April 2, 2009

WI- Official: Ordinance driving sex offenders into hiding

4-2-2009 Wisconsin:

Noncompliance up after law passed, Green Bay board told

Green Bay's sex offender residency requirements appear to be driving sex offenders into hiding, a prison official says.

Tom Smith, who works for the Department of Corrections' sex offender registration program, spoke to the city's Sex Offender Residency Board Wednesday.

Smith's job is to track and enforce compliance with state requirements for convicted sex offenders to annually register their names and current address and provide an up-to-date mugshot.

Since May 2007, after the city passed its sex offender residency ordinance and established the board to hear appeals, noncompliance with the state registry has jumped, just as state officials had predicted it would, Smith said.

Green Bay's ordinance forbids convicted sex offenders from residing within 2,000 feet of a school, park or other gathering place for children. Sex offenders who established residency prior to the passage of the ordinance are exempt unless they want to re-locate within the city.

Because of the number of gathering places for children in the city, the ordinance effectively prohibits offenders from living in all but a few mostly-unpopulated parts of the city.

Smith referred 14 cases to the District Attorney's office for prosecution for noncompliance in 2007, and 31 cases in 2008. So far in 2009, the number has reached 12 and appears on track to be the highest yet, he said.

Failure to comply with the state's registry requirements is a felony offense carrying a maximum penalty of six years in prison and a $10,000 fine.

Smith had lobbied against passage of the ordinance in 2007 and favors elimination of the ordinance.

The ordinance is driving sex offenders underground and harming the registry, the one tool that actually improves safety against sex offenders, Smith said.

In addition, it's greatly complicating the process of providing ex-convicts with one of the important things they need to stay out of trouble — a place to live.

Jed Neuman, a corrections field supervisor for state parole agents in Brown County, said his agents are spending far more time than they used to finding suitable living quarters for their sex offender clients.

Without the ordinance, "The agents would be better able to serve their clients, rather than driving around looking for for-rent signs," Neuman said.

The location of a sexual predator's residence has little to do with where his offense is likely to occur, Smith said. He spoke of a case in Calumet County where the offender drove from his home in New York to assault a girl he'd met over the Internet.

"That's more than 2,000 feet, isn't it?" said Arthur Taylor, the residency board chairman.

Board member Dean Gerondale defended the city's ordinance.

While no one wants to drive sex offenders underground, he said, it's wrong to set policy by their further wrongful actions.

"Just because felons choose to commit another felony, we should ignore it?" Gerondale said.

Smith and Neuman addressed the board not to lobby against the city's ordinance but to discuss the nuances of compliance with the registry.

The board shouldn't bar residency on the basis of seeing the word "noncompliant" on the registry Web site, Smith said. There are various degrees of noncompliance, and some sex offenders can be listed as noncompliant for failing to fill out their annual form properly, Smith said.

True noncompliance is when an offender lies about his residence or fails to report where he's living, Smith said.

Alderman Jerry Wiezbiskie, one of only two on the 12-person City Council to vote against the ordinance, attended Wednesday's session. He has called upon the council to revisit the issue and possibly adjust the ordinance.

"I'm not for repealing it, but I think it can be sharpened up," Wiezbiskie said.

One possible change would be to reduce the 2,000-foot distance to something like 500 feet, using it to establish enforceable safety zones rather than to exclude convicted sex offenders from living in the city, he said. ..News Source.. by Paul Srubas

No comments: