Fresno City Council to Weigh Group-Home Registration Requirement for Sex Offenders

Close to 1,300 registered sex offenders live in Fresno, and city leaders say they don’t know how many group homes currently house them or where those facilities are located. A proposed ordinance scheduled for discussion Thursday aims to change that by requiring group homes housing sex offenders to register for a city license and capping occupancy at six offenders per facility.

The measure, branded the SHIELD Act by its sponsors, would force group-home operators to obtain a city license and would adopt an existing county ordinance limiting the number of sex offenders allowed in a single residence. The proposal followed a case earlier this year in which a convicted child molester, David Allen Funston, was nearly released to a Fresno transitional-housing facility called Centers for Living.

Funston, now 64, received three consecutive life sentences in 1999 for kidnapping and molesting eight children, the youngest age three. He became eligible for parole under California’s Elderly Parole Program, which the state expanded in 2020 to allow inmates who turn 50 and serve at least 20 years to be considered for release. Authorities in Placer County reopened a 30-year-old case to keep Funston incarcerated.

Advertisement

“This man here is probably one of the most dangerous child predators that the state of California has ever seen,” Fresno County District Attorney Lisa Smittcamp said during a Tuesday news conference with city and county officials.

Local officials acknowledged they expect legal challenges to the ordinance, citing pushback typically aimed at reducing prison overcrowding. “Where we’ve taken away the voice of the victims, we’ve taken away the voice of prosecutors and judges who have given lawful sentences to people like Funston, and we have now empowered them to say, ‘You’re going to get out early,’ and, ‘Well, where would you like to go?'” Smittcamp said.

Fresno County Sheriff John Zanoni said the lack of a registry creates uncertainty for residents. “That causes fear for residents. Especially if you have children. Especially if individuals like this are moving next door to you,” he said.

The Breakdown

• The SHIELD Act would require group homes housing sex offenders to register for a city license
• The license would impose a six-offender limit per facility, adopting an existing county ordinance
• City officials say they currently don’t know how many such facilities operate in Fresno or where they’re located
• The measure is scheduled for discussion at Thursday’s city council meeting

What This Means for You

Fresno voters elected the city council that will decide whether to move this ordinance forward. The proposal reflects a policy choice about how closely the city tracks and limits group housing for registered offenders, balancing public notification against legal constraints on where released inmates can live. If passed, the licensing requirement would give the city enforcement authority it currently lacks — and would publicly document which facilities house how many offenders and where. The outcome will shape how much transparency residents have about these placements and whether the council prioritizes that transparency over the legal risk officials say accompanies it.

What You Can Do

The Fresno City Council will discuss the SHIELD Act during its meeting Thursday. The material does not state the meeting time or whether a public comment period is scheduled.

What to Watch

City and county officials acknowledged they expect legal challenges to the ordinance, typically aimed at reducing overcrowding in prisons and protecting released inmates’ housing rights. The unanswered question is whether the licensing requirement and occupancy cap can survive that scrutiny — the officials quoted offered no legal analysis, only their expectation of a fight. What would confirm the ordinance’s enforceability? A legal opinion from the city attorney addressing the specific grounds on which similar measures have been struck down, and whether Fresno’s version avoids those pitfalls.

The broader tension here is one Fresno voters see in multiple contexts: the state’s parole and sentencing policies operate at a scale and pace local officials say they can’t manage, and those officials are left trying to impose local controls on decisions made elsewhere. Does a licensing ordinance actually reduce the number of offenders placed in Fresno, or does it simply create a registry while the state continues sending people here regardless? The material offers no evidence that registration alone changes the placement outcome — only that it gives the city information it currently lacks. If the goal is fewer placements, not just better tracking, the ordinance as described doesn’t get there on its own.

Related Coverage

• State Senate Committee Kills Fresno Lawmaker's Bill to Ban Sex Offenders from Running for Office