CA Sex Offender Management Board Reaches “General Consensus” on Changes to Tiered Registry Law

Source: ACSOL

The CA Sex Offender Management Board today reached a “general consensus” regarding 5 of 7 proposed changes to the Tiered Registry Law during its monthly meeting.  All of the changes considered today were included in a presentation to the board made by ACSOL during the board’s meeting last month.

Specifically, CASOMB members today gave preliminary approval to the following proposed changes:

(1) remove felony child pornography offenses from Tier 3,

(2) remove convictions for PC 288(c) from Tier 3,

(3) remove attempted offenses from Tier 3,

(4) allow those assigned to Tier 3 to petition for removal after 30 years if the individual has not re-offended and

(5) allow registrants to view their profiles on the Megan’s Law website. 

Of the two remaining proposed changes, the CASOMB members decided that one change was outside the scope of their charter and further information was required regarding the remaining change.

During the meeting, CASOMB created a committee of board members to further review the proposed changes for which there was a “general consensus”.  Committee members include the CASOMB chairman, Bradley McCartt of the Los Angeles District Attorney’s office, Ellen Coleman formerly of the Los Angeles Public Defender’s office and Sandra Enriquez of a victims rights group.  The committee is tasked to meet prior to CASOMB’s next meeting to be held on March 16.

Following CASOMB’s discussion, ACSOL Executive Director Janice Bellucci was allowed to address the board.  During her remarks, Bellucci told the board members that time is of the essence for CASOMB to present its recommendations to the legislature because this year is a non-election year and legislation regarding registrants is much more likely to be approved during a non-election year.

Members of the registrant community are encouraged to attend in person or view online the March 16 meeting of CASOMB,” stated Bellucci.  “The Board is expected to share during that meeting the results of the newly formed committee including recommendations to the legislature.”

The March 16 meeting will begin at 9:30 a.m. Pacific Time. and will be held at a location to be determined in Sacramento.  In order to view the Zoom meeting online (or call in using a phone), individuals must sign up on the CASOMB website at casomb.org (no www!).  There is also a link to download the agenda in MS Word.

Click below to download a full original list of 7 changes that were proposed by ACSOL:

Proposed-Revisions-to-SB-384-Jan-2023.pdf

Related posts

Subscribe
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 and a**
  4. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Use person-first language.
  5. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  6. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  7. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  8. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  9. 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.
  10. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  11. Please do not post in all Caps.
  12. 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.
  13. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  14. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  15. 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.
  16. Please do not solicit funds
  17. No discussions about weapons
  18. 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.
  19. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  20. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  21. 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.
  22. 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.  
 

105 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

This is great newss and we are thankful for the effort of your legal team. I am not sure why some are asking why not this or that as it is progress in the right direction. I understand we are usually only concerned with what applies on a personal level, we should still the magnitude of possible progress. Simply a few years ago we were all on for life with no end in sight and only a few cared outside of those registered. I feel like some will always want more and more at an unhealthy level. Unless everyone is off, not everyone will be happy with any change because it didn’t apply to them. If everything is addressed at once there will be most likely no change because then it’s simply a “change the whole thing because we don’t like it.” Instead point out small things to change and continue to work on progress.Imagine going in there any proposing so much that nothing is changed.

At this hearing, and any subsequent ones, the fact that we’re constant targets of vigilantes needs to be hammered into them. And that’s what makes this public registry unconstitutional. I know we are because it just happened to me. I want those bastards to pay too.

Last edited 1 year ago by Jack

I keep hearing comments, regarding cp tier 3 registrants left behind, that these reforms don’t happen all at once. “We can’t fit everyone into the lifeboat, we’ll come back and rescue you” I think people keep forgetting that the California registry reform MADE IT WORST for cp registrants who got pushed into tier 3. We should remember that fact. So pushing someone into the water, and saying we’re going to come back and rescue you later, is pretty disingenuous

My big question is what if a person gets disabled or bedridden after so many years on the registration list and can’t do anything in Society anymore? I think people like that should be automatically be off the list if they can prove what their health problem is.

Last edited 1 year ago by Geegeorg

On my birthday in San Francisco I filled out a request for removal from the Registry Tier 2 twenty years clean, and SFPD sent it to the Public Defender office across the street, and they arranged a court date four months later…I did not even have to show up in court…they just mailed me the CR 418 order for removal. Easy peasy and free.

No one who is EIGHTY years old should have to register,

It’s nice to have hope. Even if these changes don’t make it through the legislative process, it is nice to have hope. Thank you for all you do. You give hope to the hopeless.

I’m surprised that the S.O.M.B.did not include an individual’s tier level based on their risk level score. When the risk level score is not considered an individual can be on the registry for 10 years longer.