We didn’t expect anything otherwise, but the Brevard County Commissioners unanamously passed the Amendment allowing businesses to self-certify as parks, thereby preventing anyone on the registry from coming within 1000 feet of their businesses.
The good news is there is already a lawsuit in place.
Remember that this ordinance was born RIGHT before the 2020 election and the 3 commissioners who were running for reelection at the time are the 3 noisy ones who were in support of it during this commission meeting. In my humble opinion, this ordinance was a purely political move and wasn’t about helping children – it was just about looking like heroes to constituents and getting votes in 2020. Note that the former chairman, Bryan Lober, voted against it and the District 4 guy, Curt Smith, seems to be completely indifferent about it. So now, the Dreadful Three have to stand their ground and make sure they look serious about this ordinance so as not to appear like they used Brevard kids for political gain only.
The Commissioner’s let their contempt for ” REGISTERED CITIZENS” be well known. No Commission should be so down on any certain group of people. Their job is to put forth legislation that is fair to all, buy knowing the statistics and reasons for passing legislation for their County. It’s going to be easier for a RC to get into heaven then a restaurant in Brevard County. God forgives but seems like Brevard County Commission thinks they are above that! Vote them out!!! and get the lawsuits moving!
Do we know what businesses brought forth this whack-o idea in the first place, and what was their reasoning, beside being hateful people.? The Commissioner’s let their contempt for ” REGISTERED CITIZENS” be well known. No Commission should be so down on any certain group of people. Their job is to put forth legislation that is fair to all, buy knowing the statistics and reasons for passing legislation. It’s going to be easier for a RC to get into heaven then a restaurant in Brevard County. God forgives but seems like Brevard County Commission thinks they are above that! Vote them out!!! and get the lawsuits moving!
so im unable to see my attorney since the office is near a park. or unable to go to the post office in melbourne (hurts my business where i must ship items).
Lost soul – Seeing your attorney is an exception. You CAN see your attorney!
This is the type of animus toward an unpopular group of individuals that betrays the government’s claims that these ordinances have a nonpunitive purpose. There is absolutely no rational basis for why a registered individual providing notice less than 24 hours in advance of an open governmental meeting should not be able to attend. What is the rational basis or compelling government interest? It is arbitrary and capricious to deny this person participation in a government forum when the police already know he will be there. What possible rational basis to a nonpunitive purpose could there be? Is seating at the venue limited?
Here is the Broward County Commissioner meeting.
I think the offensive part starts at about about 53 minutes in.
I wonder where Zonka got her exaggerated recidivism percentages. I think she referenced doing a Google search. Does anyone have the link to the actual, factual numbers?
Commissioner Zonka openly cherry-picked the recidivism rates of those who had molested a child.
I have lots of actual stats. But the problem with recidivism is there is no universal standard for recidivism. Here are a few problems:
Are we talking about sex specific reoffense or rearrested for ANY offense including technical violations.
What’s the standard for determining recidivism? Rearrest, reconviction, reincarceration , or self-reporting? Each has limitations. For example, arrests can be for false allegations, reincarceration could include technical violations, self-reports are often coerced).
How long was the study? Every study has different lengths.
Are readers aware the longer a registrant is free, the less likely the registrant will reoffend? Most recidivism occurs in the first 3 years of arrest.
Are these studies purely American studies or were they “multinational” studies? Multinatioal studies tend to have higher rates because other nations have more refined laws that focus on higher risk offenses.
Were they reading the original study or just a summary? Or did they just get a random number off the Internet, or worse, a victim advocacy website? Based on another comment it seems one of the Brevard commissioners did just that. I’ve already debunked stats from Lauren’s Kids long ago and I belive they intentionaaly mislead readers.
Derek
A few years ago when I was registering my normal month, I was speaking with a guy who had just been released after getting arrested again. He was charged with a DUI, but he said the news picked up on his story and all they said was another sex offender was rearrested, making it sound like he had “Re-offended” which was not true.
The news lies so much, or twists stories around that they should be shut down for their false allegations that could get someone killed.
Ummm, what if you have no restrictions?
Does anyone ever bring up the way things were PRIOR TO the registry? Just curious if anyone at these meetings has the balls to say: “We didn’t have these ordinances/laws prior to the registry and there were still people convicted of sex crimes back then, too. So what exactly is the point of this?”
I’d also like to add this; would anyone have the courage to say “Well, if a registered person cannot go an patronize a business and spend their money there, shall we also make it an ordnance/law that anyone with an armed robbery conviction can’t be anywhere near a cash register or ATM machine?”
