FRESNO COUNTY – Further public input did not sway the Fresno County Board of Supervisors from its support of an ordinance that aims to limit the concentration of sex offenders in transitional housing facilities. 

The ordinance was initially included on the Jan. 6 meeting’s consent calendar because the Fresno County Board of Supervisors unanimously approved its first reading in December; however, a member of the public asked for it to be removed so people could speak on the topic. Thirteen residents gave their input before the supervisors again voted 5-0 to pass the second reading of the ordinance. 

Those who spoke against the ordinance said they understood and agreed with its intent, but wanted more time to discuss one specific section that could displace people living in transitional housing facilities. 

“What I see this particular ordinance doing in this particular case, is it will cause more homelessness of the exact population that you’re so concerned about,” Fresno resident Matt Rivera said. “And my request is that you just put it off for 30 days, think of a solution that doesn’t create more homelessness … because that’s exactly at face value what this ordinance would do county-wide.”

Sex offender concentrations

The supervisors brought the ordinance forward to address a high number of law enforcement calls to transitional housing facilities, particularly those run by nonprofit Centers for Living, in the unincorporated areas of the county. 

The county has said that its aim is to limit an over-concentration of sex offenders in residential neighborhoods by restricting the number of unrelated sex offenders living in a single-family dwelling to six. Board members said transitional housing facilities should already be following this limit and all the ordinance does is give the sheriff’s office a mechanism for enforcing the law.

Dawn Coyle, who operates Centers for Living with her husband, said they agree with this part of the ordinance. 

“We have housed six registered offenders in our homes, and we’ve complied,” Coyle said. “That is not what we’re asking to defer.”

Beyond limiting the number of registered sex offenders who can live in a single-family home, the ordinance limits the total number of people who can live in a transitional housing facility if any one of them is a sex offender. 

The ordinance specifically states that no more than six beds are allowed in a single-family dwelling occupied by one or more sex offenders, and no more than six people unrelated by blood, marriage or adoption can live in a single-family dwelling occupied by one or more sex offenders. 

“So if the ordinance passes as-is, I have one registered offender in the house. That means I can only have six people in that house, and that’s including my two house managers,” Coyle said. 

One of the house managers at the Center for Living women’s house said they currently have 12 women living in the home. Up until October, she said they had not had a registered sex offender in the house for nearly four years. With this ordinance, that woman will have to leave the house — or six others will have to leave. 

Public, supervisor input

While multiple people connected to Centers for Living spoke against the ordinance and refuted claims made about the management and legal compliance of the nonprofit, neighbors of Centers for Living facilities spoke in favor of the ordinance. 

“No one is disputing that sober living and transitional housing are important in this community, absolutely, … but I will tell you from my own observation and my own experience, this is not a well-run facility at all,” resident Beverly Raine said. 

Just as they did at the first reading, Raine and others said they witness sexual acts, drug deals and harrassment at these facilities. 

Multiple supervisors also repeated the opinions they shared at the first reading of the ordinance, but thanked members of the public coming forward to provide their input.

Board Chair Garry Bredefeld said if Centers for Living is already complying with laws, they should have no problem with this ordinance. Vice Chair Luis Chavez said he does not believe that sex offenders should be living in residential neighborhoods at all. 

“I don’t trust the heart of men that have done these unspeakable things to children, … and so I think we should do everything we can to protect those children in our community, and I think this does strike that balance,” Chavez said.