CALL TO ACTION ON SENATE BILL 1932
BACKGROUND
Senator Ed Hooper (portions of Pinellas and Pasco) has introduced SB 1932, “Sexual Offenders and Predators”. At the present time, there is no companion bill in the House.
This bill is proposing to change the definition of the word “day” to include any part of a day. Additionally, when a person requests to be removed from the registry, currently the State Attorney is notified so that they can attend the hearing to oppose the motion to be removed. Under this new bill, FDLE would also be notified so that they could attend the hearing to oppose the motion, making it more difficult, if not impossible, to be removed from the registry.
It is currently sitting in the Senate Criminal Justice Committee with the committee order given as follows:
- Senate Committee on Criminal Justice (CJ)
- Senate Appropriations Subcommittee on Criminal and Civil Justice (ACJ)
- Senate Committee on Appropriations (AP).
WHAT TO DO
Take action immediately by either calling or emailing each member of the Senate Committee on Criminal Justice:
- Senator Jason W. B. Pizzo (D)-Chair (850) 487-5038 Pizzo.Jason@flsenate.gov
- Senator Jeff Brandes (R)-Vice Chair (850) 487-5024 Brandes.Jeff@flsenate.gov
- Senator Dennis Baxley (R) (850) 487-5012 Baxley.Dennis@flsenate.gov
- Senator Danny Burgess (R) (850) 487-5020 Burgess.Danny@flseanate.gov
- Senator George B. Gainer (R) (850) 487-5002 Gainer.George@flsenate.gov
- Senator Ed Hooper (R) (850) 487-5016 Hooper.Ed@flsenate.gov
- Senator Keith Perry (R) (850) 487-5008 Perry.Keith@flsenate.gov
- Senator Bobby Powell (D) (850) 487-5030 Powell.Bobby@flsenate.gov
- Senator Annette Taddeo (D) (850) 487-5040 Taddeo.Annette@flsenate.gov
- TALKING POINTS
Why I oppose Senator Hooper’s SB 1932 definition of the word “day”:
- The topic of changing the definition of a day to include any part of a calendar day was brought up last year in a bill and was dropped due in part to opposition from Florida citizens. I am surprised to see it resurface again this year.
- Since the current statutes state that any place a registrant “remains” or is “located” for 3 days must be reported to the registrant’s local sheriff’s office, Senator Hooper’s change of a day to include any part of a calendar day would mean that registered citizens would have to report the addresses for ANY place where they “remain” or are “located” for 3 “parts of a calendar day”, such as: weekly attendance at church; favorite restaurants that the registrant likes to frequent; the home of family members or friends that the registrant visits on a regular basis, etc. These 3 newly defined days do not have to be consecutive – just any 3 parts of a day of a calendar year. Is this what Florida citizens want? To have almost every address of every location in the state registered with the various sheriff’s offices?
- There is confusion enough in the 3-day period given in the current statutes. What constitutes a “day” within the given 3-day period already stated in Florida statutes? From midnight to midnight? 3:00 pm to 3:00 pm the next day? When you first arrive at the residence until 24 hours later? Even law enforcement does not agree on the answers to these questions. The statutes are already too vague, and now Senator Hooper wants to add to this vagueness.
- In the current statutes, a person who is on the registry must report a change of address within the first 48 hours if they will be residing at the residence for 3 days or longer. If a registrant spends 3 hours each on two different days fixing up his soon-to-be new residence, is Senator Hooper saying that each 3-hour period will constitute a full 24-hour period even though the registrant might not officially move from his current residence to the new one until a week later? I doubt that even Senator Hooper will have answers for these questions as his bill is NOT well thought out.
- Senator Hooper is trying to change the definition of the word “day” that has been in existence for centuries. Why?
- Costs will be prohibitive for sheriff’s offices as they will be inundated with registrants trying to register every address for every place they frequent on a regular basis. How is this making society safer? What is Senator Hooper’s research to show that such a change will make society safer?
- When the restaurant that the registered citizen frequents closes or their parent dies, then they will need to register with the sheriff’s office that they are no longer “remaining” or “located” at that particular place. Where is the money coming from to pay for the additional employees that the various sheriff’s offices will have to hire, along with other added costs?
Why I oppose Senator Hooper’s SB 1932 that would allow for the FDLE to be notified and attend hearings to oppose the removal of a person from the registry:
- This bill would stack the opposition against a registered citizen.
- FDLE is not going to have any additional information to bring to the hearing that the State Attorney has not already brought. FDLE tends to put forth accusations they cannot substantiate with any research, such as: registrants are highly likely to sexually re-offend; society will be less safe if this particular person is removed from the registry, etc.
