This is an interesting piece from The Crime Report. The article highlights the homelessness problems caused by the Lauren Book Child Safety Ordinance in Miami-Dade County. It bans individuals convicted of certain sex crimes, including those involving minors, from living within 2,500 feet of a school. The ordinance was the subject of the recent ACLU / FAC case challenging the residency restrictions.
PLEASE READ THE STORY AT THE FOLLOWING LINK:
https://thecrimereport.org/2019/02/19/miami-dade-sex-offenders-forced-to-be-homeless/
Now called the Lauren Book Child Endangerment Ordinance
In the next few months, I probably will be facing the consequences
from residency restrictions created by another county that may render me homeless. Currently, I live in St. Lucie County in a very nice gated community. I’ve lived here since my release from prison back in 2005. My father owns the house and is currently working on selling it. This leaves me with some tough choices. My wife is from Indian River County and she is at least temporarily planning on moving back in with her parents until she can find a house. The problem is in Indian River County there is the 2,500-foot rule there also. So finding suitable housing with low crime, that is affordable and is within an allowed area is almost impossible. We have two boys together (3 and 4) and I don’t want to move into a bad place with them. I’m going to ask when I go to register tomorrow how I’m supposed to know even if her mother’s address is acceptable. It’s impossible to find a map that’s 100% accurate that shows where I’m allowed to live and where I’m not. My crime was from 1998 so I’m not under the 1,000-foot rule. It’s just certain counties took it upon themselves to make it difficult to live anywhere. So if I can’t find anywhere to live and I have to live out of my car then can I sue the county because their ordinance caused my homelessness?
Maybe just buy your dads place?
Although I applaud Elizabeth Weill-Greenberg for this excellent article, mis-spelling Book as Brook not withstanding, she could have also mentioned the new ordinance which effectively makes it a crime to be a homeless registrant.
One thing I would like to point out that I have thought about many times but never said it or ever seen it stated but mark my words that at some point in the distant future people will look back through history and realize that these laws are almost no different than racial segregation laws. Forbidden to reside in areas, forbidden to shop, eat out in certain areas, etc… don’t participate in Halloween, unable to see your child play sports at school or actively participate, and on and on and on!
Another issue that needs to be addressed is those convicted of sex crimes being sent entered to many many years in prison and being placed on lifetime supervision
Elizabeth Weill Greenberg is an angel, She has eloquently laid out the facts , who is it that can dispute any of what she has said?
Just an observation, residency restrictions are measured as a 1000 foot buffer from the parcel boundary and include any parcels whose boundaries fall within that buffer. The ACLU map in the article is drawing 1000′ radius buffers around a coordinate point not a continuous buffer at the parcel boundary, and isn’t showing the other affected properties which fall in that range.
I spent four years in college studying GIS, if the map in the article is what they are using in court then it is underreporting the actual scope of the law and I’d be happy to talk to someone about how to correct that map.
There’s a GIS mapping expert for the Does that is excellent
I think this was a really good article! One of the highlights for me was the response to residence restrictions by the victims’ rights organizations. In my opinion, that is a huge plus for those of us fighting against these ordinances.
Thanks Mary Sue!!!