Senator Phil Haines (R-8) was very disappointed with yesterday’s State Appellate Court ruling that says towns can’t enforce local ordinances that put greater restrictions on where sex offenders can live than are in state law.
“Towns are trying to protect families and children from people who have a documented past of committing heinous crimes, ” Haines stated. “The State Appellate Court’s decision takes away their ability to protect residents and puts the rights of the criminal first.”
“As soon as the Legislature reconvenes, I am going to introduce and aggressively advocate for a bill that specifically addresses this ruling. Protecting our children is of the utmost importance and it is clear legislation is needed that helps towns protect their citizens.”
The Court ruling is expected to nullify ordinances in over 100 towns that placed tighter restrictions on where sex offenders can live that are now in state law. Sex offenders will still have to comply with restrictions that are included in the state Megan’s Law such as curfews and having parole officers approve the details of their living arrangements.
Link to Post:
Similar Posts:
- Connors-Rumpf-Van Pelt: Court Decision Shows Immediate Need for Statewide Sex Offender Residency Restriction Law
July 17, 2008 - Connors, Rumpf & Van Pelt: State Should Restrict Pedophiles from Living Near Schools & Daycare Centers
September 23, 2008 - Haines: I Applaud Speaker Roberts for Seeing the Light
April 3, 2008 - Baroni: Court Decision Demonstrates Need to Move Quickly to Prevent Felons from Using Campaign Funds
December 4, 2008 - Haines: Municipal Aid Cuts Should Be Modified
March 26, 2008
