OH: Councilman tables own proposed ordinance on sex offenders

AMHERST — A proposed ban which would have prevented registered sex offenders living within the city limits from participating in Halloween will have to wait.
At a committee meeting Monday, Phil Van Treuren made a motion to table the ordinance which he promoted one week ago through a news release.
Van Treuren said his proposed ordinance was recommended after seeing the Village of Orwell in Ashtabula County adopt a similar ordinance recently, prohibiting sex offenders from answering their door during and around Halloween.

After getting feedback from council members and Law Director Anthony Pecora, Van Treuren said he felt pushing an ordinance through before Thursday was not in the best interest of the city. Instead, he hopes to craft legislation that would be implemented in the future, preventing any sex offender from participating in Halloween within Amherst. Not just the 11 living within city limits. 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.  
 

3 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Thank God that the state of Ohio currently prohibits ex post facto laws. At least Ohio hasn’t sunk to the depth’s of injustice that California and many other states have. Most states seem to enact laws that make constitutional laws void. Sad.

This is great news! We are making a difference!! Instead of elected officials passing legislation that they don’t believe in, they are watching as cities and counties in California get sued for violating the U.S. Constitution.

Why say “currently prohibits expo facto laws”? Wouldn’t Ohio have to change its constitution and the US Constitution to not prohibit them? Wouldn’t that be a massive undertaking, bordering on the impossible? Explain the legaleze someone.