Verification of Sex Offender Registry Address Description of problem or need

1. Verification of Sex Offender Registry Address • Description of problem or need • New State Law required that local law enforcement agencies verify compliance for Registered Sex Offenders when they establish residency in that jurisdiction. Guide lines were established, but there were no fast and hard rules on how to achieve this goal. Also there was no funding allocated. • Would need more personnel (2 deputies) • Manually investigate every known address • Manually verify each new registrant • Would need to purchase new technology to do adequate verification • Magnitude of the issue • County wide (279 square miles for Newton County) • 2 Deputies at $50K each for salaries ($100k per year) • Crippling financial requirement for already stretched law enforcement budget • Failure to comply would erode the public confidence and put citizens in harms way • How was the problem approached? • We used our existing parcel database and street centerline files • We located restrictive facilities and buffered 1000 ft. • Using ArcGIS tools to analyze and spatially locate all variables • GIS and the Sheriff’s Office concurred on the analysis • In about 2 weeks we were able to locate 95% of violations Results – What’s Next? • Description of results • The analysis revealed a very successful campaign to keep convicted sex offenders away from schools, churches, and places where children congregate. • By checking an address on a residence, the map immediately revealed the address and it’s violation • Gave the SO a document which was definitive • Reduced the potential for argument and accusations of unfairness • Allowed existing personnel to the monitor more completely without additional staff or equipment • Reduced the safety threat to the community as a whole • What is the recommended course of future action? • Build on what we have done and expand the program to encompass at least the adjacent jurisdictions and even the whole state. This application can be serve up on the WEB. • Since time is the key investment, little money would be required. • A working product could be up and serviceable in a few weeks. • Each Sherriff and each GIS office would need to e involved. • Since each jurisdiction has a different approach, savings are unknown. • As soon as we are directed to proceed. • What are the first steps toward a solution? • Obtain MOA • Build and adjust mapping application • Assess effectiveness • Expand to next adjacent jurisdiction • Effectively have all of Georgia with the Registry Map.

2. Analysis • Description of Process • The tracking challenge is demonstrated by these 2 maps. Violations can be avoided by knowing and enforcement of buffers on selected sites. This map shows the geographic dispersal of registrants across Newton County including the list of those currently incarcerated and those who have moved out of jurisdiction. Demonstrating the mobile nature of those people on the Registry. Parcel in the highlighted blue indicates an address under investigation for compliance by a Registrant and the Sheriff’s Office. This address would be compliant. Insert point of contact