Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Child Safety Zones topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Quincy councilor introduces updated child‑safety‑zone ordinance for registered offenders; item re‑advertised and held in committee
Summary
Councilor Ash presented a rewritten ordinance to amend Chapter 274 to create "child safety zones" that would bar registered sex offenders from specified locations. The item was discussed at length, city police assisted in drafting, and the committee agreed the updated version must be re‑advertised for public review before further action.
Councilor Ash presented an updated ordinance to amend Quincy Municipal Code Chapter 274 to establish designated "child safety zones" and to prohibit registered sex offenders from entering those zones. The item was introduced in the ordinance committee on April 7; the item requires re‑advertisement before further consideration and was left in committee for additional review.
Why it matters: the proposal replaces earlier residential‑restriction language that councilors and staff described as constitutionally problematic following new case law. Sponsors said the amended approach narrows the city’s regulation to geographic child safety zones — parks, playgrounds, recreation centers, libraries, schools, daycare centers, video arcades, pools, gyms and other children’s facilities — rather than imposing residential tenancy restrictions.
Key points of the proposal and discussion Councilor Ash said changes were driven in part by recent court decisions (the City of Lynn decision and others) that limit the city’s ability to impose residential restrictions on Level 1–3 registrants. The updated ordinance, drafted with assistance from the Quincy Police Department, would define child safety zones and prohibit registered Level 1–3 offenders from entering those specified locations.
Chief Mark Kennedy and Lt. Matt Panizelos of the Quincy Police Department participated in the committee discussion and assisted with drafting. Committee members thanked the chief and lieutenant for their work and confirmed the revised text will be re‑advertised so that the public can review the updated language before any future vote.
Actions and status - No final vote was taken. Committee leadership confirmed the ordinance must be re‑advertised; the item remains in committee for further review and public notice.
What the ordinance does not do The draft presented does not attempt to impose new residential or tenancy restrictions (the committee noted such restrictions have been found constitutionally vulnerable in court decisions). Sponsors emphasized the ordinance targets access to enumerated child‑oriented locations rather than where a person may live.
Next steps Committee members and the sponsor agreed to re‑advertise the updated version for public comment and to schedule another committee meeting to review any suggested revisions. Additional legal review and drafting clarifications will be completed before a new committee hearing is held.
