California State Treasurer Phil Angelides
c/o Angelides for Governor
1331 21st Street
Sacramento, CA 95814

Dear Treasurer Angelides:

We write to express our disappointment with your decision to support Jessica's Law, and the plan you have created to further exacerbate the already challenging issues surrounding the re-integration of sex offenders upon release from incarceration.

Proposition 83, or Jessica's Law, responds to a hideous crime that certainly warrants thought among California's legislators. As is the case in Three Strikes, however, the pursuit of tough sentencing schemes and other punitive measures will provide little benefit for the public safety over the long-term while inciting fear among communities. Since 1978, California voters have accepted every "tough-on-crime" measure presented on a ballot, except one. Despite longer sentences and severe additions to the penal code, California's adult crime rate continues to rise.

The Center on Juvenile and Criminal Justice is a nonprofit, nonpartisan organization in San Francisco dedicated to the establishment of balanced and effective criminal justice policies. Through our direct services and policy programs, we work to reduce society's reliance on incarceration and promote public safety. We hope you will listen to the voices of community-based organizations operating in this field and consider our informed guidance.

As a gubernatorial candidate, you have an opportunity to discover best practices in criminal justice policy, to educate the public about them and to support their implementation. A clear determination by the state executive to prevent crime and provide resources for the treatment and rehabilitation for those who have offended will position California as a leader in fair and humane criminal justice policies, and demonstrate the potential for changing a very troubled corrections system. Directing resources toward such a change is also in line with society's interest in efficient public safety, as indicated by a March 2006 Field Poll indicating that only 36 percent of Californians support new prison construction.

Your plan "to protect our children and families against sexual abuse" capitalizes on the public's misunderstanding of sexual offending and the California parole system. The state does not need more stringent laws or longer sentences. The state requires effective treatment for offenders during their already long periods of detention behind bars. Only with treatment can California citizens expect that supervision of sex offenders on parole ultimately will be successful.

What is most striking about the ongoing research into sex offending is the finding that treatment works in a large percentage of sex offender cases. While it may not cure the problem, it will control the impulses to an extent that supervision upon release from prison will be less daunting to the community and the parolee. To best protect children and families from sex offenders released from prison, California must institute treatment for sex offenders that begins on the first day of their incarceration and continues until their release. Residency requirements and longer prison sentences have not proven to be effective measures to reduce sex offending, while long-term treatment and community integration with supervision have been.

Indeed, the residency requirements respond to a common misperception that children are at risk of abuse by strangers in public places. While such threats are a concern to every parent, they are extremely rare. In fact, 80 to 90 percent of sex crimes against children is committed by a family member or acquaintance whose access to the child will not be limited by residency restrictions. While serving little public good, these restrictions will serve to push sex offenders into rural communities where they may have no social connections and support, or to become homeless due to the difficulties of finding appropriate housing.

At a time of desperate prison over-crowding, increasing crime rates and almost 10 percent of the California budget dedicated to corrections, it would make more sense to consider a new path of treatment and rehabilitation. The current path will not lead to success.

Best of luck in your campaign.

Respectfully,

Megan Doyle Corcoran
Director of Communications and Policy