Local police agencies review policies on where sex offenders can live

Cities and counties are grappling with residency rules involving paroled sex offenders since a California Supreme Court decision last month.

The court struck down a blanket ban that kept registered sex offenders from living near schools or parks.

In response, California prison officials on Tuesday issued a new policy tossing the ban and requiring parole agents to determine individual residency restrictions for each of the 6,000 offenders that are monitored.

The California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation said the ban on living near parks and schools will still apply to offenders classified as a high risk to offend again. Several cities and counties have repealed their restrictions, while others say they will continue to enforce the prohibitions.

In Stanislaus County, authorities said the court decision does not specifically apply to the county, but agencies are reviewing their residency policies for registered sex offenders.

Jill Silva, the county’s chief probation officer, said the department has changed its policy and now considers on a case-by-case basis where sex offenders can live. The department keeps track of convicted sex offenders who are on probation.

“We would assess whether they are an immediate threat to schoolchildren,” Silva said. If the registrant is deemed a threat to children, county probation will take the case back to a Superior Court judge to keep the offender from living near a school.

Under public safety realignment, the county Probation Department is responsible for supervising many sex offenders coming out of state prison. They are put on electronic devices to monitor their whereabouts, Silva said.

“To me, this decision did not have a significant impact on us because it still allows us on a case-by-case basis to take them to court and force them to relocate,” Silva said.

She said no registrants have been returned to court to impose restrictions since the ruling last month.

The restrictions in the 2006 ballot measure, called Jessica’s Law, prohibited registered sex offenders from living within 2,000 feet, or about a half mile, of schools or parks.

Sheriff Adam Christianson said the court decision held that Jessica’s Law was unconstitutional as it was applied in San Diego. “In other words, the court’s decision is not binding upon us,” the sheriff wrote in an email. Still, the Sheriff’s Department is doing a case-by-case review to make sure its guidelines for restricting where registrants live are not unreasonable.

Christianson expects that will keep the department’s policies from being challenged in court. “If we receive notice of a registered sex offender who’s in violation of Jessica’s Law, we’ll review the case to ensure the terms and conditions of probation are being met and that the sex offender is in full compliance,” the sheriff wrote.

He said he does not believe it’s difficult for registrants to find housing in the county jurisdiction.

Last month, the justices said the restrictions imposed by the 2006 ballot measure left too many offenders unable to find permanent homes. That greatly increased the number of transient offenders, making them more difficult to supervise.

There were 1,448 transient sex offender parolees statewide as of Feb. 28, about half of whom are considered child molesters. According to the state, there are 44 transient sex offender parolees in Stanislaus, 59 in San Joaquin, 11 in Merced and one in Tuolumne.

Modesto defense attorney Frank Carson said Jessica’s Law has excluded registrants from housing in much of the city. Modesto has 75 parks and there are dozens of schools within its boundaries.

“It had the effect of making people homeless,” Carson said. “It denied these people due process and then it punished them for years and years.”

Carson said the ruling has broad implications even though it focused on enforcement policies in San Diego County. “It is appropriate to strike these restrictions down. The distance and proximity requirement did not necessarily result in any greater safety. I know of no research that showed it improved safety,” he said.

In an email, Modesto police Chief Galen Carroll said police have no control over where paroled sex registrants live in the city, “as that would be a term of parole or probation.”

The chief said there has been an increase in convicted sex offenders who register as homeless, but not necessarily because they can’t find housing. “Some individuals register as being homeless to avoid the scrutiny of their neighbors, or to avoid police detectives and probation officers going to their residences to conduct checks,” Carroll wrote.

Those registered as homeless are required to check in with authorities every 30 days, the chief said.

Janice Bellucci, a lawyer for sex offenders, said the new guidelines are being unevenly applied throughout the state, and she’s concerned too many of sex offenders are labeled high risk and remain subject to the prohibition.

At least two state lawmakers said they plan to introduce legislation imposing new restrictions.

This story was originally published April 15, 2015 at 9:32 PM with the headline "Local police agencies review policies on where sex offenders can live."