Florida registry Archives - Florida Action Committee (FAC) https://floridaactioncommittee.org/tag/florida-registry/ Reforming Florida’s Sex Offender Registry Laws Thu, 15 Oct 2026 18:45:07 +0000 en-US hourly 1 https://floridaactioncommittee.org/wp-content/uploads/2024/04/FAC-logo-Transparent-150x150.png Florida registry Archives - Florida Action Committee (FAC) https://floridaactioncommittee.org/tag/florida-registry/ 32 32 123336211 No Stable Home, More Felony Charges: Is This Making Florida Safer? https://floridaactioncommittee.org/florida-registry-reporting-housing-arrests-family-costs/ https://floridaactioncommittee.org/florida-registry-reporting-housing-arrests-family-costs/#respond Thu, 15 Oct 2026 18:45:07 +0000 https://floridaactioncommittee.org/?p=28716 Housing · Accountability · Public Safety No Stable Home, More Felony Charges: Is This Making Florida Safer? Child safety deserves policies that work. A closer look at housing barriers, reporting rules and the human cost of repeated arrests. By FAC Media Research and Commentary October 15, 2026 On October 14, Brevard booked Travis Kinte Green, listed as transient in Cocoa.

The post No Stable Home, More Felony Charges: Is This Making Florida Safer? appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

]]>

Housing · Accountability · Public Safety

No Stable Home, More Felony Charges: Is This Making Florida Safer?

Child safety deserves policies that work. A closer look at housing barriers, reporting rules and the human cost of repeated arrests.

By FAC Media Research and Commentary
October 15, 2026

On October 14, Brevard booked Travis Kinte Green, listed as transient in Cocoa. His jail page shows six registration and housing charges across three cases, including older cases. No new sexual-contact charge is listed. These are allegations, not findings of guilt.

Children deserve safety. Survivors deserve care. Accountability and stable housing matter.

These three county reviews separate bookings and charges from new acts of harm. A missed reporting duty can bring a felony charge in Florida without any new allegation of sexual contact. California generally treats the first two willful failures to meet its monthly transient-reporting rule as misdemeanors, although they still carry jail time. That comparison raises a fair question: Are Florida’s penalties helping people follow the rules and keeping the public safer?

Miami-Dade

42registry-coded bookings

July 1–October 14, 2026

Identified feed records, not a complete county total. Eight explicitly mention transient reporting; court review confirms another transient case.

Brevard

14bookings involving 12 people

July 1–October 14, 2026

Registry or residency-related. Includes 12 reporting/compliance bookings, one false-information-only booking and one restriction-only booking. Public-index screening, not a certified export.

Broward

3people in verified examples

July 1–October 15, 2026 review

Partial case examples only. One new registry case and two returns in older cases. These are not three verified new offenses or a countywide booking total.

These reviews use different sources and counting methods. The figures cannot fairly rank counties or be added into one total. October 15 was still in progress.

What the numbers mean

Eddie Lee Kimble’s pending Miami-Dade case has 103 numbered felony counts alleging missed monthly reports for a transient address. Alleged dates span May 2018–July 2026; only one falls after July 1, 2026. Some dates repeat, so 103 counts do not establish 103 separate incidents. The charging document alleges no new sexual-contact offense.

Other reviewed cases include domestic violence, robbery, drug or theft allegations.

Where can people live?

Fort Lauderdale’s section 16-127 creates a 1,400-foot housing buffer around certain places where children gather. It covers permanent, temporary and transient residences for covered people. This is a city rule, not a countywide rule.

The City of Miami eased its public-camping arrest process, with a shelter exception naming registry status. Our review does not show that this city rule caused the registry arrests.

48 HOURS

Under Florida’s registry law, a covered person must report in person to the sheriff in the county where they are located within 48 hours after establishing a transient residence and give its addresses and locations. The separate report due every 30 days does not extend that first deadline.

Listening and sharing stories

FAC’s reporting helped inform Local 10’s shopping-center coverage. Read “Sent to a Shopping Center Instead of Home.”

Today, October 15, FAC members are scheduled to accompany a Miami New Times reporter to Broward encampments to hear people’s stories. See FAC’s weekly update.

A note for people living outside

People living in makeshift camps, sometimes called bivouacs, deserve to be seen and heard. Finding water, a bathroom, food and shelter from rain can fill the day. If you wear a GPS monitor and report a cross street as your location, where can you safely charge it? Keeping charging equipment dry and following care instructions adds to the worry. Imagine always staying alert while trying to follow every rule and get enough rest.

People without homes can still have jobs. Arrest can stop wages while rent and car bills keep coming. Calls and commissary purchases can cost families money. If you support yourself, who protects your job and belongings? Jail supplies for people without money cannot replace a paycheck.

Should a reporting failure with no new allegation of sexual harm cost someone their job, housing and family stability?

Thank you to everyone sharing your story, and to the journalists and reporters listening. Through articles, videos and conversations, we are reaching more people and bringing these concerns to new audiences.

Sources & how the records were counted

Research checked October 15, 2026. This is research and commentary, not legal advice. Booking and charging records describe allegations. Everyone is presumed innocent unless proven guilty. Custody, charges and court schedules can change.

  1. Brevard / Green: Official October 14 booking page and FDLE registry entry. Six displayed charge rows span three dockets; one has a 2025 prefix and another also appears in his July booking. They are not six verified new October offenses. The 14-booking review screened all 4,270 rows returned by the July 1–October 14 public index, using archived charge reports and official detail pages. Every included booking was checked against its official page. Two bookings expressly list transient reporting. Court dispositions were not verified; no certified agency export was obtained. Official booking search.
  2. Miami-Dade: County historical booking feed and official inmate search. The 42 selected rows contain an explicit registry statute in the feed’s three visible charge slots. That limited feed does not prove completeness. Eight rows explicitly say transient; court review also confirms Kimble. A separate July 17 capias rebooking of Jean Antoine on an older registry case was verified in court documents and is outside the 42 coded rows. It is not a new July reporting offense. A June 30 registry arrest was excluded even though its case opened July 1. Seven current-custody checks were interrupted by the official site’s outage; historical records remain verified.
  3. Kimble: Miami-Dade case F-26-014307, information DIN 15, filed August 19, 2026. The 119-page information has 103 numbered counts under section 943.0435. Dates span May 30, 2018–July 21, 2026; 102 numbered counts state pre-July dates. Some August and September 2023 dates repeat. Count totals, unique incidents and bookings are different measures.
  4. Broward: Broward Clerk records and BSO arrest search. Verified examples: Patrick Boyd, new case 26010963CF10A; Jerry Louis McCall, warrant arrest in older case 25008606CF10A; Otis Sparks, court-recorded return in older case 22005365CF10A. Sparks’s independent new jail-admission date was not established. Search limits prevent a countywide total.
  5. Fort Lauderdale: Code of Ordinances, section 16-127. The 1,400-foot provision applies to covered persons and defined locations, subject to its terms and exceptions.
  6. City of Miami: WLRN, July 23 amendment and 3–2 vote; FAC, July 28, including the shelter-ineligibility provision. The July 23 amendment passed 3–2 and removed the written-warning requirement. A verbal warning and reasonable time to leave remain. The shelter-ineligibility exception allows arrest despite a shelter-placement barrier, including registry status. City camping enforcement is distinct from county booking data and state registry charges.
  7. California comparison: Penal Code 290.018(g), reflected in the Los Angeles County District Attorney’s March 23, 2026 Legal Policies Manual, PDF page 89. This narrow misdemeanor rule concerns the first two willful 30-day transient-reporting failures; it does not make all registry violations misdemeanors. The general penalty under this provision is 30 days to six months in jail; statutory exceptions apply. Florida’s reviewed transient-reporting cases show felony charges.
  8. 48-hour and 30-day duties: Florida Statutes 943.0435(4)(b)2 and the parallel provision in 775.21(6)(g)2.b. These require an in-person report within 48 hours after establishing a transient residence and in-person reporting every 30 days while maintaining it. The law has a specific definition of transient residence and other reporting duties. The monthly duty does not replace the initial deadline. The GPS note raises practical questions; it does not claim that everyone on probation or everyone without housing wears a monitor, or that a charging problem automatically leads to arrest.
  9. Jail supplies and family costs: Florida Model Jail Standards, 2026, sections 7.6 and 11.6, address basic hygiene supplies and writing materials/postage for people without funds. Brevard Sheriff’s jail FAQs describe commissary purchases and accounts funded by friends and family. Costs vary; no universal fee or cost total is claimed. The questions about lost income, bills and personal belongings describe possible burdens, not verified outcomes for every person in the booking review.
  10. FAC reporting: June 30 shopping-center article and October 14 weekly update. The October 15 reporting visit is described as scheduled, not completed.
FAC Media Research and Commentary · Public-record review

The post No Stable Home, More Felony Charges: Is This Making Florida Safer? appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

]]> https://floridaactioncommittee.org/florida-registry-reporting-housing-arrests-family-costs/feed/ 0 28716 Growing Up on the Registry: When the Whole Family Pays https://floridaactioncommittee.org/growing-up-on-the-registry-when-the-whole-family-pays/ https://floridaactioncommittee.org/growing-up-on-the-registry-when-the-whole-family-pays/#comments Tue, 13 Oct 2026 13:45:56 +0000 https://floridaactioncommittee.org/?p=28617 FLORIDA ACTION COMMITTEE MEDIA Growing Up on the Registry: When the Whole Family Pays Children grow. Parents age. Families keep caring. October 13, 2026 · Video premiere PREMIERES TODAY AT 10 A.M. EASTERN Tuesday, October 13, 2026 · 5 minutes, 32 seconds The premiere page is open; playback begins at the scheduled time. Watch the premiere Children grow, parents age,

The post Growing Up on the Registry: When the Whole Family Pays appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

]]>

FLORIDA ACTION COMMITTEE MEDIA

Growing Up on the Registry:
When the Whole Family Pays

Children grow. Parents age. Families keep caring.

October 13, 2026 · Video premiere

PREMIERES TODAY AT 10 A.M. EASTERN

Tuesday, October 13, 2026 · 5 minutes, 32 seconds
The premiere page is open; playback begins at the scheduled time.



Children grow, parents age, and caregiving changes direction. Registration can affect a family’s plans across generations. A parent who once provided rides may need help with appointments. An adult child may become a caregiver. Those changing needs deserve attention.

Youth and aging in the records

AGE 65+

20,118

INCLUDED ABOVE: AGE 80+

2,914

October 6, 2026 ages; deceased/absconded records excluded. Includes out-of-state and confined records, not just Florida community residents.

572

All-age Juvenile Walsh records, including one deceased; not 572 children.

76

A separate review identified 76 people with qualifying court decisions before 18.

26

Under 18 as of October 6, 2026.

These groups can overlap. Do not add them.Yes. His concern is about who the statistics include, rather than the proposed legislation. The missing detail is that the 76 came from a limited ten-year review, not every case involving an offense before age 18.

What these numbers mean

572: Records labeled “Juvenile Sex Offender (Walsh)” by FDLE, across all ages and case years in the records reviewed. Most are adults now; one record is marked deceased.

76: People with other registry designations identified in a separate review of people age 31 or younger on October 6, 2026. Their qualifying court decisions occurred before age 18 between October 6, 2016 and October 6, 2026. Older people and earlier court decisions were outside this review.

26: People under 18 on October 6, 2026, across all registry designations in the records reviewed. Twenty are also included in the 572.

These are not totals for everyone whose offense occurred before age 18, or everyone who first registered before 18. Age at the offense, age at the court decision and age at first registration are different. Do not add these figures into one youth total.

Families carry the strain

A 2009 Levenson–Tewksbury study found 73% anxiety, 77% depression and 65% feeling excluded among 95 caregiver responses about children. These self-selected reports were not diagnoses, national estimates or proof of causation.

Age alone is not a diagnosis. NIA distinguishes ordinary forgetfulness from cognitive impairment. Families facing memory changes need clear instructions, reminders and caregiver support. Our records do not measure cognitive conditions.

Preventing sexual harm and supporting survivors remain essential. Protecting family stability, recognizing documented care needs and making instructions understandable should be part of that conversation.

Policy reaches the household

Panama City Beach’s SB 212 update retained broader local restrictions. Lawmakers should explain impacts on housing and care.

Thank you to FAC’s Legislative Committee: its proposed 2027 Young Adult Registry Petition Act seeks a removal-petition pathway after 10 years rather than 25 for qualifying people whose offenses occurred at 25 or younger. It is not law or automatic removal.

Join today’s 10 a.m. Eastern premiere. Our companion Short is planned for 5 p.m. Eastern on FAC’s YouTube channel.

Earlier OPPAGA figures and comparison limits

Age 65-plus: 14% in October 2018 versus 22.6% in the October 6, 2026 records used for this report, about 8.6 percentage points higher. To align with OPPAGA’s broad death-excluded scope, this comparison includes absconders: 20,497 aged 65-plus out of 90,615 current records. That broader population differs from the headline counts above. OPPAGA’s 14% of 73,004 is rounded; no matched historical 80-plus count is presented.

Provisional juvenile-category comparison: 515 in October 2024 versus 571 in the October 6, 2026 records used for this report, deaths excluded. OPPAGA uses “juvenile sex offenders”; the file uses “Juvenile Sex Offender (Walsh).” An exact category mapping has not been obtained, so this does not establish a like-for-like increase or newly registered children.

Sources: FDLE files pulled for this report, separate reviewed court records and linked OPPAGA reports. Ages are completed years on October 6, 2026. The files supplied October 6, 2026 are not a certified live census. The headline elderly figures cover 89,453 records excluding deceased and absconded entries. The 76-person case review is not added to snapshot counts; court-decision ages do not establish first-registration ages.

The post Growing Up on the Registry: When the Whole Family Pays appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

]]> https://floridaactioncommittee.org/growing-up-on-the-registry-when-the-whole-family-pays/feed/ 2 28617 Florida’s Registry Keeps Growing. Public Safety or Overenforcement? https://floridaactioncommittee.org/florida-registry-public-safety-overenforcement/ https://floridaactioncommittee.org/florida-registry-public-safety-overenforcement/#comments Mon, 12 Oct 2026 12:00:13 +0000 https://floridaactioncommittee.org/?p=28577 INVESTIGATIVE REPORT Florida’s Registry Keeps Growing. Public Safety or Overenforcement? What are taxpayers getting? By Florida Action Committee Media   Opinion and Commentary · October 11, 2026 An arrest makes a headline. What happens afterward is harder to see. Florida’s registry grows, reporting rules accumulate, and public money supports enforcement. But the public still needs clearer answers about costs, outcomes

The post Florida’s Registry Keeps Growing. Public Safety or Overenforcement? appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

]]> .fac-post{background:#f4f9fd;padding:18px 8px;font:17px/1.75 Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;color:#1f2937}.fac-post article{max-width:980px;margin:auto;background:white;border:1px solid #d7eef4;border-radius:20px;overflow:hidden;box-shadow:0 8px 24px #0d2f5219}.fac-post header{background:linear-gradient(120deg,#0d2f52,#126493 58%,#17836a);padding:34px 22px;text-align:center;color:white!important;border-bottom:7px solid #78a957}.fac-post header h1{font-size:29px;line-height:1.3;color:white!important;margin:12px 0}.fac-post header p{color:white!important;margin:0}.fac-post main{padding:26px 24px}.fac-post section{margin-bottom:28px}.fac-post h3{font-size:21px;color:#0d2f52}.fac-post h2{font-size:25px;line-height:1.35;color:#0d2f52!important}.fac-post a{color:#126493;text-decoration:underline;overflow-wrap:anywhere}.fac-post a:focus-visible,.fac-post summary:focus-visible{outline:3px solid #17836a;outline-offset:3px}.fac-post .byline,.fac-caption{font-size:14px;color:#405866}.fac-chart{background:#eef7fb;border:1px solid #d7eef4;border-radius:12px;padding:22px;margin:22px 0 10px}.fac-legend{font-size:14px;margin-bottom:20px;color:#0d2f52}.fac-chart-row{display:grid;grid-template-columns:80px 1fr;gap:15px;margin-bottom:20px}.fac-bar-track{margin-bottom:8px}.fac-bar-track span{font-size:13px;display:block;line-height:1.6}.fac-post details{border:1px solid #d7eef4;border-radius:12px;margin:20px 0;padding:18px}.fac-post summary{font-size:19px;color:#0d2f52;font-weight:bold;cursor:pointer}.fac-table-scroll{overflow-x:auto}.fac-factcards{display:grid;grid-template-columns:repeat(3,1fr);gap:12px;margin-top:24px}.fac-factcards>div{background:#0d2f52;color:white;padding:22px;border-radius:12px;border-top:5px solid #78a957}.fac-factcards strong{display:block;font-size:38px;line-height:1.2;margin-bottom:10px}.fac-factcards span{font-size:14px;line-height:1.5;display:block}.fac-takeaway{background:#eaf5e4;border-left:5px solid #17836a;padding:18px;border-radius:8px}.fac-post thead{background:#0d2f52;color:white}.fac-post tbody tr:nth-child(even){background:#f1f7fa}.fac-post tbody th{color:#0d2f52}.fac-post table{border-collapse:collapse;width:100%;font-size:14px;margin:18px 0}.fac-post caption{text-align:left;font-weight:bold;margin-bottom:8px}.fac-post th,.fac-post td{padding:10px;border-bottom:1px solid #d7eef4;text-align:left}.fac-post .source-item{border-bottom:1px solid #d7eef4;padding:15px 0;font-size:14px}.fac-source-image{margin:24px 0;border:1px solid #d7eef4;padding:12px;border-radius:12px;background:white}.fac-source-image figcaption{font-size:13px;color:#405866;line-height:1.6;padding:12px 4px 2px}.fac-watch{background:#eef7fb;border-left:5px solid #17836a;padding:18px;border-radius:12px}.fac-directory-item{border-bottom:1px solid #d7eef4;padding:12px 0;font-size:14px}.fac-directory-item h3{font-size:17px}.fac-death-callout{border-left:6px solid #126493;background:#eef7fb;border-radius:12px;padding:18px 22px;margin:20px 0}.fac-death-callout h3{font-size:25px;margin-top:0;color:#0d2f52}.fac-compact-panel{background:#eef7fb;border:1px solid #d7eef4;border-radius:12px;padding:14px 18px;margin:14px 0}.fac-compact-panel p{margin:5px 0}.fac-compact-panel strong{color:#0d2f52}.fac-post footer p,.fac-post footer strong,.fac-post footer cite,.fac-post footer blockquote{color:white!important}.fac-post footer a{color:#d7eef4!important}.fac-hope{margin:0 0 22px;padding:0;border:0}.fac-hope p{font-family:Georgia,serif;font-size:22px;line-height:1.6}.fac-hope cite{font-size:14px;font-style:normal}.fac-post footer{background:#0d2f52;color:white;padding:24px;text-align:center;font-size:13px}@media(max-width:600px){.fac-factcards{grid-template-columns:1fr}.fac-factcards>div{padding:18px}.fac-factcards strong{font-size:32px}.fac-post table,.fac-post tbody,.fac-post tr,.fac-post td,.fac-post tbody th{display:block;box-sizing:border-box}.fac-post thead{position:absolute;width:1px;height:1px;overflow:hidden;clip:rect(0,0,0,0)}.fac-post tbody tr{border:1px solid #d7eef4;border-radius:9px;margin-bottom:12px;overflow:hidden}.fac-post tbody th{background:#e6f0f6}.fac-post td:before{content:attr(data-label);display:block;color:#405866;font-size:12px;font-weight:bold}.fac-post td{border-bottom:0}.fac-post caption{display:block}.fac-post main{padding:20px 16px}.fac-post header h1{font-size:24px}.fac-chart{padding:14px}.fac-chart-row{grid-template-columns:58px 1fr;gap:10px}.fac-post{font-size:16px}}
.fac-post summary{color:#0d2f52!important;min-height:28px;line-height:1.45;padding:4px 0}.fac-post details[open]>summary{margin-bottom:14px}.fac-post thead th,.fac-post .fac-factcards strong,.fac-post .fac-factcards span{color:#ffffff!important}.fac-post .fac-compact-panel h3,.fac-post .fac-chart h3,.fac-post .fac-return-chart h3{color:#0d2f52!important}.fac-post .fac-table-scroll:focus-visible{outline:3px solid #116d57;outline-offset:3px}.fac-post .fac-share-track{height:22px;background:#d7eef4;border:1px solid #759cae;border-radius:6px;overflow:hidden}.fac-post .fac-share-track span{display:block;height:100%}.fac-post .fac-return-track{display:flex;height:28px;border:1px solid #759cae;border-radius:6px;overflow:hidden}.fac-post .fac-return-track span{display:block;min-width:0}.fac-post .fac-comparison-bars,.fac-post .fac-return-chart{background:#eef7fb;padding:16px;border-radius:10px;color:#0d2f52!important}.fac-post .fac-comparison-bars p,.fac-post .fac-return-chart p{color:#0d2f52!important}.fac-post .fac-comparison-bars strong,.fac-post .fac-return-chart strong{color:#0d2f52!important}.fac-post *{box-sizing:border-box}.fac-post img{max-width:100%}.fac-post details p,.fac-post td,.fac-post th{overflow-wrap:anywhere}

/* Compact native dropdowns; header/footer rules are unchanged. */
.fac-post main details{margin:12px 0;padding:0 14px;border:1px solid #b8cfda;border-radius:10px;background:#fff}
.fac-post main summary{display:list-item;box-sizing:border-box;min-height:44px;padding:11px 0;margin:0;font-size:16.5px;line-height:1.35;color:#0d2f52!important;font-weight:700;cursor:pointer}
.fac-post main summary::marker{color:#126493}
.fac-post main details[open]{padding-bottom:12px}
.fac-post main details[open]>summary{margin-bottom:8px;border-bottom:1px solid #d7eef4}
.fac-post main details details{margin:9px 0;border-color:#d7eef4;background:#f8fbfd}
.fac-post main details details>summary{font-size:15.5px;min-height:44px}
@media(max-width:600px){.fac-post main details{margin:10px 0;padding-left:12px;padding-right:12px}.fac-post main summary{font-size:16px;min-height:44px}.fac-post main details details>summary{font-size:15px}}
/* Coordinated interior palette only. Source images and chart-series colors stay original. */
.fac-post main{background:#fbfcfe;color:#202938}
.fac-post main h2{color:#193857!important}
.fac-post main h3{color:#14263d}
.fac-post main a{color:#155d88;text-decoration:underline}
.fac-post main details{background:#f5f8fb;border-color:#b8cbd5}
.fac-post main summary{color:#075b62!important}
.fac-post main summary::marker{color:#075b62}
.fac-post main details[open]>summary{border-bottom-color:#c4d9df}
.fac-post main details details{background:#fff;border-color:#cbd8e1}
.fac-post main .fac-compact-panel{background:#edf6f8!important;color:#14263d!important;border-color:#b8cdd3;border-left-color:#65538b!important}
.fac-post main .fac-factcards>div{background:#14263d;border-top-color:#398a8b}
.fac-post main .fac-death-callout{background:#edf7f6;border-left-color:#447e85}
.fac-post main .fac-death-callout h3{color:#193857!important}
.fac-post main .fac-takeaway,.fac-post main .fac-watch{background:#edf6f8;border-left-color:#65538b}
.fac-post main .fac-source-image{background:#fff;border-color:#bdcfdc}
.fac-post main thead{background:#14263d}
.fac-post main a:focus-visible,.fac-post main summary:focus-visible{outline-color:#447e85}

/* Stronger interior emphasis only; the masthead/footer palette stays unchanged. */
.fac-post main>section>h2{border-bottom:3px solid #447e85;padding-bottom:8px}
.fac-post main details{border:1px solid #14263d;border-left:4px solid #398a8b}
.fac-post main summary{background:#14263d;color:#fff!important;list-style-position:inside;padding:11px 12px;margin:0 -14px;border-radius:8px;min-height:44px}
.fac-post main summary::marker{color:#a4e5df}
.fac-post main details[open]>summary{margin:0 -14px 8px;border-bottom:2px solid #398a8b}
.fac-post main details details{border-color:#075b62;border-left-color:#398a8b}
.fac-post main details details>summary{background:#075b62;color:#fff!important;min-height:44px}
.fac-post main #what-records-show{background:#101e35!important;border:1px solid #101e35;border-left:7px solid #398a8b!important;color:#fff!important}
.fac-post main #congress-funded-infrastructure{background:#514273!important;border:1px solid #514273;border-left:7px solid #398a8b!important;color:#fff!important}
.fac-post main #what-records-show :is(h2,h3,p,li,strong),.fac-post main #congress-funded-infrastructure :is(h2,h3,p,li,strong){color:#fff!important}
.fac-post main #what-records-show a,.fac-post main #congress-funded-infrastructure a{color:#c8eef2!important;text-decoration:underline}
.fac-post main .fac-death-callout{background:#14263d;border:1px solid #14263d;border-left:7px solid #398a8b;color:#fff}
.fac-post main .fac-death-callout :is(h3,p,strong,.fac-caption){color:#fff!important}
.fac-post main .fac-death-callout a{color:#c8eef2!important}
.fac-post main #what-records-show a:focus-visible,.fac-post main #congress-funded-infrastructure a:focus-visible,.fac-post main .fac-death-callout a:focus-visible{outline-color:#c8eef2}
.fac-post main .fac-source-image{border-color:#447e85;border-top:5px solid #398a8b;background:#fff;box-shadow:0 5px 14px #14263d14}
.fac-post main .fac-key-figure{background:#e7edf8;color:#14263d!important;padding:1px 4px;border-bottom:2px solid #65538b;box-decoration-break:clone;-webkit-box-decoration-break:clone}
.fac-post main .fac-key-line{color:#514273;border-bottom:2px solid #398a8b;box-decoration-break:clone;-webkit-box-decoration-break:clone}
@media(max-width:600px){.fac-post main summary{margin-left:-12px;margin-right:-12px}.fac-post main details[open]>summary{margin-left:-12px;margin-right:-12px}}

/* Professional interior: blue/teal foundation, restrained purple/orange accents. */
.fac-post main #congress-funded-infrastructure{border-left-color:#b45309!important}
.fac-post main .fac-death-callout{background:#075b62;border-color:#075b62;border-left-color:#398a8b}
.fac-post main .fac-key-line{border-bottom-color:#b45309}

INVESTIGATIVE REPORT

Florida’s Registry Keeps Growing. Public Safety or Overenforcement?

What are taxpayers getting?

By Florida Action Committee Media

 

Opinion and Commentary · October 11, 2026

An arrest makes a headline. What happens afterward is harder to see. Florida’s registry grows, reporting rules accumulate, and public money supports enforcement. But the public still needs clearer answers about costs, outcomes and the families living with the consequences.    Arrows are Drop Downs Please Click 

Congressional Record, January 6, 2026, H35 (PDF page 23). Original headers and Osceola row: $1 million for Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) equipment, not a verified Cooked expense. Other rows omitted. Tap to enlarge; full PDF.

Children deserve protection, and survivors deserve lasting care and support. The public deserves evidence that the work being done delivers on those promises.

Who conducted the investigation? Was the person online a child or an adult decoy? What happened in court, what did it cost, and what happened to the families?

Records of Florida operations connected to Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) task forces, Chris Hansen’s productions and Safe from Online Sex Abuse (SOSA) help make the activity visible. Careful counting matters.

The registry has grown. What does that number mean?

Population scope: All registry figures here concern Florida’s sexual offender and sexual predator registry, including covered juvenile registrants. The separately labeled Florida resident estimates describe the state’s general population. Community registry counts include only registered people living in Florida communities; full-list counts also include other statuses, as labeled.

Florida’s Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability, known as OPPAGA, gives us another way to examine the system. Its reviewed reports put the number of registered people living in Florida communities at 26,845 in 2015 and 30,907 in 2024. That is 4,062 more people, an increase of about 15.1% across nine years. Over the same period, the total registry grew from 66,523 to 86,207, about 29.6%.

Put the growth in perspective: 2015–2024

Florida resident population: +15.8%

Registrants in Florida communities: +15.1%

Full registry, excluding deceased: +29.6%

2024 community benchmark: 0.134% of Florida’s resident population, about 134 per 100,000. The comparable 2015 benchmark was about 135 per 100,000.

Community registrants grew slightly slower than Florida’s overall population over these nine years. These same-year benchmarks pair April 1 population estimates with September/October registry snapshots; they are not counts taken on the same day.

Population comparison: four snapshots and calculation limits
Same year, different snapshot dates
Year Florida residents, April 1 Full registry, Sep/Oct Community registrants, Sep/Oct Community / residents
2015 19,879,230 66,523 26,845 0.135%
2018 20,854,945 73,004 28,548 0.137%
2021 21,898,945 78,357 30,180 0.138%
2024 23,014,551 86,207 30,907 0.134%

Florida resident totals used in these calculations: Florida BEBR/EDR estimates, February 2025 conference. Registry counts: OPPAGA reports 15-16, 18-08, 21-10 and 24-11. All registry counts exclude deceased records here. The community group includes covered juvenile registrants, so the resident population used for comparison includes all ages. These ratios measure listed populations, not offending or risk. No 2026 ratio is calculated from the FDLE full registry CSV uploaded October 6, 2026; the upload date does not establish its generation date.

The full 2024 registry divided by Florida’s resident population is 0.375%, or about 375 records per 100,000 residents. That is only a scale comparison: the registry includes nonresidents and confined people. It is not the percentage of Florida residents who are registered.

Registry totals and community counts, 2015–2024
36%Of the 2024 registry total lived in Florida communities.
+7,850Net registry increase, September 2021 to October 2024.
+727Net increase in the Florida community category over that period.

Snapshots from Florida’s Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability (OPPAGA), excluding deceased records. These measure listed populations, not crime rates.

Blue: Total registry · Green: Florida communities

Sep 2015

Total registry: 66,523

Florida communities: 26,845

Oct 2018

Total registry: 73,004

Florida communities: 28,548

Sep 2021

Total registry: 78,357

Florida communities: 30,180

Oct 2024

Total registry: 86,207

Florida communities: 30,907

Both series cover registered sexual offenders and sexual predators, including covered juvenile registrants. Community residents are part of the total, not an additional population. Totals exclude deceased records and include confined, nonresident and absconded categories. Sources: OPPAGA 2015, 2018, 2021 and 2024. Different snapshot months; no interpolation or 2026 estimate.

The distinction between the registry and the community population is essential. OPPAGA’s October 2024 total of 86,207 excludes another 1,521 deceased records. The chart uses that same exclusion. These are historical snapshots, not live 2026 counts.

Operation announcements and registry snapshots measure different things. Neither establishes how much offending occurs or how many crimes a policy prevents.

Two community-supervision figures need reconciliation

OPPAGA’s October 2024 FDLE table yields 6,050 people under FDC community supervision (4,421 + 1,629), while its FDC narrative reports 6,079. The report does not reconcile the 29-person difference. Neither figure counts registered people held in FDC prisons.

These are separately reported measures, not evidence of manipulation or an established error by one agency. Sources: OPPAGA 24-11, narrative, printed page 3 and Exhibit 3, printed page 5.

OPPAGA 24-11, Exhibit 3, printed page 5. This is a direct crop of the original PDF, with its notes and source line preserved. Open the original exhibit and surrounding report.

