Neighbors, provider locked in legal battle over nursing home for inmates

9-5-17 Connecticut:

A nursing home for paroled inmates that recently received approval for federal funding is now locked in a legal battle with its neighbors, who argue the facility is hurting their property values and putting their families at risk.

The town of Rocky Hill, CT, argued in court last week that 60 West, which opened in 2013, has resulted in a decline in property values for the homes surrounding it. The facility, which can house up to 95 residents, is currently home to 13 paroled inmates, the Hartford Courant reported.

In addition to property values, the owner of a local appraisal company testified in court that the facility has changed from “a quiet normal nursing home ... to a place with sex offenders, criminals and the smell of marijuana wafting over.”

The median home value of a house in the area is $236,900, and values are expected to increase by 2% over the next year, according to Zillow.

Neighbors also reported that they installed alarm systems and have become more restrictive of their children's' outdoor activities due to the facility's inhabitants. Rocky Hill also claims the facility violates local zoning codes because its residents are not traditional long-term care patients. ..Continued..

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

State launches new background check system for long-term care employees

11-9-15 Connecticut:

The Connecticut Department of Public Health has launched a comprehensive background check program for employees of nursing homes and other long-term care agencies that strengthens protections for the elderly and disabled residents.

The background check program helps nursing homes and other providers identify whether a job seeker has a disqualifying criminal conviction or other patient abuse or neglect information that could make him or her unsuitable to work directly with residents.

“With this system, Connecticut has implemented an important safeguard which will help protect the health and safety of some of our most vulnerable residents and clients,” said DPH Commissioner Dr. Jewel Mullen in a news release.

Long-term care facilities or providers covered under the new program include nursing homes, residential care homes, home health agencies, assisted living services agencies, intermediate care facilities for persons with intellectual disabilities, long-term care hospitals and hospice providers.

Previously, it was up to each care facility to decide whether to do background checks, and the primary method for doing so was to use sites such as the state and national sex offender registries and the Connecticut nurse’s aide registry. But, while these basic checks catch some offenders, there were gaps that allow people with troubling backgrounds to slip through the cracks.

In 2011, the state Legislature voted to approve a more intensive background check program, which would include fingerprinting prospective workers and running the prints through State Police and Federal Bureau of Investigation databases.

Since then, DPH has worked with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and the Connecticut Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection to establish a web-based program called the Applicant Background Check Management System.

The management system provides long-term care facilities with a web portal to submit information on potential employees or volunteers of long-term care facilities and to obtain fingerprint-based criminal history records checks, as well as checks of several relevant registries, prior to hiring for employment. Long-term care facilities subject to the background check program must register with the background check management system. ..Source.. by Amanda Cuda

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Mandated Review of Connecticut Sex Offender Registry Underway

October Connecticut:

The application and development of laws and public policies pertaining to sex offenders are often a “very politically charged and emotionally charged issue,” according to Andrew Clark, acting executive director of the Connecticut Sentencing Commission. The Commission, thanks to a recently passed legislative measure, has been tasked with conducting a full review of the state’s sex offender registry and its effectiveness in promoting public safety.

In order to do so, the Sentencing Commission has created a task force co-chaired by Robert Farr, former chair of the state Board of Pardons and Paroles and longtime legislator, and Stephen Grant, executive director court support services for the Connecticut Judicial Branch.

The State of the Sex Offender Registry

Connecticut’s sex offender registry was created by law in 1999 and now consists of more than 6,000 names in an online database. While it was designed to help alert the public about potentially dangerous sex criminals, critics maintain that the lack of organization and the use of unnecessarily complex language makes the list all but impossible for most citizens to utilize easily.

As it currently stands, low-level offenders, including those who have had consensual sex with an underage partner, are mixed in with truly dangerous predators who have bene convicted of violent sex crimes. Each offender is listed by the crime for which they were convicted, but terms like “risk of injury” or “third-degree sexual assault” often mean little to someone without legal background or point of reference. There is also no existing official risk assessment as to the danger a particular individual may present to the community at large.

Rights of Registrants

The law requiring the sex offender registry review began as a 2015 bill to impose limitations on sex offenders, including prohibiting them from living within 1,000 feet of a school. It quickly became clear, however, that the current state of the registry required closer inspection and possibly revisions before additional blanket limitations should be applied. Many low-level offenders, critics point out, have paid their debt to society and truly pose no public risk. These individuals should not be grouped in with those who do present danger to the community, particularly those convicted of violent crimes who may still be on parole.

Risk Assessment

There are likely to be several options available to the panel for improving the sex offender registry. The first would involve a tiered approach, which clearly delineates the severity of particular offenses and offenders. Currently in use in Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, and Maine, the ranking system helps those who access the list to understand the threat presented by a specific individual. In New Jersey, for example, certain lower-tiered offenders are made known only to law enforcement.

The other likely approach is the application of risk assessment to determine if an offender is likely to commit subsequent crimes. Since the registry’s inception nearly 16 years ago, the science of risk assessment has experienced exponential growth and is used in a wide variety of applications, including DUI-related evaluations in many states. Risk assessment takes into account an offender’s circumstances, influences, education, and countless other factors to establish the degree of likelihood that he or she will continue to commit sex offenses. By including risk assessment in the sex offender registry, citizens are likely to have a better understanding of who and what to be aware of in their neighborhoods.

While the review committee continues its task, which is expected to be completed by December 2017, the current sex offender registry remains part of the Connecticut justice system. ..Source.. by If you have been charged with a sex crime, landing on the registry can serious damage your future and available opportunities. Contact an experienced Hartford criminal defense attorney today to schedule your confidential consultation. We will review your case and help you take the necessary steps in protecting your rights. Call 860-290-8690 for an appointment at the Woolf Law Firm, LLC.

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

EDITORIAL: Sex Offender Registry Review A Tricky Task

8-12-15 Connecticut:

Connecticut's sex offender registry was created in 1998 to protect the public. Does it work?

A committee of the Connecticut Sentencing Commission hopes to answer that question in the next 30 months as it reviews the state's laws and policies relating to sex offenders.

"This is not an easy topic,'' said committee co-Chairman Robert Farr, former chairman of the Connecticut Board of Pardons and Paroles.

That is an understatement.

The registry has more than 6,000 names on it. Critics have long argued that many if not most of those on the list pose no danger to the public, and that keeping such a large list makes it difficult for police to monitor or for residents to distinguish low-risk offenders from predators who may pose a threat.

Along with some rapists and pedophiles, the registry has an array of voyeurs, porn possessors and people who had sex with an underage partner. Registrants are listed by the crime they were convicted of, but it's not clear whether a conviction for "risk of injury" or "third-degree sexual assault" means the person is a danger to others.

