Ft Lauderdale, FloriDUH almost had a Lauren F. Book Boulevard. Almost.

The level of arrogance Book family just won't stop. Not content with an entire neighborhood named after them (seeing as how they created that neighborhood, that is understandable), the Books want a major street named after Lauren. Thankfully, it failed. Interestingly, a number of Floridians opposed this measure and is upset the proposal was not up to vote.

The scariest thing is the FloriDUH Senate approved the measure (but it died in the House). Obviously, SB 338, that bill, failed, so Ron pushed ahead in the local political sphere.

The fact many Floridians are up in arms over it tells me I'm too hard on Floridians sometimes.

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/local/broward/fort-lauderdale/fl-lauderdale-lobbyist-street-naming-20151117-story.html

Lauderdale won't consider a Lauren Book Boulevard
Larry Barszewski
Sun Sentinel
Street-naming for lobbyist's daughter will have to wait. Bill fails to clear state Legislature.

— There won't be any Lauren Book Boulevard in the city just yet.

City commissioners were to consider a resolution Tuesday night supporting the state Legislature's decision to name a stretch of Federal Highway in honor of Book, a state Senate candidate and the daughter of lobbyist Ron Book.

But the item was pulled from the commission's agenda because of one unnoticed problem: The bill that included the honorary naming apparently didn't pass the Legislature this year after all.

A review of the Florida Senate's web site shows the bill cleared the Senate but was not taken up in the House of Representatives.

People in the city had not been aware of the proposed designation, which would have covered Federal Highway between Sunrise and Broward boulevards. If approved, it would have allowed commemorative signs to be placed in the street's medians at Sunrise Boulevard and near Broward Boulevard.

"We don't need ceremonial names for lobbyist relatives, especially those who are still living and running for current political office," Victoria Park resident Larry Wallenstein said in a written message to commissioners.

Ron Book sought the naming from legislators as a way of honoring his daughter's work through Lauren's Kids, an organization she created that educates adults and children about sexual abuse. Lauren Book herself endured six years of sexual abuse by a nanny.

lbarszewski@tribpub.com or 954-356-4556

Copyright © 2015, Sun Sentinel

Some of the comments under this article:

lostthatlovingfeeling
Pass a law that anyone who was ever a lobbyist, married to a lobbyist, born to a lobbyist, in any kind of relationship with a lobbyist or in any way related to a lobbyist be forever banned from having a public building, public park, public road, sidewalk or lane named for them now and forever. If I've missed anything, please add it to the list.

Someone else please start the list for developers and politicians.

KCK33317
How about we stop altogether these egomaniac politicians and lobbyists that want their name on everything. What a joke that we're supposed to "honor" them for making a gravy train living off of the taxpayer's back.

americananarchist
Book as in Crook

whopper
A father wants the city to name a street for his daughter? Really?? This is really sick.

Here is an earlier article, with comments:

http://www.sun-sentinel.com/local/broward/broward-politics-blog/fl-blog-lauren-book-boulevard-20151113-story.html

Lauren Book, state senate candidate, getting her own street
Larry Barszewski
South Florida Sun-Sentinel

What gift can a lobbyist dad get for his daughter? How about a street-naming by state legislators?

Lauren Book may be running for state senate in Hollywood, but she could soon have her own boulevard in Fort Lauderdale.

State legislators this year approved naming the stretch of Federal Highway from Broward Boulevard to Sunrise Boulevard for her because of her work with Lauren's Kids, which educates adults and children about sexual abuse. Book herself survived six years of sexual abuse by a nanny.

While Book isn't from the city and her district wouldn't include the roadway, the stretch is part of her annual statewide Walk in My Shoes awareness walk from Key West to Tallahassee.

Lauren F. Book Boulevard would be an honorary designation, with signs erected with her name on them in the U.S. 1 median at Sunrise Boulevard for southbound traffic and at Northeast Second Street for northbound traffic.