Where the more recent increase appears

Where the 2021–2024 increase appears: category-by-category figures
Where net registry growth appears: September 2021 to October 2024
Registry category 2021 → 2024 Net change
Non-Florida residents 28,646 → 33,465 +4,819
Confined 18,507 → 20,742 +2,235
Florida community residents 30,180 → 30,907 +727
Absconded; location unknown 1,024 → 1,093 +69
Total, excluding deceased 78,357 → 86,207 +7,850

Calculated from matching categories in OPPAGA 2021, Exhibit 4 and OPPAGA 2024, Exhibit 3. Confined includes incarceration and civil commitment. Absconded people may or may not be in Florida communities.

From September 2021 to October 2024, only 727 of the 7,850 net increase, about 9.3%, appears in the Florida community category. The rest appears in other categories. This is an accounting comparison between two snapshots, not a count of new crimes, a record of individual movements, or proof of what caused the changes.

FDLE full registry CSV, uploaded October 6, 2026

92,456 unique FDLE record numbers

1,841 marked deceased · 90,615 not marked deceased

The 90,615 figure is the total minus records marked deceased. It is not a Florida-resident count or an independently verified count of living people.

Aging on the list: 20,149 age 65-plus · 2,921 age 80-plus.

Ages as of October 11, 2026, across the full file after excluding records marked deceased or absconded. Age 80-plus is included in age 65-plus. These are not Florida-resident counts.

Older registrants: how the ages and address groups were counted

Ages were calculated from recorded birth dates as of October 11, 2026. The source is the FDLE full registry CSV uploaded October 6, 2026; an FDLE generation timestamp was not supplied. Age 80-plus is part of age 65-plus; the two columns must not be added. These counts exclude the exact statuses “Deceased” and “Absconded,” so their exclusions differ from the 90,615 figure above. They still include nonresidents and people in custody, and do not independently confirm living status or current residence.

Age groups in the FDLE full registry CSV, uploaded October 6, 2026
Recorded group Age 65-plus Age 80-plus
Full file, after exclusions 20,149 2,921
At least one recorded Florida address, after exclusions 11,003 1,302
Full file: released or supervised 15,962 2,529
Full file: confinement or civil commitment 3,396 268

The Florida-address row includes any permanent, temporary or transient address marked Florida. It is not a verified count of current Florida residents. Released or supervised combines “Released – Subject to Registration,” Florida Department of Corrections supervision and United States probation. The full-file remainder is recorded as deported. Address and status rows overlap; do not add them.

Age alone does not establish anyone’s risk or health. These figures raise a practical question: how do reporting rules account for people growing older while they remain on the list?

Source: FDLE full registry CSV, uploaded October 6, 2026. The copy retained October 9 was byte-identical. October 6 is the upload date, not an established FDLE data-generation timestamp. The counts are not a fresh October 11 FDLE snapshot, and “not marked deceased” does not establish current residence or independently verified living status. We keep them separate from OPPAGA’s dated snapshots because we have not established that their dates and counting methods match.

Could the structure itself keep the list growing?

Yes. Keeping people on the list for many years is a documented part of the explanation. OPPAGA’s 2021 review identified lifetime registration as a primary contributor to growth. It also explained that Florida retains information about registrants who visited the state after they leave. Florida law generally requires lifetime registration, with limited ways to seek removal for people who meet the legal conditions.

How entries, time on the list and removals affect growth
A growing list reflects entries, retention and exits
Part of the count How it can affect growth Records still needed
Entries People newly required to register add to the list. Unique new entries and qualifying reasons.
Retention Long listing periods allow old entries to remain as new ones arrive. Years listed; resident/visitor status; eligibility for relief.
Exits Removals reduce the total; category transfers alone do not. Annual removals and reasons, with corrections separated.

A new enforcement operation may eventually lead to people being required to register, but we need court outcomes to establish how many. A registration-violation case involving someone already listed can increase enforcement and custody activity without adding a new person to the registry. Transfers between community and confinement categories also need to be separated from new entries.

Our question is straightforward: how much annual growth comes from new cases that require registration, people arriving or visiting, long periods on the list and limited ways off it? The current operation catalogue cannot answer that. A yearly account of who entered, who left and why could.

The costs stretch across agencies

Follow the Osceola money: award, request and unanswered cost questions

The equipment award establishes public support for the task force’s tools. The records below distinguish that support from the cost of a particular operation. FY means fiscal year.

Osceola funding records: keep the years and funding status separate
Record Amount and status What it establishes
October 6, 2026 official announcement; January 6 Congressional Record $1,000,000 · FY2026 award Osceola County Sheriff’s Office received a DOJ Byrne Discretionary Community Project grant for Central Florida ICAC software, equipment and technology, following Soto’s funding request. The January table lists the matching equipment project under DOJ OJP–Byrne, with Soto as requestor. These are two records of the same funding line, not two $1 million awards.
FY2027 request in the same release $998,200 · request only Additional resources were requested. The release does not establish an award, payment or expense for this amount.
DOJ FY2024 ICAC award table, page 2 $561,018 · FY2024 award DOJ’s FY2024 table lists broader Osceola regional ICAC support under award 15PJDP-24-GK-04191-MECP. This is a different program line and fiscal year from the FY2026 Byrne equipment award. The table supplies no Operation Cooked allocation.

Do not add these amounts into an Operation Cooked total. The FY2027 request is not an award; neither award identifies what Cooked actually cost. Announced funding, grant obligations and money spent are different stages.

A funding history, not a finding about motive

The equipment line appears at the bottom of printed page H35, PDF page 23, of the January 6, 2026 Congressional Record. The court-stamped FAC complaint, page 1, records an August 11, 2026 filing. Soto’s award announcement followed on October 6. The January entry establishes that this funding line was already public months before the lawsuit. It does not establish when Cooked was planned, when equipment was bought or whether any particular purchase was used in that operation.

No reviewed record establishes that Cooked’s planning or publicity was a response to FAC’s lawsuit. Dates alone cannot answer that question.

What would turn a funding announcement into an account?

The next evidence would be the signed award and approved budget, purchase orders and invoices, grant payments, and an operation-level spending record showing any payroll, overtime, equipment use or reimbursements charged to Cooked. Dated planning records would answer a separate question: who approved the operation and when. Those records were not located in this review; no records request is represented as having been sent.

Being eligible for funding, or having funds set aside, does not establish that a particular jail received a grant or that a sting was paid for with it. Those records also do not show agencies increasing arrests to obtain money. To follow dollars responsibly, we need award agreements, approved project budgets, actual spending and the costs of any resulting jail stays.

Funding sources checked October 12, 2026. The Congressional Record and October announcement document an equipment-funding line. They do not verify Operation Cooked’s expenditure or its funding source.

Jail and registry funding: three records and their limits

There is a documented route back to custody. In the historical FY2014–15 figures, OPPAGA reported 878 registration-violation convictions, with 499 prison sentences and 195 jail sentences. These figures describe that year’s case outcomes, not today’s caseload or new sexual-offense convictions.

Corrections access and registry-policy funding: different mechanisms
Funding record What the record says What it does not establish
FY2024 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Countywide Local governments may seek funding for eligible projects, including corrections. A county allocation is not proof of jail spending or a sting payment.
Marion agenda, April 1, 2025 $56,686 in JAG grant revenue identified for jail camera equipment. The agenda request alone does not verify disbursement or completed spending.
FY2024 Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) bonus The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) lists a $464,968 Florida compliance bonus allocation. Compliance-linked funding is not payment per registrant or arrest.

The Bureau of Justice Statistics describes Justice Assistance Grant formulas based on population and reported violent-crime offenses. SORNA bonus eligibility is tied to substantial implementation. Do not add these figures to other JAG totals without reconciling overlapping components.

More fiscal records: appropriations, actual expenses and fees

FY means fiscal year. ICAC means the Internet Crimes Against Children task-force program; FDLE is the Florida Department of Law Enforcement.

A full registry-related cost account needs spending from FDLE, sheriffs, corrections, other agencies and the courts. A prison per-day figure alone cannot supply that total.

Audited public spending records exist. Financial compliance and measurable safety benefits need separate evaluation; the fiscal detail below distinguishes actual expenses from allocations and proposals.

Do not add parent appropriations, component awards and carried-forward funds
Record Amount or mechanism Interpretation
Broward audited FY2024 expenses $641,243 federal ICAC; $427,221 state South Florida ICAC. Year ended September 30, 2024; distinct regional program expense streams, not a cost per sting.
FY2024 Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Countywide $6,403,156 allocated across Florida local governments. Eligible justice projects; not a dedicated registry or jail-spending total.
Online-sting appropriation $2.5 million in FY2024–25; $1,745,426 carried into FY2025–26. Carry-forward is not additional money to add to the original appropriation.
Gainesville approval $800,000 FY2025–26 regional award/budget. A component of the state funding pool; approval is not verified expenditure.
July 1, 2026 allocation law 80% divided equally among recognized task forces; 20% to FDLE. Not a per-arrest or per-registrant formula; authorized uses include scoped overtime, travel and training.

Fees also vary. Okeechobee’s sheriff lists registration as no fee. A Hernando ordinance adopted in 2023 authorizes a sheriff-set fee, but no current amount or collections were verified here. Fee authority does not establish profit.

Federal Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) rules are minimum standards; the Justice Department’s registry-policy office distinguishes local residence and activity restrictions from those federal requirements. A compliance bonus does not establish that every added Florida or local burden is federally required.

FDLE grant reports track such items as arrests, children rescued, victims identified and devices examined. Those are useful operational measures; the reporting requirements do not establish an arrest quota or measure crimes prevented by themselves.

Publicly operated state prisons: December 31, 2023

Custody pressure is measurable in a dated official comparison. Florida’s publicly operated state prisons held 74,138 people against reported operational capacity of 66,158, or 112.1%.

This measure excludes private prisons, local jails and people held in other states. It is not a 2026 occupancy figure and does not measure how much registry enforcement contributed.

Operational capacity reflects staffing and services; it is not Florida’s statutory total-capacity threshold. Calculation: 74,138 ÷ 66,158 × 100 = 112.062%. Bureau of Justice Statistics, Prisoners in 2023, Table 21, pages 35–36; operational-capacity definition on page 3.

In a February 2022 response published by FAC, the U.S. Department of Justice’s Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (SMART) said the number of people on a registry is not used to decide funding under either the Adam Walsh Act implementation-grant program or the bonus under the Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA) through the Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) program. That answers a specific funding question; it does not provide a complete account of public spending.

A prison population report has a defined custody count, and Florida corrections reports publish inmate per-day costs. A full registry-related cost account would need spending from FDLE, sheriffs, corrections, other agencies and the courts. A prison per-day figure alone cannot supply that total. Sheriff budgets separate law enforcement, detention and court services, with building costs handled separately. Following all those costs means looking across several agencies’ accounts. The reviewed records do not establish that registry administration costs more than imprisonment.

What the numbers actually show

The records reviewed show nine documented local ICAC-linked operations in 2024, 5 in 2025 and 10 in 2026 through October 11. Those are the operations located in this review, and the choice of comparison year matters. They do not establish how much actual statewide activity changed: source coverage is stronger in 2026, older records are uneven, and this is not a complete state reporting system.

For Hansen-linked operations, we located three in 2025 and three in 2026 through October 11. All six fall within the January 1–October 11 window in their respective years. This part of the record does not show a 2026 increase over 2025.

Annual operation chart and matching-window comparison
Blue: ICAC-linked · Green: Hansen-linked

2018

ICAC-linked: 2

Hansen-linked: None located

2019

ICAC-linked: 3

Hansen-linked: None located

2020

ICAC-linked: 4

Hansen-linked: None located

2021

ICAC-linked: 2

Hansen-linked: None located

2022

ICAC-linked: 4

Hansen-linked: 1

2023

ICAC-linked: 5

Hansen-linked: 2

2024

ICAC-linked: 9

Hansen-linked: 2

2025

ICAC-linked: 5

Hansen-linked: 3

2026*

ICAC-linked: 10

Hansen-linked: 3

Documented operations located. 2018–2025 are full calendar years; *2026 covers January 1–October 11. ICAC includes decoy, child sexual abuse material and mixed operations. Coverage is incomplete and uneven. Affiliations overlap. “None located” means none in this catalogue, not proof that none occurred. SOSA’s deployment count remains unestablished.

For a matching January 1–October 11 window, the ICAC counts are 2, 3, 4, 2, 4, 4, 8, 4 and 10 for 2018–2026. The source-discovery limitation still applies. See annual data and operation sources below.

We ran the numbers we could verify. We still need more complete records. What follows is our analysis and the questions it raises about public safety, public spending and the people living with these policies.

Across all years covered by this review, we identified 83 distinct operations: 71 ICAC-linked and 13 Hansen-linked, with one operation involving both. This is a documented minimum, not a complete statewide total.

These counts describe operations, not arrests, convictions, television episodes or children protected. A single operation can generate many cases and broadcasts. One operation may also involve more than one organization, so the columns cannot simply be added together.

ICAC, Hansen and SOSA: different roles and overlapping records

Internet Crimes Against Children (ICAC) is a law-enforcement task-force program whose work includes investigations, digital evidence, training, victim services and public education. Its operations can involve adult decoys, investigations of child sexual abuse material (CSAM), actual victims, or a combination. Treating every ICAC announcement as the same kind of sting would hide important differences.

Hansen’s role brings a media production into the picture. The records reviewed identify 13 distinct Florida operations involving him or his productions, beginning with two in 2006. The modern entries include Polk, Martin and Marion counties. Those are documented operations located, not a claim to have found every Florida production.

SOSA, Safe from Online Sex Abuse, describes itself as a nonprofit working with police and prosecutors. It says its team creates decoy accounts, communicates with suspects, organizes evidence and helps arrange meetings; police make the arrests. These are SOSA’s descriptions of its practices. They do not independently establish what happened in every case.

SOSA’s 2024 annual report names four operations, but their locations remain unverified. They cannot be counted as four Florida operations. Separately, records connect SOSA to an Orlando police case that resulted in an arrest on May 6, 2021. This is evidence of an actual investigation, beyond training, but one case does not tell us how many separate operations took place. The total number of SOSA operations in Florida remains unknown, so SOSA has no numerical bar in this chart.

Different organizations, different roles: verified names and links

This directory has 73 entries covering organizations, people, shows, channels, name variants and relationships documented at particular times. It is not a count of 73 separate organizations or operations. A shared subject, interview, police response or similar name does not by itself establish a partnership. Five independent creator brands have reported Florida activity in the reviewed sources; the other creator entries do not establish Florida operations.

Government funding, nonprofit donations, subscriptions and paid media can overlap. A funding source does not establish who controlled an investigation, how much was earned, or anyone’s motive.

Direct website and channel links are limited to Chris Hansen and SOSA. Other entries retain government records or independent reporting where available. ICAC means Internet Crimes Against Children; FDLE means Florida Department of Law Enforcement; FBI means Federal Bureau of Investigation. Listing a name does not endorse it.

Independent creators with reported Florida activity

EDP Watch

Independent confrontation/sting video producer

TruBlu publisher identifies EDP Watch as a Schlep video collaborator; this does not establish a joint Florida Hansen operation.

Florida connection: Reported Florida activity

Brand names do not establish guilt. Police response to a creator encounter does not itself establish a formal partnership.

Supporting source 1

Operation 17:2

Independent sting/confrontation producer

Official site self-describes as nonprofit; tax status not independently verified. No formal ICAC affiliation established. Florida location is Palatka, not Jacksonville.

Florida connection: Reported Florida activity

Brand names do not establish guilt. Police response to a creator encounter does not itself establish a formal partnership.

Supporting source 1

Predator Poachers

Independent sting/confrontation producer

Website directly links @PPSETX; do not assume every similarly named channel belongs to the group. TruBlu release identifies Schlep collaborations, not a joint Florida Hansen operation.

Florida connection: Reported Florida activity

Brand names do not establish guilt. Police response to a creator encounter does not itself establish a formal partnership.

Supporting source 1

Dads Against Predators

Independent sting/confrontation brand

Current official about page profiles Joshua Mundy. Historical news association of Carnicom is not proof of every current organizational relationship. Reporting includes charges against the creator; charges are not convictions. DAD Cares nonprofit language is a site claim, not an independently audited tax finding.

Florida connection: Reported Florida activity

Brand names do not establish guilt. Police response to a creator encounter does not itself establish a formal partnership.

Supporting source 1

Protect The Innocent (PTI)

Independent sting/confrontation group

Local report says sheriff personnel were called after the encounter. This does not establish a formal law-enforcement partnership. Current branded website and historical group name match; no private operator identity investigated.

Florida connection: Reported Florida activity

Brand names do not establish guilt. Police response to a creator encounter does not itself establish a formal partnership.

Supporting source 1

Independent creators with Florida activity unverified

Skeeter Jean / Skeet Hansen

Independent sting/confrontation videos; Hansen impersonation persona

First-party Locals post October 22, 2023 describes Chris Hansen impersonation. This is not evidence of employment by or operational partnership with Hansen.

Florida connection: Florida operation not verified

Brand names do not establish guilt. Police response to a creator encounter does not itself establish a formal partnership.

Supporting source 1

Trilogy Media

Produces scam investigations and sting/confrontation content; also hosts interviews

Podcast listing contains an Incogni promotional code/link; this verifies a promotional mechanism, not the compensation contract or amount. Agency-cooperation claims need episode-specific agency corroboration.

Florida connection: Florida operation not verified

Brand names do not establish guilt. Police response to a creator encounter does not itself establish a formal partnership.

Colorado Ped Patrol

Independent sting/confrontation producer

Official Linktree verifies both YouTube handles and podcast branding. Calling police does not itself establish formal partnership. No catch/arrest totals adopted from promotional claims.

Florida connection: Florida operation not verified

Brand names do not establish guilt. Police response to a creator encounter does not itself establish a formal partnership.

Supporting source 1

CC Unit

Independent sting/confrontation producer

Public alias retained; no attempt to identify anonymous operators. Police response in an individual case does not prove formal partnership.

Florida connection: Florida operation not verified

Brand names do not establish guilt. Police response to a creator encounter does not itself establish a formal partnership.

Supporting source 1

Schlep

Independent exposure/confrontation videos; documentary contributor

Publisher explicitly says Hansen engaged Schlep for Dangerous Games and identifies Schlep video collaborations with Predator Poachers and EDP Watch. This establishes a documentary relationship, not a Florida joint sting. Florida Attorney General citation of a creator video is not proof of a Florida operation.

Florida connection: Florida operation not verified

Brand names do not establish guilt. Police response to a creator encounter does not itself establish a formal partnership.

Scaling Up Catches

Independent sting/confrontation videos

Interview description plus matching first-party membership page verify the entity. No Florida or agency affiliation established; no private surname inferred for Tanner.

Florida connection: Florida operation not verified

Brand names do not establish guilt. Police response to a creator encounter does not itself establish a formal partnership.

Podcasts and interviews

Trilogy Media Podcast

Podcast interviews/commentary; same parent creator brand as Trilogy Media

Do not count as an additional independent sting group. Guest appearance does not imply shared operations.

Florida connection: Podcast, not additional Florida operator

Brand names do not establish guilt. Police response to a creator encounter does not itself establish a formal partnership.

CPP: Behind The Catch Podcast

Creator-linked podcast format

Verified podcast listing only; no separate operational entity inferred.

Florida connection: Podcast, not additional Florida operator

Brand names do not establish guilt. Police response to a creator encounter does not itself establish a formal partnership.

Predators I’ve Caught

Podcast series; Retrospective cases, updates and commentary

Continues within the renamed Have A Seat podcast feed

Florida connection: Revisits Florida cases; podcast publication does not establish a new operation

Series continues on Mondays while the new interview series runs Wednesdays. This is two series sharing a feed, not two independent sting organisations.

Public page 1 · Supporting source 2

Have A Seat with Chris Hansen (2025 podcast feed/interview series)

Umbrella podcast feed and interview programme; Interviews plus the continuing Predators I’ve Caught series

Feed rebrand and new interview show announced by Hansen

Florida connection: Florida subject matter and guests are not necessarily sting operations

Distinguish from Hansen’s earlier 2019 YouTube use of the same title; do not collapse the whole period into a 2025 launch.

Public page 1 · Supporting source 2

Have a Seat with Chris Hansen / Chris Hansen YouTube channel

Hansen’s own online interview/investigation brand, earlier use distinct from 2025 podcast-feed rebrand; Hansen’s own online interview/investigation brand, earlier use distinct from 2025 podcast-feed rebrand

A June 1, 2020 original interview with Hansen calls Have a Seat his current YouTube program and links directly to channel UCgKTJAN-IrVyX-jIJ5INEhA, which resolves as Chris Hansen. This securely establishes early use before the later podcast rebrand. Contemporary November 2019 coverage confirms the title; a university dissertation cites an October 16, 2019 first interview video, but the video could not be fetched. The exact October 9 start date remains secondary-only.

Florida connection: No Florida sting established by early brand sources.

See relationship/source qualifiers.

Public page 1

Hansen media brands and documented relationships

Chris Hansen

Public media personality; Produces/presents sting-related media; also interviews and commentary

TruBlu co-founder; Takedown executive producer and host

Florida connection: Verified participation in the 13-event Florida lower-bound ledger

Personal brand, programmes and companies remain separate entities; programme appearances do not create additional operations.

Public page 1

TruBlu / TruBlu Streaming Network

Streaming-network brand; Produces/distributes original sting programmes and other crime media

Founded by Hansen and Shawn Rech; carries Takedown

Florida connection: Company’s June 14, 2023 release explicitly identifies Polk County/Grady Judd collaboration

Release describes business/production relations, not a Florida payment or a count of deployments.

Supporting source 1

TruBlu legal-name variants

Names published by brand and app stores; the exact legal identities have not all been matched; App seller/developer and site publisher

App developer is TruBlu Factual Streaming Network, LLC; website copyright says TRUBLU STREAMING, LLC

Florida connection: Associated with the same public streaming brand; legal contracting entity for individual Florida operations not established

Do not merge differently styled LLC names into one legal entity without registry or contract evidence. Trademark aggregator’s TruBlu Factual Streaming LLC is an additional unverified legal-name lead.

True Blue / TrueBlue / Tru Blu

Context-dependent spelling/transcription variants; Search terms only

Some interviews/transcripts render the TruBlu name phonetically

Florida connection: No extra Florida entity or operation established by spelling variants

Unrelated True Blue companies, Tru Blu Productions businesses or domains must not be treated as Hansen affiliates solely from their names.

TruBlu Plus

Subscription/product label; Subscriber access

Hansen’s official link page uses this label for the TruBlu subscription service.

Florida connection: Product label; no independent Florida operation

Not evidence of a separate company or law-enforcement partner.

Supporting source 1

Takedown with Chris Hansen

Programme title; Original recorded confrontations/interviews from police collaborations

Hansen hosts and executive-produces; TruBlu distributes

Florida connection: Eleven modern operations in existing Florida ledger: Polk8, Marion2, Martin1

Episodes, seasons, YouTube uploads and free previews are not operational events.

Supporting source 1

TruBlu Streaming Network YouTube

Official distribution channel; Full and partial programme releases, previews and promotion

Linked directly from TruBlu’s official website

Florida connection: Carries Florida footage already represented in the operation ledger

A channel posting a later video does not identify a later sting date; do not count unofficial reupload channels.

Shawn Rech

Public producer/executive; Production and streaming-network management

TruBlu co-founder/CEO/director; Transition Studios co-founder/CEO/director

Florida connection: Discussed Florida production in 2022 interview; no additional dated Florida deployment established

Shared leadership does not by itself establish identical legal entities or ownership percentages.

Transition Studios

Independent production company; Film/television production

Rech describes Transition as a vendor used by TruBlu

Florida connection: Rech said the company had a Destin office and described Florida production; this is business presence rather than a new sting location

Published interview transcript places vendor discussion at 24:18 and Destin-office discussion at 14:05; timings not audio-reverified. Separate from similarly named UK audio-mastering business.

American Sheriff Network (ASN)

Acquired streaming network; Law-enforcement media programming

Founded by Mark Lamb; acquired by TruBlu

Florida connection: Acquisition release mentions TruBlu’s existing Polk collaboration, but establishes no separate ASN Florida sting

An acquisition relationship, not merely a new name for Takedown; no disclosed deal value or Florida sheriff compensation.

Red Seat Ventures

Media-services/ad-sales company; Podcast sponsorship and advertising representation

Lists Hansen and both Have A Seat / Predators I’ve Caught; official feed directs ad inquiries to RSV

Florida connection: Commercial media link; no operational role in Florida stings established

Advertising representation does not establish ownership of TruBlu or involvement in decoy conversations/arrests.

Supporting source 1

Dangerous Games: Investigating Roblox — A Chris Hansen Special

Documentary title; Documentary investigation and interviews

Hansen/TruBlu documentary; Schlep engaged as independent collaborator

Florida connection: Marion case coverage discussed in interviews; no additional distinct undercover event established

Documentary reporting on arrests is not a new sting merely because it is a separate title.

Our Rescue

Nonprofit support organisation; Claims training/equipment support for participating law-enforcement teams

Says it supported FDLE ICAC/trafficking-trained teams that participated in Seek and Ye Shall Find Out

Florida connection: Reported support of teams on an event independently linked to Hansen; indirect co-event association

Not proof Our Rescue directly hired/worked with Hansen, supplied decoys, or funded that production. Do not add another July 2025 operation.

Ascending Media Group

Distribution/representation company; free ad-supported streaming-channel/content distribution

Distribution representative describes helping TruBlu reach platforms and identifies TruBlu as a client

Florida connection: No operational Florida role established

Distribution is separate from production or undercover work. No deal terms or revenue allocation established.

Chris Hansen / NBC News / Dateline NBC / To Catch a Predator / Perverted Justice

NBC reporter / program and segment / independent online-decoy organization / parallel police operation; NBC reporter / program and segment / independent online-decoy organization / parallel police operation

Hansen’s sworn June 27, 2006 congressional testimony identifies him with Dateline NBC, describes Perverted Justice volunteers as online decoys, and describes Fort Myers Police conducting a parallel investigation. These are separate roles, not interchangeable aliases.

Florida connection: Yes, Fort Myers testimony; no new operation beyond baseline. This testimony does not provide exact April dates.

See relationship/source qualifiers.

Public page 1

Perverted Justice / NBC News / Flagler Beach Police Department / Chris Hansen

paid civilian decoy partner and police-approved television coverage; paid civilian decoy partner and police-approved television coverage

A June 14, 2010 jurisdictional party brief, citing stipulated facts and testimony, says Flagler Beach PD engaged PJ, approved NBC filming, and PJ received $150,000 from NBC at $75,000 per broadcast hour. The brief reports PJ representatives were not sworn police. This establishes paid civilian assistance, not an NBC employer or a police-unit alias.

Florida connection: Yes, Flagler Beach baseline only

Do not promote December 8-10 to the definitive entire operation range: parent has NBC’s four-day description. Use December 2006 unless independently reconciled.

Public page 1

Hansen News Network / Hansen vs. Predator / Chris Hansen / Fairfield Police Department

attributed independent production company and show; parallel law-enforcement collaboration; attributed independent production company and show; parallel law-enforcement collaboration

CTPost identifies Hansen News Network as Hansen’s production company and Fairfield as the revival’s first site. Original reporting with direct Hansen and deputy-chief interviews dates the four-day operation from October 1. Contemporary original reporting is strong but no corporate registry was checked; do not equate this legal entity with later TruBlu.

Florida connection: No; Connecticut. TNR explicitly says Hansen had no involvement in the Florida police stings being discussed in that 2015 article; do not generalize beyond that contemporary context.

See relationship/source qualifiers.

Public page 1 · Supporting source 2

Hansen vs. Predator / Crime Watch Daily / Crime Watch Daily with Chris Hansen / Telepictures Productions / Warner Bros. Domestic Television Distribution

segment / host-program rebrand / producer / distributor; segment / host-program rebrand / producer / distributor

The program’s own announcement names Hansen as new host and Hansen vs. Predator as a signature series within Crime Watch Daily with Chris Hansen. It names Telepictures as producer and Warner Bros. Domestic Television Distribution as distributor. Neither the show title nor distributor is a decoy organization.

Florida connection: No additional Florida event established; the cited HvP story is Fairfield, Connecticut.

See relationship/source qualifiers.

Tetrad Core / Chris Hansen / Hansen vs. Predator

civilian child-protection and online-sting collaborator; civilian child-protection and online-sting collaborator

An original radio-interview article with Hansen identifies local authorities and Tetrad Core as his collaborators. An EXPLOITED: Crimes Against Humanity episode featuring Tetrad Core’s Donna Staples identifies its law-enforcement assistance and educational work and specifically places its Hansen vs. Predator collaboration in Connecticut. No verified contract, incorporation record, alias relationship, or Florida collaboration located.

Florida connection: Not established

Episode notes claim 11 arrests/convictions while local reporting describes 10 arrests. Do not use this podcast description as a precise operation count. Do not call Tetrad a paid contractor without a contract/payment source.

Crime Watch Daily / True Crime Daily

explicit digital continuation/rebrand; explicit digital continuation/rebrand

The team’s own announcement states the fourth television season was not picked up and some of the same team continued its existing stories and new reporting under True Crime Daily. Archived HvP uploads on this brand do not represent a separate producer-led sting event.

Florida connection: No operation implied by brand change.

See relationship/source qualifiers.

True Crime Daily / True Crime News

current publisher identity / digital archive continuation and television launch; current publisher identity / digital archive continuation and television launch

The original True Crime Daily 2018 rebrand URL redirects to the same article at True Crime News. The current publisher’s July 10, 2024 announcement describes its existing YouTube, Facebook and podcast audience and new television show hosted by Ana Garcia. Direct evidence supports archive continuity; exact digital rename day was not located.

Florida connection: No operation implied by brand change.

See relationship/source qualifiers.

Have a Seat with Chris Hansen / Genesee County Sheriff’s Office / Shiawassee County Sheriff’s Office / GHOST

reporter embedded in police-led Michigan sting; law-enforcement task force; reporter embedded in police-led Michigan sting; law-enforcement task force

Original local reporting and sheriff statements tie Hansen’s early Have a Seat show to the October 2020 Michigan police operation. GHOST is identified as Genesee Human Oppression Strike Team. It is not evidence of a civilian Guardians organization or a Florida event. A contemporaneous press conference link exists but video extraction failed.

Florida connection: No, Michigan.

See relationship/source qualifiers.

Public page 1 · Supporting source 2

Polk County Sheriff’s Office

Public law-enforcement agency; Police-led investigations/arrests and media collaboration

TruBlu named Grady Judd/Polk as a sting collaborator in its June 14, 2023 company announcement.

Florida connection: Eight verified modern Florida deployments,2022–2026

Neither appearing together nor agency participation establishes payment, production control, or that all arrestees were interviewed by Hansen.

Marion County Sheriff’s Office

Public law-enforcement agency; Police-led investigations/arrests and media collaboration

WFTV identifies Hansen in sheriff-supplied Operation Bad Habits video; the earlier event is separately crossmatched in the existing ledger.

Florida connection: Two verified modern Florida deployments: July2025 and June2026

Neither appearing together nor agency participation establishes payment, production control, or that all arrestees were interviewed by Hansen.

Public page 1

Martin County Sheriff’s Office

Public law-enforcement agency; Police-led investigations/arrests and media collaboration

Hansen and the sheriff appear together in the May 8, 2026 announcement of Operation Undercover Chatter.

Florida connection: One verified modern Florida deployment: May2026

Neither appearing together nor agency participation establishes payment, production control, or that all arrestees were interviewed by Hansen.

SOSA brands and documented relationships

SOSA — Safe from Online Sex Abuse, Inc

Independent nonprofit; the organization itself

Legal name verified; nationwide organization based in New Haven, Connecticut. Existing Florida case remains one case, not a deployment count.

