residency restrictions Archives - Florida Action Committee (FAC)

Understanding how Florida’s SB 212 registry rules impact daily life

FAC_Media — Sat, 10 Oct 2026 21:47:48 +0000

Florida Action Committee | Media Buzz

SB 212: One Example of How Registry Rules Complicate Everyday Life

By FAC Media

For our neighbors in Port St. Lucie, St. Lucie County, and Panama City Beach, registry restrictions affect ordinary decisions. We understand why another change can leave people worried about conversations, errands, and family life. You deserve understandable answers and practical guidance.

SB 212, Chapter 2026-17, took effect July 1, 2026, changing pool-related residence restrictions, communication rules, and supervision requirements.

One ordinary moment

Imagine a person on the registry choosing Walmart curbside pickup in Port St. Lucie. While opening his trunk, he chats with the employee loading his groceries. Later, he learns the worker is 17. What if this location is within new restricted residency or restricted zones?

He worries afterward about whether that conversation could mean trouble. This hypothetical reflects concerns shared with FAC; it is not a documented arrest or court finding.

What the law covers

Section 856.022(4)(a) covers specified qualifying convictions involving victims under 18. It restricts knowing contact or communication with minors, or approaching with that intent, at parks, playgrounds, and public swimming pools. It includes an exception for legally defined family or household members.

SB 212 removed the previous requirement for sexual intent or sexual content. Ordinary conversation at a covered location can therefore fall within the wording. An ordinary store parking lot is not automatically a covered location.

What about an accident with a driver under 18?

That question also came from our community. Imagine a collision with a 16-year-old driver: can exchanging information become a registry violation?

The driver’s age alone does not establish a violation of this communication provision. An ordinary roadway is not automatically a park, playground, or public swimming pool. Florida’s crash law requires identifying information and reasonable assistance in covered crashes, regardless of the other person’s age. Separate supervision conditions or court orders need individual review.

State law permits warrantless arrest based on probable cause for the communication offense. Officers must apply its actual requirements.

OFFICER Discretion is whats used.

State law and local layers

The St. Lucie County Sheriff’s Office handles state registration requirements locally. Officers can enforce state law without a matching county ordinance.

Port St. Lucie is a separate city. Its 2022 ordinance expanded residence restrictions to 2,500 feet around specified locations. Panama City Beach’s July 9, 2026 ordinance connects state restrictions with local residence provisions and lifeguard permitting.

Overlap alone does not make an ordinance unlawful. Residents deserve clear explanations of what local rules add and why.

In Panama City Beach, the ordinance also requires property owners who knowingly allow a prohibited residence to begin removal steps within ten days of learning of the violation or receiving a citation. It does not require a completed eviction within ten days.

A person can want to comply and still struggle to understand several overlapping sets of rules. That uncertainty deserves attention, because the consequences reach spouses, children, employers, and the wider community, too.

To everyone living with this uncertainty: your concerns matter. We will keep explaining these rules and advocating for the people and families behind them.

Visit FAC’s dedicated FAC v. Glass case page and read the First Amended Complaint, filed September 29, 2026. Thank You!

The post Understanding how Florida’s SB 212 registry rules impact daily life appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).

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

FAC_Media — Sun, 04 Oct 2026 18:37:45 +0000

Florida Action Committee

Opinion & Commentary

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

The questions that follow people on both sides of the badge

By FAC Media
October 3, 2026 · Updated October 4, 2026

As a military veteran, I have friends in law enforcement. I ask them these same questions on a personal level, and even they are torn. One of those friends is a police director.

Those conversations stay with me. A uniform does not make difficult questions disappear. A person can believe in public safety, take their job seriously, and still wrestle with whether a law is fair or whether enforcing it will make the situation better.

That is the human side I want people to consider when we talk about registry enforcement. There is a person behind the badge, and there is a person standing in front of it. Both may be dealing with rules neither one had any say in writing. The consequences, though, fall heavily on the person being arrested and the family left behind.

If an officer apologizes while making an arrest, I can appreciate the compassion. I also want to understand what “it’s the law” means in that particular encounter. Is there a warrant? Does the law require that response? Is agency policy involved? Could the situation have been handled another way?

Those questions matter because carrying out a law and deciding whether that law is justified are different responsibilities. An arrest can be legally authorized and still leave the public with serious questions about the rule that led to it.

What we ask officers to carry

Florida’s own training recognizes that police work involves more than enforcement. The FDLE’s 2023 basic recruit textbook places constitutional rights and ethical responsibility alongside the duty to enforce the law. Its code of ethics calls for respect for “liberty, equality, and justice” and enforcement “courteously and appropriately.” It also teaches officers to speak up and intervene when another officer acts unethically.

