only a smoke and mirrors tactic to sell the thing!!!

  13. Drummer

    Another teen goes missing,
    Elizabeth Thomas, kid napped by a
    Culleoka Tennessee school teacher
    Tad Cummins and here we have senator Leyva attacking registrants for stepping on school grounds in the name of protecting the children even though
    not one incident has ever occurred and yet every year we see teachers doing the very thing senator Leyva created SB 26 for. What a joke.

  14. P.R

    Made my phone calls in opposition.

  15. TG

    So, did anyone go to the hearing? What happened?

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 *

.