They won't be campaign signs. They'll be a gift from dad.

Book's father, lobbyist Ron Book, sought the designation as a surprise for his daughter, who he said has "really become a symbol for what victims can become" in moving forward with their lives.

"It's about how she works to empower people," he said.

Ron Book said the road is close to the Nancy J. Cotterman Center for sexual assault treatment where his daughter received counseling and care. He said he started seeking the designation during last year's legislative session, before his daughter became a candidate for political office.

Before signs can be erected, Fort Lauderdale commissioners must pass a resolution supporting the naming. The resolution is on their Tuesday agenda.

The city's street-naming policy says honorees should be deceased, but that policy involves a street being dual-named and not for an honorary designation. The state has no requirement on who can be given an honorary designation, Ron Book said.

lbarszewski@tribpub.com or 954-356-4556

Copyright © 2015, Sun Sentinel

Mickey Dumberly
How much hubris is the local lobbying community filled with if they now think they can gift naming rights on Federal Highway between Broward Blvd and Sunrise Blvd to their 30 year old daughter. The biggest insult to Fort Lauderdale residents is that this lobbyist Ron Book is a paid lobbyist of the city of Fort Lauderdale, being paid to lobby Tallahassee for things we want, not things he wants for his daughter and her now political career. I will be sending a New Times article about Ron Book and daughter from February that details their history and accomplishments in the public sector. The crazy thing is the article explored the idea that Lauren and her father were attempting to parlay this career as a professional victim into a political career. Guess what, they were right. Lauren is now running for a State Senate seat. Hopefully Fort Lauderdale Mayor John P. “Jack” Seiler can see all the negative publicity and attention this egregious act of a rogue lobbyist will have during a public discussion and will just pull the shameful item from the agenda. I plan to be seguing from the dais into why Fort Lauderdale is paying someone with Ron Book’s white collar criminal history detailed in the New Times article to lobby Tallahassee for this city. Maybe “Jack” figures no one without a little dirt on them can be trusted up in Tallahassee, maybe he’s right, “Jack” would know.

MI Senator Rick Jones is giving registrants one last middle finger on his way out of office

Prick Jones can go jump in a lake.

Mishitgan state senator Prick Jones has reached his term limit so he is on his way out, but that hasn't stopped him from trying to stick it to registered citizens. Just months after the MI Supreme Court struck down

Here is a link to the bill:

http://www.legislature.mi.gov/
(S(izwy2ivecfo4vhv2ax3u3kbb))/
mileg.aspx?page=getObject&objectname=2015-SB-0581

Here is the dumb quote from straight from the horse's mouth ass mouth ass's mouth.

http://www.senatorrickjones.com/senate-panel-oks-jones-bill-to-keep-sex-offenders-away-from-schools/

Senate panel OKs Jones bill to keep sex offenders away from schools
Posted on November 5, 2015
Sen. Rick Jones

LANSING, Mich. — The Senate Judiciary Committee on Thursday approved legislation sponsored by Sen. Rick Jones to restore a law prohibiting sex offenders from working or living within 1,000 feet of a school.

“A federal judge recently ruled that parts of Michigan’s sex offender registration law were too vague. As a result, sex offenders of all kinds can once again hang around our schoolyards,” said Jones, R-Grand Ledge. “Whether the convicted sex offender is a flasher or a pedophile, they have no business hanging out at the local school playground and leering at children.

“It is important to clarify the law so that we are protecting our children and still meeting the federal guidelines.”

Senate Bill 581 would prohibit a registered sex offender in Michigan from working or living within a student safety zone, which is defined as the school property and the area that lies 1,000 feet or less from the school property line. It also clarifies the law concerning how close an offender can be to a school while walking or driving.

The bill includes exemptions for an offender transporting his child to or from school, attending an event sanctioned by his child’s school and meeting with a school employee regarding his child enrolled at that school.

SB 581 now heads to the full Senate for consideration.