The same training says personal feelings cannot govern an officer’s decisions. I understand that. A legal duty can remain even when the person carrying it out is uncomfortable with the outcome. That is a difficult position, especially when an officer can see that the immediate action will leave the underlying problem untouched.

There is also a difference between having authority to arrest and being required to arrest in every situation. Florida’s general warrantless-arrest statute uses “may arrest.” The available choices depend on the law, agency policy, warrants, and circumstances. That does not make a warning an option for every registry violation.

I want to understand where an officer has a choice and where the responsibility belongs to the people who wrote the law or set the policy. Otherwise, we can end up arguing with the person standing at the door while the decision that brought them there escapes scrutiny.

That tension appeared in a 2013 account of a Davie neighborhood meeting. Detective Adam Granit described having to follow rules even when he might disagree with them. His words are included under Broward County below. The report does not identify a particular restriction he wanted repealed.

Lawmakers have questioned the results, too. In remarks reported by the Florida Bar in 2008, then-Senator Dave Aronberg criticized conflicting local housing limits and proposed a uniform statewide approach. He still supported restrictions. What he challenged was whether the existing patchwork was making the public safer.

Written policies deserve scrutiny, too. The Orlando Police Department’s registry policy, effective April 21, 2025, opens with a broad claim about reoffending. Yet its non-arrest-contact section also limits arrest for merely refusing information. An agency’s assumptions and its procedures both shape what happens at the door. The exact policy excerpts appear under Orange County.

Officers have seen the human cost

These concerns appeared in public long before my personal conversations. In a July 20, 2009 NPR interview, then-Miami Police Chief John Timoney described officers responding to a man attempting suicide at the Julia Tuttle Causeway encampment. The report examined how residency restrictions had left registrants living beneath the bridge.

“It’s just an awful situation.”

John Timoney, then Miami police chief — NPR, July 20, 2009

That was a police chief describing distress his officers had encountered. Police can be the people called to respond when someone reaches a breaking point under the conditions the system has created.

The supervision side was raising concerns, too. In a 2009 research paper, Amy L. Datz, a Florida Department of Corrections assistant bureau chief, described Florida’s policies toward people convicted of sex offenses as “too broad and overreaching” and “ineffective and under-funded.” Her FDLE-hosted research surveyed 259 correctional probation specialists across Florida. Seventy-eight percent identified residency restrictions as the leading obstacle for supervised registrants.

That is a historical finding from Datz’s research, rather than an official statewide policy position. But it deserves attention. The people responsible for helping others comply were identifying housing restrictions as a major barrier to compliance. Lawmakers should have to answer that concern.

Perez put the conflict into words

By December 2017, Miami-Dade was again discussing enforcement at an encampment of homeless registrants. At the December 13 Public Safety & Health Committee hearing, Police Director Juan Perez described the position his department was in:

“We are in a catch 22, because regardless of what laws are in place in legislation, we know we have to enforce eventually the laws and county ordinances.”

Juan Perez, Miami-Dade Police Director — December 13, 2017

Later in the same hearing, he explained what concerned him about enforcement:

“Because my, my concern is that we do come in there and enforce, and we just displace it to another neighborhood or somewhere else. Because I don’t believe that the county ordinance is going to put individuals that are there – take them away – and there’s going to be some magical solution to it. They – the individuals there – will come out again, especially for county ordinance, and will be looking for a place to live, reside, and to be able to use as an address.”

Juan Perez — a later excerpt from the same hearing

These are the two recorded excerpts transcribed for our documentary, with punctuation adjusted for readability. They occur separately in the original hearing recording, at approximately 55:46–55:57 and 57:17–57:42.

This is why I wanted his words included. Perez was acknowledging a duty to enforce the rules while questioning what that enforcement would accomplish. Move people out of one neighborhood, and they still need somewhere to sleep. Arrest them, and that need may still be waiting when they come out. They still need an address they can lawfully use.

The county’s January 2018 research notes summarize that concern. They also summarize Deputy Mayor Maurice Kemp saying the county did not intend to arrest its way out of the situation. The problem was being recognized inside county government, including by the department expected to enforce the ordinance.

If the police director can see that the law will move the problem rather than solve it, why should the public be satisfied with another round of arrests?

A judge questioned the punishment

The same questions reach the courtroom. In State of Tennessee v. Rex Allen Moore, a routine appointment to swap a GPS monitor led to discovery of an unreported email account. Moore was already on probation for a separate theft conviction. The discovery led to registry-related charges and proceedings to revoke that probation.

