UPDATED with Public Hearing Date: Some Brevard County Talking Points
The Public Hearing on the Amendment to the Brevard County Ordinance is scheduled on the Agenda for Tuesday August 25th at 9am. Location is Brevard County Government Complex at 2725 Judge Fran Jamieson Way Viera, FL 32940 in the Commission Chambers. Registered Citizens are not able to attend due to this same ordinance because the complex is located within 1000’ of a school.
If you are a family member or concerned citizen, and able to attend the meeting, we will be organizing a group to attend and to present at the public hearing. If you are a registered citizen or otherwise unable to attend, but wish to be heard, please write a letter to the commissioners and send copy to us. All correspondence, questions, plans to attend should be sent to anita@floridaactioncommittee.org or call 407-782-6912.
We need your support to stop this amendment which will 1) change the definition of a park to include 1000’ around certain private properties and 2) add 1000’ around certain businesses as exclusion areas to the already 1000’ around schools, parks, playground and daycares. Read the Legislative text here for an explanation of the proposed changes.
- The Legislative Text states that “pharmacies” are NOT excluded, yet we have heard from members that they are told they cannot go to certain pharmacies. What has been your experience? Specifically what locations have you been told, by probation or Sheriff, you are NOT permitted to go due to the current ordinance, and how will this proposed addition of certain business impact you or your family? Let’s hear from you in comments below or email anita@floridaactioncommittee.org.
Brevard County currently has an ordinance that makes it illegal for registrants to enter into or remain within the 1000-foot buffer zone surrounding any school, daycare center, park or playground, with only a few exceptions given. Now Commissioner Tobia would like to add an amendment to that ordinance, whereby private businesses would be able to declare themselves the center of an exclusion zone, banning anyone registered as a sexual offender or predator from entering within a 1000-foot radius of the outermost boundary of their business.
Our concern is not just Brevard County. It is the domino effect that can lead other counties to pass such ordinances, as has happened in the past. We need as many people as possible to write these commissioners. Currently, there has been very little opposition within Brevard County, so the commissioners feel comfortable with passing it. If you are not a resident of Brevard County, you can still let the commissioners know of your concern as you do not want ordinances like this one spreading to your county. But Brevard County residents, you really need to speak up. Without you, we are all sunk.
These are the email addresses and phone numbers for the commissioners along with talking points for those who need some suggestions:
Rita Pritchett (Vice Chair), 321-607-6901: D1.Commissioner@brevardfl.gov
Bryan Lober (Chair), 321-454-6601: D2.Commissioner@brevardfl.gov
John Tobia, 321-633-2075: D3.Commissioner@brevardfl.gov
Curt Smith, 321-633-2044: D4.Commissioner@brevardfl.gov
Kristina Isnardi, 321-253-6611: D5.Commissioner@brevardfl.gov
- Tobia state that there is a high propensity to re-offend: Re-offense rate for committing another sex crime is in the single digits. There are numerous studies out there to support this fact, one being the May of 2019 U. S. Department of Justice Report on the Recidivism Rate over a 9-Year Period for Released Inmates Whose Most Serious Offense Was Rape/Sexual Assault being 7.7%.
- Commissioner Smith inquired as to what had happened to initiate such an amendment: Tobia had not a single case to give Smith. The 867 registrants in Brevard County are not re-offending.
- Unconstitutional: It would be applied retroactively against people whose offense was before the ordinance was passed.
- We already have Florida Statute 856.022: This statute prohibits anyone on the sex offense registry from loitering within 300 feet of where children congregate.
- This amendment is proposing 1000 feet away from the outermost boundary all around the property: One thousand feet is 3 and 1/3 football fields. The area of a circle with a radius of 1000 feet is 3,141,592 square feet. The radii on these circles would actually be longer than 1000 feet if taken from the center of the property, making the area even greater.
- There is no research to support exclusion/proximity/buffer zones: Ask the Brevard County commissioners to provide their research that shows the effectiveness of having these zones.
