news-record.com

HIGH POINT - When the state Supreme Court ruled that the town of Woodfin could ban registered sex offenders from public parks last summer, local governments across the state followed suit.

Greensboro's ban passed in September. But a proposed ban in High Point is sitting in committee and most of the City Council says the idea makes them uncomfortable.

"I want more information about how many people are on these lists and how they get there," said Councilman Latimer Alexander.

Alexander said he's heard from registered sex offenders who were convicted of consensual sex acts. Those people shouldn't be considered the same threat as a pedophile, he said.

"A convicted drug dealer wouldn't be banned. A convicted murderer wouldn't be banned," he said. "Those are real threats. But not everyone who is a sex offender is the same threat."

High Point's proposed ban would bar registered sex offenders from public parks and recreation facilities except in cases of a public meeting or polling place.

According to the Guilford County Sheriff's Office, High Point has about 100,000 residents and 134 registered sex offenders, and Greensboro has about 250,000 residents and 313 registered sex offenders.

Alexander said the ban came to the council from the city's Parks and Recreation Commission, not the police, and wasn't in reaction to an existing problem.

"Our police chief said to us that there haven't been incidents in our parks that have sparked this, and we're pleased to hear that," Alexander said. "If it becomes a public safety problem I think we'll hear that from the police and we should deal with that. But right now it doesn't seem to be."

Police Chief Jim Fealy said the department hasn't been officially asked for input on the ban yet, but that he supports it.

"It's not that I think it would be proactive in catching predators," Fealy said. "We aren't going to card people going into the park, so we wouldn't know who is and isn't a sex offender. But it does send a message, and some people who are sex offenders will voluntarily comply."

Fealy said it's good that the council is considering the matter carefully.

"I know that they're not in the habit of passing ordinances that are unenforceable or don't help us accomplish a mission," Fealy said. "I wouldn't want that either. So they need to take a careful look."

Parks and Recreation director Allen Oliver said he doesn't blame the council for wanting to study the matter further, but he hopes they'll eventually approve a ban.

"I think passing a ban sends a message that we don't want sex offenders in our parks and gives us something we can work with," Oliver said. "If we see a suspicious person or a suspicious car and it turns out they're a sex offender, we can do something about it then."

The ban will go before the council's public safety committee along with proposed bans on public drinking and public urination. If council members can agree on language, it could go before the council again before the new year.

Contact Joe Killian at 883-4422, Ext. 228, or joe.killian@news-record.com