Florida connection: Yes: one documented Orlando case; deployment count undetermined

One documented Florida case; distinct Florida deployment count remains unknown.

Public page 1 · Supporting source 2 · Supporting source 3

Roo Powell / Sloane Ryan

Public professional pseudonym; person, not separate group

Bark updated its February 2020 FAQ to identify Sloane Ryan as Roo Powell; SOSA identifies Powell as founder/CEO.

Florida connection: Yes through documented SOSA Orlando case

Brand, programme and case counts must remain separate.

Supporting source 1

Bark Special Projects Team

Former professional relationship; separate business

Bark identifies Ryan/Powell with its special projects work in 2020. ABC editor update says Powell parted ways with Bark and started SOSA. No continuing corporate identity or Florida deployment inferred.

Florida connection: Florida operation unverified

Brand, programme and case counts must remain separate.

Supporting source 1

Undercover Underage

Documentary brand; not independent operation unit

SOSA says two seasons on Investigation Discovery, streaming on HBO Max.

Florida connection: Florida case shown; episodes do not establish distinct deployments

Brand, programme and case counts must remain separate.

Public page 1

SOSA Undercover / @sosaundercover

SOSA-owned documentary channel/brand

SOSA identifies continuation of Undercover Underage, same producers, own YouTube channel. SOSAU shorthand is a search variant, not independently established legal name.

Florida connection: Florida deployment unverified for this continuation

Brand, programme and case counts must remain separate.

Public page 1 · Supporting source 2 · Supporting source 3

Predator Files

UK distribution title; not new entity

SOSA states its series airs in UK as Predator Files on Crime & Investigation.

Florida connection: Florida deployment unverified

Brand, programme and case counts must remain separate.

Public page 1

SOSA Undercover Operations / LE Training

Programs of canonical SOSA entity

Program labels do not create new organizations or operations. Training, inbound cases, prevention and survivor support are distinct activities.

Florida connection: Florida case and proposed training; completed statewide program unverified

Brand, programme and case counts must remain separate.

Public page 1 · Supporting source 2 · Supporting source 3 · Supporting source 4 · Supporting source 5

Orlando Police Department

Documented law-enforcement case partner

May 6, 2021 arrest in one SOSA-supported online-decoy case. Case repeated in later media/training does not establish additional deployments.

Florida connection: Yes: Orlando, Orange County

Brand, programme and case counts must remain separate.

Public page 1 · Supporting source 2

Canadian County Sheriff’s Office

Documented law-enforcement operation partner

Official releases identify SOSA decoy partnership in a four-day operation reported Feb28,2023 (5 arrests), February2024 three-day operation (3), and Aug29–Sep2,2024 operation (9). Agency explicitly identifies Oklahoma ICAC membership.

Florida connection: No Florida evidence in these records; Oklahoma

Brand, programme and case counts must remain separate.

Public page 1 · Supporting source 2 · Supporting source 3 · Supporting source 4 · Supporting source 5

Shreveport Police Department Vice Unit

Documented law-enforcement operation/training partner

Agency confirms SOSA operations March24–30,2025 (6 arrests), October23–26,2025 (5). SOSA 2024 annual report separately describes on-the-job training.

Florida connection: No Florida evidence in these records; Louisiana

Brand, programme and case counts must remain separate.

Public page 1 · Supporting source 2 · Supporting source 3

ICAC public agencies and support relationships

North / Northern Florida Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force; North Florida ICAC; NFICAC

Regional ICAC task force

Hosted by Gainesville Police Department. December 2004 city record says established December 2003 and then covered northern 38 counties.

Florida connection: Florida relationship documented: Northern Florida

Historical county count is a dated snapshot; do not assume fixed boundaries. NFICAC is a search abbreviation, not a separate organization.

Public page 1 · Supporting source 2

Gainesville Police Department

Current regional host

National ICAC directory identifies Gainesville as Florida – Northern host.

Florida connection: Florida relationship documented: North Florida

Central Florida Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force; Central Florida ICAC; CFICAC

Regional ICAC task force

Polk County Sheriff received $265,000 to form a new regional task force.

Florida connection: Florida relationship documented: Central Florida

Grant-to-form announcement is not an exact operational start date.

Public page 1 · Supporting source 2

Polk County Sheriff’s Office → Osceola County Sheriff’s Office

Historical host transition

North Port renewal explicitly says previous written partnership agreement was with Polk and Osceola is now lead agency.

Florida connection: Florida relationship documented: Central Florida

Transition verified by February 2019; exact handover day unresolved. 2018 award identifier and secondary reporting support 2018, not an exact date.

Public page 1

Osceola County Sheriff’s Office

Current regional host

National ICAC directory identifies Osceola as Florida – Central host.

Florida connection: Florida relationship documented: Central Florida

Central Florida ICAC 2018 service area

Dated jurisdiction definition

OJJDP competition specifies 17 counties for Central Florida applicants.

Florida connection: Florida relationship documented: Sarasota, Manatee, Highlands, Hardee, DeSoto, Okeechobee, Pinellas, Hillsborough, Pasco, Sumter, Citrus, Hernando, Lake, Polk, Osceola, Orange, Seminole

Service region is not proof that every agency or operation in those counties is an affiliate.

Public page 1

South / Southern Florida Internet Crimes Against Children Task Force; South Florida ICAC; Broward ICAC

Regional ICAC task force

Broward ICAC unit oversees the regional task force and manages its grant and National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC) tips; page says more than 65 affiliate agencies.

Florida connection: Florida relationship documented: South Florida

Current membership total cannot establish historical affiliation; SFICAC is an unverified shorthand, not a separately established entity.

Public page 1 · Supporting source 2

South Florida ICAC web aliases

Officially linked regional web aliases

Broward Sheriff’s Office safety pages explicitly link these names to South Florida ICAC. Use Broward Sheriff’s Office page as authoritative directory endpoint.

Florida connection: Florida relationship documented: South Florida

Other official Broward Sheriff’s Office page links .com: https://www.sheriff.org/sextortion/ . Do not treat two domains as two task forces.

Public page 1 · Supporting source 2

LEACH; Law Enforcement Against Child Harm

Historical and continuing task-force label

Broward budget describes federal ICAC funding administered by its LEACH task force.

Florida connection: Florida relationship documented: South Florida / Broward

LEACH existed before national ICAC. Earlier LEACH activity is not automatically ICAC activity.

Public page 1

Child Pornography Task Force → Child Abuse Intelligence Network → LEACH

Pre-ICAC predecessor chain

OJP-hosted Joining Forces Against Child Sexual Exploitation traces this sequence, pp18–19. It expands LEACH as Law Enforcement Effort Against Child Harm.

Florida connection: Florida relationship documented: South Florida

Report is a federally funded study based on visits/interviews, with authors’ views disclaimer. A 1999 FSA account says LEACH active since 1994; preserve differing milestones rather than forcing one start date.

Public page 1

Broward LEACH early partners

Dated investigative partnership

Study identifies Broward, Manatee sheriff, FDLE and U.S. Customs participation; describes outreach to Postal Inspection.

Florida connection: Florida relationship documented: South Florida

Historical relationship only. U.S. Customs is the historical agency label, not identical to current Homeland Security Investigations (HSI).

Public page 1

National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC)/Florida branch

Nonprofit support and education partner

FSA reports National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC)/FL support for LEACH, jointly hosted training and prevention education.

Florida connection: Florida relationship documented: South Florida

Training/support does not make National Center for Missing & Exploited Children (NCMEC) an arresting agency.

North Port Police Department

Dated partner under a written agreement

Approved renewal with Osceola, replacing prior Polk written partnership agreement.

Florida connection: Florida relationship documented: Central Florida

Does not establish every North Port case as a regional operation.

Public page 1

Eustis Police Department

written partnership-agreement record

City packet contains Osceola–Eustis written partnership agreement to join CFICAC and apply ICAC standards; Osceola distributes tips to jurisdictional affiliates.

Florida connection: Florida relationship documented: Central Florida

Agenda document establishes proposed agreement terms; final execution date not inspected.

Public page 1

Florida Attorney General Child Predator CyberCrime Unit; CPCU; CyberCrime Unit

State investigative unit and ICAC affiliate

FBI explicitly identifies Attorney General unit as North Florida ICAC and Jacksonville FBI Cyber Taskforce member.

Florida connection: Florida relationship documented: Florida; Jacksonville office specifically

Unit is neither synonym nor fourth regional ICAC task force. Individual case used for relationship evidence, not new operation count.

Public page 1

Florida Attorney General CyberCrime regional offices

Historical expansion plan / funding relationship

Attorney General plan describes planned July 2008 office expansion and North Florida ICAC-administered training/equipment funds; FBI partnership equipment support.

Florida connection: Florida relationship documented: Jacksonville, Tallahassee, Pensacola, Orlando, Tampa, Fort Lauderdale/Miami, Fort Myers/Sarasota

Plan is not proof all proposed offices opened on schedule.

Public page 1

Project Safe Childhood; PSC

Distinct federal coordination/prosecution umbrella

DOJ describes ICAC, U.S. attorneys’ offices, Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section and federal agencies as partners; later scope includes all federal child exploitation and failure-to-register offenses.

Florida connection: Florida relationship documented: National including Florida

PSC label alone does not prove ICAC participation or a multi-person operation.

Public page 1

Project Safe Neighborhoods; PSN

Distinct violence-reduction umbrella

USAO-coordinated violent-crime initiative, not another name for ICAC or Project Safe Childhood.

Florida connection: Florida relationship documented: National including Florida

Never classify an operation as child exploitation solely from PSN label.

Public page 1

FBI / Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) / FDLE / Broward State Attorney / local police

Operation-specific partners

Broward Sheriff’s Office indexed release names federal/state/local partnership with South Florida ICAC for Red Card.

Florida connection: Florida relationship documented: Broward

Specific event evidence; not a complete membership list. Direct page currently returns 502; indexed primary text and NBC corroboration available.

Public page 1

Fox Valley Technical College; FVTC; National Criminal Justice Training Center

Training/technical-assistance provider

OJJDP identifies FVTC as ICAC investigative/undercover training provider. Broward Sheriff’s Office FY2016-17 budget names FVTC training support.

Florida connection: Florida relationship documented: National; Florida training relationship

Florida evidence: https://www.sheriff.org/media/utvddlhj/fy-2016-17-proposed-budget-book.pdf printed p166. Provider is not another operation or arresting task force.

Public page 1 · Supporting source 2

National White Collar Crime Center; NW3C; Innocent Justice Foundation SHIFT; TLO

Dated training support providers

Broward Sheriff’s Office lists these organizations among support sources for quarterly ICAC training.

Florida connection: Florida relationship documented: South Florida

Documented training role only; no inference they participated in arrests, currently contract with Broward Sheriff’s Office, or endorse every operation.

Public page 1

Child Rescue Coalition; CRC

Nonprofit technology-support provider

County-hosted 2017 grant application describes proposed server support for Broward and South Florida ICAC. CRC’s February 2026 account reports its technology used in a Broward Sheriff’s Office ICAC investigation. SOSA cites a CRC statistic. That citation does not establish an operational partnership. CRC provides investigative technology/training to law enforcement; not established here as a SOSA-style online-decoy group. Hansen delivered keynote and Q&A supporting CRC at its ninth annual gala

Florida connection: Florida relationship documented: Broward / South Florida

Application is not proof of grant disbursement. 2026 case support is self-reported at . Single investigation is not an added multi-person operation. Fundraiser/speaker link. Do not label CRC a Hansen decoy contractor or add a sting to the operation ledger.

Public page 1 · Supporting source 2 · Supporting source 3

Follow the money: what the SOSA proposal establishes

Public funding deserves the same care. SOSA’s Florida proposal changed as the budget process moved forward. FY means the government’s fiscal, or budget, year:

SOSA proposal: three different stages, no verified payment
Budget stage Amount shown What it establishes
December 19, 2023 request $750,000 Requested funding for FY2024–25 training and decoy operations.
January 24, 2024 committee proposal $350,000 Proposed nonrecurring amount; not a payment.
February 28, 2024 conference Offer 2 No funding shown Both House Offer 2 and Senate Offer 2 show no funding for this item.

SOSA also solicits donations and describes paid YouTube memberships offering full-length cuts. Those are separate sources of support and media income. They do not establish the amount received, profit, or how any particular Florida case was funded. An independent nonprofit can collaborate with police and receive different kinds of support; “government-funded” and “independent” are not mutually exclusive labels.

We have not verified a final award or payment. A request, a committee proposal and money actually spent are different things. Neither $750,000 nor $350,000 can be treated here as established taxpayer spending.

For any publicly supported operation, residents should be able to see the actual spending, participating agencies, outside agreements and eventual case outcomes. When filming is involved, that includes who controls the footage and what financial arrangements exist. It also means separating public investigative costs from a producer’s or nonprofit’s separate accounts.

Arrest totals can describe activity. Evaluating child protection also requires asking whether children were identified and helped, whether investigations produced reliable evidence, whether cases held up in court, and what support survivors received afterward.

The rules have accumulated, with some changes easing compliance

The records show repeated additions over decades, including more reporting duties and local housing restrictions. OPPAGA counted 196 local ordinances in 52 counties in 2024, with 19 additional ordinances since its 2018 review. Which rules apply depends on the conviction, the person’s legal classification, whether they are under supervision, and where they live.

OPPAGA 24-11, Exhibit 10, printed page 15. The map records local ordinance coverage in 2024; it does not measure effectiveness or mean every ordinance applies to every registrant. Open the original exhibit and surrounding report.

Requirements have expanded repeatedly over the past decade. In our view, the cumulative burden on people required to register and their families has become increasingly harsh. Simplifying one procedure does not erase the weight of the remaining restrictions.

Ten complete calendar years, 2016–2025: six years with substantive additions

This covers January 1, 2016, through December 31, 2025, not state fiscal years. Six qualifying years were 2016, 2018, 2021, 2023, 2024 and 2025. Four involved registry reporting, coverage, penalties or continued listing; 2021 and 2023 involved supervision for specified offenses. This does not mean six years of added duties for every registrant.

We compared enacted laws with prior enacted laws, counting each year once when a substantive addition took effect. Core sections were 943.0435, 775.21, 775.215, 856.022 and 948.30; the review also checked related relief, qualifying-offense and supervision provisions. Clarifications, agency-only changes, relief-only changes and failed bills were not counted.

The 2017 law narrowed and replaced an earlier Internet-reporting definition blocked by a court. Against the earlier enacted text, it is not counted as a second expansion. Against the older rules that remained enforceable after the court order, its practical effect can look different. No addition was identified in the reviewed core sections for 2019, 2020 or 2022; that does not establish that no other state or local rule changed.

Completed calendar-year review: 2016–2025
Year Enacted record or identified gap Who is affected; relief and limits
2016 Adds quarterly reporting and exclusion from ordinary 25-year removal for specified lewd or lascivious battery of an elderly or disabled person; adds court-qualified sexual racketeering predicates.
Effective: 2016-10-01. Ch.2016-104 ss.1–4,30; Ch.2016-24 ss.9–12,70. 2016-104 §3 pp.22–24 and §30 p.56; 2016-24 §§9–12 pp.11–15, §70 p.56		 Specified offenses and statutory findings; not every registrant. The Internet-definition expansion was enjoined before its scheduled effective date and is not the basis for counting this year. Online reporting channels for specified changes; Internet-definition injunction separately identified. Additional official source 1 Additional official source 2
2017 Replaces the enjoined 2016 Internet definition with social-communication identifiers and express site/app pairing; permits online reporting and gives nonsupervised registrants 48 hours after use.
Effective: 2017-06-26. Ch.2017-170, ss.1–2. §§1–2 pp.2,4–8,11–14; §15 p.32		 Compared with enacted 2016 text, pairing was already included. Compared with the surviving court-enforceable 2014 baseline, 2017 can represent an operative expansion. Do not double-count the same pairing expansion. Narrower covered communications; supervised reporting remains before use. Final body permits online paired reporting despite inconsistent in-person wording in the act title. Additional official source 1
2018 Residence threshold falls 5 to 3 days; felony registration violations trigger minimum community control with electronic monitoring if no prison sentence imposed.
Effective: 2018-07-01. Ch.2018-105. §§1–2 pp.1–5; §3 p.5		 Covered registrants; sanction applies upon felony violation, subject to statutory exclusions. Minimum 6 months/1 year/2 years for first/second/third-or-later offense.
2019 No 2019 amendment in 943.0435,775.21,775.215,856.022 or 948.30 histories.
Effective: Not applicable. Core statute histories; local example separate. History notes of all five core sections		 This does not prove no change anywhere in Florida law or local ordinances. Clay County adopted a local restriction in November 2019; do not relabel that statewide. Additional official source 1 Additional official source 2 Additional official source 3 Additional official source 4 Additional official source 5
2020 No 2020 amendment in the five reviewed core sections.
Effective: Not applicable. Core statute histories. Core-section history notes; OPPAGA21-10 Appendix A p.23		 Local enactments not comprehensively inventoried for this year. OPPAGA 2021 described no substantial registration-law changes since 2018. Additional official source 1 Additional official source 2 Additional official source 3 Additional official source 4 Additional official source 5
2021 Mandatory sex-offender probation/community-control conditions extended to specified human-trafficking offenses. Separate law clarifies release from a sanction/no-sanction registration trigger.
Effective: 2021-07-01 (supervision); 2021-06-22 (registration clarification). Ch.2021-189 s.4; Ch.2021-156. 2021-189 §4 pp.5–9, §11 p.14; 2021-156 §§1–2 pp.1–3, §32 p.21		 Supervision expansion applies to specified offenses committed on/after July 1, 2021; not all registrants. OPPAGA’s no-substantial-change statement concerns its registration-law review; it cannot erase a separately verified supervision amendment. Additional official source 1 Additional official source 2
2022 No added obligation identified in the reviewed core histories. SB1932 proposed changes but died March 14, 2022.
Effective: Not enacted. SB 1932(2022). Core-section history notes; SB1932 final bill history		 No 2022 amendment in the five reviewed core sections. A printed proposed effective date is not evidence of enactment. Additional official source 1 Additional official source 2 Additional official source 3 Additional official source 4 Additional official source 5
2023 Expanded specified probation/community-control conditions and electronic-monitoring coverage to attempts, solicitations and conspiracies; expanded incentive-gain-time exclusions.
Effective: 2023-07-01. Ch.2023-146 (HB 537). §§1–3 pp.1–3; §4 pp.3–8; §5 p.8		 Specified attempted, solicited or conspired offenses and statutory date, age and victim conditions. Does not impose these supervision conditions on all registrants. HB 1085 red-license-text proposal is not established as enacted by its analysis; do not count it.
2024 Adds specified minor-victim human-trafficking crimes to first-offense sexual-predator designation criteria. Extends the three-week response duty to county/local address-verification correspondence.
Effective: 2024-07-01 (Ch.71); 2024-10-01 (Ch.73); 2024-07-01 (terminology Ch.84). Ch.2024-71 ss.2,19; Ch.2024-73 ss.1–2,11; Ch.2024-84 ss.10,14,53. 2024-71 §2 p.2, §19 p.11; 2024-73 §§1–2 pp.19–20,30, §11 p.39; 2024-84 §§10,14 pp.9–15, §53 p.40		 Designation requires the listed offense, degree and minor-victim criteria. Correspondence duty concerns covered registrants receiving qualifying verification correspondence. Day-count clarification and online vehicle updates; removal-petition notice is procedural. Separate-instance offense language is identified as clarification, not independently counted. Contractor-operated facility terminology is not a new registrant duty. Additional official source 1 Additional official source 2 Additional official source 3
2025 Adds employment fields and change reporting, including occupation and business information. Separate law adds the new capital-human-trafficking predicate.
Effective: 2025-10-01 (both substantive chapters). Ch.2025-134 ss.1–3; Ch.2025-156 ss.4,7,10–12,97. 2025-134 §§1–2 pp.1–13, §3 p.13; 2025-156 §§4,7,10–12, §97 p.69		 Address-verification frequency is an agency duty, not automatically extra registrant visits. A new predicate does not establish how many additional people are covered given overlapping offenses. Online reporting of qualifying in-state temporary travel and removal of duplicate driver-license-office travel reporting. Mixed additions and relief. Additional official source 1 Additional official source 2

OPPAGA’s 2021 statement about no substantial registration-law changes since 2018 does not erase the separate supervision amendment for specified offenses enacted that year. Local ordinances are a separate layer; this is not an exhaustive local-law calendar.

Separate update: 2026 through October 11

Chapter 2026-17, effective July 1, 2026, adds public-pool housing buffers for specified groups and changes child-contact and school-notice rules, including a 500-foot loitering/prowling zone. Offense, victim, date and exception requirements differ. This is not a universal park or pool entry ban; family, school-event and existing-residence exceptions require careful treatment. Some older covered people who move permanent residence can become subject to the pool buffer. This incomplete year is outside the ten-year count.

Selected changes, 1993–2026: additions, qualifications and relief

This is a selected legislative history, not a claim that a new burden appeared every year. A statutory snapshot identifies the rule at that time, not necessarily its first enactment. Different rules cover different groups.

Original statutes and official historical sources
Date Documented change or baseline Scope and qualification
1993 Florida began sexual-predator registration. Predator classification is distinct from the later broader offender classification.
1995–1996 Limited newspaper community notification was added in 1995; broader notification followed in 1996. These are notification expansions, not counts of additional registrations.
1997-10-01 Public Safety Information Act broadened coverage beyond predators and enabled public Internet/hotline information. Eligibility depends on statutory criteria and release/sanction rules, not every past sex-related allegation.
1998 Statutory snapshot specifies lifetime registration with a discretionary petition route after 20 years. 20 years ran from release from confinement, supervision or sanction, whichever later; no intervening arrest and other conditions. This is a verified historical baseline, not proof every provision originated in 1998.
2005 Jessica Lunsford Act added twice-yearly in-person sheriff re-registration and strengthened enforcement. Do not treat lifetime GPS or 25-year prison minimum as applicable to every registrant.
2007 Quarterly reporting for predators, specified offenders and qualifying juvenile registrants; removal waiting period increased 20 to 25 years for eligible offenders. Same act created special-circumstance relief; this was not uniformly restrictive. Adult offense exclusions limit 25-year relief.
2007 Email/instant-message reporting and distinctive driver-license/ID information added. Reporting an online identifier is distinct from a ban on Internet use.
2009 Required home/cellular telephone numbers; corrected registration coverage for traveling-to-meet-minor convictions. Coverage correction and additional data fields, not an across-the-board new sentence.
2010 Added transient-residence registration and specified child-proximity restrictions; holiday-event limits for certain supervised offenders. Holiday restrictions do not automatically apply to every person on the registry; relief eligibility also expanded for a specified offense.
2012 Expanded qualifying offenses involving commercial-sex human trafficking and specified video voyeurism. Broadens eligibility rather than establishing a new reporting frequency for everyone.
2014 Expanded reported identifiers, vehicles and other data; added 30-day in-person transient check-ins and international advance notice. Monthly checks are additional to periodic re-registration. International rule and online identifier timing were subsequently amended.
2016 Phone/employment changes due within 48 hours; some online reporting expanded; specified elderly/disabled-victim battery moved to quarterly registration. Includes an easier reporting channel, not solely added burden.
2017 Internet identifiers tied to social communication and corresponding website/app; nonsupervised registrants allowed 48 hours after use instead of before use. Narrowed definition/timing alongside site/app reporting. Do not describe as a blanket social-media ban.
2018 Residence reporting threshold reduced 5 to 3 days; felony registration violations carry minimum community-control/electronic-monitoring terms when no prison term imposed. Minimums:6 months first,1 year second,2 years third/subsequent; not automatic imprisonment for any paperwork error.
2021 Clarified that release from a sanction triggers coverage; no sanction means deemed release at conviction. Legislature responded to an interpretation involving unpaid fines; this is coverage clarification, not a new routine check-in.
2024-10-01 Clarified residence-day counting and travel reports, allowed online vehicle updates, added FDLE notice/opposition role in removal petitions. First arrival day excluded in counting residence days. Court-ordered travel-reporting relief is a separate development.
2025-10-01 Required occupation/business/employment-address/telephone details and changes; defined in-state travel reporting and removed DHSMV duplicate travel reporting. In-state travel may be reported online or through specified in-person channels. New employment omissions can constitute third-degree felonies.
2026-07-01 Added public swimming pools to 1,000-foot housing buffers for specified groups; broadened certain child-contact rules and 500-foot loitering/prowling zone. Not a universal ban on entering any park or pool. Contact, housing and supervision provisions have different definitions and exceptions.

Some reporting procedures were simplified, but other duties expanded. Florida’s 2025 changes removed a duplicate reporting trip and allowed online in-state travel reporting, while adding employment-reporting details. Easier paperwork in one area does not, by itself, establish a lighter overall burden. A review of core registration laws and related provisions found substantive additions in six of the ten complete calendar years, 2016–2025: four years involved registry duties or coverage; two involved supervision for specified offenses. Several laws also reduced burdens. The annual record separates those changes and shows 2026 year-to-date separately.

What does research say about added safety?

A study of Jacksonville’s historical expansion from 1,000- to 2,500-foot residence buffers found no statistically significant reduction in sexual rearrests. It tested one older local policy, not every Florida requirement. A Florida study of 23,523 registrants found that more restrictive housing rules were associated with living without a fixed address. That link does not, by itself, prove the rules caused the housing instability.

Broward and Miami-Dade accounted for 940 of Florida’s 2,351 transient-only registrants in October 2024, about 40%, but 2,891 of its 30,907 community registrants, 9.4%. Transient-only means a recorded transient address without a permanent one. These figures show concentration, not what caused it. OPPAGA’s county figures provide the comparison.

OPPAGA 24-11, Appendix B, October 2024. Selected county rows and definitions, printed pages 23–24. Tap image to enlarge. Original report.
Housing concentration: two counties, two statewide denominators

Both bars describe Broward and Miami-Dade together in October 2024. Each uses its own statewide population; neither describes all people experiencing homelessness.

Transient-only registrants: 940 / 2,351 statewide (40.0%)

Community registrants: 2,891 / 30,907 statewide (9.4%)

OPPAGA October 2024 county counts
Recorded group Broward Miami-Dade Combined Florida total
Transient-only registrants 426 514 940 2,351
Community registrants 1,249 1,642 2,891 30,907

Source discrepancy: the report prints 4% statewide, while 2,351 ÷ 30,907 = 7.61%. We retain the counts and flag that unresolved difference. Transient-only records are part of the community population, not an additional group to add. Concentration alone cannot establish the effects of housing rules or other causes. OPPAGA 24-11, Appendix B, printed pages 23–24 (PDF pages 25–26).

The findings are mixed. The research below includes studies reporting benefits, studies finding no reliable reduction, and important limits.

Required state review and seven outcome studies: what each can tell us

Florida law already requires OPPAGA to review registration and public notification every three years. It directs the review to examine information-sharing and accuracy, supervision and monitoring, and whether notification keeps communities informed. When deficiencies are found, the report must offer correction options and their projected costs.

Oversight therefore exists. The question is what that review establishes about the safety benefit and cost of each added rule, and how officials act on its findings. A required review alone does not answer every question about the system’s combined effects.

Policies and outcomes must be evaluated separately
Research Finding Important limit
Zgoba & Mitchell, Review of 18 studies No statistically reliable change in reoffending under the researchers’ preferred method. Published online in 2021; other statistical methods gave different results. The combined findings do not establish zero benefit for every policy.
Jacksonville buffers, 2012 study No statistically significant sexual-rearrest reduction after the historical 1,000-to-2,500-foot expansion. One city and older policy; compared policy changes without randomly assigning people to groups. Official profile is archived, not current-law guidance.
Florida housing instability, 2015 study Among 23,523 registrants, restrictions were linked with living without a fixed address. Housing markets and other factors may contribute; a link does not prove cause and effect.
Prescott & Rockoff, 2008 working paper Evidence of police-registration benefits and mixed public-notification effects. Compared policies and outcomes across states; does not evaluate today’s complete Florida system.
Minnesota notification, 2008 study Targeted high-risk notification associated with a lower estimated likelihood of sexual reoffending during follow-up. Historical groups that were not randomly assigned; different from universal Florida public listing.
South Carolina adult evaluation, 2010 report Initial program associated with fewer first-time sex-crime arrests; no detected reduction in repeat offending. Failure to register did not predict new sexual offending. Older observational program. Compliance violations are not automatically harmless, and arrest measures are incomplete.
Matched juvenile study, 2008 Only two sexual reconvictions among 111 matched pairs. Too few events for a valid comparison of repeat sexual offending; inconclusive is not proof of no effect.

Police registration, public notification, housing exclusion and reporting frequency are different policies. Rearrest, reconviction, rule violations and victimization are different outcomes. A research assessment commissioned by the Justice Department’s Office of Sex Offender Sentencing, Monitoring, Apprehending, Registering, and Tracking (SMART) also cautions against weak comparisons and broad conclusions from limited samples. No study reviewed here measures the combined net effect of Florida’s entire current system.

A review combining 18 studies found no statistically reliable change in reoffending under the researchers’ preferred method. Other statistical methods produced different results, so this is not proof that every measure has zero benefit.

The evidence is not uniformly negative. Prescott and Rockoff found evidence of benefits from police registration, alongside mixed effects from public notification. A Minnesota study found lower sexual reoffending under targeted high-risk notification. Those findings deserve attention too. They do not establish the value of every later restriction or the combined effects of Florida’s current system.

For Florida’s required three-year review, ask: what does this added requirement achieve, for whom, at what cost, and compared with what alternative?

Watch the policy question being debated

Florida House Criminal Justice Subcommittee · November 5, 2025

During the HB45 discussion, a member asks whether greater homelessness would make people harder to track; the sponsor responds that she does not foresee that outcome. See approximately 22:48–23:19. These are legislative arguments, not measured findings, and this earlier proposal is not the final 2026 law.

Watch the complete official hearing on The Florida Channel

More compliance activity also deserves follow-through

OPPAGA reported that convictions followed 60% of 2014 registration-violation arrests and 45% of 2022 arrests. These are compliance cases, not counts of new sexual victimization. The different case outcomes deserve examination; they do not by themselves prove that arrests were unjustified.

Registration-violation arrest events: 1,612 in 2014 → 2,220 in 2023, a 37.7% increase between those endpoints.

The series fluctuates. It counts arrest events, not unique people; it cannot establish the percentage of registrants arrested or the rate of new sexual offending.

Annual registration-violation arrests and year-to-year change, 2014–2023
FDLE data reported by OPPAGA, Exhibit 13
Year Arrest events Change from previous year
2014 1,612 —
2015 1,469 -8.9%
2016 1,509 +2.7%
2017 2,068 +37.0%
2018 2,171 +5.0%
2019 2,234 +2.9%
2020 1,832 -18.0%
2021 2,193 +19.7%
2022 2,261 +3.1%
2023 2,220 -1.8%

Original OPPAGA Exhibit 13. Percentages are changes in event counts, not percentages of registered people. The exhibit reports 2,220 for 2023; nearby prose says 2,200, an unresolved source discrepancy. Later years were not available in this verified series. To calculate what share of registered people were arrested, we would need to count each person once and know who was subject to the rules during the same period. Case outcomes would still need a separate follow-up.

OPPAGA 24-11, Exhibit 13, printed page 18. Many 2023 cases were still open; OPPAGA excluded that year from its conviction-rate comparison. The chart shows 2,220 arrests for 2023 while the preceding text says 2,200; that discrepancy is unresolved. Neither line measures new sexual victimization. Open the original exhibit and surrounding report.
An audit found problems in a small sample of federal registry records

Meeting minutes published by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE), July 14, 2025, page 3, summarize a February 2025 Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) audit of National Sex Offender Registry records, a federal law-enforcement system.

