Officials: Sex offender law has few problems

With respect to the police mentioning where "residency restrictions" came from, this is absolute proof they have no idea what is from the Adam Walsh Act, and what comes from the minds of state lawmakers. Residency restrictions DO NOT come from the AWA federal law, what has happened is, state lawmakers, when enacting AWA requirements, coupled their own requirements which have nothing to do with AWA, then blame the federal law. This is th kind of misinformation that is spreading across the nation.

2-22-2011 Ohio:

Scott Hildenbrand has a pragmatic attitude about the responsibility law-enforcement agencies have to keep track of registered sex offenders who live in area communities.

"In a perfect world, we wouldn't have any sex offenders," said the chief deputy of the Geauga County Sheriff's Office. "But this isn't a perfect world. We do have sex offenders and we need to have a system in place that accounts for their whereabouts so law-abiding citizens can have peace of mind."

The system referred to by Hildenbrand has been in place since Jan. 1, 2008, when Ohio's Senate Bill 10, originally passed in July 2007, went into effect.

Ohio already had been at the forefront of states in registering sex offenders since the mid-1990s. With the implementation of the legislation, Ohio became the first state to come into substantial compliance with the federal Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006.

"Nothing that's happened since then indicates to me there are any problems with the system," said Lake County Sheriff Daniel A. Dunlap. "Our role (in monitoring registered sex offenders) has grown greatly in recent years. We take advantage of any program that enhances the safety of our citizens."

A key provision of the bill established residency restrictions for registered sex offenders. They are prohibited from establishing a residence within 1,000 feet of a preschool, school or day-care center. The law also establishes three classifications for registered sexual offenders.

Tier III offenders are individuals convicted of the most serious felonies. They must do in-person registrations every 90 days for the rest of their lives at the sheriff's office in their home county, and the sheriff's office must provide written notification by mail to all residents living within one mile of the offender when they move in.

Tier II offenders must register twice annually for 25 years. Tier I offenders must register once per year, on the anniversary of conviction, for 15 years.

As of Friday, the office of Attorney General Mike DeWine reported that there are 17,927 registered sex offenders in Ohio. That total is down slightly from 18,809 in November 2009.

The eSORN list is linked to 88 sheriff's offices and 32 correctional facility records offices of the Ohio Department of Rehabilitation and Corrections.

In the Lake County Sheriff's Office, the registration and monitoring of registered sex offenders is handled by deputies Michael Perry and David Harvey.

"Is the system flawless? No. But our success rate is good," Perry said. "It's a group effort involving law enforcement and the courts. We're very aware of what citizens want."

Perry said that a new wrinkle in the system, in place since late 2010, sends written notifications to registered sex offenders of the next date they must report to the sheriff's department.

"This eliminates the excuse of not knowing the registration deadline," Perry said.

"Once the individual goes three days past the deadline, a warrant is issued for his or her arrest."

Hildenbrand said that in Geauga County, there have been "several instances" of registered sex offenders violating the 1,000-feet rule. Those individual were required to change residence to come into compliance.

Lake County Prosecutor Charles E. Coulson has been critical of the legislation since it hit the books in 2008. Coulson said the law casts too wide of a net.

"The law is arbitrary and indiscriminate," Coulson said. "We want to protect the public, of course, but by covering such a wide area, we are needlessly putting the spotlight on people whose offenses may not rise to the level of seriousness this law intends to address.

"There are individuals who technically fall under this law, needing to register, who are not a danger to society," Coulson added.

"I hate to see kids who make one stupid mistake forced to wear a scarlet letter for the rest of their lives.

"Right now, there is no discretion for judges who know the entire history of a case. We need to give the judges some discretion."

In June 2010, the Ohio Supreme Court by a 5-1 vote threw out sections of the legislation.

The justices ruled that provisions of the law violated the constitution when state officials were forced to change the classifications of individuals convicted of sex offenses prior to implementation of the new rules.

Perry said the ruling necessitated a certain amount of paperwork but did not represent a setback to the registration and monitoring of sex offenders in Lake County. ..Source.. David S. Glasier

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Parents: New Lynn sex offender law not strong enough

2-13-2011 Massachusetts:

LYNN - Ingalls parents were not happy to hear Tuesday that a revamped local sex offender law set to be enforced starting Friday exempts more than 200 local offenders, including 60 classified by the state as “likely to reoffend.”

