Red Lining laws and other Civil Rights legislation protects people from discrimination based on their identification with a Protected Class as defined by Federal and State Civil Rights statutes. "Sex Offender" is not a protected class. Protected classes include Race, Gender, National Origin, Religion, Disability Status, etc. (There are a few other protected classes but I don't recall offhand what they are. Minnesota Statute is a little broader than the Federal in that it also includes Sexual Orientation, GLBT, etc.)
Under the law, rental property owners, employers, Country Clubs, etc. are perfectly free to (and usually do) discriminate against people based on their criminal history. As an employer I am completely within my rights to decline employment to you on the basis of your criminal history, but not on the basis of your ethnicity. The question of where convicted sex offenders live is a real hot button issue in several neighborhoods in Minneapolis. (In fact, it becomes a hot button issue in any neighborhood in which there is a Level 3 Notification meeting.) The truth is that the factors which determine where they live after getting out of prison have more to do with the economics of the housing market than just about any other single factor. Most people who have just finished a long stretch in the joint aren't in a position to buy a house. This means that they need to find housing in the rental market. They probably aren't making much money when they get out so their housing options are even more limited. Many landlords, whether it's justified or not, are leery of renting to people with a criminal sexual history, which further limits their choices. Each of these factors tends to concentrate registered sex offenders in a few socio-economically disadvantaged neighborhoods. Add to this the fact that the preponderance of people in our prison system are from economically disadvantaged backgrounds, and the fact that people released from prison tend to return to the neighborhoods from which they came, and it's easy to see how these concentrations develop. The real problem is that we, as a society, through our legislature and courts have not come to grips with how to protect the public from people who we deem to be chronic, lifelong predators. If we truly believe that convicted sex offenders are beyond redemption, and that these individuals will always pose an unacceptable risk to the public, then I think that we need to seriously consider some mechanism to permanently separate them from society. The obvious answer is to convict these individuals to life in prison without the possibility of parole. (Some would argue that the death penalty would accomplish the same thing but I for one am deeply opposed to capital punishment on moral, philosophical, and practical grounds.) Please remember that I only mention this draconian solution (life imprisonment without parole) based on the unproven, but widely accepted assumption that sex offenders cannot be rehabilitated and will always pose an unacceptable risk to public safety. I think it extremely unlikely that we will adopt this solution. Given that realization, I believe it is perfectly reasonable to ask ourselves if there is some other legislative mechanism which can provide relief to already overburdened neighborhoods wrestling with this issue, and I think the answer is "yes". Is it a proven fact that Registered Level 3 Sex Offenders are disproportionately concentrated in a few specific neighborhoods in Minneapolis? Yes. Does this concentration contribute to the neighborhood livability issues that many residents already face in these neighborhoods? Yes it does. Based on my experience as a Crime Prevention Specialist I have seen firsthand, the anxiety, fear, mistrust, and suspicion that many residents feel when they learn about a Level 3 in their neighborhood. Does this make the jobs of Neighborhood Associations, City Agencies, and other civic groups engaged in the difficult and necessary work of uplifting these neighborhoods more difficult? Of course it does. Given all of these facts, I think it is very important for us to take a long hard look at finding ways to mitigate concentration of registered sex offenders in these neighborhoods. Legislative approaches regulating where they can live is certainly worth serious consideration. "Treat people as if they were what they ought to be, and you help them to become what they are capable of being." --Johann Wolfgang von Goethe Tim Hammett Crime Prevention Specialist Minneapolis Police Department - 4th Pct. 1925 Plymouth Ave N. Minneapolis, MN 55411 (612) 673-2792 [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----Original Message----- From: Terrell Brown [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, October 01, 2004 10:24 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: RE: [Mpls] sex offenders in mpls 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" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 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 > [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls > REMINDERS: > 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at > [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls > > > REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls REMINDERS: 1. Think a member has violated the rules? Email the list manager at [EMAIL PROTECTED] 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:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Un-subscribe, etc. at: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
