Officials in the Gloucester County township overstepped legal bounds, the lawsuit argues, when they passed an ordinance that severely curtails where sex offenders can make their home. Versions of that ordinance have swept the state and country.

The lawsuit, which could get a first hearing as early as tomorrow, alleges that local "pedophile-free zones" are unconstitutional and are preempted by Megan's Law, the state measure that regulates offenders and enables parole officers to dictate where they can live. It seeks special relief for the man, who is identified in court papers as A.B. and faces possible imprisonment if he does not move by Wednesday.

At least 45 other towns statewide have laws similar to Franklin Township's, and they have prompted at least a handful of lawsuits that are pending.

But this is the first time the state has been the one mounting the challenge.

Tom Rosenthal, a spokesman for the defender's office, said the office had been representing low-income registered offenders in civil matters since 1995, a year after Megan's Law was passed. State attorneys, he said, are involved in the process of classifying sex offenders, and generally work with law enforcement and the courts to monitor them and prevent repeat offenses.

The state, Rosenthal said, is doing a good job on its own; its recidivism rate for offenders, he said, is half the national average. Towns, he said, are simply muddying the waters with ordinances that may be aimed at helping, but ultimately don't.

"You may be moving them 3,000 feet from a school, but you're moving them 3,000 feet closer to something else," Rosenthal said. "Moving them around, you're just destabilizing them... . All you've done is put them back into an environment where they're at risk of repeating their offense."

He added: "Do you want to prevent these guys from repeating their offense, or do you want to keep punishing them?"

David Ferrucci, mayor of Franklin Township, said officials were trying to protect children, not punish sexual predators. He said the township's solicitor had drafted the measure to pass legal muster.

"We're going to defend the ordinance vigorously," Ferrucci said. "We think we passed the ordinance for all the right reasons."

Under the law, different classifications of offenders face different restrictions.

Tier 2 offenders such as A.B. - those determined to be at moderate risk of offending again - are banned from living within 2,500 feet of most places where children may congregate. That includes schools, libraries, day-care centers, churches, beaches, churches, convenience stores and recreational areas.

Other similar local laws include grandfather clauses that allow offenders already living in towns to stay put. But when Franklin Township officials passed their law last October, they gave offenders a year to get out.

And that year is almost up.

Under the law, A.B. - who was convicted in 2000 of molesting young children in his care - has until Wednesday to move. His home of 37 years is too close to a lake for the town's comfort.

Court papers do not identify the man, but the date of birth, personal description and criminal record provided by his attorneys match those of Richard Hess, of the Malaga section of the town. A township official confirmed that identity. The Inquirer was unable to contact Hess.

The Associated Press quoted A.B. yesterday as saying that due to his frail health, "I'm no threat to anyone." It did not further identify A.B.

According to court papers, A.B. is blind in one eye and suffered a heart attack last year.

"I don't even go to the lake," he said. "I mind my own business."

A.B. said he and his wife of 44 years, who was described in court papers as being mentally ill and dependent on her husband's care, would not know what to do if they were forced out of the home he has owned since 1969. The pair, according to court papers, live on $1,200 a month from Social Security.

"If I had to leave here and go anywhere else, I don't think I'd be able to make it," he said.

Rosenthal, of the public defender's office, said the case "has the potential to have statewide implications." But fundamentally, he said, "we represent clients, not causes."

"This is someone facing imminent harm," Rosenthal said. "We're just trying to get some relief for him."

Franklin Township Police Chief Michael DiGiorgio said the ordinance affects two other registered sex offenders in the township. Only one, he said, is considering a move, but he would not elaborate.

If they don't move, they face up to $1,250 in fines or 90 days of community service or imprisonment for each offense, according to court papers.

"They are welcome to reside in Franklin Township," DiGiorgio said. "They just can't live in these zones."

William Buckman, a Moorestown lawyer who sits on a committee with the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers that is working on a policy to combat such ordinances nationwide, derided that notion.

He called the pedophile-free zones, which have been adopted by scores of towns and more than 18 states across the country, "a thinly veiled attempt" to keep all sex offenders out. And towns are passing the laws so quickly that offenders don't even know where they can live anymore, he said.

"There's no master list," Buckman said. "Wake up and smell the Kafka. You don't know you're living in a pedophile-free zone until you move there."

Sex Offenders and Home Values

Sex offenders are bad for a neighborhood's real estate values, according to two published studies.

Two professors in Ohio found that housing prices fell 17 percent within a 10th-of-a-mile radius of an offender's home, and depressed values for as much as a third of a mile.

A study conducted in North Carolina found similar results.

"Individuals have a strong distaste for living in proximity to a sex offender," Leigh L. Linden and Jonah E. Rockoff wrote in a paper published earlier this year by the National Bureau of Economic Research. "Prices of homes near a sex offender decline considerably following an offender's arrival in the neighborhood. We estimate the sale price of homes closest to the offender decline by about 10 percent in value or about $10,000 for the median value home in our data."