Scotia’s Washington Road residents vowed they would not stop until their voices were heard.
After more than six months of speaking with village officials, collecting signatures and hanging caution tape throughout their neighborhood, residents finally received the news they have been waiting for: Convicted sex offenders in Schenectady County will need to move if their current residency is within 2,000 feet of a school, daycare center, playground or public pool. For Washington Road residents, this means their neighbor’s houseguest, a level three sex offender, will need to move by Oct. 1, when the county law goes into effect.
A lot of burden will be lifted off of many parents of young children. This law has been on the table for two years, and we feel we made a difference in getting it back into action, said Washington Road resident Stan Kubick.
Kubick moved to Scotia with his wife and five children a few months before his neighbor Bill Seyse decided to let a level three sex offender into his home last fall. Seyse sent his neighbors a letter informing them about his decision to take Richard Matthews III into his home.
The neighborhood has many families with young children.
`People simply felt it was a poor decision. It was not the place to have this person living. We started to get together to discuss what we could do. At first, I thought it was helpless, but when we started to make progress, I knew we could really make a difference,` said Kubick.
Kubick spoke of the parents who attended many government meetings, on both the village and county level. He said to hear people in their 40s talk about being abused as a child, and how it still affected them, was very emotional.
`For these people to have to relive their abuse to get a law passed to protect our children was a very emotional experience. Everyone says, ‘What about the rights of the sex offender,’ well what about the rights of a victim?` said Kubick.
Not everyone feels the law will bring ease to parents. Some argue that sex offenders will move into areas that are more rural.
Glenville town supervisor Frank X. Quinn said he opposed the legislation because it is poorly constructed and attempts to steer sex offenders to the five Montgomery and Schoharie towns surrounding Schenectady County.
`The proposed legislation can affect thousands of people in all five towns.
There was little or no communication by the county legislature with the key stakeholders in the towns throughout the county,` said Quinn.
Kubick’s response to those who say the law will push offenders to neighboring towns is that he feels there needs to be a statewide law.
`The state needs to step up and deal with this problem instead of pushing it on counties and municipalities. They need to find a better way to deal with this age old problem, like finding these offenders proper housing and giving them proper rehabilitation after jail time,` said Kubick.
Kubick said he has seen moving trucks and boxes at his next-door neighbor’s house. He said while he is unsure whether Matthews has moved, he does know he feels a sense of peace.
`My neighbors and I feel like we now have some recourse should something like this ever happen again,` said Kubick.
RELATED STORY: Sex offender laws under fire
Supervisors say county legislation is shortsighted
By JESSICA HARDING
Schenectady County’s five town supervisors have all spoken against the county’s new local law restricting where convicted sex offenders can live, saying the law will negatively impact the communities they serve.
Glenville’s Supervisor Frank Quinn spoke on behalf of the county’s five town supervisors at the Schenectady County Legislature’s meeting Tuesday, June 12. He said he was opposed to the law that would restrict convicted sex offenders at any level from living within 2,000 feet of any place where children congregate.
The Legislature passed two local laws at the meeting. One restricted where offenders can live, and the second will force offenders currently living in restricted zones out of their homes by Oct. 1.
`The supervisors are in total agreement about what’s going on here,` Quinn said in a telephone interview. `We are steering sex offenders from the city into the towns. We are not addressing the problem and not dealing with the real issues.`
The elected local officials whom Quinn said were closest to the 84,000 plus residents living in the county’s towns opposed the legislation because they feared it would have many negative impacts on their municipalities.
Furthermore, Quinn said, none of the county’s supervisors were involved in discussion regarding the issue and neither were other stakeholders such as local police chiefs, probation officers and the county’s district attorney.
Quinn said the town supervisors meet with members of the County Legislature once a month during meetings of the Intergovernmental Cooperation Committee, and the issue of restricting sex offenders was never brought up at those meetings.
`All of a sudden, there it is on the docket, and I had to go and get the information out myself,` Quinn said.
Quinn presented the Legislature with a list of nine concerns and urged the legislature not to vote at Tuesday’s meeting but wait until answers were available.
The town supervisors said both laws are an attempt to steer sex offenders into the five towns, and lack the necessary data that show these laws work. They added that the legislation will force offenders underground.
Rotterdam Supervisor Steven Tommasone said one of his biggest concerns is the constitutionality of the law.
`The county should know whether the law is constitutional. The DA and the county attorney need to be sure of that,` Tommasone said.
He added that, as supervisor, his role is to create laws that won’t be challenged in court because that only costs the taxpayers.
Tommasone said he was also worried that this law would force offenders into rural areas of the county where they wouldn’t be easily monitored.
`Supervisors in particular are charged with ensuring the safety of our communities,` he said.
Niskayuna Supervisor Luke Smith said he doesn’t think this law will work to protect children. He said the law will force offenders underground and give people a false sense of security.
Smith was also disappointed that he was not involved in discussions.
`The county pushes the idea that we are working on intergovernmental cooperation, but they don’t include us in this matter,` Smith said. `I think this law in an unfortunate way to deal with this issue, and I would have liked to voice my opinion before the vote.`
Smith said many residents assume offenders wouldn’t move into Niskayuna because of the town’s lack of two-family housing.
`Pedophiles are not just poor people; they have resources and they already live in Niskayuna,` Smith said.
The Intergovernmental Cooperation Committee met again Tuesday, June 19, and Quinn said Ed Kosiur, D-Schenectady, and architect of the legislation had promised to get answers to the supervisors’ concerns.
In a telephone interview, Kosiur said the county planners were still working on a map outlining where offenders can and cannot live, and more answers would be available once the map is completed.
Kosiur said one reason why this legislation was so quickly passed was because the city of Schenectady and the village of Scotia were going to pass their own residency restrictions and the county didn’t want to have a `hodgepodge of local laws.`
`We took the heat, and we are going to continue to take the heat to protect our children,` Kosiur said.“
