The problem is that there is much ambiguity between allowable and prohibited conduct, and no way to prevent those charged with enforcing the Ordinance from engaging in arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement. He claims the law cannot withstand constitutional scrutiny because it would penalize behavior that others may think is a precursor to criminal or prohibited behavior, even though the person has not actually engaged in or attempted such behavior. This is in no way to try to impact the victimization of the victims," Stucky continued. In presenting the scenario, the Plaintiff offered no other facts or circumstances. To accomplish this, the Amended Ordinance extends beyond generalized loitering. It requires that the circumstances connected with staying in or circulating around a place suggest to a reasonable person that the sexual offender has knowingly selected that location based primarily on its access to children and the fulfillment of desires or taking of action that would be harmful to children. Such a prohibition is consistent with state law. And when he tries to vote in person in an election, he is prohibited from doing that as well, as his polling place is located inside an elementary school. That, Valenti, said is a violation of another constitutional right. The Defendant submits that the Plaintiff is misreading the Amended Ordinance, and that passively sitting on the park bench is not punishable because the Ordinance requires that the "primary purpose or effect of the behavior is to enable a sex offender to satisfy an unlawful sexual desire, or to locate, lure or harass a potential victim. Shimkus would rather have a registered sex offender living next to his home, and next to an elementary school, than have a sex offender choose not to register in order to have an easier time finding a place to live. The Ordinance thus fails to provide adequate guidance and authorizes arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement. The ordinance prohibits residency within 1, feet of schools, public parks, playgrounds, child care institutions or other places where children regularly congregate. But they deny the allegation that Valenti and other sex offenders represent a class of plaintiffs.