WI: For now, sex offenders will not be allowed to move into the village of Hartland

Members of the Hartland Village Board have voted to begin work on an ordinance that will restrict where sex offenders can live. In the meantime, the village will not allow any new offenders to move into the village. …

The moratorium states that sex offenders cannot move into Hartland until the village’s average amount of sex offenders living in the village is the same as the rest of the county. 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
  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
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

Wait just a minute… these restrictions are supposed to be about keeping certain people from residing near schools, parks, etc. All about public safety. Because someone who decided to snatch a random toddler from a park and abuse them could never be expected to walk 5 minutes from his front door to accomplish this offense worth life in prison.

Is it possible that this is straight banishment? Hmmmm.

Despite there being a “concentration” of RCs versus the rest of the county, what sort of spike in crime has Hartland comparatively suffered? I’d bet zero. Once again, the facts and data belie the myths and statements.

Wisconsin doesn’t have a state-wide residency rule, with the exception of those deemed to be predators (Chapter 980). For everyone else, it’s up to the local municipalities to enact or not enact restrictions.

Something very common here in many of the local residency restrictions is a clause called “Original Domicile”. It states that unless the person was a resident of xxxxx at the time of the most recent conviction for which he/she is registered, that person may not establish a residence in xxxxxxx.

In other words, if a person was living in Milwaukee at the time of their conviction, they cannot move to Menomonee Falls.

Some jurisdictions state that if you were not a resident of County XXXX then you cannot live in this jurisdiction. Others make it the specific jurisdiction.

This particular clause is what really scares me the most about these rules. If a few more jurisdictions enact such a rule, I will not be able to move anywhere. I was not a resident of my current jurisdiction at the time of my conviction, so if I decide to sell I cannot move to another house in this town. Most all of the neighboring towns will not let me in due to the Original Domicile rule.

My question is this: From where does a jurisdiction gain the authority to determine who may and may not reside in their jurisdiction? What if a jurisdiction decided by board vote to disallow anyone convicted of any felony? Would that be legal?

I understand the basis for the residency restrictions. I don’t agree, but I understand. The Original Domicile clause seems like nothing more than a bar to residency that surely wouldn’t hold up in court.

Yep, wait till SCOTUS gets this in front of them. I have full faith these laws are done once that happens and at the bare minimum they rule the states have to go back to LE only and no in-person reporting, NO restrictions of any kind including absolutely no push notifications to anyone including IML. Registration will only be applicable after due process exactly like in Hendricks for civil commitment.

I imagine the laws will get so abundant, so punitive and restrictive, and so wide spread that the SCOTUS will have no way of denying they are punitive in nature, discriminatory, and unconstitutional. I do believe that is why they don’t want to hear it currently because it is already there and the SCOTUS doesn’t like reversing their decisions. But it is coming. Let’s thank these hate mongering self-centered politicians for enacting more punitive laws showing everyone what they are about. Sorry for all of us that are suffering while this goes on.

Wi. is well into it’s phase of residency restrictions. Many have been rolled back under threat of lawsuit to 750 or 500 feet. From 1000 2000 or more. The newest thing to help deflect lawsuits seems to be adding an appeal process for registrants so a board can vote on you. (Green Bay New Berlin & others). Milwaukee has drastically reduced their residency restrictions temporarily for a year.

The origin of this article is a website (citydata.com)
It is a website seemingly for poeple looking to relocate etc. Hartland is generally a country/suburban area. Low crime. When you buy or sell any real estate the registry is in your face. We are all on this website even if we are not on the registry. We are all a statistic. The big difference is People on the registry get thier own personal background entry and a map of where they live. note, there is also an interactive map of income and racial distributions.