For low-risk offenders who have served their sentences, the additional burden of public humiliation can be devastating. Many find it difficult to find jobs or homes; some suffer threats or physical harm. They are citizens with rights.

Connecticut does differentiate between violent and nonviolent offenders in one sense; the former stay on the registry for life, the latter for 10 years, in general. There are other options: The science of risk assessment has advanced since 1998; some states use assessment techniques to determine who is likely to commit another crime and should be on the list. Some states, such as New Jersey, create tiers of offenders and make the names of low-risk offenders available only to the police.

This is an emotional and politically charged issue. Protection of the public is paramount. The sentencing commission has done some fine work to date on juvenile sentencing; this will be a tougher challenge. ..Source.. by Hartford Courant

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Connecticut committee begins 2-year review of sex offender programs; housing a major issue

8-5-15 Connecticut:

HARTFORD, Connecticut — A major obstacle for sex offenders in Connecticut is a lack of housing, a new panel that embarked Wednesday on a two-year review of issues facing offenders and victims was told.

Eduardo Palmieri of the state Judicial Branch's court support services division said a "supportive living environment" is the best place for a sex offender re-entering society, but such a place can be hard to find.

"A lot of our offenders who have family have lost their support or have never had any familial support," said Palmieri, deputy director of adult probation. And if an offender becomes transient or homeless, the risk of that person committing more crimes increases, he told the special committee of the Connecticut Sentencing Commission.

Probation officers in Connecticut were overseeing 2,300 sex offenders as of July 31.

Lisa Tepper Bates, a committee member and executive director of the Connecticut Coalition to End Homelessness, said some homeless shelters are housing a disproportionate number of sex offenders because of the difficulties registered sex offenders have in finding permanent housing.

The group agreed to form three subcommittees that will examine sex offender sentencing, management of sex offenders and the needs of the community and victims. The committee is to submit a final report in 2017 to the General Assembly, which passed legislation this year calling for the extensive review.

Besides housing, the state's sex offender registry is expected to be a major focus of the group's work. The website currently provides the public with information on more than 6,000 sex offenders living in the state who are required to register with the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection. But critics contend the site makes it difficult to determine which offenders are high-risk.

The committee is expected to find ways to make the registry more detailed and possibly implement a tiered system to help the public determine whether an offender is potentially a major threat.

Division executive director Stephen Grant, who co-chairs the committee, warned members their task will be labor intensive. ..Source.. by SUSAN HAIGH

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Bill to study Connecticut sex offender registry heads to Malloy

5-16-15 Connecticut:

HARTFORD - A bill calling for a study of Connecticut's sex offender registry is heading to the governor.

The House of Representatives voted unanimously late Thursday in favor of the bill, which would require the Connecticut Sentencing Commission to study various aspects of the registry. The registry provides the public with information on sex offenders living in the state who are required to register with the Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection.

The bill already cleared the Senate and now awaits the governor's signature.

The Sentencing Commission has until 2017 to examine issues such as the risk assessment and management of sex offenders, as well as housing opportunities and obstacles for sex offender registrants. Members also would review the possibility of creating a tiered classification based on the risk of reoffending. ..Source.. by The Bulletin

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Bill to Keep Sex Offenders Away From Schools Could Cause ‘Chaos,’ Critics Say

3-17-15 Connecticut:

A bill intended to keep convicted sex offenders away from kids would throw the Connecticut’s sex offender registry into “chaos,” according to the state’s Department of Correction.

Included in Senate Bill 1087 is a provision that would prohibit registered sex offenders from residing within 1,000 feet of a school or a child day care center, but according to Eric Ellison, deputy director for parole and community services at the Correction Department, that’s not a feasible, or even desirable, goal.

“In reality, future sex offenders would no longer be allowed to live in major urban areas,” he told members of the legislature’s Judiciary Committee during a public hearing Monday.

Should such a provision be put into law, Ellison said, registered sex offenders would be forced to move away from urban areas and, therefore, treatment programs and support services.

“It would certainly displace thousands of offenders that we are successfully managing at this time,” he said. “It would cause a migration into suburban, rural areas.”

State Rep. William Tong, D-Stamford, said that the desire to keep sex offenders away from school zones is “emotionally satisfying,” though the concerns Ellison raised also make sense.

“We don’t want a permanent class or category of people who are, frankly, living under bridges,” he said.

Ellison argued that the efficacy of residency requirements have been disproven, that it “throws the registry into chaos,” making tracking and management of sex offenders a far more difficult task and actually increasing the risk of additional offenses.

“Housing instability has been known to increase general and sexual recidivism,” he said.

There are currently about 5,800 registered sexual offenders in Connecticut, many of whom live in major, urban areas. For example, a search through the registry for offenders living in Hartford returns 746 individuals. The registry lists 340 individuals living in Bridgeport, 482 living in New Haven, and 262 offenders in New Britain, not including adjacent towns.

Sen. Cathy Osten, D-Norwich, testified in favor of the bill, saying that if something can be done to keep residents safe, it is the legislature’s responsibility to do so.

“The majority of Connecticut residents believe that sexual violence is a problem in their community,” she said.

In December, Norwich residents spoke en masse to Osten and other legislators expressing displeasure with the number of sex offenders living within the town’s borders. American Civil Liberties Union staff attorney David McGuire told the Judiciary Committee that residency restrictions are “irrational,” which sparked a vociferous debate with state Rep. Emmett Riley, D-Norwich.

“I find that offensive,” Riley said.

The problem, Ellison said, is that most sex offenses against minors are not committed by “predatory” offenders but people known to the victims.

“The research is clear that victims for the most part know their perpetrator, they know their offenders,” he said. “They’re family, they’re friends, they’re those that are in a position of authority over those children.”

He added: “It’s not these predatory offenses that we’re all concerned about. There’s a perception in the general public that they occur routinely and it’s just not the case.”

Ellison’s contention is borne out by a 2000 U.S. Department of Justice report titled “Sexual Assault of Young Children as Reported to Law Enforcement: Victim, Incident, and Offender Characteristics.”

“The temporal pattern of sexual assault shows that unlike adults, young juveniles are at highest risk of sexual assault in the hours when meals are served and after school,” that report says. “Rarely were the offenders of young juvenile victims strangers. Strangers were the offenders in just 3 percent of sexual assaults against victims under age 6 and 5 percent of the sexual assault victimizations of youth ages 6 through 11.”

