Property also red-tagged due to alleged building code violations
By Jason Arndt
Staff Writer
After three motions to stay placement of a convicted sex offender at a Geneva Road property in Wheatland, the Wisconsin Court of Appeals gave the Town of Wheatland a reprieve Tuesday evening.
The court, which denied a Town of Wheatland motion, later accepted the same motion filed by Kenosha County’s corporate counsel, pending an appeal hearing.
The appeal hearing is set for June 8.
Additionally, the Town of Wheatland issued multiple code violations at the property, 32200 Geneva Rd., after officials discovered the Fond du Lac-based landlord, allegedly did not obtain permits for improvements done on the residence since 2012.
According to a Sheriff’s Department news release, authorities red-tagged the property Tuesday.
The property, which sits next door to where a 1-year-old lives, has left the family and Town of Wheatland in its grips since May 11 when the proposed placement of a sex offender was discussed.
At the May 11 Town Hall meeting, Department of Health Services announced the placement of Michael McGee on or before May 20.
McGee, 53, had been convicted in 1987 of second-degree sexual assault and burglary in Racine, and later was civilly committed to Sand Ridge Secure Treatment Facility in Mauston.
Kenosha County Sheriff David Beth, who spent hours advocating for the child and his parents, Mark Rogers and Danielle De Mali, stated during a peaceful protest on Saturday that McGee’s placement into the residence is enough to rattle his nerves.
“For Mr. McGee, his first major violation was that he burglarized a house and sexually assaulted a woman inside,” Beth explained. “This is something that terrifies people.”
A legal standoff
Before the announcement at the Wheatland Town Hall meeting, multiple local and county agencies received notification from DHS on May 6, stating Michael and Robert McGee, no relation, were set for release from Sand Ridge by May 20.
Robert McGee, 55, had been convicted in 1989 of first-degree sexual assault in Milwaukee County.
Kenosha County Deputy District Attorney Michael Graveley, in attendance at the Town Hall meeting, told local residents that he spent three straight days addressing the placement order.
DHS officials reconsidered Robert McGee’s placement and requested his order get overturned in Milwaukee County Circuit Court.
Additionally, Wheatland Town Attorney Todd Terry filed a motion to stay placement of Michael McGee in Racine County Court May 11.
Graveley held a discussion with Racine County District Attorney Rich Chiapete, who was not aware a 1-year-old lived next door when the order was approved.
Chiapete, who had been involved in several of Michael McGee’s contested placements, coordinated efforts to stop the placement with Graveley that included a formal request addressed to Racine County Circuit Court Judge Allan Torhorst.
At the Wheatland Town Hall meeting, residents learned both were not classified as serious sex offenders since they were convicted before 1990, when state statutes did not have language pertaining to serious sex offenders.
Leading up to the Town Hall meeting, local residents received support from four state legislators, who cosigned a letter addressed to Racine and Milwaukee County Courts citing 2015 Act 156.
Act 156, passed in a February session, had been designed to bar serious sex offenders from living within 1,500-feet where a child lives and plays.
Citing the conviction dates of Michael and Robert McGee, the DHS did not have to report that a child lived next door to court officials, which was included in a three-paragraph survey conducted by Kenosha County Sheriff’s Det. Dave Smith.
While DHS officials acknowledged an error in placement of Robert McGee, they continued the order of Michael McGee, arguing options at a Racine County motion hearing May 24 that they searched 28 counties for a suitable housing option.
While Judge Torhorst granted the Town of Wheatland a stay in placement May 18, he later upheld the order May 24, rejecting arguments by Kenosha County officials.
Those officials cited Act 156 that includes language stating convicted sex offenders must be placed in their own counties.
Additionally, a town ordinance prohibits serious sex offenders from living with 2,500-feet of a park.
However, Torhorst rejected all arguments, and later denied two stay of placement requests by the Town of Wheatland and Kenosha County, pending an appeal.
In the seven-page decision, Torhorst rejected arguments by Kenosha County officials that the proposed residence was close to an area considered a park and that McGee would pose a danger to the 1-year-old.
Additionally, Torhorst rejected a request by Racine County District Attorney Rich Chiapete to overturn the ruling. Chiapete said he was not previously aware a child lived nearby.
In the ruling, Torhorst wrote that McGee’s targeted victims are considered adult women and prepubescent males – not 1-year-old children. He also contends that a nearby bike trail does not constitute a prohibited zone for the placement of a sex offender under the definition of a park.
According to the first law enforcement bulletin, Michael McGee had his parole revoked when he allegedly molested a 10-year-old nephew.
Terry, who filed a motion on behalf of the Town of Wheatland, stated Torhorst denied a stay in placement, pending an appeal.
Thereafter, a Court Appeals denied the same motion May 27.
On Tuesday, Torhorst rejected the same motion by Kenosha County Corporate Counsel.
“Procedurally, generally, the circuit court has to deny that motion before the Court of Appeals will entertain it,” Terry explained. “If neither court stays the placement, it will go off per the order.”
Lawmakers voice frustration
Two state legislators involved in the passage of Act 156 expressed disappointment and anger after Torhorst’s ruling in Racine County.
State Rep. Tyler August of Lake Geneva said that Torhorst overrode the state’s law.
“I’m very disappointed in Judge Torhorst’s decision to place a Racine-area sex offender into Kenosha County,” August stated. “It is extremely frustrating to have the judicial branch ignore a bill we passed in the legislature this past session to prevent this very thing from happening.”
State Sen. Van Wanggaard of Racine agreed, stating the ruling did not look out for the best interests of the Wheatland community, including the family next door.
“I was very disappointed that the judge continued the placement,” Wanggaard said. “He probably followed the letter of the law, but not the spirit of the law.”
A family affected
If McGee takes residence next door, Rogers has not determined what course to take ¬– move or stay.
“Does that mean we have to stay in this house, that I don’t know, but I won’t put my family in any danger,” Rogers said.