Ludington Landlords on Patrol: A Failed Policy

[XLFD]

After two years of having an ordinance which had landlords check into whether they were renting to Registered Sex Offenders (RSOs), Ludington Police Department (LPD) Police Chief Mark Barnett made a statement at a City Council meeting saying that there were no RSOs living within 1000 ft of a school safety zone (SSZ).  Any idiot with a computer and a couple of minutes could look up the local RSO list and find that he was not telling the public the truth, and there were actually six RSOs living within SSZs in the City of Ludington at the time he made the statement.  This idiot did just that:  Sex Lies and Vigilantes

 

Shortly after a couple of letters were wrote to the proper authorities, the Chief rephrased his statement at a subsequent city council meeting, acknowledging three of the RSOs as having been 'grandfathered' in, living there before this law took effect.  By that time, one had moved out, but he never commented on the other two, who still live in SSZs to this day.  Sex Lies and Clarifications

 

This local law is ridiculous, and I am more convinced than ever that when this ordinance was proposed it flew within the face of state law.  This ordinance requires landlords/apartment managers to check out the RSO status of those they rent to, and send a form to the LPD if they rented within 1000 ft. of school property  Landlord RSO Form.  The landlords can be charged with a municipal civil infraction if they fail to do so.  Contrary to this ordinance, State law gives the duty of verifying whether RSOs live in a school safety zone to local law enforcement with jurisdiction, period.   Passing this duty to civilians is ridiculous, and against the public interest.

 

Captain Michael Harrie, who is given credit for drafting this policy, must have thought the 16 members of the LPD were not up to this simple verifying task.  Currently, LPD's Sergeant Schultz is in charge of this program.  Let us not confuse him with the bumbling dumbkopf who shared his name as the iconic character in Hogan's Heroes.  Instead, let's compare the City of Ludington's current policy to Nazi Germany officials trying to discover dissidents and Jews hiding out by offering incentives to the citizenry for turning them in.   

 

Does this ordinance actually work?  Nein.

 

 

Consider Luke Patterson; he was found guilty of CSC 3rd degree, did his time, and is now living on Dowland Street at Bud's Tap Room, according to the public registry.  He wasn't on the registry there last year during the Chief's boasting, but he now lives within 800 ft. of the Foster School playground.  As a loyal citizen of the Third Reich Ward, I accuse Luke and the owners of Bud's  Owner's Info of crimes against the City. 

 

 

Consider Aaron Reamer; he was found guilty of CSC 2nd degree, assault, did his time, and is now living on 7th Street according to the public registry.  He wasn't on the registry there last year, but he now lives within 900 ft. of the PM School/Early Childhood Center property.  As a loyal citizen of the Third Reich Ward, I accuse Aaron and the owners of this house  Owner's Info of crimes against the City.

 

 

Consider Kenneth Wilson; he was accused of CSC 1st Degree, did his time, and is now living on North Staffon, according to the public registry.  He wasn't on the registry there last year, but he now lives within 900 ft. of Franklin Elementary property.  As a loyal citizen of the Third Reich Ward, I accuse Kenneth and the owners of that property Owner's Info of crimes against the City.

 

Each of these three people last registered at their current address in early April, 2011.  I will presume that these three RSOs and their corresponding landlords did not mean to run afoul of the law, but they have.  I would have liked to see some proactive involvement by the local law enforcement with jurisdiction over the school safety zones in their area prevent them from becoming tenants in an area they shouldn't.  But they have not.  Who is really guilty of being irresponsible?  Who is really shirking their public duty? 

 

 

The name of his character might be Sgt. Schultz, but he has an uncanny resemblance to a certain Police Chief.

 

Is public safety being compromised by this law?  Of course; taking this responsibility out of the local police's hands, and giving it to landlords, many who don't even live in Ludington (and some of which are trusts or LLCs) is total negligence on the part of the City.  We must strongly encourage City Hall to repeal this ordinance, thus making the LPD responsible (as it should) for keeping the bad guys away from the kids.   

[JRGF]

Good detective work XLFD, at least someone is looking out for the citizens of Ludington.

[XLFD]

I hate not to claim the credit, but the Michigan Registered Sex Offender Registry is available to one and all who have internet access.  It takes less than ten minutes to look at all the 80+ RSOs in the 49431 area code, and make a short list of those who are 'close' to the schools.  http://www.mipsor.state.mi.us/

I actually went out on the town and measured the distances using horizontal and vertical components.  If you live out of state, you can still confirm their distances by getting on Google.Maps or other similar application and zooming into Ludington, using the scale they may provide, and the City's assessor site to get the locations of the addresses. 

[Eve Alone]

The last guy, the worst offender because he was first degree CSC, has a Ohio based Limited Liability Company as landlord.  How do you charge that LLC with a Ludington municipal civil infraction? 

