Towns look into repealing sex offender residency laws
Appeals court rules state should oversee regulations
BY JANE MEGGITT Staff Writer

MILLSTONE — A sex offender residency ordinance, passed in 2005, will have to be repealed, based on a recent court decision.

At the Aug. 6 Township Committee meeting, Township Attorney Duane Davison explained that a state appeals court ruled that municipalities do not have the power to adopt sex offender residency ordinances.

By adopting Megan's Law, the state took over sex offender regulations, according to Davison. Megan's Law, named for 7-year-old Megan Kanka, a New Jersey girl who was raped and murdered by a neighbor, took effect in 1994 and mandates that offenders register with police and notify officers when they change addresses.

Davison said that Cherry Hill, one of the municipalities involved in the case that went before the appellate court, has said it would appeal the decision to the Supreme Court. However, chances of the Supreme Court hearing the appeal are 1 in 10, Davison said.

"In my opinion, the chances that the Supreme Court will agree with the Appellate Division are extremely high," he said.

Davison recommended repealing the township's sex offender residency ordinance so Millstone does not end up with litigation.

Mayor Nancy Grbelja said the Township Committee would introduce an ordinance to repeal the sex offender residency ordinance at its Aug. 20 meeting.

Millstone's 2005 ordinance prohibits registered sex offenders from living in certain areas of the township. The ordinance states that a registered sex offender who has entered into a lease in a prohibited area prior to the effective date of the ordinance would have up to one year to relocate. Offenders who failed to move out of a prohibited area within the prescribed time could fall subject to a maximum penalty of $1,250 in fines, 90 days of imprisonment and 90 days of community service, according to the ordinance.

In its decision, the appellate court said it found strong evidence that such ordinances substantially interfere with the ability of parole officers to carry out their statutorily mandated function of finding the most appropriate housing for certified sex offenders. In many cases, the most appropriate housing would be in a location prohibited by the residency restriction ordinances, according to the decision.

"We conclude that the residency restriction ordinances conflict with the policies and operational effect of the statewide scheme implemented by Megan's Law, which was intended, both expressly and impliedly, to be exclusive in the field," the decision states. "The subject matter reflects a need for statewide uniformity. The ordinances interferewith and frustrate the purposes and operation of the statewide scheme."

Neighboring Upper Freehold Township, which also has a municipal sex offender ordinance, is expected to discuss the issue at its Sept. 25 workshop meeting, according to Mayor Steve Alexander.