Ohio HB 353 will require Registered Citizens to give info of every adult in the household to the state. You just know something stupid is about to happen...

Cross-posted with ReFORM-Ohio.

If there is a state that could challenge FloriDUH for the sheer stupidity of sex offender laws, it is the state of Ohio (or as I call it, "D'Oh-I-O). Ohio was the one state that finally dethroned FloriDUH's Shiitake Award dynasty (if only for a year), and D'OHio was the first state to pass the Adam Walsh AND is the only state that can place people on the sex offender registry through a civil trial. 

So now the great state of D'OHio wants to remind us that our legislators can be as birdbrained as FloriDUH. State Rep. Margaret Ann Ruhl has introduced HB 353, which will "amend sections 2950.04, 2950.041, and 2950.99 of the Revised Code to require a sheriff to mail a notice to every adult member of a household where a person who is required to register as a sex offender resides informing those household members that the person has committed a sexually oriented offense or a child-victim oriented offense."

Now, it is already a stupid idea to waste millions of dollars of taxpayer money to send a notice to every adult living in the household with a Registered Citizen that they are indeed living with a Registered Citizen. It seems as asinine as placing warning labels on jars of peanut butter that peanut butter contains peanuts. I can't imagine a single scenario where this is even necessary or helpful. Obviously, people living with a Registered Person knows they are living with a Registered Citizen. What's next? Notices that water is wet?

But this isn't the worst part of the law. If passed the Ohio Revised Code will be revised again, adding to the information collected by the Sheriff's Office, "Regarding an offender or delinquent child who is registering under a duty imposed under division (A)(2), (3), or (4) of this section as a result of the offender or delinquent child residing in this state or temporarily being domiciled in this state for more than three days, a list of every other person age eighteen or older who resides at the residence at which the offender plans to reside."

What this means is the state will expect Registered Citizens to register the names of every adult living in the household with the Sheriff's Office. I know that Anti-Registry activists like to use the expression, "When someone is forced to register, the entire family registers," but it seems Ohio is taking this expression literally. 

But hey, it isn't like something like a computer glitch would accidentally add dozens of people to the Ohio sex offender registry or anything, right? Oh wait...

http://www.10tv.com/content/stories/2011/11/02/columbus-sex-offender-registry-mistake.html

Dozens Mistakenly Added To Ohio Sex Offender Registry

Wednesday November 2, 2011 6:33 PM 

UPDATED: Wednesday November 2, 2011 7:45 PM

COLUMBUS, Ohio - Some people raised questions on Wednesday, wondering how dozens of people could have been wrongfully included to a statewide sex offender registry.

Outdated and inaccurate information was put into the system by an outside company that helped run the registry, 10TV's Chuck Strickler reported.

It took more than two weeks to figure out what the problem was.   The site was then shut down and fixed. 

The state had been working to switch the entire registry operation over to a Louisiana company called Watch Systems. 

In early October, the state said the company took control of the search operation of the registry and mistakenly put inaccurate information into the system for all to see, Strickler reported.

The state attorney general's office said the problem was a result of human error. 

"There were probably hundreds, but we don't know exactly because we didn't take the time to go through the records individually," said Steven Raubenolt, Deputy Superintendent of BC&I.

                                                                                                                                          

Members of the group 'Families Against the Registry' said they were concerned that people who were no longer required to register were listed again during the glitch. 

"Watch Systems and the Ohio Attorney General do not seem to care that when you list a man on the registry, his wife and children suffer," said Ellen Shores of Families Against the Registry.

"Obviously we are sorry this happened.  As I said, we don't want bad or inaccurate data being displayed to the public," said Raubenolt.

I see nothing but problems arising from this idiotic bill. Ohio has already screwed up and added innocent people to the registry once before, so this bill is a disaster waiting to happen. Florida had similar problems recently, so obviously non-registered citizens understand that being mistaken for a "sex offender" is a pretty bad thing. The last thing Ohio would want is for a non-registrant to be beaten to death by a deranged vigilante, as has happened in Florida. 

