Williamsport council tables RDA-led blight enforcement plan after governance concerns

Williamsport — The city council voted to table consideration of an intergovernmental agreement that would have allowed the Redevelopment Authority (RDA) to hire a state‑certified third‑party codes contractor to inspect and enforce property‑maintenance violations in a targeted area of the city.

Councilmembers and RDA representatives debated the proposal for more than an hour Thursday, focusing on who would hold operational control. The RDA’s representative, Skip, told the council the authority would fund the work from its own (non‑federal) accounts and retain a contractor to inventory and address blighted properties; he said the RDA was already investing heavily in the area and that the arrangement was intended to “prime the engine” so city resources could be more effective.

Why it mattered: the agreement would have run from mid‑June through Dec. 31, 2026, and RDA officials said the work could identify roughly 100 severely blighted parcels out of an estimated 1,100 homes in the zone. RDA representatives estimated the enforcement engagement would cost in the neighborhood of $100,000; the authority told council it would fund the cost and return any fines to city coffers.

Council concerns centered on delegation of enforcement authority. “If I learned anything… from the whole fallout from the Bill Nichols thing,” Councilmember Dr. Adam Yoder said, “putting too much authority within an entity… can lead to bad things.” Several members worried the written agreement, as drafted, appeared to delegate control of hiring and day‑to‑day enforcement to the RDA without a clear, explicit role for city oversight or an override mechanism.

The RDA and its consultant pushed back that the contracted inspectors would use the city’s adopted International Property Maintenance Code, that fines would be remitted to the city, and that the RDA would provide bi‑weekly reporting to the mayor and the city’s codes leadership. Codes contractor representative Mr. Lions told council that an initial sweep of the proposed area with two inspectors would “take approximately two weeks” to catalog properties and begin outreach.

Council members also raised equity and process questions: whether a narrowly defined geographic zone risked uneven enforcement, how residents with limited resources would be connected to assistance programs, and whether the city’s codes office should remain the primary hiring and oversight authority.

Outcome: rather than approve the agreement as written, council moved to table the item and direct staff to continue negotiations with the RDA to clarify oversight, reporting and whether enforcement authority would be concurrent with — not exclusive of — the city’s codes office. The table motion passed on roll call, 5–1. Council and RDA leaders agreed to continue discussions in the coming weeks.

What’s next: council asked staff to present amended language that specifies oversight roles and reporting pathways; RDA representatives said changes would need to be accepted by their board for the agreement to proceed.