The Issaquah City Council is on the verge of approving an ordinance that would block sex offenders from living within 1,000 feet of schools and day-care centers.

If passed, the measure would be the first of its kind in Washington and would have the practical effect of requiring sex offenders to reside within 15 percent of the city's developable land — mainly office or commercial zones. Those already living in neighborhoods considered off-limits would be forced to move.

Issaquah's proposal would go well beyond a little-noticed new state law that went into effect last month. That law restricts offenders convicted of specific sex crimes against children — and who are still under the supervision of the state Department of Corrections — from living within 880 feet of school grounds.

Issaquah city officials say their objective is clear: protect citizens at all costs.

"If the sex offender doesn't like what I do, he can take me to court," said Councilman Joe Forkner. "If a little kid gets hurt, all I have is the scar of what was done."

The council is expected to vote on the ordinance on Monday. But the city's proposal raises thorny legal and civil-liberties questions.

"Presumably, there is no end in sight to regulating where offenders can live," said Dennis Carroll, assistant supervisor in the sex-offender commitment division for the Seattle-based Defender Association, a King County public-defense group. Offenders who register are essentially rendered homeless, Carroll said, "and you then make it someone else's problem."

The constitutionality of such laws so far has been upheld in court. In Iowa, sex offenders challenged a state law barring them from living within 2,000 feet of a school or registered child-care facility by arguing that it violated their freedom to live where they wanted. They said it also made it nearly impossible for them to find housing.

The U.S. 8th Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed, and ruled in April that the law was constitutional. An appellate court in Illinois made a similar ruling against sex offenders that same month.

Issaquah drafted its ordinance last month after two sex offenders moved in together in the 800 block of Highwood Drive Southwest in June. The Squak Mountain neighborhood sits near Issaquah Valley Elementary and is filled with single-family homes.

Furious residents packed a July City Council meeting, some choked with emotion, claiming that Kyle Douglas Lewis, 28, a registered Level 3 sex offender convicted on two counts of child molestation, and John D. Weber, a Level 2 offender also convicted of child molestation, had turned what they called a "safe" neighborhood into a danger zone. Level 2 and Level 3 sex offenders are considered to have a moderate and high risk, respectively, of re-offending.

Robin Kelly wept as she told the council about her struggle to explain to her 4-year-old son why he couldn't play outside anymore.

"I know everyone has rights, and [the sex offenders] have served their time," she said. "But everyone else is serving time now ... and it's not a fair balance."

All seven council members have supported the ordinance so far.

Lewis and Weber are no longer under supervision by the Department of Corrections, although, like all registered offenders, they must inform the local county sheriff's office of any change of address. As of Aug. 1, 18,694 sex offenders were registered in Washington, including about 3,900 in King County.

In Florida, a slew of cities have passed ordinances to keep convicted sex offenders at distances of up to 2,500 feet from places children gather, after the high-profile kidnappings and murders of 9-year-old Jessica Lunsford and 13-year-old Sarah Lunde earlier this year.

"This is kind of the hot new thing," said Todd Bowers, Washington's assistant attorney general. "I wouldn't be surprised if this were picked up by other [places]."

But some worry such residential restrictions, by targeting a specific group, infringe on civil liberties and provide little benefit.

"The freedom of movement is one of the basic fundamental freedoms that we have," said Eric Janus, vice dean at William Mitchell College of Law in St. Paul, Minn., and national expert on sex-offender public policy. "Keeping them away is false security. It's not a policy that really reduces sex offenses."

Doctors who work with sex offenders say it's in society's best interest not to heap more stigma onto an already-demonized population.

"I understand that people are frightened and upset ... but these decisions are based purely on emotion. It creates a we-versus-they mentality," said Dr. Fred Berlin, an associate professor of psychiatry at Johns Hopkins University and founder of its sexual-disorders clinic. "There isn't a sense of them wanting to make it."

In the Squak Mountain neighborhood yesterday, children were playing in the street and two young girls walked a dog near the two sex offenders' home.

Thirteen years after his offense, Kyle Lewis says he hasn't re-offended and never will.

"The majority of sex offenders, they just want to get on with their lives," Lewis said. "It puts us in a hard spot because we don't have anywhere else to go."

But neighborhood residents feel differently.

"He's going to re-offend; it's only a matter of time," said next-door neighbor Jacob Mills, 26. "It's gonna happen somewhere. It's going to happen to someone."

Times staff writer Ari Bloomekatz contributed to this report.

Sonia Krishnan: 206-515-5546 or skrishnan@seattletimes.com