This smiling face is that of State Representative Margaret Ann Ruhl, by the way. This is the woman listed as the primary sponsor. Rep. Heather Bishoff, Rep. Cheryl L. Grossman, Rep. Brian Hill, and Rep. Martin J. Sweeney are co-sponsors. I have added direct links to their representative pages. Feel free to contact them and ask them what they were thinking when sponsoring this stupid bill. 

Putting Semen in someone's coffee will lead to registry status if Minnesota bill passes

Pat Maahs got a little too much cream in her coffee. Now, she wants her co-worker added to the public registry

Yes, what the guy did to this woman was nasty, and I'd be pissed if someone creamed my coffee. But, do we need yet another way to squeeze a few more names onto the registry?

You can find the text of HF 0889 HERE. I'd much rather hear an audio of the actual floor debate. According to the audio below, it was extremely lively.

http://www.startribune.com/politics/statelocal/297894541.html?page=all&prepage=1&c=y#continue

Bill on bodily fluids merits much more than snickers
Article by: JON TEVLIN , Star Tribune Updated: March 28, 2015 - 10:32 PM

The debate on the floor of the Minnesota House surfaced near midnight, when most of the curious and the connected had gone home.

It followed a long and contentious argument over lowering the minimum wage for restaurant servers. Members were no doubt tired, and the issue at hand, many acknowledged, was something that they found uncomfortable to discuss aloud.

Words such as “body fluids” and “semen,” and the discussion of a horrible sexual violation of a woman who drank semen put into her coffee by a co-worker.

What followed was a strange debate, even by legislative standards. A couple of legislators cracked jokes, made odd comparisons to putting gum under a dinner plate and questioned whether a new law would punish mischievous students who spit in another student’s soup. At times, there was laughter.

Little did many of the legislators know, the victim of the assault was sitting in the gallery.

The idea for a bill was brought to Rep. Debra Hilstrom, DFL-Brooklyn Center. The impetus was a crime brought to court back in September. A Blaine man, John R. Lind, 34, admitted to police that he ejaculated several times into a co-worker’s coffee and onto her desk. He was, he said, trying to get her attention. He got it when the woman caught him near her desk, and notified police.

Lind was initially charged with criminal sexual conduct, but a judge found that the act he committed was not covered under state sex offender laws, and the case was dismissed. Lind was later charged with indecent exposure, a misdemeanor.

Hilstrom is seeking to change the act to a felony for adults who put bodily fluids in food or drink, knowing someone else may consume it. There would also have to be intent to arouse or gratify sexual desire, or involve a child, to be considered a felony sexual offense.

During Monday’s debate, Rep. John Lesch, a prosecutor, offered some reasonable questions. “It appears to be legislation designed out of a specific incident, an incident that elicits disgust from any person who hears about it,” he said. “But in crafting legislation this way, I think it falls victim to the folly of so many bills, where policy is written as a reaction to an incident that garnered a lot of press controversy, and that folly is a lot of ill-considered construction of law.”

While prompted by the Lind case, this is not a bill targeted to one strange incident, Hilstrom said.

“This isn’t the one-time thing,” Hilstrom said in an interview. She pointed to the movie “North Country,” which depicted the same type of behavior in the mines of the Iron Range.

I know. I covered the lawsuit and read thousands of pages of disgusting testimony of how some men sexually abused some female co-workers. I have also worked in a couple of factories, and have witnessed similar “pranks” toward both men and women.

Hilstrom also pointed to a California teacher who baked cookies for his students that included his body fluids, which launched a multimillion-dollar lawsuit.

“This is an indication that, clearly, Minnesota law needs to be tightened up,” Hilstrom said.

