Three bills of great importance to registrants and their loved ones will be heard soon by the relevant Assembly or Senate Appropriations Committees. The Assembly Appropriations Committee is scheduled to consider AB 558 (internet exclusions) on May 10 and the Senate Appropriations Committee is scheduled to consider both SB 26 (school campus visits) and SB 421 (tiered registry) on May 15.
Due to the large number of bills to be considered on each of those dates, the committee hearings will begin at 9 a.m. and could end at 5 p.m. or later.
“The Appropriations Committee process is opaque as compared to the Public Safety Committee process,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci. “It is possible that the bills of interest to us will not be heard, but could be kept in the committee’s suspense file.”
If a bill is kept in the committee’s suspense file on May 10 or May 15, it could be considered on a later date or the committee could refuse to consider it all. The outcome of the Appropriations Committee hearings will be reported on this website as soon as that information is available.
“If any of these bills is approved by an Appropriation Committee, ACSOL will encourage individuals to write letters and make phone calls before the bills are considered on the floor of the Assembly or the Senate,” stated Bellucci.
Let’s hope they will vote NO on AB 558 and SB 26 and a big YES on the tiered registry SB 421
Opaque is an interesting word to use; surely I would think that someone has a feel for what the members are thinking. With all that is being said, I am a Christian who was honest about what I have done. My walk with God has allowed me to self-evaluate and correct my ways; I believe strongly that one way or the other, our cause will prevail. Also, are 288 with sub categories expungable? and what is the Static 99? apparently, I have not seen nor taken a SARS examination.
Thank you for this update on the Bills’ collective status.
** Fingers crossed & saying prayers.**
Is anyone going to the AB 558 hearing to oppose it?
AB 558:
I believe this basically would ban exclusions? I brkieve the only 2 offenses not requiring exclusion are misdemeanor sexual battery and misdemeanor indecent exposure!
As noted, I’ve never had the static 99? 21 years ago. Also, as noted, if you have been crime free for 10 years or more, it’s no longer pertinent!
If u have a felony/county time, contact the public defenders office and get it reduced to a misdemeanor pursuant to 17B!
I recall the days the Megan’s Law went up! I called (I was on it) and the lady stated I needed to fill out the exclusion (it had been reduced to a misdemeanor). It was removed shortly after! Be proactive
@ExpatRFSO
Hi, just a reminder again that PC 311.11 became chargeable as a felony on Jan. 7, 2006. With such a sensitive subject the information needs to be correct.
TM
Got a jury duty summons this week, and wondered if I’d ever be chosen to be on a jury. Surely not a sex offense case. Then It got me thinking why the DA’s might be pushing for a tiered registry. They are probably having to take these cases to full trial a lot more than they used to ( more intensive work for them) .
I would imagine since the registry requirements and restrictions have become more oppressive over the years, defense attorneys have been “educating” their clients on the wonderful lifelong sentence they will endure once they take a plea bargain, and more of those accused are taking their chances with a trial. By reducing many convictions to 10 yrs on the registry, the State might avoid more time consuming and expensive courtroom dramas.
I don’t think the Los Angeles DA’s being a proponent of a tiered registry has anything to do with the petitioning process whatsoever.
Any available update on the hearing for AB 558 that was scheduled today?
I checked on AB 558, said placed in “suspense file”?
For “Suspense File”? – read paragraphs 4 and 5 of the article up top here. Writer explains the suspense file.