|
______
<br />
<br />By By NICK FERRARONICK FERRARO | | nferraro@pioneerpress.comnferraro@pioneerpress.com | Pioneer Press | Pioneer Press
<br />PUBLISHED: PUBLISHED: June 11, 2018 at 5:22 p.m.June 11, 2018 at 5:22 p.m. | UPDATED: | UPDATED: June 12, 2018 at 11:05 a.m.June 12, 2018 at 11:05 a.m.
<br />A sex offender who sued West St. Paul over its 2016 ordinance that restricted where he could live will receive $84,000 as part of aA sex offender who sued West St. Paul over its 2016 ordinance that restricted where he could live will receive $84,000 as part of a
<br />settlement agreement approved by a federal judge Monday.settlement agreement approved by a federal judge Monday.
<br />U.S. District Court Chief Judge John Tunheim entered an order that dismissed without prejudice the lawsuit that Level 1 sex offenderU.S. District Court Chief Judge John Tunheim entered an order that dismissed without prejudice the lawsuit that Level 1 sex offender
<br />Thomas Wayne Evenstad filed against the city in August.Thomas Wayne Evenstad filed against the city in August. As part of the settlement, both parties will pay their own costs and attorney fees. As part of the settlement, both parties will pay their own costs and attorney fees.
<br />Thomas Wayne EvenstadThomas Wayne Evenstad
<br />West St. Paul is among at least 84 cities, townships or counties in Minnesota with residency restrictions for sex offenders, according to theWest St. Paul is among at least 84 cities, townships or counties in Minnesota with residency restrictions for sex offenders, according to the
<br />Department of Corrections.Department of Corrections.
<br />But Evenstad, 52, and his attorneys argued that West St. Paul’s ordinance was too broad and unconstitutional because it imposedBut Evenstad, 52, and his attorneys argued that West St. Paul’s ordinance was too broad and unconstitutional because it imposed
<br />retroactive punishment by banishing him from almost all of the city.retroactive punishment by banishing him from almost all of the city.
<br />Tunheim agreed, granting in January Evenstad’s motion for a preliminary injunction that prevented the city from enforcing the ordinanceTunheim agreed, granting in January Evenstad’s motion for a preliminary injunction that prevented the city from enforcing the ordinance
<br />against him. Tunheim concluded that Evenstad likely would prevail with his lawsuit in trial because the ordinance is “significantly moreagainst him. Tunheim concluded that Evenstad likely would prevail with his lawsuit in trial because the ordinance is “significantly more
<br />restrictive than those upheld by the 8th Circuit.”restrictive than those upheld by the 8th Circuit.”
<br />Adele Nicholas, a Chicago civil rights attorney who agreed to take on Evenstad’s lawsuit, said Monday that she and Evenstad are pleasedAdele Nicholas, a Chicago civil rights attorney who agreed to take on Evenstad’s lawsuit, said Monday that she and Evenstad are pleased
<br />with the result.with the result.
<br />“We think Judge Tunheim’s decision is really important because it establishes that municipalities don’t have unlimited discretion to pass“We think Judge Tunheim’s decision is really important because it establishes that municipalities don’t have unlimited discretion to pass
<br />law that restricts where people are allowed to live. There are some limitations and the restrictions have to be reasonable,” she said.law that restricts where people are allowed to live. There are some limitations and the restrictions have to be reasonable,” she said.
<br />Nicholas noted how Nicholas noted how West St. Paul amended the ordinance in March,West St. Paul amended the ordinance in March, loosening the restrictions. It now applies only to Level 2 and Level 3 loosening the restrictions. It now applies only to Level 2 and Level 3
<br />offenders whose crimes involved children, not to Level 1 offenders or those whose crimes involved adults. Also, group homes wereoffenders whose crimes involved children, not to Level 1 offenders or those whose crimes involved adults. Also, group homes were
<br />eliminated from a 1,200-foot restriction.eliminated from a 1,200-foot restriction.
<br />In 1999, a jury found Evenstad guilty of raping an 18-year-old Richfield woman he met through a telephone dating chat line. Before heIn 1999, a jury found Evenstad guilty of raping an 18-year-old Richfield woman he met through a telephone dating chat line. Before he
<br />was released from prison in 2008, he was assessed to be a Level 1 offender, meaning he is least likely to re-offend.was released from prison in 2008, he was assessed to be a Level 1 offender, meaning he is least likely to re-offend.
<br />Evenstad moved into a friend’s West St. Paul home last August. Three days later, a West St. Paul police investigator called the landlord andEvenstad moved into a friend’s West St. Paul home last August. Three days later, a West St. Paul police investigator called the landlord and
<br />said Evenstad had to go.said Evenstad had to go.
<br />The city cited Evenstad’s first-degree criminal sexual conduct conviction in 1999 as the reason he could not live in the home, a 1½-storyThe city cited Evenstad’s first-degree criminal sexual conduct conviction in 1999 as the reason he could not live in the home, a 1½-story
<br />duplex on a corner lot near Dodd Road.duplex on a corner lot near Dodd Road.
<br />On Monday, Evenstad said that he left West St. Paul in mid-March and now lives in St. Paul, which imposes no limitations on sexOn Monday, Evenstad said that he left West St. Paul in mid-March and now lives in St. Paul, which imposes no limitations on sex
<br />offenders.offenders.
<br />“In all honesty, I think it’s poetic justice,” he said.“In all honesty, I think it’s poetic justice,” he said.
<br />NEWSNEWS
<br />Sex offender who sued West St. Paul to get $84K inSex offender who sued West St. Paul to get $84K in
<br />settlement. He now lives in St. Paul.settlement. He now lives in St. Paul.
|