Y’all gotta start asking the kinds of questions that will leave them dumbfounded and scrambling for answers they know they don’t have.
You did not have the balls or courage to attend and frankly don’t know what you’re talking about. You actually imagine that saying these things would have influenced them?
Ordinarily responses like mine might violate FAC posting rules, but I am not the one questioning the ‘balls’ and ‘courage’ of our Brevard attendees.
I didn’t have the balls to attend?
Well, for 1: I don’t live in Florida.
2: I’m no longer on the registry.
3: if you don’t like that I still keep up with what’s going on with registered people, too bad for you. Get over yourself.
And that’s what you get for playing “internet psychic”…. it made you look a bit foolish. Try again.
Maestro
Thank you for staying active with FAC even after being removed from the registry. That means a lot to me personally because I would probably do the same thing.
I haven’t met a single person on here. (Well maybe someone when I register but would have no idea that they are on FAC) but feel I have at least made some like minded virtual friends.
I have to go now, I might start crying haha (Doesn’t take much to make me cry, I am a big softy).
Maestro
They would reply “We didn’t create the registry; we are just complying with the statues”.
My take is, why do counties, cities, and states get to make their own registered person ordinances? They are going well beyond what the law states we have to do. At some point we are going to basically be back on probation of sorts. Afraid to leave our homes for fear we might make a left turn instead of a right and enter into a registry free zone. When will the new street signs be posted reading ” NO sex offenders allowed beyond this point”?
What kind of park are local businesses allow to become?
National parks
State parks
Amusement parks
Baseball parks
Water parks…….
Religious parks……
I think you get the point.
Was the meeting broadcasted? I would like to watch this circus. More material to rally supporters with.
https://youtu.be/c01-GrHtoOw
Everyone on the hit list in that county needs to tell all their friends who have kids to take them to those businesses and let them get a game of baseball going in the parking lots, or let them go inside the businesses and tell them to run around and play tag. After all, they’re now parks, right? Parks are meant for kids to run around and have fun, screaming and hollering and such. Thats what kids do. And if a car windshield happens to get broken while the kids are outside playing baseball, oh well. The car shouldn’t have been parked on the playing field.
These idiot business owners can’t have it both ways. They need to allow kids to treat them as parks and say nothing, or get with the program. No one at a park tells a kid to stop running around or to sit down and be quiet.
Disgusted
You just gave me an idea. On the 4th of July they set off fireworks at many local parks. So, any of these businesses that become a park better look out as my uncle says he will donate an 18-wheeler full of fireworks. Then, the next 4th of July we can shoot off said fireworks at all the new declared “parks”. Party time. So we don’t get in trouble we might have to do a Fireworks “Drive-by”. LOL 🙂
I know I’m going to say this and nobody will understand my point, however, I’m going to say it anyway…
How are registrants supposed to eat? It’s bad enough that there are already some restaurants within the 1,000 foot buffer zone, eliminating registrants from patronizing an establishment… and, of course, this would eliminate ANY McDonald’s… One of the consequences to this “law” would be that there would be fewer places to eat and shop, and in turn, some establishments near sex offender homeless sites could charge more to the homeless because the establishment knows the homeless cannot go anywhere else to buy foods and goods… it would seem to me that this is legal torture/murder for many sex offender homeless people… if all establishments around a homeless sight got on board with this, then a sex offender couldn’t even leave the sight because he/she is surrounded by this rule, and then couldn’t patronize… that’d be like waving a t-bone in front of a starving caged dog but not letting him eat it… this is definitely “cruel and unusual punishment” and dangerous.
Amen, agree 100%
There cannot possibly be a court at the State or Federal level that can find this constitutional and allow it to stand. I hope they are asking for a Stay while the case is being litigated.
Alan
I am passing an ordinance to make all food at my local Walmart free to registrants. That actually, although crazy, makes more sense than what the county is passing. Because the King or Queen says it, it makes it so?
So, a Tattoo parlor is now a park? A dog grooming shop now doubles as daycare? That last one makes more sense since it might be a doggy day care with a stretch of the imagination.
There is truly something wrong with these people. They are not looking out for their community in any way at all. If this is not pure evil then explain to me what is?
Thank you FAC and thank you to everyone who wrote letters and showed up. Reminder FAC can always use donations.
Mp
And all these cities are doing is, pushing people off on other cities making it, “Their problem”. Look at south Florida, there was only a bridge underpass left to go to and the city even took that away. Essentially pushing human beings to wander looking for a new place to sleep.
I expected nothing less. Not at all being a negative Nancy, but I knew they were Hell bent on doing this and 1 million opposers would not have changed their mind. My hopes are this will be another eventual legal challenge win costing the county a pretty penny.
Any judge who cannot see that this will essentially make it to where registered individuals will have no place to live, sleep, shop or dine, needs to re-read the constitution. Godspeed to the Lawyers who take on this case.
Agree
Out of curiosity, are or will any business owners adversely affected somehow be included in the lawsuit? Wondering if any businesses near a “self certified” business would take on the cause of their right to freely provide goods/services to whomever they choose being infringed upon. It really seems to go against more people’s freedom than just people on the registry.
That is an excellent argument!
That is a good point. The courts are ruling in favor of religious freedom, such as pharmacists not selling birth control or bakers not providing cakes to same sex couples. Would this ordinance and those that might be coming, be held in the same regard? I don’t know legal theory all that well, but I hope not. I just feel like this ordinance is legalized discrimination
Brevard businesses remain free to serve whomever they wish without penalty. It’s a certain customer who must be careful.
Which business do we think will be the first to go on record as suing the county for the right to take in sex offenders? Would we view that as an effective marketing strategy?
A potential plaintiff I could see is the landlady who rents to the registrants at the meeting if any business nearby one of her homes declares itself “park”
One issue, though, is that certain businesses could lose customers over this. I spoke with one businessman who said that there are many business owners who do not care if a person is on the registry; it is all about their being a paying customer.
How many bars, restaurants, retail stores, etc. care whether or not someone is on the registry? There are well over 800 registrants in Brevard, many of whom are paying customers to these businesses.
Sadly, Fischer Nissan, in Titusville, just lost a sale. My friend needed me to go with her to help pick out a new car. She lives near the Fischer dealership. I told her about my concerns with travelling in Brevard and took her to an Orange County dealer instead. She bought a new expensive Rogue. I will probably let Fischer know about this and cc: to the commissioners.
This is a good idea!
GO< GO< GO
RAYO
Is my HERO………..
If I was a girl in another life, I would be your cheerleader LOL
I was going to say we need to protest these places that choose to become parks, but then I realized we cannot get within X amount of distance from them 🙁
Media
And, at any register, people come and go in a store spending money and no one knows their history/past. And generally, all most businesses care about is getting a sale. If I ran a business, as long as someone was not causing problems, if they want to buy what I was selling, as long as they got the money, that is all I would care about.
I wouldn’t care what race, gender, religion, political stance or criminal history status. A customer is a customer, unless, like I said it is a troublemaker like a frequent shoplifter. If they are going to start banning us from anywhere people gather, we are all going to have to live in tents in the desert.
It’s true that business owners don’t mind serving sex offenders; but that is not the same as publicly calling attention to their right to do so. Not every Fischer Nissan customer is comfortable being aware that sex offenders are welcome in the same showroom. If a business like Fischer joined a public lawsuit, would they gain more customers than they lose? We don’t know, so Fischer might prefer to continue to deal with customers more discreetly.
You might respond, labeling all registrants as sex offenders and creating fear of them conducting normal business dealings is irrational. And you’d be right, but a business would need to be ready for how their lawsuit would be portrayed in the press, how their competitors and customer base would respond, and how commissioners would capitalize on the resulting controversy.
Considering this, do we still think there is any business that would view a lawsuit as financially compelling?
Jacob
“SEX offenders walk among us”. That could be the headlines. Having said that, it is TRUE. I shop at walmart, publix, The gas station, Target, CVS, Taco bell and 100s of more places. We ALL do. At any given time in a super walmart there could be more than 5 sex offenders in the store, Previous and those who haven’t been caught.
Having said that, I do not go to walmart to hide in the dressing rooms waiting to offend. I go there to buy a few essentials and then leave, I do not loiter around waiting to get my jollies. And most of us do not.
Seems what may end up happening is what happened during house arrest. I had to write down a weekly schedule stating where I would be going, what time that would be and how long I would be there. If it comes to that, it would be a no brainer that it is at that point punitive and overly restrictive.
I have not seen anything in the news about roving packs of sex offenders perving out at stores anywhere, have you? And yes occasionally someone is on the news for doing just that, but more times than not, it is not someone on the registry.
Seems to me that this is just abuse of power and discriminatory.