The night took a strange turn when Rep. Ron Erhardt, DFL-Edina, began with an odd anecdote about putting gum under his plates and putting them into the dishwasher. Then he and others questioned whether we should actually make it a felony to spit in people’s food. Erhardt mentioned a commercial for the television show “Friends,” in which one of the characters licks her coffee cup so no one would use it. He actually pretended to lick a coffee cup to illustrate.

Rep. Phyllis Kahn, DFL-Minneapolis, then rose to ask: “Suppose a child spits into his own soup, how is that covered under your bill?”

Assured that spitting in your own soup would not be a felony, Kahn asked if a kid who tried to spit in his own soup, but spit in someone else’s soup instead, would face a felony.

Hilstrom, who remained impressively calm through the questioning, said the bill would not make that a felony.

”If saliva is the part that gives the body heartburn, I’m happy to delete saliva from the bill,” Hilstrom said. “If members are OK with people spitting in their food and eating it, we can amend the bill.”

Hilstrom should have performed an epic microphone drop at this point and exited.

Instead, the bill was referred back to committee to decide whether spitting into someone’s food should be a felony, or simply bad manners, and whether putting semen in someone’s coffee would make someone a sex offender (seems obvious to me). The Senate Friday passed a bill making the acts of putting bodily fluids in food a gross misdemeanor. The Legislature will ultimately decide how far the law should go.

I asked Hilstrom what she thought of the “debate.”

“Sometimes nothing good happens late at night,” said Hilstrom, who acknowledged colleagues were tired but added “that is not an excuse. I was disappointed.”

Maybe “disappointed” is the Minnesota way of saying “disturbed.”

Hilstrom was being magnanimous, and so was the person whose abuse launched the bill, Pat Maahs, who watched the discussion from the gallery and heard the snickering.

“To me, it kind of hurt to see people act like this,” said Maahs. “It’s likely because they don’t know what something like this can do to a person. I still don’t know what Lind’s medical history is. A lot of diseases can stay with you for life.”

So, Maahs will have to get tested regularly to make sure she didn’t contract a disease, such as AIDS or hepatitis C.

“At first I was very, very, very embarrassed and tried to hide it,” said Maahs. She courageously came forward so other women wouldn’t have to suffer.

“It’s really sad when we have to legislate morality,” Maahs said.

It may be hard to see an upside to a story like this, but Maahs volunteered one.

“How about a little free advertising for Beisswenger’s Hardware?” Maahs asked.

She has worked at the New Brighton store for 26 years, and they have arranged her schedule so she could try to change state law.

“Everybody there, from the owners to my co-workers, have been wonderful,” Maahs said. “Just wonderful.”

Arlington Heights, Illinois limits garage sales because of Predator Panic

I would like to know just how people come to idiotic conclusions like this. Even worse, the ordinance was passed unanimously, by ALL NINE Village Idiots. 

I think I save solved the mystery, actually...

http://www.chicagotribune.com/suburbs/arlington-heights/news/ct-arlington-heights-garage-sales-tl-20150203-story.html

Arlington Heights limits garage sales after sexual assault
By Sally Ho
Chicago Tribune
FEBRUARY 4, 2015, 12:37 PM

Arlington Heights is now limiting garage sales, months after neighbors blamed an out-­of-­control number of such events for a home invasion and sexual assault in the Cedar Glen area.

A policy limiting the number of garage sales to three per year on residential property was approved Monday by the village board, according to a recording of the meeting posted on the village website.

Garage sales now must be held between 9 a.m. and 6 p.m. and last no more than three consecutive days. The move is in direct response to the community outcry following a crime that happened in September. A woman reported that she was sexually assaulted when her home in the 2400 block of South Embers Lane was broken into. Neighbors claimed the area was becoming unsafe due to a regular flood of strangers attending garage sales.

Some residents pointed to two homes in the residential area south of the Township High School District 214 headquarters for reportedly hosting frequent events that sometimes last for day s and occur several times a month.

