Geneva council hears call for person‑centered response to panhandling; council says laws are sufficient

A resident and a behavior‑analysis expert urged the Geneva City Council on Monday to prioritize services and person‑centered responses over tougher penalties for people who panhandle, while council members said current local laws are generally sufficient and that enforcement hinges on citizens pressing charges.

Steven Kelly, a constituent from Ward 3 and a board‑certified behavior analyst, told the council he had “no specific solutions” but cautioned that punishment alone won’t change behavior: “Punishment can't teach behavior. It can deter. But unless there's another method to meet the need of that behavior, they're still going to do it,” he said.

Kelly said that jailing people without addressing underlying needs creates a “revolving door” and observed that fines or arrests are unlikely to reduce panhandling unless alternative supports exist. He added that he believed the laws discussed at an earlier meeting were “sufficient to address the concerns regarding aggression.”

A council member, speaking during council reports after consulting with the police chief, told attendees that passive panhandling is a First Amendment right and that the city’s current ordinances, combined with laws against loitering and trespassing, provide enforcement options when panhandling becomes harassment. The council member said officers and prosecutors rely on citizens to press charges for many alleged offenses.

Councilors and staff repeated the practical limits of local authority: enforcement outcomes often depend on whether an individual victim reports harassment and pursues charges. The council did not introduce new legislation at the meeting.

Why it matters: Geneva officials said they want to balance public safety and legal protections for speech while community members and experts emphasized that enforcement alone will not resolve the social needs that contribute to visible panhandling.

Council work ahead includes continuing to monitor downtown incidents and coordinating with police and community groups on non‑criminal responses. No formal votes or new ordinances were taken on panhandling at Monday’s meeting.