FAC Sends Letter to Gainesville City Commission
Below is a letter sent to the Gainesville City Commission.
FAC Letter to Gainesville City Commission
The letter is in response to the commission considering an amendment to their residency restriction that would roll back the restriction from 2500 to the State’s 1000 square feet.
FAC supports this Amendment for two reasons; 1000 feet is better than 2500 feet, and there would be a provision in the ordinance that would not make it retroactive, so that people required to register before the enactment of the restriction would not be subject to it (no ex post facto issue).
If you would like to submit your comments to the City Commission, you can find their contact information here:
https://www.gainesvillefl.gov/City-Commission
Remember, FAC SUPPORTS (is in favor of) this amendment.
As always FAC on top of situations, I am thankful for FAC and we gratefully support FAC in our prayers and financially.
As an update to the amended Gainesville City Ordinance, please continue to post public comments and send letters. The first reading of the ordinance was a success. According to the Mayor, he expected the first reading of the amended ordinance to pass by a 4-3 vote. Instead, it was unanimous! The second and final reading will be November 17. As soon as the agenda is uploaded to the Gainesville City Commissioner Meeting Calendar, please begin posting your comments. I will keep you updated on what agenda item it is.
They all just got a personal email in support of the change. Hopefully it means something to them.
In case any family members are interested in copying and pasting or you want to rewrite to meet your request to the commissioners:
Dear Commissioner XXXXX,
My name is XXXXXXXX, and I am writing to you in regards to the proposal to update the City of Gainesville’s ordinance pertaining to residency restrictions for those people registered as sex offenders.
While I whole heartedly oppose any residency restrictions, I support the plan to scale back the restrictions to a 1,000-foot radius. Housing for every human being makes living a normal, productive life possible. The nearly 1 million men and women who are forced to register as sex offenders are no different in their desire to live as normal citizens than any other person.
Stable and affordable housing throughout the state has become harder and harder to find, and placing further restrictions on people places them at risk of homelessness, poverty and possible recriminalization. I think it is important to note the evidence of the negative impact of these restrictions on the previous offenders, their families and the communities has been investigated and is supported by empirical studies: FDLE Study and
Federal Study.
As a family member who is personally affected by these laws, I request that you support the decrease in residency restrictions that is being proposed. It would bring the city in line with the state statute and aid in increasing stability and safety for the community.
Sincerely,
XXXXXX
Thank you, Logical! I would especially encourage any City of Gainesville residents to do this, in their own words, if they have time, or maybe place a call to your commissioner expressing support.
As a family member myself in Gainesville, I greatly appreciate this, Logical. I, too, am writing letters, emails, and sending the research on the ineffectiveness of RR along with the collateral damages they cause.
Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! Logical
I live in Marion County and once a year my company send me to Gainesville, in the city of. I have to work, live and sleep on the job site and the address is sometimes changing Therefore, before I can accept the job I have to do my homework to make sure that I am at an address the is compliant. If not I have to drive back and fourth between Marion and Gainesville twice a day for about 50 days…the fuel cost alone means I don’t take home the total pay that I’ve earned. But, this is not the only difference between the two cities and counties… Gainesville treats me like I’m human. Thank you Gainesville for even considering this , when most cities and counties want to burn you me if given a reason.
My husband and I are the ones that brought the suit against the city. I grew up here and moved back to take care of my father. After my husband and I bought the house, I learned of the city ordinance. My husband’s health is declining and since I am his caretaker, he needs to be in Gainesville with me. Driving back to the Tampa area routinely to take my husband to doctor’s appointment has become harder, since I also work full time.
I tried to do things differently – getting an exception of some sort, but after meeting with the Mayor and the Chief of Police, I was unable to accomplish this. I also reached out to the City Attorneys with no response. There was nothing left I could do except for file suit. A big Thank you to my friend, Kyle, for all of his hard work and research to write the motion and respond to all the hoopla that occurred afterwards. The case is still pending but has been placed on a “stay” until we see what happens with the ordinance.
I plan to add my comments to the city council as well and be at the meetings when allowed. I am glad that this change will help a lot of others as well. Sometimes you have to fight for what is important.
I see the “PRO SE” filter is working brilliantly today. LOL. As I type this, there is a pop up in the lower right corner asking to “Let’s spread truth”. How can you be serious when you cannot post such an innocuous statement as a congratulatory reply to the comment posted by Gina. You say you want positivity. Yet, you allow a continuous barrage of attacks and criticism made about one of my comments – which I subsequently apologized for – that you did not post.
Kyle, we do not encourage pro se litigation because we’ve been very burned by people who created bad case law that all of us have had to try to overcome. That’s not suggesting there are not brilliant non-lawyers out there who are smarter than a Supreme Court Justice, but there are logistical issues that face pro se litigants as well as a general bias against a pro se litigant.
We all get that you are pushing the pro se angle (and in full disclosure to our readers you prepare paperwork for people to file pro se), that’s your gig and you are entitled to it, but we do not want to endorse it for some pretty valid reasons. First, what happens if/when there is a hearing or trial and your client needs to show up and argue? You can’t represent them and if they can’t hire someone to step in, they are fending for themselves and often left hanging. Second, often people chose not to hire an attorney because they cannot afford one. If they can’t afford an attorney, what will happen when they need to hire expert witnesses?
For challenges we endorse and help facilitate, we want to make sure they are fought by qualified and licensed attorneys who are not only familiar with the area of law, but the rules of civil procedure and local rules of court. We also want cases to be properly funded so that they can be supported by the best experts and right resources.
We wish you and everyone anywhere who files a pro se lawsuit the best of luck and hope for tremendous victories. We hope that you can wish FAC the best of luck in our challenges as well, and simply leave it at that.
As far as the “barrage of attacks and criticism”, there’s no barrage here. You should try moderating a forum for registrants to see some of the comments posted by vigilantes. Then you might appreciate what attacks are. If you like, to accommodate your concern I can remove all comments from you or in response to yours and wipe the slate clean. Or, we can just let it go and move on to a different topic. I just can’t handle the drama anymore and you really shouldn’t be texting me (or any board member) at 8PM to complain about comments in this forum. It’s just not appropriate.
So please lets make up and move on.
I understand and do want to move on from this misunderstanding. I will abide by your wishes. I do want to clarify that I do not advocate filing pro se for the sake of being a martyr. I ALWAYS encourage anyone I assist with trying to find affordable legal representation, and where appropriate, like in two of my cases, I request the court to appoint counsel for the litigant. My issue, at least the one I have perceived from this forum, is that pro se litigation is doomed to fail and should be avoided at all costs, even when the fight warrants litigation. Many people, especially those in our boat, experience harms caused by the registry that can either be redressed in court or, at the very least, provide a sense of active enablement that can give them peace to their situation. Unfortunately, they do not have the funds to hire attorneys to fight for them. To those individuals, I encourage, as should FAC, to be smart and informative, not scared, when facing this demon pro se. For example, I received an additional college degree in paralegal studies and I am a certified paralegal. I communicate with attorneys who are gracious enough to provide me advice. I research case law and analyze those arguments which are successful in court and those which are not before attempting to file a complaint or motion. I understand my opinion regarding this topic is not a popular one, but I asked us not to jump to conclusions when the prospect of filing pro se arises. Enough said on this topic. I agree it is time to move on.
Great – We always need more help in all our committees, INCLUDING LEGAL, so cooperatively we can get more done. Let’s move this conversation offline and strategize how we can help each other in all pending cases.