This study was conducted BEFORE California implemented its current policy of granting parole to many inmates based on needs created by prison overcrowding rather than just merit.
Any city council member who votes to allow parolee housing in light of this information, needs to be replaced as he/she is clearly not a guardian of Clayton’s best interests (and, remember, there is an election in November…).
Results from a study conducted by the National Institute of Justice (the research, development and evaluation division of the US Department of Justice) revealed the following:
Bureau of Justice Statistics studies have found high rates of recidivism among released prisoners.
One study tracked 404,638 prisoners in 30 states after their release from prison in 2005. The researchers found that:
-Within three years of release, about two-thirds (67.8 percent) of released prisoners were rearrested.
-Within five years of release, about three-quarters (76.6 percent) of released prisoners were rearrested.
-Of those prisoners who were rearrested, more than half (56.7 percent) were arrested by the end of the first year.
-Property offenders were the most likely to be rearrested, with 82.1 percent of released property offenders arrested for a new crime compared with 76.9 percent of drug offenders, 73.6 percent of public order offenders and 71.3 percent of violent offenders.
In other words: The HUGE majority of these people who have “paid their debt to society” tend to quickly create new debts to their new community.
The above data can be found and “fact-checked” at: https://www.nij.gov/topics/corrections/recidivism/Pages/welcome.aspx.
While I am in agreement with not allowing this in Clayton. After the city council meeting, it would help if people understood what was voted upon and if they followed Roberts rules of order used in every city council meeting in the United States. Watching my fellow citizens constantly interrupt proper governance is appalling. Clayton is better and more proper than what I saw. I will support any regulation that has its say rather than get sued and waste our tax dollars on defending the inevitable out of spite and ignorance. Clayton is a awesome city we must protect but it seems our hand s are tied by the state if you bothered to read the state regulations.