Would you be affected by House Bill 45 and Senate Bill 212? We break it down.
After posting yesterday’s Call to Action, we received a lot of comments (on our posts, in phone calls, and in email) from members who are confused as to whether House Bill 45 and Senate Bill 212 will apply to them. To try to simplify things, here’s how it breaks down:
HB 45 and Senate Bill 212 would ban certain people convicted of specified sexual offenses from living within 1,000 feet of public swimming pools or public bathing places. Whether the rule applies depends on when the underlying conviction happened and when the person moved into the house (or when the pool/bathing place was built).
Point 1: The bill targets (a) people convicted in Florida of qualifying offenses on or after October 1, 2004, and (b) people convicted in other jurisdictions of similar offenses on or after October 1, 2010. These people would now be prevented from residing within 1000 feet of a public swimming pool or public bathing places.
Point 2: The bill contains a key legal carve-out (which is the confusing part). If a person already lives somewhere and a new public pool/bathing place is built after they moved in, the bill says they would not be required to move. But if the person moved into a residence that was already within 1,000 feet of a pool/bathing place, the bill (as written) could put them in violation and force them to move or face penalties — even if they moved in years ago.
Here are a few hypothetical examples that will help you understand the bill:
“John” was convicted of a qualifying offense in 2003. John moved into his house in 2011. John’s house is within 1,000 ft of a public pool. John would not be in violation.
“Sam” was convicted of a qualifying offense in Florida in 2006. Sam moved into his house in 2011. Sam’s house is within 1,000 ft of an existing public pool built in 2009. Under the bills as written, Sam would be in violation and could be forced to move.
“Tom” was convicted of a qualifying offense in Florida in 2008. Tom moved into his house in 2011. A public pool was built next door in 2015. Under the bills as written, Tom would not be required to move, because the pool was built after he established residence.
“Louis” was convicted in another state in 2009 (a qualifying offense). Out-of-state convictions count only if after October 1, 2010, so Louis would be excluded from the bills’ restrictions.
“Fred” was convicted in another state in 2011 (a qualifying offense). Fred moved into his house in 2020. Fred’s house is within 1,000 ft of an existing public pool built in 2009. Under the bills as written, Fred would be in violation and could be forced to move.
“Ted” was convicted in another state in 2011 (a qualifying offense). Ted moved into his house in 2020. Ted’s house is within 1,000 ft of an existing public pool built in 2021. Under the bills as written, Ted would not be required to move, because the pool was built after he established residence.
The bills treat the timing of both the conviction and the pool/bathing-place as crucial. This creates two very different results depending on those two dates.
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I’m still confused, would I still be able to visit the beach or a lake etc.?
I would guess so. I think Broward county banned PFRs from beaches etc. It’s getting out of hand. So if you can’t live near something. Logically it would only make sense that these places would be off limits. Just like schools etc are off limits
Keep in mind, though, that a restriction of residency is not the same as a ban on being present.
What is your reading of the bill text, when it comes to this question?
In line 301 of the bill,…(a) A prohibition on visiting schools, child care
302 facilities, parks, public swimming pools, public bathing places,
303 and playgrounds without prior approval from the releasee’s
304 supervising officer. The commission may also designate
305 additional prohibited locations to protect a victim. The
306 prohibition ordered under this paragraph does not prohibit the
307 releasee from visiting a school, child care facility, park,
308 public swimming pool, public bathing place.
I understand that it sya supervising officer, however they are using the sex offender probation as reference to what rules are added.
Oh wow good catch! 👍
Thank you for this perfect illustration of the meaning and context and the examples.
If they forced someone to move couldn’t that then be deemed as punishment and be challenged on ex post facto grounds? We all know in 2003 SCOTUS upheld the SORNA in Alaska under the false pretense of “Frightening and High” which has sense now been debunked.
Still, this should not give a “Blank Check” to Attorney Generals and Legislatures to keep adding and adding and adding. I know Justice Gorsuch was, in Gundy vs US, was referring to separation of powers but still we can infer that there comes a point where “Blank Checks” cross the line and constitutes punishment: Forcing someone to move from a home they have lived in for 11 years is clearly punishment after the fact.
God forbid if this were to pass: WHATS Next. and when does the tea go in the Harbor.
Once again FAC thank you for a clear interpretation.
Tearful
MAYBE this could be a good thing? They keep pushing more and more to the edge until they fall off the cliff. If they allow us to be removed from our homes, what keeps us from being deported to another country, sent back to prison, or sent to camps like they tried to do with the Mexicans who came here to help with crops and farming jobs but got sent to tent cities.
There are only so many more things they can do to us, as it already feels like probation. Having to register (Lots of stuff), have law enforcement come to our house as many times as they feel like it, having to show the officers our drivers license each time even though he/she has checked on us for years and so many other things that no other people in the U.S have to deal with. Not even murderers who have been released.
OMG!!! They have way too much time on their hands if they can dream up a scheme like this!!!
This is so confusing, even a lawyer would lose their mind trying to figure this out.
Not you FAC, just the laws they make against us, many of us each session that these laws could make us lose our homes. At one point does the supreme court say enough is enough.
There have been a few instances of registered persons taking their own lives due to some of these never-ending laws and ordinances, some that may not even be constitutional.
So, this goes by the conviction date instead of the offense date? Just want to make sure because my conviction date is after October 2009 but the offense date was two and a half years before that.
Defer to FAC but I believe its Offense Date.
No, it goes by the date of the offense, not the date of the conviction. Taken verbatim from the Florida Statutes:
775.215 Residency restriction for persons convicted of certain sex offenses.—
[For those with Florida convictions involving a minor under 16 years of age:]
(c) This subsection applies to any person convicted of a violation of s. 794.011, s. 800.04, s. 827.071, s. 847.0135(5), or s. 847.0145 for offenses that occur on or after October 1, 2004, excluding persons who have been removed from the requirement to register as a sexual offender or sexual predator pursuant to s. 943.04354.
[For those with out-of-state convictions involving a minor under 16 years of age:]
(c) This subsection applies to any person convicted of an offense in another jurisdiction that is similar to a violation of s. 794.011, s. 800.04, s. 827.071, s. 847.0135(5), or s. 847.0145 if such offense occurred on or after May 26, 2010, excluding persons who have been removed from the requirement to register as a sexual offender or sexual predator pursuant to s. 943.04354.
Curious
Just wonder why people like me got a break depending on the offense date, however, on the registry, everyone was retro-actively applied. (For those who were Pre-registry)
My offense was in the stone ages of 1991 but in 1997 when Florida created a registry, I got added for life with no chance to spin the wheel for a get out of jail card.
Jumping to the present, there are ways to be removed now but not many get granted relief depending on the judge. So why was it not automatic if we were eligible? Like dangling a toy for a cat to chase around and tease.
Great breakdown thank you for that, here is our problem. This is yet another addition to the already restrictive restrictions we live under every day. For those that it does not effect today if it passes some brilliant politician trying to get elected down the road will then amend it to include everyone and so on and so on.
It needs to be shut down now, there needs to be some common sense in the state of Florida when it comes to new RSO laws. We have enough right now to follow so much so that a lot of law enforcement officers don’t even know what they are.
stop it now or we are done in FL
if it passes a very slippery slope
This is why we need all our supporters to participate in our various teams. We are not getting alot of participation from our supports which then makes it very hard for the ones who are make all this work behind the scenes. Remember we need to Show Up, Stand Up and Speak Up. If your interested in helping our teams please contact us. We need your help!!!