NJ- Officials push for limits on residency

The Court of Appeals decision striking down residency laws is found here:

8-5-2008 New Jersey:

Cherry Hill officials have appealed to the state Supreme Court in an attempt to preserve their ordinance restricting where sex offenders can live, a move that could impact more than 100 towns with similar laws.

Cherry Hill Mayor Bernie Platt on Monday said the recent court decision that struck down a township ordinance prohibiting offenders from living near schools, playgrounds and other areas where children gather was unjust and undermines the concept of home rule.

"I believe letting an offender live near children is like giving a bottle of vodka to an alcoholic," Platt said. "I am asking the Supreme Court to think about the innocent children in our society instead of the sex offenders rights."

-That is an excellent comment Mr Mayor, and in fact, is the very reason why the Supreme court killed all local residency laws for RSOs.

Think about this, does anyone know of a law which prevents "alcoholics" from living near a place that sells alcohol? No, well why should there be a law which prevents (don't jump to misconstructions now) former sex offenders from living where they want or where housing is available.

It is a misconstruction to believe RSOs are trying to live close to schools etc for the purpose of committing further crimes. It is also a miscontruction to believe any criminal offender -after reentry into society- will to live near the type of place that was the source of their crime. These misconstructions abound.

Do we need laws to prevent domestic violence offenders from living near any families, or alcoholics from living near any establishment that sells alcoholic beverages, drug offenders from drug stores, DUI offenders from any place where there is a car, etc. etc,.

A three-judge panel ruled last month that the state's Megan's Law already governs how sex offenders should be treated. It requires sex offenders to register with authorities and have their housing approved by parole officers, among other conditions.

In their decision, the appellate judges said the Legislature intended for the state law to be a "comprehensive framework" for controlling and supervising the lives of offenders.

But Platt said it is "fatally flawed" since it does not address residency restrictions.

"I believe allowing sex offenders to live near a place where our children play, learn and worship is unacceptable," he said.

-Mr Mayor, have you forgotten what your own statutes say? Residency laws are denying RSOs housing options which is specifically prohibited under your state laws (see below):

New Jersey Statue: 2C:7-16 Authorized use of disclosed information; prohibited uses.

5. a. Any information disclosed pursuant to this act may be used in any manner by any person or by any public, governmental or private entity, organization or official, or any agent thereof, for any lawful purpose consistent with the enhancement of public safety.

b.Any person who uses information disclosed pursuant to this act to commit a crime shall be guilty of a crime of the third degree. Any person who uses information disclosed pursuant to this act to commit a disorderly persons or petty disorderly persons offense shall be guilty of a disorderly persons offense and shall be fined not less than $500 or more than $1,000, in addition to any other penalty or fine imposed.

c.Except as authorized under any other provision of law, use of any of the information disclosed pursuant to this act for the purpose of applying for, obtaining, or denying any of the following, is prohibited:

(1)Health insurance;

(2)Insurance;

(3)Loans;

(4)Credit;

(5)Education, scholarships, or fellowships;

(6)Benefits, privileges, or services provided by any business establishment, unless for a purpose consistent with the enhancement of public safety; or

(7)Housing or accommodations.

d.Whenever there is reasonable cause to believe that any person or group of persons is engaged in a pattern or practice of misuse of the information disclosed pursuant to this act, the Attorney General, or any county or municipal prosecutor having jurisdiction, or any person aggrieved by the misuse of that information is authorized to bring a civil action in the appropriate court requesting preventive relief, including an application for a permanent or temporary injunction, restraining order, or other order against the person or group of persons responsible for the pattern or practice of misuse. The foregoing remedies shall be independent of and in addition to any other remedies or procedures that may be available under other provisions of law.

e.Evidence that a person obtained information about an offender from the Internet registry within one year prior to committing a criminal offense against that offender shall give rise to an inference that the person used information in violation of subsection b. of this section.

The New Jersey Office of the Public Defender, which has represented sex offenders in similar cases, has said the residency restrictions run the risk of destabilizing offenders and increasing the risk of recidivism.

"We think the appellate decision showed that the law in this area is clear," said Tom Rosenthal, a spokesman for the office. "We're hopeful the Supreme Court will agree with the Appellate Court and deny the petition."

It's up to the Supreme Court to decide whether to hear the case - one that, if heard, would be watched closely by municipal officials across the state.

In neighboring Gloucester County, ordinances in two towns, Monroe and Franklin townships, have been challenged by sex offenders who claimed they were being punished twice for their crimes.

Monroe had held off on enforcing the local law pending the Appellate Court decision.

Solicitor Charles Fiore said the township council has not yet determined how to move forward.

Locally, however, an official in one Salem County township said he would still enforce his local ordinance if an offender moved into the community.

"We really hadn't had an opportunity to enforce it, but we will if it takes place," said Pete Voros, mayor of Pittsgrove, where no sex offenders currently live, according to the New Jersey Sex Offender Internet Registry.

The case in Cherry Hill was combined with a challenge in Galloway Township, where officials are reportedly appealing the decision as well.

In Cherry Hill, two sex offenders living in a motel with the approval of their parole officers challenged their violation of the local law.

In Galloway Township, a student at Richard Stockton College challenged the ordinance after moving on campus.

The laws in both towns prohibited sex offenders from living within 2,500 feet of schools, day cares, playgrounds and other areas where children gather. ..News Source.. by Trish G. Graber