Randall Wallace, a psychologist with the Justice Resource Institute, told committee members about 90 percent of sex crimes committed against children in Connecticut are committed by individuals known to the victim. Residency restrictions, therefore, are actually detrimental, making “appropriate housing and employment” more difficult to obtain.

“It’s been shown over and over again to be ineffective,” he said.

As Wallace wrote in testimony submitted to the committee, “Empirical evidence clearly indicates all key aspects of this bill are overly costly, ineffectual, heighten empirically known risk factors for sexual reoffending, undermine the current effective collaborative supervision system, create an environment for additional trauma to sexual abuse survivors, and mislead the general public about sexual offense risk.”

According to a 2012 report on sex offenders and recidivism issued by the Connecticut Office of Policy and Management, “it is important to recognize that individuals who have committed sex offenses do not constitute a single, homogenous population.”

“Together they exhibit a wide range of criminal behaviors that may or may not include violence or contact with other persons,” the report says. “Sex offenders vary by age, ethnicity, and social background. They also vary by their motivations, the nature of their crimes, and by the extensiveness of their non-sex-related criminal histories. As a consequence, the risk, or likelihood, of committing new sex crimes is not consistent across all sex offender types.” ..Source.. by Jordan Fenster

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Foes of sex offender house in Norwich ‘getting nowhere’

2-24-15 Connecticut:

Members of Broad Street Neighborhood Watch said they are "getting nowhere" with city and state officials in their attempt to close or move a state-subsidized apartment house at 152 Broad St., where convicted sex offenders have been placed.

But residents pointed to a decision last fall by then-interim Corrections Commissioner Scott Semple to cease sex offender placements at a similar house in a Manchester neighborhood with a further pledge to assess the location of the home "based on appropriate community concerns."

In a meeting with Norwich officials shortly after that decision, however, Semple said he would not make the same decision for the Norwich house, saying at the time that every city and town would want to end all placements.

Neighborhood watch chairwoman Stacey Moed-Klein said the Manchester decision is what the Norwich group wants for Norwich. Semple has since been nominated by Gov. Dannel P. Malloy to be the permanent corrections commissioner.

"How do we go about getting treated just the way Manchester is?" Moed-Klein asked.

Resident Brian Curtin, who lives next to the house at 152 Broad St. and is also the city treasurer, said he has been trying to close the house using zoning, legal and administrative avenues, but he has "struck out."

"In my opinion, it's a rooming house," Curtin, a former city alderman, said. "I got no help from City Hall, and I'm part of City Hall."

Curtin noted that even during a municipal election year, no members of the City Council attended Monday's meeting.

Only four residents attended Monday's meeting, along with three police officers and state Sen. Cathy Osten.

Curtin complained that top state officials are to blame for allowing a secretive process which has allowed the firm Connections Inc. to lease the house privately and then bring in sex offenders through its contract with the state using state-subsidized rental payments. Curtin said a second Connections-leased house - not housing sex offenders - has opened a block away.

The four state-funded beds are assigned to the house through the REACH - Reentry Assisted Community Housing - program. Although the REACH beds are not reserved for sex offenders, the majority of those placed in the Broad Street house have been sex offenders.

"Seriously?" Curtin said. "They destroyed our neighborhood."

Curtin called the sex offenders placed in the Broad Street house "the worst of the worst," with first-degree sexual assault convictions and others who likely pleaded to lesser charges to protect minor victims of crimes.

Four sex offenders were listed as living at 152 Broad St. The most recent resident is Rodney Whitaker, 44, who was convicted in 1995 of first-degree sexual assault involving sexual intercourse with a child under age 13, according to the registry listing.

Robert Douchette, 43, who was released from prison Nov. 13, had pleaded guilty to first-degree sexual assault for repeatedly raping his former girlfriend, binding her wrists and threatening her with a knife in January of 2010 in New London. She was finally able to escape and ran to a neighbor's house naked and screaming. He was sentenced in December of 2011 to five years and three months in prison and five years of special parole.

The registry also listed Carlos Cruz, 47, convicted in 2008 of risk of injury to a minor, and Christopher DePallo, 23, on probation since July 2014 for third-degree possession of child pornography, as living at 152 Broad St.

Osten told the group she has submitted several bills this legislative session to address concerns expressed in the past by the neighbors and by city officials - including legislation that would clarify and put stricter controls on the location of state-subsidized housing.

Resident Nancy DePietro, a former alderwoman, said she was frustrated because the state sex offender registry doesn't provide enough detailed information about the offenders. She also objected that it's left to residents in the neighborhoods to monitor the situation and study the registry to learn about the new placements.

Police Sgt. Peter Camp, supervisor of the department's community policing program, offered to provide more information to the residents and urged them to report any concerns to the department.

Officers Thomas Lazzaro and Christopher Chastang, recently appointed as the downtown community policing officers, attended the meeting and said they would have a constant presence in the neighborhood, including bicycle patrols in summer.

Lazzaro said there have been no "calls for service" at 152 Broad St. since the house opened under Connections' lease. ..Source.. by Claire Bessette

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

New Haven Housing Authority proposal aims to help ex-offenders

2-18-2015 Connecticut:

NEW HAVEN >> The city’s Housing Authority already offers affordable living accommodations to 14 individuals who are re-entering society after having served time in prison.

But the city’s legislative delegation is hoping to broaden the level of help New Haven offers to those who are seeking a second chance after prison. Lawmakers have proposed Senate Bill 173, a pilot program in which four former prisoners would qualify for the following benefits:

• Tuition to cover the costs of getting a bachelor’s degree from a school in the state university system.

• A cost of living stipend to cover expenses such as food, transportation and clothing.

• Space in one of the Housing Authority’s units for four years.

The legislation has the support of the Housing Authority’s leadership, but authority Executive Director Karen DuBois-Walton said a state appropriation would be required to cover the bulk of the costs associated with the program.

“We’re hoping for a special appropriation,” DuBois-Walton said Tuesday after a meeting of the Housing Authority’s commissioners.

She told the commissioners that individuals selected to participate must have taken a year or more of college courses while in prison and have excelled academically. Additionally, those selected for the pilot program would need to have had some previous tie to the city before having gone to prison, DuBois-Walton said.

“They would be selected by a committee that would representatives of the Department of Correction, higher education officials and representatives of the public housing community,” she said. Those selected for the pilot program would have to maintain a 3.0 grade point average,

The Housing Authority started offering space to those returning from prison about three years ago, DuBois-Walton said.

“The success of individuals returning to the community is very much tied to stable housing,” she said. “And the response of those living in our communities has been, ‘This is something that you should have done a long time ago.’”

The Housing Authority does not accept individuals who are convicted arsonists or sex offenders into its community re-entry program.

