Video of Crestview City Council Members’ Discussion of Sex Offender Ordinance
On September 25, 2023, the Crestview City Council voted 3 to 1 in favor of a sex offender ordinance that will expand the residency restriction from the state’s 1000 feet to 1500 feet from schools, day care facilities, parks, playgrounds, SCHOOL BUS STOPS, and COMMUNITY CENTERS.
Councilman Bullard is to be commended for not supporting this ordinance because of some concerns he expressed at the meeting.
Another council member stated that 67% of people on the registry WILL sexually re-offend. This council member incorrectly quoted from a government study that came out in 2019. The study actually found that people with a past sex offense that was rape or sexual assault sexually re-offended at a rate of 7.7% over a 9-year period. Many people on the registry, such as those convicted of CP possession, were not included in the study. More will be coming about this study.
Florida Action Committee is appreciative of the registrant who had the courage to speak at this meeting.
You can view the video of the meeting at our YouTube channel.
Again no one is answering the question if people are going to be removed from their homes? I cannot see the supreme court allowing people who are already established having to be dragged from their homes or forced to move.
Sorry but it would take 10 of their best men to take me down when it comes to my house. Any judge that would allow the retro-active application of people being removed from their homes should be ashamed and have their Jurist license revoked.
People affected by this new ordinance who own their home will receive an exemption. People renting will not. This could be a big problem for renters as school bus stops are sometimes moved around.
Well still not right, at least let them finish their lease. And I bet they lose their deposit too. Having said that, most apartments do not allow sex offenders anyway so maybe private homes that are rented out?
The word banishment comes to mind. Just take us all out to sea and drown us why don’t they.
Who is the person that proposed this? He needs to be given correct updated information to educate him.
They were all given the research but only Bullard seemed to care.
Even the State of Floriduh decided not to make the 1000 ft. residence restriction retroactive. It’s only effective for offense dates after September 2004. Maybe we should make sure these [moderated] town leaders are aware of this when they start getting bored and looking for new crap to pass.
IF residency restrictions are the answer then it should be added:
No one convicted of DUI can reside within 1500 feet of a bar.
No one convicted of bank robbery or armed robbery can live within 1500 feet of a bank, ATM, or anywhere that cash or goods transfers occur.
No one convicted of breaking and entering can live within 1500 feet of a house or structure designed for business or human occupation.
No one convicted of selling narcotics can live 1500 feet within any residence, school, gas station, park, place of business, or anywhere humans are known to patron.
1,000 is quickly becoming the rare case, now we see upwards of 1,500 2000 and 2,500 feet or like in Miami Beach which is almost impossible to comply with the law by design. At what point do we challenge the courts on a banishment grounds.
I agree, but the problem is the cost. The money FAC raises only goes toward expenses such as the cost of hiring expert witnesses and depositions and other expenses . We are not actually paying the attorneys. They only receive their fee if we win and the court decides the other side pays it. So it can be difficult to find an attorney to take a case when they know that they might not ever get paid. With that said, the attorneys that have taken cases for us are outstanding and are busy right now dealing with legal issues for us. We are hoping they are eventually reimbursed. They deserve it.
We have a lot of situations where we would like to file a lawsuit but have to wait until some other lawsuits are finished (and hopefully won). Then it takes an attorney who is willing to help us out.
How we all wish we had the money to pay attorneys what they deserve to take on all these lawsuits.
This new law could help us it allows up to $50,000 for the defendant who is able to show new ordinance https://casetext.com/statute/florida-statutes/title-vi-civil-practice-and-procedure/chapter-57-court-costs/section-57112-effective-1012023-attorney-fees-and-costs-and-damages-arbitrary-unreasonable-or-expressly-preempted-local-ordinances. I have yet to see how laws like this are allowed https://www.tampabay.com/news/courts/dunedin-woman-who-stalked-radio-djs-is-sentenced-must-leave-pinellas/1229509/?outputType=amp. Banishment is illegal theses laws amount to banishment. There has to be a lawyer who will work on contingency being paid thru this ordinance. At the end of the day the only thing they can say is no.
The Honorable Council Members who voted for this should be gently corrected in public on this error. Also they should be told the date the results were collected and the parameters of the data. All too often statistics are thrown around without context or relevance.
Agreed.