CA: Assembly Committee Approves Senate Bill 145

Today the Assembly’s Public Safety Committee approved a newly amended version of Senate Bill 145 (SB 145) that eliminated all references to residency restrictions. Specifically, the newly amended version eliminated Sections 5, 6 and 7 of the bill.

“This is a great victory for registrants and their families who no longer need to worry that SB 145 would cause them to be homeless,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci.

In the introduction of his bill, Senator Scott Wiener apologized to “everyone who could have been affected” for language in a prior version of SB 145 that would have resulted in homelessness for tens of thousands of registrants and their families. The senator stated clearly that he opposes residency restrictions and believes they are unconstitutional.

During the hearing, representatives from the Los Angeles District Attorney’s office as well as CalCASA, a victim’s rights group, spoke in support of the newly amended version of SB 145. This bill is “long overdue”, according to the CalCASA representative.

More than 30 additional people, including registrants and their family members, spoke in favor of the newly amended version of SB 145. Included in that number were representatives from ACSOL as well as the ACLU, the Public Defenders Association and Equality California.

“Today’s success is the direct result of action taken by registrants and their families,” stated ACSOL President Chance Oberstein. “We appreciate and thank everyone who made phone calls, wrote letters and participated in the April 9 and July 9 hearings.”

The next step for SB 145 is consideration by the Assembly’s Appropriations Committee in August followed by consideration by the entire Assembly in September. If the Assembly passes the bill, the Governor must sign the bill before it becomes law.

Related posts

Subscribe
Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...

 

  1. Submissions must be in English
  2. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  3. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  4. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t and a**
  5. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Always use person-first language.
  6. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  7. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  8. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  9. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  10. 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 that are not personally identifiable.
  11. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  12. Please do not post in all Caps.
  13. 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.
  14. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  15. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  16. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  17. Please do not solicit funds
  18. No discussions about weapons
  19. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  20. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  21. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  22. 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.
  23. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
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.  
 

18 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

San Diego and Orange County loved keeping there foot on sexofenders throats smh ….im glad to see that theres light at the end of the tunnel

Any chance we can find out who added the amendment we called to remove?

And here is the funny thing on San diego… they wanted to WAIT for 145 to PASS with residency restrictions (allowing them to set their own rules) this would VALIDATE San diego so they could get Janice’s lawsuit dropped as a mute point….. well that alone just shows that SD has a ordinance that is ILLEGAL….

Now that residency was REMOVED “the show must go on” as queen would say.. SAD thing is when SD looses they don’t care taxpayers pay for it !!

The city is NO different than the county….
Here is a short story (TRUE)
Years ago when on lame parole I had a violation… went to jail had a CHRONO for a extra mattress from medical…

A ROGUE jack off cop took it, interfering in my medical business….
I SUED the county in small claims… won $1000 buxs…
county appealed it, yea they won only cause I had a hater CRIMINAL Judge that started saying OH im not a trusted witness (how is that… I never testified) it was his lame excuse….
then he asked what my convictions were (the second he asked that I knew he was a jack ass in the judicial system)…and he would rule against me. I after caused him grief and made a complaint on judicial review….

Funniest part was though… at the END the COUNTY attorneys (which can show up for a appeal on small claims) they requested I pay all fees and their fee’s… cop wages for showing up (the one I sued the county cause)… medical staff, atty’s for the county etc…. Once again.. JERK OFF JUDGE said yea I had to pay… I said NOPE I dont have to I didn’t appeal, plus atty FEES etc are nor recoverable on small claims as attys are NOT allowed (cept in a appeal)….

So in closing, I left the county holding the bag ! Prolly cost them more than the $1000 original judgement !

Janice&Chance,
Way to go. That result there an example of EFFECTIVE ADVOCACY.

Sorry because he knows he can’t get away with his bullshit. We need to organize in San Francisco to get this asshole out of office.

Great job, Janice, Chance, and ACSOL – What a relief! I’m so impressed that you were able to get an audience with the right people, and convinced them to drop the references to Jessica’s Law. You did all that quickly and effectively. We’re lucky to have you fighting for us! And thanks to Senator Wiener as well for his leadership on this issue, and for doing the work necessary to amend the bill. It’s nice to see an elected official do the right thing.

Thank you Janice and team and all others who called in to voice their oppo to the hypocrites George and late Sharon Runners’ language of hate and fear mongering. I don’t even want to mention the name of the law to give it any credence as it started all this drama in CA since it passed in 2006.

I will call Sen. Weiner’s office to express my thanks.