ACSOL’s Conference Calls

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

Monthly Meetings | Recordings (3/20 Recording Uploaded)
Emotional Support Group Meetings


CA: Legislature Passes Helpful Bills, Stops Hurtful Bills

The California legislature has recently passed two bills that could help registrants and stopped two bills that could have harmed registrants and their families.

In the first of the helpful bills (AB 2138), the legislature made it more difficult for the Department of Consumer Affairs to revoke existing, or deny applications for a new, professional licenses. The scope of the bill covers licenses for many professions such as barbers and court reporters, but does not address licenses for many other professions including attorneys and doctors. In the second of the helpful bills (AB 2293), the legislature made it easier for individuals convicted of criminal offenses, including sex offenses, to obtain an EMT license. Both bills have been sent to the Governor who must decide whether to sign them by September 30.

“We strongly recommend that the Governor sign both AB 2138 and AB 2293,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci.

In the first of the harmful bills (SB 1143), the legislature voted against restrictions that would have made it more difficult for many registrants to obtain housing. In the second of the harmful bills, the legislature stopped an attempt to prevent patients at Coalinga State Hospital from voting in local elections. Because these bills were stopped in the legislature, they were not sent to the Governor. (ACSOL)

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.  
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Great news! Let’s hope things continue going this route.

Any news on where we’re at with the daycare bill that would require LE to report registrants to daycare centers if they lived within a certain distance?

@AO – Thank you for the reminder about that bill (AB 514) which has also passed, although in a very weakened form. As passed by the state legislature, the bill requires the State Department of Social Services (not local law enforcement) to notify day care centers if a registrant whose victim was less than 14 years old moves within 1,000 feet of a licensed day care facility. This requirement is based upon the availability of funding within the department for that specific purpose.

How would the department know or be notified themselves as to who has moved near a day care center? And at this point, is the bill referring to people who will have moved to a day care center after the law is passed, or does it refer to people who just live near a day care center already (I have lived near a day care center for a couple of years)? Will there be any challenge to the law if the governor signs it?

@AP: I, too, have the same questions. Janice, do you have the answers?

AB514 is not a helpful bill nor is it NOT hurtful. Is it going to be challenged? I just don’t understand why my husband has to be on the registry if an agency like Social Services can just notify whoever that he’s on the registry. HOW has the bill made it this far?

We live next door to a daycare. Are we supposed to just sit back and hope that there’s not enough funding available for our lives to be further wrecked?

AB 514 passed and awaits Gov. signature. Hasn’t been talked about here lately. A bit surprised.

Back in 2007 I went in to apply for HUD (Housing Urban Development) and immediately saw on the of the first page of the document that sex offenders are disqualified. Section 290 of CA Penal code specifically covers using the registry as a reason to banish a person from housing. What’s interesting is that while HUD is a federal program, they still operate in California. Government entities are operated exactly like businesses and would in my interpretation to be in violation of 290. HUD should be made available to those who are disadvantaged and unable to afford housing on their… Read more »

“Government entities are operated exactly like businesses and would in my interpretation to be in violation of 290.”

Wow, I was ready to jump into that fight before realizing federal law probably trumps the state law. I’d be glad to be proven wrong.

Great news! I actually lost a professional (healthcare/1998) as a result of my plea (Felony Battery-since reduced to a misdemeanor/expunged). I’m not sure if this bill would allow me to re-apply. Although, I can only wonder how/if I could obtain a Real Estate License/Brokers License or investment license since I lost a professional license. The Licenses are all tied into The Consumer Affairs Licensing Board.

I was able to get a car saleperson License after my 288c conviction

but real estate I am not sure..I would encourage you to try again
Let us know

Unrelated to this but does anyone know if anyone is doing anything about the new “10 year and 20 year parole terms law?” Is anyone working to reduce it or anything or am I just stuck with ten years parole (3 1/2 times more then I even did in prison) with nothing I can do about it? I’ve already done 2 years more than I did in prison. (2 1/2 years in prison and 4 1/2 years parole already)
Any advice or opinions or knowledge would be greatly appreciated.

@Guy in California

A lot of us are dealing with this 10-year parole thing. It doesn’t seem legal, but the CDCR does all sorts of things that don’t seem legal. You should go to the living 290 thread. There is some good information and advice on the 10-year parole topic there.

here is the link:

This is a big deal. If I’m not mistaken, this will allow many people with a criminal history/7 years have passed/expunged will help obtain or re obtain a professional license. Great to here. Please advise.

Yes USA it sounds like a big deal since that is one of the major constitutional violations, especially here in CA where we actually have a seven year background limit law. That is just one of the employment issues though but it is a step in the right direction. That 20-30 year parole crap in CA is definitely news to me. Parole is actually considered punishment and is part of a sentence. The only way that it would be legal to even have you on parole at all is if it does not exceed the original statutory maximum sentence. People… Read more »

I keep hearing about how background checks in California can’t go beyond 7 years back. However, I also hear that people in here have said they’ve been denied employment 20 years after their offense. I’ve also had someone in here tell me that every year when I register it renews the 7 year window.. I can’t seem to figure this one out. I accepted a plea deal in late 2014 for misdemeanor 311.11(a). I understand I can no longer file for relief under 1203.4 since that law changed on 1/1/2014. Luckily I’ve had the same job since then, but I… Read more »

Apologies if this was already reported. Though not affected by it, I followed it all the same as it struck me as a truly foolish bill that was written as a knee-jerk reaction to one constituent’s complaint…

…CA AB 514 was vetoed on 9/27/18 by Governor Brown.

Governor Brown has signed both bills

Not sure where to post this or how to post a new thread. I am in California, my case was in 2005 and convicted of 288(a), did 7 months in county. I recently renewed my driver’s license and in bright RED letters are the words: Federal Limits Apply. I read up on it and it is intended for undocumented people. I was born in the US and am a citizen. Is this the new way to identify us federally? I am not allowed to fly with the new license, not even from state to state and not allowed on any… Read more »

It sounds like you got a license that does not comply with Real ID. See for the skinny on it all. You could probably call the DMV and get an answer, too. All in all, it appears to have nothing to do with your offense, and totally to do with the type of (non-compliant) license you got.

Addendum: I’m guessing you didn’t have the proper proofs of ID the Real ID Act requires in order to get a federally compliant license. As such, you were considered “undocumented” in the sense that you didn’t provide sufficient documentation to prove citizenship. You’re probably going to have to go back in with all the proper documentation.


@AJ – Thank you so much. I was concerned for a bit. Looked at the site more closely and will go to DMV to submit appropriate documents.

Would love your thoughts, please comment.x