Analysis In
Support Of Senate Bill 917 (102nd Tennessee General Assembly)
The “Tennessee
College & University Campus Sex Crimes Prevention Act of 2002”
By S. Daniel
Carter, Senior Vice President, Security On Campus, Inc.
Current Tennessee law does not provide a means to fully capture, or share with campus police or the public information about registered sex offenders attending or working at institutions of higher education. This deprives members of college and university communities of the same type of warnings about potentially dangerous sex offenders that other communities receive.
Tennessee is not alone in failing to capture or disseminate this type of information, and in response Congress modified federal sex offender registration guidelines in October 2000 with passage of the “Campus Sex Crimes Prevention Act” (section 1601 of Public Law 106-386) to close this loophole. States that fail to comply by October 27, 2002 risk losing eligibility for 10% of their Edward Byrne Memorial State and Local Law Enforcement Assistance Formula Grant Program funding. In Tennessee 10% of this funding would have amounted to almost one million dollars out of a nearly ten million dollar total award for fiscal year 2001.
Senate Bill 917 once amended by Senator Burchett’s proposed amendment (No. 1) would close this loophole, and help ensure that Tennessee is in compliance with the new federal sex offender registry guidelines. The analysis below goes section by section of the bill as amended, except for Section One which titles the bill the “Tennessee College & University Campus Sex Crimes Prevention Act of 2002” and requires no analysis.
The new federal guidelines concerning campus sex offender registration use the term “carries on a vocation” as does existing Tennessee law, but the term isn’t defined in state law. Section two would directly adopt the federal definition of this term in Tennessee law.
Section two also defines campus law enforcement that will be entitled to receive sex offender registry information as only those agencies recognized under state law, not non-police campus security departments. This will help ensure that sex offender registration information is not improperly disclosed to non-police personnel.
Although current Tennessee law requires registrants to submit a new registration form to the TBI when they enter a jurisdiction to work, carry on a vocation, or enroll as a student, it does not provide for the capture of specific information about a registrant’s status as a worker, or student at an institution of higher education. Section three would specifically require that such information be captured. This will ensure that police know in what capacity an individual is present on campus, and will eventually allow for this specific information to be shared with the public.
The new federal guidelines require that information about registrants present on campus be shared with a law enforcement agency having jurisdiction for the campus, section four provides that this should be the campus police agency, if the campus has one, or the local law enforcement agency having jurisdiction for the campus if there is no campus police agency. This section also provides for notice to the campus or local police when the registrant ceases to be enrolled or work on the campus.
The legislative history of the new federal guidelines indicates that it was the sponsor’s intent that campus police, rather than off-campus local law enforcement, be notified when a sex offender is studying or working on campus as that agency has primary responsibility for protecting the campus.
Sharing information about registered sex offenders on college and university campuses with the public is an essential public safety matter, and the provisions of sections five and six accomplish this by specifying that the name and address of any institution of higher education where a registrant is employed, carries on a vocation, or is a student may be publicly identified.
General public disclosure of this information is limited to
offenses committed after the effective date of the Act, October 27, 2002, to
help preclude any ex post facto claims.
Although the United States Court of Appeals For The Sixth Circuit ruled in Cutshall v. Sundquist that Tennessee’s sex offender
registry provisions were not punitive, and thus not subject to ex post facto
claims, there is not final resolution on this issue nationally.
The effective date of October 27,
2002 coincides with the effective date of the new federal guidelines concerning
campus sex offender registration.
Neither Senate Bill 917 as
introduced, nor the proposed amendment (No. 1) would amend TCA Sections
40-39-106 (c) and (d) to specifically confer discretionary authority on campus
law enforcement agencies to perform community notifications concerning
registrants. Further, TCA Section 40-39-106 (e) isn’t amended to afford
campus law enforcement the same immunity from liability for actions under the
sex offender registration statute as other law enforcement officers receive for
carrying out their responsibilities under this law.
Without the specific statutory
authority empowering campus police to make discretionary notifications like
other police are empowered to one of the primary intentions of this
legislation, ensuring that campus communities receive the same type of sex
offender information other communities receive, would be subverted.
Therefore we believe that SB 917
should be further amended to ensure that campus law enforcement can perform
community notifications when in their discretion such notice is necessary to
protect the public, and that campus law enforcement officers are afforded the
same degree of immunity from liability that other officers are. Section
40-39-105 should also be amended to make registration forms available at campus
police departments.
Adoption of Senate Bill 917, as
amended by Senator Burchett’s proposed amendment (No. 1), and an
additional amendment to ensure that campus police may make discretionary
notifications, and are immune from liability, will close the loophole that denies
college and university communities information about convicted sex offenders in
their midst, and will also help ensure that Tennessee retains full Byrne grant
eligibility.
Security On Campus, Inc., a national non-profit college and university campus safety, and crime victim advocacy organization, believes that this legislation will help make Tennessee’s college and university campuses safer places and urges its prompt adoption by the Tennessee General Assembly.