Loading...
CC - Item 5F - Ordinance No. 975 - Second Reading And Adoption: Repealing Chapter 9.30 Titled Residency Restrictions For Registered Sex Offenders From The Rosemead Municipal Code mil 5 E M F O � 4 O ROSEMEAD CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT , �Ap,s,7ED�Dt TO: THE HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: BILL R. MANIS, CITY MANAGER, 41 DATE: OCTOBER 24, 2017 SUBJECT: ORDINANCE NO. 975 — SECOND READING AND ADOPTION: REPEALING CHAPTER 9.30 TITLED RESIDENCY RESTRICTIONS FOR REGISTERED SEX OFFENDERS FROM THE ROSEMEAD MUNICIPAL CODE SUMMARY On September 12, 2017, the City Council introduced Ordinance No. 975, repealing chapter 9.30, titled residency restrictions for registered sex offenders from the Rosemead Municipal Code. STAFF RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve the second reading and adoption of Ordinance No. 975. FISCAL IMPACT -None STRATEGIC PLAN IMPACT -None PUBLIC NOTICE PROCESS This item has been noticed through the regular agenda notification process. Prepared by: ah 4.1 appr,Ofr Marc Donohue, City Clerk Attachment: Ordinance No. 975 ITEM NUMBER: SP E M CIVIC PRIDE /NCORPORATED 19`9 Attachment Ordinance No. 975 ORDINANCE NO. 975 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF ROSEMEAD REPEALING CHAPTER 9.30 TITLED RESIDENCY RESTRICTIONS FOR REGISTERED SEX OFFENDERS FROM THE ROSEMEAD MUNICIPAL CODE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ROSEMEAD DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. Findings. A. On November 7, 2006 the voters of the State of California approved Proposition 83, the Sexual Predator Punishment and Control Act, with the intent to better protect Californians, and children in particular, from sex offenders. Following the adoption of Proposition 83, the City of Rosemead, like many other cities in the State of California, adopted an ordinance that prohibits any registered sex offender from residing in certain locations within the City. B. Studies conducted after the adoption of Proposition 83 indicate that the Proposition has not improved the protection of persons from registered sex offenders, and case law has called into question the constitutionality of enforcing Proposition 83. In its September 2011 Report entitled "Homelessness Among California's Sex Offenders," the California Sex Offender Management Board concluded that there is no evidence that residency restrictions prevent or deter sex crimes against children. In fact, the Board has found evidence that residency restrictions actually have the unintended effect of increasing the likelihood of re-offense because the restrictions push the offenders into homelessness, and stable housing has been shown to be a key factor in reducing recidivism. Based on these facts, the California Supreme Court in In Re Taylor found Proposition 83 to violate the U.S. Constitution as applied in San Diego County. C. On May 21, 2017 the City received a letter from the Law Office of Janice M. Bellucci threatening legal action against the City challenging the City's residency restrictions for sex offenders based on In re Taylor and a later appellate case titled People v. Lynch which held that residency restrictions can only be lawfully applied to sex offenders while they are on parole. D. Based on these facts, the City Council finds that this ordinance is necessary for the preservation of the public peace, health, and safety. SECTION 2. Repeal of Chapter 9.30. Chapter 9.30 of the Rosemead Municipal Code is hereby repealed. SECTION 3. Environmental Determination. The City Council exercises its independent judgment and finds that this ordinance is exempt from environmental review. The ordinance involves updates and revisions to existing regulations, and it can be seen with certainty that the text amendments will have no significant negative effect on the environment, per CEQA Guidelines, Section 15061(b)(3). wow SECTION 4. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision will not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this ordinance and each and every section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 5. Publication. The City Clerk is directed to cause this ordinance to be published in the manner required by law. SECTION 6. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30)days from its passage by the City Council of the City of Rosemead. PASSED, APPROVED AND ORDAINED this 24`h day of October, 2017. Polly Low, Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST: Rachel Richman, City Attorney Marc Donohue, City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) § CITY OF ROSEMEAD ) I, Marc Donohue, City Clerk of the City Council of the City of Rosemead, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 975, was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Rosemead held on the 12th day of September, 2017 and was adopted by the City Council of the City of Rosemead at a regular meeting held the 24th day of October, 2017, by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: Marc Donohue, City Clerk