Agenda - Council Work Session - 08/23/2016

Home

COUNCIL MEMO FORM 9.1 Meeting Date May 16,2016 Agenda Section Ordinance and Resolutions Item Description ORD/Amending Chpt 46;Offenses&Miscellaneous Provisions, Article III Offenses Involving Public Safety 211d Reading) Submitted By Carolyn Braun,Planning Director BACKGROUND INFORMATION In response to U.S. District Court Judge Donovan Frank's ruling that Minnesota's program for confining predatory offenders is equivalent to permanent confinement without a clear path to release and ruling the program to be unconstitutional,many communities are enacting local ordinances to restrict where Level III predatory offenders can live after they are released. One news article indicated as many as 39 communities have enacted such ordinances (although no list was included in that article). In research to date,the following communities are either studying adoption of a residency restrictions ordinance, have enacted a moratorium on to study the issue, or have adopted a residency restriction ordinance: Monticello, Otsego,Albertville, Wyoming, Birchwood Village,Duluth(a limited ordinance), Cloquet, Brooklyn Center, Fergus Falls, White Bear Township, Taylors Falls, LeCenter, Columbia Heights,Willmar,Elysian, Cleveland, Mahtomedi, Minnesota Lake, and Mankato. This legislative session, a bill has been proposed that would allow cities and counties to enact tougher laws to keep Level III sex offenders away from schools,parks another other places frequented by children. The legislation is intended to give municipalities stronger legal standing to defend locally adopted residency restrictions ordinance. Currently there is a debate over whether municipalities truly have this authority, absent specific legislation authorizing them to create such ordinances. This debate, however,has not stopped municipalities from adopting residency restriction ordinances. Advocates of residency restrictions believe that these regulations diminish the likelihood that sex offenders will come in contact with children whom they might victimize. In researching this ordinance,however, there is no information that shows that residency restrictions actually reduce re-offenses. Some worry that restricting residency will create a shortage of housing options for Level III offenders and others indicate that it will be harder to monitor the Level III offenders if they are driven to rural areas because they are restricted from living in more populated areas. People in rural areas, however, also worry that the Level III offenders will all be placed in their communities and have adopted ordinances to prevent that from occurring. PROPOSED ORDINANCE AMENDMENT Based on review of numerous similar ordinances,the proposed ordinance titled"Predatory Offender Residency Restriction Ordinance"includes the following sections (in summary form). The exact language is shown in the accompanying draft ordinance. The draft ordinance has been reviewed by the City Attorney and the Police Chief. Section 46-62. (a) Findings and Purpose. This section states the purpose for adopting this ordinance and makes findings in support of adoption. This language is very similar to the language found in many of the ordinances that were reviewed. (b)Definitions. This section includes definitions that are specific to this ordinance. COUNCIL MEMO FORM 9.6 104 of 170(c)Prohibitions; Measurements of Distance; Penalties; Exceptions. This section includes a number of provisions: 1. Prohibited location of residence. Any designated predatory offender(a Level III offender)is prohibited from establishing a permanent or temporary residence within 2,000 feet of any school, day care, licensed child care facility,place of assembly, facility for children, or a park. The intent of this section is to eliminate temporary or permanent housing for Level III predatory offenders in areas where children will be present. The ordinances reviewed limited residency for distances of 500 feet to 2500 feet. Most of the ordinances reviewed use 2000 feet as the distance for prohibiting such residences. A map of the area regulated by the 2000' distance is attached. 2. Prohibition present in safety zone. This section makes it unlawful for a Level III predatory offender to be present within 100 feet of any facility for children or a day care facility. 3. Prohibited activity. This section makes it unlawful for a Level III predatory offender to participate in a holiday event involving children, such as distributing candy or other items or 86 of 152