Sex Offender Ordinance May Incorporate Trails, Open Space

By John Voket

A proposed “ordinance to protect children” that would permit local police to approach and potentially remove registered sex offenders from public gathering places where they might pose a threat, particularly to children, may be amended to include town-owned trails and other areas of open space.

Legislative Council Vice Chair and newly elected Ordinance Committee Chair Mary Ann Jacob said that panel would not take action or plan to make a recommendation at a meeting scheduled for Wednesday, February 9. Prior to the meeting, Ms Jacob said that Deputy Land Use Director Rob Sibley supported expanding the jurisdictional aspect of the current proposal.

Mr Sibley said he can easily provide a map of all town-owned land for the committee’s consideration.

Ms Jacob said that with the town’s growing network of trails and open space acquisitions where residents and families would ostensibly gather, it might be appropriate to incorporate those sites much like the other public parks, schools, and playgrounds currently identified in the proposal.

The ordinance, as proposed, would identify a number of “Child Safety Zones,” specifically any park, school, playground, recreation center, bathing beach, swimming or wading pool, gymnasium, sports field, or sports facility under the town’s operation or otherwise sanctioned for use or leased by the town or any of its departments or agencies. All parking areas and land in the immediate vicinity of those locations would also fall under the ordinance, although public sidewalks and streets adjacent to those areas would not be included within the “safety zones.”

The proposed ordinance goes on to identify specifically individuals who would be subject to enforcement. They include anyone with a record of a “criminal offense against a minor,” a “nonviolent sexual offense,” a “sexually violent offense,” or any felony determined by the court to involve a “sexual purpose” as defined in state law.

The ordinance would also apply to anyone convicted or found not guilty by reason of mental disease in any other state, in federal or any military court, or in any foreign jurisdiction — and which requires the individual to register as a sexual offender. Anyone on that list as of or after October 1, 1998, is subject to the enforcement of the ordinance.

Individuals identified under the proposal who are entering the established “safety zone” to vote, who enter the zone to pick up or drop off their own children, or meeting with a nurse, teacher or regarding an educational issue, are excluded from enforcement. Those provisions, however, require the individual to depart the safety zone immediately once his/her business there has been completed.

Those removed from the state sex offender list would also be exempt from the ordinance.

The proposal would require local police, to the best of their ability, to provide said individuals with a copy of the ordinance and local safety zone locations in writing to the individuals’ last registered address in town. If enacted, local police would be empowered to issue an infraction for any applicable individual who violates the ordinance, whether or not they have received a copy of the notice.

The fine would be $250 — the maximum allowed by statute.

The ordinance would provide for signs to be posted in high traffic locations at or around the zones, warning and further reinforcing the provisions. The zone map would also be posted on the town website.

Anyone lawfully removed from the state sex offender registry would have their information removed form all local records, including a registry that would concurrently be available for public inspection at the local police headquarters. Those local records by ordinance would have to be destroyed and not stored elsewhere within the department — and no future reference to the individuals affected could be publicly disclosed by members of the local police force.

During the February 9 meeting, Ms Jacob said she plans to review this and other ordinances she is expecting to review in the coming weeks, including a proposal to amend the Fairfield Hills Ordinance to prohibit the Fairfield Hills Authority from entering into “negative lease” situations. The committee will also expedite its required review of local purchasing practices.

Ms Jacob also expects in the coming weeks to hear about a proposed conservation easement ordinance tendered by the Conservation Commission. Ultimately, Ms Jacob said she would like to see at least the former three proposals go to public hearing at the same time.