Lately, Colorado has been having a conversation on how the registry needs to be changed using research-based policies, and now we see that Boulder is attempting to look not only at solutions for the homeless but have included people on the registry in the discussion.
Yes, registrants are not eligible for housing assistance or supportive housing, but I am focusing on this one short sentence: “For ‘sex offenders’, the city is purchasing units specifically for housing this population.”
Boulder is taking seriously the idea of tackling a growing homeless situation, and they have included registrants in the discussion. It might not be a lot to some people, but it is more than Florida is doing.
Meanwhile, something FAC appears to have missed. VIDEO: Democrat Mayor Blasted for Hiring Registered Child Sex Offender https://www.breitbart.com/crime/2021/10/22/democrat-mayor-child-sex-offender/
There are several factors here that need to be mentioned for those who are not familiar with Boulder, CO:
1) The current governor lives there full time and not in the mansion downtown where they would traditionally live; therefore, he sees this population more in his own neighborhood. However, if they were at the mansion, they would see the same encampment needs there in the neighborhood. There is currently major discord between the governor and the mayor of the major city just SE of it down US 36; so the governor is doing what they can in their local personal area. Oh, homelessness impacts the tourism money coming into Boulder when they are all along the major tourism avenues and near the college. This is a financial thinking effort, not altogether altruistic from the heart.
2) The city is very progressive and liberal with their politics, especially with the major university there which helps to drive topics to the top for consideration.
3) There are parts of Boulder County that are open areas which could house people forced to register in a housing setting, but that could possibly mirror the prisoner of war camp and the internment camp which were in CO during WWII or even the old TB wards which dotted CO back in the day in concepts of group settings for specific groups of people. There are enough nuts in CO that if someone wanted to, they could pinpoint this housing settlement for their own vigilante justice. NIMBY will rear its head on this effort unless it is placed in tornado alley to the east and away from Boulder altogether.
4) CO has gotten bad press in the last few years for their shady practices related to those people who will be forced to register who are supposed to be counseled by professionals prior to leaving confinement (which you can see online), so they need to do something about turning the corner away from it.
5) It is nice they are thinking about it, but they need to do away with the registry overall so those who are impacted by it can move along in life with one less ball and chain in life.
Thanks for filling us in on what is going on in Boulder.
Are these housing options going to be placed in good areas or is it going to be located in an industrial park or some lonely county road near the jail? Will it be near bus and other mass transit lines where registrants can get to the available services and jobs? Yes, it’s possibly a better situation than Florida where legislative homelessness is legalized. But it still sounds sentencing people to gulag or ghetto. A gulag with out the barbed wire fencing and searchlight.
On one hand, I think it is great that they are finally thinking of housing for Registered Persons. On the other hand, I always have my reservations about “separate housing” for Registered Persons. What kind of housing would it be? Are they given fair housing or will it be a poorly managed slum? Will it have reasonable access to basic needs or will it be way out in the middle of nowhere and diffiult to get to?
It doesn’t matter even if the housing is great. It is still wrong. It is wrong to segregate people because of sex, as if those people are somehow any different than any other people walking around. This would just be a PFR segregation camp.
I’d also bet that the percentages of people in such camps who are violently dangerous (or whatever other category) would very, very closely match the percentages just out and about in the free public. This idea that PFRs are somehow different than unlisted people is just simply false. I’m met so many “people” who are unlisted who are just walking, talking pathetic pieces of garbage.