Call to Action: Oppose HB 45 / SB 212 – “Sexual Offenders and Sexual Predators”
HB 45 and SB 212 are dangerous, extreme, and counterproductive. SB 212 would banish more than 30,000 Floridians from “being” within 200 feet of a body of water and both bills would make 80% of Florida uninhabitable, displacing thousands of families from their homes and causing thousands to lose stable employment. These bills undermine public safety by increasing homelessness, instability, unemployment, and monitoring challenges.
The bills will:
- Push thousands into homelessness by making the majority of Florida off-limits for housing.
- Prevent tens of thousands of individuals from ever going to a beach, fishing in a lake or “being” near waterways or swimming pools for life.
- Make supervision harder and reduce public safety.
- Increase the financial burden on Florida through higher incarceration and enforcement expenses and mass unemployment.
- Risk a certain constitutional challenge.
- Do absolutely nothing to meaningfully prevent abuse or protect children!
Evidence is clear: residency restrictions and banishment do not reduce re-offending. They increase instability, homelessness, unemployment and risk.
The Florida Action Committee urges you to contact Florida legislators and urge them to VOTE NO on CS/HB 45 and CS/SB 212.
Protect children through education, prevention, treatment, and effective supervision—not by creating homelessness and chaos.
- The bills seek to expand exclusion zones to banish registrants from living within 1,000 feet of Florida’s 8,426 miles of shoreline along the Atlantic and Gulf coasts; more than 7,700 lakes that are 10 acres or larger (including Lake Okeechobee); over 30,000 other lakes and ponds; approximately 12,000 miles of rivers, streams and canals; and hundreds of thousands of swimming pools. The swimming pool restriction includes apartment complexes, motels, mobile home parks, etc.
- SB 212 creates an expansive proximity ban that would criminalize the mere presence of certain individuals within 200 feet of a wide range of everyday public places, including swimming pools (even if in a residential community or hotel) and beaches, regardless of intent, probation status or whether the offense was committed decades ago.
- Residence restrictions and proximity ordinances “increased isolation, created financial and emotional stress, and led to decreased stability” and reduced housing options for registrants. (Jill S. Levenson & Leo P. Cotter, The Impact of Sex Offender Residence Restrictions: 1,000 Feet From Danger or One Step From Absurd?, 49 Int’l J. Offender Therapy & Comp. Criminology 168 (2005)). Broward County, FL study (N≈109) showed that residency restrictions were associated with increased transience, homelessness, and difficulty securing employment and treatment. The study documents registrants’ self-reports and local enforcement perspectives. (Jill S. Levenson, Collateral Consequences of Sex Offender Residence Restrictions, 21 Criminal Justice Stud. 153 (2008)).
- FDLE research/survey of probation/parole officers in Florida reporting that officers view residency restrictions as a top obstacle to finding housing for supervised offenders; officers linked restrictions to homelessness and recommended risk-tiering and supervised/shared housing as remedies. (Amy L. Datz, Sex Offender Residency Restrictions, Sanity or Inhumanity (research paper), Fla. Dep’t of Law Enforcement (FDLE) (2009)). Homeless people are hard to monitor as they move frequently and are hard to locate (OPPAGA, 2024).
- If the amended statute is challenged, which it almost certainly would be, a Court may find that the exclusion zones are tantamount to banishment. That could result in the entire statute being declared unconstitutional and Florida would be left without any residency restriction.
You can find contact information for all Florida Senators here: https://www.flsenate.gov/Senators
And for all Florida Representatives here: https://www.flhouse.gov/representatives
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
To banish registrants from the lakes and rivers serves no purpose other than punishment. Hopefully they realize their folly before they vote,
I doubt it, but if it went to Fed court and was struck down, then it really would put a dent in their abilities.
Why is it only applicable to those who have criminal convictions where registration happens? Why not those who have civil sex case judgements against them too even if no criminal case was had? Need to include everyone.
If I’ve already sent an email, does it pay to send another?
Think of all the waterfront property this would make available to developers for new high end dwellings, “with those sex offenders”out? I wonder who all is profiting if this passes??
Good morning, all, well a new year a new struggle and I have now reported over 40 times. I actually made that comment in the office and one of them couldn’t believe it. I said, “Yeah, tell me.” back on the subject.
I see this going obviously one of three ways. Each could have great outcomes or so so outcomes. Humor me.
1. This gets defeated and we all breath for another year and they try again. So So outcome. Good in the short term no future protection.
2. This gets passed, goes to litigation, it should get defeated and could put in jeopardy the whole residency restrictions because the courts are now forced to take a hard look at it.
3. I guess it never comes to a final vote and dies on the table.
Not a lawyer, not a scholar, not an expert just completely and totally my thoughts.
All steam ahead.
Who do I send the letter too? House Leadership? Or House Judicial Committee? Can someone narrow this list down for me.
Agreed, tearful. We need to do all we can on all fronts.
And when these (maybe) get shot down, next term there will be the same bills re-introduced again and again. We are so tired of this
It’s all wrong . Finding housing is near impossible. As a single mom of four my youngest son being made and so next week because his public defender refuses to defend him, told us I was too late for help, we were here for punishment. Now he isn’t allowed to live in our home we have owned 8 yrs because it is 100ft too close and our county increased the Florida distances. It’s very upsetting and the effect on everyones me tal health yo not be allowed to swim, or fish or kayak ..insane and unconstitutional.
I agree either way it is a Dice roll. In the long term ….. if this passes and goes to court and the court strikes it down it could, and please this is only my thoughts, opinions etc, derail the Residency Restrictions in the statute. That scenario, in the long run, would be the best outcome.