When will this endless scapegoating end. Can’t those in government take on some actual problems and do their jobs instead of grandstanding passing these useless “feel good” laws that do more harm to children by giving parents a false sense of security?
Perhaps they should be held liable for the next child abduction because I can virtually guarantee that it will NOT be done by someone on the hit list!
This may only end when the Commissioner s are no longer seated at that podium! So those of us that can vote, vote them out of there! Hopefully their opponents are better than they are!! One at a time or two at a time however they go, it’s a must!!
Although, did commissioner Smith have anything to say about this issue? Is he the only one that seemed to not have an opinion? I wonder why? Commissioner Zonka has clearly been pulling numbers from the purchasing card audit , Commissioner Pritchett, I am not sure where she has been , but her story is the same ol, same ol, she needs to come up with something new! Don’t get me started on the one Commissioner whose favorite word seems to be “UH”,I mean, can he say more than two words without the hesitation. He is a hypocrite and possibly needs to be the first one to go off the board.
Those of you that spoke at the meeting, you did great. You held your emotions, for the most part, you didn’t engage past your allotted time. Thank you for your strength and courage to stand up to them and be heard!
Great , we need to start a business next to the Sheriffs Office and Probation offices. Cant register and report. lol
Bill
Then all they would do is grant an “Exception” for that location. Isn’t it funny how everything seems to work in THEIR favor? Don’t like something, create an ordinance.
And we are not the only ones being treated like this, the homeless get pushed from place to place. I know of several places in my area where law enforcement came in with bulldozers and evicted them all recently.
Bill, that’s a pretty good idea in my opinion. Wish I had the money for such a venture and to pay for the legal defenses of all RCs who would be charged for failing to register. If only I was a Powerball winner.
That is a great idea
It’s not a great idea. Often people throw stuff out there without even reading the ordinance and others who also have not read the ordinance jump on the bandwagon. There are two exemptions to the Brevard proximity ordinance that the Sheriff would likely claim allow registrants to visit the Sheriff’s office to register: To…
(2) Comply with a request or court order from the judiciary, a correctional facility or a law enforcement entity;
(3) Attend a scheduled meeting or interview with criminal justice personnel at a criminal justice facility;
So if someone is ordered to comply with registration and compliance requires in person reporting at a Sheriff’s office, the location would likely fall within an exemption to the proximity ordinance.
Aside from the fact that it would likely not accomplish the goal you are trying to achieve, the suggestion that “we start a business” is not a viable game plan for FAC as an organization or the overwhelming majority of our members as individuals.
It was said earlier that there was an exemtion for legal services, is that true for non criminal legal representation? Such as estate or divorce?
except to:
(1)
Attend a scheduled interview or meeting with a social service provider licensed by the state;
(2)
Comply with a request or court order from the judiciary, a correctional facility or a law enforcement entity;
(3)
Attend a scheduled meeting or interview with criminal justice personnel at a criminal justice facility;
(4)
Attend a bona fide educational institution as a registered student;
(5)
Attend a scheduled or emergency health care visit with a licensed physician;
(6)
As a result of fulfilling legally allowable duties imposed by gainful employment;
(7)
Transport children within their legal custody to and from school or daycare without any undue delay or loitering on premises;
(8)
Seek refuge in a public shelter that has been officially designated by the county or any municipality to house sexual offenders or sexual predators during times of impending natural disasters or acts of terrorism;
(9)
Attend a scheduled legal consultation meeting with an attorney who is recognized as a licensed member of the bar of the state;
(10)
Attend a church service or function;
(11)
Vote at a designated polling place within his or her district, obtain a vote-by-mail ballot from the supervisor of elections, or deliver a vote-by-mail ballot to a secure drop box of the supervisor of elections or office of the supervisor of elections;
(12)
If the sexual offender or sexual predator is the parent or guardian of a person under 18 years of age, provided the sexual offender or sexual predator has declared his or her status as a sexual offender or sexual predator prior to entering the school property and has either scheduled a set time period to enter upon the property with the principal or designee or immediately notifies the principal or designee upon entering the school property:
a.
Attend a scheduled conference at school with school personnel to discuss the progress of his or her child academically or socially;
b.
Participate in scheduled child review conferences in which evaluation and placement decisions may be made or considered with respect to his or her child regarding special education services; or
c.
