Williamsport council tables proposed 9 p.m. youth curfew after public testimony

Council President Beiter opened a heated discussion Tuesday night on a proposal to lower the city’s juvenile curfew from 11 p.m. to 9 p.m. and raise penalties. Police Chief Taviano told council the change would target a ‘‘niche group of kids who are out causing problems’’ and outlined proposed fine increases while stressing that diversion would be the preferred outcome.

The issue drew a string of public speakers. Kevin Mackey, a former city treasurer, urged passage and described recent local incidents — including shots fired and a drive‑by — saying the ordinance would provide ‘‘the backing [police] need’’ to prevent crime. "Let them make the stops. Let them ensure the safety of city youth and give them the ordinance that they're asking for," Mackey said.

Juvenile Uplifting Mentoring Program executive director Intesa Martin told council she supports accountability and public safety but urged against a policy that relies primarily on stops and higher fines. Citing national research, Martin said curfews ‘‘do not reliably reduce youth crime’’ and recommended a compromise: move the curfew to 10 p.m., avoid increasing parental fines, and create a standard diversion option through JMP that would include parent sign‑in, skills training and certificates in lieu of fines.

Resident Lauren Montgomery, who said she has three teenagers, also opposed a 9 p.m. curfew and warned it would penalize working teens and low‑income families. "Fining children, forcing them to appear in court for not being at home is not a reasonable solution," Montgomery said.

Several council members echoed concerns about equity and effectiveness. Doctor Yoder urged that an annual review built into the ordinance be enforced and said he was ‘‘hesitant’’ about how the ordinance is written, endorsing a potential 10 p.m. compromise. Councilor Liz Meeley recommended working with local partners — including JMP and other community organizations — to insert diversion pathways into the ordinance and to review outcomes after the summer months.

After discussion about exceptions for work and community events, and repeated calls from members and presenters to incorporate diversion programs rather than defaulting to fines, Council President Beiter called for a motion to table further action. The motion to table passed on a roll call vote, 7–0.

Next steps: council members asked staff to coordinate with community partners to draft changes that would add diversion and accountability alternatives to the ordinance and requested an earlier summer review of impacts (calls, citations, diversion enrollments) if the ordinance is revised and adopted later.