- FDLE has financial incentives to keep people on the registry: Millions are paid every year to the state of Florida to monitor 80,000 people on the registry. The federal monetary amount funded is due in part to the number of people on the registry. If the registry were reduced in number, there would be jobs lost as a result, along with other benefits that result from the federal money being given to Florida.
LINK FOR SENATE BILL 1932: https://www.flsenate.gov/Session/Bill/2022/1932
I wonder if Sen Hooper is up for re-election soon. Hence the reason for bringing this issue up again
You didn’t read our weekly update last week.
Maybe this is the bill that finally breaks the Registry in Florida.
After 15 years trying to get florida legislaters to not vote for additional restrictions on registered people, maybe some one who has some connections with the press, can explain to them how changing these laws are simply a way for certain congressmen to try to get votes. Expose them for what they are doing.
Exactly! Instead of wasting Money on never ending court battles, negative political campaign ads might be more effective. Research has shown that negative ad campaigns work. This strategy may stop some of these ridiculous bills from even being proposed in the first place.
The press is not interested in anything unless it sells a story.
Is there no way to confince the press that reading about sex offenders could sell papers or at least 30 seconds on TV could entice, viewers?
Sex offenders definitely generate news. Repeat offenses and even registration failures are often seen as newsworthy.
But what we’re trying to do here is prevent bills from advancing in committee. For that, committee members need to hear directly from us, the public, in real time, that we are opposed.
If anyone knows anyone in the media, explain to them how Florida legislatures try to gain votes by strengthening laws already filled with nonsense. Negative publicity is a better way to stop these politicians from continuing to ruin our lives. If you think that writing or calling these so called politicians will help then please continue to do so.
I have often written to media representatives on how politicians use these nonsensical, punitive laws as political fodder. Apparently, the media does not feel that it is a story that would sell.
The only response I have ever received on this topic was from a Brevard County Commissioner. He said he was offended by my remark. Then he was offended by the truth.
Have you ever gotten the feeling that some of these politicians very likely are simply not good, decent people? I don’t think it is a stretch to call plenty of them evil. Americans should have no delusions about where our real enemies are and live.
Will
I know this is irrelevant to our cause; yet our government is trying to ban exotic animals making it a felony for possessing one that will be listed. How many people involved in that field have safety protocols for their business, but get blanket restrictions based on a few idiots. Just like sex offenses we get blanket laws based on rare cases that violate our rights. Politicians don’t care about anything except power, control, greed, and re-election.
There’s my irreverent rant for a Friday about our overreaching and over bloated government. Time for the bubble to pop and for them to deal with reality.
Of course it doesn’t sell. The only thing that sells is reporting crap like who Kim Kardashian is screwing this week. Real and sensible news is irrelevant to the media.
Is there no companion House bill that’s gained any traction?
I misread, the answer is above!
Not yet.
I just emailed them all
Thank you.
I’m a little behind on this but I have just read the entire proposed SB1932 and I don’t see the words “remain” or “located”. It says “abides, lodges, or resides” in the definition of “permanent residence” and “transient residence”. The first day is excluded in the count. The only troubling part in those definitions is “any part of a day”.
I don’t see anything that indicates going to the grocery store, restaurant, friend’s house, working on a future new residence or church would require additional listings as you aren’t abiding, lodging or residing.
I am composing an email to send to the listed senators.
Does the bill propose to remove ‘remain’/‘located’ from statute?
Thank you, Robert, for sending emails. Our concern is about the vagueness in parts of this bill. Our legal committee has said that because of “any part of a day” this could possibly included the places you mentioned. Do we let the bill pass and then see what the intent is? No way! We need to stop it now.
One thing we can be sure of is that the bill would make life even worse for people on the registry along with their family members.
Sure would be a shame if 80,000 registered persons happened to register all the addresses of the lawmakers supporting this bill. What I see happening here is a gotcha moment from lawmakers trying to catch a registrant noting an address visited for an hour such as a parent, friend, restaurant, shopping venue, etc as being within a radius of a school, daycare, park, or place where children congregate.
Nothing like throwing this against the wall to see if anything sticks. This is why I hate Florida’s politicians because each year they try to outdo the bills that failed. How many times do they have a law go through the court system? Sometimes I feel that Bugs Bunny needs to take a saw and cut the state from the country, they sure act like an authoritarian state. Fighting for injustice and having the silver spoons taken away from Florida’s politicians knocking them off their high pedestal is justice.
Brandon, your comment about blanket laws based on rare cases is something I will include in my comments to legislators, journalists, and all others I am trying to educate. Interesting way to put it. Thanks.