Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the City Government Meetings topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Struthers City Council approves emergency ordinances, authorizes OPWC application and OKs $20,000 settlement; resident raises noise complaint
Summary
At its Dec. 10 meeting Struthers City Council passed emergency ordinances including a temporary 2026 appropriation and a clerk-of-council position, adopted the Mahoning County solid-waste plan, authorized an Ohio Public Works Commission application and approved a $20,000 settlement in federal litigation. Resident Tina Thurman urged enforcement of the city’s noise rules during public comment.
STRUTHERS, Ohio — Struthers City Council on Wednesday night approved several emergency ordinances and resolutions affecting the city’s administration and near-term finances, authorized the mayor to seek state infrastructure funds and voted to settle pending federal litigation for $20,000.
Council moved quickly through its agenda. Members voted to establish a Clerk of Council position retroactive to Jan. 1, 2026, repeal an earlier ordinance (25-036) and declare an emergency; to adopt a temporary appropriation ordinance to carry the city into early 2026 for up to 90 days; and to revoke ordinance 13-036, rescinding conditional zoning for city lots 3100, 3101 and 3102. The council also adopted a resolution formally approving the Mahoning County Solid Waste Management Plan and passed a measure authorizing the mayor to submit an application to the Ohio Public Works Commission for state capital or local transportation improvement funds. Several of those measures were advanced under suspension of the rules and were approved by voice vote.
The council also approved a $20,000 settlement in litigation filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, identified in the record as Michael Corabia v. City of Struthers (case no. 24C v 1479). A council member moved the settlement; the motion was seconded and the council voted in favor.
During public comment, resident Tina Thurman of 422 6th Street described repeated early-morning disturbances that she said came from a neighboring commercial operation. “This is the third time in just December,” Thurman said, adding the activity occurred around 4 a.m. and that she had submitted complaints online and received responses she found unsatisfactory. “Why is he getting a free pass?” she asked the council.
Council members and staff described the practical challenges of enforcing a noise ordinance and proving violations in court. One council member advised that “if you have a recording of it… that will help as well,” and another said it can be difficult to convince a judge that a sound meets the legal standard for an ordinance violation because testimony about a sound is inherently subjective.
The meeting record shows the city’s safety service director, Anthony Larisha, submitted a report to council and was thanked for positive initial reports since his appointment. The mayor’s written report was filed and read earlier in caucus, and the city auditor’s monthly statement and tax-office reports for October–November 2025 were placed on file.
The council noted the Finance and Legislation Committee will meet Dec. 17 at 6:00 p.m. The meeting adjourned after the regular business was completed.
What happens next: The adopted emergency ordinances take effect immediately as declared. The OPWC application, if pursued by the mayor and approved by the state program, would require separate project specifications and any subsequent contracts. Any resident seeking enforcement on noise-related complaints was told to document incidents (for example, by recording and noting times) to assist possible enforcement or legal action.
