Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Offender Residency Decision topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Board denies Mario Ricketts’ request to reside at Cherry Street, cites need for treatment and concerns about remorse

Green Bay Offender Residency Board · July 16, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Green Bay Offender Residency Board voted 3–1 to deny Mario Ricketts’ request to live at 1314 Cherry Street, citing concerns about the nature of his past offenses, lack of completed treatment and statements the board viewed as insufficient remorse.

The Green Bay Offender Residency Board denied Mario Ricketts’ appeal to reside at 1314 Cherry Street after members raised concerns about the severity of his past offenses, incomplete treatment history and comments the board characterized as lacking remorse.

Ricketts told the board he was arrested in May 2015 on counts that included first-degree sexual assault and repeated offenses involving minors; he described conduct spanning several years, acknowledged pleading and serving approximately 10 years, and said he has since attended inpatient treatment (94 days at the Joshua Glover House) and is on a waiting list for SOT. He also described struggles with addiction and mental-health issues and said treatment helped him understand trauma and his behavior.

Lieutenant Allen of the Green Bay Police Department summarized the police file, saying Ricketts had resided with the victims and that the file contained indications the contact was not voluntary (for example, a victim told authorities she was moved to a bedroom without a lock and resisted). Board members repeatedly asked whether Ricketts had completed required sex-offender treatment and raised concern about comments Ricketts made about "forgiving" victims, which some members said suggested insufficient remorse.

One member moved to deny the address-specific request; the motion was seconded and carried 3–1. The board advised Ricketts to pursue and complete recommended treatment, coordinate with his probation agent (with whom he meets weekly), and reapply once he has documented the required programming.

The board’s denial was framed as conditional: members said the applicant could reapply after completing treatment and meeting the board’s expressed conditions.