Attend scheduled conferences to discuss other student issues concerning his or her child such as retention and promotion,
(13)
If the sexual offender or sexual predator lawfully resides within 1,000 feet of any school, day care center, park or playground, he or she may enter into or remain within 1,000 feet of such school, day care center, park or playground for the purposes of travel to and from his or her residence, and any other bona fide activity arising from the ordinary maintenance and activities associated with such residence.
(14)
If the sexual offender or sexual predator wishes to be present at a public meeting held on Brevard County government property that is within a 1,000-foot buffer zone, he/she may do so provided that no less than 24 hours prior to entering the Brevard County government property for the purpose of being present at a public meeting, the sexual offender or sexual predator has notified the county manager’s office and the county sheriff’s office of:
a.
The sexual offender or sexual predator’s status as a sexual offender or sexual predator; and
b.
The sexual offender or sexual predator’s intention to be present at the public meeting.
When a sexual offender or sexual predator enters upon Brevard County government property pursuant to this subsection the sexual offender or sexual predator shall, upon adjournment of the public meeting, promptly depart from the Brevard County government property without any undue delay or loitering on premises. For purposes of this subsection, the term “Brevard County government property” does not include school property.
(15)
If the sexual offender or sexual predator needs to enter Brevard County government property within a 1,000-foot buffer zone to conduct official government business, he/she may do so provided that no less than 24 hours prior to entering the Brevard County government property to conduct official government business, the sexual offender or sexual predator has notified the county manager’s office and the county sheriff’s office of:
a.
The sexual offender or sexual predator’s status as a sexual offender or sexual predator; and
b.
The sexual offender or sexual predator’s intention to enter the Brevard County government property for official government business.
When a sexual offender or sexual predator enters upon Brevard County government property pursuant to this subsection the sexual offender or sexual predator shall promptly depart from the Brevard County government property without any undue delay or loitering on premises after completing official government business. For purposes of this subsection, the term “Brevard County government property” does not include school property.
(16)
If the sexual offender or sexual predator wishes to be present at a public meeting held on county school board property or local municipality government property that is within a 1,000-foot buffer zone, he/she may do so provided that no less than 24 hours prior to entering the county school board property or local municipality government property, the sexual offender or sexual predator has notified the county school board or local municipality’s designee, as applicable, and the law enforcement agency that is primarily responsible for general enforcement of state and local law at the location of:
a.
The sexual offender or sexual predator’s status as a sexual offender or sexual predator; and
b.
The sexual offender or sexual predator’s intention to enter county school board property or local municipality government property to be present at the public meeting.
When a sexual offender or sexual predator enters upon county school board property or local municipality government property pursuant to this subsection, the sexual offender or sexual predator shall, upon adjournment of the public meeting, promptly depart from the county school board property or local municipality government property without any undue delay or loitering on premises. This subsection does not apply to meetings described in 74-102(b)(12) above.
(17)
If the sexual offender or sexual predator needs to enter county school board property or a local municipality government property within a 1,000-foot buffer zone to conduct official government business, he/she may do so provided no less than 24 hours prior to entering the county school board property or local municipality government property, the sexual offender or sexual predator has notified the county school board or local municipality designee, as applicable, and the law enforcement agency that is primarily responsible for general enforcement of state and local law at the location of:
a.
The sexual offender or sexual predator’s status as a sexual offender or sexual predator; and
b.
The sexual offender or sexual offender’s intention to enter county school board property or local municipality government property for official government business.
When a sexual offender or sexual predator enters upon County School Board property or local municipality government property pursuant to this subsection, the sexual offender or sexual predator shall promptly depart from the county school board property or local municipality government property without any undue delay or loitering on premises after completing official government business. This subsection does not apply to meetings described in 74.102(b)(12) above.
(18)
If a governmental agency holds a public meeting at a location other than its own property and within a 1,000-foot buffer zone provided by this section, the notice provision of the governmental agency holding the meeting shall apply.
(19)
With respect to subsections (14)—(18) above, in the event a governmental agency holds an emergency public meeting and the 24-hour notice provision cannot be met, the sexual offender or sexual predator shall provide notice as soon as reasonably possible, but at a minimum, must provide it to law enforcement present upon entering the governmental building.
So we have to give notice and get permission to be on a school property escorting our kids, but school shooters seem to walk right in unchallenged and unnoticed? Unreal.
School shooters are also not permitted on school property.
If you choose to walk in without notifying and risk being unchallenged and unnoticed, you can take that risk.
This is a curious listing of allowed conditions. Most curious are the hoops required when the public meeting is within 1000 feet, yet zero hoops are required when the public meeting is outside of the exclusion zone?
