Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br /> <br /> <br />Page 7 of 10 <br />H. There is no accommodation in the current statute for persons on parole or probation supervision. <br />These offenders are already monitored and their living arrangements approved. Iowa County <br />Attorneys Association <br />I. [This policy] is contrary to well-established principles of treatment and rehabilitation of sex <br />offenders….These goals are severely impaired by the residency restriction, compromising the <br />safety of children by obstructing the use of the best known corrections practice. Iowa County <br />Attorneys Association <br />J. The sex offender residency restriction was a very well intentioned effort to keep the children of <br />our communities safe from sex offenders. It has, however, had unintended consequences that <br />effectively decrease community safety. Iowa Coalition Against Sexual Assault <br />K. ….some offenders are attempting to comply by providing descriptions of where they are actually <br />living….”under the 7th street bridge,” “truck near river,” “rest area mile marker 149,” “Flying J, in <br />truck,” “in tent, S side of I-80,” “RV in old K-Mart parking lot,” “I-35 rest area,”….Two listed Quick <br />Trips…. For the first time, sex offender treatment providers tell us, sex offenders are absconding <br />in larger numbers. Iowa Coalition Against Sexual Assault <br />L. When a brutal sexually violent crime occurs, such as the one that occurred in Iowa last year, our <br />societal tendency is to focus all our resources and energy on stopping offenders. The long-term <br />solutions to eradicating sexual violence from our society, however, do not lie in measures taken to <br />stop re-offense, but rather in preventing sexual violence from happening in the first place. Iowa <br />Coalition Against Sexual Assault <br />M. … the Board of the Iowa Coalition Against Sexual Assault joined the Iowa County Attorneys <br />Association in stating that these unintended consequences warrant replacing the residency <br />restriction with more effective measures. Iowa Coalition Against Sexual Assault <br />N. Housing restrictions have passed in most localities with little resistance. Child safety is rightly the <br />primary concern when sex offender restrictions are imposed. It seems to make sense that <br />decreasing access to potential victims would be a feasible strategy to preventing sex crimes. There <br />is no evidence, however, that such laws are effective in reducing recidivistic sexual violence. On <br />the other hand, such laws aggravate the scarcity of housing options for sex offenders, forcing them <br />out of metropolitan areas and farther away from the social support, employment opportunities <br />and social services that are known to aid offenders in successful community re-entry. Sex offender <br />residence restrictions. A Report to the Florida Legislature, October 2005, Jill S. Levinson, Ph.D. <br />O. Despite overwhelming public and political support, there is no evidence that proximity to schools <br />increases recidivism, or, conversely, that housing restrictions reduce reoffending or increase <br />community safety. Sex offender residence restrictions. A Report to the Florida Legislature, October <br />2005, Jill S. Levinson, Ph.D. <br />P. Based on the examination of level three re-offenders, there were no examples that residential <br />proximity to a park or school was a contributing factor in any of the sexual re-offenses noted… <br />Enhanced safety due to proximity restrictions may be a comfort factor for the general public, but <br />it does not have any basis in fact…it appears that a sex offender attracted to such locations for <br />purposes of committing a crime is more likely to travel to another neighborhood on order to in <br />secret rather than in a neighborhood where his or her picture is well known. Level Three Sex <br />Offenders Residential Placement Issues, 2003 Report to the Legislature, Minnesota Department of <br />Corrections <br />Q. Having such restrictions in the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul would likely force level three <br />offenders to move to more rural areas that would not contain nearby schools and parks but would <br />pose other problems, such as high concentration of offenders with no ties to the community; <br />isolation; lack of work, education and treatment options; and an increase in the distance traveled