Deltona seeking to tighten restrictions on where sex offenders can live

The City of Deltona, Florida is considering expanding their Sex Offender Residency Restrictions. A resolution was brought forward this past Monday to “add “Designated School Bus Stops, Libraries, and Churches to the list defining locations as to where children congregate so that distancing calculations as to living restriction where an individual convicted of a violation of F.S. Section 794.011, 800.04, 827.071, 847.0135(5) or 847.0145 or similar law of another jurisdiction, regardless of whether adjudication has been withheld, may reside in the City of Deltona. Additionally, revision to Sec 48-2 (4) Temporary residence definition changed from five days to three”

We encourage you to write to the commissioners at Commissioners@deltonafl.gov and ask them to OPPOSE the measure.

Any members in or around Deltona are encouraged to contact the commission to find out the status of the amendment and share their findings in the comments below.

41 thoughts on “Deltona seeking to tighten restrictions on where sex offenders can live

  • December 16, 2020 at 6:43 am
    Permalink

    As usual a Florida county tightening their noose.

    Reply
    • December 16, 2020 at 8:48 am
      Permalink

      This is actually a city in Volusia County. Its doesn’t help either that Sheriff Chitwood of Volusia County is from Philadelphia, which has very tough residency restrictions against people forced to register. In fact, they believe that excluding convicted sex offenders from living virtually anywhere in the except forested areas and a few high-income areas is the only path to protecting the public when such laws and codes actually undermine monitoring, rehabilitation and public-safety efforts by state and county probation and parole agencies.

      Reply
  • December 16, 2020 at 8:12 am
    Permalink

    I am not understanding how this isn’t clearly unconstitutional. It routinely restricts a person’s liberties. Clearly unconditional. This is one of, if not the main, reason that the federal circuit’s are calling the registries unconstitutional. I could see if they said it was for anyone convicted from the date of the passing of the ordinance, but retroactive is clearly wrong. I guess rather than fight each municipality. The Ex Post Fact III case will deal with it at state level. Then F.A.C. can sue each municipality for its legal fees (and the state) so it can use those funds for future endeavors. Maybe even state in the lawsuit that a portion of the damages would go to sex abuse education and prevention.

    Reply
  • December 16, 2020 at 9:07 am
    Permalink

    When I saw this on WFTV Channel 9, I was reminded that every inch of progress we make, some government is going to take a foot away from us.
    This is a small Volusia county city and already hard to find a place to live. Wonder if they will try an enact a “Retroactive” application of it, if it passes.

    Reply
    • December 16, 2020 at 10:00 am
      Permalink

      WFTV is probably the worst news station against registered citizens in the Central Florida. They are akin to a National Inquirer mentality of so called “news reporting.”

      Reply
    • December 16, 2020 at 11:03 am
      Permalink

      Ever notice how ALL the news anchors always cover a “human interest” story, with a smile, along with back and forth playful banter on camera? However it’s the exact opposite when they segue into anything about seX ofFendRs? All that glee immediately drains from their faces and is replaced with a contemptuous glare. The look of feigned concern and disdain they convey into the camera for the viewers is always the SAME!

      Whenever I notice this happening, I’m always reminded of how a black male must feel from hearing the sound of door lock mechanisms activated while walking through a parking lot.

      The media is playing a disgusting role in brainwashing, marginalizing and dhumanization.

      Reply
      • December 17, 2020 at 9:40 am
        Permalink

        Facts

        Well there for a while they didn’t even say sex offenders they would call everyone on the registry sex predators regardless if that was their designation by the Gestapo.
        And as FAC and many others have pointed out, why are we still labeled sex offenders? Do they have evidence that every one of us is still actively offending. And to further that, is someone who accessed illegal porn actually a sex offender if they never touched someone?
        I saw a story last night of a guy who got 10 years for murder. That is less than I got for a consensual act where not a single witness showed up for any of my court hearings. I have said before, two factors guide your future in court, the attorney you have and the judge you are assigned to.

        Reply
    • December 16, 2020 at 5:23 pm
      Permalink

      I hope not I live here. I’ll be making some phone calls tomorrow.

