Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Richland council approves first reading of ‘failure to supervise’ ordinance after split vote over vague wording
Summary
After heated debate over the term “unreasonable periods of time,” the council approved first reading of Ordinance 2026‑15, creating an enforcement tool for repeat juvenile misconduct; the motion passed with two no votes (Council members Meyer and Witten).
Get email alerts on the Public Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The Richland City Council on June 2 approved the first reading of Ordinance 2026‑15, which adds a city code provision allowing enforcement actions in circumstances involving repeat juvenile misconduct, unlawful operation of mini‑bikes or situations that pose risks to the juvenile or the public.
Chief Pilcher and staff said the measure is intended to provide discretion for officers to issue warnings and then pursue accountability where misconduct is repeated or egregious. The ordinance’s drafters said the objective is not to criminalize reasonable parenting but to give police an additional tool for serious or repeated incidents.
The measure prompted extended council debate focused on a clause that would make leaving a child without adult supervision for “unreasonable periods of time” a basis for enforcement. Council member Meyer and others argued that “unreasonable” is undefined and could be applied subjectively; Meyer urged removing the phrase or replacing it with a specific, objective standard. Supporters, including Mayor Pro Tem Van Dyke and Council member Jones, said the flexibility is intentional and that officers are trained to apply a reasonableness standard tied to context.
After discussion the council took a roll‑call vote on the first reading. The vote passed with Mayor Richardson, Holton, Jones, Samuel and Van Dyke voting yes; Meyer and Witten voted no.
City attorney said the ordinance is consistent with reasonableness standards used in law enforcement and that the language as drafted is legally sound; council may revisit the text before final adoption.
The ordinance will come back for a second reading before final adoption.
