AD HOC COMMITTEE

 

SEXUAL PREDATORS

 

NOVEMBER 1, 2006

 

The meeting was called to order by Mr. Pleasant at 6:00 p.m.

 

MEMBERS PRESENT:  Ed Pleasant, David Burke, Leah Sellers

 

OTHERS PRESENT:  Asst. Police Chief Nicol, Tim Aslaner

 

AGENDA:

 

Assistant Police Chief Nicol was invited to the meeting to share concerns of the Police Department or share information that would give direction to the Committee.   He stated there hadn’t been any problems in the last three years.  The problems occurred in a couple of the parks, but the individuals were not necessarily sexual offenders.  From the Police Department’s view, legislation would probably help to restrict a person from living right next to a park where he’d have quick, easy access there or in the privacy of his home to lure someone to a safe area where he wouldn’t be readily noticed.  You won’t prevent them from being in a park unless you want to go so far as to restrict them from being in the park.  Another area of concern would be the library. There was one sexual offender who frequented the library in order to use the computer internet service, because he did not have the service at home.   He did approach a minor in the library.  Living restrictions near a library would not prevent accidents from happening, prohibiting from the premises would.  Mr. Pleasant asked about daycare centers.   

 

Mr. Burke asked if these people serve their time then blend back into society and never commit any offenses again?  Are there day-to-day crimes by people who never get charged due to lack of evidence?  Response was most of these people have to report to a probation officer or parole.  They are tracked quite often.  Some of the more serious sexual predators are locked up for quite some time.  When they get out, they usually relocate.  A lot of the sex offenders that Mr. Nicol is familiar with are ones that had dealt with some kind of family relationship or befriends someone like that.  That takes a little time to do.  It’s not something that the police are aware of.  If one of these individuals is meeting with another family member or friends, it would not be out of the ordinary for the Police to be notified of that.

 

Mr. Pleasant asked if the network is good enough that if somebody is charged in Ohio at another location and then comes here, are we counting on them to report to us.  Mr. Nicol said when they get out on probation, they are required to report. 

 

If they don’t report as required, it’s handled through the County Sheriff’s office.  Same way with individuals from out of state.  If they don’t report, there is a warrant issued for them.  It would be a probation violation.

 

The library is an attraction for these people.  There have been some incidents at Legion Park at the pool.  When thinking about places to restrict or prohibit sexual predators, think about places where there are unsupervised juveniles, meaning parents are not with the children at that place.    Mr. Pleasant asked if the YMCA could be classified as one of these places.  Mr. Nicol stated yes, but one of the detractors would be all the adults intermingled with the juveniles.

 

Sex offender is considered a less serious crime than a sexual predator, although sex offenders are generally moving up.  You can’t be a sexual predator without being a sexual offender.  There is a lifetime restriction requirement for sexual predators. Neighbors must be notified if a predator moves in. 

 

With this legislation, we need to ask are we targeting people that have committed a crime in the past or are we targeting people that are likely to commit again.  Do we want to make our community not friendly to people who have committed crimes.

 

What happens if this legislation becomes law, you have an individual who lives within 1,000’ of a certain destination and is on the mend.  Is it mean to tell a person they have to leave?  Mr. Nicol pointed out there is no “on the mend” for these people.  Mr. Aslaner agreed.  The court makes a determination and classifies a person as a sexual predator, meaning that you are someone, based on statutory criteria, likely to repeat.

 

Mr. Nicol feels using the term sexual predator in the legislation is preferred over sexual offenders.

 

If community enacts a law that states no sexual predators in certain areas, you have to question what was that law enacted for.  Was it to make a statement that we don’t want to take that chance?  Do you want such a law to say they have to have clear evidence that they knew that law existed.  When an individual registers as a sex predator, they know where they’re allowed to live or where they’re not allowed to live.  It’s given to them when they register.  If someone moves in without registering, they will definitely be arrested because they’re not complying with the law. 

 

On the flip side, an individual is trying to go by the law and he gets a job in construction or landscaping and they subcontract in our parks, you have to

consider whether you want to take away their liberties.  The law should prohibit loitering with no legitimate purpose to be in a certain area.  If individual is doing his job, he needs to do it and get out, such as trash man.  While in a park for instance, he should be dumping the trash and nothing else. 

 

Sexually-oriented offenders.  A law exists prohibiting living 1,000’ from schools and the requirement to register with the Sheriff’s Office.  Committee questioned expanding the number of years to have to be registered.  Currently law is 10 years.  Should those laws be repeated in the City’s code.  Mr. Aslaner stated you need only reference the State ORC; you don’t need to repeat it in the City code.    Mr. Aslaner questioned the possibility of running into Home Rule issues. 

 

Suggestions for legislation.  Cannot live within 1,000’ from a library, parks & swimming pool, commercial daycare and YMCA.  School bus stops would be hard to keep track of because they change frequently. 

 

Sexual predator.  1,000’ living restriction and restrictions to parks, swimming pool and library.  Discussed using term adjacent as opposed to setting an amount of feet from a certain area.

 

There are so many variables for this legislation.  Committee agrees imperical data is necessary before a decision is made to move forward with legislation i.e.  data on where sexual offenses occur, evaluate how far from home or work sexual offenders recommit crimes, look at number of sexual offenses that offenders commit as opposed to predators.  Find some statistics or analysis based on statistics or behavior science.  Mr. Nicol will do further research.  Ms. Sellers will pursue getting her contact at the Child Crime office to speak to the Committee. 

 

Meeting adjourned at 7:03 p.m.