WI: Mauston facing legal uncertainty over living facility for sex offenders: ‘They’re still going to need a place to live.’

Source: wiscnews.com 2/9/23

Tammy Most and her husband have three children, their youngest being an 8-year-old daughter.
They moved into their house near the heart of Mauston’s historic downtown area in 2012, but they didn’t know that their new home would come with a constant state of unease.

Directly across from Most’s residence sits 108 Wisconsin Street. It’s a modest two-story duplex, and it’s served as a rental property since 1997. The City of Mauston is contemplating legal action that would evict its tenants — at least three sex offenders.

The city council voted to serve the property, a supportive housing facility, with a notice that it was operating against zoning regulations in December. The house is rented by ATTIC Correctional Services. The private, non-profit agency runs a variety of correctional treatment centers, transitional housing facilities and rehabs across the state.

“Recently, we were advised that we were going to have several rather contentious offenders being released from other parts of the state, and that this was a transitional place that they could go to because it’s part of the (Office of Corrections),” Chief Zilisch stated at the meeting.

He explained that other local facilities have requirements that prevent them from releasing occupants into counties where they didn’t offend.

That protects us from having sex offenders released within our community all the time,” he explained.


Read the 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
  19. We no longer post articles about arrests, only selected convictions. If your comment contains a link to an arrest 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

Wisconsin seem to be in a pickle They force the registrants to return to the area they committed a crime in that area they committed a crime in this everything in their power to remove them from the community.

Chief Zilisch stated at the meeting that other local facilities have requirements that prevent them from releasing occupants into counties where they didn’t offend.

“That protects us from having sex offenders released within our community all the time,” he explained.:

You force them to return to the town they committed their charge and force them away from the same community at what point is it banishment?

Now hang on a minute. If the sex offenders were there, before they moved in, then they should’ve checked Megan’s law themselves and decided not to move there. This one is definitely on them, not us.

Oh Jack, even better, the Most should just assume (correctly) that anyone/everyone is a potential sex offender and teach, watch & protect their children accordingly!!
Voila, problem solved! Then they don’t even have to look at the Megan’s Law website!

Otherwise, while they’re searching the website, their children are at risk from teachers, pastors, tutors, coaches, music instructors, family “friends”, relatives, etc.

Maybe the Registry websites should be renamed the “At Risk Distraction” sites! 🤷🏻‍♂️🤗
It’s very disturbing that lawmakers, police & media have conspired to mislead people with this “public safety” lie. 😕 And equally disturbing that the public has bought into it. 😕

BTW, maybe I missed it, but I’m sure the article mentioned prevention programs/resources for individuals at risk of offending.
It didn’t?? 😳
What do you mean, “There are none.”?? 😲😳

“”””In 2019, Gov. Tony Evers vetoed a bipartisan bill that would have lifted state restrictions on how close sex offenders can live to schools. The bill would have required offenders be placed in their home county after being released from prison while repealing a state law that prevents sexually violent individuals from living less than 1,500 feet from schools, public parks or places of worship.
The measure passed the state Assembly and Senate unanimously. In Evers’ veto message, he wrote that weakening current protections would put children at risk.”””””

And of course Evers is a ,…………………………. democrat!?!?! No way!

“Most recently, the police department notified the public that long-time resident and registered sex offender James D. Kern was being re-released into the city and would be living at 108 Wisconsin Street”

So I looked up this gentleman’s rap sheet

“The long-time resident was convicted in 2017 for fourth-degree sexual assault of a 68-year-old, for which he was initially given 18 months of probation. The charge was later reopened in 2019 and Kern’s judgment was amended to add 9 months to a jail sentence”

This begs the question. If this man was convicted of a 4th degree sexual assault on a 65 year old, why is this hysterical “mama bear” (as she calls herself) worried about her 8 year old daughter wading in a rubber swimming pool within view sight of this man’s house?

Wow – what a poorly written article when it comes to facts.

There is no state-wide residency restriction when it comes to sex offenders in Wisconsin, unless the sex offender has been determined to be a predator under Chapter 980. People being released from prison are required to be released to their county of conviction/previous residence, but there are no state-wide restrictions related to how many feet to a school, etc.

The state created a hot mess with its predator (civil commitment) statute which is constantly tries to fix, only to make things worse. For these people there are all kinds of restrictions that only make a bad situation worse.

My guess that the “contentious” sex offenders being discussed here are people who have been found to be a predator according to Chapter 980.

It’s a shame, because Attic runs a number of programs around the state and not many accept sex offenders at all. This program seems to have run successfully in this location for a long time, at least till some soccer mom decided it had to go.

The ATTIC organization was forced upon me upon mandatory release in 1995. Nice to see there still around. While a was kinda forced to spend 9 weeks there, coincidently the same building where mom plopped me out. Seven weeks in ” the ice cream man” was let out per MR and all hell broke loose. Thing was the “A house” was right next door to Bridge Elementary. The same action by city took place then. I had a place to live at release so they had to let me go, but only because the high profile offender story made it happen. At least three other sex offenders already there before I was forced by DOC Parole to be there. They a bailed like fleas off a dog. I think that Mauston will shut it down. Just like those on the bracelet, I was a slave to the property operating under DOC lease contract. Really to privately owned property. Who ever owns- holds the deed to the house- has to pay annual taxes to the city. Housing offenders by leasing to DOC ” treatement” is much more lucrative than renting to single families. Because the property is leased, until the lease expires it will remain temporarily because Judges will lend the state deference until the expiration of said lease.

What is the name of ” the husband ” to which the Author refers?
How is it I know its a c***? How jacked is the source code the damn web page too. I’ll give her a break, because I’m sure her pay grade as an online journalist doesn’t cover proper English, Journalism, nor properly terminated web protocol.
I’m betting the hubby said “Leave me out of it!” Thus only the Mrs. is cited. Mauston WI has a population of ~4600 people. So three offenders is about the same ratio in the state as a whole.