  • 18 of 30 sampled records contained inaccurate information.
  • 7 of 30 were incomplete.
  • 4 of 30 were described as invalid because removal had not occurred within three days after receipt and verification.

These categories may overlap and must not be added together. This small sample is not a statewide error rate or an audit of Florida’s public website. The minutes do not say why those removals were due. The three-day federal-record process is different from FDLE’s one-year public-site death-removal policy and does not explain any particular deceased person’s listing.

The minutes say the FBI accepted FDLE’s responses. That is important, but it does not independently verify every correction was completed. Accuracy and timely correction deserve measurement alongside arrest totals.

Administrative improvements matter too: 24 of 26 sheriffs’ offices using FDLE’s LEMobile mobile app reported more efficient address verification. Efficient recordkeeping and preventing harm are related but different questions.

Returning to prison does not, by itself, tell us what happened. Was there a new sexual offense, another criminal offense, a registration violation or a supervision violation? Public reporting should make those distinctions clear before return totals are used to justify additional restrictions.

FDC definition, printed page 1 (cover: December 2024), and undated FAQ, page 2. Labelled excerpts. Tap image to enlarge. Report · FAQ.
Prison returns: source audit, 2021 illustration and public resources

In a supplied dashboard’s 2021 released-sentence sexual-offense group, 346 of 1,388 people (24.9%) returned to Florida Department of Corrections (FDC) prison within three years. These are prison-return classifications, not sexual-reoffending rates.

The group is defined by the released sentence’s offense category. It is not a count of all registrants or everyone with any sexual-offense history. “No recorded return” does not establish that no offending occurred.

All 1,388 releasees are the denominator below.

Supplied dashboard: 2021 group, unverified return classifications
Dashboard classification (not a verified return reason) People Share of all 1,388 releasees
No recorded FDC prison return within three years 1,042 75.1%
Technical-proxy return 237 17.1%
Registry-labelled return (unverified) 54 3.9%
Other-new-offense-proxy return 55 4.0%
All returns, comprising the three return rows 346 24.9%

The technical-proxy and registry-only categories together contain 291 people: 84.1% of the 346 returnees, or 21.0% of all 1,388 releasees. The different denominators answer different questions. Rounded category percentages may not sum to exactly 100%.

Classification and replication limits: “technical-proxy” is a derived category, not a verified official technical-revocation reason. Missing offense dates and classification priority can affect it. “Other-new-offense-proxy” is not limited to sexual offenses. The aggregate CSV counts reconcile, but the raw event classification and original transformation code were not available for independent replication.

Source: the supplied Florida Criminal Justice 101 dashboard and its retained aggregate CSV. The dashboard is not an official FDC publication, and access may require an invited account; that link does not by itself make the analysis publicly reproducible. This figure uses the mature 2021 group only, separate from provisional 2023. The earlier 1,740-person study uses a different, incompletely specified cohort; selection code is needed to explain the difference.

What the new audit verified

The October 11 review independently reproduced 396 category-sum checks across 36 annual subgroup summaries, with no differences. It also reproduced both denominator calculations. This checks aggregate arithmetic, not why anyone returned to prison. The annual subgroups overlap and cannot be added as unique people. The four recidivism CSVs contain aggregates, not the person-and-event rows needed to recreate the selection and classification.

What still needs to be established

The combined 84.1% must not be described as returns without a new crime. It is the share of 346 returnees assigned to two dashboard categories. Registration violations can themselves be crimes under section 943.0435(9)(a) and section 775.21(10)(a). Neither the combined percentage nor the other-new-offense category is a sexual-reoffending rate.

For its own purposes, section 948.06(1)(c) treats a technical supervision violation as one that does not involve a new felony, misdemeanor or criminal traffic offense. A date-based proxy does not establish that legal ground.

  • Missing offense rows: the FDC public-data FAQ identifies delays, immediate releases and database inconsistencies. An unlinked charge may mean the reason is unknown, rather than technical.
  • Offense dates and custody spells: an older offense can lead to a later admission. Multiple incarceration periods can share an initial ReceiptDate, so that date alone is not a unique return-event key.
  • Changing file membership: readmitted people leave the release file, while some people scheduled for release within 60 days appear in it. Snapshot dates and actual release events matter.
  • Missing classification fields: the retained public dictionary has no explicit admission/revocation reason or unique custody-visit key. A person-level match alone cannot reliably link each offense to the correct prison stay.
  • Registry-only and mixed returns: verification needs a dated statute/charge crosswalk, a confirmed return-event link, and a rule for other qualifying offenses. Keep mixed registry, supervision and other-crime flags before applying any display hierarchy.

A stronger analysis would retain verified technical-only, verified registry-only, mixed grounds, verified other-new-offense and unresolved categories alongside the original dashboard labels. It should publish unmatched cases and missing-date counts rather than assigning unknown reasons to a category. First return, worst return and any return are different outcomes.

Original raw-data replication remains incomplete: the source snapshots, executable transformation code and linked official return reasons were not available. Current raw-file retrieval was not completed in this review; that does not establish that the advertised public files are unavailable.

Keep official statewide figures separate

The official FDC report gives 5,325 returns among 24,971 people released in 2020 (21.3%). The dashboard’s all-release 2020 group gives 6,214 among 27,808 (22.35%). These broader statewide groups are separate from the sexual-offense group illustrated above.

FDC omits deaths/executions, release-time detainers and certain atypical or outside-direct-custody releases, and counts only each person’s first release in a calendar year. Equivalent dashboard exclusions and snapshots have not all been established. A reconciliation table is needed before attributing the difference to any one exclusion or calling it a change over time.

The linked report’s cover says December 2024, while the publication index labels it December 2025. We preserve that date discrepancy and the reported values. The dashboard’s 2023 follow-up remains provisional and is excluded from mature-year comparisons here.

Public source resources and next checks

To resolve the remaining questions, freeze the original input versions and dates; reproduce cohort eligibility and exclusions; identify actual release/readmission spells; apply an exact three-year follow-up; link charges and official reasons to each return; and publish an aggregate comparison of proxy versus verified reasons. The earlier 1,740-person study’s current, prior or later offense eligibility remains incompletely specified. No assumption about that selection resolves its difference from the dashboard.

How many people successfully leave the registry?

Most reported removals were deaths

OPPAGA reports 2,282 deceased people removed between October 1, 2021, and September 30, 2024. Removal after death is not the same as a person gaining relief during their lifetime.

Death does not mean immediate removal. FDLE’s FAQ says a deceased person’s record should leave the public website one year after the death date documented on the death certificate. The FDLE full registry CSV uploaded October 6, 2026 contained 1,841 records marked deceased. That count alone does not tell us which records were publicly visible, whether a removal was overdue, or whether the policy was followed.

OPPAGA states 2,554 total removals, but its listed categories add to 2,485, a difference of 69. Deaths are the majority under either total; we do not use the report’s disputed percentage.

One record that needs an explanation

A funeral-home obituary for James Terrill Zillioux reports that he died on November 25, 2021. On October 11, 2026, his flyer was still available through FDLE’s public search, marked “Deceased.”

FDLE public flyer, checked October 11, 2026, at 18:04 UTC. This privacy-limited crop shows only the name and status; date of birth, address and family information are omitted. Open FDLE’s official search; enter first name James, last name Zillioux, and select Both under state.

That appears inconsistent with FDLE’s published one-year public-removal policy and deserves an explanation. The public record does not tell us what death documentation FDLE holds, what date it recorded, or why the page remained available. It does not establish deliberate inflation of the registry. This example concerns removal from the public website, not destruction of every underlying agency record.

Readers on FAC’s website have described family requests as part of getting deceased people removed: a May 2018 comment and a February 2020 comment raise that concern. Those comments are unverified and do not establish a requirement to hire a lawyer or petition a court. Even after death, removal may not be straightforward. FDLE publishes a one-year removal policy, yet the verified example here shows a deceased person still publicly listed years later. Who must follow up when the promised removal does not happen?

How often living people obtain removal is still unclear from the public sources we reviewed. We did not locate statewide annual counts for 2008–2025 or January 1–October 11, 2026. Missing data must not be read as zero successful removals.

Verified removal figures covering longer periods
Verified relief benchmarks: different measures and periods; do not add
Period or cutoff Reported figure Measure
By July 2011 241 Total court-granted Romeo-and-Juliet petitions reported by that date.
By August 2, 2012 283 Total people granted relief by that date, in OPPAGA’s Romeo-and-Juliet discussion.
October 1, 2021–September 30, 2024 26 FDLE completed removals under Romeo-and-Juliet provisions.
October 1, 2021–September 30, 2024 22 FDLE completed removals after the relevant convictions were set aside.

A granted petition and a completed FDLE removal are different measures. Death-related removal is different again. These figures cover totals accumulated over time or periods longer than one year, so we cannot turn them into annual results or calculate a success rate without comparable application and denial counts.

Year-by-year successful-removal figures were not found in the public sources reviewed

For 2008–2026, NA means an annual statewide figure was not located in the official sources reviewed. It does not mean zero, and it does not prove the administrative data do not exist.

Annual figures: no yearly estimates made from longer-period totals
Calendar year Court-granted petitions Completed FDLE court-relief removals
2008 NA NA
2009 NA NA
2010 NA NA
2011 NA NA
2012 NA NA
2013 NA NA
2014 NA NA
2015 NA NA
2016 NA NA
2017 NA NA
2018 NA NA
2019 NA NA
2020 NA NA
2021 NA NA
2022 NA NA
2023 NA NA
2024 NA NA
2025 NA NA
2026 through October 11 NA NA

Reviewed: OPPAGA reports 08-60, 12-12, 15-16, 18-08, 21-10, 24-11, and the 2011 Senate issue brief. The 2018 report supplies only a three-year average for all-cause removals, which cannot fill individual years.

We need FDLE to resolve the difference in the reported removal totals and publish annual counts by reason. Families deserve to know how often eligible people gain relief while they are alive, as well as how records are handled after death.

People still have lives after the cameras leave

An arrest does not establish guilt or automatically place someone on a registry. The evidence, charges and legal outcome matter. Reporting should leave room for that process and should follow up when a case changes, rather than leaving the original accusation as the only public account.

Behind every arrest and registry entry is a person and a family. Whatever the accusation, people in custody deserve safety, medical care and humane treatment. Accountability means examining both public-safety outcomes and what happens to people after an arrest. Children and survivors also need lasting care, privacy and support.

In OPPAGA’s October 2024 snapshot, 24,135 of 30,907 community registrants (78.1%) were classified “Sentence Served – Required to Register.” This describes sentence status, not risk. FAC members describe lasting barriers to housing, work, travel and family life. These are reported experiences, and they deserve attention alongside evidence about public safety. They do not establish that every person or every sting case has the same outcome.

More oversight, or more overreach?

FAC has stated that its ultimate goal is to abolish the registry, while supporting practical reforms that reduce harm in the meantime. That stated goal provides context for this opinion column; the research above still needs to be judged on what each study actually tested and found.

Florida needs effective protection for children, meaningful support for survivors and fair, reliable investigations. Our opinion is that officials should explain how the spending and restrictions advance those goals, using outcomes that the public can check. Over the years, changes to registration laws and local ordinances have added layers of obligations and restrictions. Who measures whether each added burden improves public safety, and who examines their combined effect on families? At what point does oversight become overreach? These records raise that question; the counts alone cannot answer it.

Ryan Anderson describes repeated unanswered requests from personal experience. The correspondence reviewed gives a narrower picture: FDC supplied referrals and a no-responsive-documents response, while FDLE acknowledged two requests. No substantive FDLE production was located in the mailbox reviewed through October 11, 2026; live portals and other correspondence channels were not checked. Families and policymakers still need information connecting registration status, custody, outcomes and spending.

Records access: personal experience, documented replies and unanswered questions

Media and member personal accounts : “In my experience, several individuals and organizations have sought this information without receiving a response.” This is his account, not an independently verified finding about every requester or agency.

The retained correspondence supports a narrower documentary conclusion: a reply can acknowledge a request, point to another source or report no responsive documents without supplying the requested tabulations. Those outcomes must be distinguished from silence.

Bounded correspondence review through October 11, 2026
Agency and topic Documented outcome What remains unestablished
FDC: Pasco detention data; September 16 request September 23 report referral and partial information route Delivery of the underlying machine-readable submissions and field documentation was not established.
FDC: prison counts and sexual-offense histories; September 23 inquiry / September 25 formal request September 30 no-responsive-documents response and referral to public OBIS files Requested tabulations were not supplied. The overlapping inquiries are not counted as two ignored requests.
FDLE: Pasco registry-file request; September 16 Acknowledgment and referral No substantive production located in the scoped mailbox review.
FDLE: youth/young-adult statistics; September 17, supplemented October 8 Receipt and September 21 docket confirmations No substantive production located in the scoped mailbox review.

Scope: this is a review of retained agency correspondence, not a statewide survey or live-portal certification. Other channels were not checked. Unsent draft requests were excluded. No-responsive-documents does not establish that all underlying data are nonexistent. These records do not establish unlawful withholding or deliberate concealment.

To assess registry-related imprisonment and spending, the public needs dated registration status, custody episodes, the grounds for detention, clear offense and violation definitions, and aligned spending records. Acknowledgments, referrals, partial production and substantive answers should be reported separately.

We need to examine the activity being counted, the legal and financial demands placed on people, and whether stable, lawful housing is realistically available. Then ask what safety the spending produces.

Publish annual entries and exits, case outcomes, actual spending and evidence of safety benefits. Then Floridians can judge the system on its results, its costs and its effects on real people.

Explore the annual counts and source record

This review found 83 distinct operations: 71 documented ICAC-linked operations and 13 Hansen-linked operations, with one verified overlap. Some categories overlap, so they cannot simply be added together. We used operation dates where available and clearly labeled announcement dates when field dates were not reported. Statewide and multistate umbrella announcements were not counted as extra local operations. Individual SOSA cases, unverified leads and registry-compliance sweeps were not added to these operation totals. ICAC work is broader than decoy stings. Sources include government records, agency releases, news reporting and organizational descriptions; a linked source is not automatically an official government finding.

Annual documented operations located, 2006–2026 (2026 through October 11)
Year ICAC-linked Hansen-linked
2006 None located 2
2007 2 None located
2008 None located None located
2009 1 None located
2010 1 None located
2011 1 None located
2012 7 None located
2013 2 None located
2014 4 None located
2015 2 None located
2016 4 None located
2017 3 None located
2018 2 None located
2019 3 None located
2020 4 None located
2021 2 None located
2022 4 1
2023 5 2
2024 9 2
2025 5 3
2026 10 3

Years with no located entries are evidence gaps, not confirmed zero activity. A publication or broadcast date is not automatically an operation date. Some source dates are approximate or announcement-based. Source coverage varies by year and agency, so neither full-year nor same-cutoff comparisons establish a statewide rate of change.

2006 · Flagler Beach / Dateline To Catch a Predator
Flagler · Traveler-decoy or mixed child-sting initiative
Tags: Hansen. Dates: December 2006; four-day operation; Month; court documents corroborate December 9 activity. Source 1 Source 2 Source 3
2006 · Fort Myers / Dateline To Catch a Predator
Lee · Traveler-decoy or mixed child-sting initiative
Tags: Hansen. Dates: April 2006; three-day operation; Month; exact start/end unverified. Source 1 Source 2
2007 · Guardian
Polk · traveler decoy sting
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2007-07. Source 1 Source 2
2007 · Home Alone III
Broward · traveler decoy sting
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2007-fall. Source 1
2009 · Orange Tree
Statewide · CSAM sweep
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2009-03/06. Source 1
2010 · Grim Reaper
Citrus · traveler decoy sting
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2010-10. Source 1
2011 · Blue Shepherd
Escambia · traveler decoy sting
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2011-06-20/26. Source 1 Source 2
2012 · Cyber Child
Polk · traveler decoy sting
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2012-05/06. Source 1
2012 · Intercept
Sarasota · traveler decoy sting
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2012-05/06. Source 1
2012 · Red Cheeks
Osceola · traveler decoy sting
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2012-01-08/16. Source 1
2012 · Riptide
Bay · traveler decoy sting
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2012-05/06. Source 1
2012 · Southern Sentinel
Broward · mixed CSAM / prostitution
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2012-05/06. Source 1
2012 · Summer Knights
Citrus · traveler decoy sting
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2012-05/06. Source 1
2012 · Tailspin
Alachua · traveler decoy sting
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2012-07-23. Source 1
2013 · Last Minute
Hillsborough · traveler decoy sting
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2013-01-25/27. Source 1
2013 · Pegasus
Alachua · traveler decoy sting
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2013-06-18/30. Source 1
2014 · Cyber Child III
Polk · mixed CSAM / traveler sting
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2014-06-30. Source 1
2014 · Guardian
Duval · traveler decoy sting
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2014-04. Source 1
2014 · Home Alone
Pinellas · traveler decoy sting
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2014-01-23/27. Source 1
2014 · Unnamed October Osceola sting
Osceola · traveler decoy sting
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2014-10. Source 1
2015 · Panther
Alachua · traveler decoy sting
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2015-08. Source 1
2015 · Unnamed February CSAM-led sweep
Polk · CSAM-led mixed sweep
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2015-02. Source 1
2016 · Blue Hawk
Duval · traveler decoy sting
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2016-07. Source 1
2016 · Child Shield III
Polk / Osceola · CSAM sweep
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2016-07. Source 1
2016 · Undertow
Escambia · traveler decoy sting
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2016-09-07/11. Source 1
2016 · Wayfarer
Pinellas · traveler decoy sting
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2016-01-20/24. Source 1
2017 · Cupid’s Arrow
Leon / Columbia · traveler decoy sting
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2017-02. Source 1
2017 · Resilient
Alachua · traveler decoy sting
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2017-03-15/19. Source 1 Source 2
2017 · Watchdog
Duval · traveler decoy sting
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2017-05. Source 1
2018 · D.U.V.A.L.
Duval · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2018-08; operation month/date. Source 1 Source 2 Source 3
2018 · Paladin’s Shield
Walton · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2018-02-28; field date/month unless noted. Source 1 Source 2
2019 · Deviant Desire
Volusia · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2019-09-26; operation month/date. Source 1
2019 · Downpour
St. Johns · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2019-04; operation month/date. Source 1
2019 · Safe Summer
Duval · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2019-06-19; operation month/date. Source 1
2020 · Cyber Guardian
Volusia · CSAM
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2020-01-01; operation month/date. Source 1
2020 · Hindsight 2020
Osceola · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2020-01-09; operation month/date. Source 1
2020 · Illicit Solicit
Volusia · undercover fictitious minor plus compliance
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2020-08; operation month/date. Source 1
2020 · Unnamed Orange Park joint sting
Clay · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2020-01-24; operation month/date. Source 1
2021 · Endgame
Duval · mixed decoy CSAM
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2021; year; summer field dates unspecified. Source 1
2021 · Night Owl
Okaloosa · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2021-08; operation month/date. Source 1 Source 2
2022 · April Fools
Marion · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2022-03-28; operation start date. Source 1 Source 2 Source 3
2022 · Cyber Scumbag
Volusia · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2022-08; operation month/date. Source 1
2022 · Operation Cyber Guardian II
Polk · Traveler-decoy or mixed child-sting initiative
Tags: Hansen. Dates: Late August–early September 2022; documented chats August 29, arrivals August 31–September 3, later warrants September 6–8; Case dates; full operational start/end not expressly established. Source 1 Source 2
2022 · Peek-a-Boo
Okaloosa · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2022-02; operation month/date. Source 1
2022 · Wolves Blanket
Walton · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2022-01-26; operation month/date. Source 1
2023 · Lucky Strike
Citrus · undercover fictitious minor plus unrelated drug
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2023-03; operation month/date. Source 1 Source 2 Source 3
2023 · M.A.P. Mirage
Marion · mixed decoy CSAM
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2023-05; field date/month unless noted. Source 1 Source 2
2023 · Operation Child Protector III
Polk · Traveler-decoy or mixed child-sting initiative
Tags: Hansen. Dates: February 2023; two-week initiative; sting arrivals February 6 and 7; Month for umbrella; exact dates for linked encounters. Source 1
2023 · Operation Child Protector IV
Polk · Traveler-decoy or mixed child-sting initiative
Tags: Hansen. Dates: September 19–25, 2023; End date derived from stated seven-day operation beginning September 19. Source 1 Source 2 Source 3
2023 · Spring Fling
St. Johns · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2023-04; operation month/date. Source 1
2023 · Unnamed Pensacola three-day sting
Escambia · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2023-02; field date/month unless noted. Source 1 Source 2
2023 · Unnamed four-day CSAM sweep
Marion · CSAM
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2023-12; announcement month. Source 1
2024 · Creep Sweep
Volusia · mixed decoy CSAM registration
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2024-04; field date/month unless noted. Source 1
2024 · Cyberstorm
Indian River · mixed CSAM online solicitation
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2024-04; field date/month unless noted. Source 1 Source 2
2024 · Heartbreaker 2
Flagler · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2024-07-11; field date/month unless noted. Source 1
2024 · Operation Autumn Sweep, child-solicitation component
Polk · Traveler-decoy or mixed child-sting initiative
Tags: Hansen. Dates: October 2–6, 2024; End derived from five-day operation beginning October 2. Source 1 Source 2
2024 · Operation Child Protector V
Polk · Traveler-decoy or mixed child-sting initiative
Tags: Hansen. Dates: February 22–29, 2024; Exact range in agency release. Source 1 Source 2
2024 · Safe Summer
Bay · mixed decoy CSAM
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2024-07-17; field date/month unless noted. Source 1 Source 2
2024 · Safe Summer
Manatee · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2024-07; field date/month unless noted. Source 1 Source 2
2024 · Summer Scoop
Hernando · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2024-07-17; field date/month unless noted. Source 1 Source 2
2024 · Summertime Blues
Marion · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2024-07; announcement month. Source 1 Source 2
2024 · Unnamed Lake City undercover operation
Columbia · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2024-12; field date/month unless noted. Source 1
2024 · Valiant Knights
Duval · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2024-04; operation month/date. Source 1
2025 · Dark Harvest
Okaloosa · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2025-10; operation month/date. Source 1
2025 · Full Throttle
Volusia · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2025-03; operation month/date. Source 1 Source 2
2025 · Operation Child Protector VI / concurrent Fool Around and Find Out
Polk · Traveler-decoy or mixed child-sting initiative
Tags: Hansen. Dates: May 2–10, 2025; Exact range in agency child-sting release. Source 1
2025 · Operation Child Protector VII / Fool Around and Find Out Again
Polk · Traveler-decoy or mixed child-sting initiative
Tags: Hansen. Dates: September 8–14, 2025; Exact range in agency release. Source 1 Source 2 Source 3 Source 4
2025 · Operation Seek and Ye Shall Find Out
Marion · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: Hansen. Dates: July 2025; six-day operation announced July 30; Month; exact start/end not verified. Source 1 Source 2 Source 3 Source 4 Source 5 Source 6
2025 · Rabbit Hole
Leon · undercover online exploitation
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2025-04-10; operation month/date. Source 1
2025 · Summer Hurricane
Franklin · undercover fictitious minor plus compliance
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2025-07-10; operation month/date. Source 1
2025 · Travel to Gavel
Volusia · mixed decoy CSAM
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2025-06; operation month/date. Source 1
2026 · Catch a Con
Osceola · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2026-03-18; operation month/date. Source 1
2026 · Checkmate
Duval · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2026-04; operation month/date. Source 1 Source 2
2026 · Cooked
Osceola · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2026-09-02; operation month/date. Source 1 Source 2
2026 · Firewall
Alachua · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2026-07-30; operation month/date. Source reviewed: agency public-information post by Lisa Sacaccio identifying North Florida ICAC; direct personal-account link omitted.
2026 · Firewall
Clay · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2026-07-15; operation month/date. Source reviewed: agency public-information post by Lisa Sacaccio identifying North Florida ICAC; direct personal-account link omitted. Source 1
2026 · Last Lap
Volusia · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2026-02; operation month/date. Source 1 Source 2
2026 · Operation Bad Habits
Marion · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC, Hansen. Dates: June1–6,2026; announced June11; Exact range in Florida AG release. Source 1 Source 2 Source 3 Source 4 Source 5 Source 6 Source 7
2026 · Operation Child Protector VIII / Polk Around and Find Out
Polk · Traveler-decoy or mixed child-sting initiative
Tags: Hansen. Dates: April 20–26, 2026, as reported by the Lakeland Ledger from the sheriff’s briefing; Contemporary news report of sheriff’s briefing; separate contemporary report corroborates April 20 start and week-long duration. Source 1 Source 2 Source 3 Source 4
2026 · Operation Red Card
Broward · Child-sex solicitation/travel sting within trafficking enforcement
Tags: ICAC. Dates: Announcement July 2, 2026; exact operation dates not stated in primary release. Source 1 Source 2
2026 · Operation Undercover Chatter
Martin · Traveler-decoy or mixed child-sting initiative
Tags: Hansen. Dates: Three days ending May7,2026; announced May8; End and duration reported by TCPalm; exact range not independently documented. Source 1 Source 2 Source 3 Source 4 Source 5
2026 · Safe Harvest
Leon · undercover online exploitation
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2026-03-12; announcement date. Source 1
2026 · Tor/Pedo
Volusia · undercover fictitious minor
Tags: ICAC. Dates: 2026-07-09; operation month/date. Source 1
Registry figures and calculation notes
OPPAGA registry snapshots
Snapshot Registry total Florida communities
Sep 2015 66,523 26,845
Oct 2018 73,004 28,548
Sep 2021 78,357 30,180
Oct 2024 86,207 30,907

Total growth: (86,207 − 66,523) ÷ 66,523 = 29.59%. Community growth: (30,907 − 26,845) ÷ 26,845 = 15.13%. These are changes in listed populations, not offense rates, repeat-offending rates or estimates of sting effectiveness. The operations and registry series have different units and observation periods; these counts do not show that one caused changes in the other.

 

“Hope” is the thing with feathers –
That perches in the soul –

Emily Dickinson · Read the poem

 

FAC MEDIA BUZZ
Florida Action Committee

Opinion and Commentary · Research checked October 11, 2026

The post Florida’s Registry Keeps Growing. Public Safety or Overenforcement? appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

]]> https://floridaactioncommittee.org/florida-registry-public-safety-overenforcement/feed/ 3 28577 Florida’s Registry: The Rules, Records and Money That Keep It Running https://floridaactioncommittee.org/florida-registry-rules-records-money/ https://floridaactioncommittee.org/florida-registry-rules-records-money/#comments Tue, 06 Oct 2026 13:00:43 +0000 https://floridaactioncommittee.org/?p=28413 FLORIDA · PUBLIC RECORDS · RESEARCH Florida’s Registry: The Rules, Records and Money That Keep It Running How reporting duties, shared information, enforcement, and funding connect across Florida October 4, 2026 · Updated October 5, 2026 · Research based on public records Florida’s registry runs through sheriffs’ offices, state agencies, computer systems, paid employees, and public money. These parts connect

The post Florida’s Registry: The Rules, Records and Money That Keep It Running appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

]]>

FLORIDA · PUBLIC RECORDS · RESEARCH

Florida’s Registry: The Rules, Records and Money That Keep It Running

How reporting duties, shared information, enforcement, and funding connect across Florida

October 4, 2026 · Updated October 5, 2026 · Research based on public records

Florida’s registry runs through sheriffs’ offices, state agencies, computer systems, paid employees, and public money. These parts connect through reporting duties, shared records, verification, and public notices. Together, they form the infrastructure that keeps registration and enforcement operating.

This is a long read because no single budget, database, or law tells the whole story. We start with one county’s records and follow the information and money outward. Each section takes one piece at a time and explains the terms along the way. It is still only part of a bigger puzzle.

For people required to register—registrants—and their families, the questions are simple: Who receives an update? Who can change a record? How is a mistake corrected? What does the money supporting this work accomplish?

What this article follows: The records, offices, paid positions, and services behind Florida’s registry—from registration and public notification to verification and enforcement.

These are selected examples, not a statewide cost estimate. County program costs and broader federal criminal-justice allocations measure different things.

FY means fiscal year: the accounting year used for a budget or grant. It can differ from the January–December calendar year.

What one county budget shows

Polk’s FY2025–26 budget book reports FY2023–24 spending on the tracking program of $295,099, support from the General Fund—the county’s general operating fund—and funded staffing equivalent to 2.1 full-time jobs.

For FY2023–24, Program 231500 reported 1,459 sexual offenders/predators verified and 233 arrests for violations resulting in criminal prosecutions. Its FY2025–26 adopted budget—the approved spending plan—lists $297,882 and a target of 200 arrests.

Polk measures performance partly through its arrests resulting in prosecution. Prosecution brings charges to court; it does not mean the person was convicted. The measure does not identify new sexual crimes or necessarily count different people. The public also needs to know what the violations involved, how cases ended, whether address errors were corrected, and whether people were able to comply. Case records and the program’s counting instructions would help answer those questions. Activity counts alone cannot show whether the work prevented harm.

OPPAGA, Florida’s legislative research office, reported in its 2024 review that registration-violation conviction rates were 60% for arrests in 2014 and 45% for arrests in 2022. It excluded 2023 because many cases remained open. An arrest count needs to be followed through the court process.

The budgeted staffing equals work hours, not a confirmed employee headcount; funded jobs may be vacant. The verification measure needs a clear counting rule. These figures do not establish payment per arrest.

Polk gives us one example of the people, money, and activity behind registry work. The next connection is the information itself: where it goes after someone reports it.

Information given at a Florida registration appointment can travel far beyond that office. Photographs, address updates, and reported moves can reach state agencies, other jurisdictions (such as states and territories), public searches, and email alerts.

The registry count needs context

OPPAGA—the Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability, Florida’s legislative research office—separated the registry into these groups in its October 2024 snapshot. The full total includes people outside Florida and people in custody, so it cannot be read as the number living in Florida communities.

Florida registry snapshot: October 2024
Status People
Living in Florida communities 30,907
Confined: incarcerated or civilly committed 20,742
Non-Florida residents 33,465
Absconded; whereabouts unknown 1,093
Total, excluding deceased records 86,207

This October 2024 snapshot is not a current headcount.

The same snapshot lists 24,135 community registrants as “Sentence Served – Required to Register.” Registration and probation are separate obligations. Completing a sentence does not necessarily end registration.

A program serving people in the community covers a different population from the full registry. That matters when comparing headcounts, workloads, and costs.

The connections begin in Florida’s statutes

Section 943.0435 directs sheriffs to send registration information, photographs, fingerprints, and palm prints to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement (FDLE). It also covers motor-vehicle information, verification, and notices about certain moves and travel.

Sections 944.607 and 944.606 connect courts, corrections, and county jails to registration and release reporting. Section 775.21 separately sets duties for people designated as sexual predators.

Selected documented connections
Part of the framework Documented connection
County sheriff’s office Collects registration information and transmits specified materials to FDLE.
Driver-license and identification offices Forward specified photographs and information to FDLE.
Courts, corrections, and county jails Provide registration or release information through statutory channels.
FDLE and local law enforcement Share verification responsibilities and authorized information tools.
Public notification services Provide searches, maps, and automatic alerts using jurisdictional information.