At the August 19, 2022 hearing, Judge G. Scott Green of the Knox County Criminal Court found a violation but questioned whether it warranted making Moore serve the full four-year sentence:

“Do I think that he should go serve four years in the penitentiary for this, I don’t know that I feel that way”

G. Scott Green
Judge, Knox County Criminal Court, Tennessee
August 19, 2022 hearing; quoted in the July 11, 2023 appellate opinion.

The outcome was time served and renewed probation. The appellate court affirmed, finding knowing nondisclosure. The judge’s hesitation concerns the punishment; it does not erase the court’s finding. The four-year sentence was the underlying theft sentence.

What response makes someone more likely to comply and makes the community safer? A reporting violation deserves examination. So does the punishment imposed for it.

There are practical alternatives within Florida’s own agencies. In written replies to FAC in 2022, Manatee County’s Tom Kitchen Jr. and Walton County’s Jeffrey Goldberg described emergency sheltering that kept registrants with their families. Other county replies required separation or sheltering at a jail. These historical records show different administrative choices; they do not establish shelter rules in force today.

Hear the difference, county by county

We tried to find quotations for every Florida county, with speakers’ names, positions, dates, context, and source links. This has been hard. Some statements are easy to find; others are buried in older reports, hearings, written policies, or archive comments that lead to another source.

You deserve to see the words for yourself: how leaders connected to your county defend these rules, and what concerns others raise about their effects on registrants and families. Where we found both perspectives, we put them together below. All existing county quotations are retained. Where a perspective is still missing, we say so; that gap does not mean everyone in the county agrees.

A report or republication date is not necessarily the date words were spoken. Housing restrictions, registration checks, presence rules, and emergency policies can involve different laws and years. These excerpts are not presented as a direct debate. A safeguard or accommodation does not necessarily mean opposition to registration.

54 counties have source-linked quotations. Forty-four include enforcement or restriction material alongside concerns, substantive safeguards, or humane alternatives. Ten still need a substantive contrasting voice.

Choose a county below to read its quotations.

Alachua County

Florida Registry Laws: Behind the Headlines, Beyond the Labels

FAC_Media — Fri, 25 Sep 2026 12:30:06 +0000

FLORIDA ACTION COMMITTEE • MEDIA & ACTION

Florida Registry Laws: Behind the Headlines, Beyond the Labels

Real Lives, Real Consequences—and the Courage to Keep Going

Video Premiere

Friday, September 25, 2026
10:00 a.m. Eastern Time

Join us on FAC’s YouTube channel and share the video with someone
who needs to hear the full story.

Watch on YouTube Channel

WORD OF THE WEEK

Targeted

Selected as the focus of attention or action.

In the context of this week’s video, the word invites us to look closely at who is singled out, how enforcement operations are described, and what the announced results actually show.

When officials announce an operation targeting people on the registry,
the public deserves clear answers: What conduct is alleged? Which charges involve registration requirements? Which involve allegations of a new sexual offense? What do the numbers establish—and what
remains unproven?

For people and families affected, being the focus of repeated scrutiny can feel deeply personal. Our video asks viewers to examine the evidence and consider the consequences beyond the headline.

A label should never replace the facts. Every person’s dignity still matters.

Florida Registry Laws: Looking Beyond the Headlines

Florida registry laws affect housing, travel, family relationships, and everyday community life. Our new video examines those consequences through real footage, public officials’ own words, and research
presented on screen.

Florida’s registry enforcement operations often begin with a press conference, a dramatic operation name, and an arrest total. But what do those headlines tell us—and what remains unexplained?

The video examines the language used to describe people on the registry, public safety claims, and the consequences for individuals and families trying to build stable lives.

The film explores the difference between an arrest for a registration violation and an allegation of a new sexual offense. It places claims about repeat offending and “stranger danger” alongside research for
viewers to consider. It asks whether the public receives enough context to understand an operation’s numbers.

Behind every label is a person. Around that person may be a spouse, children, parents, friends, and others who also live with the consequences.

How is someone supposed to move forward when access to housing, family support, and everyday community life keeps narrowing? What does a meaningful opportunity to succeed actually look like?

These are questions about public policy, accountability, and whether the measures promoted in the name of safety deliver the results communities deserve.

Our goal is to encourage viewers to listen carefully, examine the evidence, and recognize the human consequences that a brief news report may leave out.

Join the premiere Friday, September 25, at 10:00 a.m. Eastern—and
help bring this conversation to people who have never heard the full story.

Sharing the video with a friend, a journalist, a community leader,
or an elected official can open a conversation. Your own experience
can also support another important part of this work: helping FAC document the effects of the laws it is challenging.