- Enforcement/compliance would be impossible: How do you know if you are 900 ft or 1050 ft from the outermost boundary? Will a map be provided to help registrants and law enforcement?
- This amendment will keep law-abiding registrants from meeting the constitutional basic needs provided to all citizens of this country: attending government meetings; visiting banks, businesses, restaurants, and in family/friends’ homes that they have been doing for years without incident.
- Lober wants the amendment to apply to those labeled as a predator: What about those labeled as a “predator” who are law-abiding citizens now? Released murderers, gang leaders, and armed robbers who re-offend are given the right to live and be physically present anywhere in Brevard County. Mr. Lober stated that “predators” are registrants who have two or more second degree felonies or have committed a first degree felony. In the statute on predators, it defines a predator as “repeat sexual offenders, sexual offenders who use physical violence, and sexual offenders who prey on children.” In Florida, the term is used for anyone where the victim is under 12 years old. Florida does not differentiate between “over the cloth” and “under the cloth”, as some states do. All one has to do is touch a child under the age of 12 over the cloth on the breast, buttock, or between the legs momentarily, and the prosecutor has the choice to classify the accused as a predator. Florida does not use risk assessments, so everyone is put in the same box. There are many people labeled as a predator who are leading law-abiding lives and are not a threat to anyone. What Mr. Lober is really requesting is a risk assessment which he will unfortunately not get in Florida.
- Tobia stated that anyone violating this new amendment could not only face jail time of up to 60 days but also a possible fine of up to $500 and be subject to consideration for incarceration if there are other violations: Why is Mr. Tobia looking for more ways to incarcerate people who are now law-abiding citizens?
Lober is willing to apply the amendment to offenders now as well. He will propose a list of exceptions by original offense, ie, someone who has only been convicted of offense x may still access the child safety zone. This proposal will affect a broader cross-section than just state-defined predators and was agreed to between Lober and Tobia towards the conclusion of the video discussion.
I don’t think Lober has figured out yet that either scheme has the same flaw, ie, that original offense is a poor predictor of risk. It does not take into account the length of time that the person has been in the community offense-free, for example, whether they’ve completed treatment, or whether they’re a lot older than they were when they last offended. All of these are risk factors he is not considering. If we apply the new restrictions to equally to those in the community who have made efforts to rehabilitate themselves and those who haven’t, then what incentive is there for Brevard registrants to work on their rehabilitation? Tobia is correct that the legislature determined a blanket high risk to re-offend regardless, but that determination has proven to be factually false, and by now the commissioners should have seen the statistics.
GREAT talking points. Thank you, Media Committee, and others.
Jacob – your comments are also great talking points to add to the discussion.
Here’s another great talking point to consider about this type of decision right here, though:
He will propose a list of exceptions by original offense, ie, someone who has only been convicted of offense x may still access the child safety zone*
The average, uneducated, doesn’t care to be educated American who happens to notice one of their registrant neighbors in these areas are not going to understand that he/she is there because his/her offense doesn’t qualify them to be banned from the area. The nosy busy body goodie-two-shoes who thinks all sex offenses are child related will probably call the police and inconvenience the registrant for no reason.
So this idea of making such an ordinance or law based on the type of offense makes the people pushing for it sound like they’re taking certain people into consideration. But they’re truly not. They know anyone who notices a registered person in an area that the news media will blab all over TV, will try to make that person’s life difficult.
THAT is a talking point which needs to be mentioned. The average person doesn’t care what or when your offense was, they only care that you’re on the registry and therefore you’re scum. Period.
Another way in which this will be a massive waste of police resources, even though Tobia maintains that it is “free.”
Additional points that two board members brought up, but that I hadn’t even considered, even though they seem powerful:
Brevard businesses already have the ability to exclude registrants, without any ordinance amendment whatsoever. That’s because they can view or scan ID’s at the door, and then they can trespass the person if they wish, and law enforcement will enforce that trespass if necessary. So all the ordinance appears to accomplish, beyond existing law, is to give law enforcement additional reasons to arrest people!
Any reason we should not use those points as well?
