HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC Ord 1665 2017-03-27ORDINANCE NO. 1665
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL
BEACH REPEALING CHAPTER 7.65 OF TITLE 7 OF THE CODE OF
THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH REGARDING SEX OFFENDER
RESIDENCY RESTRICTIONS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SEAL BEACH DOES ORDAIN AS
' FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Findings and Intent.
A. On November 7, 2006, the voters of the State of California overwhelmingly
approved Proposition 83, the "Sexual Predator Punishment and Control Act' commonly
known as "Jessica's Law," with the intent of better protecting Californians, and, in
particular, the State's children from sex offenders.
B. Proposition 83 also includes a provision which expressly authorizes further
local regulation of sex offender residency. Penal Code Section 3003.5(c) states that
municipal jurisdictions are not prohibited from enacting local ordinances that further
restrict the residency of any person for whom registration is required pursuant to
Section 290.
C. Following the adoption of Jessica's Law, the City of Seal Beach, like many
other cities in California, adopted new residency and location restrictions applicable to
registered sex offenders. Some of those restrictions were repealed in response to court
rulings in other cities in 2014. Chapter 7.65 of the Municipal Code currently prohibits
any registered sex offender from establishing a residence within 2000 feet of a public or
private school, park, child care center or public library, or within 2000 feet of any other
residence already occupied by another registered sex offender. .
' D. Studies and reports released after the passage of Jessica's Law suggest
that blanket enforcement of residency restrictions has not improved public safety. The
California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation (CDCR) reports the evidence
suggests that residency restrictions have the unintended consequences of increasing
homelessness among registered sex offenders, thereby actually threatening public
safety. Convicted sex offenders who are homeless are reportedly not only more difficult
to supervise than those who have established residences; they are also more likely to
re- offend. Additionally, two court decisions, one from the California Supreme Court (In
re Taylor (2015) 60 CalAth 1019) and one from the Court of Appeal (People v. Lynch
(2016) 2 Cal.App.5th 524) have called into question the constitutionality of certain
residency restrictions similar to Chapter 7.65 but enforced by the State. This creates
significant doubt about the remaining authority of cities under Penal Code section
3003.5.
E. The Sex Offender Supervision and GPS Monitoring Task Force is a multi -
agency Task Force created to assist CDCR to develop a comprehensive approach to
sex offender supervision. In October 2010, the Task Force released a report based on a
review of reports generated by the Office of Inspector General, the California Sex
Offender Management Board, best practices throughout the nation, effective use of
GPS, as well as relevant CDCR sex offender supervision policies and practices. The
' Task Force found that blanket residence restrictions have "not improved public safety
and have compromised the effective monitoring and supervision of sex offender
parolees." Specifically, the Task Force stated:
'There is no evidence that residence restrictions for sex offenders make
the community any safer. Since the passage of Proposition 83, residence
restrictions have expanded significantly with an unintended consequence.
Transient sex offender parolees have increased by approximately 24
times. Presently, more than 1/3 of all sex offenders on parole have
become transient. Before the passage of Proposition 83, residence
restrictions were already in place. Penal Code Section 3003(g) prohibited
high risk sex offenders with child victims from residing within 1.2 mile from
schools. Additionally, Parole Agents used discretion to prevent parolees
from residing in any housing location that would increase their risk of re-
offense. Repealing the blanket residence restrictions imposed by
Proposition 83 will provide adequate housing options for sex offenders
while continuing to provide public safety."
F. After careful consideration of the growing evidence from experts in
the field, including those experts within California state government, suggesting
that policies that further restrict sex offender residency could threaten public
safety in our community, as well as the recent court decisions that bring into
question the City's authority to enforce blanket residency restrictions, the City
Council has decided to repeal its Sex Offender Residency Restrictions and rely
on enforcement of other State laws to protect the public.
Section 2. Chapter 7.65 of the Code of the City of Seal Beach is hereby
repealed.
Section 3. The Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after adoption. The
City Clerk is directed to cause this ordinance to be published and /or posted as required
by law.
[ORDINANCE CONTINUES]
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 27,0 day of March, 2017.
Sandra Massa -Lavitt
Mayor
A
Robin L. Roberts, M
City Clerk
APP
City
STATE OF CALIFORNIA }
COUNTY OF ORANGE } ss
CITY OF SEAL BEACH }
I, Robin Roberts, City Clerk of the City of Seal Beach, do hereby certify that the
foregoing Ordinance was introduced for first reading at a regular meeting held on March
13, 2017 and was passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council at a regular
meeting held on 27th day of March, 2017 by the following vote:
' AYES: Council Members: Massa - Lavitt, Varipapa, Deaton, Moore, Sustarsic
NOES: Council Members: None
ABSENT: Council Members: None
ABSTAIN: Council Members: None
and do hereby further certify that Ordinance Number 1665 has been published pursuant
to the Seal Beach City Charter and Resolution Number 2836.
NINS.-T41,11% i . i