      Reply
    • December 17, 2020 at 1:13 am
      Permalink

      I have offered to train people on how I have used my leverage in salons and barber shops to remove people from office that make these crazys laws but get little response. I’ve flipped seats in California from Democrat to Republican and seats from Republican to Democrat. I am a Libertarian and although on the registry I am also a militar veteran. I am rolling to brain at no costa for our greater cause. Join the right where every you are and support sites like this one FAC.

      Reply
  • December 16, 2020 at 10:35 am
    Permalink

    Here is the video of the commission meeting. To skip to Sex offender agenda Go down to Agenda 6B and click it and video will start .
    There is a board member named Loren King that actually spoke against the ordinance based on school bus stops changing constantly and his concerns offenders could be arrested retroactively.
    A sheriffs office deputy addressed that and said people would not have to move if they already live there. The commissioner challenges that stating “Then what’s the point of the rule”?

    http://deltona.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=1&clip_id=838&meta_id=4234

    Reply
    • December 16, 2020 at 10:45 am
      Permalink

      I forgot to mention, the amendment passed 7 yays – 0 nays
      despite confusion over retroactive application.

      Reply
    • December 21, 2020 at 7:04 pm
      Permalink

      This just shows the single mindedness of city officials. He states he is against making someone have to move, but also against the grandfather ordinance. He would prefer that they never bring a bus stop within range. So tell me commissioner, is this going to be the same idea for churches, schools, daycares, playground, youth activity centers, etc.? I mean, you can’t really screw over one without the other as well. No eating your cake if you cannot even obtain it in the first place.

      Reply
  • December 16, 2020 at 10:52 am
    Permalink

    This isn’t about safety, this is about real estate values. My guess is if you look at who is donating to the politicians pushing this, real estate agents and brokers will be at the top of the list.

    With a public registry and indexing of the FDLE SO website, numerous 3rd party websites are now letting people know where registrants live. What effect does that have on property values? A lot. How do you solve that issue? Pass registry restrictions to bunch registrants in neighborhoods where real estate prices are already low or pass such draconian restrictions, there is no where left in the county for them to live at all.

    Reply
    • December 17, 2020 at 9:31 am
      Permalink

      ALAN
      That already happened in Miami. The homeless especially kept getting thrown out of every location they went to. Bad enough those men and women had no real home to begin with, then they get tossed around like trash.
      AND, I am sort of a hypocrite on this issue because a homeless camp had set up right outside our neighborhood and there was crime, trash, human feces, drug needles, theft, noise and shootings. We finally got it all cleaned up but now they are just someone else’s problem. 🙁
      Part of the problem is, I do not work so between not affording a place to stay, I had to move in with some relatives who do not live in the greatest area. And I know that I could one day become one of those among the homeless if things do not get better for us, and that scares me more than death.

      Reply
  • December 16, 2020 at 12:18 pm
    Permalink

    Remember when Brevard commissioners received angry emails from throughout the state? That worked out great for us. Good times.

    Were I a Deltona constituent, I’d surely reach out to them respectfully. I would like more Deltona police resources devoted to working hard-to-solve abuse cases, 95% of which are perpetrated by someone close to the victim and with no criminal record. Deltona cannot afford to devote officers to enforcing where someone can or can’t live.

    Reply
    • December 17, 2020 at 9:43 am
      Permalink

      Jacob

      OH contraire my dear friend. The city will apply for a cares act funding for new officers to be assigned to a special sex offender unit. We have said all along, the registry is a money maker and when you threatened someone’s money source, you get push back.

      Reply
  • December 16, 2020 at 1:09 pm
    Permalink

    Just let them know that leaves nowhere you can live and you plan to sue big time including them personally since you’ve made them aware and they showed neglect by not doing a study causing harm and maybe even death in some cases not having a place to live is pretty serious.

    Reply
  • December 16, 2020 at 5:16 pm
    Permalink

    Can this be held retroactive? I live in deltona. I bought a house a year ago here. This comes very concerning. I sold my house in ocoee,fl. I owned for 25 years and couldnt live there legally.

    Reply
    • December 17, 2020 at 8:49 am
      Permalink

      I got out of prison in 2010 and there was a case in Deltona where the city tried to make a couple registrants move. A judge decided they couldn’t make them move. I remember because I had just gotten out and I was living DeLand on probation at the time. Not that it’s answered your question but just something I remember. Deltona is the worst about that out here.