In approving the new policy , the village board agreed that it was necessary but debated how the new code amendment would be enforced and whether it was overreaching or unproductive.

The rule does not create a permitting process that would require residents to seek permission to host what is for some a de-cluttering tradition. Instead, the village's new local law will be addressed on the basis of complaints.

Those thought to be breaking the law would be cited for violating the municipal code. A law enforcement official would document every complaint in support of a ticket.

A judge in Cook County housing court would then likely hear the case, with a fine of up to $750 possible, village officials said.

Trustee Joseph Farwell commented that he didn't want a "permit to wipe our nose every time we sneeze" but that he "wouldn't be surprised" if permits were needed in the future to curb ordinance "abusers."

The village manager said the policy is meant to warn would-­be offenders before a citation is necessary, while also avoiding an "overly elaborate process" for law-­abiding residents.

But Trustee John Scaletta, who is running for reelection in April, said he was concerned that a judge would throw the cases out in a "he said, she said" situation.

"I'm all for doing something but I just want to make sure what we do is productive," Scaletta said.

The California ASSembly looks to circumvent Court decisions ruling further restrictions violate state law

His name is Bill,
And he sponsored a Bill,
and its gonna stink up Capitol Hill....

This grinning idiot is Bill Brough, and he's the sponsor of an upcoming bill that will allow cities and counties throughout California to adopt restrictions beyond the already asinine restrictions imposed by the state. 

This bill is intended to circumvent court rulings that found imposing extra restrictions on Registered Citizens violated state law. This guy puts the ASS in ASSembly. 

Feel like contacting Bill? Here's how:

CAPITOL OFFICE

State Capitol: Room 2174

Mailing Address: State Capitol P.O. Box 942849

Sacramento, CA 94249

Phone: 916-319-2073

DISTRICT OFFICE

Orange County Office:

29122 Rancho Viejo Road, Suite 111,

San Juan Capistrano, CA 92675

Phone: (949) 347-7301

Fax: (949) 347-7302

http://californiarsol.org/2015/01/assembly-bill-would-authorize-cities-counties-to-adopt-presence-restrictions/

Assembly Bill Would Authorize Cities, Counties to Adopt Presence Restrictions

Posted On 30 Jan, 2015 - 7 Comments

Assemblyman William P. Brough introduced Assembly Bill 201 on January 29 that, if passed, would authorize cities and counties to pass laws that restrict where registered citizens may be present. Brough is a Republican member of the Assembly from Oange County.

“This bill attempts to reverse decisions of the California Court of Appeal and Supreme Court made in 2014,” stated California RSOL President Janice Bellucci. “The bill would also reverse the positive results of lawsuits filed last year in federal district courts.”

During 2014, a total of 26 lawsuits were filed challenging city and county laws that prohibited registered citizens from visiting public places, including libraries, parks and museums, as well as privately owned places, including movie theaters, bowling alleys and fast food restaurants. Of that total, more than 20 lawsuits have been settled and an additional 51 cities and/or cities have voluntarily repealed their ordinances.

In the past, there have been two failed attempts to provide the same authorization to cities and counties. “We must remain vigilant to keep the victories we have won. California RSOL will fight this bill and all bills that further erode the civil rights of registered citizens and members of their families,” stated California RSOL Vice President Chance Oberstein.

You can read the full text of the bill BY CLICKING HERE.

AB 201, as introduced, Brough. Registered sex offenders: local ordinances.

Existing law, the Sex Offender Registration Act, requires persons convicted of specified sex offenses to register with local authorities for life while residing, located, attending school, or working in California. Existing law, as adopted by the voters by the passage of Proposition 83 at the November 7, 2006, statewide general election, prohibits a person who is required to register as a sex offender from living in specified places, including within 2,000 feet of a school or park where children regularly gather. Existing law authorizes municipal jurisdictions to enact local ordinances that further restrict the residency of the registered sex offender. Existing law makes it a misdemeanor for a person who is on parole for specified sex offenses to enter any park where children regularly gather without express permission from the person’s parole agent.

