WI: Gov Candidate Supports Housing Community For Registered Sex Offenders
A recent article in the Washington Free Beacon takes aim at Wisconsin gubernatorial candidate David Crowley for expressing support for the work of It Takes a Village Foundation, a nonprofit that helps formerly incarcerated people return to society. The controversy centers on the foundation’s founder, Dr. Shawna Whitehead, who said in a 2022 interview that she wanted to bring partners together to purchase land, build houses, and create a community for people convicted of sex offenses. Her reasoning was straightforward: people are leaving prison, they need somewhere to live, and society has a responsibility to confront that reality rather than pretend the problem will disappear. Whitehead described the social stigma facing these individuals by comparing their treatment to that of people with leprosy.
FAC has mixed feelings about designated communities for people required to register, and we think it is important to acknowledge both sides of the issue. Here in Florida, we have a similar community in Pahokee, where people who might otherwise struggle to find housing can find a place to live. The work being done to provide safe, stable housing for this population is tremendous, and we recognize the importance of having somewhere people can go when nearly every other door has been slammed shut in their faces. No one should have to choose between homelessness and a place to live simply because of their registry status.
But there is another side to this equation. When we concentrate registrants in remote communities, separated from the broader population, we have to ask whether we are actually promoting reintegration or simply creating a more organized form of banishment. Successful reentry means more than having a roof over one’s head. It means having opportunities to work, maintain family relationships, access services, participate in everyday community life, and demonstrate through one’s conduct that a criminal conviction does not have to define a person forever. A designated community may provide a necessary refuge in a society that offers few alternatives, but we should be careful not to mistake a refuge created by exclusion for a model of successful reintegration.
We applaud anyone working to ensure that registrants have safe housing, while questioning a system that makes isolation seem like the only realistic solution. Ultimately, our goal should be a society in which these communities are an option for those who choose them, not a necessity for those whom the rest of society refuses to accept.
Discover more from Florida Action Committee (FAC)
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I get that some folks may shudder at the idea of our own communities, but if we ran outr own communities we can dictate our community’s policy.
I asked about this in my 2022 Anti-Registry Activist Survey about this– 45% supported the idea of our own self-sustaining communities, while about 22.3% opposed it (About a third remained neutral.) So there is support for the idea.
I’d love to start my own town. Hell, here in Nebraska, all I’d need is 100 adults to move to a concentrate and vote to incorporate then we set bylaws.
In a state like Wsconsin, I see this as even more to our benefit. Just as in FloriDUH, there are communities in the state with outrageous restrictions, and housing leads are virtually nonexistent there. Some even have what they call an ‘original domicile rule” where you cant live there unless your conviction was from there!
Furthermore, you have an added layer of government there called townships or just “towns”. all in all, there are 1922 city, village, town, and county governments and they all have different laws, and even communities under 200 people have such restrictive laws. I found one in a town of like 180 or folks, and one house–JUST ONE HOUSE– was not in a restricted zone.
Registrants could create a town and start our own businesses and get help from the state for certain services.
That sounds good in theory, but once you try it, the government will ask why we’re using taxpayer money for that. I can see it going wrong, plus the public might start taking things into their own hands like what happens in some Florida communities.
Derek, do you actually think this corrupt goverment would extend the same kind of lattitude and autonomy they give tribal nations / indian reservations? Because I don’t. This is basically “self-clustering” or that island they want to ship us all off to. These communities are bascially kowtowing to authority and appeasing public sentiment. Not to mention it lets every loon and nutjob know “where they are” if they want to do random drive-bys and spray every house with bullets. And don’t think for one second that the cops wouldn’t do random “check ups” or the county opts to install Flock cams because that would be next.
There’s no such thing as “safe housing” when your name is on the Internet. Especially when someone can safely lob mortar shells from a distance knowing they won’t hit anyone “innocent” in one of these so-called communities.
History shows that in Florida, when the locals find out what’s going on, it usually leads to banishment or protest to dismantle
FAC
AND, when they dismantle, they go somewhere else, where someone else will complain and banish them and the ball keeps getting kicked down the court until there is no court left to kick. And sadly, some give up and go back to prison, where they know what to expect.
A person called it a cancer this last few weeks in an interview. Perfect analogy.