Bill to Restrict Sites of Parole Offices Shelved

A state Senate committee has sidetracked a bill that would block construction of parole offices within 500 yards of residential areas, schools and parks, thwarting efforts to keep a parole office out of Pasadena.

Supporters and opponents of the legislation agreed that it will be harder now for Pasadena to fight the relocation of a parole office from Alhambra.

The suspended bill, sponsored by Assemblyman Patrick J. Nolan (R-Glendale), will die in the Senate Appropriations Committee in 10 days unless Nolan can persuade the committee to reconsider. The bill passed the Assembly in January.

Nolan could not be reached for comment on whether he will try to resurrect the bill, which he introduced last year after residents rallied against a plan by the state Department of Corrections to open a parole office in Pasadena.

One supporter of the bill said he doubts that it will survive.

“There’s a slim, slim chance it will pass,” said Pasadena resident Harold Britton, leader of a citizens group that successfully fought a plan to move the parole office to 468 N. Rosemead Blvd. in the Lower Hastings Ranch area of Northeast Pasadena. “We sent 6,000 postcards and letters in support of (the legislation). Apparently that wasn’t a drop in the bucket.”

Britton and Director William Thomson flew to Sacramento on Monday to lobby for the bill, while Monterey Park and Alhambra officials argued against it. On Tuesday, Monterey Park Mayor Judy Chu accused Nolan of designing the bill to make it impossible to build a parole office in Pasadena.

“How many places are 500 yards from a residential zone?” she asked. “Maybe Irwindale or the middle of a pit. It’s clear there isn’t any place.”

Thomson denied that the 500-yard provision was intended to keep the parole office out of Pasadena altogether. He said it was intended to protect residential areas and children from the higher crime rates believed common in areas frequented by parolees.

If the bill passes and state officials find a location that meets the requirements, “we’d have no choice but to accept the office,” he said Tuesday.

“The bill is not about keeping a parole office out of Pasadena nor is it about keeping one in Alhambra,” Thomson said.

The parole office controversy began in 1988 when Alhambra and Monterey Park officials and residents complained about crime, loitering and graffiti near the parole office at 1721 E. Garvey Ave. They urged state officials to close that office, with each city pledging up to $100,000 in relocation costs.

The Department of Corrections agreed, and began looking at possible sites in Pasadena. Since then, Pasadena residents have staged demonstrations, and the city Board of Directors adopted a resolution opposing any parole office within the city limits.

But state officials have insisted on Pasadena because it is home to about 500 parolees, the largest concentration in the northwest San Gabriel Valley, yet has no parole office. Meanwhile, Alhambra has two offices serving 2,500 parolees, only 70 of whom live in Alhambra, said Michael Conway, a parole administrator.