Erik Clemons, the chairman of the Housing Authority board, said Gov. Dannel P. Malloy’s speech at Yale University earlier this month about creating a “second chance society” in Connecticut with criminal justice system reforms, indicates there’s support among state political leaders for the kind of opportunity the pilot program would offer.

“Given what Governor Malloy has set out, I think there is some staying power to this,” Clemons said following Tuesday’s meeting. ..Source.. by Luther Turmelle

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Legislature holds hearing on bill to protect seniors from sex offenders

2-11-2015 Connecticut:

A bill being considered by the Legislature would provide more details about sex offenders’ crimes and provide better notice when they move to a town.

The current version of the bill, however, does not put more restrictions on where sex offenders can live and visit.

“It’s important to Norwich as well as Montville,” state Rep. Kevin Ryan, D-Montville said. Ryan co-sponsored the bill with state Sen. Cathy Osten, D-Sprague, and state Rep. Emmett Riley, D-Norwich.

Ryan spoke in favor of the bill at a hearing held Tuesday by the Legislature’s Committee on Aging.

State Sen. Mae Flexer, D-Killingly, is co-chairman of the committee. Osten is a vice chairman and state Rep. Daniel Rovero, D-Killingly, is a member.

“We owe it to our most vulnerable citizens, the seniors, to protect them. We should be responsible for keeping sexual offenders away from areas where our seniors congregate or reside so that they feel safe,” Ryan said in his testimony.

Last year and in 2013, Norwich officials and residents reacted angrily when they learned several paroled sex offenders had been placed in Norwich apartments with what they felt was inadequate notice.

In 2012, in response to the construction in town of the January House, a treatment facility housing sex offenders, Montville passed an ordinance creating “senior safety zones,” which banned sex offenders from entering places where elderly residents live and gather such as the senior center or elderly housing.

The town later rescinded the ordinance after concerns were raised that it would be unconstitutional.

The Legislature considered passing sex offender restrictions similar to Montville’s, but instead, last year, it created the Senior Safety Zone Task Force to study the issue. Osten served as co-chairman of the panel.

In a report issued Jan. 1, the task force issued a report whose recommendations are expected to be the basis of the bill Osten, Riley and Ryan have sponsored.

They are:

n Analyze sex offenders’ crimes to see what groups — such as children, adults or the elderly — might be most at risk and notify appropriate officials when offenders move to a town.

n Have police, parole and probation officers notify senior centers when a sex offender moves to a town.

n Change the state’s sex offender registry to create a tiered system better showing how serious the offenders’ crimes are and the risk they may pose to the public.

n Encourage senior centers and similar places to create a safety plan including training staff members to spot signs of abuse and neglect.

Betsy Ritter, acting commissioner of the state Department on Aging, said she supported the bill and that measures preventing abuse of the elderly are among the highest priorities of Gov. Dannel P. Malloy’s administration.

David McGuire, a staff attorney with the Connecticut chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union who also served on the Senior Safety Zone Task Force, said the task force’s recommendations were “well thought out and they don’t offend constitutional principles.”

He said “no-go zones” for sex offenders would invite a court challenge, however.

Sally Zanger, a staff attorney for the Connecticut Legal Rights Project, testified against the bill, saying it hurts the rights of people on the sex offender registry.

“They aren’t all pedophiles, they aren’t all predators,” Zanger said. “It is important to craft legislation that doesn’t just restrict people.”

“The overwhelming majority of people who choose to commit sexual violence have never been caught or convicted and are not on the registry,” Jillian Gilchrest, director of public policy and communication of the Connecticut Sexual Assault Crisis Services, said in her testimony. “It is vitally important to consider that a senior will more likely be abused by a caregiver, someone who is not on the registry.”

So far, the specific provisions of the bill have not been written, only a general statement of its purpose.

“We have a long way to go,” Osten said.

She said she is certain the bill will be passed by the Aging Committee, and it is likely to be considered by the Judiciary Committee as well.

Once out of committees, the bill would have to be passed by the entire House and Senate and signed by Malloy to become law.

“I hope we come up with a comprehensive plan dealing with several issues regarding sex offenders,” Osten said. ..Source.. by John Barry

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

State officials will examine sex offender housing placements; no promises to close Broad Street Norwich facility

11-12-2014 Connecticut:

State Department of Correction officials today pledged to examine the policies surrounding placement of sex offenders in state-subsidized rental housing in residential neighborhoods, provide more information about placements to municipal officials and to hold quarterly meetings with leaders in the host towns.

Interim Department of Correction Commissioner Scott Semple said at the start of today’s hour-long meeting that he was “taken aback” by the number of registered sex offenders – 110 – living in Norwich, a city with a population of about 40,000. He said the number seems significantly higher than he would expect.

The nonprofit agency Connections, Inc. leases a two-family house at 152 Broad St. for convicts released under the REACH -- – Reentry Assisted Community Housing – program. According to the state Sex Offender Registry, Carlos Cruz and Christopher DePallo live at the Broad Street location.

Neighbors learned of the placements by talking to tenants, and brought their complaints to the Norwich City Council and local legislators.

Semple said he is not inclined to order that no further placements be allowed in the Broad Street house, but said he would examine the state’s approval of the site in the residential neighborhood near a school bus stop. Semple recently did order no additional placements in a similar situation in Manchester, but said he realized after that decision that he would face similar requests in other towns.

State Rep. Emmett Riley, D-Norwich, asked if the commissioner would make the same order in Norwich.

“When I walked out of that meeting,” Semple said of the Manchester decision, “I thought ‘now every community will want the same.’”

But Semple did pledge to re-examine the Department of Correction’s approval process for REACH beds. He said renting entire small apartment houses is a preferred situation to avoid affecting other tenants who live in an apartment house.

“We have to look at the bed placement,” state Sen. Cathy Osten, D-Sprague, said of the upcoming legislative session, “to ensure that we’re not impacting neighborhoods. While renting a full house may work better, but you have to understand the impacts.”

Osten said she also wants to explore increased penalties for convicted sex offenders, the length of time they must remain on the mandatory sex offender registry and a possible tiered registry system that would provide more details about an offender’s situation to the public.

In Manchester, Semple agreed to hold quarterly meetings with the community, and he said department officials would do the same in Norwich. He said a public hearing in Manchester, however, turned contentious, with residents demanding the house be closed down rather than hear details about the strict oversight and frequent supervision of sex offenders residing in the state-subsidized facility.

“It’s just such a difficult situation to manage,” Semple said. “I do believe in this program.” ..Source.. by Claire Bessette

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Correction Commissioner Halts Placement Of Sex Offenders At Manchester Halfway House

See earlier: Residents Concerned Over Sex Offender Group Home in Manchester

10-23-2014 Connecticut:

The state will not place any more convicted sex offenders in a halfway house that residents have said does not belong in their neighborhood, the state correction commissioner wrote in a letter released Thursday.

"Based on appropriate community concerns," Interim Commissioner Scott Semple wrote to state and local officials, "we are assessing whether this is an appropriate location for placing offenders."

"I do not intend to place any additional individuals at the Clinton Street location from this point forward," Semple wrote in the letter, dated Oct. 20 and received at town hall on Thursday.

East Side residents crowded a meeting with Semple earlier this month, saying they were outraged that the safety of them and their children had been compromised and that neither they nor town officials had been told of the transitional housing facility at Clinton and School streets.

Currently, four sex offenders who have been released from prison live at the home, which is run by Hartford-based Chrysalis Center under contract with the correction department.

"It's a step in the right direction," Mayor Jay Moran said of the correction department's actions. "Are we happy it's not shut down? No. Between myself and [state Sen. Steve Cassano, D-Manchester, and state Rep. Joe Diminico D-Manchester] we're going to stay on top of them, hopefully to the point where they shut it down."

At the meeting with Semple, held on Oct. 6 at the Nathan Hale Building, residents and town leaders criticized the correction department for lack of communication.

"In an effort to improve our current practices that govern transitional housing in the community, we are discussing and reviewing requests for proposals, contract language, length of service terms, as well as avenues for effective communication," Semple wrote in the Oct. 20 letter.

He also offered to start quarterly "safety meetings" with local officials to enhance communication "and discuss issues specific to your community members, allowing for collective solutions."

Correction department officials have said that the sex offenders, some of whom were convicted of first-degree sexual assault, are monitored closely. The house is the correction department's only transitional living facility in Manchester, and without such housing, department officials said, the men would be homeless. The program helps them find work and provides other services to "get them back on their feet in the community," agency spokeswoman Karen Martucci has said.

But Manchester board of directors member Mark Tweedie said Thursday that if the correction department had researched the location and held a public hearing before leasing the home, they would have found that many single women and children live in the neighborhood. Stopping placements of offenders, Tweedie said, "is not a big enough step."

"Ultimately, it needs to go," he said. ..Source.. by JESSE LEAVENWORTH

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Schools mull computer background checks on visitors

10-12-2014 Connecticut:

A proposal to keep sex offenders and other criminals out of city schools by doing instant background checks and issuing photo IDs to all visitors could well be jettisoned before it is even tried.

Parents, members of the public and even school board members expressed concern that instead of keeping students safe, the system would become a deterrent to parent involvement for individuals who are undocumented, have pasts they want to put behind them or who worry about personal information being collected and stored by the school.

"What I am hearing as a parent, this is going to be a big problem in our district," Tammy Boyle, president of the District Parent Advisory Council, said. "I can guarantee you if this is anywhere pertaining to what it seems like ... it is going to be a problem."

The idea, according to Police Lt. Paul Grech, who oversees school district security, is to create a visitor access system that is better than simply asking visitors to sign in and wear a green visitor sticker.

"We're committed to further ensuring our kids are safeguarded against sex offenders at school," Grech said. "This system helps us do just that by using 21st century technology."

He told members of the school board's security committee this week that the Fast Pass system -- as it is known -- is a tool other districts are turning to.

Using a portion of a $1.4 million school security grant the district received from the state following the December 2012 Sandy Hook School shooting that killed 20 first graders and six adults, the plan would require all visitors to a city school to show identification or give their name, which would be entered into a computer.

The computer would conduct instant background checks, and a printer would print out a temporary picture ID with the date, time and location.

About $20,000 would be enough to equip three schools with the system. Of that, $4,000 would come from the city.

Grech wants to try the system out first at the Fairchild Wheeler Interdistrict Campus, work out the bugs, and then bring it to the city's other high schools.

The system could be customized to collect as much, or as little information, as the board wants, said James Denton, a supervisor of school security. In the case of evacuation, it would also tell officials who was in the building.

"It is a way to give security guards ... another tool on their belt," Denton said.

Now in place

All 37 school buildings in the district have one or more security guards and share about a dozen school police officers, according to officials.

There are also security cameras in and around schools, but not enough. Board member Dave Hennessey said he wishes instead of a visitor access system, the state grant money could be applied to more pressing needs, like extra guards and security cameras for the 1,200 student Cesar Batalla School.

District schools have locked doors and a buzzer entry system. Since Sandy Hook, security guards began asking to see identification of visitors.

"The last thing we want is parents to feel that the police are going to come get them," said Hernan Illingworth, a school board member.

"We need to do a better job of keeping our children safe," Illingworth said.

At Central High School, which his daughter attends, Illingworth said even with security guards and metal detectors at the front entrance, people seem to be able to wander the hallways unchecked.

Board member Joe Larcheveque, chairman of the security committee, said there must be something to the system if other large urban districts use it with little push-back.

But board Chairwoman Sauda Baraka called the system potentially problematic. She worries that parents will be fearful and just not bother coming to school. She also said nothing can occur without a board policy change.

Board member Kenneth Moales, often at odds with Baraka, agreed that some parents wouldn't take the risk and would simply stay away from school.

The idea also concerns David McGuire, a staff attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union of Connecticut.

He said schools need to protect children but have to also be aware of the real potential for misuse of technologies.

"We'll be very concerned if parents are blocked from seeing their children in a school event or denied access to a parent-teacher conference only because, for example, they or someone with a similar name had a minor legal scrape in the past," McGuire said.

How it works

The Fast-Pass system is used in a number of other school districts according to Sisco Identification Solutions, the company that provides it.

Among them are Detroit, Miami-Dade County and Bronxville, N.Y. The only Connecticut school district now using the system is Killingly, a small 2,800-student district in the northeast corner of the state.

Paul V. Gerardi, the district's school resource officer and emergency management coordinator, said Fast-Pass has been in place for seven years -- long before Sandy Hook -- and the district has had no issues with it.

"It is a nice piece of technology," Gerardi said. "We would do whatever is necessary to protect the safety, security and welfare of the entire school community."

Gerardi is unsure of the initial cost, but said annual maintenance runs about $6,000, now that the warranty has run out. Main office staff in the district's five schools do the screening and issue the passes, which need to be turned in when visitors leave.

Nancy DuBois, an administrative assistant at Killingly Memorial School, said the process takes her about 30 seconds if the visitor has their license in hand.

Only about a dozen times in seven years has the computer screen gone red, indicating a sex offender match.