Yes, because in that case the meeting would be outside the exclusion zone and there are no hoops required.
Most of those exceptions look exactly like the exceptions that I had for probation.
I think people took my comment a little to serious. It was a jest. lol
This is not a surprise, especially given how this unprofessional commission took extra steps to stop people from attending.
However, they have provided evidence that their intent was to harm registered persons and that will work against them in the pending litigation.
Really…will it really? I doubt it will make any difference at all. Sure it is clearly the intent but the entire thing is an obvious flagrant cluster_f^ck of unfair stupidity and has been for years.
Nothing has change and it just keeps getting piled on so if you want to feel better about it fine but the reality is that this was done in 2022 and things have been added each year since this list was made!
I see no change in the future other than continued assault on registered persons aka “business as usual” with the promise of useless lawsuits that are either outright dismissed or simply tied up in courts for years with no end in sight.
Truth, so the lawsuit that was filed against Brevard County was useless? How so? The case hasn’t even been heard yet and the commission already rolled back the restriction on attending public meetings. The mere presence of registrants at the meeting (which was not allowed to happen in 2020) is a change. Why would you call it a useless lawsuit when it’s already proven to have utility?
I personally have spent weeks of work trying to find a first amendment rights firm to take our case, endured virtual doors getting slammed in my face left and right until FJI agreed to pick the case and tons of effort since it kicked off. Oh… and since I mentioned FJI, did you forget that they WON the internet identifier lawsuit a few years ago or do you think that was “useless” too, Mr. “Truth”? How about that we have have two active cases in federal court, one that SURVIVED a motion to dismiss (so no “outright dismissed”) and the second had oral arguments in the 11th Cir. this past May?
I’m sorry you have such a pessimistic outlook and you think the hundreds of hours of volunteer time and thousands of dollars of personal savings individuals like myself put into our efforts are useless, but if you’re going to come into the FAC forum and crap on our efforts educate yourself “Mr. Truth”. And since you’re so ungrateful and unappreciative – do something yourself.
Speaking of FJI, do we know whether they need $ to continue to fund this challenge (or to be persuaded to take others like it)?
Or are they less hard up than we are
FYI is less hard up than we are, plus they (unlike FAC) are a lawfirm that would be entitled to fees for prevailing. Based on the action taken thus far, it’s likely they will be awarded their fees.
Having hope and doing something is better than doing nothing and complaining.
I agree with both of you.
On the post of truth, I agree sometimes we all get frustrated.
But in FAC defense, just having an FAC has changed my outlook. Yes I have a family that loves me, yes I believe in and know God would walk through fire for me.
But having a place where I can share my frustrations and my hopes with other likeminded people who are experiencing the same frustrations, has really given me an outlet. I try not to not complain as best as possible, but I have in the past gotten under someone’s skin volunteering for FAC. We are all human, we all have emotions, and we ALL say stupid things sometimes.
Peace, love and much prayer for all of us.
Final note, “Together we stand, divided we fall.”
Everyone wants the Hail Mary pass that wins the game but remember that in order to get to that game winning play, an entire game was played to get to that point. A Hail Mary TD doesn’t matter if we’re down by a hundred.
Last night was NOT the end of the game. As I posted earlier in the day, I’ve seen teams win games after getting shut out in the first half. You look at the tape, make adjustments.
Sorry, OT, but I think you’re wrong on this on. FAC can tell you I disagree with them a lot, but I think in this case FAC has been handling the Brevard County Commission pretty well with limited resources. Brevard is playing more defense than you’re realizing.
PS: The words “Intentional Infliction of Emotional Distress” also come to mind (for those directly affected on a daily basis).
Ask you lawyer about it, Brvard Registrants. (It’s worth a fortune!)
I would hope that any family members of a Registered Citizen, would not patronize any business that would claim they are a PARK! I also hope there will be a list of these businesses that FAC can add to the weekly summary.
During the meeting, Tobia seemed to agree to finally make the off-limits list available.
Tobia apologized that no businesses appeared to be certified yet and promised to promote the certification law to local businesses. Pretty slick of him.
Don’t just boycott the business. Sue them. They’ll back off the moment litigation is filed because most small businesses can’t handle it and would be eager to settle quickly.
I sincerely hope this ends up costing the taxpayers a big bundle of money and that this is made very very public afterwards.
County commissioners can pass whatever they want. Doesn’t make it constitutional.
ADD MCNAMEE to Lawsuit. Absolutely BULL S ***