[Mpls] sex offenders in mpls

[Terrell Brown]

The ordinance, to me, looks like red lining.  Generally red lining is a
violation of all kinds of fair housing laws.  This proposal is
discrimination against a specific class of persons.

Are we next going to see a proposal that the same restrictions should
apply to workplaces?

News flash:  Those with criminal convictions have to live someplace.



Terrell Brown
Loring Park


--- "Leurquin, Ronald" <Ronald.Leurquin at walkerparking.com> wrote:

> This ordinance sounds good for the sound bite it offers, but how does
> it really fix any of the problems?
> 
> Booker wrote:
> Now that all the hoopla about sex offenders has worn off, the H.I.T
> (Hodges 
> Investigative Team) decided to publish the results and inform the
> community 
> about our efforts to prevent sex offenders from being
> disproportionably 
> placed in certain areas. The topic of sex offenders has been
> virtually 
> ignored by the Black press, so I am going to change that.
> 
> Ron writes:
> When is it the hoopla wore off?
> 
> Booker wrote:
> Proposed Ordinance:
> 
> Any person registered as a convicted level 2 or level 3 [sex
> offender] with 
> the Minnesota Department of Corrections living within the limits of
> the City 
> of Minneapolis shall not live within 1,000 feet of any of the
> following:
> 
> 1. School and any auxiliary fields that youth frequent.
> 
> 2. Community center that youth frequent.
> 
> 3. Community organization that serves youth.
> 
> 4. Battered women's shelter, or place that provide counseling
> services to 
> victims of sexual abuse.
> 
> 5. Library.
> 
> 6. Church that youth frequent.
> 
> 7. Park or swimming area that youth frequent.
> 
> 8. Corner store that youth frequent.
> 
> 9. Nursing home, or any other facility that provides services to
> vulnerable 
> adults.
> 
> 10. Mental health center, or place that provides services to people
> with 
> mental disabilities.
> 
> Sub A.
> 
> No more than two registered sex offenders shall live on any one city
> block 
> at any given time.
> 
> Sub B.
> 
> No more than 10 percent of the total registered sex offenders living
> in 
> Minneapolis shall live in any one given neighborhood.
> 
> Sub C. Terms
> 
> Youth: Anyone that is between the ages of 0-18.
> 
> Vulnerable Adult: Is defined in Minnesota State Statues 609.232
> subdivision 
> 11.
> 
> 
> Ron writes:
> Not much space left within Mpls for them to live, but that is
> probably the point of this stringent list of moving objects.
> 
> Booker wrote:
> Not only are sex offenders dumped into minority communities, but they
> are 
> allowed to roam freely around our neighborhoods. These offenders are
> allowed 
> to drive multiple vehicles and hold multiple addresses. Who checks up
> on 
> these people in Hennepin County? When someone finds out, please let
> me know.
> 
> 
> Ron writes:
> Where did the sex offenders come from before they committed the
> crimes your upset about?  
> Are they minorities returning to their communities?  How many sex
> offenders started out in Mayor Rybak's hood compared to the 55411 zip
> code?  Give me all the facts, not just the ones that suit your
> argument.
> 
> Booker wrote:
> I have a sex offender who lives on my block. His name is James
> Vanwyhe. He 
> seems to be a pretty nice guy, but nonetheless, he was convicted of
> raping 
> adult women he had known, forcing them to comply by using some sort
> of 
> weapon. So at the community notification meeting, everyone seemed
> really mad 
> about him moving to the neighborhood, and for good reason. But I must
> say to 
> you, what a difference a few months make.
> 
> A lot of people who attended the community meeting now allow their
> children 
> to play at James' house with James' kids. As a matter of fact, he has
> the 
> most popular hangout for kids in the neighborhood. Only in the Black 
> neighborhood would the most popular hangout for kids be at the sex 
> offender's house. We must not care that much about sex crimes as a
> people.
> 
> Ron writes:
> Where did James live before conviction?  Why should his children not
> have friends over?
> Are these children at risk if his crime was against adult women?
> Isn't it a good thing the parents know, rather than not?
> 
> Booker wrote:
> I personally feel that the vast majority of sex offenders cannot be 
> rehabilitated and thus must be kept under constant watch. People
> won't pay 
> attention to this issue until it affects their households, and that's
> sad.
> 
> Ron writes:
> I'm glad you admit it to be your opinion, rather than some sort of
> fact.  It has been shown that sex offenders quite frequently
> recommit, but not all of them.  Its also been shown that they have
> repletion's in the type of victim they go after, so that would lead
> to a need to deal with each one on a case by case basis.  A generic
> ordinance will not work for all cases.
> 
> To those of you that have read this far, I know this is a touchy
> subject for many people and for many reasons.  I don't think there
> are any simple answers or solutions to this problem.  I also don't
> think Bookers proposed ordinance will actually help matters any, just
> make for more government regulations that cause more problems than
> they solve.  I wish I had some good ideas to fix the problem, but
> right now I do not.
> 
> I have to admit to being one of those that does not want to know
> about the criminal behavior of my neighbors for several reasons.  I
> want to think well of my neighbors, and knowing will cloud my
> treatment of them (my issue).  I don't want to know which are
> molesters, drug addicts, drunks, swindlers, thieves, murderers, or
> any of it.  If we don't want these people on our streets then we need
> much bigger jails or the death penalty for many more things than we
> can stomach.
> 
> Enough ranting.
> Ron Leurquin
> Nokomis East
> 
> REMINDERS:
> 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at
> mplslist at tcq.net before continuing it on the list. 
> 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
> 
> For state and national discussions see:
> http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
> For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
> ________________________________
> 
> Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn
> E-Democracy
> Post messages to: mailto:mpls at mnforum.org
> Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
> REMINDERS:
> 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at
> mplslist at tcq.net before continuing it on the list.
> 2. Don't feed the troll! Ignore obvious flame-bait.
> 
> For state and national discussions see:
> http://e-democracy.org/discuss.html
> For external forums, see: http://e-democracy.org/mninteract
> ________________________________
> 
> Minneapolis Issues Forum - A City-focused Civic Discussion - Mn
> E-Democracy
> Post messages to: mailto:mpls at mnforum.org
> Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
> 
> 
>