Several offices can be involved in the same person’s record. One may take the registration report, another may check the address, and another may handle supervision or investigate a possible violation. Knowing who did what matters when a record needs attention.

The system reaches identity documents and qualifying juvenile cases. Section 322.141 requires specified license and ID markings: “SEXUAL PREDATOR” or “943.0435, F.S.” Here, F.S. means Florida Statutes, the state’s written laws.

Section 985.4815 assigns duties to clerks, juvenile justice officials, and sheriffs, including electronic reporting compatible with the Florida Crime Information Center (FCIC). It applies only to the specific juvenile cases covered by the law.

CJNET: what the agency connection means for registrants

The Florida Criminal Justice Network (CJNET) connects authorized agencies to state and national resources. Florida’s Sexual Offender/Predator System (SOPS) is the agency registry application. The public website shows selected information; agency users may hold additional information within their permissions.

Different parts of the information system
Component Documented function Meaning for a registrant
CJNET Network connecting authorized agencies to criminal-justice resources. A connection route; access still depends on the resource and user’s authorization.
SOPS Florida’s agency registry application, with record viewing and specified update functions. Agency workflow extends beyond the public search page.
Cyber Communication System (CCS) Online reporting of specified updates by eligible registrants. A registrant reporting tool; distinct from authorized agency access through CJNET.
Public registry and National Sex Offender Public Website (NSOPW) Public searches and selected published information; NSOPW searches participating jurisdictions. Public results have accuracy limits and legal disclosure restrictions.
Florida Crime Information Center (FCIC) and National Crime Information Center (NCIC) State and national criminal-justice resources; the national registry file is within NCIC. A registry entry and a wanted-person entry serve different purposes.
FL LEMobile Law-enforcement field tool for residence checks, maps, and field submissions. Field verification information can be submitted through a mobile interface.

Viewing a record and changing a record are different permissions

FDLE describes record viewing, limited field and address-check updates, enhanced searches, and national registry submissions through CJNET. Each function has its own permissions. Access to one tool does not give every officer unrestricted editing rights.

FDLE’s 2023 guide describes electronic signatures and fingerprints, transient-residence check-ins (a legal residence category that can include shelter locations without a street address), document uploads, and verification reminders. Some features require an appointed Agency Administrator. This dated workflow guide must be read alongside later laws and notices.

Limited Access users need eligible agency affiliation, training, an exam, and annual certification. Their searches depend on job duties, tools, and device restrictions; they cannot add hot-file entries—law-enforcement alert records, such as wanted-person entries. Certification does not grant SOPS editing rights. FBI policy also limits access to assigned tasks.

CCS is the registrant’s reporting tool

FDLE’s October 2025 guide allows registrants outside corrections or juvenile justice supervision to use the optional Cyber Communication System (CCS) for specified updates. They can report at the sheriff’s office instead. CCS does not replace scheduled re-registration.

For an employment update, users enter the information and save it. The CCS guide says “Pending Review” changes are generally reviewed and accepted within one business day. Sending an update, having it accepted, and seeing it on the public website are separate steps.

Field verification can feed the agency record

FL LEMobile connects fieldwork to agency records: due and assigned residence checks, maps, directions, and verification submissions. Its location permission concerns the official’s device and reported locations; it does not establish continuous tracking of a registrant’s phone.

FDLE’s notice effective October 1, 2025 distinguishes address verification from twice-yearly or quarterly re-registration. Neither replaces the other. Updates go through the sheriff, supervising agency, or CCS where applicable.

What is collected, what is published, and what can be corrected

Sections 943.0435 and 775.21 require identifying details, photographs, fingerprints, palm prints, residences, employment, vehicles, phones, email addresses, and Internet identifiers. They also cover campus connections, passports, immigration documents, professional licenses, moves, and international travel. Access depends on permissions; this list does not describe every CJNET screen.

Collection and public disclosure have different limits. FDLE publishes selected registration information unless exempt. Section 119.071 protects Social Security numbers, fingerprints, and palm prints. Section 943.043 restricts online display of vehicles owned by people not required to register. Each information category needs its own access and disclosure check.

Public records can be downloaded and copied

FDLE’s August 2025 memo permits automated downloads. The registration-list file updates every four hours and is “obsolete as soon as the file is generated.” Website amendments occur in real time.

A correction on the website leaves a practical question: did it also reach people holding an older download? Notices and updates should leave a trail that can be checked.

FDLE also warns that being listed does not indicate an individual’s risk level. That matters when interpreting a map or flyer.

FDLE says it compiles information from corrections, motor-vehicle officials, law enforcement, and registrants without independently confirming accuracy. Other agencies may verify it. Published errors can be reported to the Offender Registry Services Bureau: 888-357-7332 or sexpred@fdle.state.fl.us.

When told someone is not at a reported address, FDLE describes adding a remark and, when appropriate, seeking a warrant. A field note alone is not an automatic arrest trigger.

The FBI says an NCIC match alone does not establish probable cause—the legal grounds needed for an arrest. Agencies must confirm information before official action.

A federal audit found gaps—and FDLE made corrections

OPPAGA reports that a 2022 FBI audit sampled 30 records; 27 had information missing from the national registry. FDLE corrected programming and reinforced training. More than 1,000 records also bypassed automated record checks; FDLE fixed that error. These findings concern missing information and a small sample, not a registry-wide error rate.

The public needs to know what failed, what was fixed, and how the fix was checked. Accuracy is one question. A record of who looked up the information is another.

What the access logs can tell us

FDLE’s training describes a five-year archive of FCIC/NCIC database searches and responses on Florida devices, called Transaction Archive Reports, and auditable transactions. FBI policy distinguishes logging capability from always activating it. Neither establishes SOPS’s exact logging or a complete history of views of one person’s record.

FDLE’s public-records page links a request portal and 2026 guide. Contacts: publicrecords@fdle.state.fl.us or 850-410-7676. Requests cover existing records; FDLE need not create records or answer questions. Specify the record, event, and dates to help control costs.

A disputed address or status could be traced through existing registration forms, changes, verification records, and available access logs. Release depends on legal exemptions, redactions (removing protected information), and charges. Section 119.07 requires nonexempt portions and the legal basis for withholding information; a complete lookup history is not guaranteed.

County and city rules meet the statewide system

Local rules add another layer. OPPAGA counted 196 local ordinances (city and county laws) in jurisdictions across 52 counties as of September 2024. Depending on the place, state, county, and city requirements can meet at the same address.

Brevard’s registration and tracking unit handles registration, notification, verification, and investigations. Its courtesy address-review guidance directs people considering a home inside a city with its own police department to that department. One address can involve county and city offices.

The Justice Department’s SMART Office, which supports national registration and notification standards, describes notifications to law enforcement, prosecutors, supervision agencies, schools, and public housing, alongside public notices. Recipients have different access levels. FDLE says its website updates continuously as criminal-justice partners send information.

FDLE’s December 31, 2025 report lists 3,450 new public-registry entries and more than 5,900 travel notifications to other states and territories in 2025. It also describes programming, document, and website changes to implement legislation.

These figures show recordkeeping and communication. A website addition does not tell us that a new sexual crime occurred, and more than one travel notice may concern the same person. To assess safety, the public needs outcomes as well as activity counts.

The connection reaches into courts and corrections

A reporting violation can bring the work into court. Under Section 943.0435(9)(a), listed failures to register or report required information can be prosecuted as felonies. A charge about a registration requirement is different from a charge for a new sexual offense.

For felony violations covered by Section 943.0435(9)(b), committed on or after July 1, 2018, the court must impose community control with electronic monitoring if it does not impose prison. The minimum terms are 6 months for a first offense, 1 year for a second, and 2 years for a third or later offense.

Community control means intensive supervision with restrictions on a person’s freedom in the community. This connects reporting duties to court orders, supervision, and monitoring. Case and spending records would show the outcome and cost for a particular person; an arrest announcement cannot answer those questions.

Following outcomes also involves shared records. FDC—the Florida Department of Corrections—describes a longstanding agreement in its July 2026 recidivism report. It sends prison-release and probation-admission records to FDLE’s Statistical Analysis Center. FDLE matches criminal-history records and returns arrest and conviction information; FDC uses its own records to determine incarceration. That reporting process covers broader release and supervision groups, not just registrants.

The reasons for a return also matter. For probation and community-control proceedings, Florida law defines a technical violation as an alleged supervision violation that is not a new felony, misdemeanor, or criminal traffic offense. Registry violations can be criminal charges, so they should not all be labeled technical violations. A return to prison does not, by itself, tell us whether there was a new sexual offense, a registry charge, another crime, or a supervision violation.

Paid positions connect reporting duties to daily work

The money terms matter. A budget is a spending plan. An allocation assigns an amount to a recipient or purpose. An award approves a grant. Recorded expenses show costs entered in accounting records; confirming that a payment cleared the bank is a separate step. The Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) is a federal program for a broad range of criminal-justice work. Its allocation formula is explained below.

All of this work depends on people. Job postings show duties and advertised pay. Payroll and spending records show which jobs were filled and what was actually paid.

Orange County Sheriff’s Office job 24-00315, opened February 25, 2025, advertised $36,171–$54,537 annually for an Investigative Service Officer in the Sexual Offender Surveillance Squad. Duties included databases, documents, agency and registrant communication, and registration support.

Brevard’s 2026 Registration Specialist posting advertised $17.50 an hour for work involving sexual offenders, sexual predators, and felons. Mixed duties limit how much of the salary can be assigned to one registration category.

A salary notice starts the question; payroll answers more of it. Filled positions, earnings, benefits, overtime, and time spent on mixed assignments would show the cost of the work.

FDLE’s 2025 legislative highlights identify $446,220 from the state’s general operating revenue and staffing equivalent to two full-time jobs for sexual-offender and predator enforcement. The Governor’s FY2025–26 announcement describes the same allocation: count it once. Payroll and spending remain separate questions.

FDLE’s annual registry maintenance and support

FDLE Cabinet reports identify annual software-support purchases. Florida Accountability Contract Tracking System (FACTS), the state’s contract-record database, separately shows maintenance vouchers (accounting entries for payments) for the Florida Offender Alert System (FOAS), its public email-alert service.

Selected FDLE registry support records: three completed fiscal years
Fiscal year Selected registry computer-support purchase FOAS maintenance recorded in FACTS
FY2023–24 $170,000 · C21243 $57,499.76
FY2024–25 $170,000 · C3D3CF $59,224.74
FY2025–26 $170,000 · C5C687 $60,099.96

Each selected computer-support purchase covers July 1–June 30. The first describes systems analysis and programming; later reports list 2,000 information-technology (IT) support hours. These are purchase amounts. FOAS vouchers are grouped by FACTS-assigned fiscal year under C0923 and already included in the vendor subtotal below.

These selected records cover part of FDLE’s registry support. The agency’s FY2025–26 budget summary lists $93,635,754 and 400 positions for the broader Criminal Justice Information program. Calculating a registry-only total would require payroll, contracts, expenses, and a defensible share of costs used by more than one program.

Pinellas shows local spending tied to statewide services

Pinellas’s Sexual Predator and Offender Tracking (SPOT) unit handles registration, paperwork, neighborhood notices, verification, surveillance, and suspected violations. It also handles career offenders, a separate registration category under Florida law, and links FDLE’s statewide searches, maps, and alerts.

SPOT’s career-offender work connects to Florida’s SB 1332 registration changes, effective October 1, 2026. Senate staff describe requirements “similar to those for sexual offenders and sexual predators.” Expanded reporting, annual registration visits, and penalties for specified failures add to the reporting and enforcement cycle. The legal designations remain separate.

Pinellas SPOT: adopted budget and reported actual spending
FY2024–25 measure Amount Evidence type
Adopted budget $1,848,601 Spending authority in the adopted column.
Reported actual expenditures $1,621,403 Personnel $1,616,249 plus operations $5,154.
Actual below adopted amount $227,198 Calculated comparison; not a verified final available balance.

Reported spending was $227,198 below the adopted budget. Final or amended budgets and an explanation are needed to establish why. That difference alone does not show that grant money was returned.

SPOT’s mixed duties prevent treating its whole-unit cost as sexual-offender registry spending.

Pinellas grant letters report JAG awards for SPOT personnel: $105,000 under 2019-JAGC-3405 (October 10, 2019 letter; FY2018–19 amendment request) and $100,000 under 2020-JAGC-3625 (September 22, 2020 letter; FY2019–20). Payroll, approved amendments, and records assigning costs to the funded work would show how the awards were used.

Four adopted budgets for two county tracking programs

The next table follows the same two county programs across four adopted-budget years, FY2023–24 through FY2026–27. These amounts show approved spending plans, separate from actual costs.

Published adopted budgets for two named county tracking programs
Program FY2023–24 FY2024–25 FY2025–26 FY2026–27
Pinellas SPOT unit $1,752,977 $1,848,601 $1,807,441 $1,728,221
Polk Sexual Offender/Predator Tracking $271,047 $276,984 $297,882 $302,674

These two programs are examples, not a statewide cost ranking. Pinellas includes career offenders. Polk lists General Fund support and 2.1 funded positions. Their duties and accounting differ, so the totals cannot be treated as identical measures of registry work.

Grant agreements, funding-source ledgers, spending, and closeout records would show each program’s federal share and use of funds.

Vendor contracts maintain a public notification component

The software also has an ongoing cost. FDLE records identify Watch Systems LLC as a FOAS maintenance vendor. Contract C0923 describes custom-built proprietary software using OffenderWatch technology and FDLE’s stated support and warranty arrangement.

C2119 specifies $13,750 quarterly payments in arrears, meaning payment after the service period. Later C0923 terms specify $15,024.99 quarterly, with credits tied to availability.

Selected FOAS voucher and accounting records
Official record Entries Recorded total after adjustments
C1413 / FDLE-014-13 32 $329,533.42
C2119 / FDLE-021-19 14 $192,500.00
C0923 / FDLE-009-23 14 $205,149.46
Purchase order C09A45 1 $14,162.50
Total of these extracted records 61 $741,345.38

These records span January 31, 2013–July 21, 2026: 57 positive vendor voucher entries and four signed reversal or accounting-adjustment entries. Voucher dates do not establish when a payment cleared the bank. The separate purchase-order voucher has different identifiers; agency confirmation would resolve possible duplication elsewhere.

Florida’s Department of Financial Services (DFS) lists a $15,024.99 warrant (a state payment order) to Watch Systems LLC under C0923, dated July 22, 2026. Document D7000027101 matches the prior day’s FACTS voucher. It corroborates an existing amount, not additional spending; no bank-clearing date is shown.

C0923’s original contract ceiling—the maximum authorized amount—was $175,099.48. An approved amendment raised it to $220,174.45. Its recorded accounting total is $205,149.46. These figures describe the same arrangement and must not be added together.

Jacksonville lists two finally closed purchase orders: 695125-25, June 30, 2025, $19,335.67 for an annual OffenderWatch subscription; and 673500-24, March 4, 2024, $6,100 for a sexual-offender mailout. Invoices, vouchers, and records of payments sent would help verify payments.

Local fees create another funding connection

Putnam Ordinance 2025-021, adopted August 26, 2025, sets $50 for new initial registrations, $25 per periodic re-registration, and $10 for address changes outside scheduled registration, with listed exemptions. People unable to pay must still be registered and receive an invoice. It takes effect upon state filing; that date was not recovered.

Jacksonville publishes a $25 registration charge. In OPPAGA’s 2024 survey, seven of 50 responding sheriff’s offices (of 67 statewide) charged fees: $15–$75 initially and $5–$25 for re-registration. Uses included general funds and registration costs.

Fees put some of the cost directly on registrants. Collection ledgers, waivers, unpaid balances, and fund transfers would show how much was collected and where it went.

The cost of following the rules

The cost of complying also includes time. OPPAGA’s survey found 57% of registration locations operated during regular business hours. For someone working those hours, a visit may require travel and time away from work.

Among responding offices reporting transient populations, 33% cited residency restrictions—rules limiting where someone can live—as a contributing factor to transience. Those responses do not establish why any particular person became homeless.

Florida law requires sexual offenders maintaining a transient residence to report in person at the sheriff’s office every 30 days. Each visit also creates information for the office to process. Housing stability, reporting duties, and verification work are connected.

Federal standards have a financial connection

Sections 943.0435(6) and 775.21(8) tie verification systems to applicable federal standards, including conditions attached to Florida’s receipt of federal funds.

Section 943.0436(1) records legislative concern that unmet federal requirements can jeopardize public-safety funding. Whether money was actually lost in a particular year requires the allocation and implementation records.

The Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA) uses a baseline JAG formula that weights population and reported violent crime equally for states. Direct local allocations depend on the local share of reported violent crime. Registry-compliance adjustments are separate.

SORNA, the federal Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act, connects implementation to funding. SMART describes an annually assessed 10% reduction in the applicable state-side JAG allocation for nonimplementation, with specified exceptions. Separate direct local allocations are generally unaffected. Compliant jurisdictions can receive bonuses from those reductions.

OPPAGA reports a $491,477 Florida compliance bonus in federal FY2023; the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) lists a $464,968 SORNA bonus allocation for FY2024. Award budgets and spending ledgers would show their use across JAG’s eligible purposes.

Implementation incentives do not establish payments per registrant, address check, or arrest. Additional local rules have separate authority.

SMART says SORNA’s minimum requirements depend on the offenses covered by the law. Risk assessment can inform supervision, treatment, and some notification decisions. This does not make every Florida rule federally required or identify a particular Florida assessment tool.

Four years of broader federal criminal-justice funding

Federal FY2023–FY2026 are the latest four published JAG allocation years. They show a broad criminal-justice funding stream. The allocation tables do not identify how much supported registry work.

Federal source: Congress approves JAG funding through federal spending laws. The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) administers it through the Office of Justice Programs (OJP) and BJA.

State-administered awards go through FDLE for approved state projects and local subawards—grants the state passes on to local recipients. Eligible counties and cities receive separate direct local BJA awards. Both routes are DOJ funding; allocation tables do not identify registry spending.

Florida JAG allocations: state-administered and direct local funding
Federal fiscal year State-administered allocation Direct local allocations Combined Florida allocation
2023 $12,421,604 $6,890,099 $19,311,703
2024 $10,717,097 $5,808,926 $16,526,023
2025 $11,948,239 $6,587,011 $18,535,250
2026 $10,944,598 $5,846,520 $16,791,118
Four-year sum $46,031,538 $25,132,556 $71,164,094

Florida’s combined four-year allocation is $71.16 million. The state column includes local pass-throughs, meaning funds the state passes on to local recipients. Signed grant awards, drawdowns (cash requested from an approved federal award), and spending records would verify receipt and use.

SORNA and Prison Rape Elimination Act adjustments may be included in published allocations; never add included bonuses again. Separate FY2025 and FY2026 SORNA bonus amounts were not independently verified.

The five largest county-government direct allocations

The table follows the five largest county-government direct allocations in FY2026 back through FY2023. Rankings in earlier years may differ.

Leading county-government direct JAG allocations, ranked by FY2026
FY2026 rank County government FY2023 FY2024 FY2025 FY2026
1 Miami-Dade $517,346 $383,023 $444,854 $477,515
2 Orange $438,256 $383,673 $445,105 $273,714
3 Hillsborough $168,612 $148,372 $172,129 $160,998
4 Escambia $137,684 $121,157 $140,556 $129,041
5 Pasco $134,699 $118,530 $137,509 $126,243

These broad allocations are already in Florida’s direct local totals. County applications and approved budgets would identify any registry use.

BJA classifies Jacksonville as municipal, so its $510,251 FY2026 allocation is outside this county ranking. Joint-group totals are also excluded; all five selected counties are outside those groups. This ranks named county governments, not every federal dollar reaching their geographic areas.

Population and reported violent crime, eligibility, and annual congressional funding decisions affect JAG allocations. To see the size and spending of a registry unit, the public needs its program budget, payroll, and grant records.

Newer grant priorities include registry work

Executive Order 14321, July 24, 2025, directed departments to assess lawful discretionary-grant priorities, including SORNA compliance and mapping and checking registrants without fixed addresses.

BJA’s FY25 and FY2026 Public Safety and Mental Health Initiative notices use that criterion. Qualifying state applicants may request priority consideration; it does not guarantee funding.

Those initiatives also cover crisis response, treatment, housing access, and related services. A Florida award and approved budget would identify any registry share.

The FY25 SMART implementation-grant notice covers technology, collaboration, verification, and corrections to national records. Its measures include training, accessible records, transmissions, and information exchanges. The Florida award below shows planned work; the notice’s requirements for keeping that work going are discussed later.

A Florida award shows the planned work

The official federal award record for FDLE’s grant for registry work lists $399,993 committed for a project running March 1, 2026–February 28, 2029. Planned uses include 1 staff member, partner-agency training, software, supplies, and other registry support.

The project plans work across several years. The committed amount is not a verified payment total. Grant financial reports and FDLE’s accounting records would show what was paid and how it was used.

Palm Beach shows the difference between an award and spending

Palm Beach’s October 19, 2010 packet documents award 2010-WP-BX-0006: $150,000 for Comprehensive Approaches to Sex Offender Management. Its strategy included risk-based management, registration compliance, training, equipment, supplies, contracts, and overtime through the sheriff’s grant fund.

County audits list expenditures of $37,553 in FY2011, $41,820 in FY2012, $7,853 in FY2013, and $55,120 in FY2014: $142,346 combined.

The $150,000 award and $142,346 in expenses describe overlapping money. They cannot be added together. Amendments and closeout records would explain the remaining difference; the subtraction alone does not show unused or returned funds.

Federal support can also reach a local operation

An April 16, 2024 U.S. Marshals account describes an August 19, 2019 discussion about a sex-offender operation it was funding for St. Johns County. It gives no amount, award identifier, invoice, or payment date.

An agreement, reimbursement limits, claims, payroll or equipment records, and payment records would establish what the operation cost and who paid. An agency-wide budget cannot answer that operation-specific question.

What “use it or lose it” means for a grant

BJA’s August 2026 guidance requires JAG funds to be legally committed during the project period, which can span years. Properly incurred obligations—costs the grant recipient has legally agreed to pay—must be paid within 120 days afterward. Uncommitted or unspent funds, including interest, must be returned at closeout, the final accounting and reporting when a grant ends.

DOJ allows justified extensions without additional funding, but not solely to use an uncommitted balance.

That is the documented “use it or lose it” rule. To find out whether a deadline affected an operation, follow its award, project dates, approved activities, amendments, balances, obligations, extensions, and closeout reports. The rule does not establish that arrests are required to retain funding, or that county operating budgets follow the same deadlines.

Why the infrastructure keeps operating

The work does not end with one appointment, one employee, or one grant. Florida law assigns continuing duties, agencies maintain the systems, and later budgets and grant applications decide how the work will be supported. One person leaving the registry does not automatically end those wider functions.

The federal connection is recurring. SMART assesses SORNA implementation annually; failure to maintain substantial implementation—meeting SORNA’s implementation standard as determined by DOJ—can reduce the applicable state-side JAG allocation by 10%. JAG’s baseline formula uses population and reported violent crime, not registry headcount. A person leaving the registry is not a per-person deduction from that formula.

The separate FY2025 SMART funding notice asks applicants to explain how their program and grant-funded positions will continue after the award ends. That plan—called sustainability—carries 5% of the application review score. It concerns continuing the work and positions, rather than retaining a named employee. It supports planned continuity without guaranteeing permanent funding or jobs.

If a state declines JAG, the money has another route

Federal law expressly addresses a state choosing not to participate. Under 34 U.S.C. §10156(f), after the Attorney General makes the required determination, the state’s allocation—or the relevant portion—must be awarded to local governments within that state. Priority goes to jurisdictions with the highest annual numbers of reported Part 1 violent crimes over the three most recent available calendar years.

Withdrawal can change who receives the money and which projects it supports. Eligible local governments also have a separate direct JAG application route. Leaving the state-administered program does not automatically remove JAG funding from Florida’s geographic area. These remain broad criminal-justice funds; approved local budgets would identify any registry use.

Ending an existing award also leaves termination and closeout responsibilities: written notice, final reports, matching the accounting records to those reports, and returning excess cash received from the award. Unspent award balances are cancelled; costs found ineligible under the grant rules may have to be repaid. Leaving the program does not automatically require repayment of every properly spent dollar. Federal property rules and continuing audit responsibilities can also apply.

The legal duties are another layer. Florida’s registration law continues to assign work to FDLE and local agencies independently of accepting JAG. Federal SORNA rules can separately apply to covered individuals even when their jurisdiction does not substantially implement SORNA. State removal and federal duties therefore need separate examination.

This is a hypothetical funding route. It shows how the work can continue through different sources of money. The infrastructure can change, but ending a grant relationship alone does not change the laws assigning the work.

The public deserves clear answers

These records connect county offices, state agencies, national databases, and paid services. The public deserves to know who handles the information, how errors are corrected, where the money goes, and what the work accomplishes.

Florida requires OPPAGA to review registry effectiveness every three years and identify corrective options and projected costs when it finds deficiencies. That review should help show whether mistakes are corrected and people can comply.

This is still only the tip of the iceberg. More of this infrastructure needs to be traced, including registry-specific county costs, actual grant spending, correction notices, and enforcement outcomes. These records affect people’s homes, jobs, travel, and families. The people living under these rules deserve clear answers and dignity.

Research scope and calculation notes — click to open

The courts-and-corrections section uses 2026 Florida Statutes §§943.0435(9), 948.001(3), and 948.06(1)(c), plus FDC’s July 2026 quarterly report. The electronic-monitoring minimums apply to the violations and dates covered by §943.0435(9)(b), excluding subsection (13). The FDC–FDLE exchange is a broader criminal-justice reporting process, not proof of registry-only outcomes or unrestricted SOPS access. No unfinished cohort findings, statewide cost estimates, or forecasts are treated as established results.

Research dated October 4–5, 2026; factual, editorial, calculation, and link checks completed October 5. These are selected examples, not a statewide estimate. The findings are supported by research and the public records linked throughout this article.

“Direct local” in these tables means BJA’s federal route. FDLE’s separately named JAG Direct program belongs to its state-administered pass-through route.

JAG years are federal FY2023–FY2026. State-administered totals include pass-throughs: $46,031,538, plus $25,132,556 direct local, equals $71,164,094. County amounts and included bonuses overlap these totals. Separate FY2025/FY2026 SORNA bonuses remain unverified, not assumed zero.

County ranking: select the five largest of 39 numeric County Direct Allocation rows in BJA’s FY2026 list, then trace those counties back three years. Exclude municipalities and joint totals; all five are outside joint groups.

County program figures are adopted budgets for FY2023–24–FY2026–27. Pinellas’s cost center changed from 3041 to 3220. Mixed duties and shared costs limit comparison. Actuals, budgets, grants, fees, and pay retain separate labels.

The address-update illustration is hypothetical and follows documented functions; it does not describe a real case or every reporting duty. Population is an October 2024 snapshot. The audit was in 2022, with documented corrections. Download guidance dates to August 2025. The DFS warrant corroborates an existing voucher; it adds no spending.

CJNET findings use public laws, agency descriptions, dated guides, security policies, and the mobile-app listing. Internal permissions, actual logging, and complete individual access histories were not verified. The 2023 guide is separate from later reporting duties.

Calculated comparisons: Pinellas budget less actuals, $227,198; Palm Beach audits, $142,346; signed FDLE accounting entries, $741,345.38. These are separate, overlapping measures and are not combined into a registry-cost total.

FDLE support covers three completed fiscal years, FY2023–24–FY2025–26. Follow one selected computer-support purchase per year. FOAS uses FACTS-assigned fiscal years, including vouchers dated after June 30; four rows per year were recalculated. FOAS is already in the C0923 subtotal. The broader Criminal Justice Information budget is context.

FDLE award 15PSMA25GG02134AWAX was checked against the official USAspending record on October 5, 2026. Its award-level federal payment total (outlay) is missing; a separate account-level field reports zero. Neither establishes FDLE’s actual expenses. The $399,993 commitment is not treated as verified spending or added to payroll, contracts, or JAG allocations. Survey percentages describe responding offices or their registration locations. The historical conviction rates group arrests by year.

The infrastructure cycle summarizes documented relationships, not a claim that all JAG funds support registration. State withdrawal is hypothetical; §10156(f) addresses funding rerouting after a federal determination. State removal and federal SORNA duties are separate questions. Amounts are nominal dollars, meaning they have not been adjusted for inflation. This is descriptive research, not a causal analysis of funding and arrests. Sources are linked directly in the text and tables. Read laws and fee provisions in full.

Florida registry research · Reviewed October 5, 2026

The post Florida’s Registry: The Rules, Records and Money That Keep It Running appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

]]> https://floridaactioncommittee.org/florida-registry-rules-records-money/feed/ 13 28413 ⚡ Media Tuesday #4— The Buzz: After the Call Part Two, FAC v. Glass & Registry News https://floridaactioncommittee.org/media-tuesday-after-the-call-part-two/ https://floridaactioncommittee.org/media-tuesday-after-the-call-part-two/#comments Tue, 06 Oct 2026 12:30:15 +0000 https://floridaactioncommittee.org/?p=28416 Florida Action Committee Media ⚡ MEDIA TUESDAY — THE BUZZ Tuesday, October 6, 2026 Media • Legal Developments • Community • Ways to Take Action This week, we pick up where After the Call left off. We heard what a threatening call can do to a person and their family. Part Two asks what help should follow, and whether the

The post ⚡ Media Tuesday #4— The Buzz: After the Call Part Two, FAC v. Glass & Registry News appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

]]>
Florida Action Committee Media

⚡ MEDIA TUESDAY — THE BUZZ

Tuesday, October 6, 2026

Media • Legal Developments • Community • Ways to Take Action

This week, we pick up where After the Call left off. We heard what a threatening call can do to a person and their family. Part Two asks what help should follow, and whether the people targeted are receiving the protection they deserve.

We also have a quick update on FAC’s lawsuit, four recent FAC articles worth catching up on, national stories to follow, and a few ways each of us can help keep this work moving.

 

Don’t miss the latest report on Florida’s Registry: Rules, Records and Public Money, dropping on the FAC website today at 9 am EST! 📝🏛 #Florida #Registry #Records #Money

This Week’s Lead

🎬 After the Call — Part Two

TUESDAY, OCTOBER 6 • 10:00 AM EASTERN

The warning is a beginning. What happens after someone asks for help?

Part Two asks what help should follow a scam threat: clear reporting, dependable follow-up, and support for affected families. It connects that question to dignity, reentry, and the responsibility to protect people whose registry information is publicly exposed.

Public safety should include the person reporting a crime, regardless of the label beside their name.

▶ Watch Full Part Two

⚡ Need info but no time? Click here

Before Part Two: A Quick Look Back

🎬 After the Call — Part One

Part One shows how callers impersonating law enforcement use arrest threats and demands for money to frighten registrants and families. The call ends, but the fear and stress can remain.

▶ Watch Full Part One

FAC Legal Update

⚖ FAC v. Glass: A Trial Date and an Amended Complaint

Our September 29 weekly update reports a November 8, 2027 trial date and a June 1, 2027 deadline for summary-judgment motions. The judge encouraged filing those motions at the earliest appropriate time.

The amended complaint adds a civil-conspiracy claim and describes Florida’s registry as an interconnected system of state laws, local ordinances, registration duties, and coordinated enforcement. Please read last week’s weekly update below.

We thank you for all your help and for every declaration submitted. A special thank-you to our Legal Committee for all their efforts and tireless work on this case.

