Posted on 01/19/2007 9:44:19 AM PST by NormsRevenge
SYLMAR - Concerned that their community has become a dumping ground for sex offenders, residents Thursday applauded a proposed law that would evenly distribute the state's most despised parolees across Assembly districts.
Stating that 124 registered sex offenders live in Sylmar and just six reside in Beverly Hills, Assemblyman Richard Alarcón, D-San Fernando, said it is unfair that some communities - often in lower-income areas - shoulder more responsibility than others.
"If it was equal up and down the state, I guess Sylmar would have to accept their fair share," he said. "But this is not equal. This is not right."
Under current law, sex offenders must return to the area where they lived before going to prison. But in many cases, parolees do not have permanent housing to return to, so parole agents often find temporary housing in motels that meet residency requirements for them.
In addition to requiring state officials to evenly distribute paroled sex offenders, Alarcón's bill would require landlords to check renters' names against the Megan's Law Web site - a registry of the state's 100,000 sex offenders - to prevent the clustering of sex offenders in one building.
Details of how the paroled offenders would be distributed are not included in the bill.
Alarcón announced the plan in front of a motel where parole agents housed 25 paroled sex offenders this fall until neighbors found out and, loud protests outside the business, demanded their eviction. After the parolees moved out, residents called for laws like Alarcón's proposal.
"They were literally dumped in Sylmar," said Chief Anthony Alba of the San Fernando Police Department. "This is kind of a safeguard for the public against that."
Parole agents said the motel met the legal requirements that restrict paroled sex offenders from living near schools.
Finding housing for all sex-offense parolees is expected to get tighter after the strong support in November for Proposition 83. The law prohibits sex offenders from moving within 2,000 feet of parks and schools, requires GPS tracking of high-risk offenders and increases sentences.
"This is going to be a difficult bill to vote for. ... But it draws attention to the problem," said Bob Stern of the Center for Governmental Studies.
State Sen. George Runner, R-Lancaster, who authored Proposition 83, said he supports a fair distribution of sex offenders across the state, but added that the law requiring parolees to return to their communities means some areas may get more than others.
"I think it's a careful balance that you have to deal with," Runner said.
However critics have said Runner's law creates buffer zones in communities where sex offenders can't live and pushes them into other areas where they can.
"I think the critics are correct that, when you say you can't live here, more will live in another part of the community," Runner said. "But the reason we're doing that is because we don't want them next to a school."
Still, Alarcón's measure could be a hard sell for areas with few sex offenders, such as Santa Clarita, where just four are registered.
"I think any parent ... is always concerned about where people who are chronic sex offenders would be living," said Santa Clarita Mayor Marcia McLean. "I think it's a problem all over."
--
Maybe there is something in the water in those areas, ya never know. ;-)
Hell,, just spread 'em around... or better yet, deport them or send them to other states.
Posted just in case anyone wonders why California is the laughingstock of the universe when it comes to idiots in public office.
How about getting rid of the cancer as opposed to moving it through the body.
Spreading sex offenders around. Hmmm. I think the best way to do it would be with a wood chipper.
Spreading sex offenders around. Hmmm. I think the best way to do it would be with a wood chipper.
-----
Good idea to fight the insanity of the left. Our world is totally upside down.
I hear they make good fertilizer.
Haaaaaa! pretty funny! Brilliant.
I always figured they just dumped sex offenders in San Fransicko where they are welcomed with open arms.
The idiocy of current law is that they return these cretins to the areas from whence they came, often putting them back into the same communities where their victims are attempting to get on with their lives. This makes no sense whatsoever.
Then when the victim requests special conditions and/or geographic reassignment they must wait and wonder while the beaurocracy runs its slow course and the predator walks the streets they know best.
Actually this is just common sense to a Leftist. It's based on one of the main principles of Socialism. Spreading misery equally throughout society.
I read recently where in Iowa almost all of the county sheriffs and prosecutors are calling for the repeal of a similar law there because it causes sex offenders to move to rural areas, is a nightmare to enforce, and reporting has gone way down. Oh, and it doesn't keep kids any safer since something like 90% of sexually abused kids have it happen in their own house or by somebody known.
People live where they can AFFORD to live. Most people can't afford Beverly Hills.
Also - and please note that I am in no way trying to defend sex offenders - I'm curious as to the way 'sex offender' is defined here. To me, at least, there is a huge difference between a "man" who preys on small children and some fool who drank too much beer at the game, doesn't wait in line at the porta-potty, and gets popped for public indecency.
While I may not want to live next to either of them, I think I'd take the latter over the former, if forced to choose.
This is something I've never understood. If released sex offenders are still considered a danger to the community, why are they released?
Good question. What bothers me more is that the article is discussing parolees. They should at least be forced to serve their entire sentence.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.