This bill would state that a local agency is not preempted by state law from enacting and enforcing an ordinance that restricts a registered sex offender from residing or being present at certain locations within the local agency’s jurisdiction. The bill would authorize a local agency to adopt ordinances, rules, or regulations that are more restrictive than state law relating to a registered sex offender’s ability to reside or be present at certain locations within the local agency’s jurisdiction.

Oklahoma's "separate but equal" registrant nursing home is about to get even less equal

I want to oppose the idea that this is a prison. It’s not. It’s a LTC facility that is providing what I refer to as ‘appropriate resident care for a specific population.’ This population has needs that are not being met in our traditional LTC facilities. What we have uncovered is that these people are much younger, predominately male, so there are some obvious differences with traditional residents. Are therapy and activities being provided to these offenders to keep them engaged to deal with their psycho-social needs? Oftentimes what we find is that these sex offenders end up in that so called ‘secure lock down unit.’ But what this is supposed to be is a special, secure LTC facility. -- Wes Bledsoe of "A Perfect Cause," an organization pushing segregation of sex offenders in nursing homes across the US, in response to the question, "Is there the potential for this facility to resemble a prison with people being segregated from each other and, figuratively, on 'lock down'?"

Oklahoma has created already created a disgusting and disturbing precedent when it became the first state in the US to create a law for a "separate but equal" nursing home facility for elderly and disabled registrants. Oklahoma is about to take this innovative idea to new depths. 

There is a reason I added the quote from Wes Bledsoe. This clown is the reason for the Oklahoma segregation law in the first place. He does not want us to think this segregation facility is a prison. Well, it will be hard for Bledsoe to continue to say such asinine things once Oklahoma passes SB 578, because the Oklahoma legislature seeks to turn over the responsibility for running the segregationist nursing home to the Department of Corrections. 

There is no way even a moron like Bledsoe can read this bill and NOT conclude this facility will be a prison. What else could you call a facility run by the DOC and includes prison inmates? It makes me wonder if Oklahoma will hire the same people that built the Minnesota facility with doors that lock during fire alarms?

AS INTRODUCED 

An Act relating to sex offenders; amending 63 O.S. 2011, Section 1-849, which relates to long-term care facility for sex offenders; allowing the Department of Corrections to initiate certain proposals; providing definitions; and providing an effective date. 

BE IT ENACTED BY THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA: 

SECTION 1. AMENDATORY 63 O.S. 2011, Section 1-849, is amended to read as follows: 

Section 1-849. A. The State Department of Health Department of Corrections shall initiate a request for proposal for the operation of a stand-alone long-term care facility for: 

1. sex Sex offenders who are assigned a numeric risk level of II or III as provided in the Sex Offenders Registration Act; or 

2. Any incarcerated offender deemed by the Department of Corrections to be either critically or terminally ill.

The request for proposal shall set forth surveillance and security specifications providing for heightened security of residents to protect the public and residents of the facility. 

B. The State Board of Health Department of Corrections shall promulgate rules and establish procedures necessary to implement the request for proposal and the operation of the stand-alone long-term care facility for: 

1. Level II and III sex offenders; or 

2. Any offender deemed by the Department of Corrections to be either critically or terminally ill. 

C. For the purpose of this section: 

1. Critically ill means: 

a. being unable to perform at least two (2) activities of daily living, such as eating, toileting, moving from one place to another, bathing, dressing or being able to self-medicate; 

b. requiring substantial supervision for protection from threats to health and safety because of a severe cognitive impairment. 

2. Terminally ill means having a condition that reasonably may be expected to result in death within twenty-four (24) months. 

