Sex Offender Bylaw Not Needed, Committee Says

Plymouth does not need a bylaw prohibiting where sexual offenders may live, according to a committee formed to decide that very question.

John Hammond, chairman of Precinct 4, said the committee unanimously voted against the creation, citing legal and civil issues as well as the fact that no studies have been done showing that such a bylaw actually works.

In October 2009, Town Meeting considered a bylaw that would have prevented Level 3 sex offenders from living within 2,500 feet, or half a mile, of any school, daycare center, elderly housing complex, park or recreation facility.

Hammond said the reasons for a bylaw were that some people feared Plymouth would become a refuge for sex offenders who could not live in other towns, and that schools and playgrounds need to be protected.

The arguments against are that it would force sexual predators who have been convicted before to go underground, making it difficult for police to keep tabs on them. It could also prevent offenders from living near stabilizing forces such as family. It could also be considered unconstitutional.

Southborough, Marlborough, Mendon, Natick and Ashland all have some type of bylaw prohibiting where sex offenders may live or have established no-loitering zones near schools, parks, day-cares, elderly housing and other places.

Hammond said most towns that have adopted such bylaws have done so in response to sensational crimes, such as murders, but that the actual enforcement of the bylaw has done little good. One New Hampshire town that passed a very restrictive sexual offender law was sued several times and eventually the law was  struck down by state courts as being too restrictive.

Hammond said considering the number of Level 3 offenders currently residing in Plymouth (there are only four), that it would not be helpful to the police department.

He said a mental health councilor who specializes in treating sexual offenders told the committee that Plymouth is actually not an advantageous town for sexual offenders, citing expensive housing and the lack of public transportation.

“There are only four people who would fall under this bylaw and they are well controlled by police,” Hammond said. “I’m a social worker, I’ve worked with both victims and perpetrators and I think what would be more be far more helpful and, something the committee did not explore, is public health education about this issue, teaching people who to protect children and protect yourself, but that’s just my opinion, not the committee’s.”Police Chief Michael Botieri told the committee that a bylaw would not help his officers keep tabs on the offenders who live or work in town.

Botieri said that his officers visit Level 2 sex offenders three times a year, rather than just the one time recommended by the Sex Offender Registry Board, and they visit Level 3 offenders six times a year. Uniformed officers talk to the offenders about their lives, and get updates on where they live, where they work and other things.

Botieri said the program has worked well and that his department has done a good job controlling offenders.

“I think that’s why the committee decided not to go forward with this bylaw,” Botieri said Wednesday.

He also noted that when released from prison most offenders will go home, but such a bylaw could prohibit them from going home. He said it would be more difficult to track offenders and keep tabs on them, which is an important task done by police, he said.