Your Story Matters: Complete Declaration Versions 1 and 2

FAC is gathering declarations for FAC v. Glass, its federal challenge to Florida’s registry laws and local restrictions.
These declarations help attorneys explain how the challenged requirements affect people’s actual lives. FAC has urgently asked affected registered citizens to participate.

A statute can describe a restriction in a few sentences. It cannot, by itself, explain what it feels like to lose a housing opportunity, miss time with family, or avoid a place because you are afraid of
violating an unfamiliar rule.

Your declaration can help make those consequences visible.

Do You Live In—or Visit—One of These Communities?

The map below identifies county and municipal defendants named in
FAC v. Glass. Shaded areas indicate defendant counties; red circles mark defendant cities.

The impact of these restrictions can extend beyond where you live.

Consider the places where you visit family, stay with friends, or would like to spend time but avoid because of local restrictions.

Version 1: How the Laws Affect You Where You Live

The original declaration form covers the effects of Florida’s registration requirements and applicable local restrictions. It includes experiences involving housing, overnight visits with family or friends, public spaces, travel reporting, identification markings, and residence checks.

Read the statements carefully, select only those that are true
for you, and review the completed declaration before signing. The form requires you to confirm that you are an adult FAC member
and that your declaration is truthful.

Complete Declaration Version 1

Version 2: How Other Counties and Cities Affect You

The effects of these restrictions do not necessarily end at the boundary of the county where you live.

Perhaps you cannot stay with relatives in another community.
Perhaps you avoid visiting friends, traveling to certain places, or entering public spaces because you do not know whether a local
proximity ordinance applies.

FAC prepared Version 2 to address the effects of restrictions in
other counties and cities.

If you have already submitted a declaration about your own county,
you can also submit a second declaration about other places
that affect you.

Complete Declaration Version 2

Please complete both versions if both apply to your circumstances.

Each serves a purpose: explaining the impact where you live and
explaining the impact of restrictions elsewhere. Please describe
only experiences that are true for you.

You do not need to have the most dramatic story for your experience
to matter. An ordinary family visit you cannot make, a place you avoid, or a housing choice you cannot pursue can help explain how these rules operate in daily life.

Add Your Voice: Sign FAC’s Human Rights Petition

FAC’s petition asks the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights to investigate public sex offender registration in the United States as a violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

The petition describes harms that extend beyond the person listed, including effects on housing, employment, personal safety, spouses, children, and other family members. It asks for investigation and
action on those human rights concerns.

Human dignity should remain part of every discussion about public safety, punishment, and rehabilitation.

Signing the petition is another way to support that message. Sharing it gives others an opportunity to learn about the issue and decide to add their voices.

Sign and Share the Human Rights Petition

If you have already signed, please share the link with someone who has not. Explain why this issue matters to you. Personal conversations can reach people who might otherwise scroll past.

Help FAC Continue This Work

Research, public education, outreach, and sustained legal action require people willing to contribute their time, their experiences,and their support.

76% of the goal

As of September 17, 2026, FAC had reached 76% of its fundraising
goal for this lawsuit.

Help support the effort by making a donation.

FAC’s General Legal Fund supports existing and future legal challenges,
including expenses such as attorneys’ fees, court filings, records
requests, and litigation research.

Donate to FAC’s Legal Efforts

For information about making a

tax-deductible donation to Florida Action Foundation, Inc.,
a 501(c)(3) organization,

contact:
anita@floridaactionfoundation.org

If you cannot donate, you can still contribute. Complete the declarations that apply to you. Sign and share the petition. Share FAC’s reporting and videos. Help someone else find the information they need to participate.

Your involvement matters.

Keep Going—Even When Progress Feels Slow

“Success is how high you bounce when you hit bottom.”

— Commonly attributed to General George S. Patton

There are days when another headline, another restriction, or another closed door can make progress feel far away. Those feelings are understandable. They do not erase the value of the work already
done—or the possibilities still ahead.

Every person who speaks honestly about their experience helps others understand. Every volunteer who follows through helps the work continue. Every declaration, shared resource, and contribution
represents someone choosing to stay involved.

We cannot promise that change will come quickly. We can keep showing up, documenting the facts, supporting one another, and asking the questions that deserve answers.

Never give up on your dignity, your family, or the possibility of change.

Visit FAC’s YouTube channel for the September 25 premiere
at 10:00 a.m. Eastern.

Complete
Version 1
and
Version 2
if both apply to you.

Sign and share the human rights petition.

Help support FAC’s continuing legal efforts.

With unity comes change.

Florida Action Committee

The post Florida Registry Laws: Behind the Headlines, Beyond the Labels appeared first on Florida Action Committee (FAC).