RECONSIDERING CALIFORNIA’S SEX OFFENDER RESIDENCE RESTRICTIONS POLICIES
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The California Sex Offender Management Board (CASOMB) has, after reviewing the evidence, once again come to the conclusion that the reality reflected by the high and still escalating rate of homelessness among registered sex offenders in California is the single greatest obstacle to the effective management of sex offenders in California. The Board believes that the rise in homelessness among sex offenders needs attention because it is so closely associated with an increased level of threat to community safety. CASOMB continues to believe that the issue is primarily about where sex offenders should live in our communities and under what conditions - concerns that are not addressed by dictating where they may not live. While there are numerous opinions and many impassioned arguments, pro and con, regarding the value, importance and efficacy of residence restrictions, the arguments offered in this paper will be primarily based upon the best available scientific research evidence rather than relying on emotion based arguments.
The four central questions addressing this issue are:
- What is the current California reality with respect to the impact of residence restrictions for sex offenders?
- Is there any evidence to support the belief that residence restrictions increase community safety?
- Is there any evidence which suggests that residence restrictions are actually counterproductive with regard to increasing community safety?
- Finally, are there any other considerations worth noting in evaluating the effectiveness of California’s current residence restrictions and the validity of the assumptions upon which these policies appear to be based?
The answers provided in the following report to these four questions will only represent summaries of the available knowledge in the field of sex offender management and not a comprehensive review of all the available information.
Based on all that is known about sex offender recidivism and about the nature of most sex offenses involving children, there is no evidence that residence restrictions are related to preventing or deterring sex crimes against children. To the contrary, the evidence strongly suggests that residence restrictions are likely to have the unintended effect of increasing the likelihood of sexual re-offense.
Analysis of the situation in California shows that residence restrictions have led to dramatically escalating levels of homelessness among sex offenders, particularly those on parole, of whom nearly one in three are now homeless. In addition, sex offender homelessness is likely to be exacerbated by local ordinances, which continue to proliferate. It is extremely difficult to keep track of these ordinances and to evaluate their contribution to the problem.
In conclusion, CASOMB strongly recommends, once again, that policy makers take action to review this situation and revise the state’s residence restriction policies.
