On Feb. 12, residents used the period for "public comment" on nonagendized items to voice their complaints publicly...and Councilwoman Lowenthal pledged to agendize the issue (which she indicated she'd already been discussing with the City Attorney's office and others) for the next Council meeting (Feb. 19)...and did so.
The scheduled Council item received L.A. media attention...including a Feb. 19 KFI radio broadcast by afternoon talk show hosts "John & Ken" from outside the building.
Prior to the March 11 Council vote, Councilwoman Suja Lowenthal delivered a written statement...which LBReport.com has transcribed and provides below:
Councilwoman Suja Lowenthal: [begins with extemporaneous introductory remarks]...I do want to thank the residents and the City Attorney's office for helping bring this item forward. As you can see, both have been very, very diligent in their work and I trust that they will work with the City Prosecutor's office to provide some clarification between now and the final reading.
[From written text] We're charting a new direction among local governing bodies through our involvement in this issue of residency requirements. By its actions today and through our meetings with the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, Long Beach is taking a stand on behalf of its communities.
I want to reiterate for those of you that may have been misunderstood my comments at the February 19 meeting, sex offenders have been deemed criminals by the courts, but in this instance I believe they are pawns in an emerging cottage industry involving the Dept. of Corrections and greedy landlords looking to make a buck off the system. [audience applause]
In reaching this conclusion, I'm not denying the challenges of locating registered sex offenders in our society. If it were up to some residents, no sex offender would be allowed into any community.
But I have to question the logic and spirit of clustering offenders in one building as a means of maximizing one's caseload, that somehow we're all better off because the parole officer can check on everyone at once.
This shouldn't be a matter of convenience for a state department or a landlord. Everyone must be a conscientious neighbor, recognizing that these practices upset the balance of a neighborhood.
I also have to wonder whether placing this city's sex offenders in one building is really beneficial to the rehabilitation of the sex offender.
All this being said, it's my feeling that the Department is violating state law and its own procedures as it relates to placement of registered sex offenders near parks and schools.
To those who've expressed concerns that our legal approach will result in more homeless sex offenders, your logic is truly flawed. We are not creating more homeless registrants. This practice of clustering has put this population at risk.
We are protecting the rights of our law abiding residents and their children and ensuring that every community has an opportunity to assimilate registered sex offenders without being overwhelmed by convenience or greed.
This brings up another point. We've all seen the recent news coverage that multiple sex offenders were removed from one location in Altadena and Carson after residents and local elected officials protested. I think we, as members of the public, naturally assume that they've been placed in separate locations, safely away from parks and schools, maybe even outside of that community, I think one would hope.
But the fact is that our experiences in Long Beach attest to this fact: that the registrants are simply being located around the corner or a few streets away, in many cases without regard to state law restricting residency near schools and parks. In many cases they're grouped again in another location.
The fact that we have taken some time to come up with this policy, I believe, makes our policy defensible. Any community can within 24 hours require that people be moved, but that's not defensible and so I'm very, very proud of the process we've gone through.
The City of Long Beach is not interested in playing shell games. We've done our homework, researched other city ordinances and state law, met with the Department of Corrections on two occasions and are now prepared to pass an ordinance that sets a precedent among cities in California.
We stand ready to assist the Department of Corrections in addressing this issue, but cooperation is a two-way street, and Long Beach will not be placated by simple shifts in sex offender registrants from one property to another. We want real reform and permanent results, and Long Beach is just the tip of the iceberg when it comes to cities and counties realizing how their communities are being impacted by policies, practices and procedures that are followed -- or in this case, not followed -- at the state level.
So thank you, Miss [Cristyl] Meyers [Deputy City Attorney] for all of your work, for working with my staff, working with the community. I'm completely confident that we have a defensible approach as opposed to acting too quickly. I believe this is the way to go and I thank you for your diligence on this...
Earlier in the meeting during public testimony, a member of the public, Helen Bush of LB, referenced AB 370 (Adams) and SB 913 (Hollingsworth), two pieces of legislation on related issues now stalled in the state legislature (previously reported by LBReport.com.)