These Level 3 offenders and 154 Level 2 “moderate” reoffenders are exempt from the law and its exclusion zones because they lived in the city prior to Feb. 11.

“That’s not too good,” said Ingalls parent Eric Pagan, father of a 5-year-old and an 8-year-old.

“I feel they should be as far away as possible; especially people who are likely to reoffend,” he said.

The law, passed last December by the City Council and signed by Mayor Judith Flanagan Kennedy on Jan. 12, bars offenders from living within 1,000 feet of public or private schools or parks including ballfields and playgrounds.

The new ordinance is a redrafted version of an offender residency proposal approved by the council in 2009. City lawyers scrutinized the proposal last September and raised questions about it with Solicitor Michael Barry, noting that the 2009 proposal excluded offenders from living near the city’s more than 800 daycare facilities.

“It appears that the ordinance would result in extremely limited amount of residences within the city where Level 3 sex offenders could lawfully reside,” Barry warned in a Sept. 21 letter to Council President Timothy Phelan.

In his letter Barry also recommended the council exempt current Level 3 offenders living in the city from residency restrictions on the grounds that “by requiring these individuals to vacate their homes and/or rental property, the city of Lynn could be exposed to lawsuits seeking compensation for regulatory takings.”

The redrafted offender law does not include day-care centers as areas covered by a 1,000 foot “child safety zone.”

It also excludes offenders living with siblings, parents or spouses.
City lawyers are preparing a map showing the zones that will be printed by the city Inspectional Services Department and posted in the City Clerk’s office.

Sex offenders are required to register with police when they move into a community or change addresses. City attorney James Lamanna said police will forward the address to city attorneys who will check the address against the map and send warning letters to offenders moving into safety zones.

Ingalls parent Debra Pickering thinks the offender law needs more review. The mother of an 8 year old discovered an offender living at an address “two houses down” from her previous address.

“They should be restricted from anywhere where there are kids,” Pickering said.

The state Sex Offender Registry on Tuesday listed 154 Level 2 and 60 Level 3 offenders living or working in Lynn. The Lynn Police Department Web site lists high risk offenders.

James Hagen, father of five, said offenders currently registered with the city should not be allowed near schools like Ingalls where his 11-year-old is a student. The law, he said, “should be very stringent.” ..Source.. Thor Jourgensen / The Daily Item

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

A dozen Sand Springs sex offenders could be forced to move out

11-23-2010 Oklahoma:

SAND SPRINGS, Okla. - The city of Sand Springs is taking steps to move nearly two dozen sex offenders who live just down the street from a neighborhood.

City officials say parents are worried that so many sex offenders live near their children, so the city created a city park that draws new boundaries.

"I'm concerned for the childrens' safety," said resident Wilma Stanfill.

Stanfill has lived in Country Meadow Estates in Sand Springs for 25 years. She had no idea that 23 registered sex offenders lived so close.

The very person complaining provides testimony that, for 25 years there has not been a single incident, if there were I'm sure she would have mentioned it. Hopefully the former offenders will get a lawyer and take the city to court, using her testimony as evidence.

"I'd like to see it be safe, and I'd like to see the park be there, and maybe those other people can move away," she said.

Assistant Chief of Police Mike Carter says the owner who built the RV park in Tulsa County is building another one on city land. Residents are concerned more offenders will move in.

"When you're looking at close to 40 sex offenders living in one area, that wasn't looked at as the best interest of our citizens," Carter said.

So the city created a park within Country Meadows. Under Oklahoma law, sex offenders cannot live within 2,000 feet of a city or county park. Both RV parks fall within that boundary.

"People will make the case, well now you know where they are. Our citizens didn't sign up for that," Carter said.

Troy Norris owns both of the RV parks. He says he allowed sex offenders to live at his Tulsa County location at the request of Operation Hope Ministries.

Norris says the site in Sand Springs city limits would be different.

"I never intended to allow offenders in this park. I think the city kind of assumed that was going to be the case," he said.

"Then we really don't have a conflict," said Carter, after hearing this. "In that respect, if that's not what his intentions are, then I'm glad we could help him out. Because I think we're going to be protecting the new occupants of his new RV park."

Norris says city officials never contacted him with their concerns.

"It doesn't really bother me from a business stand point, personally it seems that it's a little underhanded," he said.

The Tulsa County Sheriff's Office wasn't aware that Sand Springs had created this park. They are consulting with the DA's office and if the sex offenders have to move, they will be contacted. ..Source.. Sara Goldenberg

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Ordinance would ban sex offenders from most affordable housing

Since logic and evidence are not tools that will keep political folks in office, they will ignore same in favor of "it sounds good" to garner public support. Of course public safety is not enhaced following political sounds good theory but they simply do not care.

5-6-2010 Minnesota:

Three city councilors are proposing an ordinances that would prevent convicted Level III sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of a church, playground or day care. But critics say the measure would push those offenders back toward a life of crime.

If you look closely, there’s a spot on the Aerial Lift Bridge where Level III sex offenders could live.

Otherwise, if an ordinance proposed by three Duluth city councilors passes on Monday, the number of areas sex offenders who are most likely to reoffend can live in Duluth would be severely limited. The ordinance would all but bar them from most low-income housing areas in the city.

That’s according to a map put together by the city of Duluth that shows where the offenders would be banned — which is within 2,000 feet of any church, playground or day care.

Not that the councilors who proposed the ordinance have any problem with that.

“For me, this is about the (Minnesota) Department of Corrections accurately placing these people in the community the way it was meant to be,” said 4th District Councilor Kerry Gauthier, the lead author of the ordinance.

“The idea is to make sure (Level III sex offenders) aren’t around children,” said At Large Councilor Dan Hartman, who is co-sponsoring the ordinance along with 3rd District Councilor Sharla Gardner. “I think this is an opportunity to make people feel safer in the community.”

But some experts disagree that would be the case. Studies suggest that limiting where sex offenders can live doesn’t reduce the rate of repeat offenses — but actually increases it, said William Donnay, the director of risk assessment and community notification for the Minnesota Department of Corrections.

A Department of Corrections study of all 224 sex offenders from 1990 to 2002 who returned to prison for another offense found that in not a single case would the reoffense been prevented by restricting where the offender could live.

Donnay says other studies show that making it harder for an inmate to find housing increases that person’s instability, leads to homelessness and increases chances of reoffending. An ordinance like the one proposed by the Duluth City Council, he said, provides a false sense of security for residents.

“People conclude because of the residency restrictions, there are never any sex offenders in my neighborhood,” he said. “It’s not where they’re sleeping at night, who they’re hanging out with, who they are associating with. It’s where are they spending their time during waking hours? That’s what we need to look at in terms of recidivism.”

Tom Roy, executive director of Arrowhead Regional Corrections, which supervises the offenders, said he also believes the restrictions might increase the likelihood of reoffending.

“We would support efforts that would tend to support sex offenders rather than destabilize their lives,” Roy said.

Gauthier rejects the notion that the ordinance could increase the chances a Level III offender would reoffend, calling that “conjecture” by the Department of Corrections.

He said areas of West Duluth and Duluth Heights might offer offenders affordable housing, and he notes that there would be exemptions for offenders who have already found housing and for offenders to live with family or in a facility owned by the corrections department.

That means Level III offenders could still live in a house in Lincoln Park the corrections department owns and uses as transitional shelter — and also happens to be a half-block away from Gauthier’s home.

Still, offenders would largely be banned from the areas and facilities they typically use for housing now, such as the Seaway Hotel and the CHUM shelter.

“Do you really want Level III predators to be staying at a shelter?” Gauthier said. “I think we need to find them more stability than that.”

Gardner said the ordinance isn’t about reducing recidivism but protecting the community, noting that nine sex offenders currently have been placed in Duluth, though not all of them lived here before their crimes.

“It’s too easy to place people in Duluth because there aren’t restrictions,” she said. “This is about the future; it won’t disturb what’s already in place. I don’t think it will do harm and will ultimately protect our community.” ..Source.. Brandon Stahl, Duluth News Tribune

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

MS- AG: No new sex offender laws

The "arc of protection" is a ruse because no one has yet shown that crimes are committed at all in that protected area even before these "arc of protection" laws. The concept of "arc of protection" laws is a myth, one used by lawmakers to get votes and support but provides no real protection for anyone; a political myth, a tool used for ulterior purposes!

7-22-2009 Mississippi:

DESOTO COUNTY - Efforts to widen the "arc of protection" against sexual predators in DeSoto County have been hamstrung by state law.

