With threat of a lawsuit hanging over its head, the city will repeal local residency restrictions for registered sex offenders and defer to existing state regulations.
The move is not unexpected. Cities across California have been forced to bow to pressure from sex offender law reformists in recent years, while courts have simultaneously limited local regulatory authority.
In December 2014, the City Council reluctantly agreed to align its local ordinance restricting the movements of registered sex offenders with the statewide regulations already in effect.
That decision came after the California chapter of Reform Sex Offender Laws sued the city in August of that year, contending that local ordinances were overkill.
Are statewide restrictions preventing RSOs from living 2000 feet from a school or park actually enforced anywhere in the state of California?
The language in this article is poor. Saying “forced to bow to pressure” instead of “complying with the law” makes it sound like the cities are the victims here.
Video of city council…
http://victorville.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=6&clip_id=1725&meta_id=148749
The video will open right at the start of the segment for residency restrictions repeal.
Note the usual “I don’t wanna do it, but we can’t legally defend it!” comment, along with the accompanying dittos.
I’m glad to see another city coming into compliance. It would be nice if there were an article showing what has happened in cities after repealing these restrictions. My guess: nothing bad. I’d hope a reduction in homelessness, but that is something much easier to create than to remedy.
Janice,
THANK YOU!!!
This basically answered my query long ago when I inquired about when the VV police department gave me a letter stating that re:Taylor decision only pertained to those on parole, not any other registrants. Now this informs us that in VV, there are no residency restrictions for all registrants.
I presume that’s what this repealing means b/c the reporting doesn’t actually go into detail:
=====================
With threat of a lawsuit hanging over its head, the city will repeal local residency restrictions for registered sex offenders and defer to existing state regulations.
=====================
What does it mean “defer to existing state regulations”? I thought re:Taylor removed all residency restriction.
I don’t recall ever hearing of residency or proximity restrictions preventing a crime. I’ve never seen any proof that these restrictions keep anyone safe either. Just like I’ve never heard of the sex offender registry preventing a crime and I’ve never seen any proof that it keeps anyone safe. I’ve looked and always come up with a big fat zero. When are people going to wake up to the reality none of this does anything good for anyone?
They are only doing the right thing.
Right?