Read the Weekly Update

Follow the Case

National Watch

🇺🇸 Beyond Florida: Two Stories Worth Reading

COMMUNITY & REENTRY • SEPTEMBER 28 COMMENTARY

When insurance concerns shape who can worship

In a NARSOL commentary, Matt Snell examines how insurance coverage, liability concerns, and risk-management advice can influence whether people on the registry are welcomed into houses of worship.

He argues that institutions need to consider what their commitments to dignity and restoration mean in practice. He also recognizes the responsibility to maintain safeguards and address actual risks.

This is an opinion piece, rather than a new law or court ruling. It is worth reading alongside our conversation about rebuilding a life: community support matters, and access to that support can depend on decisions made well beyond a courtroom.

Read Matt Snell’s “Insured Against Grace” →

CALIFORNIA • OCTOBER 5 REPORT • COURT WATCH

Housing instability and a failure-to-register case

According to Davis Vanguard, a Yolo County judge on October 2 declined to dismiss a felony failure-to-register charge against an unhoused man. His public defender argued that the requirements were unreasonable for people without stable housing and raised concerns about competency restoration and access to treatment.

The prosecutor opposed dismissal, arguing that monitoring served public safety. The judge denied the dismissal motion, and the report describes a referral to CARE Court with a hearing set for October 30.

This is a pending case. The defense’s arguments are not court findings. It brings a practical question into view: when someone is struggling with housing and treatment, what response will help them comply and become more stable?

Read Rowan Barnell’s Davis Vanguard report →

In Case You Missed These

📰 Four Recent FAC Articles Worth Reading

These articles help explain the questions behind this week’s video: what the law requires, what enforcement accomplishes, and what happens to the people living under those rules.

“It’s the Law”: The Human Side of Registry Enforcement

Published October 4, this FAC commentary looks at the difficult questions facing officers and families. It brings together law-enforcement perspectives, housing concerns, and the responsibility of lawmakers to examine the rules they create. An arrest can be legally authorized while still leaving serious questions about whether the law helped anyone become safer or resolved the problem in a humane way.

Read “It’s the Law”

FDLE Registry Enforcement History Under Mark Glass and Its Continued Burdens

Published October 2, this public-records analysis follows enforcement during Glass’s leadership and the reporting burdens that continue after a change at the top. It separates registration allegations from new sexual-offense allegations and puts arrest announcements alongside legal duties and family experiences. The public deserves to know what the numbers actually represent and what the system achieved.

Read the Mark Glass Analysis

Pinellas Deputies Accused of Police Database Misuse

FAC’s October 3 report examines two separate cases involving former deputies accused of using police databases for personal reasons. It asks who checks access to sensitive information and how improper searches are discovered. The charges remain allegations; neither case establishes retaliation against a registrant. The broader question matters to our community: what safeguards protect people from misuse of government access?

Read the Pinellas Report

Common sense arrives in Australia

In its October 5 commentary, FAC reports concerns raised about a proposed public-notification law in Australia. Critics question whether public identification could create false reassurance, encourage vigilantism, and make housing, employment, and reintegration harder. The proposal is still being debated. It gives readers another example of lawmakers asking whether a tougher-sounding policy actually reduces harm.

Read the Australia Article

This Tuesday

✅ Three Things You Can Do

1. Watch and share Part Two. Help get the scam-prevention conversation to a family, caregiver, or community member who could use it.

2. Sign and share the petition. Already signed? Send it to someone new and tell them why you added your name.

3. Help us follow the stories. Send FAC Media a source link, a local development, or an experience you think deserves attention. Let us know whether we may share your account publicly.

📧 Contact FAC Media

Make an Impact

Two Ways to Move This Work Forward

🌎 Add Your Voice

Help the U.N. Petition Reach 10,000

9,667

VERIFIED SIGNATURES

Just 333 more signatures to reach 10,000

Count checked October 5, 2026

The petition asks the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to investigate public sex-offender registration in the United States and the human-rights concerns it raises.

Already signed? Share it with someone new and tell them why you added your name.

🎥 Let people hear from you. You can also upload a short video on the petition page to share what you think and why this matters to you. A few words in your own voice can help others understand the people behind the signatures. If you can, please share your video and the petition with others.

✍ Sign, Comment & Share →

💛 Fuel the Work

Support FAC’s Work

Your support helps sustain FAC’s litigation, media, research, public education, and advocacy.

LEGAL FUNDRAISING GOAL

$134,163 raised

Toward our $170,000 goal

79% reached • $35,837 to go

FAC fundraising figures as of October 1, 2026

💚 Please Donate to the FAC Legal Fund →

Tax-Deductible Giving

For information about making a tax-deductible donation through Florida Action Foundation, Inc., a 501(c)(3) organization, contact the Foundation.

Admin@floridaactionfoundation.org

TWO THOUGHTS FOR THIS WEEK

Today, I could not decide between two quotes I have saved and liked over the years, so I am sharing both.

“My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together.”

— Desmond Tutu
Source: Global Fund for Children

“The opposite of love is not hate, it’s indifference.”

— Elie Wiesel
Source: The Elie Wiesel Foundation

These words belong alongside this week’s stories. People on the registry and their families still need safe homes, community support, and reliable help when someone threatens them. Those needs deserve attention from a system that says it exists to protect the public.

Keep asking the questions. Keep sharing the facts. Keep making room for the people behind the labels.

FLORIDA ACTION COMMITTEE

INFORMATION. PARTICIPATION. COMMUNITY.
WITH UNITY COMES CHANGE.

FAC Website •
FAC YouTube •
FAC v. Glass
U.N. Petition •
Donate •
Contact Media

The post ⚡ Media Tuesday #4— The Buzz: After the Call Part Two, FAC v. Glass & Registry News appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

]]> https://floridaactioncommittee.org/media-tuesday-after-the-call-part-two/feed/ 1 28416 FDLE Registry Enforcement History Under Mark Glass and Its Continued Burdens https://floridaactioncommittee.org/fdle-registry-enforcement-mark-glass-burdens/ https://floridaactioncommittee.org/fdle-registry-enforcement-mark-glass-burdens/#comments Sat, 03 Oct 2026 00:48:17 +0000 https://floridaactioncommittee.org/?p=28370 Florida Action Committee • Friday Wrap-Up FDLE Registry Enforcement History Under Mark Glass and Its Continued Burdens Friday, October 2, 2026 • Opinion & Analysis Based on Public Records View all dropdown sections ▾ Sources and next OPPAGA report▾ How the estimated years were calculated▾ Open all 118 operation entries and source links▾ Open the 12 verified uses of “targeted”

The post FDLE Registry Enforcement History Under Mark Glass and Its Continued Burdens appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

]]>

Florida Action Committee • Friday Wrap-Up

FDLE Registry Enforcement History Under Mark Glass
and Its Continued Burdens

Friday, October 2, 2026 • Opinion & Analysis Based on Public Records

View all dropdown sections

Choose a section, then tap its arrow to open it.

About this article: Opinion and commentary grounded in cited public records and reported data. Estimates and allegations are labeled; editorial questions and conclusions are presented as analysis.

The history of registry enforcement under Mark Glass begins when he became acting FDLE commissioner on May 1, 2022. He was appointed commissioner on August 23 that year. The September 2026 leadership transition ended his tenure. This article follows the public operation record through September, with sources checked October 2, 2026. For people listed as sexual offenders or legally designated as sexual predators, those years were lived through reporting deadlines, enforcement checks and requirements that reached into jobs, housing and family life. A change in leadership does not end those burdens.

Glass’s 2025 accomplishments release presents arrests as successes. To understand the enforcement history, the public needs to know what those arrests involved. Was a new sexual crime alleged, or was it a registration violation? How did the case end, and what happened to the household afterward? Public announcements and OPPAGA’s statewide findings provide a starting point. What is still needed is a fuller account of the results: what kept people safe, what worked and what the people living through the enforcement experienced.

Victims of sexual abuse deserve justice, support and protection from further harm. People who have completed their sentences also need a fair chance to rebuild. A failure-to-register charge alleges a violation of a registration duty; it does not, by itself, allege a new sexual act. Some operations include other charges, which must be identified separately. Rules covering moves, jobs, vehicles, identification and online activity continue to govern people’s lives. Even someone trying hard to follow them can miss a requirement and face another felony case. The examples in this article show why those circumstances deserve to be heard.

OPPAGA’s Statewide Registration-Violation Arrests

2022
2,261
Reported statewide registration-violation arrest events
2023
2,220
Reported statewide registration-violation arrest events

All Florida agencies are included. These are annual arrest events, not a count of different people or arrests by FDLE alone. Glass began as acting commissioner on May 1, 2022; the 2022 figure includes months before he took over.

Before looking at operations during Glass’s tenure, it helps to see the longer statewide history. OPPAGA’s analysis of FDLE data shows about 38% growth in registration-violation arrest events from 2014 to 2023, with fluctuations between years. Much of that period predates Glass. The arrest figures describe the system he inherited and enforced, but they cannot show whether an arrest prevented harm or what a family experienced afterward. OPPAGA also reports aggregate convictions; those findings belong in the conversation, while the outcome of each operation and its effect on safety still need to be explained. A lower conviction rate does not, by itself, establish that arrests were wrongful.

Florida Registration Arrests and Community Population, 2014–2023

The table puts three things together for each year: reported registration-violation arrests, the community registrant population and a comparison of the two. The community count includes people legally classified as sexual offenders and sexual predators, both under supervision and after their sentences have been served.

The percentage is the arrest count divided by the community population, multiplied by 100. For example, 7.24% means about 7.24 arrest events for every 100 community registrants. It does not mean 7.24% of residents were arrested: one person may have more than one arrest, and the arrest records have not been matched to the people in the population snapshot. It is not a sexual reoffending rate.

Annual arrest events compared with Florida’s community registrant population
Year Registration-
violation
arrests		 Community
registrants		 Arrests ÷
population (%)
2014–2021: Before Glass became FDLE commissioner
2014 1,612 ~25,828
Estimated		 ~6.24%
2015 1,469 26,845
Published		 5.47%
2016 1,509 ~27,413
Estimated		 ~5.50%
2017 2,068 ~27,980
Estimated		 ~7.39%
2018 2,171 28,548
Published		 7.60%
2019 2,234 ~29,092
Estimated		 ~7.68%
2020 1,832 ~29,636
Estimated		 ~6.18%
2021 2,193 30,180
Published		 7.27%
2022–2023: Glass’s tenure began during 2022
2022 2,261 ~30,422
Estimated		 ~7.43%
2023 2,220 ~30,665
Estimated		 ~7.24%

Reading this table fairly: Mark Glass was not FDLE commissioner during 2014–2021. He became acting commissioner on May 1, 2022, and was appointed commissioner on August 23, 2022. The 2022 figure covers the whole calendar year, including January through April before he took over. These are statewide arrest counts across all Florida agencies, so they should not be presented as arrests made by Glass or FDLE alone.

Published: the population comes from an OPPAGA snapshot taken in that year (2015, 2018 or 2021). Estimated (~): the population was calculated between published snapshots; its percentage is also an estimate. All ten arrest counts are reported figures. The population figures are snapshots, rather than annual averages.

Sources and next OPPAGA report

Sources: OPPAGA Report 24-11, Exhibit 13: registration-violation arrests and Exhibit 5: community populations. The 2023 arrest count is the exhibit’s exact figure, 2,220; nearby report text rounds it to 2,200. These statewide arrest figures cover all Florida agencies and begin before Glass’s tenure. They are separate from the selected operation announcements.

The available annual arrest series ends in 2023. OPPAGA’s 30,907 community population is from October 2024; it is not a verified 2026 count.

Based on the three-year review cycle and the December 2024 report, the next OPPAGA report is estimated for December 2027, with no confirmed release date.

How the estimated years were calculated

Missing populations are interpolated in a straight line between the nearest OPPAGA snapshots: 23,793 in 2012; 26,845 in 2015; 28,548 in 2018; 30,180 in 2021; and 30,907 in 2024. This assumes smooth changes. Estimated counts are rounded for display; ratios use the unrounded estimates.

Snapshots are not annual average populations. The arrest events have not been linked person by person to the community population. Exact annual snapshots and linked FDLE records would be needed to measure distinct resident arrest incidence.

Published-year cross-checks: 2015 report, 2018 report and 2021 report. The latest report’s historical series supplies all interpolation anchors consistently.

A complete May 2022–September 2026 arrest total, including how many arrests had no companion sexual charge, remains unverified. The FDLE criminal-history reporting portal offers broader records, but answering those questions requires linked arrest events, complete charge records and checks for repeat arrests. The table gives useful context, but it cannot tell readers how many different people were arrested, how many families were affected or how many cases ended in convictions.

After the Sentence Has Been Served

OPPAGA’s October 2024 community snapshot placed 24,135 of 30,907 community registrants in the category “Sentence Served – Required to Register.” That works out to 78.1%, nearly four out of five. This describes the 2024 community population; it is not an arrest rate, a reoffending rate or a current risk assessment.

For someone trying to move forward, this distinction is lived every day: the sentence can be over while the registry remains. A job, children or a lawful home may be signs of rebuilding, yet a change in any of those circumstances can bring a reporting deadline and the possibility of a felony charge. For most of the community population in OPPAGA’s 2024 snapshot, completing the sentence did not end registration. That continuing obligation is part of the burden this history needs to explain.

The Enforcement Record During Glass’s Tenure

The statewide figures provide context; the announcements below show how enforcement was carried out and described during Glass’s tenure. Every entry links to its source. Some releases combine registration charges, probation violations and other crimes. Some include repeat arrests or warrants served on people already in custody. Those details can disappear in a headline, even though they change what the arrest count means. The figures remain separate because charges differ and cases can overlap; adding them together would produce a misleading total. These mixed announcements do not establish a total of arrests involving only registration violations.

This history also needs to be clear about responsibility. Glass led FDLE, which participated in many of these operations. Sheriffs and municipal police have separate authority, while FDLE’s statewide registry, information sharing and joint operations connect their enforcement activities. The tables identify reported FDLE involvement and distinguish operations led by other agencies, so readers can see who carried out the enforcement and who was responsible for the decisions.

The entries use operation dates where available and announcement dates otherwise. Updated totals replace earlier figures, and overlapping components are identified. This is the public record located for the article, including follow-ups. It does not capture every arrest in Florida.

The located public record becomes fuller in the later years. 2026 already matches the 2025 entry count in these tables. There are more announcements for readers to examine, but an announcement count is not a measure of statewide enforcement growth. Coverage, components and announcement practices differ. The question remains what these operations achieved and what their consequences were for the people involved.

2022 (partial)8
202312
202426
202536
2026 (through September)36

Entries include operation components and follow-ups. Coverage and announcement dates differ; 2022 is a partial tenure record. These counts do not measure statewide growth. Bad Apple began before Glass took office; its full count cannot be attributed to his tenure.

Open all 118 operation entries and source links

2022

Public arrest announcements: 2022
Date / period Operation and location Announced arrest figure What the announcement covers
2022-03-28 to 2022-06-10 Operation Bad Apple
Osceola		 56 Local / federal partners: registry restrictions and other allegations. Began March 28, before Glass became acting commissioner; entire count cannot be attributed to his tenure.
2022-06 Operation Child Protector II
Polk		 12 Local / partners: online child-sex sting; includes later warrant arrests outside Florida.
2022-08 Operation Cyber Scumbag
Volusia		 3 Local / federal partners: alleged travel to meet minors; additional drug allegation in one case.
2022-08 to 2022-09 Operation Cyber Guardian II
Polk		 13 FDLE / partners: online child-sex sting and related warrant arrests.
2022-09 Operation Keystroke
Nassau		 11 FDLE / partners: online child-sex sting; figure reported in sheriff annual report.
2022-10 Hillsborough joint Halloween operation
Hillsborough		 40 FDLE / partners: registry and probation checks; published charge groups overlap.
2022-10 Polk Halloween compliance initiative
Polk		 13 Local / partners: registry, probation and other allegations. Outstanding warrant is excluded from the arrest count.
2022-10-31 Operation Safe Night
Osceola		 7 FDLE / partners: registrant Halloween / probation compliance; individual charge breakdown unavailable.

2023

Public arrest announcements: 2023
Date / period Operation and location Announced arrest figure What the announcement covers
2023 Operation Peer-to-Prison
Hillsborough		 4 Local / partners: CSAM investigations plus a drug-only companion arrest; mixed headline.
2023-02 Operation Child Protector III
Polk		 30 FDLE / partners: mixed registrant-compliance and new sexual-offense cases; outstanding warrants are not added.
2023-03 Operation Lucky Strike
Citrus		 12 FDLE / partners: online child-sex sting plus a drug-only companion arrest; mixed headline.
2023-04 Operation April’s Fools
Okaloosa		 7 Local / partners: online child-sex sting.
2023-05 Operation M.A.P. Mirage
Marion		 20 FDLE / partners: online child-sex sting; includes a reporting allegation alongside new sexual allegations.
2023-05 Operation May’s Monsters
Polk		 8 Local / partners: new CSAM-possession allegations.
2023-05 to 2023-06 Operation C.A.K.E.
Osceola		 9 Local / partners: online child-sex sting; announced aggregate retained.
2023-07-17 to 2023-07-28 Won’t Back Down
Alachua		 9 FDLE / partners: registry compliance and other warrants; headline includes a nonregistrant.
2023-07-21 to 2023-07-23 Operation Cross Country XIII – Bay/Northwest Florida component
Bay		 19 Local / federal partners: child-sex / CSAM operation; component only, not national total. Charge subgroups overlap.
2023-08-02 to 2023-08-06 Operation Shining Light
Clay		 10 Local / federal partners: child-sex / CSAM investigations; some related arrests outside Florida.
2023-09 Operation Child Protector IV
Polk		 6 Local / partners: online child-sex sting with trafficking allegations in some cases.
2023-10 to 2024-01-11 Operation Renewed Hope
Hillsborough		 123 mixed arrests; child-sting subtotal not supplied Local / partners: mixed trafficking, prostitution and online child-sex investigations; spans 2023-2024.

2024

Public arrest announcements: 2024
Date / period Operation and location Announced arrest figure What the announcement covers
2024 (announced December 19) Operation Lifeguard
Leon		 15 arrested FDLE / partners: online child-sex sting, with CSAM allegations in some cases.
2024-01 to 2024-02-16 Thin Ice
Wakulla		 10 FDLE / partners: registry compliance checks.
2024-02 Polk February 2024 registry compliance initiative
Polk		 14 listed arrested; 2 listed wanted (16 charged/headline) Local / partners: vehicle, license, address and reporting allegations; roster includes other charges. Wanted subjects excluded.
2024-02-22 to 2024-03-13 Operation Child Protector V – online component
Polk		 8 arrested in online component Local / partners: online child-sex cohort; separate from companion registry initiative.
2024-02-23 to 2024-04-03 Operation Kessel Run
Escambia, Santa Rosa, Okaloosa
Related source 1		 13 cumulative (12 initially plus 1 follow-up) FDLE / partners: online child-sex / CSAM allegations; cumulative follow-up replaces initial announcement.
2024-03-05 Catch-Up
Jefferson		 3 FDLE / partners: registry and probation allegations.
2024-04 Operation Valiant Knights
Duval
Related source 1		 27 arrested FDLE / partners: online child-sex sting; reported in sheriff annual report.
2024-04 to 2024-05 Operation Formula One
Miami-Dade		 50 trafficking-related arrests; registry/child subtotal not supplied FDLE / partners: mixed human-trafficking enforcement; no registrant or child-sex subtotal supplied.
2024-04 to 2024-06 Operation Creep Sweep
Volusia		 12 arrested: mixed registry/new-sex cases Local / partners: mixed reporting and new child-sex / CSAM allegations.
2024-04 to 2024-08-08 Operation Cyberstorm
Indian River
Related source 1 / Related source 2		 7 arrests reported; wanted/pending cases excluded Local / partners: new CSAM allegations; wanted / pending cases excluded from completed arrests.
2024-05-06 announcement Operation Cyber Springsting
Citrus
Related source 1		 15 people; 17 arrest events separately reported Local / partners: mixed registration and new sexual allegations; reported people and repeat arrest events are different units.
2024-05 to 2024-08-20 Operation Summer Shield
Hillsborough		 148 mixed trafficking arrests; child/registry subtotal not supplied Local / partners: mixed human-trafficking / prostitution enforcement; no registrant or child-sex subtotal supplied.
2024-06 Operation Spring Cleaning
Leon
Related source 1		 13 reported arrested Local / partners: Leon online child-sex sting; distinct from FDLE registry operation in 2026.
2024-07 Operation Safe Summer – Manatee County
Manatee
Related source 1		 8 arrested Local / partners: online child-sex sting; distinct from Bay operation.
2024-07 Operation Summertime Blues – Marion County
Marion
Related source 1 / Related source 2		 33 initially reported; later counts differ Local / partners: online child-sex sting; later headlines differ and remain unreconciled.
2024-07-11 to 2024-11 Operation Heartbreaker 2
Flagler		 8 cumulative: 4 initial plus 4 warrant arrests FDLE / partners: online child-sex sting; initial and follow-up warrant arrests counted once.
2024-07-17 to 2024-08-05 Operation Safe Summer – Bay County
Bay
Related source 1 / Related source 2		 20 cumulative (19 initially plus 1 follow-up) Local / partners: online child-sex sting; initial and follow-up arrests counted once. Distinct from Manatee operation.
2024-09 Coastal Capture (Florida Safe Halloween component)
Franklin		 7 people; repeat arrest noted FDLE / partners: registry allegations; one person was arrested twice.
2024-09 Duck Duck Goose (Florida Safe Halloween component)
Hardee		 2 FDLE / partners: registry compliance checks.
2024-10 Spooky Sweep
Gadsden		 6 FDLE / partners: registry compliance checks.
2024-10-02 to 2024-10-06 Operation Autumn Sweep – child-sting component
Polk		 3 child-sting arrests; separate 157-person adult cohort Local / partners: online child-sex component only; separate adult prostitution total not added.
2024-10-02 to 2024-10-31 October/Halloween compliance initiative
Polk		 13 Local / partners: registry and probation allegations; some warrant actions involved people already jailed.
2024-10-28 to 2024-10-31 Hernando Halloween Ops Plan 2024
Hernando, Pasco
Original November 1, 2024 release: PDF currently unavailable		 3 FDLE / partners: Halloween checks. The November 1, 2024 release reports 174 home checks with no current violations; the three arrests arose from earlier October findings. Original PDF currently unavailable; agency archive linked.
2024-11 Broken Crayon
Hernando		 9 FDLE / partners: registration and probation allegations.
2024-11 Full Moon
Hillsborough		 27 FDLE / partners: reporting, probation, drug and a harmful-material-to-a-minor allegation.
2024-11 Operation Cold Turkey
Okaloosa		 9 arrested FDLE / partners: online child-sex sting; additional firearm allegation in one case.

2025

Public arrest announcements: 2025
Date / period Operation and location Announced arrest figure What the announcement covers
2025 Operation Criminal Return
Statewide		 More than 230 reported FDLE / ICE: immigration enforcement involving registered people; no FTR charge breakdown. Later repeated figure is not added.
2025 Operation Tidal Wave
Statewide		 1,120 overall immigration arrests FDLE / ICE: overall immigration arrests include an unquantified registrant subgroup; not a registrant arrest total.
2025 months-long (announced October 30) Operation Unmasking Predators – Hillsborough
Hillsborough		 171 Local / partners: mixed trafficking, child-sex, CSAM and failure-to-register allegations; no FTR breakdown.
2025-01-15 to 2025-03 Special Operation Deviant Nightfall and Deviant Sunrise
Nassau, Clay, St. Johns, Duval, Georgia unspecified		 23 FDLE / partners: online child-sex sting and follow-up combined once.
2025-02-06 to 2025-03-07 Operation Heartbreaker – Orlando
Orange/Orlando		 27 Local / federal partners: child-sex sting and prostitution components; mixed headline.
2025-02-14 Operation Matchmaker
Hillsborough/Tampa; entire geographical spread not stated		 44 FDLE / partners: alleged unreported online accounts; yearlong effort spanning 2024-2025.
2025-03 Operation Cleanse the Swamp
Alachua		 8 FDLE / partners: registry checks; includes people transferred to immigration authorities.
2025-03 Operation Spring Fever
Columbia		 10 FDLE / partners: registry compliance checks.
2025-04-30 to 2025-05-07 Operation Restore Justice – Middle District of Florida component
Middle District of Florida		 5 Federal / partners: new child-sex allegations; Florida district component only, not national total.
2025-05 to 2025-10-08 Operation Not a Fan
Wakulla, Leon, Taylor		 10 FDLE / partners: registration allegations and a school-presence / notification allegation.
2025-05-02 to 2025-05-10 Operation Child Protector VI – Polk
Polk
Related source 1		 11 Local / partners: child-sex component only; separate prostitution-operation total is not added.
2025-05-09 and 2025-05-13 Unnamed Indian River registration compliance operation
Indian River		 2 FDLE / partners: registration and alleged false-information charges.
2025-05-21 to 2025-05-24 Ocala online child-exploitation sting – unnamed
Marion/Ocala		 20 Local / partners: online child-sex sting; prior registry status not established for every accused person.
2025-06 Operation Dragon Eye
Hillsborough, Pinellas, Pasco		 8 Federal / FDLE / partners: child-recovery mission; arrests involved mixed offenses, including trafficking.
2025-06 Operation Summer Sweep
Levy		 7 Local / partners: registry and probation enforcement; later follow-up appears below.
2025-07 (six days; announcement July 30) Operation Seek and Ye Shall Find Out – Marion
Marion
Related source 1		 48 FDLE / partners: online child-sex sting; latest announcement replaces earlier lower count.
2025-07-14 Operation Summer Sweep follow-up
Levy, DeSoto, Dixie		 1 additional arrest Local / partners: additional fugitive arrest connected to Summer Sweep; not a second sweep.
2025-08 Operation Knock Knock
Hernando		 10 FDLE / partners: registration violations; annual summary does not provide individual charges.
2025-08-04 to 2025-08-07 Operation Summer Sizzle
Alachua		 8 FDLE / partners: compliance sweep; annual and local accounts describe the same operation.
2025-08-21 to 2025-08-23 Special Operation Stuffed Animals – Nassau
Nassau
Related source 1		 8 FDLE / partners: second online child-sex sting of 2025; separate from Deviant Nightfall / Sunrise.
2025-08-28 Operation Summer Hurricane
Franklin		 6 FDLE / partners: online child-sex sting. Detailed release differs from annual summary; figures are not combined.
2025-09 Operation River Roundup
Suwannee		 13 FDLE / partners: felony registration allegations.
2025-09-08 to 2025-10-08 Operation Child Protector VII – Polk
Polk, Arizona/Jacksonville follow-up
Related source 1 / Related source 2		 18 announced Oct. 7; subsequent warrant arrest noted FDLE / partners: online child-sex component. Additional original-warrant arrest announced Oct. 9; cumulative count remains unreconciled.
2025-09-17 to 2025-09-20 Operation Safe Passage
St. Johns		 17 Local / partners: online child-sex sting, separate from Unified Watch.
2025-09-22 to 2025-09-25 Operation Unified Watch
St. Johns		 19 FDLE / partners: registry compliance; separate from Safe Passage.
2025-10 October/Halloween compliance initiative
Polk		 32 headline, including warrant / probation actions Local / partners: registration, probation and warrant actions; headline is not a count of fresh FTR bookings.
2025-10 Operation Your Trick, Our Treat
Osceola		 37 Local / partners: registry restrictions, probation and new-law allegations; no complete charge breakdown supplied.
2025-10 Halloween holiday Operation Trick Bag
Hernando		 8 FDLE / partners: registry / probation compliance.
2025-10-23 Operation Twelve Parsecs
Escambia, Santa Rosa, other partner counties		 13 FDLE / partners: online child-sex sting, separate from address-verification checks.
2025-11 Operation Home for the Holidays
Tampa Bay, Orlando, Jacksonville, Fort Myers, Florida and nine other states		 6 Federal / FDLE / partners: child-recovery mission; mixed felony arrests, including a sexual-assault allegation.
2025-11 Operation Lights Out
Hillsborough		 29 FDLE / partners: registry / probation compliance.
2025-11-03 to 2025-12-06 Operation Holiday Sweep
Levy		 7 Local / partners: registry / probation enforcement with a new CSAM allegation.
2025-11-05 to 2025-11-08 Operation Fall Sweep
Bay		 14 initially announced Local / partners: online child-sex sting; this is the initially announced cohort, with later follow-ups unreconciled.
2025-11-25 to 2025-12-15 FDLE Orlando-region CSAM multicase enforcement – unnamed
Orange, Osceola		 3 FDLE / partners: new CSAM investigations. Separate immigration-only detentions are not child-sex arrests.
2025-12 Operation Northern Lights
14 North Florida counties; recoveries also Tennessee, Mississippi, Louisiana		 9 Federal / FDLE / partners: child-recovery mission; mixed arrest allegations, not a registry sweep.
2025-12 (announced December 19) Operation Relentless Justice – Middle District of Florida component
Middle District of Florida		 10 Federal / partners: new child-sex allegations; Florida district component only, not national total.