      Reply
    • December 17, 2020 at 9:55 am
      Permalink

      Just tired

      Watch the video I posted on here. The city council said they would not force anyone out of their home who is already living there. However, if a bus stop is put near your home, they do plan to notify they parents of the presence of an offender in that area.

      Where I live, the school bus stop literally stops 21 feet from my front door. I told the school board at a meeting that the kids play in front of my house all week anyway so if I were going to grab one of their kids it wouldn’t be in front of the school bus full of witnesses.
      AND here is what is sad. They put everyone on the registry together and make it sound like we are all a child predator. They seem to throw the same rules on someone who watched some porn along with a serial rapist that attacked 10 kids.

      At one point it was talked about having threat assessments and levels where an ex offender could get a mental health evaluation and risks analysis. They would either get bumped up, bumped down or get removed from the registry based on the findings.
      That got so much push back from those who would have lost the most from the registry going away that it was tabled.

      I told the judge one time to let me off and if I got so much as a loitering charge I would agree to go to prison for life but the judge said they did not have the authority to order that “Sort of nonsense”. In other words “Uh no”.

      Reply
      • December 18, 2020 at 10:39 am
        Permalink

        I don’t remember hearing that. What I remember is the one guy speaking and did not want anybody grandfathered in and insisted with the officer that the school board be held responsible to a degree of not putting a school bus stop near an offender. The officer didn’t seem to want anybody run out of their homes. Nothing I remember was discussed about the what ifs. Say i’m to close to a church or library or such now. They cant move the church like a bus stop. Is it even possible to move a bus stop a half a mile away from me and kids still be able to reach that bus.

        Reply
        • December 18, 2020 at 5:40 pm
          Permalink

          Just tired
          That scenario should be a slam dunk case for why the registry is punishment then if you are forced to move. I mean at what point is that fine line between civil and punitive?
          It seems it has been crossed many times, and yet the courts turn a blind eye to the facts. So THAT is what they mean by justice is blind! They only see what they want to see.

          Reply
  • December 16, 2020 at 6:00 pm
    Permalink

    Jim:
    These laws are constitutional until challenged in court.
    Any monetary damages should go to registrants and their families that have suffered because of these laws.

    Reply
  • December 17, 2020 at 12:26 am
    Permalink

    The More things dont change the more they get worse

    Reply
  • December 17, 2020 at 8:34 am
    Permalink

    just tired:
    Read Mann v Georgia, 282 Ga 754, 603 SE2d 283 (2007) and discuss it with your attorney. Forcing you out of your home is unconstitutional. This would be a good issue for a class action.
    Good luck.

    Reply
  • December 17, 2020 at 8:42 am
    Permalink

    I have a real problem with this paragraph in deltona, florida commissioners reading of the ordinance. Where do they get their data from.

    (a)Repeat sexual offenders, sexual offenders who use physical violence and sexual offenders who
    prey on children are sexual predators who present an extreme threat to the public safety. Sexual
    offenders are extremely likely to use physical violence and to repeat their offenses, and most
    sexual offenders commit many offenses, have many more victims than are ever reported, and are
    prosecuted for only a fraction of their crimes. This makes the cost of sexual offender victimization
    to society at large, while incalculable, clearly exorbitant.

    Reply
    • December 17, 2020 at 11:36 am
      Permalink

      That’s the preamble for all these ordinances. It’s a cut and paste of language that was disproved years ago.

      Reply
      • December 17, 2020 at 12:45 pm
        Permalink

        The preamble has not yet been disproven in COURT, at least not in our circuit, even though it’s disproven in the scientific community.

        Let’s keep working the courts!

        Reply
      • December 18, 2020 at 8:33 pm
        Permalink

        S943.0435 justification is almost as inflammatory and also unproven:

        “(12) The Legislature finds that sexual offenders, especially those who have committed offenses against minors, often pose a high risk of engaging in sexual offenses even after being released from incarceration or commitment and that protection of the public from sexual offenders is a paramount government interest. Sexual offenders have a reduced expectation of privacy because of the public’s interest in public safety and in the effective operation of government.”