In each case, the additional information, like a middle initial, or picture ID helped clear the person, she said.

"If I ever got to the next step where I could not (clear the person), I would call for an administrator," DuBois said.

Gerardi said it is safe to say the system has uncovered someone on a sex offender list one or two times in seven years. Even then, entry to the school may not be denied if the visitor has a legitimate reason to be at the school, Gerardi said. It all depends on board policy. ..Source.. by Linda Conner Lambeck

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Residents Concerned Over Sex Offender Group Home in Manchester

Yes, its scary when you live in your imagination, maybe it time for reality? Nothing has ever been reported nor is anything mentioned here, except the imagination of some folks.

10-6-2014 Connecticut:

A home for convicted sex offenders is making neighbors angry in Manchester, and now those upset homeowners plan to voice their concerns at a meeting Monday night.

"Why put them here? Find somewhere else to go. Take them out of our neighborhood please," said neighbor Celestine Hamilton.

The Manchester Town Manager says multiple convicted sex offenders live in a home on Clinton Street, and neighbors can't understand why.

"I want to know why they were put here and no one was told. I have six grandchildren in this house," said Hamilton.

Hamilton says she found out they were living there weeks after the offenders moved in. The town manager says Manchester has a number of group homes and that the Department of Correction, like other agencies, is under no obligation to alert towns when they arrange for the facilities.

Just half a mile away lies Charter Oak Park which is filled with play sets for kids. Also half a mile away is Elisabeth Bennet Academy.

Currently there is no law in Connecticut outlining where convicted sex offenders can reside. Connecticut's ACLU has stated in the past that restricting where offenders live does not deter sex crimes and has had disastrous consequences in other states, forcing them into homelessness or to stop registering in order to avoid arrest.

Still neighbors say they don't want them anywhere near where children play.

"It's so family-oriented around here. It's a little scary knowing something like that is very close," said neighbor Krystal Schlichting.

The meeting with the DOC and neighbors is scheduled to take place Monday night at 6.30 at the East Side Neighborhood Center on Spruce Street. ..Source.. by Jamie Ratliff

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Sex offender house surprises Norwich

9-16-2014 Connecticut:

Four men living in Broad Street home in program backed by state

Norwich - The recent discovery of a two-family home on Broad Street housing serious sex offenders released from prison has rekindled a controversy that first emerged last summer, with residents and city officials complaining that the city is being unfairly targeted by state programs.

The house at 152 Broad St., purchased by West Hartford business Homemax LLC in April, houses four sex offenders with convictions ranging from first-degree to third-degree sexual assault. The house is run by REACH - Reentry Assisted Community Housing - a state subsidized housing program managed by Middetown-based Connection Inc., which also runs the controversial sex offender treatment center at the Corrigan Radgowski Correctional Center in Montville.

Two of the convicts are on parole, while two are on probation, state Sen. Cathy Osten told the City Council Monday as part of a report updating aldermen on state statistics involving housing of sex offenders in Norwich. She said none of them were released from the January Center, the sex offender treatment program, which was the source of a controversy last summer regarding a similar contracted apartment house in Greeneville.

Under the REACH program, the current tenants might live there up to six months, but other tenants in the REACH program could replace them.

"There are four violent sex offenders living within eight feet of my house," Brian Curtin, the Norwich treasurer and former alderman, told the City Council on Monday, "living in a family neighborhood."

Curtin said there is a school bus stop with 15 children in front of his house. He pleaded with the council not to let the state "sugarcoat" the arrangement.

"This is a public disgrace that this is allowed," Curtin said, "for as far as I'm concerned the predator is the state." ..Continued.. by Claire Bessette

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Bill would require state to notify mayors about sex offender placements

Given there is no requirement to live at any specific residence for a specified period of time, a registrant could move at a moments notice, if necessary. So what good is this waste of time bill?

4-6-2014 Connecticut:

If a measure before Connecticut legislators becomes law, when registered sex offenders leave prison and are placed into a Connecticut community, the chief executive officer of the town or city would be notified by the state.

On Wednesday, the General Assembly's Judiciary Committee voted 40-0 in favor of Senate Bill 432, which, if approved, would charge the state Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection with alerting mayors or first selectmen via email when a registered sex offender is provided with local housing. The measure is co-sponsored by state Sen. Cathy Osten, D-Sprague.

If legislators in both chambers approve the bill, it's up to Gov. Dannel P. Malloy to sign it into law, which could take effect July 1. Lawmakers said a controversy that flared up last year in Norwich was the impetus for the provision.

Former Mayor Peter Nystrom led a vocal group of city officials who assailed the state for placing offenders into city apartments upon their release from a treatment facility known as The January Center, on the grounds of Montville's Corrigan-Radgowski Correctional Center.

In early February, the influential lobbying group Connecticut Conference of Municipalities included the proposal in its list of legislative priorities.

“This bill is a direct reflection of the problem we ran into in Norwich. We're doing this for chief elected officials of cities and towns to get more information,” Osten said. “They need to know who is living in their community. When residents come to them with questions, they need to know what's going on.”

Norwich Mayor Deb Hinchey said she supports the legislation if it brings peace of mind to residents.

“It's about being responsive to the citizens, and if they feel it gives them an extra measure of comfort or protection to have the mayor notified, I think that's fine,” Hinchey said. “If the law passes, I would certainly sit down with (Police) Chief (Louis J.) Fusaro and the city manager and figure out the process that we would implement to make sure the information was put out where it needed to be.”

In a statement, spokeswoman Brenda Bergeron said the state department already sends information about the whereabouts of sex offenders to local law enforcement, and it will fully cooperate with any new provisions.

“The Department of Emergency Services and Public Protection is committed to the continuing improvement of all facets of public safety and stands ready to comply with the notification process outlined in the bill. It may be noted that this information is already provided to municipalities through their local police departments or resident state troopers,” she said.

Eastern Connecticut officials aren't the only ones backing S.B. 432. ..Source.. by Adam Benson

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Council drops proposal to ban sex offenders in Wallingford parks

3-7-2014 Connecticut:

Regulations preventing sex offenders from entering parks won’t be pursued by the Town Council, the ordinance committee determined Thursday night.

Town Councilor Craig Fishbein, chairman of the committee, said the opinion of the Law Department was sought after the committee spoke on the issue in past meetings. Fishbein said Corporation Counsel Janis Small issued memos to the committee — made up by the Town Council — on Feb. 26 and Feb. 28 with information on how other municipalities and states handled similar bans. Other municipalities in Connecticut have regulations preventing sex offenders from entering parks, but according to Small, they’ve never been enforced, Fishbein said.

