WI: Sex offender ordinance is working, Sheboygan officials say

Five years after Sheboygan first enacted strict limits on sex offenders seeking to live here, the city’s sex offender population has slowly waned, with the city now denying about a quarter of all residency requests it receives, records show.

The 2008 ordinance essentially barred most registered sex offenders from living here without first receiving a waiver from a city committee and ultimately the Common Council. Since then, the city’s sex offender population has fallen by 13 percent, state records show, with 184 offenders now living at a Sheboygan address — some likely live outside the city limits — compared to 212 several months before the ordinance passed. Full Article

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 and a**
  4. Please avoid the use of derogatory labels.  Use person-first language.
  5. Please stay on topic - both in terms of the organization in general and this post in particular.
  6. Please refrain from general political statements in (dis)favor of one of the major parties or their representatives.
  7. Please take personal conversations off this forum.
  8. We will not publish any comments advocating for violent or any illegal action.
  9. 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 that are not personally identifiable.
  10. Please refrain from copying and pasting repetitive and lengthy amounts of text.
  11. Please do not post in all Caps.
  12. 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.
  13. We suggest to compose lengthy comments in a desktop text editor and copy and paste them into the comment form
  14. We will not publish any posts containing any names not mentioned in the original article.
  15. Please choose a short user name that does not contain links to other web sites or identify real people.  Do not use your real name.
  16. Please do not solicit funds
  17. No discussions about weapons
  18. If you use any abbreviation such as Failure To Register (FTR), Person Forced to Register (PFR) or any others, the first time you use it in a thread, please expand it for new people to better understand.
  19. All commenters are required to provide a real email address where we can contact them.  It will not be displayed on the site.
  20. Please send any input regarding moderation or other website issues via email to moderator [at] all4consolaws [dot] org
  21. 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.
  22. If addressing another commenter, please address them by exactly their full display name, do not modify their name. 
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

Sounds to me that it is generating discrimination against a class of people. I wonder if they required convicted drug dealers or a murderer to submit a waiver?

WOW – that’s shocking news!

Who would have possibly guessed that if it make it difficult and not pleasant to live somewhere then people will not make an effort to move there and actually move out.

Congrats on the brain trust that runs that city…real bunch of rocket scientists they have there.

I am guessing that since it worked so well with sex offenders that Jews and blacks will be the next groups targeted.

Perhaps someone should introduced them to this little thing we have/had in the USA called the CONSTITUTION!

I see it as a question of equal access to the election polls, can’t live there, then you can’t vote there to change the law.

How those personnel are undermining the law of the land…
the very foundation of this nation is criminal and u-American…….fifty years ago President Kennedy would challenge those personnel who restrict the rights on free
Americans and WIN.

Of course it’s working. If you make it almost impossible for registrants to live anywhere in the city, then there won’t be as many registrants registering in the city. It doesn’t take a lot of brains to figure that one out, but then we are talking about the general population of voters who have been duped on this topic for years and kept their heads in the sand so they won’t hear the truth. I am curious though, are they actually wanting people to believe it means there are fewer registrants overall?

Letter to the Editor in response to this article:

Verbs are so revealing. Notice that the ordinance is working. What exactly is that work? Is it making the public safer in any measurable way? No discussion of that. Is it preventing children from being harmed? No, nothing there. What is working is the reduction of the population of sex offenders. That was the objective and that is “working”. This is simple banishment, punishing people a second time for the same crime. At least in Sheboygan, there is no pretense that there is any public safety purpose or anything other than population reduction. It’s not much different than the banishment of Japanese in WWII, Soviet banishment of “undesirables” from 1932 to 1980. Those ended and this will end also.

These officials in Sheboygan have to be freaking geniuses! Of course the RSO population will be fewer if they can’t live there. Duh! Hopefully soon they will ban others, drunk drivers, thugs, gang members, murderers and the like. Eventually they can ban evil thinkers and the city will be empty, except for the innocent children. Welcome to Pleasantville.

I find these bans, as they are called, completely useless. These men, and women, have served their sentence, and are trying to move on with their lives. The same way that the drunk driver, drug dealer and burglar down the street are. Why should they not be allowed to live in a place where they are comfortable, functioning and abiding all laws and parole guidelines? It seems that the public in favor of these bans, are ill informed and, quite honestly, vindictive people who cannot relate to others’ issues. Do they know that Sex Offenders have the lowest recidivism rate of all ex inmates? Or that sex offenders receive the most treatment while incarcerated, and after release? Or that most sex offenders are family men and women, who work full time, own homes and cars and have children that these bans also affect? Plus, there is a registery so that you can take precautions, if you feel it necessary. There is no registery for drunk drivers or drug dealers, so they could be right next door selling your kids drugs, or come home from work drunk and kill everybody in your yard with their vehicle. Perspective, people. How about having a little compassion and faith in peoples ability to conquer their demons, and become better people. Try it out…