Anyway, thank you for all these great talking points.
*b/c registry status already is coded into registrants’ licenses, and commissioners may not be aware of that.
What “businesses” are we talking about here? What business would turn someone’s money away because of registry status? Are we talking about a Walgreens where you need to show ID to buy cigarettes? Are we talking about restaurants (when do they ever actually check IDs)? Are we talking about Staples or Publix or what? What businesses are turning away people on the registry?
Any business (or other facility) with an ID scanner can exclude registrants if they want to. Examples include Bravoz, other childrens’ entertainment businesses, certain day care centers, certain YMCA’s, certain private schools (and some public ones).
If you didn’t know about these scanners, that’s good news, it means your family hasn’t been hurt by them in any way.
And you know who else doesn’t seem to know about this? Chairman Lober and the other commissioners. Unless we mentioned it in one of our letters to them. And I admit that I haven’t. Have you?
Did I answer your question?
Now we are left with two choices:
The ability to scan IDs (which we already have and can’t eliminate within the next week);
OR
The ability for a business to declare themselves and all their neighbors to be an exclusion zone, enforced by police via arrests?
(h/t: FAC Legal Committee, for pointing this out to me and others)
Ok, these “businesses” you pointed out are obviously child related. Not that every offender did something to a kid but when we broadly use the term “businesses”, it makes some of us wonder what businesses they’re referring to.
But no matter how many feet a school is from a pharmacy (I’m sure I’ve never seen a school right next to a Walgreens or CVS) I find the states/counties laws/ordinances to be flat out violating the constitutional rights of people REGARDLESS of their criminal past.
And the argument needs to be made: “What happened after 25+ years of the registry that ALL OF A SUDDEN we need exclusion zones?”
That was the same question posed by Commissioner Smith. And they all know the answer.
You can bet that the Books have a hand in this.
It’s ok if there’s no research to support proximity ordinances. Intuitively, proximity ordinances work, and that’s why commissioners support them.
But the facts are more powerful than this, aren’t they— it’s not that there’s no research. There IS in fact research, and that research affirmatively CONCLUDES that such ordinances ARE NOT effective.
Which might be a more powerful observation than there being no research. But am I right here, or am I mixed up— have proximity ordinances been studied, or has it just been residency restrictions?
Commissioner Tobia,
I have been following your amendment proposal since I first heard about it. I must admit that rarely do we get to see such an ill conceived, lack of purpose amendment coming from a politician who will do anything to deceive the voters into thinking he has their best interests in mind. The lack of professionalism and factual support is appalling. Can I assume that you have reams of factual evidence to support your proposal? Actually I doubt that you do because such evidence does not exists supporting a high recidivism rate for registered citizens. You come into the commission meeting spewing innuendo, lies, hate, and concocted fear while your fellow commissioners know little about the subject and cannot even challenge you with an intelligent question…except maybe Commissioner Lober.
It doesn’t take a whole lot of courage to to make charges and propose regulations that will affect hundreds of individuals and their families while you are sequestered in a chamber that is off limits to the people most impacted. Would you be willing to go one on one with a valid, factual study supporting high recidivism in opposition to a valid, factual study supporting a low recidivism rate? I suspect the high rate reports would run out long before the low rate reports. Your proposal is backed up only by garbage.
As a representative of the people of Brevard why don’t you try to do something positive for individuals and their families instead of trying to put yourself on the pedestal of righteousness? Anyone with half a brain can see what you are trying to do. I trust your fellow commissioners will see through you and put you in your place if your proposal ever comes up for a vote. It is people of your ilk that are destroying the unity and fabric of this nation. You are trying to destroy lives and are completely clueless in the process.
WRT Florida Statute 856.022, it applies only to a person whose offense was committed on or after May 26, 2010, thus not retroactive. Whereas Bretard’s ordinance would be retroactive and unconstitutional, but that doesn’t mean anything anymore.
And we’ve sent the letter threatening the lawsuit right?
What lawsuit?
I think he’s asking if this ordinance would bring about a lawsuit. Especially when you consider what you at FAC have written about it, posing the questions like “how will the homeless know about the ordinance?” and people who need to visit a PHARMACY for MEDICINE being arrested because of a buffer zone??? None of this is constitutional. How can anyone even CONSIDER making this a law/ordinance?
And this is troubling also;
Registered Citizens are not able to attend due to this same ordinance because the complex is located within 1000’ of a school.
What does that have to do with attending a PUBLIC HEARING of which the outcome will effect you? Do they literally have it in their minds that a registered person is going to the PUBLIC HEARING just so he can stop by the school and see if he can get a date for dinner later? This is getting FUCKING RIDICULOUS. And it needs a lawsuit. The entire state of FLORIDUH needs a lawsuit. The Kanka family who started this horseshit needs a lawsuit, AND…. the leftist president who signed Megan’s Law into law needs a lawsuit. Especially if more information about his trips to Epstein’s island come out of the closet. It should make anything that man signed into law be reversed.
Can’t even go to a fucking public hearing!!!?? WHAT COUNTRY IS THIS????
Dear Commissioner Tobia:
I watched the hearing online of July 21 and perceive that you are greatly distressed by the thought of offenders and by the fact that a commissioner has been contacted by one because of the commissioner’s official status. And that contact has prompted the inappropriate response to increase the restrictions based on the unproven belief that it will increase the safety of children.
I sympathize with your feelings especially if you have been harmed yourself or have a family member or friend who has been harmed. An incident can stay with a person for a lifetime and it takes much work and counseling to resolve the feelings.
I can sympathize because I was sexually abused by my father for several years as a child. I have moved past it with the help of counseling and forgiveness, but the memory is always there. But it was one of the most common incidents that fits the category that most child victims know the perpetrator. And an ordinance like this would not have done anything to make me safer.
I know when we suffer a harm that we want to take action to keep it from happening to others. And I have taken some steps like this in my life through educating myself and becoming active in issues. There are many avenues for action. Educating children to protect themselves is one very productive way. Piling burning coals on the heads of those you personally feel deserve to continue to be punished will not accomplish your purpose.
There is no evidence that a proximity ordinance or residency restrictions make children safer. During all the years that a business proximity ordinance has not been in effect, have there been incidents to show the need? While it may be cheap to implement the business registry there will be costs incurred by law enforcement to administer and enforce this almost impossible unenforceable regulation. How will registrants know how to comply especially as the business registry changes? How will the homeless be able to comply if they do not have knowledge of the areas to avoid?
Passing an ordinance like this is not going to accomplish your purpose of making kids safer other than to make you feel good because you acted. And to enhance your standing with your constituents as you run for re-election. Please ask yourself if you are being unduly influenced by Ron Book and his family. He and his daughter seem to have made it their mission in life to continue to pass laws at the local, county and state level to make it more and more difficult for registered citizens and their families to live a productive life after they have served their punishment. This includes legislating hundreds into homelessness in south Florida.
Action should be research and evidence based. The Center for Effective Public Policy advocates for “Evidence-Based Policy and Practices (EBP). Starting in the medical profession two decades ago, EBP asserts that public policy and practice must be based on the best available scientific evidence in order to be effective in the achievement of its goals and to be efficient in the use of taxpayers’ dollars.”
The medical profession has a mandate to “first do no harm.” I think that rule should also apply to any legislation passed by politicians. Consider the harm this revision will do verses the unproven benefits.
You are already active in the community and care about your constituents. You have the power to advocate for better education for children on this issue and for other resources that will improve their lives and safety. However, I think you have an entrenched position that no amount of facts or pleadings by those about to be harmed will be able to change. Your position is disingenuous in that you pretend to care about the safety of children while you are trying to punish as well as improve your chances of reelection.
I watched the funeral service today for Congressman John Lewis. He accomplished a lot of good in his life. One of his quotes is “recognize the worth and dignity of every human being.” Please educate yourself, rethink your position and withdraw this ordinance.
I sent this email to Mr. Tobia today. I also sent emails to the 4 other commissioners that were slightly different based on their comments during the July 21 meeting.
Well written letter. I just hope the commissioners take time to read it.
Nice letter, I do hope he actually reads it.
Having read all of the comments below, thank you to those who have written to the commissioners. I am learning that the most powerful tool is a one-on-one conversation with a commissioner, but as difficult as it can be, you cannot be confrontational, otherwise they will not listen. We really need some Brevard residents to visit their offices to have a civilized, polite conversation. We do have one Brevard citizen who has asked for a one-on-one meeting with one of the commissioners, and we all greatly appreciate his standing up for us.
SarahF, such words of wisdom are tremendously helpful to people like me who are new to this. All of us who expect shenanigans in our own counties someday should pay attention.
I think you are right about not being confrontational. Most of them are thin-skinned babies. Many of them got into positions of power because they felt weak their entire lives and they have low self-esteem. They desperately want people to beg them and kiss their rears.
That’s why I have to pay people to talk to them for me. I know I’m not equipped to do it. I mean, I could if I really needed to, but I’m not interested in acting. I will hire people more talented than I am.
Update on Lober: he is willing to apply the law to offenders as well as predators, as long as he can carve out certain offenses which are OK.
That is what Tobia got Lober to agree to during the last public discussion on this.
We need figure out a way to help Lober to get out of the difficult political position that Tobia has put him in here.
I have said this before and i’ll say it again if you have a skill that can be used in any country or you can work from the computer Move away from the united states to a country that will accept you because it is never going to get better here as time goes on.
Tell that to the people of California, which eliminated all their exclusion zones.
Or Michigan, which is now registration-free, indefinitely.
Jacob i love the optimism but for s long as i have been on the registry every time we get a decision in our favor two more re created to hurt us and the one that went in our favor gets overturned by higher courts almost every time. Talk about California now because they are out of money that why they eliminated their exclusionary zones. I promise you this once they get an influx of cash or are able to crack down on us they will or some politician trying to get elected will make up another stupid law that hurts us twice as bad. As far as Michigan they are already fixing the loopholes that were used to get it suspended and it too will be up and running soon. They do not want us here nor do they want us to travel. I’m trying now to get a work visa to work over seas but the American government is fighting it.
I fear that someday the people on the registry who get placed into an ever tightening noose will one day soon start to just snap from the pressure and retaliate against these laws and law makers. There’s only so far you can push a man before he pushes back. Seems like talking and litigation isn’t working. I hope this movement dosent have to proudece marters like MLK and so on. Some people have had to die in American history to force Justice.
A word to the wise: be careful about making comments like this on a public forum. While history shows us what can happen, please be careful what you say.
If someone had the resources (a lawyer), they should challenge the ban on being present at the county commission meeting as a violation of the 1st amendment right to “petition the government for a redress of grievances”.
That’s in the works, Howard
I want to restate that I’m sure the timing of this ridiculous amendment has everything to do with re-election. Note, the 3 commissioners who have made it clear that they’re ready to vote ‘yes’ on it, without modifications, are the ONLY 3 Brevard commissioners who are up for reelection. So, there’s a slim chance this idea will magically disappear after the November election. On another note, I would hate one day to read that a truly dangerous, ‘career’ predator used Brevard’s registry of businesses to shop for victims.
These exclusion zone proposals are nothing more than political acts by bureaucrats who realize they have done nothing during their current term and with elections coming up they have to do something…anything. Thus exclusions zones.
They just keep on adding more and more “distance” rules. I still can’t wrap my head around how to find a decent place to live with the 2500 foot rule. I have a 4 and 6 year old and we’ve been to the Brevard Zoo a few times over the years. I’d really hate for them to take away going to the zoo. There are so few things I can do with my children as it is. 7 years ago I was forever kicked out of Disney World which isn’t the worst thing except it was on Christmas Eve while I was on my honeymoon. It’s just another thing I can’t do with my family. It’s been 22 years since I got in trouble. How long are they going to add more and more stringent rules and say it’s not a form of punishment?
JD, just a word of caution: On one of our previous Monday night Brevard calls, one Brevard resident stated that law enforcement sometimes drives through the Brevard zoo checking license plates for registrants. You might want to check this out, though, with someone more knowledgeable about Brevard than I am.
I feel for you. It is all so unfair — something I never thought, when I was younger, could happen in the United States of America. But this is why we are banding together to fight these injustices.
It’s all just such a huge pile of nonsense. It is stupid security illusion designed for stupid, hateful “people”. That is literally all that it is. Just a bunch of dumba**es harassing families just because they can.
When I take my children and/or grandchildren to a zoo or anywhere else, I never, ever, ever assume that nanny big government has been doing anything useful, in any way, to keep dangerous people away from us. I wouldn’t in 1,000 years even fantasize that their Registry Hit Lists were doing anything to protect us. So, I’m not going to support their brainless harassing of families listed on their Hit Lists. All they are doing is pissing those people off and making them more dangerous. That’s it.
Nope, I’ll protect my family without the “help” of big government and their dipsh*t Lists.
I do believe that the law enforcement criminals (LECs) drive around looking for People Forced to Register so they can harass them. Where I live, they’ve bragged about that on many occasions. Usually when they are trying to fleece more money from taxpayers. They will tell them they need more resources to protect them from “sex offenders”.
Where I live, they have Automatic License Plate Readers and it is very easy for the LECs to drive anywhere and it will scan and check every single plate that is visible. It can do that even when driving down an interstate. So you should always assume that LECs see any Registered vehicle and might want to target its occupants for harassment. Always.
I’ve always Registered a lot of cars just because. I drive a number of cars and my children drive them and others. I expect that the LECs have wasted tons of resources looking around in parks, etc. for me when I wasn’t there. I fully expect that. But they’ve never once talked to me at such a location. They did come to my home once to ask me about one of my cars that was in a different state for a long time. I wasn’t nice to them and of course didn’t tell them anything.
But I’d like to reassure the geniuses who think this security illusion is useful – if I ever go to a zoo or anywhere else to do anything nefarious, I promise that I’ll never drive a Registered car there or ever worry about any “presence” bans. So you could tell your big governments to stop wasting resources on dumb, useless “laws” and messing with them.
” It’s been 22 years since I got in trouble. How long are they going to add more and more stringent rules and say it’s not a form of punishment? ”
For as long as it looks tough on crime and keeps the votes coming in.
Today, the amendment to the proximity ordinance was approved, 4 to 1 (Chairman Lober was the one to vote against it). The oaf Tobia was super unprofessional and childish with his comments. Commissioners Pritchett and Isnardi (especially Isnardi) showed simple-minded righteousness as well. I’m going to keep in touch with Brevard businesses that are on the new registry and those that are just nearby those businesses (since their businesses will be patronized less because they are within about 1000 ft of the registered business) to let them know how often they are not getting my money.
You can pull up video of today’s meeting and start watching at 1 hour 59 minutes, for just over an hour. This time frame includes public comment and then comments from commissioners and their votes. It’s at: http://brevardfl.granicus.com/player/clip/107?view_id=1&redirect=true
That’s terrible news, RayO. Thanks for the important update.
I was OK with the proceedings until Isnardi made the comment that those on the registry are ‘sexual deviants’. At that point she displayed how ignorant she is on the subject. I had to send her an email on it. I doubt I will get a response as most politicians I find to be ‘gutless’ when called on the carpet about justifying with facts their comments. I info’ed the other commissioners. As with the current ordinance, as far as I am concerned with the amendment they can place it where the sun don’t shine.
After calling the sort unit the other day and being told registrants cant go to the commission meeting due to the 1000 foot rule I got to thinking why arnt we being arrested every time we reregister? The sort unit is well within 1000 foot of a. Park!!!!!!!
It’s one of the 13 exemptions – to meet with law enforcement.
We’re wasting our efforts trying to change minds. All these people understand is litigation and court decisions.