Changes to Suamico’s sex offender residency code discussed

By Kevin Boneske

Staff Writer

SUAMICO – Possible changes to the village’s sex offender residency code to comply with state law were discussed at the April 19 Suamico village board meeting.

Board members heard from Village Attorney Ashley Lehocky, who said convicted violent sex offenders may no longer be regulated by a local ordinance because of a change in state law five years ago.

“The state retains that control, and so the state, usually through some local agency, the county, is going to be in charge of placing any offender who has been deemed, designated, sexually violent under that portion of the statutes,” she said.

Lehocky said violent sex offenders are not allowed to live within 1,500 of a designated protected zone, such as a school, licensed day care centers and public parks.

“Those we are deeming the most dangerous offenders, 1,501 feet is what is required for them to be placed in a home,” she said. “Then the state, or potentially the county, will look at an appeal, if they want to live closer, and they will consider certain factors, such as is there a familial connection to this property, are they going to be benefited by having the support of family, are they going to have employment opportunities that are unique in that area, is there an exception to this rule.”

Lehocky said the proposed changes to the village ordinance include removing violent sexual offenders because they can no longer be regulated with Suamico’s code because of the change in state law.

“I’m also recommending you expand the protected zone for loitering and reduce the protected zone for residency,” she said.

Lehocky said the 50-foot loitering radius is short and should be expanded to 150 feet so convicted sex offenders couldn’t be parked, sitting or watching activities within that area.

“It becomes more difficult when we talk about residency,” she said. “Your current ordinance has a 2,500-foot radius, so registered offenders are not allowed to live within 2,500 feet of these protected areas… and that is more restrictive than state statute for the most violent offenders.”

Lehocky said she believes it would be difficult, if not impossible, to defend the 2,500-foot radius in a court challenge for a registered sex offender, given the state implemented a 1,500-foot radius for violent sex offenders.

Trustee Dan Roddan said he understands why the village code could legally be challenged if it is not changed.

“It’s not that we want to do it,” he said. “It just that it can legally be challenged in court that the most violent sex offenders can live in this area (between 2,500 and 1,500 feet from protected zones), but someone who isn’t a violent sex offender can’t. That just doesn’t make common sense.”

Difference of opinion

Lehocky said sex offenders required to register under Chapter 301 of the state statutes could be regulated by the village.

“If they have been deemed sexually violent under Chapter 980, then we would not be able to regulate those individuals,” she said. “That definition of a sexually violent person comes from Chapter 980 and requires a petition and a hearing and ultimately a determination that they fall into this category of as a sexually violent offender.”

However, Directed Enforcement Officer Marc Pisani questioned the accuracy of Lehocky’s description.

“For someone to be deemed a 980, they would have to be deemed a sexually violent person,” he said. “Part of that is that they have to have a mental disease or defect that predisposes them to commit a sexual act in the future. That’s part of this that’s getting lost is that our original ordinance referenced the offense, specifically, not the person. It had nothing to do with mental disease.”

Following the difference of opinion expressed between Lehocky and Pisani, the board decided to hold off on the first reading of the ordinance revision she presented and agreed with Village Administrator Alex Kaker to look over options presented at a subsequent meeting on possible changes to the code.