"I'd like to know...if the City Council, what is [your] position? Do you support AB 370 or SB 913? [silence] Or do you know what it is? [more silence] Mayor Foster replied, "I'm not sure, but go ahead and make your point please" and Ms. Bush continued:
"The point that I'm making is that we can write all the ordinances that we want, until we get those amendments through...we should be supporting it...[turns to Councilwoman Suja Lowenthal]...Maybe your father in law [State Sen. Alan Lowenthal] could help, because he's in that position...It seems that's the root of the problem [referring to state legislature]..."
In the discussion that followed, Councilwoman Gerrie Schipske pursued the point:
"I would ask...that our Council State Legislative Committee [chair, Councilman Patrick O'Donnell] place on its list of
state legislative priorities those two pieces of legislation because without them not only is our city, but many other cities, are having great difficulty in California doing what they need to make the regulations necessary so I would hope that that is on our State Legislative Agenda [committee chair O'Donnell offmike: "The current language should cover that approach."] well if they're not, if they could be, I think that's tantamout and we've got to put pressure on our state legislators to do something about this and get those bills moved."
REDLINED VERSION
CHAPTER 9.66
SEX OFFENDER RESIDENCY AND
LOITERING RESTRICTIONS
9 .66.010 Definitions .
For purposes of this Chapter only, and unless the context clearly requires a
different meaning, the words, terms and phrases set forth in this Section are defined as
follows:
A. "Apartment House" shall mean a residential land use for a multifamily
dwelling rented or leased for permanent residency .
B . "Child" or "Children" shall mean any person(s) under the age of
eighteen (18) years of age.
C. "Child Care Center" shall mean any State of California, Department
of Social Services licensed facility that provides non-medical care to children in
need of personal services, supervision, or assistance essential for sustaining the
activities of daily living or for the protection of the individual on less than a twenty
four (24) hour basis, including but not limited to a family day care home, infant
center, preschool, extended-day care facility, or school-age child care center .
D. "Child Safety Zone" shall include those areas located within a three
hundred (300) foot radius of a child care center, public or private school, park,
public library, swimming or wading pool, commercial establishment that provides,
any area in or adjacent to such establishment as a children's playground, school
bus stop, or any location that facilitates on the property classes or group activities
for children .
E . "Duplex" shall mean a residential land use for a building containing
two dwelling units .
F. "Hotel/Motel" shall mean a commercial land use for the rental of six
(6) or more quest rooms or suites for primarily temporary residency for a period
of not more than thirty (30) consecutive days .
G. "Inn" shall mean a commercial land use for the rental of five (5) or
fewer quest rooms or suites primarily for temporary residency for a period of not
more than thirty (30) consecutive days .
H . "Loiterinq" shall mean to delay, linger, remain or wander without
any apparent purpose .
I . "Multi-family Dwelling" shall mean a buildinq desiqned for
permanent residency for three (3) or more families livinq independently of each
other. This includes apartment houses and condominiums, but does not include
hotels, motels, or inns .
J . "Owner's Authorized Aqent" shall mean any person authorized to
act for the owner of a property by virtue of a notarized statement of authorization,
a proof of contract to purchase, or a lease to the property .
K. "Park" shall include any areas publicly owned, leased, controlled,
maintained or manaqed by a city or county which are open to public use for
recreational, cultural and community service activities, and include, but are not
limited to, beaches and seashores, playgrounds, playfields, athletic courts, and
doq park recreation areas .
L . "Permanent Residency" shall mean any occupant who, as of a
given date, has either at his or her own expense or at the expense of another,
obtained the right of occupancy in a residential dwelling for which rent was
charged and paid in advance for a minimum of one (1) month .
M . "Property Owner" shall mean the owner of record of any parcel of
real property as desiqnated on the county assessor's tax roll, or a holder of a
subsequently recorded deed to the property .
N . "Residential Exclusion Zone" shall include those areas located
within a two thousand (2,000) foot radius of a child care center, public or private
school, or park in which a sex offender is prohibited from temporarily or
permanently residing .
O . "Responsible Party" shall mean the property owner and/or the
owner's authorized agent .
P . "Sex Offender means any person for whom registration is required
pursuant to Section 290 of the California Penal Code, regardless of whether that
person is on parole or probation .
Q . "Single Family Dwelling" means one (1) permanent residential
dwelling located on a single lot with yard areas that separate that dwelling from
other dwellings .
R . "Temporary Residency" means any occupant who, for a period of
less than one (1) month, either at his or her own expense or at the expense of
another, obtains the right of occupancy for which rent is charged .
