What is Your Take: Landlords and Sex Offenders

[XLFD]

What is your opinion of this law passed by the City of Ludington in 2007 and its effectiveness?

Article:  Fewer sex offenders living in Ludington in wake of ordinance

Kevin Braciszeski - Daily News Staff Writer

Wednesday, February 10, 2010

Fewer registered sex offenders are living in Ludington two years after the city council passed an ordinance requiring landlords to check if renters in school zones are on the Michigan Sex Offender Registry.

“We were able to clear the (sex offenders) living in those zones out of those zones and keep them out and as a result we have fewer sex offenders living in the city,” said Ludington Police Chief Mark Barnett.

Barnett said there were about 10 registered sex offenders living in school zones — a 1,000-foot radius from schools — and a total of about 65 registered sex offenders living in the city during late 2007.

“Frankly, we had a bad situation with people living in these areas,” he said about school zones.

Now there are none known in the school zones and about 45 in the city.

“We were kind of surprised by the result,” Barnett said about the overall number decreasing by so many. “It was unintended, we didn’t start out to drive them from the city.”

There was some resistance to the ordinance initially after the council approved it in October 2007, Barnett said, because it gave landlords the responsibility for checking on the renters. But, Barnett said, without the ordinance his department had no way of knowing if registered sex offenders were living in school zones.

He spoke about the issue Monday while providing his department’s 2009 annual report to the city council.

 

Article VIII: Sex Offender Residency (Ludington Municiple Code)

Sec. 34-231.  [Landlord responsibilities.]

A landlord who rents property as a residence that is located within a school safety zone shall:

(a)   Have prospective tenant(s) sign a form that indicates whether tenant or any member of tenant's household, over the age of 18 who will reside in the rental property, is or is not a registered sex offender, or required to be registered, with the Michigan Public Sex Offender Registry or other similar state sex offender registry.

(b)   Prior to such rental, check the Michigan Public Sex Offender Registry to determine if prospective tenant(s) is/are a registered sex offender. If landlord does not have access to the Internet, landlord may fill out a form provided by the Ludington City Police Department requesting the police department to check the registry to determine whether the prospective tenant is registered.

(c)   Sign a form provided by the Ludington City Police Department, for landlord's file, verifying that the landlord has asked the tenant if they or any member of tenant's household who will reside in the rental property is a registered sex offender and confirming whether or not the prospective tenant was listed on the Michigan Public Sex Offender Registry.

(d)   Landlord must retain the forms required by subsections (a) and (c) above, while tenant occupies the rental property, and must make such forms available to the city police department if requested.

(Ord. No. 169-07, § 1, 10-8-2007)

Sec. 34-232.  [Prohibitions.]

Landlord shall not rent rental property located within a school safety zone as a residence to a prospective tenant if tenant:

(a)   Admits that they or any member of tenant's household who will reside in the rented property is a registered sex offender.

(b)   Is found to be registered on the Michigan Public Sex Offender Registry.

(c)   Fails to sign the form described in subsection 34-231(a) above.

(Ord. No. 169-07, § 1, 10-8-2007)

Sec. 34-233.  Penalty.

(a)   If landlord violates the provisions of this article VIII, for the first violation only, the City of Ludington Police Department will send a letter to the landlord informing the landlord of the violation.

(b)   After the landlord has been given a letter from the Ludington Police Department under subsection (a), at any time landlord shall subsequently violate this article VIII, then the landlord shall be liable for a municipal civil infraction punishable under Code section 1-7.

(c)   Landlord will not be in violation of this article VIII if a tenant is not required to be registered at the time landlord rents to tenant, but tenant is subsequently required to register with the Michigan Public Sex Offender Registry after the commencement of the lease or rental.

(Ord. No. 169-07, § 1, 10-8-2007)

[Mary A.]

Aqua,

Are you forgetting about their constitutional rights? I can just see it now - Castration of sex offenders at first, then on to mandatory tubal ligations and vasectomies for the poor, homeless and mentally ill and others that the "majority" see as unfit to reproduce. I don't think you really want to live in that type of society, do you?

[XLFD]

Very good analysis, Mary. Where would we stop? What if the sex offender was later proved innocent? While many of us would like to have a public stoning of the worst of these pervs on the visceral level, in the end, would that make things better?

[Edie Lindsey]

The loophole in state laws, shows a loophole in the local laws-- no landlord, no need to report. Few things are more scarier than a dangerous, homeless RSO. I agree with Masonco that the majority of these guys and gals already on the list and compliant are fairly harmless, but those who operate under the radar are the harmful ones.

[Mary A.]

When the list first became available, I checked and was surprised at how many RSOs lived in the Ludington area.

[Dave]

In general, the sex offender list is a great idea. The only thing that has ever bothered me in regardless to the list is the occasional, and i'm sure its only occasional, those who's sex crime was for example a 18 year old doing something with a 17 or 16 year old gf/bf and being branded as being a sex predator with those individuals who truly are predators. In some states, a person might be on the sex registry for years or decades for what might of been either a minor crime or something like what i've mentioned before. I mean I know that by law a person of age doing things with a person under age is illegal... I get that and understand that. I just don't know if I want them to be branded as perverts for doing what many teenagers have done for a very long time. I guess I just wish they would make more of a designation on the list of what the individual done. Past that though, I have no issue with the list/registry.

[XLFD]

You can turn on shows like Maury and Jerry Springer and have them parade out underage kids who are 'out of control'. If we believe their stories, they could effectively make the guys who take advantage of their naivety into RSOs by divulging their identity, even if the sex was (so-called) consensual.

Some of the time the guy(s) come onstage and acknowledge their parenthood/relationship to these underage girls. In the meantime, someone who couldn't get to a public restroom in time may get caught and stigmatized for the next 25 years as a menace to society. The RSO is a good idea, but as the recent loophole Eastwick and Masonco pointed out, the laws need some tweaking.

[AQUAMAN]

Some of you guys are way, way behind the times. Castration now consists of an injection or pill, or maybe both, I sure aint no expert on it, but, it was in the news long ago about the remedies now available. No, we don't take knives or guillotines to do the job now. Anyhew, it's not a very savory subject, and having said that, I bid you all, a good nite, and pleasant dreams, and don't forget to dial 911 or 357 when your home is invaded. Laws for the sane/insane are having no visible lines nowadays, just invisible.

[masonco]

That is why I said there are pills now.

BTW did you know that even if someone is almost comatose and in a nursing home, they still have to register? Yes SO's can be on their deathbed and receive knock on the door if they don't register. I wonder if the court would come to them and take them to prison?

[XLFD]

I haven't heard any glowing testimonials yet, but does anyone here believe that placing the responsibility on the landlords of Ludington for determining whether their renters are a RSO, and establishing penalties for the landlord when they don't, is a good idea? The results seem to have worked for the better, if there is no RSOs in Ludington school safety zones, and the amount of RSOs has dropped by 25 in the city.

[masonco]

I would not be a bit surprised if everyone of those 25 are "homeless" and don't have to register. The same thing goes for school safety zones. How would an out of the area landlord know if there is an extra person "sleeping on the couch".

[XLFD]

Sounds like a valid assumption, now that the RSO law has been certified as incomplete by the courts.
Since this has just been legally confirmed, their could be a lot less RSOs around in the future if they can pass themselves off as homeless, whether legit or not. Of course, they would still actually be around.

[Angela]

I think it is a good idea because most of the landlords that would rent to RSO are slum-lords - so now this ordinance is making this slum-lords accountable for something and making them pay better attention who they will and wont rent to.