Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Waste Management topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Struthers council debates draft ordinance to require enclosed dumpsters at properties that provide them for tenants

Struthers City Council · December 4, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Council members discussed a draft ordinance to require dumpsters provided for tenants to be fenced—and possibly locked—targeting properties that 'require a dumpster' (proposed threshold: more than four units). Council asked staff for counts and recommended a spring compliance window; no vote was taken.

At a recent Struthers City Council meeting, unnamed council members discussed drafting an ordinance that would require dumpsters provided for tenants to be enclosed (fenced, and potentially locked) and suggested applying the requirement to properties that provide a dumpster for tenants—proposed threshold: more than four units.

The proposal, introduced by Speaker 2, responds to repeated complaints about loose trash and dumpster divers near multiunit properties and some businesses. "If you went above 4 units, must have it," Speaker 2 said while arguing a unit threshold would avoid imposing new burdens on small duplexes and businesses that manage waste differently. Speaker 1 asked whether the ordinance should include a compliance window; Speaker 1 proposed a 90‑day window for owners to install fencing or other containment measures.

Council members discussed practical limits and enforcement. Speakers raised that many existing dumpsters are already full or used irregularly by businesses and that locking may be difficult where frequent access is needed. Speaker 4 said many dumpster problems stem from "dumpster divers," adding that containment will not solve every instance of litter. Multiple council members agreed staff should gather a list of affected properties before finalizing ordinance language; Speaker 2 estimated "less than 10" multiunit complexes would be affected and suggested administration or the hauler (referred to in discussion as "Republic") could provide a registry.

Council members suggested an effective date in spring rather than winter to allow for construction and ground thaw—options discussed included a May 1 deadline or a beginning‑of‑summer compliance date. Several members emphasized making the ordinance targeted (apply to properties that "require a dumpster") and practical, with phased implementation rather than immediate blanket requirements.

No formal vote or motion to adopt an ordinance occurred during the discussion. Council asked staff to follow up with administration (several speakers referenced speaking with "Anthony" and "John" in administration) to provide counts and to have the law director review the proposed enforcement approach. The meeting closed with a motion to adjourn recorded at the end of the session.

What comes next: staff are expected to collect data on which properties have dumpsters, return with counts and legal guidance, and draft proposed ordinance language for future council consideration.