Council member urges city permitting to curb downtown blight

A council member at a Struthers City Council meeting urged the city to adopt its own permitting system and tighter enforcement to address long-running downtown building projects that community members say have become eyesores.

The council member argued the city should “craft something that actually works” rather than copy other jurisdictions’ rules and said local permits would let the city set enforceable timelines and penalties. “I think permitting is the fairest way to do it. I really do,” the committee member said, arguing tailored permits would make expectations clear from project start.

Why it matters: Council members said county-issued permits often run for a year and can be extended repeatedly, which they said can allow slow progress to continue. Several speakers said the city’s safety service director and mayor already have tools to order timelines, but that legislation making permits mandatory would give the city control over terms and enforcement.

Discussion highlights included debate over whether to create a local commercial inspector (most members worried that a city inspector would be an unnecessary expense), how to structure permits by task (examples raised: separate permits for windows, siding, roof with different durations such as 90 days for some jobs and up to a year for larger scopes), and whether to require financial assurances up front. The group agreed the county inspector currently handles technical construction oversight and that the city might rely on county inspections for technical review while using city permits to set timing and penalties.

Members raised specific properties in the downtown district, including one owner described as doing much of the work himself and the boarded Old Eagle Antiques storefront. Council members acknowledged the owner has shown progress on some fronts but expressed concern about long gaps in visible completion. One speaker said that some grant funding had been put toward downtown projects and that “about $200,000” was discussed for roof and window work, while noting the transcript did not specify exact grant sources or confirm the final funding tally.

Next steps: The council asked administration to return with options for a tailored permitting approach and enforcement plan, and members agreed to invite the property owner in after the break to review his status and eligibility for further aid. The meeting closed after a motion to adjourn was made and seconded; the transcript does not record a formal vote on that motion.

The council’s conversation balanced enforcement and support: members repeatedly emphasized that permits should not penalize owners who are legitimately making progress, while also seeking mechanisms to prevent properties from becoming long-term blight.