        Reply
  • December 17, 2020 at 9:13 am
    Permalink

    I spoke to the criminal unit for Volusia county and I am told that I am grandfathered in. I was approved to l live there prior to Deltona changing their residency restrictions tighter as along as I do not move.

    Reply
    • December 17, 2020 at 11:48 am
      Permalink

      Get it in writing if you can.

      Reply
    • December 19, 2020 at 12:45 pm
      Permalink

      Get it in writing like Bob said but also do what you can to help kill this horrible idea. Heidi Herzberg is on FB, let her know what you think.

      Reply
  • December 17, 2020 at 2:12 pm
    Permalink

    just tired:
    If you were forced out of your house in Ocoee within the last 3 years, you should discuss it with a good attorney to see if you can sue. Mann v Georgia is an out of state case but does allude to federal case law. The statute of limitations vary, but you can sue for most things within 3 years and sometimes longer. It would be nice if you could pick up a little change out of a lawsuit.

    Reply
    • December 19, 2020 at 6:48 am
      Permalink

      In a sense I was but I went to prison in 2011 and got out in 2012 to find out I could not return to my home. I was to close to a park but thats not the kicker, I was told I am not able to live anywhere within the city even If I was far enough away from anything. It was devastating. It took me years before I could remodel the house to sell and move my wife to a new home where I was approved.

      Reply
  • December 17, 2020 at 9:15 pm
    Permalink

    just tired:
    Getting grandfathered in means, “don’t worry until we get a different mayor or city council and they change their minds or our current mayor or city counsel gets called out by your neighbors” (or another valigator val).
    You stand a good chance of being left alone if you lay low (which isn’t right. It’s like telling a black man to be quiet and the white folks won’t mess with him). We are in uncharted territory in Michigan and I believe it is only a matter of time before Florida comes around.
    Like FAC mentioned “keep working the courts”.

    Reply
  • December 19, 2020 at 10:09 am
    Permalink

    These people are so late to the game. More than a decade late since Florida practically invented the first residency restriction and the Books took that to another level. You would think by now they be informed of the many well researched evidences that these type of restrictions don’t work. Or maybe they do know, but just don’t care. That seems to be the norm.

    Reply
    • December 22, 2020 at 6:19 am
      Permalink

      It’s my contention that the State of Florida “created a new crime” with the establishment of sec 794.065 in 2004 (now codified in sec 775.215) The States intention was to punish not remedial.

      In determining whether a law was civil, not criminal, Courts employ a two part test:

      (1) Did the legislature intend to impose punishment?

      (2), if not, is the statutory scheme “‘so punitive either in purpose or effect as to negate the State’s intention’ to deem it ‘civil.’”

      To date all litigation challenging the residency restriction has been limited to the second question. Applying the highly subjective seven factors of Kennedy V Mendoza, has made it nearly impossible to show that a so called remedial law has a criminal purpose or effect through the ex pot facto challenge. Courts have easily manipulated these factors in deference to the States.

      If a court were to find 775.215 criminal that ends the inquiry.

      Florida State constitution:

      Section 11 paragraph 9: this section shall be strictly construed to maintain such supremacy of this Constitution and of the Legislature in the enactment of general laws “(Punishments for Crimes)” pursuant to this Constitution.

      Because the punishment imposed by 775.215 is a 1,000 foot exclusionary zone, the constitution would prohibit the counties from increasing the punishment imposed by the State.

      But then I’m just another jailhouse lawyer

      Reply
  • December 19, 2020 at 12:22 pm
    Permalink

    The people pushing this are sicker than almost anyone who is actually on the registry.

    Whatever else they take from you, don’t let them cause you to forget that you are good people and THEY are the bad guys (as are all the ignorant people cheering them on.)

    Reply
  • December 26, 2020 at 3:11 pm
    Permalink

    Challenge the distances?

    Has anyone ever found out the basis for the calculation of “safe distances”? Is there a scientific basis – or is it just arbitrary? “Everyone else is doing it” Could they also be considered “capricious”? Isn’t that a constituional issue?

    I have heard of people creating 2 ft. square patches of grass and calling them a “park” to take advantage of this.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *