ME: Orrington residents to choose if they want to limit where sex offenders live

R H

Source: bangordailynews.com 12/1/23

Orrington residents will choose if they want to enact an ordinance that prohibits people on the sex offender registry from living within 750 feet of schools and churches

About 35 residents, the board of selectmen, Town Manager Chris Backman and town attorney Andrew Hamilton gathered at the Center Drive School on Thursday to discuss which of three ordinances voters should choose if they decide to vote for the restriction of where registered sex offenders can live.

A special town referendum is scheduled for Dec. 11.

The public hearing and upcoming election follow months of advocacy and petition gathering from Orrington residents who were dismayed to learn the town did not already restrict where people on the sex offender registry are allowed to live.

Maine does not have a statewide residency restriction for sex offenders, but it offers language towns can adopt. Under Maine law, it would only apply to someone on the registry for a conviction of a crime against a child younger than 14.

Read the full article

 

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.  
 

7 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

So this is all for show? City is assuming everyone will either vote of the City endorsed version, or all three which produces the same result? Might be a city ordinance or something that forces this to a vote, but there is no chance some version of this isn’t adopted.

So the registrants that have been living inside these zones, possibly for years, with no difficulty are suddenly too dangerous to just leave there for more years? Why?

1
Reply

And what does anyone want to bet that the one question that will not be asked is, “How many local sex offender registrants were arrested for a new sex crime?”

1
Reply

I wonder if this includes people caught with cp where the victim in the images are under 14. If that’s the case, this ordinance is even more of a travesty.

1
Reply
View Replies (3)

It passed
Orrington, Maine residents vote to pass ordinance limiting where sex offenders can reside

population 3812 and according to city data there is seven registered offenders.

“Orrington Town Manager Chris Blackman says the rule does not apply to sex offenders who already live in these zones — instead, it prohibits people on the registry from moving to these areas in the future”

surely the registry is not punishment if the goal is being able to ban people from moving to your city.

0
Reply