The internet exclusion bill, AB 558, is scheduled to be considered by the Assembly Public Safety Committee on April 18. The committee hearing will begin at 8:30 a.m. in Room 126 and include consideration of more than 30 pending bills.
“This bill must be stopped,” stated ACSOL executive director Janice Bellucci. “If the bill becomes law, families will be harmed and victims will be re-victimized.”
AB 558 was previously scheduled for a hearing on March 28, however, the bill was pulled from consideration by its author. The Assembly Public Safety Committee has issued an analysis of AB 558 which notes that only low to low-moderate risk offenders are currently granted exclusions from their personal information being posted on the Megan’s Law website. In addition, the committee analysis cites a CA Sex Offender Management Board report which states that the current sex offender registration systems and Megan’s Law website have become too unwieldy to be effective for law enforcement.
Organizations in opposition to AB 558 include ACLU, CA Attorneys for Criminal Justice, CA Public Defenders Association and ACSOL. In addition, AB 558 is opposed by the Office of the Los Angeles District Attorney. The only organization in support of AB 558 is the CA Protective Parents Association.
Registrants, family members and supporters are encouraged to speak in opposition to AB 558 on April 18 as well as to send letters and make phone calls to members of the Assembly Public Safety Committee prior to the hearing date.
Call and write the Assembly Public Safety Committee in opposition to this bill
Assembly Public Safety Contact Info – Sample Letter in Opposition to AB 558
I really hope all of you folks have made calls and sent letters. Please note that the Public Safety Committee has a new member: Heath Flora. He replaced Cunningham.
This is going to destroy my entire life if it passes.
ACSOL members, get ready to write those letters and make those calls! We are about to post to this page (1) an updated letter that reflects the amendments to AB 553 and (2) an updated list of Assembly Public Safety Committee members (one changed). We will also send an updated action alert that has this updated information.
So, they pulled the tiered registry bill, but put this abomination back on. What a complete shock. The only way any of this is ever going to be finally resolved is at the Supreme Court level. And I have no expectation that the current cast of characters would ever vote in our favor. I hope I am wrong. But this is just classic.
I have been told by the people in the Assembly people’s offices that none of them see the text of our letters, only that the person writing in was either for or opposed.
What do you guys think about that? Should we bother writing anything in our letters except to state our opposition?
As long as the SCOTUS doesn’t do anything stupid in the North Carolina and Michigan matters then I’m ok with Cali leaving 100,000 + and growing So’s on the registry because that is a bubble which will burst sooner than later!
I’m a little confused. Sometimes these bills are difficult to understand. If passed, does this mean all registrants will be online? I have a misdemeanor battery/expunged from 20-21 years ago? No arrests etc
I looked at the sample letter to get talking points for this amended bill. The sample letter hasn’t been updated to reflect the recent changes. I still talks about in family offense. Anyone write a letter for the amended bill, would you be able to post it. Basically my talking points are they need to show evidence that this bill will increase safety and whether that is enough to counter the debilitating effects posting on the internet site will have on registrants due to lack of obtaining jobs and putting themselves and their families in danger amongst other deleterious effects of the public registry.
Nondescript, your correct. I recall many years ago calling the Megan’s Law Website/I was posted online. The operator asked if I had filled out the exemption form, but by that time the charge was a misdemeanor/expunged.
Those fed up (like me) with many of those politicians using us as their whipping boy for votes can join me in getting many of those elected officials un-elected/out of office in 2018. Our efforts will be separate from ACSOL. We will harness local relationships within communities throughout California I’ll train on the how-to and you’ll learn an extra skill and income while fighting for our cause! Robert (949) 872-8768.
So does a reduction of felony to misdemeanor mean I would be excluded? Lots of reference to felony violations not being excluded but after 7b motion my felony is now a misdemeanor right? All so confusing. I’m thinking I should be excluded now. Guess I should see a lawyer and find out.
“Hard to go to work without a place to live” ( on fighting homelessness)
~ Sharon Quirk-Silva ( her own tweet)
But does she really care?
Prior to the hearing, we will meet at Starbucks (12th and L) at 8 a.m. and then walk together to the hearing room. Or you can join us at the hearing room (Room 126 of the Capitol) at 8:15 a.m. Either way, please join us! Don’t rely on others to protect your civil rights. We need YOU to show up, stand up and speak up!!
I read the text of AB 558 and trying to understand the context. So technically, registrants can still apply for internet exclusions given they met the requirement. I was charge with 647.6 and currently not on Megan’s website. If this bill, hypothetically pass, does that mean I would have to re-apply to be excluded from Megan’s website?
For those of you who have gone to a hearing, what can I expect? Will I have a chance to say something to the committee?
How do these things work?
TOMORROW is the hearing for AB 558!
Please show up in Sacramento and speak out!
I hope everybody made their calls and emails.
It’s so quiet in the comment thread concerning this Bill. The hearing is tomorrow and how the Committee decides on it will give a good idea of how they will vote on other upcoming legislation concerning SOs.
Even if you’re not directly affected by this Bill, I hope that you and your families will show up to voice their opposition. Only through solidarity can we expect to affect any change. We have to realize that it’s all connected, we can’t just cherry pick what we’ll support and what we’ll remain silent on.
Please consider speaking out on April 18th against this terrible, terrible bill.
AB 558 must be stopped.
If you want others to support YOUR concerns should legislation come threatening your life, then please do the same for other SOs and come help tomorrow in Sacramento and voice your opposition!
Re-posting just for easy reference for meeting tomorrow morning in Sacramento to protest AB 558, we need every voice we can get:
Prior to the hearing, we will meet at Starbucks (12th and L) at 8 a.m. and then walk together to the hearing room. Or you can join us at the hearing room (Room 126 of the Capitol) at 8:15 a.m. Either way, please join us! Don’t rely on others to protect your civil rights. We need YOU to show up, stand up and speak up!!
I just can’t be there, but in case you need some talking points (it’s still not clear to me that you can say anything at all) I was going to try to say this:
“The exclusion has not been a “loophole,” as Asm. Quirk-Silva states. It has been a lifeline that has allowed registrants to rebuild their lives, and to get jobs and employment.
If this bill passes, all that will go away. That means that there would likely be hundreds of newly homeless and jobless sex offenders. And that will definitely not make communities safer.”
Sorry, but I have to laugh at something absurd. I do not currently show up as a dot on a map, but if you look me up by name, I’m there. Now here’s the stupid part: if this law causes me to appear on a map, what will that do to the prices of houses adjacent to me or otherwise nearby? Yup, negative impact, right? Realtors should be adamantly opposed to this law as should most homeowners.
PC 311.11 (Possession of obscene matter, the corresponding state law to the federal one I was convicted of) was a misdemeanor when I was arrested. It’s now a felony. So I am assuming this change in AB558 won’t apply to me? I’m not sure.
Janice and team, I am praying for you all. Give them a fight.
Well, unfortunately, they passed the Bill. Nevertheless, many thanks should go to Assemblyman Bill Quirk for his valuable and courageous comments in opposition to this Bill and his “No” vote – the sole “No” vote – against it.
Here’s the Bill for those with questions:
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billTextClient.xhtml?bill_id=201720180AB558
I don’t understand why they’d give the analysis that they did, basically stating that they don’t support this bill, but then vote to approve it?!
Janice and Chance…will there be any suit filed to stop this or is it basically a done deal? Also, if you’ve had your case expunged, is there a case against it? I’m a misdemeanor 647.6, 20 years ago. Never been listed…is this just the end of the road now and all hope is gone for not being listed any longer?
Are there any exclusions ? or will everyone now be listed?