I have to ask these registered sex offenders: why the Helen are you risking going back into the slammer by staying at these places?  If I was a RSO, I would check and recheck to make sure I was at least 1000 ft. away from a school. 

I have to ask the LPD, WTH are you doing?  Why are you not catching these derelicts before some part-time blogger does?  I am joining the chorus of those who believe you need to be consolidated by the MCSO.

[Eye On Ludington]

 I highly doubt they are more dangerous at 900 feet than they are at 1000 feet, or safer at 1100 feet than at 1000 feet.   These 1000 foot restrictions are mere window-dressing anyway if as some studies claim most child molestations occur within the victims own family.  Of all crimes committed by an already RSO, I wonder how many were committed by an RSO living 900 feet from a school vs 1001 feet plus. 

I do think it is ridiculous to make it a crime on the landlord if an RSO moves into one of their rentals.  Instead of rental, what is the law when an RSO buys a home?  Would the bank be charged with a crime if they approved a mortgage?  What if the RSO paid cash money to buy a house, would the seller be charged with a crime?

[XLFD]

I can see the logic of keeping the RSOs away from areas where kids are, but if these distances are too great and/or an area has many schools separated evenly away from each other, you run into problems of having high concentrations of RSOs in geographically small areas in a city-- which is also not desirable

Going by memory of what I've read on the laws, the local policy does not affect home purchases, although the state law does.  There are a couple of RSOs in Ludington that owned and lived in a house that was in a School Safety Zone before the restrictive laws were passed.  They effectively are grandfathered in, they can live there without fear of being forced out.  Yet, I believe they and other RSOs cannot buy new property in a SSZ.

The points you make about the banks and cash-sellers being charged with a crime (or at least a civil infraction), is well-taken, when you extend the logic of the local landlord policy.  I think the legislators who wrote the state law would be at least chagrined with what the local ordinance has done as for accountability and responsibility of law enforcement.

[Eye On Ludington]

What will you do differently in the future to change the law?  Will you be able to accomplish change or will you merely complain about it?

 

The local ordinance being what it is and holding landlords accountable, did you inform the owner's of those homes that you would be publishing this information about their rentals? Why or why not?

 

[XLFD]

This ordinance needs to be repealed, and the state law followed-- local law enforcement has the duty to keep the RSOs from moving into the SSZs.  Not landlords and landladies who have no idea often how far away the nearest school property is.

I hope the local landlords/landladies get charged with a civil infraction for their part in not obeying this insane ordinance.  And then in an act of civil disobedience against this unjust law, not pay it.  Those with the cojones to do this, will thank me for doing so, no doubt.  But the LPD is not a proactive force, so this is an unlikely result.

 

[Jennifer]

luke patterson no longer lives on dowland st.  IN FACT he was grand fathered in, but because of a 2 week period the year before he changed his address the grand father claus no longer stood ground for him to stay. SO because of this He was given 30 days to leave the apartment where him and his wife who has a heart condition and children (one being autistic) had lived for the last 11 years. It doesn't really matter what you see or hear anymore. Just a thought that before any one judges other people you should really look into actual court documents of peoples cases before you pass judgement or want to comment on what you think is wrong or right. For instance with this mans case, he was 18 and the "victim" was 17. But she was 19 before she pressed charges with no evidence other than her word against his. He was scared because the police were telling him if he didn't plead guilty he was going to be going a way for a long long time. He had no prior criminal record or history. His court appointed lawyer talked him into pleading no contest. If you read his actual court documents the girl was caught lying in the court room over 7 times by her own lawyer. AND her and her brother were actually escorted out of the court room for "laughing". In the documents it also states that she went to eat at a restaurant with him and a friend of hers approximately 6 months after the so called crime. ALL  I can say on this topic.....BEFORE you judge think about how easy this could have happened to you in your life time. There are many sex offenders who are on the lists that were boyfriend/girlfriend too. Just saying....not all sex offenders are really criminals. SOME ARE and those are the ones you need to be concerned about, BUT until you actually read that particular offenders actual court documents I wouldn't being throwing judgement around so easily.

[XLFD]

You will notice this thread is a couple of years old, and RSOs are notoriously transient, and so Luke Patterson does show up elsewhere. 

Actually, I am making no allegations about the characters of any of the Registered Sex Offenders above other than they were classified as RSOs and were living within school safety zones in violation of the state laws, thereby making their landlord/lady also non-compliant with the local law.   I am sure there are many who have got a bad rap, and I welcome anyone to defend their past or their convictions, if they have some relevant documents or revelations backed by more than hearsay. 

Prosecution and police in our area are fairly well known for their abilities to put lawful people through the wringer at times.  If you can present a case with some actual meat behind it, you're free to present it here and have our audience review and possibly critique it either way. 

[AQUAMAN]

Very insightful and cogent comment Jennifer! I tend to agree wholeheartedly! Where is the BEEF?