FL: Reentry Task Forces Recommends a Stop to Residency Restrictions for Sex Offenders

[from the last page]

We affirm the findings of the OPPAGA that “many studies have established that sex offenders who maintain stable employment, housing and family  relationships have significantly lower recidivism rates” as well as the numerous studies which conclude that SORRs undermine successful reentry of returning citizens, while doing nothing to promote public safety.

For that reason, we make the following recommendations:

1) Legislation should be enacted that would pre-empt the patchwork of county and city SORR ordinances in favor of the State’s SORR Statute (F.S. §775.215).

2) Counties should be required to designate a homeless shelter/reentry program that is able to service the transient registrant population and focus on helping these individuals secure stable and meaningful employment, stable and affordable housing (including arrangements with family members or others when appropriate), and pro-social support systems that help them maintain a law-abiding lifestyle.

3) Legislation should be enacted to incorporate an evidence-based procedure by which registrants who have demonstrated an extended period living offense-free in the community, have successfully completed a sex-offending treatment & rehabilitation program, and have successfully completed probation, can
petition for relief and removal from registration requirements in the time periods prescribed by the federal SORNA tiers.

Florida Reentry Task Force 2020 Report


Related posts

Notify of

We welcome a lively discussion with all view points - keeping in mind...


  1. Your submission will be reviewed by one of our volunteer moderators. Moderating decisions may be subjective.
  2. Please keep the tone of your comment civil and courteous. This is a public forum.
  3. Swear words should be starred out such as f*k and s*t
  4. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  5. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  6. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  7. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  8. We cannot connect participants privately - feel free to leave your contact info here. You may want to create a new / free, readily available email address.
  9. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  10. Please do not post in all Caps.
  11. If you wish to link to a serious and relevant media article, legitimate advocacy group or other pertinent web site / document, please provide the full link. No abbreviated / obfuscated links. Posts that include a URL may take considerably longer to be approved.
  12. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  13. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  14. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people
  15. Please do not solicit funds
  16. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), or any others, the first time you use it please expand it for new people to better understand.
  17. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  18. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  19. We no longer post articles about arrests or accusations, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest or accusation article we will not approve your comment.
ACSOL, including but not limited to its board members and agents, does not provide legal advice on this website.  In addition, ACSOL warns that those who provide comments on this website may or may not be legal professionals on whose advice one can reasonably rely.  

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

The title of this article is a bit misleading. They’re only advocating forbidding counties and cities from enacting their own, more stringent residence restrictions even as the data they affirm suggest such restrictions should be repealed altogether. They go into detail about how residence restrictions are counterproductive – steadily causing homelessness while having no benefit whatsoever – yet recommend they remain in place.

Doesn’t strike me as any kind of victory for the cause. More like giving a dog a bone to get him to ignore the big steak it came from.

What about Lauren Book?

Is that @Ron & Lauren Book coughing at the sound of this or just the wind outside? Asking for those on the FLA list…


Nah that’s the peeling out of Ron Book’s exotic car heading to his next binge drinking party. Hopefully Lauren isn’t nearby her plastic will melt.