9 .66.020
Violation of Child Safety Zone .
No Sex Offender shall Loiter in a Child Safety Zone .
9 .66.030 Violation of Residential Exclusion Zone .
No Sex Offender shall permanently or temporarily reside in a Residential
Exclusion Zone .
9 .66.040 Sex Offender Violation-Single Family Dwellings .
No Sex Offender shall obtain occupancy in a Single Family Dwellinq
already occupied by a Sex Offender, unless those persons are legally related by
blood, marriage or adoption .
9 .66.050 Sex Offender Violation -Multi-Family Dwellings .
No Sex Offender shall obtain occupancy in a Multi-family Dwelling already
occupied by a Sex Offender, unless those persons are legally related by blood,
marriage or adoption .
9 .66.060 Sex Offender Violation - Duplex Dwellings .
No Sex Offender shall obtain occupancy in a Duplex Dwelling already
occupied by a Sex Offender, unless those persons are legally related by blood,
marriage or adoption .
9.66.070 Sex Offender Violation -Hotel/Motel/Inn Rooms .
No Sex Offender shall obtain occupancy in a guest room of a Hotel, Motel,
or Inn already occupied by a Sex Offender, unless those persons are legally_
related by blood, marriage or adoption .
9 .66.080 Responsible Party Violation-Single Family Dwellings .
No Responsible Party shall knowingly rent a Single Family Dwelling to
more than one (1) Sex Offender during any given period of tenancy, unless those
persons are legally related by blood, marriage or adoption .
9 .66.090 Responsible Party Violation-Single Family Dwellings .
No Responsible Party shall knowingly rent a Single Family Dwelling to a
Sex Offender for a period of Temporary Residency .
9.66.100 Responsible Party Violation-Multi-Family Dwellings .
No Responsible Party shall knowingly rent any unit within a Multi-family
Dwelling to more than one (1) Sex Offender during any given period of tenancy,
unless those persons are legally related by blood, marriage or adoption .
9.66 .110 Responsible Party Violation-Multi-Family Dwellings .
No Responsible Party shall knowingly rent more than one unit within a
Multi-family Dwelling to a Sex Offender during any given period of tenancy .
9 .66.120 Responsible Party Violation-Multi-Family Dwellings .
No Responsible Party shall knowingly rent any Multi-family Dwelling to a
Sex Offender for a period of Temporary Residency .
9.66.130 Responsible Party Violation-Duplex Dwellings.
No Responsible Party shall knowingly rent any unit within a Duplex
Dwelling to more than one (1) Sex Offender during any given period of tenancy,
unless those persons are legally related by blood, marriage or adoption .
9.66.140 Responsible Party Violation-Duplex Dwellings.
No Responsible Party shall knowingly rent more than one (1) unit within a
Duplex Dwelling to a Sex Offender during any given period of tenancy .
9 .66.150 Responsible Party Violation - Duplex Dwellings .
No Responsible Party shall knowingly rent any Duplex Dwelling to a Sex
Offender for a period of Temporary Residency .
9.66.160 Responsible Party Violation-Hotel/Motel/Inn .
No Responsible Party shall knowingly rent a guest room in a Hotel, Motel,
or Inn to more than one (1) Sex Offender, unless those persons are legally related
by blood, marriage or adoption .
9.66 .170 Penalties .
Every person who fails to obey and comply with any provisions of Chapter
9 .66 or who violates any such provision or who causes such failure,
disobedience or violation, shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and shall be
subiect to the penalties as set forth in Section 1 .32 .010.
9.66.180 Criminal Penalties Do Not Satisfy Administrative or Civil Actions .
Neither the arrest, prosecution, conviction, imprisonment, or payment of
any fine for the violation of Chapter 9 .66 shall satisfy or diminish the authority of
the City to institute administrative or civil actions seeking enforcement of any or
all of the provisions of this Chapter.
9 .66.190 Civil Actions .
Any person required to comply with any or all of the provisions of Chapter
9 .66 shall be liable in an action filed by the City in any court of competent
jurisdiction in order to enforce such provision and to pay such reasonable costs of
the suit as the court may deem appropriate, including any and all attorney fees
incurred by the City in the prosecution of said enforcement action .
Return To Front Page
Contact us: mail@LBReport.com