3. Long-term care facility means a health care facility, other than a general acute or specialty hospital, constructed, licensed, and operated to provide patient living accommodations, twenty-four (24) hour staff availability, and at least two of the following patient services: 

a) selection of patient care services, under the  direction and supervision of a registered nurse, ranging from continuous medical, skilled nursing, psychological, or other professional therapies to intermittent health-related or paraprofessional care services; and 

b) a structured supportive living environment that provides support or assistance with individual activities of daily living. 

SECTION 2. This act shall become effective November 1, 2015. 

Virginia wants to publicly shame Registrants (and their children) who want to get involved with their kids' educations

Some of you might find this hard to believe, but some people on the registry -- wait for it-- have kids! I know, it is a shocker, right? Even more amazing is the fact that registered people actually want to do the typical parenting thing. 

What makes this bill unique isn't a ban on allowing registered persons on school grounds, but the process by which a registered person can petition to be exempt from the law to see his own kid. This is the actual text of the bill as it relates to this petition:

C. Every adult who is prohibited from entering upon school or child day center property pursuant to subsection A may after notice to the attorney for the Commonwealth and either (i) the proprietor of the child day center, (ii) the superintendent of public instruction and the chairman of the school board of the school division in which the school is located, or (iii) the chief administrator of the school if such school is not a public school, petition the circuit court in the county or city where the school or child day center is located for permission to enter such property. The court shall direct that the petitioner shall cause notice of the time and place of the hearing on his petition to be published once a week for two successive weeks in a newspaper meeting the requirements of § 8.01-324. The court may permit any person who attends the hearing to testify regarding the petition. For good cause shown, the court may issue an order permitting the petitioner to enter and be present on such property, subject to whatever restrictions of area, reasons for being present, or time limits the court deems appropriate.

[You can find the full text of the bill HERE]

What does this mean? The registered person wanting to be involved with his kid's school life has to petition the court, and that hearing will be released to the media. It is nothing but a form of humiliation for the registrant AND his kid. That is Shiitake-worthy. 

I'll allow the ACLU to finish critiquing this bill: 

http://wavy.com/2015/01/20/aclu-questions-new-sex-offender-bill/

ACLU questions new sex offender bill

By Stephanie Harris

Published: January 20, 2015, 11:25 pm  Updated: January 20, 2015, 11:26 pm

13Click to share on Twitter Click to share on Google+ 7Share on Facebook Click to share on Pinterest

VIRGINIA (WAVY) — Their faces and address are already public, now one Virginia lawmaker wants registered sex offenders to face public hearings before going inside schools.

To have access to Virginia public schools, House Bill 1366 would require violent sex offenders to pay for a newspaper ad publicizing a personal court hearing. It would run once a week for two weeks. Then anyone could attend the hearing and testify against them.

The bills author, Delegate Jeff Campbell, says it’s about safety, but the ACLU says it crosses the line of civil rights.

“The public hearing is simply an invitation for an angry mob to gather at a school and get in the way of a parent’s right to be involved in the education of his or her child,” said ACLU of Virginia’s Executive Director Claire Gastanaga.

Gastanaga said there is no real proof that registries and restrictions like this keep kids safer. He said the most direct impact of the bill would be on parents with kids in school who want to go and meet with the kids’ teachers.

Delegate Campbell disagrees: “I disagree totally, what it does is it gives parents of the other children a say in who is around their children.”

The ACLU is also concerned that paying for the ad would be hardship. 10 On Your Side checked with the Virginian-Pilot. They could not quote us on an ad without exact wording, but said it costs $8.11 per line, per day.

That is an acceptable amount, according to Delegate Campbell: “The public’s right to know who is around their children and to have a say in whether they agree in that or not trumps that individual’s right to free access to the school,” he said.

Currently, sex offenders must inform school superintendents before they go inside a Virginia school.

Delegate Campbell said there was an incident last year in Wise County where a parent did that and got permission to attend sporting events, but then started showing up to school at other times. Parents got upset and that is the reason for his bill.

A subcommittee unanimously passed the bill on Monday, but there is no set date yet for it to go before the full committee.