Judiciary Committee Rules Favorably on Sex-Offender Siting Bill

The Judiciary Committee ruled favorably Tuesday on House Bill 6632, “An Act Concerning the Siting of Residential Sexual Offender Treatment Facilities.”

The state has made plans to build an experimental sex-offender treatment facility on the grounds of the Corrigan-Radgowski prison. The facility would be run by The Connection, Inc., or TCI.

This bill that the Judiciary Committee ruled on on Tuesday would repeal and replace an earlier bill, and would require anyone making a proposal for a sex-offender facility to identify at least five proposed sites, around the state.

The proposal would have to establish criteria to evaluate the site, including its proximity to municipal parks, recreation facilities, youth services facilities and senior centers, schools, churches, liquor stores and day care services.

The bill also says: “If, on or before June 8, 2010, the Department of Correction or the Court Support Services Division of the Judicial Department selected a site for a residential sexual offender treatment facility pursuant to requests for proposals issued pursuant to section 19 or 20 of public act 08-1 of the January special session, the department or division, as the case may be, shall:

(1) prepare a description of the physical location and surrounding area of the site selected, and of any other proposed sites identified for consideration by the person… and

(2) evaluate the site selected, and such other proposed sites, in accordance with established criteria, including the criteria set forth in subdivision (2) of subsection (a) of this section. The department or division, as the case may be, shall submit such description and evaluation to the General Assembly not later than July 1, 2011.”

The town brought a case against the state in 2010, charging that these very criteria had not been met.

Part of the town’s complaint says that the website of the General Assembly's judiciary committee showed two releases dated Jan. 7, 2010, "one of which indicated that a site… had already been selected."

The complaint goes on to say that a new request for proposals should have been issued when TCI, the company that would run the site, was asked to submit ideas for five sites. By failing to do this, the complaint alleges, "the DOC necessarily failed to comply with the requirements."

"A new request for proposal," the complaint says, "might have resulted in the submission of additional bids, any of which was likely to have identified potential sites other than those identified by TCI in its bid, which… was the sole bid submitted."

The case the town brought against the state was dismissed by a judge in January. Today is the deadline to appeal. The town has spent more than $85,000 in attorney fees to date on the case.

To read more about the case against the state, click . To read the case, as filed in court, click the pdf in the photo box.

To read the bill in its entirety, click here.

To read about a memorandum of understanding the state has promised Montville, click .