The Feb. 28 memo was interesting, Fishbein said, because it stated that Small spoke to victims’ advocacy groups “who are adverse to municipalities doing things like this.”

Advocacy groups feel such regulations create a false sense of security, Fishbein said. Small was not available to attend the meeting.

Town resident Chrissy Rutigliano first brought up the idea of banning sex offenders from parks. Rutigliano said she contacted the council when she saw there was no ordinance regulating the activity of sex offenders.

“This isn’t reinventing the wheel,” she said. “Other towns have these ordinances.”

Rutigliano suggested that the council consider signs that designate child safety zones where sex offenders aren’t allowed.

That would create a liability, Fishbein said, because the town would be guaranteeing safety, but police can’t watch over the parks all the time. Town Councilor John Sullivan has also said such signs would scare people away from parks.

Just as there are drug-free zones near schools, the town should consider child safety zones, Rutigliano responded.

“It’s very alarming that we can have sex offenders living within 100 feet of a school,” she said.

The state Sex Offender Registry lists 38 sex offenders in Wallingford.

Drug-free zones are state law, Town Council Chairman Vincent Cervoni said. These laws are immediately enforceable, while local ordinance is bound by a “silly warning” system, he said. Local ordinance requires a warning provision, he said, so a sex offender would have to be warned first for violating regulations before an infraction is issued. The infraction would then be referred to Meriden Superior Court.

For more responsive laws, Cervoni suggested Rutigliano “get a movement afoot at the state level.”

“That’s where you’re going to get a law passed,” he said. A state law could dictate that through probation all sex offenders are disallowed from entering a child safety zone, Cervoni said. Probation can currently prevent sex offenders from being in certain public locations.

A state law would be “immediately enforceable without the silliness we’re forced to deal with locally,” Cervoni told Rutigliano.

Asked after the meeting if she would consider pushing for a stricter state law, Rutigliano said, “it’s something I have to consider.”

In other business Thursday, the Town Council decided to table discussion of running bamboo regulations due to the potential passage of stricter regulations at the state level. The committee also voted against raising fines for those who don’t clear their sidewalk of snow or ice within 18 hours. A proposal would have raised the fine from $25 to $50, but a majority of councilors were opposed. Discussion on whether fines should be raised for those who place snow on road that have been cleared was tabled until a future meeting. Current fines are $50. ..Source.. by Andrew Ragali

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

2 Legislators Want To Keep Sex Offenders Away From Children

12-11-2013 Connecticut:

A Republican and a Democrat announced plans last week to push for a law to prohibit sex offenders from living near places where children gather.

The proposal comes from Rep. Themis Klarides, R-Derby, and Sen. Joe Crisco, D-Woodbridge. In a joint press release, the two legislators called for legislation establishing a 1,000-foot radius around schools, daycares, “and other locations where children typically gather.” The bill would prevent any registered sex offenders from residing within these zones.

“The last thing a parent should have to worry about when they send their child to school is whether a depraved sex offender is lurking around the corner from the jungle gym or classroom,” Klarides said in a statement.

The legislation also would ramp up penalties for crimes committed within the zones.

Klarides said she proposed a similar bill in 2007 but was met by “inexcusable opposition” from Democratic lawmakers.

Crisco does not share that opposition. He said the state already has good reason to require sex offenders to register where they live.

“This initiative is a straightforward extension of these safeguards and protections and if enacted, will help separate those on the registry from schools and daycare centers where children congregate,” he said.

The proposal is in some ways similar to the state’s already-existing “drug-free zone” statutes. Another group of state lawmakers have worked unsuccessfully for the past few years to get those policies repealed.

For many lawmakers in urban communities, the problem with the state’s 1,500-foot drug free zones policy is that as it is currently written, the zones often encompass entire urban neighborhoods or even most of a given municipality. As a result, anyone who’s convicted of a drug charge in those cities faces a stiffer penalty than they would in another town.

According to an Office of Legislative Research report from 2007, many states impose varying residency restrictions on convicted sex offenders. The report found the most compelling argument for the laws is that they reduce recidivism by separating known offenders from potential victims.

But OLR also found that the policies can have unintended consequences, like forcing sex offenders to move into rural areas. The relocation can sometimes lead to homelessness, which causes the offenders to go underground and become more difficult for law enforcement to track.

Michael Lawlor, Gov. Dannel P. Malloy’s criminal justice policy adviser, said the state currently imposes residency restrictions on sex offenders on a case-by-case basis. There are 2,284 sex offenders in Connecticut under probationary supervision by a specialized sex offender unit, he said.

“Probation and parole can decide where they can live, where they can work, where they can go, and where they can’t go,” Lawlor said. “That’s all standard for the offenders under supervision. The approach we’ve taken in Connecticut depends on the individual offender. We’ve resisted the ‘one size fits all’ approach.”

Klarides said she believes most people think there already are laws preventing sex offenders from living near schools.

“Keeping sex offenders away from kids is a common sense policy that many people assume is already in place . . . I call on my colleagues to do the right thing for our communities and support this legislation when the 2014 session convenes,” she said.

However, the American Civil Liberties Union and others have questioned the constitutionality of such residency restrictions. Andrew Schneider, executive director of the Connecticut chapter of the ACLU, said Tuesday that his organization will oppose the proposal if it is raised next year.

“Banishing former sex offenders from certain neighborhoods and depriving them from the basic right to freedom of movement would be unconstitutional and counterproductive. It would interfere with their reintegration into society and their rehabilitation, which could harm both them and society,” Schneider said. ..Source.. by Hugh McQuaid

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Officials: Sex offenders to be moved out of Norwich

9-21-2013 Connecticut:

At least two of the three sex offenders placed in apartments in Occum and Greeneville will be moved out of the city because of public scrutiny, state officials confirmed Friday.

Norwich officials still plan to fight to prevent any more offenders from being placed in the city from the January Center, a sex offender treatment center on the grounds of the Corrigan-Radgowski Correctional Center in Montville.

Norwich Mayor Peter Nystrom will ask Montville officials and the Southeastern Connecticut Council of Governments to co-sign a letter with Norwich officials asking for a state review of the January Center program and operations.

About two dozen Norwich and Montville officials, along with local legislators representing the two municipalities, met for 90 minutes Friday to raise numerous complaints about the operation of the January Center. Montville officials claimed the state lied about how the center would operate and violated provisions in a signed agreement between the host town and the state.

State Rep. Kevin Ryan, D-Montville, and state Sen. Cathy Osten, D-Sprague, told officials that the state Department of Correction commissioner has informed them that the two offenders on parole from the DOC would be moved from the apartments in Occum and Greeneville.