2026

Public arrest announcements: 2026
Date / period Operation and location Announced arrest figure What the announcement covers
2026-01-01 to 2026-02-06 Hillsborough multiweek undercover operation
Hillsborough		 89 Local / partners: mixed child-exploitation and trafficking investigations; announced March 2026.
2026-02 Operation Last Lap
Volusia/Port Orange
Related source 1		 13 Local / partners: online child-sex sting; prior registry status not supplied for every accused person.
2026-02 (early; exact dates unverified) Operation Cupid’s Cleanup – initial cohort
Leon
Related source 1		 18 FDLE / partners: mixed trafficking / adult prostitution enforcement; later additional arrest below.
2026-03-12 Operation Safe Harvest
Leon		 20 FDLE / partners: online child-exploitation sting.
2026-03-18 to 2026-03-21 Catch a Con
Osceola, Hillsborough
Related source 1		 16 Local / partners: online child-sex sting.
2026-03-30 Operation Low Tide
Monroe		 2 FDLE / partners: registration / reporting allegations.
2026-03 to 2026-summer Operation Safe Childhood – Manatee umbrella
Manatee		 27 across two components FDLE on registry component / local partners: registry-probation and separate ICAC components; parent listed once.
2026-04 Child Protector VIII
Polk		 19 Local / partners: online child-sex / CSAM allegations; includes action on a person already jailed.
2026-04 Fool’s End
Leon
Related source 1 / Related source 2		 7 FDLE / partners: online child-sex sting.
2026-04 late to 2026-07-15 Operation Checkmate
Duval		 32 Local / partners: online child-sex sting; latest cumulative announcement replaces earlier updates.
2026-04-01 Operation Running Wild
Columbia		 17 FDLE / partners: registry reporting allegations; an additional out-of-state warrant arrest is described separately.
2026-04-08 Operation Cupid’s Cleanup – April follow-up
Gadsden, Leon		 1 FDLE / federal partners: additional minor-solicitation / attempted-trafficking arrest tied to Cupid’s Cleanup.
2026-04-16 Operation Relentless Pursuit
Orange/Orlando, Central Florida partner areas
Related source 1		 15 Local / partners: online child-sex sting begun in 2025; announced in April 2026.
2026-04-22 to 2026-04-23 Wrong Turn
Miami-Dade		 15 FDLE / partners: alleged human trafficking of minors.
2026-05-26 to 2026-05-29 Unnamed FDLE-led five-person online-account investigation
Jackson, Santa Rosa		 5 FDLE / partners: mixed registration, probation and new CSAM allegations.
2026-06-01 to 2026-06-06 Bad Habits
Marion
Related source 1 / Related source 2		 58 FDLE / partners: online child-sex sting; later additional-arrest lead not reconciled with headline.
2026-06-01 to 2026-06-30 Operation Silver Spur
Osceola, Marion (source warrant), Colorado (out-of-state fugitive)
Related source 1		 126 reported; repeat arrests included Federal / FDLE / local partners: registry and other crimes; repeat arrests and nonregistrant cases included.
2026-06-04 Operation Spring Cleaning
Jefferson		 5 FDLE / partners: registration allegations; the release also describes compliance corrections.
2026-06-08 to 2026-08-05 Operation Relentless Summer
Hillsborough		 116 Local / partners: mixed online child-sex, trafficking, hotel operations and registrant checks.
2026-06-10 to 2026-06-14 Innocence Shield
Flagler		 10 FDLE / partners: trafficking-victim recovery and adult prostitution / other charges; not ten child-sex arrests.
2026-06-15 to 2026-08-14 Operation Riverwatch
Duval		 59 Local / partners: sexual and career-offender registry operation; full current-charge breakdown unavailable.
2026-06-16 to 2026-06-18 Operation Get ‘Em Gator
Alachua
Related source 1		 25 FDLE / partners: June compliance sweep; July updated announcement replaces earlier count.
2026-06-17 Operation Black Horizon
Hernando		 13 FDLE / partners: registration, probation and drug allegations; includes an unrelated fleeing / eluding case.
2026-07-02 (announcement; field dates unreported) Operation Red Card – Broward
Broward
Related source 1		 7 FDLE / partners: trafficking / child-sex sting; rescued victims are separate from arrests.
2026-07-09 to 2026-07-11 Tor/Pedo
Volusia		 7 Local / partners: online child-sex sting.
2026-07-10 Operation No Go
Taylor		 5 FDLE / partners: online accounts and registration compliance.
2026-07-15 to 2026-07-18 Operation Firewall – Clay County
Clay
Related source 1		 12 Local / partners: online child-sex sting in Clay; distinct from Alachua Firewall.
2026-07-22 to 2026-07-25 Operation Summer Sentinel
Okaloosa		 10 FDLE / partners: online child-sex sting and an additional internet-identifier reporting charge; headline combines different allegations.
2026-07-24 Operation Adam’s Watch – Miami-Dade component
Miami-Dade		 34 Federal / local partners: Miami-Dade component only; national total is not added.
2026-07-30 to 2026-08-01 Operation Firewall – Alachua County
Alachua
Related source 1		 16 Local / partners: online child-sex sting in Alachua; distinct from Clay Firewall.
2026-08-06 Operation Blount Force
Calhoun, Bay (one arrest on Calhoun warrant), Jackson (one arrest on Calhoun warrant)		 10 FDLE / partners: registry compliance; includes a nonsexual felony probationer.
2026-08-05 to 2026-08-06; FDLE announcement August 19 Operation Singularity Edge
Hernando
Related source 1 / Related source 2		 10 FDLE / partners: sexual-registry and career-offender compliance; not exclusively sexual registrants.
2026-08-25 to 2026-09-21 Operation Offenders: Endgame
Flagler, Volusia (follow-up warrant arrest)
Related source 1 / Related source 2		 45, latest cumulative announcement FDLE / partners: registration / probation allegations. Latest cumulative count includes repeat arrest activity.
2026-09-10 to 2026-09-13 Operation Late Checkout – Indian River
Indian River		 50 headline; additional arrest described FDLE / partners: mixed prostitution / drug enforcement; separate minor-sex arrest described. Overlap unresolved.
2026-09-21 week Operation 6-7
Bay		 44 Local / partners: broad drug / warrant operation including registry checks; registrant subset unverified.
2026-09-23 Operation Sandspur
Jackson		 21 FDLE / partners: registry compliance. One seized phone reportedly contained child sexual abuse material; additional charges were possible.

The Word Agencies Used: “Targeted”

In official announcements for at least 12 different operations, agencies used the exact word “targeted” when describing groups that included registrants or people legally designated as sexual predators. Eleven concerned registry or probation compliance. The twelfth, Tidal Wave, was broader immigration enforcement that explicitly included registered sex offenders among several groups. Ten of the compliance announcements came from FDLE; one came from the Levy County Sheriff’s Office.

The words used to describe enforcement are part of its history, too. These are the agencies’ own descriptions of operations involving registrants. Someone working to keep a job, a home and a family together may hear the word differently when they are the person being described as a target. The public still needs to know why a person was included, what was alleged and how the case ended. The word itself does not establish a new sexual offense or a conviction.

This Language Appears in Recent Headlines, Too

Families and neighbors see this language in headlines, too. The examples below show when it appeared, the words used and what kind of enforcement the report described:

  • June 11, 2024 — Volusia Sheriff: the Creep Sweep headline says “Targeting Sex Offenders And Predators”. The operation combined registration enforcement with allegations of new crimes.
  • October 8, 2025 — St. Johns County Sheriff: its dual-operation headline uses “Targeting” and explicitly names registered sexual offenders and predators who were not complying with statutory requirements. The release combines an online sting with Unified Watch’s compliance enforcement.
  • November 13, 2025 — WSVN: its headline describes a “sweep that targeted sex offenders, violent criminals”. This was immigration enforcement; the report identifies Criminal Return as the operation’s official name and Dirtbag as a nickname.
  • March 12, 2026 — Tallahassee Police: its Safe Harvest headline includes “Targeting Online Child Predators”. That describes an investigation of alleged online crimes; it does not establish that everyone investigated was already on the registry.

These examples show the language appearing repeatedly in recent coverage. They do not give us enough information to say how much more often it appears in headlines. “Targeted” and “targeting” are identified separately. The count of 12 above comes from the text of official announcements, rather than 12 headlines. Within its 11 compliance operations, four announcements are from 2025 and seven from 2026. Those are the examples verified here. A fair comparison with earlier years would need a fuller record.

Open the 12 verified uses of “targeted” and their official sources

Dates below are announcement dates. Each operation is counted once, even if it appears in a follow-up or an annual summary. The excerpts are short, verbatim portions of the official descriptions.

Exact-word review: official operation descriptions involving the registry population
Announcement Operation / official source Exact wording excerpt Enforcement context
2025-02-14 Operation Matchmaker “targeted sexual offender and sexual predator registrants” Registry compliance
2025-07-16 Operation Summer Sweep “targeted Levy County sexual offender/predators” Registry compliance
2025-10-07 Operation Unified Watch “targeted registered sexual offenders and predators” Registry compliance
2025-11-21 Operation Lights Out “targeted registrants residing in the rural cities” Registry and supervision compliance
2025-12-31 Operation Tidal Wave “targeted individuals with prior arrests or convictions” Broader immigration enforcement; explicitly includes registered sex offenders
2026-04-01 Operation Running Wild “targeted registrants residing within Columbia County” Registry compliance
2026-06-17 Operation Black Horizon “targeted 52 registrants on active supervision” Registry and supervision compliance
2026-07-07 Operation Get ‘Em Gator “targeted 80 registrants residing within Alachua County” Registry compliance
2026-07-10 Operation No Go “targeted 78 registrants residing within Taylor County” Registry compliance
2026-08-06 Operation Blount Force “targeted sexual offenders and sexual predators” Registry and supervision compliance
2026-08-19 Operation Singularity Edge “targeted career offenders, sexual offenders and sexual predators” Registry and supervision compliance
2026-09-23 Operation Sandspur “targeted career offenders, sexual offenders and sexual predators” Registry and supervision compliance

This is a verified minimum within the public sources reviewed for this article, checked October 2, 2026. It counts 12 relevant uses across 12 distinct operations, including 11 compliance operations; it does not count people, arrests or all Florida announcements. The 12 announcements were published in 2025 and 2026. That distribution does not establish a year-to-year increase in use of the word.

Related wording appears in Creep Sweep, Manatee County’s Match Maker component of Safe Childhood and Criminal Return. Those use “targeting” and are excluded from the exact-word count. Uses describing children being targeted, unrelated operations, and online stings without an explicit registry-population focus are also excluded.

How the Law Changed During Glass’s Tenure

The enforcement history is also a history of changing law. During Glass’s tenure, legislators approved measures affecting registration, designation, supervision and related screening. Each change could add to what registrants and people legally designated as sexual predators had to understand alongside existing deadlines. The official records below explain substantive changes, juvenile provisions and technical amendments, and identify the laws enacted during his tenure. Lawmakers enacted them; FDLE and other agencies carried out their assigned duties.

Open 11 enacted HB/SB entries and official sources

Inclusion uses Governor approval from May 1, 2022 through the September 2026 transition. Effective dates are listed separately. Each enacted bill appears once; its companion is shown for reference. These are legislative and gubernatorial actions during the period Glass led FDLE.

Registration, designation and supervision

Eight enactments directly touching registration, designation, supervision or juvenile reporting
Enacted bill / companion Approval / effective date Registry-related change
2023 CS/HB 537
Custody and Supervision of Specified Offenders
Companion: CS/SB 528 (identical; laid on table).		 Approved: May 25, 2023
Effective: July 1, 2023
Chapter 2023-146		 Supervision
Excludes people supervised for listed sexual felonies, including attempts, solicitation and conspiracy, from graduated-incentive supervision reductions. Extends specified sex-offense supervision conditions to those inchoate offenses, including electronic monitoring in covered cases.
2024 CS/HB 305
Offenses Involving Children
Companion: CS/CS/SB 312 (identical; laid on table).		 Approved: April 10, 2024
Effective: July 1, 2024
Chapter 2024-71		 Predator designation
Requires sexual-predator designation after a first qualifying conviction or attempt involving specified human trafficking of a minor. Designation brings the existing predator registration and notification requirements into effect.
2024 CS/CS/HB 1235
Sexual Predators and Sexual Offenders
Companion: CS/SB 1230 (identical; laid on table).		 Approved: April 10, 2024
Effective: October 1, 2024
Chapter 2024-73		 Registration and removal
Revises residence-day calculations, vehicle and travel reporting, transient reporting, address verification and removal criteria. Authorizes online reporting for specified information and treats specified reporting failures as separate offenses. Adds FDLE notice and participation in removal proceedings.
2024 CS/CS/HB 1337
Department of Corrections
Companion: CS/SB 1278 (similar; laid on table).		 Approved: April 11, 2024
Effective: July 1, 2024
Chapter 2024-84		 Technical registry amendments
Changes correctional-facility terminology in registration and notification statutes to “contractor-operated correctional facility.” Official staff analysis identifies the conforming changes as nonsubstantive; this row represents a technical amendment.
2024 CS/CS/HB 1181
Juvenile Justice
Companion: CS/CS/SB 1274 (similar; laid on table).		 Approved: April 26, 2024
Effective: July 1, 2024
Chapter 2024-130		 Juvenile supervision and reporting
Eliminates postcommitment probation as a juvenile sentencing option, leaving conditional release following commitment where applicable. Makes related changes to juvenile sexual-offender supervision and photograph/notification provisions reported to FDLE.
2025 CS/HB 1351
Registration of Sexual Predators and Sexual Offenders
Companion: CS/SB 1654 (identical; laid on table).		 Approved: June 10, 2025
Effective: October 1, 2025
Chapter 2025-134		 Reporting and verification
Creates an in-state travel residence category and a 48-hour reporting duty through specified channels. Adds occupation, business and employment information and change reporting. Requires at least quarterly address verification for predators and annual verification for offenders outside DOC custody, control or supervision.
2025 CS/CS/SB 1804
Capital Human Trafficking of Vulnerable Persons for Sexual Exploitation
Companion: CS/CS/HB 1283 (similar; laid on table).		 Approved: June 19, 2025
Effective: October 1, 2025
Chapter 2025-156		 Qualifying convictions
Adds the new capital human-trafficking offense under section 787.06(5) to sexual-predator designation criteria and sexual-offender registration and release-notification provisions.
2026 CS/CS/CS/SB 212
Sexual Offenders and Sexual Predators
Companion: CS/CS/HB 45 (similar; laid on table).		 Approved: March 31, 2026
Effective: July 1, 2026
Chapter 2026-17		 Residence, proximity and supervision
Adds public pools to the 1,000-foot residence restriction for covered offenses and certain existing covered people who change permanent residence after July 1. Expands specified loitering distance to 500 feet, child-contact and school/daycare notice rules, and pool-related supervision and public-employer screening conditions. Applicability and exceptions vary.

Related screening and career-registry laws

Three related laws; their effects differ from direct sexual-registration duties
Enacted bill / companion Approval / effective date Registry-related change
2022 SB 2524
Education		 Approved: June 2, 2022
Effective: January 1, 2023, for the cited eligibility amendment
Chapter 2022-154
Enacted schedule: section 60 applied the changes to people screened after January 1, 2024. The Legislature passed the act in March 2022; approval occurred during this tenure.		 Related education screening
Adds covered education-employment ineligibility through the exemption criteria in section 435.07(4)(c), which include sex-offender registration-related disqualifiers. The current-registration exclusion already existed. This is an additional eligibility cross-reference in a broader education act.
2023 CS/SB 676
Level 2 Background Screenings
Companion: CS/HB 249 (similar; laid on table).		 Approved: June 12, 2023
Effective: July 1, 2024, for the cited registry-screening changes
Chapter 2023-220		 Related employment screening
Adds checks of sexual-offender/predator registries in states where employees lived during the preceding five years. Expands screening to specified qualified-entity affiliations and extends existing exemption restrictions to those affiliation disqualifications.
2026 CS/SB 1332
Career Offender Registration
Companion: CS/CS/HB 931 (similar; laid on table).		 Approved: June 16, 2026
Effective: October 1, 2026
Chapter 2026-151
Approved during the tenure; effective October 1, after the September leadership transition.		 Related career-offender registry
Primarily changes the separate career-offender registry. A person relieved of sexual-offender/predator registration must register as a career offender if otherwise designated as one. Adds career-offender ID marking; the sexual-offender/predator markings remain unchanged.
Law-table sources and scope

Official Florida Senate histories and enacted chapter laws are linked in the tables. Approval and effective dates differ; later amendments and individual applicability matter. Technical and related enactments are not eleven new reporting duties for every registrant.

The Felony Warnings Signed at the Registration Office

At the registration office, that legal history becomes a set of duties people are asked to acknowledge and sign. The acknowledgment reviewed here lists 18 state felony-warning categories: 16 third-degree warnings and two second-degree warnings, plus a separate federal warning. Several categories use the same statutory penalty provision. Signing the paperwork is one moment; remembering the duties through moves, work changes, family emergencies and travel continues afterward. The dropdown preserves each warning and the history of the laws behind it.

Open all 18 warnings and when the laws took effect

The form-item numbers follow the reviewed registration acknowledgment. Statutory wording and chapter laws were checked against official legislative sources. The dates below identify when the legal duties and amendments took effect; they do not establish the form’s revision date.

Dates below trace the sexual-offender provisions in section 943.0435. People designated as sexual predators use section 775.21(6), (8) and (10). Its statutory history begins in 1993; the 1997 core-law date below describes the separate offender statute.

18 state felony-warning categories in the registration-office acknowledgment
Form item Duty / alleged noncompliance Felony degree Sexual-offender authority (F.S.) Origin and material changes
1 Initial registration
In-person registration within 48 hours after a statutory triggering event.		 Third degree 943.0435(2)(a); (9)(a)
Oct 1, 1997 Ch. 97-299: Core residence-triggered duty and felony penalty.
Jul 1, 2000 Ch. 2000-207: Release-from-custody/control/supervision trigger added.
2 Complete registration information
Provide required identity, residence, contact, employment, vehicle, conviction and other registration information.		 Third degree 943.0435(2)(b)-(c); (9)(a)
Oct 1, 1997 Ch. 97-299: Core identity, address, conviction, photograph and fingerprint information.
Jul 1, 1998 Ch. 98-81: Employment, Social Security number, and vehicle/vessel residence information.
Oct 1, 2014 Ch. 2014-5: Palm prints, broadly defined vehicles owned, passport/immigration and professional-license information. Other field-specific dates appear below.
3 Florida driver license or identification card
Obtain or renew the required Florida credential and photograph within 48 hours after initial registration, unless the statutory exception applies.		 Third degree 943.0435(3); (9)(a)
Oct 1, 1997 Ch. 97-299: Credential and photograph obligation established.
Jul 1, 1998 Ch. 98-81: Express 48-hour deadline after initial registration added.
Aug 1, 2007 / Feb 1, 2008 Ch. 2007-207: Required credential markings added; separate possession felony has a different effective date, explained below.
4 Email addresses and Internet identifiers
Report email/Internet identifiers and corresponding website or app within 48 hours after use; DOC/DJJ before-use duties apply to covered supervised people.		 Third degree 943.0435(4)(e)1.; (9)(a)
Oct 1, 2007 Ch. 2007-143: Email/instant-message reporting began, originally before use.
Oct 1, 2014 Ch. 2014-5: Expanded Internet-identifier terminology.
Jun 26, 2017 Ch. 2017-170: Current definition, corresponding website/app, and general 48-hours-after-use rule.
5 Residence, legal name and credential changes
Report required residence/name changes and update credentials within 48 hours; separately report an in-state travel residence within 48 hours after establishment.		 Third degree 943.0435(4)(a); (9)(a)
Oct 1, 1997 Ch. 97-299: Residence changes and credential renewals.
Jul 1, 2000 Ch. 2000-207: Legal-name changes.
May 26, 2010 Ch. 2010-92: Transient residences incorporated.
Oct 1, 2025 Ch. 2025-134: Separate in-state travel reporting route.
6 Higher-education enrollment, employment or volunteering
Report the institution/campus and changes in enrollment, employment or volunteer status within 48 hours.		 Third degree 943.0435(2)(b)2.; (4)(e)2.; (9)(a)
Jul 1, 2002 Ch. 2002-58: Institution reporting and 48-hour status-change duty.
Oct 1, 2014 Ch. 2014-5: Express volunteer-status wording.
Oct 1, 2016 Ch. 2016-104: Online reporting route and expanded definition, including online courses.
7 Home and cellular telephone numbers
Report added, changed or deleted home/cell telephone numbers within 48 hours.		 Third degree 943.0435(2)(b); (4)(e)2.; (9)(a)
Jul 1, 2009 Ch. 2009-194: Phone numbers added to registration data.
Oct 1, 2016 Ch. 2016-104: Express 48-hour added/deleted/change reporting rule.
8 Employment and self-employment
Report new/terminated employment, required employment-detail changes and creation of a new business if self-employed within 48 hours.		 Third degree 943.0435(2)(b); (4)(e)2.; (9)(a)
Jul 1, 1998 Ch. 98-81: Occupation/place of employment added to registration data.
Oct 1, 2016 Ch. 2016-104: Express 48-hour employment-change reporting.
Oct 1, 2025 Ch. 2025-134: Express new-business/self-employment wording and detailed employment-change penalties.
9 Changes to vehicles owned
Report changes to vehicles owned, as statutorily defined, within 48 hours.		 Third degree 943.0435(2)(b)3.; (4)(e)2.; (9)(a)
Sep 1, 2005 Ch. 2005-28: Vehicle make/model/color/tag data required at periodic reregistration.
Oct 1, 2014 Ch. 2014-5: Broad vehicles-owned definition and 48-hour change-reporting duty.
Oct 1, 2024 Ch. 2024-73: Online update option and explicit penalty language.
10 Vacating without another residence
Report in person within 48 hours after vacating without establishing or maintaining another qualifying residence; supply required location and updated information.		 Third degree 943.0435(4)(b)1.; (9)(a)
Jul 1, 2004 Ch. 2004-371: Permanent-residence vacating duty.
May 26, 2010 Ch. 2010-92: Expanded to temporary and transient residences.
11 Remaining after reporting an intended move
If remaining at the reported-to-be-vacated residence, report in person within 48 hours after the reported move date.		 Second degree 943.0435(4)(c)
Jul 1, 2004 Ch. 2004-371: Second-degree felony provision created.
May 26, 2010 Ch. 2010-92: Expanded to temporary and transient residences.
13 Out-of-state residence and international travel
Generally report an intended out-of-state residence at least 48 hours before departure and international travel at least 21 days before departure; unanticipated plans have statutory reporting rules.		 Third degree 943.0435(7); (9)(a)
Jul 1, 1998 Ch. 98-81: Outbound-residence notice duty.
Jul 1, 2000 Ch. 2000-207: Notice made in-person.
Oct 1, 2014 Ch. 2014-5: 21-day foreign-residence notice, initially for five days or more.
Oct 1, 2024 Ch. 2024-73: International travel of any duration and revised notice rules.
14 Canceled departure from Florida
If remaining after reporting an intended departure/residence or international trip, report in person within 48 hours after the planned departure date.		 Second degree 943.0435(8)
Jul 1, 1998 Ch. 98-81: Second-degree canceled-departure provision created.
Jul 1, 2000 Ch. 2000-207: In-person reporting specified.
Oct 1, 2014 Ch. 2014-5: Foreign-country wording added.
Oct 1, 2024 Ch. 2024-73: Revised to cover intended international travel.
15 Periodic in-person reregistration
Reregister twice yearly or quarterly according to the applicable designation/offense category, updating required information.		 Third degree 943.0435(14); (9)(a)
Sep 1, 2005 Ch. 2005-28: Twice-yearly requirement and felony warning.
Jul 1, 2007 Ch. 2007-209: Quarterly reporting for specified offender categories and sexual predators.
16 Transient-residence check-ins
Report establishment of a transient residence within 48 hours and thereafter appear in person every 30 days while transient, in addition to periodic reregistration.		 Third degree 943.0435(4)(b)2.; (4)(d); (9)(a)
May 26, 2010 Ch. 2010-92: Transient-residence definition/reporting.
Oct 1, 2014 Ch. 2014-5: Separate every-30-day in-person duty and felony penalty.
17 Nonresident working or studying in Florida
For a covered out-of-state resident, Florida employment/vocation/student location is a temporary residence even for any period of time; report as required within 48 hours.		 Third degree 943.0435(1)(f); (2)(a); (9)(a)
775.21(2)(n)1.
Oct 1, 1998 Ch. 98-81: Temporary-residence definition expanded to nonresident work, vocation or study for any period of time.
18 Address-verification correspondence
Respond to required FDLE or county/local address-verification correspondence within three weeks after its date.		 Third degree 943.0435(9)(a)
Sep 1, 2005 Ch. 2005-28: Express three-week FDLE-response duty and third-degree felony.
Oct 1, 2024 Ch. 2024-73: County/local correspondence added to the express penalty text.
22 Knowingly false registration information
Knowingly providing false registration information by act or omission carries a felony warning.		 Third degree 943.0435(9)(a)
Oct 1, 2014 Ch. 2014-5: Express knowingly-false-registration-information language added to the offender reregistration penalty.
Oct 1, 2024 Ch. 2024-73: Express language incorporated into the general offender penalty paragraph. The earlier general noncompliance penalty dates to 1997.

Items 12, 19 and 21 address verification, other jurisdictions and lifetime registration; they are not additional state felony-warning categories in this inventory. Item 20 is the separate federal warning below. Numbering jumps reflect the source form.

The ID-marking dates are different

Under Ch. 2007-207, the registry-marking requirement in section 322.141(3) took effect August 1, 2007. The separate prohibition on possessing a credential with missing or altered required markings, section 322.212(5)(c), with the third-degree penalty in (6), took effect February 1, 2008. This related credential offense is not added as a nineteenth warning in the reviewed acknowledgment count.

Federal warning: form item 20

18 U.S.C. 2250(a) was enacted July 27, 2006. It covers qualifying knowing failures to register or update under SORNA, with specified federal or travel jurisdictional elements. Subsection (b), added February 8, 2016, covers knowing failures to provide required international-travel information followed by engaging or attempting to engage in that travel. Each carries a maximum of 10 years; federal elements differ from Florida reporting offenses.

What those felony degrees mean

Section 775.082(3)(d)-(e) generally allows up to five years for a third-degree felony and 15 years for a second-degree felony. These are statutory maxima, not predictions of a sentence. Ch. 2018-105 also added mandatory minimum community control with electronic monitoring for covered registration felonies committed on or after July 1, 2018 when a prison sentence is not imposed: six months for a first offense, one year for a second, and two years for a third or subsequent offense.

Ch. 2024-73 added express language that each instance of failing to register or report specified required changes constitutes a separate offense. A reporting allegation may begin with a change in housing, work, technology or travel. That is why the actual charge matters. A registration charge does not, by itself, establish a new sexual act; any accompanying allegations must be checked separately.

Open approval dates, effective dates and enacted laws
Approval dates and operative dates are shown separately
Enacted chapter Governor approval Relevant effective date What changed
Ch. 97-299 Jun 3, 1997 Oct 1, 1997 Core sexual-offender registration, identifying information, credential duties and third-degree noncompliance penalty.
Ch. 98-81 May 21, 1998 Jul 1, 1998 / Oct 1, 1998 Section 7 (July 1): initial credential deadline, expanded offender data, outbound-residence notice and second-degree canceled-departure provision. Section 3 (October 1): expanded temporary-residence definition in 775.21, including nonresident work/study.
Ch. 2000-207 Jun 5, 2000 Jul 1, 2000 Release-from-custody/supervision registration trigger; legal-name changes; in-person outbound-residence and canceled-departure reporting.
Ch. 2002-58 Apr 22, 2002 Jul 1, 2002 Higher-education registration and 48-hour status-change reporting.
Ch. 2004-371 Jun 24, 2004 Jul 1, 2004 Vacating a permanent residence without another residence; second-degree failure to report remaining after a reported move.
Ch. 2005-28 May 2, 2005 Sep 1, 2005 Twice-yearly in-person reregistration, vehicle data at reregistration, and third-degree failure to answer FDLE address-verification correspondence within three weeks.
Ch. 2007-143 Jun 15, 2007 Oct 1, 2007 Email-address and instant-message-name registration before use. Later acts changed the terminology and deadline.
Ch. 2007-207 Jun 20, 2007 Aug 1, 2007 / Feb 1, 2008 Section 1: required registry markings on credentials, August 1, 2007. Section 2: unlawful possession of a credential with missing or altered markings, February 1, 2008. General act date was July 1, 2007.
Ch. 2007-209 Jun 20, 2007 Jul 1, 2007 Quarterly reregistration for sexual predators and specified sexual-offender categories.
Ch. 2009-194 Jun 16, 2009 Jul 1, 2009 Home and cellular telephone numbers added to registration information.
Ch. 2010-92 May 26, 2010 May 26, 2010 Transient-residence definition and reporting incorporated; vacating/remaining provisions expanded to temporary and transient residences.
Ch. 2014-5 Apr 1, 2014 Oct 1, 2014 Every-30-day transient reporting; 48-hour changes to vehicles owned; passport, immigration and professional-license information; expanded Internet identifiers; express false-registration-information penalty; 21-day international notice, initially for foreign residences of five days or more.
Ch. 2016-104 Mar 24, 2016 Oct 1, 2016 Express 48-hour phone and employment changes; online reporting of these and higher-education changes; expanded Internet-identifier and higher-education definitions.
Ch. 2017-170 Jun 26, 2017 Jun 26, 2017 Revised Internet-identifier definition and website/app information; generally 48 hours after use, with before-use reporting retained for DOC/DJJ supervision.
Ch. 2018-105 Mar 23, 2018 Jul 1, 2018 Three-day residence thresholds; mandatory minimum community control with electronic monitoring for covered registration felonies when prison is not imposed.
Ch. 2024-73 Apr 10, 2024 Oct 1, 2024 Express separate-offense rule for each required registration/reporting failure; revised day counting; international notice regardless of trip length; vehicle updates online; local-agency verification correspondence added to the penalty text.
Ch. 2025-134 Jun 10, 2025 Oct 1, 2025 In-state travel residence reporting after establishment; explicit new-business/self-employment reporting and detailed employment-change penalty language.

This chronology identifies the original duties and material changes needed to explain the 18 warnings. It is not a list of every amendment to either entire statute. The linked enrolled chapter laws distinguish newly added language from provisions merely reenacted or republished.

The Laws Behind the Continuing Burden

Those warnings are part of a larger framework that continues beyond any commissioner’s tenure. Registration, required identification, restrictions on where a person may live or go, and supervision conditions can all affect a household. The table below identifies the Florida laws behind those requirements and separates a person’s obligations from an agency’s duties. Together, they explain the legal structure behind the operations and the burdens described by families.

Open Florida registration laws, related restrictions and qualifying offenses

Current-law snapshot: October 2, 2026. Each section number links to the official 2026 Florida Statutes unless marked historical. Applicability depends on designation, qualifying conviction or adjudication, offense dates, victim age, supervision status, statutory exceptions and controlling court orders. These are provisions of the current framework; they were not all enacted during Glass’s tenure.

FDLE administers the registry and performs specified investigative, information-sharing and notification functions. County sheriffs, municipal police, FLHSMV, DOC, DJJ, courts and other agencies have their own statutory responsibilities. Their separate responsibilities operate within a connected statewide registration and enforcement framework.

Registration, designation, identification and judicial relief

Registration, designation, identification and judicial relief
Statutory authority / legal subject Operative provision and applicability Responsible person or entity
§ 943.0435, F.S.
Sexual-offender registration		 Defines sexual-offender eligibility and requires initial registration, residence and identifying-information reports, travel notices, reregistration and verification responses. Subsection (14) requires semiannual or quarterly in-person reregistration, depending on the qualifying category. Subsection (9) prescribes criminal penalties for specified noncompliance; subsection (11) governs lifetime registration and limited relief. Registrant; county sheriff; FDLE; FLHSMV; courts. DOC or DJJ receives specified reports from supervised people.
§ 775.21, F.S.
Florida Sexual Predators Act		 Court designation under subsections (4)-(5) is distinct from sexual-offender registration. Establishes registration, reporting, quarterly reregistration, verification, community notification, penalties and limited relief. Subsection (10)(b) restricts specified child-contact employment for predators with qualifying convictions; it is not a prohibition on every job. Courts designate; FDLE maintains records; sheriffs register and verify; sheriffs/police notify; DOC/DJJ handle applicable supervision.
§ 775.21(2)(k), (n)-(o), F.S.
§ 943.0435(1)(f), F.S.
Permanent, temporary, transient and in-state travel residence		 Defines the residence categories and three-day counting rules. A nonresident’s Florida employment, vocation or student location can qualify for any period. An existing Florida resident’s in-state travel residence has its own reporting route. Registrant; sheriff; supervising DOC/DJJ; FDLE registration system.
§ 944.607, F.S.
DOC custody, control or supervision		 Requires covered sexual offenders under DOC custody, control or supervision to register and provide identifying information. Addresses departmental reporting, photographs, education-status information, agency transfers, sheriff reregistration and penalties. Here, “department” means the Department of Corrections. DOC; registrant; sheriffs; FDLE; jail custodians; FLHSMV; courts/clerks.
§ 985.4815, F.S.
Qualifying juvenile sexual-offender registration		 Applies to the statutorily defined juvenile sexual-offender category; requires registration information, agency transmission, specified change reports and quarterly sheriff reregistration. Juvenile adjudication criteria differ from the adult conviction list. DJJ; qualifying registrant; FDLE; sheriffs; courts/clerks; jail custodians; FLHSMV.
§ 322.141(3)-(4), F.S.
Driver-license and identification-card markings		 Requires “SEXUAL PREDATOR” or “943.0435, F.S.” on the applicable credential. Specifies reregistration-month credential compliance, unless the required credential has already been secured or updated. FLHSMV issues credentials; registrant obtains the required credential; agencies exchange classification information.
§ 322.19, F.S.
§ 943.0435(3)-(4), F.S.
§ 775.21(6)(f)-(g), F.S.
Name/address changes and the special 48-hour duties		 The general 30-day license/ID update rule preserves the shorter registrant requirements. Initial registration and specified name/residence changes require separate 48-hour compliance. In-state travel residence is reported within 48 hours AFTER establishment through the statutory sheriff/online or supervision route. Registrant; FLHSMV; sheriff; DOC/DJJ for applicable supervised reports.
§ 322.212(5)(c), (6), F.S.
Possession of improperly marked credentials		 Makes possession of a driver license or identification card lacking the required offender/predator marking, or bearing an altered marking, a third-degree felony. Law enforcement investigates; state attorney prosecutes; court adjudicates.
§ 68.07(2), (3)(i), (6), F.S.
Judicial change of name		 Requires screening and disclosure in name-change proceedings and interagency notice of a registrant’s court-ordered name change. Court approval does not replace separate registration and credential-update duties. Petitioner; court/clerk; FDLE; FLHSMV; local law enforcement.
§ 943.04354, F.S.
Removal in special circumstances		 Provides a narrow judicial removal route for qualifying offenses and age circumstances, including a victim aged 13-17 and an offender no more than four years older. Additional statutory and federal-law conditions apply. Circuit court decides after notice to state attorney and FDLE; FDLE implements a qualifying certified order.
§ 775.24, F.S.
§ 943.0436, F.S.
Judicial duty; limitations on exemption orders		 Limits orders improperly exempting eligible people from registration/designation or obstructing agency duties, subject to the stated constitutional and unlawful-operation qualifications. An affected agency may seek relief from such an order within one year. Courts; FDLE and other affected agencies.
§ 775.25, F.S.
Venue for registration prosecutions		 Identifies permissible counties for prosecution of specified registration acts or omissions. Venue determines where a case may be prosecuted; this provision does not create another reporting deadline. State attorneys; courts; investigating law enforcement.
§ 775.21(10)(g), F.S.
§ 943.0435(13), F.S.
§ 944.607(12), F.S.
§ 985.4815(12), F.S.
Assisting evasion; harboring, concealment or false information		 Specified third-party offenses require reason to believe the person has not complied AND intent to help evade law enforcement seeking that person over the noncompliance. Ordinary housing, caregiving or legal assistance is not automatically criminalized. Third parties meeting the statutory elements; law enforcement; state attorneys; courts.