In April, DeSoto County officials sought a State Attorney General's opinion as to whether they can expand the arc of protection that buffers schools and daycare centers from convicted sexual predators.

Attorney Jody Neyman, acting in the capacity of county attorney said Monday that the recently received State Attorney General's Opinion states that while the board does have the ability to adopt its own sexual offender laws separate and distinct from the State of Mississippi, they cannot supercede or go beyond state law.

"Under Mississippi's Constitution, a local government cannot pass legislation that exceeds state law," Neyman said.

District 4 Supervisor Allen Latimer, a high school history teacher, wanted to expand that arc of protection for schools and other places where children congregate from 1,500 feet to 2,500 feet.

"I was really disappointed that we didn't have any more authority than we have," Latimer said. "We should be able to enact anything for the safety of our people. Local government is what this country is based upon."

Latimer said under the Constitution, cities and local governments should have the power to expand protection.

"Right now, sex offenders can't live within 1,500 feet of a school - we can't expand that," Latimer said. "If we could have just extended it another 1,000 feet. That's at least three football fields."

Even though the effort failed, Latimer thanked the board for taking the steps necessary to expand protection.

"I appreciate the support in trying to protect the citizens of DeSoto County, but it seems like to me that our hands are tied," Latimer said.

Under state law, convicted sex offenders must register with the DeSoto County Sheriff's Department every 90 days."

There are currently 101 registered sex offenders living in DeSoto County. ..Source.. by ROBERT LEE LONG, Community Editor

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

IA- Law enforcement favors offender bill

Excellent, ignore the public by denying them input. Aren't lawmakers smart? Guess thats one way to eliminate any opposition. Funny, didn't things get to be a mess because lawmakers would not listen? Business as usual..

4-20-2009 Iowa:

A bipartisan plan aimed at better monitoring child sex offenders and scaling back the mandates of a controversial residency law won wide support tonight from law enforcement groups.

But for others — including sex offenders, their loved ones and professionals who work with victims and abusers — a public hearing Monday at the Statehouse was likely their only opportunity to voice concern.

Legislators have said the body could act on the proposal — kept secret until last week — before the end of the week.

“We believe it’s time to quit underestimating the public,” said Beth Barnhill of Iowa’s Coalition Against Sexual Assault, who, like many speakers at the Statehouse, urged lawmakers to simply repeal the state’s controversial 2,000-foot law restricting where sex offenders can live.

Lawmakers’ plan would maintain the 2,000-foot residency restriction for the most serious offenders.

Under the plan, endorsed today by Iowa Attorney General Tom Miller, sex offenders would be prohibited from entering or loitering near places where children frequent. Those places could include schools, child care centers, playgrounds, children’s play areas, swimming pools or “the premises of any place intended primarily for the use of minors.”

The legislation also aims to bring Iowa more in compliance with the federal Adam Walsh Act’s minimum standards for offender registration and notification.

(eAdvocate Post)
More than 25 people asked to speak about the proposal at the public hearing.

Law enforcement groups liked the measure, because under the legislation, more serious sex offenders would have to register in person with authorities as much as four times a year. They also would have to provide more information about themselves, such as Internet identifiers and the vehicles they drive.

Under more stringent registry requirements, some sex offenders would remain on Iowa’s sex offender registry for life.

Said Darrin Starkey, a lower-risk offender who faces life on the reigstry under the proposal: “You have to be careful of not painting everyone with the same brush.”

Most of those who turned up to speak in favor of the legislation, dubbed the Child Protection and Safety Act, were sheriffs and deputies. They, along with probation officers, face the often onerous task of tracking convicted offenders’ whereabouts.

“If we could do something this year that would make it work better, that would be great,” said Clay County Sheriff Randy Krukow.

Krukow said under current law, he and other sheriffs are helpless to do anything
when sex offenders loiter near country fairs and other places where young people are. Right now, the state’s 2,000-foot law only prohibits them from living near child care centers or schools.

Still, some scolded lawmakers for waiting until what could be the last week of the session to seek public feedback. As of tonight, many details about how the legislation would work with individual offenders was still unknown.

“We’re disappointed,” said Marty Ryan, a lobbyist who represents Iowa’s Civil Liberties Union.

“This public hearing is both dishonest and disrespectful … How is the public supposed to comment on legislation for which it has not had details?”

