HomeMy WebLinkAbout- OB-2 - Repealing Chapter XIII to Title 11 of CM - 3/4/2018CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: MARCH 4, 2014 ITEM NUMBER: OB -
SUBJECT: AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF COSTA MESA
CALIFORNIA REPEALING CHAPTER XIII TO TITLE 11 OF THE COSTA
MESA MUNICIPAL CODE, RELATING TO SEX OFFENDERS PROHIBITED
FROM CITY PARKS AND SPORTS FACILITIES
DATE: FEBRUARY 24, 2014
FROM: OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK
PRESENTATION BY: CITY ATTORNEY
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: BRENDA GREEN, CITY CLERK, AT (714) 754-5221
RECOMMENDATION:
City Council consider for second reading Ordinance No. 14-03 to be read by title only and
waive further reading which repeals Chapter XIII to Title 11 of the Costa Mesa Municipal
Code relating to Sex Offenders Prohibited from City Parks and Sports Facilities.
BACKGROUND:
At the February 18, 2014 City Council meeting, City Council considered and approved
Ordinance 14-03 for first reading.
In 2011, the City of Irvine enacted Ordinance 11-05 that prohibited registered sex
offenders from entering city parks without written permission from the chief of police. On
May 1, 2012, the City Council of the City of Costa Mesa adopted Ordinance No. 12-3,
adding Chapter XIII (Sex Offenders Prohibited From Entering Parks and Sports Facilities)
of Title 11 (Offenses — Miscellaneous), which prohibits all registered sex offenders,
pursuant to Section 290 of the California Penal Code, from entering City parks and City
sports facilities, as defined.
Recently, the Fourth District of the California Court of Appeal decided the case of People
v. Nguyen, 2014 Cal. App. LEXIS 18 (Cal. App. 4th Dist. Jan. 10, 2014). In Nguyen, the
Court of Appeal held that the Irvine Ordinance is invalid because it is preempted by state
law. The Court of Appeal, in an almost identical but unpublished case, People v. Godinez,
2014 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 159 (January 10, 2014), Appellate Court Case No.
G047657, also held a similar ordinance enacted by the County of Orange to be preempted
by state law. The Orange County District Attorney is likely to seek review by the California
Supreme Court of the Nguyen and Godinez decisions.
1
A lawsuit filed by John Doe against the City of Costa Mesa, challenging the validity of
Ordinance No. 12-3 is pending in federal court. The case has been on hold awaiting a final
ruling on under state law.
The City has not enforced Ordinance 12-3 since the Superior Court's Appellate
Department ruling in the Godinez case.
ANALYSIS:
In People v. Nguyen, the Court of Appeal held that the Legislature's enactment of a
comprehensive statutory scheme regulating the daily lives of sex offenders, including
places they are allowed to go, indicates the Legislature's intent to occupy the entire field of
sex offender regulation to the exclusion of additional local restrictions. Because Ordinance
12-3 prohibits sex offenders from entering parks in a more restrictive manner than Irvine's
recently invalidated ordinance, Ordinance 12-3 is likely also preempted by state law.
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED:
The City could continue not to enforce Ordinance No. 12-3 and take no further action
until it becomes clear whether or not the California Supreme Court will review the
Nguyen decision.
FISCAL REVIEW:
There is no anticipated fiscal impact.
LEGAL REVIEW:
The City Attorney's office has drafted and approved the attached ordinance repealing
Chapter XIII.
CONCLUSION:
The Police Department recommends that the City Council approve the attached
ordinance repealing Chapter XIII of Title 11 of the Costa Mesa Municipal Code.
Brenda Green, City Clerk
ATTACHMENT: Ordinance No. 14-03
RIA