CA: Registrant Gains Access to Section 8 Housing

A registrant in California has gained access to Section 8 housing.  This is a significant change because in the past all California registrants were denied access to Section 8 housing because they were required by state law to register for life.

“This is a significant milestone,” stated ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci.  “With the help of ACSOL, a registrant was able to persuade the federal government that he is no longer a lifetime registrant.”

The registrant, who wishes to remain anonymous, applied to live with his fiance in Section 8 housing in the year 2020.  His application was denied, however, because he was required to register for life.  ACSOL prepared a letter to the provider of Section 8 housing explaining the new Tiered Registry Law that became effective in January 2021, including the fact that the registrant has been assigned to Tier 2 which requires 20 years of registration, not lifetime registration.  The registrant also gave the provider a document regarding the Tiered Registry Law that was issued by the CA Department of Justice earlier this year.

In 2021, the registrant and his fiance married and he subsequently reapplied for Section 8 housing.  The application was approved a few months later and now the registrant and his wife are living together in a home provided by Section 8 housing.

“It appears that the federal government has reached the understanding that some California registrants are now eligible for Section 8 housing,” stated Bellucci.  “It also appears that eligibility is limited to individuals assigned to Tier 1 and Tier 2.  Unfortunately, individuals assigned to Tier 3 are still required to register for life.”

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, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest 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

They are starting to fear our numbers I wet on Megan’s law website yesterday to see how many sex offenders live in my neighborhood and it wouldn’t let me the map is blank no red or blue dots you can only look people up by name the DOJ never announced any changes to Megan’s law website maybe the website is under construction or something but if not that’s a major game changer.
Sex offenders qualifying for section 8 that’s another major game changer I wonder if Janice Bellucci can help people qualify for federal home loans

Good luck 😬👌

It’s time to start a movement to have Janice Bellucci nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize. I’m serious.
Many progressive nations and the U.N. have already spoken out about how the United States treats registrants is a blatant violation of human rights. Is there a more important human right than the right to have a safe and clean place to live??? Given all of ACSOL’s successes and attempts (with Janice at the helm) to restore registrants’ human rights, I believe it’s time for this nomination!
From what I have read, not just anyone can nominate a person. However, maybe somebody knows someone who can nominate a person. Let’s make this happen!

Tom Kelley:

Registrants and their family and friends have been getting organized. The chore is to get everybody into the fight. Most registrants choose to sit on the sidelines and leave the fight to others.
Getting soldiers into the fight will be helpful because most won’t back down in the face of adversity.

I can’t help wondering why the length of their registration obligation (as opposed to specific crime) was a factor in whether or not they were approved.

Thank you for helping him and his fiance Janice. Progress is progress no matter how small or where it occurs. I wasn’t even aware that section 8 had restrictions like that.

As I wrote the other day at the reminder of @AJ of this same topic, the registry is punishment when it comes to housing and lifers.

It’s not merely the triggering requirement of needing to register for a lifetime that is the issue (and the point, IMO, the legal community would hinge on in court when attacked to save their precious registry), but the fact a person who is required and actually registers for a lifetime ends up being banned from housing in a punishing move without any reasoning why anything less is acceptable, that I am aware of at least. Justification needs to be understood of what their thinking is when splitting along years for banishment, i.e. offense based because anything deemed lifetime is allegedly heinous enough.

Is the lifetime requirement the gate they will say is the driving factor and actually not the registry itself when deeming the registry not punishment? I don’t see how they cannot actually go together when considered as punishment since the requirement triggers the action leading to banishment which is classically used a punishment, e.g. See Napoleon and his second exile (banishment as punishment) to St Helena.

@Janice,et al – did they give you, when appealing, any reasoning why lifers are banned when others are not, e.g. optics, stats, etc?

So when SORNA regs kick in and the guy goes to lifetime again, does he get to stay?

So, I was under the understanding that when a state or fed gov program is denied to any individual that it would trigger a constitutional violation without an individual assessment. I understand gun laws and all that but that is a blanket ban and not a gov program either. Something needs to happen soon, I can tell you people that.

SORNA reg for tier 3,
“Abusive sexual contact under 18 U.S.C. § 2244 (described in the tier II offense definition) when committed against a minor under 13 years old.”

Well, 664/288 (a) is for anyone under 14 not under 13. So if my alleged victim was 13 what happens? What happens to all those convicted under 288 (a) that had alleged victims under 13? Are they tier 3 under SORNA when the state is granting them tier 2?

And what about the 288.2 that has no comparison in the SORNA regs?
Closest thing I see to it is “Production or distribution of child pornography.” Well I was not convicted of CP but instead was convicted for sending harmful material 288.2 based solely on the fact that I agreed to meet with a minor for sex they say, which by the way puts me in tier 3 under CA regs. Only thing close to it is, Coercion & enticement under 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b) which both are tier 2 offenses once again.

This shows the absolute absurdity of the Section 8 ban on lifers. With the stroke of a pen, this RC went from incorrigible and terrible to welcomed into the program, even if grudgingly.

This is excellent news! 🥳
Great job, Janice! (As always!) 🤗

Well, that’s pleasant.😡
– David, SoCal registrant

When you were in the “Corp” did you meet any men?

A small step for one registrant, a giant leap towards cementing the registry until the end of time.

yep and some of tier 3 is a SCAM… CP doesnt fit the bill and people arent equally situated !!

don’t worry some official will hear about this and propose a bill that will reverse the tier one, tier two scenario……….

You’re my hero, Tom Kelley. We California guys can only dream of being half the he-man you so obviously are!
(Oh yes, indeed, very sarcastic! 😄 But, fear not, you’re still my hero.🤪)

Befor Feb 2022 In Los Angeles HACLA denies all 290 registrants.
The reason is that the supervisor told me if there is no 290 register tier level provided when they looked at the applicants criminal background check. So they’re all denied…..
Thay Do Not Not following the
PIH 2012-28 guidelines and procedures to check the two levels of the 290 registrants.
Is this is considered discrimination on sexual basis. Refusing to follow the guidelines in efforts to deny a class of applicants.

💯 💥 👍