The proposal will remove some offenders from the 2,000-foot restriction, including those convicted of incest. State officials have not said how many offenders would no longer have to comply.

The new measure would require any child sex offender who wants to visit a school, library or child care center to first obtain written permission from administrators. ..News Source.. by LEE ROOD • lrood@dmreg.com

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

CA- State to cut back housing aid for paroled sex offenders, officials say

2-10-2009 California:

The state will stop paying long-term motel and apartment rents for thousands of sex offenders across California under an order Monday from a top corrections official, who acknowledged the move likely will add to the rolls of sex offenders who become homeless to avoid the living restrictions under Jessica's Law.

Last month, MediaNews reported that the state spent nearly $22 million in 2008 to house paroled sex offenders, in some cases paying in excess of $2,000 a month to help them abide by Proposition 83. The ballot measure, which 70 percent of voters backed in 2006, banned sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet of a school or a park where children regularly gather.

Some parolees have received the free housing for more than two years, MediaNews found, and some motels in the Bay Area have become home to as many as 18 sex offender parolees at once. In at least a few cases, the state put them up in places within the banned zones, according to an analysis of parole housing data.

The new order from Scott Kernan, undersecretary for operations with the state Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, applies to all parolees and sets a 60-day limit for transitional housing aid, except in special cases. Nearly 5,000 sex offenders received parole housing aid over the 12 months ending Jan. 31, Kernan said — most for longer than 60 days.

"I do think it led to parolees not having any real motivation to self-sufficiency," Kernan said. "I certainly hope we'll be able to help them transition. "... Parolees will be on their own and find their own housing."

Parole agents have struggled to manage sex offenders under the 2,000-foot ban, which leaves few areas for sex offenders to live, particularly in the Bay Area and other urban regions. The result has been a steep rise in the number of paroled sex offenders who register "transient" — from 88 before the law passed to 1,257 as of Dec. 28.

Critics of the residency limits, including the California Sex Offender Management Board, argue that Jessica's Law does more harm than good by weakening stability for sex offenders, adding to the risk of another sex offense. The board, which includes members from law enforcement, parole, probation and sex offender treatment, issued a report last month in which it encouraged Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger and state lawmakers to rethink the 2,000-foot ban.

"It seems unwise to spend such resources as a consequence of residence restriction policies which have no track record of increasing community safety," the report said.

Kernan said the move has less to do with the state budget crisis than the fact agents have strapped all parolee sex offenders with global positioning system anklets. He said the money would go to assistance — "such things as boots, bus tokens, tools so they can get employed" — for the larger population of more than 125,000 parolees statewide.

"I am concerned that transient status is going to increase and that I'm making it more difficult for agents out there to find residences for them," Kernan said. "But aiding parolees to become self-sufficient is a big part of moving on."

He declined to speculate on whether the change might also increase the number of sex offenders sent back to prison for violating Jessica's Law. ..News Source.. by John Simerman, Contra Costa Times

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

CA- Board Urges End To Sex Offender Restrictions

1-14-2009 California:

More Offenders Left Homeless

SACRAMENTO, Calif. -- California's Sex Offender Management Board is urging the governor and legislators to scrap restrictions on where sex offenders can live.

It says the rules voters approved two years ago are counterproductive and the $25 million a year the state spends housing them is not a good use of taxpayer money.

The panel said the restrictions are leaving more offenders homeless, where they are more likely to commit new crimes. ..News Source.. by My58.com

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...

Sex offenders, housing and spatial restriction zones

10-17-2008:

Abstract:
Sex offenders are currently a major focus of crime control policies at the local, regional, state and federal levels throughout the United States. In part, the perceived threat of offender recidivism has motivated legislators to launch stringent community notification programs and to establish spatial restriction zones (SRZs) around schools, daycare facilities and public parks. The purpose of these restriction zones is to help protect children and minimize their exposure to convicted sex offenders living in the community. In addition to the concern that the implementation of SRZs dramatically reduces viable housing options for registered sex offenders, there are concerns that offenders will be forced to reside in socially disorganized areas that may encourage recidivism. The purpose of this paper is to explore the demographic and socioeconomic differences between areas inside and outside SRZs. Implications of these results for sex offender policies are discussed. ..Source.. by Tony H. Grubesic -and- Alan T. Murray -and- Elizabeth A. Mack

Read More of Article...

Article Summary only...