1234 Main Street
XXXX, CA   XXXXX

XXXX XX, 2015

Senator XXXXX
XXXXXXX
Sacramento, CA   9XXXX



Dear Senator:

The Senate Public Safety Committee is scheduled to consider SB 267 on May 12.  I am writing to request that you oppose the bill because it will both decrease public safety and violate the constitutional rights of more than 100,000 registered citizens (also known as "sex offenders").

As currently written, SB 267 would allow cities and counties to pass laws prohibiting registered citizens from visiting both public and private places.  Those laws could return our state to chaos as each city and county could determine different prohibitions in its jurisdiction.

In the recent past, cities and counties passed almost 100 different laws that prohibited registered citizens from being present in or near public places such as libraries, parks, swimmingpools and piers.  This patchwork of local laws did not increase public safety because they were focused upon people unlikely to harm a child at places where such harm was unlikely to occur.  In addition, the laws created a minefield for registered citizens who wanted to remain law abiding citizens because there no signs present at the prohibited locations.

State appellate courts determined a year ago that the local laws described above were preempted by state laws which provide sufficient safeguards to protect children by restricting some activities of registered citizens while on parole and beyond.  The state legislature must continue to assert its leadership on this important matter and not delegate its power to local governments who have already proven themselves unworthy of this challenge.

The California Sex Offender Management Board, created by the state legislature as the state's expert on sex offender policy matters, noted on page 17 of its 2014 Year End Report that "no research shows that exclusion zones are helpful in preventing re-offense."  The Board's report also noted that "there is no evidence that broader restrictions will be effective".  

For these reasons, I strongly recommend that you oppose SB 267. Thank you.

Sincerely,