RSM Council Considers Two Options in Sex Offender Ban

The City Council voted to have staff draft two versions of an ordinance that would keep convicted sex offenders out of Rancho Santa Margarita's city parks.

The proposed ordinances would be the . The county law affects county-owned parks, harbors and beaches and does not affect city-owned parks.

The City Council plans to discuss the two proposed ordinances and decide between them at their next council meeting July 27.

Both ordinances are similar. Each would restrict California registered sex offenders from entering city parks, unless they receive a waiver from the Orange County Sheriff's Department.

Each ordinance also requires signs to be put up alerting park-goers of the ordinance.

The difference between the two proposed ordinances? A set of five reasons by which the sheriff may justify a sex offender's request to enter a park.

One ordinance includes the five reasons, and the other does not.

Some of the reasons include attending religious services or for the purposes of doing a job.

Councilmembers want more time to discuss the ordinances, as well as give city staff more time to confer with the city's homeowner's associations, which own and maintain the city's parks. 

If the councilmembers choose one of the two, according to City Manager Steve Hayman, the first reading of the ordinance—the first step in the public hearing on the item—could take place as soon as the August 11 City Council meeting. 

Councilmember Steve Baric originally brought the issue 

“There's a reason they call these people predators,” Baric said at Wednesday's meeting. “They actually prey on human beings—children.

“They’re sophisticated, they're crafty, they're manipulative and they go out and they seek the most vulnerable of our community whether they be children or women or young adults.”

In his initial proposal, Baric said  in the  was one of the factors that led him to propose the ordinance.

in June.

Since the Orange County Board of Supervisors passed the law in April, one waiver has been issued allowing a sex offender into a county park, according to chief of police services Lt. Brian Schmutz.

Much of the discussion at the July 13 meeting had to do with the proposed options originally listed in the staff report.

City staff had originally presented two options to the council: Option 1, the council could enact an ordinance almost word-for-word like the county’s, or Option 2, the council could have an ordinance that was more narrow in scope to further protect the city from possible litigation, according to city attorney Greg Simonian.

In addition to requiring homeowner's associations to post signs alerting park-goers to the ordinance, one of the stipulations of Option 2 was that only sex offenders who had been convicted of crimes against minors would be prevented from entering parks.

That would have left out a number of sex offenders, including those who were convicted of possessing child pornography, according to Susan Schroeder, chief of staff of the Orange County District Attorney’s office, who spoke at the meeting. 

Schroeder said the council should choose the option that sticks more closely to what the county has approved.

“We contemplated pretty much everything they contemplated [when working on the county law,]” Schroeder said. “I believe that option is the cleanest, and they should really adopt it.”

Jeff Gibson, founder of California's Jessica’s Law, said he was in favor of Option 1 as well.

“I ask that you step up with the rest of the cities and the communities of this county, and do not break new ground in the opposite direction,” said Gibson, a Coto de Caza resident. “Stand with the very modest proposal from the district attorney and the sheriff.”

Councilmember Jesse Petrilla motioned that the City Council adopt Option 1 with no changes. His motion failed by a 4-1 vote.  

“I think the county ordinance is as strong as it should be,” Petrilla said. “And I believe that some of my colleagues may be overthinking it.”

By asking staff to draft two ordinances, the council effectively proposed a hybrid of Option 1 and Option 2 wherein all sex offenders are banned, but signage is required.

Reasons that may justify a request to enter into the parks include:

1. Accompanying a minor for whom the registrant is a parent or legal guardian and where the registrant is not otherwise prohibited under any condition of parole or probation;
2. Accessing the park for the purposes of exercising the rights of free speech or assembly;
3. Accessing the park for purposes of lawful employment;
4. Accessing the park for the purposes of voting in any local, state, or federal election;
5. Accessing the park for the purpose of attending a religion service.