City begins repeal of sex-offender residency rules

SAN MARCOS — The City Council has voted to start the process of repealing its sex-offender residency and loitering restrictions after receiving a letter threatening a lawsuit if it didn’t repeal the rules, which courts have ruled unconstitutional elsewhere.

The San Marcos City Council’s July 25 vote for the first reading of the repeal was unanimous. Full Article

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

Well done, Janice and Chance and team! Thanks for keeping up the good work on the behalf of so many!

Thank you for continuing the fight!

Does anyone have links to the Briefs submitted that got the residency and loitering restrictions struck down successfully in California? Does anyone remember what constitutional violations were argued?

I am curious since in Texas our challenge was lost and the city of Lewisville TX has 99% of the city off limits for housing a sex offender. I am of the opinion that the lawyer wasn’t competent, though he has a good reputation of helping sex offenders in Texas pro-bono. He used “procedural due process”, which if he ever read Connecticut DPS V Doe 2003 he should have known it would easily have gotten his lawsuit tossed out, and failed to do any Substantive Due Process or Banishment challenge. Years now wasted here.

I am seeing the injection of truth in the infectious blood stream. Thanks again, Janice and team.

Corona should be next, remember reading article on here before. Maybe Leyva should know about lifting the bans and that we win? Go Team!

Video of meeting at link.

Click Item 11 on the list below the video.

Cites Janice Bellucci as the main reason for repeal!!

Vice mayor is SEETHING… entire city council is going insane at the thought of losing these restrictions.

Nicely done ACSOL! Hopefully the old adage of “as California goes, so goes the rest of the country” can apply with this.

I did shake my head at one bit of the story: “But in the years following the ordinances, a number of studies and reports have shown that the restrictions have negative effects, including isolating and increasing homelessness among sex offenders, which makes it harder for law enforcement to monitor them.”

No mention of how it “makes it harder” on the RC at all. That’s of no consequence. Apparently homelessness is okay until it makes things harder for LEOs.

Another one bites the dust!!!!

We can do our part by leaving a comment at the end of the source article. Support Janice, support San Marcos for doing the right thing.

Listening to everyone here, it sounds like an interesting editorial; however, seems someone doesn’t like our moment of glory! When I went to the article it was completely redacted. I’m finding similar problems such as this to many stories ASCOL links to.