Residence, presence, contact and related criminal restrictions

Residence, presence, contact and related criminal restrictions
Statutory authority / legal subject Operative provision and applicability Responsible person or entity
§ 775.215, F.S.
Residency restrictions		 For specified convictions involving a victim younger than 16, restricts residence within 1,000 feet of specified schools, child-care facilities, parks and playgrounds. Public-pool provisions have separate July 1, 2026 offense/residence-change criteria. Statutory exclusions and protection concerning later-established facilities apply. Covered person; law enforcement; state attorneys/courts; DOC for supervised residence review.
§ 856.022, F.S.
Loitering/prowling and specified child-contact restrictions		 Applies to listed offenses against victims younger than 18. The 500-foot provision requires loitering or prowling; it is not a blanket exclusion zone. Other provisions regulate child contact in parks, playgrounds and public pools, and school/child-care entry, notice and supervision, with specified exceptions. Covered person; property administrators where applicable; law enforcement; courts.
§ 901.15(9)(h)-(i), F.S.
Warrantless arrest authority		 Permits a probable-cause arrest without a warrant for the specified violations of section 856.022. This is law-enforcement authority, not an additional personal registration report. Arresting law-enforcement officer; courts review resulting proceedings.
§ 794.075, F.S.
Prescription erectile-dysfunction drugs		 Prohibits a person designated as a sexual predator from possessing prescription drugs for erectile dysfunction. The designation limitation matters; the section does not cover every sexual offender solely by registration status. Designated sexual predator; law enforcement; state attorneys; courts.

Probation, community control, conditional release and juvenile treatment

Probation, community control, conditional release and juvenile treatment
Statutory authority / legal subject Operative provision and applicability Responsible person or entity
§ 948.30, F.S.
Additional probation/community-control conditions		 Requires conditions for specified sexual offenses, with offense-date, victim-age and other qualifications. Conditions can include curfew, treatment, contact/location/work restrictions, Internet conditions, polygraphs and electronic monitoring. Pool and Halloween provisions have their own applicability; they are not universal registry conditions. Sentencing court imposes conditions; DOC supervises compliance.
§ 947.1405, F.S.
Conditional release		 Governs qualifying conditional-release supervision and special conditions for covered sexual offenses. Includes qualified location, contact, treatment, monitoring, public-pool and Halloween provisions. Conditional release is a specific supervision status, not a synonym for registration. Florida Commission on Offender Review orders conditions/revocation; DOC prepares plans and supervises.
§ 948.31, F.S.
Evaluation and recommended treatment		 Authorizes a court-ordered sexual-offender evaluation for a registered person placed on probation or community control, at the person’s expense. Requires completion and payment for recommended treatment. Court; DOC; qualified treatment practitioner; covered probationer.
§ 948.063, F.S.
Electronic monitoring after specified violations		 Requires court-ordered electronic monitoring after covered probation/community-control violations for the statutory category involving an offender aged 18 or older, victim aged 15 or younger and specified registration/offense criteria. Court orders; DOC implements monitoring.
§ 948.11(6), F.S.
Active location monitoring		 Requires active location monitoring when the court or Commission orders electronic monitoring for covered supervised people with a current or prior sexual-offense conviction. Court or Commission orders; DOC uses the monitoring technology.
§ 948.06(4), (8), F.S.
Supervision-violation custody and hearings		 Prescribes special custody, release and hearing rules for specified registered persons and violent felony offenders of special concern following alleged probation/community-control violations. The statutory categories and exceptions control. Courts; DOC; jail custodians.
§ 903.0351, F.S.
Pretrial release pending a supervision-violation hearing		 Prohibits bail or pretrial release before resolution of the probation/community-control violation hearing for violent felony offenders of special concern and the specified felony-supervision/qualifying-new-offense categories. An exception applies where the violation is solely failure to pay costs, fines or restitution. Courts; arresting agencies; jail custodians.
§ 948.09(1)-(3), F.S.
Costs of supervision and electronic monitoring		 Requires covered supervised people to contribute to supervision and monitoring costs. DOC may exempt all or part of specified costs for statutory factors, including diligent inability to obtain sufficient employment and undue hardship supporting dependents. Court/Commission; DOC; covered supervised person. General supervision law, not a fee owed by every registrant.
§ 948.32, F.S.
Supervision-status checks in sexual-offense investigations		 Requires investigating/arresting agencies to check DOC supervision status for specified sexual offenses and notify the supervising officer. This is an agency duty. Investigating/arresting agency; DOC correctional probation officer.
§ 985.48, F.S.
Juvenile commitment, treatment and transition		 Governs qualifying juvenile sexual-offender commitment, intensive treatment, transition, supervision and associated notices. It does not make every juvenile case subject to public registration. DJJ; courts; treatment providers; schools; local law enforcement.

Publication, notification, records and oversight

Publication, notification, records and oversight
Statutory authority / legal subject Operative provision and applicability Responsible person or entity
§ 943.043, F.S.
Public registry information and absconder assistance		 Provides Internet publication, toll-free access and requested information; requires analytical assistance locating people who abscond from registration. Limits public posting of specified vehicle information belonging to nonregistrant household members. FDLE administers public information and assists local law enforcement.
§ 943.44353, F.S.
Automatic registration-information notification		 Requires an automatic public notification system for sexual-offender/predator registration information. Section 943.44353 is the enacted section number, distinct from the OPPAGA study provision. FDLE develops and maintains the notification system.
§ 944.606, F.S.
Adult release notification		 Requires covered identification, location and release information to be transmitted to FDLE, local law enforcement and specified requesters. Includes local-jail intake/release duties. DOC/jail custodians supply information; FDLE and local agencies receive/disseminate it.
§ 985.481, F.S.
Qualifying juvenile release notification		 Requires specified juvenile release information and identifying data to be electronically supplied to FDLE, with public disclosure and local-jail duties under the statutory conditions. DJJ/jail custodians; FDLE; local law enforcement.
§ 943.0437, F.S.
Information shared with commercial social-networking websites		 Permits FDLE to provide reported email addresses and Internet identifiers to qualifying websites for voluntary screening/removal of users. It does not itself prohibit every registrant from using social media. FDLE supplies information; participating websites decide permitted action.
§ 943.0515(3), F.S.
Retention of qualifying juvenile criminal-history records		 Requires permanent retention of qualifying juvenile sexual-offense criminal-history records instead of ordinary juvenile-record expunction. FDLE Criminal Justice Information Program.
§ 943.04353, F.S.
OPPAGA triennial review		 Requires a triennial study of registration, notification, agency practices and related policy. Oversight of the system is distinct from a personal reporting obligation. OPPAGA conducts the study; Legislature receives findings.
§ 943.046, F.S.
Broader release of criminal-offender information		 Authorizes law enforcement to release qualifying criminal-offender information under specified criteria. A broader information-disclosure statute, not a stand-alone sexual-offender reporting duty. Law-enforcement agencies.
§ 943.325, F.S.
DNA database and sample collection		 Establishes FDLE’s DNA database and sample collection for statutorily covered offenders and arrestees. Eligibility is broader than registry status; collection depends on the section’s categories. FDLE database; custodial, supervision and collecting agencies; covered person.

Employment, volunteer appointments, education and screening

Employment, volunteer appointments, education and screening
Statutory authority / legal subject Operative provision and applicability Responsible person or entity
§ 943.04351, F.S.
Government employment/volunteer registry search		 Requires national-registry screening before specified government appointments where children congregate, including public pools; FDLE is the fallback. A stated criminal-history-screening exception applies. The section requires a search, not a universal hiring prohibition. Hiring government entity searches; FDLE supplies fallback information.
§ 943.04352, F.S.
Misdemeanor-probation provider registry search		 Requires public/private providers to search the registry when a person receives misdemeanor probation. It is a provider screening duty, not a new registration deadline for every person on misdemeanor probation. Public/private misdemeanor-probation provider.
§ 943.0438, F.S.
Youth athletic-coach screening		 Requires specified background screening of athletic coaches associated with independent sanctioning authorities. Registry checks apply in stated screening exceptions. Independent sanctioning authority; applicable state screening agencies.
§ 435.04, F.S.
Level 2 screening standards		 Covered screening includes fingerprint criminal-history checks and sexual-offender/predator registry searches for states in which the applicant resided during the preceding five years. Chapter 435 applies where incorporated by the governing program. Covered employer/agency; FDLE state records and FBI-check requests.
§ 435.07(4), F.S.
Exemptions from screening disqualification		 Bars specified exemptions for sexual predators and section 943.0435 offenders, with the stated section 943.04354 removal exception. Separately addresses certain previously registered child-care personnel; the exact category controls. Appropriate agency or qualified-entity head decides permitted exemptions.
§ 1012.315, F.S.
Educator and direct-student-contact ineligibility		 Excludes registered sexual offenders and other statutorily disqualified people from educator certification and covered direct-student-contact employment. Includes specified scholarship-school owners/operators and application-time continuity provisions. AHCA determines screening eligibility; education authorities administer certification/employment.
§ 1012.467, F.S.
Covered noninstructional school contractors		 Requires contractor screening; disqualifying convictions include section 943.0435 qualifying offenses. Provides school-access/badge rules and 48-hour reporting of specified arrests. Former subsection (7) expired July 31, 2026 and is not listed as a current duty. AHCA determines eligibility; school districts enforce access/badging; covered contractor reports specified arrests.
§ 1012.468(3), F.S.
Registry searches for screening-exempt contractors		 Requires FDLE and national-registry searches even for specified screening-exempt contractors. Identified offenders/predators cannot access school grounds while students are present; districts notify the contracting party within three business days. School district searches without charging the contractor; contracting party receives notice.
§ 1006.695, F.S.
Postsecondary registry-information notice		 Requires specified colleges, state universities and career centers to provide students/employees registry website and public-information phone details at orientation and on institutional websites. Covered educational institution; FDLE supplies public information.

Separate civil-commitment proceedings and voting-rights consequences

Separate civil-commitment proceedings and voting-rights consequences
Statutory authority / legal subject Operative provision and applicability Responsible person or entity
§§ 394.910-394.932, F.S.
§ 394.917, F.S.
Involuntary civil commitment of sexually violent predators		 Creates a separate evaluation, petition, trial, civil-commitment, treatment and release-review process. A section 775.21 sexual-predator designation is not by itself a civil-commitment order. DCF; state attorneys; courts; DOC/DJJ and other custodians provide referrals.
§ 98.0751(1), (2)(b), (3), F.S.
Voting-rights restoration after a felony sexual offense		 Excludes felony sexual offenses from automatic restoration on completion of sentence; civil-rights restoration is required. Eligibility turns on conviction and the statutory definition, not the registry label alone. This is a voting law, not an FDLE registration duty. Department of State; supervisors of elections; clemency authorities.

Qualifying convictions: the adult sexual-offender predicate index

These are registration predicates, not additional reporting duties. Section 943.0435(1)(h) also addresses attempts, solicitation, conspiracy, similar out-of-jurisdiction offenses, redesignated provisions and an independent other-jurisdiction designation route. Its release-date and other eligibility requirements still apply.

Twenty-three entries, including preserved former provisions
Qualifying provision Legal subject Limitation or qualification
§ 393.135(2), F.S. Sexual misconduct with clients with developmental disabilities Subsection (2) only.
§ 394.4593(2), F.S. Sexual misconduct with patients receiving mental-health treatment Subsection (2) only.
§ 787.01, F.S. Kidnapping Minor-victim qualification applies.
§ 787.02, F.S. False imprisonment Minor-victim qualification applies.
§ 787.025(2)(c), F.S. Luring or enticing a child Specified paragraph and minor-victim qualification.
§ 787.06(3)(b), (d), (f), (g), or (5), F.S. Human trafficking Specified sexual-trafficking provisions, not the entire section.
Former § 787.06(3)(h), F.S. (2013) Former trafficking provision involving a child younger than 15 Historical predicate expressly preserved by the current registration statute; link is the 2013 edition.
§ 794.011 (excluding (10)), F.S. Sexual battery Subsection (10) is excluded from this registration inventory.
§ 794.05, F.S. Unlawful sexual activity with certain minors Offender aged 24 or older; victim aged 16 or 17; statutory nonage exception applies.
Former § 796.03, F.S. (2013) Procuring a person under age 18 for prostitution Former offense preserved as a predicate; link is the 2013 edition.
Former § 796.035, F.S. (2013) Selling or buying minors into prostitution Former offense preserved as a predicate; link is the 2013 edition.
§ 800.04, F.S. Lewd or lascivious offenses involving a person younger than 16 Adult inventory lists the section; juvenile adjudication criteria are narrower.
§ 810.145(8), F.S. Qualifying digital voyeurism Subsection (8), not every digital-voyeurism offense.
§ 825.1025, F.S. Lewd or lascivious offenses upon or in the presence of an elderly person or disabled person Listed section.
§ 827.071, F.S. Sexual performance by a child; child sexual abuse material Listed section.
§ 847.0133, F.S. Protection of minors; obscene material Listed section.
§ 847.0135 (excluding (6)), F.S. Computer pornography and prohibited computer/Internet conduct Subsection (6) is excluded from this registration inventory.
§ 847.0137, F.S. Transmission of child sexual abuse material by electronic device Listed section.
§ 847.0138, F.S. Transmission of material harmful to minors by electronic device Listed section.
§ 847.0145, F.S. Selling or buying minors for sexually explicit visual depictions Listed section.
§ 895.03, F.S. Racketeering Requires the specified written judicial finding linking racketeering to listed offenses or sexual intent/motive.
§ 916.1075(2), F.S. Sexual misconduct with forensic clients Subsection (2) only.
§ 985.701(1), F.S. Sexual misconduct with persons in specified juvenile-justice status Subsection (1) only.

Juvenile adjudications: Section 943.0435(1)(h)1.d. requires age 14 or older at the offense, an adjudication on or after July 1, 2007, and specified offense/factual findings. The adult list does not automatically apply to every juvenile adjudication.

Sexual-predator designation: Section 775.21(4)-(5) uses different qualifying categories and requires a written judicial finding. The adult offender predicate list above does not automatically establish predator status.

When a headline says failure to register, the next question should be simple: what is the person accused of failing to report or do? The words alone do not explain the case. A charge under the reporting or compliance provisions does not, by itself, establish a newly alleged sexual offense. The charge document and facts determine what is alleged. That distinction matters when a few words in an arrest headline are all a neighbor, employer or family member ever sees.

Current-law sources and scope

Linked official statutes, FDLE’s statutory index (labeled as of 2025), current public requirements and FDLE’s FAQ. The current statute edition governs these summaries. County and municipal ordinances, federal obligations and individual supervision orders add separate requirements; this table does not inventory every local ordinance or general criminal-law cross-reference.

An ID Card, a Lost Job, a Family Waiting

The continued burden is easier to understand when the charge is explained. Florida’s registration statute makes failures involving residences, employment, vehicles, online identifiers and required identification criminal offenses. These are matters that can change as people work, move or care for a family. A registration offense is a new criminal allegation, but the charge itself does not allege a new sexual act.

In an April 2025 Hernando Sun report, a 63-year-old went to the registration office to report a move from Pasco County to Hernando County and a transient residence. He was arrested for failing to obtain the required Florida-issued license or ID. He said he knew the requirement but could not afford the fee. The reported April charge involved identification, not a new sexual offense. He arrived to report a change and left under arrest. His account raises a question that belongs alongside the arrest count: what happens when a person knows the rule but cannot afford what it requires? Whether help with the fee would have changed the outcome is not established by the report.

An ID card is one example. Another Hernando report describes a three-year sentence involving an unreported social-media account and job termination. A Flagler follow-up describes an evicted renter arrested when he arrived to update his registration; officials alleged the update was overdue. Losing a job or a home can leave a household struggling to get through the next day. These cases show why readers need the circumstances behind a reporting charge, as well as the headline.

Helping a child with a car can also bring reporting consequences. In a member account published by FAC on April 24, 2026, a parent described co-signing an auto loan with their son. Both names were on the title and registration, but the parent said the son was the only driver and kept the car at his own home. The writer also described failing to report a replacement license plate on a different, already-reported vehicle. The account reported four felony charges involving failure to report and providing false information, 2.5 days in jail and a $12,500 bond. The writer was awaiting trial when the account was published; it does not establish the eventual court outcome. These details come from the member’s own account. Behind the vehicle updates is a family trying to arrange transportation, then facing days of uncertainty and a criminal case.

A change in housing or work can also become the subject of an arrest. In its March 30, 2026 Operation Low Tide announcement, FDLE reported that two registrants were arrested and booked into the Monroe County Jail. The listed charges included failures to report residence and employment changes, along with other registration-compliance charges. The announcement does not describe a new sexual offense in those two arrests. A new home or job can be a step toward stability. The release does not tell us what was happening in these individuals’ lives. It does tell us the reporting charges, and those details deserve the same attention as the arrest count.

How many mothers, fathers, brothers, sisters, spouses, children and caregivers were affected by enforcement during these years? The public reports do not count them. When a paycheck stops, the rent still comes due. When a loved one is jailed, someone must care for the children, find a lawyer, gather paperwork and try to understand what happens next. Work, housing and care arrangements can be disrupted at the same time. Caregivers, lawyers and supporters may take on hearings, deadlines and legal bills while trying to keep a household together. Those consequences can outlast the operation and the headline.

When failure to register involves no allegation of a new sexual crime, could the person be trying to rebuild? Could they be looking for a lawful home, holding onto a job or trying to correct an overdue update? A reporting charge alone cannot answer those questions. This enforcement history needs room for the person’s circumstances and their effort to move forward. So does any discussion of the burdens that remain.

Families in FAC’s UN Petition

FAC’s petition addressed to the UN High Commissioner for Human Rights describes how registry burdens reach beyond the person listed. Its words help explain why families belong in this account of enforcement:

“loss of employment, loss of housing”

“The stigmatization extends to the spouses, children, family”

“psychological effects are experienced by the entire household”

These excerpts state FAC’s arguments in the petition; they are not UN findings.

What Did These Years of Enforcement Achieve?

“FDLE will continue to work alongside our law enforcement partners to help keep our communities safe.”

— Mark Glass, in the Endgame announcement

The arrest figures, the legal duties and the family experiences all lead back to Glass’s promise of safety. People want their children, loved ones and neighbors protected from harm. They deserve to know which efforts work. Investigating allegations of new sexual harm matters, as does knowing how charges ended and whether reporting discrepancies were corrected. An arrest count cannot establish that an assault was prevented, a charge was sustained or a family became safer. Understanding this history requires outcomes the public can assess and evidence of what helped.

Accuracy Matters for the Agencies, Too

OPPAGA’s account of a 2022 FBI audit describes programming and record-validation problems in the registry system. It also records FDLE’s corrections: the validation error was corrected before the audit concluded, programming changes were completed in June 2023, and additional FCIC/NCIC flag updates took effect in December 2023.

The corrections are part of the history as well. Reliable records matter to everyone affected by the system. When a missed update can bring a felony charge, the records used to enforce that duty deserve scrutiny, too. The audit findings do not establish that a particular person was wrongly arrested.

The public releases also show that a discrepancy did not always end in arrest. FDLE’s June 4, 2026 Spring Cleaning report records 12 registrants brought back into compliance after discrepancies were found and five arrests for registration violations. One arrested person also faced a marijuana-possession charge. The release does not explain what determined correction rather than custody, or whether an ID card, notice or correction of information could have changed another outcome. The public deserves to know how those decisions were made. For a person and their family, the decision can mean getting home that evening or beginning a criminal case.

The Public Deserves Answers

The public deserves clear, honest answers, and lawmakers need accurate information to make informed decisions about the laws and the people affected by them.

“Each of us is more than the worst thing we’ve ever done.”

— Bryan Stevenson

Sources and Scope

The operation tables preserve 118 entries drawn from source-linked public announcements, including components and follow-ups. The exact-word review separately verifies 12 distinct operations whose official descriptions use “targeted” for groups expressly including the registry population; 11 concern registry or probation compliance, and one concerns broader immigration enforcement. Related forms such as “targeting” are excluded. This is a minimum, with each operation counted once. They are not a complete inventory of Florida arrests. Updated cumulative announcements replace earlier totals; headline figures are not added together. Bad Apple began before Glass became acting commissioner, so its entire figure cannot be attributed to his tenure.

The tenure enactment tables use official Florida Senate bill histories and enacted chapter laws; approval dates determine inclusion and companion bills are listed once alongside their enacted vehicle. The registration-office warning table follows 18 categories in the reviewed acknowledgment, with original duties and material amendments verified against enacted chapter laws. Approval dates and effective dates are distinct; the original signed images and personal identifiers are excluded. The separate current-law table links the 2026 Florida Statutes, with historical predicate provisions labeled, and distinguishes personal obligations from agency duties. It was checked October 2, 2026.

The combined statewide arrest-and-population table uses OPPAGA Report 24-11, Exhibit 13, based on FDLE data. Its population comparison uses published same-year snapshots for 2015, 2018 and 2021; the other seven annual populations and ratios are explicitly labeled interpolation estimates. These annual figures cover all Florida agencies and are separate from the operation announcements. Neither the operation chart nor the tables establish unique people, affected families, convictions or a complete May 2022-September 2026 total. The sentence-served comparison is calculated from OPPAGA Exhibit 3 for October 2024 and describes a population category, not subsequent offending. The audit discussion follows OPPAGA’s account and includes FDLE’s corrections. The Spring Cleaning results are reported separately; no combined total or correction-versus-arrest rate is inferred. Calls for public accountability are editorial positions. The added official sources do not establish the final court outcome of the April 2025 Hernando identification case or provide a direct family account. The vehicle example is a published member account; its charges, custody duration and bond are attributed to the writer, and no court disposition is established here. The Monroe County example uses FDLE’s Operation Low Tide announcement.

Florida Action Committee • Accurate reporting. Fair laws. Room to rebuild.

The post FDLE Registry Enforcement History Under Mark Glass and Its Continued Burdens appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

]]> https://floridaactioncommittee.org/fdle-registry-enforcement-mark-glass-burdens/feed/ 3 28370 📣 Media Tuesday #3 ⚡ The Buzz: After the Call, Union County, FAC v. Glass & U.N. Petition https://floridaactioncommittee.org/media-tuesday-3-after-the-call-union-county-fac-v-glass/ https://floridaactioncommittee.org/media-tuesday-3-after-the-call-union-county-fac-v-glass/#comments Tue, 29 Sep 2026 11:30:08 +0000 https://floridaactioncommittee.org/?p=28298 FLORIDA ACTION COMMITTEE 📣 MEDIA TUESDAY #3 ⚡ THE BUZZ News • Media • Legal Developments • Ways to Take Action Tuesday, September 29, 2026 This week’s The Buzz brings together our newest media release, important Florida legal developments, our continuing declaration effort, the push toward 10,000 petition signatures, a new Florida child-protection enforcement filing, a national case to watch,

The post 📣 Media Tuesday #3 ⚡ The Buzz: After the Call, Union County, FAC v. Glass & U.N. Petition appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

]]>

  1. FLORIDA ACTION COMMITTEE
📣 MEDIA TUESDAY #3
⚡ THE BUZZ
News • Media • Legal Developments • Ways to Take Action
Tuesday, September 29, 2026

This week’s The Buzz brings together our newest media release, important Florida legal developments, our continuing declaration effort, the push toward 10,000 petition signatures, a new Florida child-protection enforcement filing, a national case to watch, and several ways you can get involved.

We have included links throughout this update so you can follow the original reports, court information and resources directly.

🎬 NEW FROM OUR MEDIA TEAM

AFTER THE CALL – PART ONE

📺 PREMIERES TUESDAY AT 10:00 AM ET

The call may end. The impact may not.

After the Call – Part One examines scam calls aimed at people and families affected by Florida’s registration laws.

Callers may claim to represent law enforcement, refer to supposed warrants or missed obligations, threaten arrest, and demand immediate payment.

The video looks at what happens after the call: fear, confusion, financial pressure, embarrassment, and the stress that can continue after the phone is put down.

Watch it. Share it. And consider sending it to someone who may benefit from knowing the warning signs.

🎬 TO BE CONTINUED… Part Two follows.

⚖ LEGAL UPDATE

FAC v. GLASS

Our federal constitutional challenge to Florida’s registration system continues.

Florida Action Committee v. Glass, et al., Case No. 4:26-cv-00388-MW-MJF, asks the federal court to evaluate multiple provisions of Florida’s modern registration system and local restrictions under the constitutional claims raised in the complaint.

The official FAC case page remains the best place to follow publicly available filings and major updates as the litigation progresses.

🚧 LEGAL WATCH

UNION COUNTY LAWSUIT

A federal lawsuit is challenging Union County’s 2,500-foot restriction, which plaintiffs allege can limit travel through parts of Lake Butler and access to ordinary public and commercial areas.

Separate case: The Union County lawsuit is not the same lawsuit as Florida Action Committee v. Glass, et al.

🌎 THE PUSH TO 10,000

U.N. PETITION

9,642
VERIFIED SIGNATURES
ONLY 356 TO GO
📲 1,465 SHARES   |   💬 194 COMMENTS

Every additional signature represents another person who has seen the issue, considered it and chosen to add their name.

Sharing matters too. Every share can put the petition in front of people who may never have encountered these issues before.

Signing grows the number.
Sharing grows the audience.
Your story can give the numbers a voice.

✍ SIGN IT

📲 SHARE IT

💬 COMMENT ON IT

🎥 Tell your story: If Change.org gives you the option, consider adding a short video explaining why you signed or how registration laws have affected you or your family.

With your permission, strong firsthand comments or videos may also help FAC identify stories for future media coverage, social posts or YouTube projects.

🌎 SIGN, COMMENT & SHARE THE U.N. PETITION

📰 LOCAL & FLORIDA NEWS

UTHMEIER SEEKS CHATGPT RESTRICTIONS FOR FLORIDA MINORS

Florida Attorney General James Uthmeier asked a Highlands County court on September 28, 2026 to temporarily prohibit ChatGPT from being offered to minors in Florida while the state’s civil lawsuit against OpenAI proceeds.

The motion also seeks additional protections for personal information collected from children under 13 and restrictions on developing new artificial intelligence models without independent third-party safeguards and approval. The underlying lawsuit began in June.

⚖ A request for restrictions, not a court ruling: As of September 28 reporting, a judge had not granted the injunction or ruled that OpenAI violated the law.

OpenAI told Florida Phoenix that it had paused training its most capable models pending additional safeguards.

For readers following Florida’s child-protection policies, this is a significant civil enforcement development involving platform access and consumer protection. It does not change Florida’s registration requirements or establish new criminal convictions.

Case No. 26000295GCAXMX. The linked motion is a copy hosted by CBS12. Status reflects September 28 reporting.

🇺🇸 NATIONAL WATCH

NEBRASKA: NEW FEDERAL CIVIL-RIGHTS CASE

A new federal civil-rights case was filed in Nebraska on September 21, 2026.

Holmes v. State of Nebraska et al., Case No. 8:26-cv-00555, names the State of Nebraska, Nebraska State Patrol, Nebraska Sex Offender Registry, Omaha, Douglas County and several officials. The docket lists the cause of action as 42 U.S.C. Section 1983.

The case is at an early stage. On September 23, the court granted the plaintiff permission to proceed without prepaying fees and stated that an initial review of the claims would follow. The court has not ruled on the merits.

🎙

JOIN OUR MEDIA TEAM

Even a few hours a week can help.

Our Media Team monitors developing news, researches stories, organizes source material, produces multimedia content and helps make accurate information available to members, journalists and the public.

📰 Monitor local and national news

🔎 Research laws, records and source material

✍ Write or proofread

📱 Help with social media

🎬 Assist with videos and multimedia

📧 Help with reporter outreach

📊 Organize research and information

💡 Bring new story ideas to the team

🔥 TURN INFORMATION INTO ACTION

What Can You Do Today?

🎬 WATCH AFTER THE CALL – PART ONE
Watch at 10:00 AM Eastern and share it.
🌎 SIGN, COMMENT & SHARE THE PETITION
Help move the petition toward 10,000 signatures and add your voice.
🎙 JOIN THE MEDIA TEAM
Even a few volunteer hours can help.

❤ SUPPORT OUR WORK

FAC’s legal, media, research and advocacy work depends on support from members and donors.

Contributions help sustain litigation, research, public education and media outreach.

❤ DONATE TO FAC

💚 TAX-DEDUCTIBLE GIVING

For information about making a tax-deductible donation to Florida Action Foundation, Inc., a 501(c)(3) organization, contact:admin@floridaactionfoundation.org

💬 “Progress is built one voice, one action, and one act of courage at a time.”

That is what this week is about.

One person watches and shares After the Call – Part One.
One person tells their story through a declaration.
One person adds their name to the petition.
One person stays informed about the Union County case.
One person helps support the legal, media and research work that keeps all of this moving.

Each action may seem small on its own. Together, they create momentum.

📣 INFORMATION. PARTICIPATION. COMMUNITY.
FLORIDA ACTION COMMITTEE
With Unity Comes Change.

The post 📣 Media Tuesday #3 ⚡ The Buzz: After the Call, Union County, FAC v. Glass & U.N. Petition appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

]]> https://floridaactioncommittee.org/media-tuesday-3-after-the-call-union-county-fac-v-glass/feed/ 3 28298