Staff Reports
California’s elderly parole program has exploded into a full‑blown political mess after the Board of Parole Hearings found suitability for at least two convicted child‑sex offenders. The decisions involving David Allen Funston and Gregory Lee Vogelsang set off outrage from victims, local law enforcement, and lawmakers. Now Assemblymember Stephanie Nguyen is pressing AB 2727 through the Capitol to tighten who can qualify for early release. This fight is about public safety, not social experiments — and voters should know which side wants safety and which side wants headlines.
Outrage Over Elderly Parole Grants
The core facts are simple and ugly. The Board of Parole Hearings reviewed inmates who met the age and time‑served thresholds under California’s Elderly Parole Program. Funston was found suitable and then turned over to local law enforcement on a new warrant. Vogelsang initially got a grant, but public and prosecutorial fury pushed the board to refer and rescind that grant — he remains in custody for now.
Victims and Law Enforcement Are Rightfully Furious
Survivors and Sacramento County Sheriff Jim Cooper called the parole decisions “dead wrong,” and prosecutors argued the most serious sex offenders shouldn’t get a fast lane to freedom just because their hair grayed. That complaint is not political theater — these are people whose lives were ruined, and local leaders see a system that treats age like an automatic get‑out‑of‑jail card. If the goal was to comfort victims, this program failed.
AB 2727: Lawmakers Move to Fix a Broken Loophole
Assemblymember Stephanie Nguyen’s AB 2727 is the measured fix the state needs. The bill narrows elderly‑parole eligibility for the most serious sexual offenses, raises minimum thresholds for some cases, and tightens the process for referring inmates to sexually violent predator evaluation. The Assembly cleared the measure and Sacramento and Orange County prosecutors have backed it. That’s what responsible governance looks like — not shrugging and hoping nothing bad happens.
Don’t Let Statistics Be a Cover for Risk
Proponents point to CDCR/BPH figures showing low re‑conviction rates among elderly‑parole releases. Fine — facts matter. But a handful of “rare” failures that involve child‑sex crimes or double murder are not acceptable tradeoffs. The public doesn’t want theoretical ratios when the cost is another family destroyed. If the Board and the governor expect Californians to trust this program, they must tighten rules, improve vetting, and put victims first — not political optics. And if anyone suggests moving these men into your neighborhood as a civics lesson, I have a spare pitchfork you can borrow.
AB 2727 is a start. Lawmakers should pass it, the Board should explain any future suitability findings in plain language, and the governor should back common‑sense limits that keep violent sexual offenders out of the elderly‑parole fast lane. California can be humane without being unsafe. Voters should demand both — and they should remember who put politics before protection when election time comes around.