Ryan said the offenders were placed in Norwich rather than their towns of origin to protect the victims. Osten reported that the two parolees were from Hartford and Enfield.

A third offender from the January Center was placed in Norwich on probation. Osten said after the meeting she did not know if that person, who is originally from Norwich, also would be moved from the apartments rented by The Connection Inc., which runs the January Center.

Both Norwich apartments are close to public parks with playgrounds.

A DOC representative did not attend Friday's meeting, but DOC spokeswoman Karen Martucci said she has reached out to the mayor to schedule a meeting with DOC staff in hopes of having a "productive conversation."

Both Martucci and Mike Lawlor, the state's undersecretary for criminal justice policy, said offenders leaving the January Center are placed in appropriate locations across the state and that Norwich was never singled out.

The decision to move two of the offenders comes after their names, locations and details of their crimes were the focus of news reports throughout the week.

"The Department of Correction has a responsibility to ensure safety," Martucci said.

Montville Mayor Ronald McDaniel said the town's written agreement with the state explicitly called for offenders to be released to their towns of origin. But Montville officials recalled that The Connection Inc. refused to sign the agreement when the state approved it.

The agreement signed in 2011 specifies that the state or service provider "shall transport each program resident to his home community or other appropriate location."

Earlier this week, a DOC spokeswoman said Norwich fit the definition of "other appropriate location" to protect the victims.

But Montville officials said Friday they understood the provision to mean the offenders would be returned to their towns of origin, not to towns in southeastern Connecticut.

Montville officials also were told "the worst of the worst" offenders — a quote from DOC officials at a public meeting, they said — would not qualify for the January Center. Yet one of the offenders released to Norwich had a record of 14 counts of first-degree sexual assault and two counts of kidnapping.

The January Center

Lawlor said the January Center was built to provide a tightly supervised transitional program for sexual offenders, many of them high-risk, who have served their sentences and are preparing to re-enter society.

The genesis of the center was to avoid former inmates from showing up at homeless shelters or sleeping in parks where there is no supervision and they are hard to track.

"That is absolutely what we don't want," Lawlor said. "The goal is to keep track of these guys so they don't reoffend."

Options for former inmates convicted of sexual offenses are limited, he said, because of the restrictive nature of the offenders' parole or probation.

But studies show there's almost zero recidivism, Lawlor said, among the sexual offenders who are properly supervised and housed in a location where there is access to jobs, a support network and mental health assistance where needed.

"The management of sex offenders on parole is one of the success stories," Lawlor said.

Lawlor also said the state is transparent about the placement of offenders, maintaining a public sexual offender registry and notifying law enforcement when an offender enters town.

Donna Jacobson, former Montville Town Council chairwoman and current council candidate, said she publicly called one DOC official "a bold-faced liar" at a public meeting when the town was fighting the treatment center. "And finding out that they're dumping these people in Norwich proves that I was right," she said Friday.

Nystrom also complained that neither the state DOC nor The Connection Inc. has notified the city officially that offenders were placed in Norwich.

Norwich officials are pursuing whether local zoning regulations can limit the placement of sex offenders in the city. Several years ago, the city worked to reduce the number of unregulated substance abuse "sober houses" by getting state officials funding their rental subsidies to agree to contact the city before approving rents to ensure the apartments met city regulations.

The two apartments used by the January Center are not approved as rooming houses and would need a special permit, with a public hearing, to be approved. Rooming houses are allowed only in multifamily zones in Norwich, and the Taftville-Occum Road house is located in a neighborhood commercial zone. It would need a zoning variance.

Norwich Alderwoman Sofee Noblick, also a local landlord, said The Connection Inc. had approached local landlords asking to rent apartments "for families in trouble and individuals on parole," with no mention that the tenants would be sex offenders released from the January Center.

Norwich Director of Planning Peter Davis said the city has requested specific information from the state on the funding source for the rent, the length of stay and the number of tenants in the apartments. He said the city cannot take enforcement action until receiving specific information.

A representative from The Connection Inc. could not be reached to comment Friday.

Re-entering the community

The offenders were being placed as part of The Connection Inc.'s Re-Entry Assisted Community Housing (REACH) program, which is a scattered-site supportive housing for individuals re-entering the community from the correctional system.

The apartments are subsidized based on the tenant's income, according to The Connection Inc.'s website. Participants have an estimated length of stay of four to six months and receive referrals to mental health and other treatment providers, vocational support, educational opportunities and transportation assistance, according to the website.

The program also had a Community Advisory Board that was to meet quarterly and advise The Connection Inc. Norwich Alderman Mark Bettencourt was a member of the board. Bettencourt said Friday that he has not been notified of any meetings since 2009, when he attended one meeting.

Friday, Osten presented statistics showing that January Center residents have been released to several cities and towns in Connecticut, and some were placed back into DOC custody.

In total, 24 offenders were released on parole and 24 others on probation from the January Center. Of the parolees, nine are living in Hartford, seven in New Haven, four were returned to custody, four are living at private homes and two were discharged and released.

Of the 24 offenders on probation, five were discharged to their towns of origin, according to the statistics Osten obtained. ..Source.. by Claire Bessette

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Montville to hold off on repeal of child safety ordinance

2-15-2013 Connecticut:

The town will not take any immediate action to repeal its ordinance enforcing child safety zones - designated areas into which registered sex offenders may not enter - although the Town Council may still follow up on the controversial issue.

The council voted against a motion to hold a public hearing on the safety zones on Wednesday night, an action that is required before holding a vote on whether to repeal them.

A vote to postpone discussion of the subject indefinitely also failed, however, leaving it open for further review.

Safety zones became a contentious issue among council members last fall, following an ordinance that created senior safety zones by banning sex offenders from areas frequently populated by senior citizens. The Connecticut chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union objected to that ordinance and said it would consider suing Montville should a complainant approach the advocacy group.

The council voted to repeal the senior safety zones last month after councilor Rosetta Jones raised the issue by sponsoring a petition. Jones was concerned about the possibility of a civil rights lawsuit against Montville.

After the repeal of the senior safety zones, council Chairman Candy Buebendorf called for a vote on the repeal of the similar child safety zones to maintain a consistent position on civil liberties. The council voted in favor of repealing the child safety zones, but the vote had no effect because the town did not hold a public hearing on the issue beforehand.

Jones, who does not support the repeal of the child safety zones, said she hopes the issue will die after Wednesday's decision. She characterized the effort to repeal child safety zones as a "knee-jerk reaction" by councilors who did not support the repeal of senior safety ...continued... by KELLY CATALFAMO Day Staff Writer

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...