California Legislature approves bill on housing for sexually violent predators

Last Updated on September 12, 2025 by The HD Post Staff

CALIFORNIA – Senate Bill 380, a measure that requires the Department of State Hospitals (DSH) to study state-run transitional housing facilities for sexually violent predators (SVP) under conditional release, passed both legislative chambers.

The bill now awaits Governor Gavin Newsom’s signature.

SB 380 responds to a recommendation from the California State Auditor highlighting significant concerns with the current SVP conditional release program.

“These challenges include complex program requirements designed to ensure public safety, a scarcity of property owners willing to rent for the program, and significant public opposition to placing SVPs in local communities,” stated bill author Senate Minority Leader Brian W. Jones (R-San Diego).

The measure provides DSH and the Legislature with data to assess whether state-run transitional housing could improve SVP placements while ensuring public safety.

If housing is not found, court may allow SVPs to live as transients

State law requires SVPs to spend at least one year in a state hospital before petitioning the court for conditional release into the community. If approved, DSH must secure suitable housing, usually in the person’s county of domicile.

Housing decisions consider statutory residency restrictions including proximity to schools, victims, and community input.

Liberty Healthcare, the vendor managing parts of the SVP Conditional Release Program, reported that community opposition has sometimes led to harassment of property owners or sabotage of potential housing.

“In one example, vandals rendered a potential placement location uninhabitable by using a hose to flood the attic, damaging the house,” the company stated.

The audit highlighted one particular difficult placement: following a Stanislaus County court order, more than 6,500 housing sites were considered over nearly three years.

Placements have averaged 17 months – far exceeding the 30-day period mandated by law. The report also noted that if no housing is found, the court may still order release, allowing the SVP to live as a transient.

DSH cites concerns and disagrees with report

DSH disagrees with the recommendation to further analyze the feasibility of transitional housing. They cite several concerns, including that nearby homeschools could make a facility unusable and that community protests over housing multiple SVPs in one location are likely.