Kyle is missing one sex offender

Two weeks after unveiling a proposal to (1) effectively prohibit sex offenders from moving to Kyle and/or (2) creating sex offender ghettos in the city, Kyle Police Chief Jeff Barnett is returning to the City Council Tuesday asking members to pass on first reading an ordinance regulating where, or if, registered sex offenders can live within the city limits. During this two-week interim, it appears the city lost one sex offender.

In his presentation Feb. 2, Barnett presented a memorandum, dated Jan. 14, that included a table listing a dozen Central Texas communities, which one of the dozen cities had ordinances restricting where sex offenders could live, how many sex offenders lived in each community and the ratio of sex offenders to the overall population in each burg. According to that table, 68 registered sex offenders lived in Kyle.

Tuesday, Barnett will come forward with a new memo, this one dated yesterday, the first sentence of which reads: “Today, there are 67 registered sex offenders in Kyle.” I know this is a minor detail, but it bothers me: What happened to that missing sex offender? Did he/she leave on their own accord or was he/she driven out of town? Or was there a miscount? It also bothers me that the memo doesn’t address the discrepancy. I have asked the City for a clarification on the whereabouts of Sex Offender 68, and Chief Barnett replied: “I have checked with our staff to make certain that my assumption was correct. We had one move out of the city during that short time period. This is common as they move in and out of the city from time to time.”

I must also admit I am bothered by other numbers offered with the new ordinance, particularly numbers concerning renters. The latest memo, which is actually one written by Dago Pates, the Kyle Police officer who came up with the idea for the ordinance, to Chief Barnett, states nine of the now 67 sex offenders living in Kyle are renters and only those nine “would eventually be affected by this ordinance when their lease expires.” I am bothered by this because Pates’ memo then says “9 of 67 is 7% of the group that would eventually be affected by this ordinance.” That is simply not true. Nine of 67 is actually almost double that — it’s 13.4 percent. So that makes me suspect all of the math associated with this entire project, including the number of actual registered sex offenders living here, the maps they are offering showing where sex offenders might be allowed to pitch tents in Kyle — all of it. Simply put, I’m quickly losing trust in this whole project.

Among the “Whereas’s” in the ordinance there is one that states “the City Council finds from evidence and statistical reports reveal that the recidivism rate for released sex offenders alarmingly high.” Forget for a moment the strange wording of that whereas. The pertinent question to ask is whether that statement is accurate. Do City Council members actually have in their possession “evidence and statistical reports (that) reveal that the recidivism rate for released sex offenders (is) alarmingly high”?  And, if they do, why don’t they share that evidence with the rest of us so that, for no other reason, some of us who might feel skeptical can feel more reassured about the justification for this action? What do you suppose would happen if you approached your city council representative and asked that person to show you those “statistical reports”? 

What this essentially means is that of the total number of sex offenders living in Kyle today — whether that number be 67 or 68 or even another number entirely — at least 58 or 59 of them, depending on which memo you read, would not be affected by the ordinance because they are homeowners. The ordinance would, once the ordinance goes into effect, simply prohibit anyone listed on the state’s sex offender database from moving to Kyle and establishing “a permanent residence, establish a temporary residence or to be a recurring visitor at a residence, located within 1,500 feet (or 1,000 feet or maybe 500 feet) of any premises where children commonly gather.” The ordinance defines a “premise where children commonly gather” as “all improved and unimproved lots where the following are located or planned to be located: a public park, private or public school (excluding in-home schools), day-care center, or private recreational facility, including a park, water park, pool, playground, skate park, arcade or youth athletic field owned by a residential property owners association, or for which an entrance, admission, or rental fee is charged.”

The reason I added the 1,000 and 500 feet designations is because Barnett has included in his presentation maps that illustrates how much of the city would be declared “off-limits” if the ordinance contained a 1,500-, a 1,000- or a 500-foot restriction. The Police Department is pushing for the 1,500-foot restriction, which, according to its map of that restriction, would essentially create a couple of sex offender districts in Kyle — in the apartment complex on Marketplace Boulevard, parts of the Trails subdivision, parts of the Post Oak subdivision, along Quail Ridge Drive, and an area under development on Opal Lane. Another alternative for registered sex offenders would be to create lofts out of the spaces in the new business parks in North Central Kyle.

Interestingly, there is no public hearing attached to this agenda item, Item No. 24, so anyone from the public wishing to speak on the issue would have to use the Citizen Comment period at the beginning of Tuesday’s meeting. Anyone wishing to speak virtually at the meeting may register to do so by clicking here.