New dumpster license ordinance takes aim at stopping rats

By CYD ABNET
Waltham Times Contributing Writer

A new ordinance aims to reduce Waltham’s rat population by requiring dumpster owners to obtain a license.

The license application requires the creation of a maintenance plan outlining how the dumpster will be serviced and cleaned. There is a $100 annual fee needed to instate and maintain licensure. 

The license requirement applies only to dumpsters that are present on a lot for more than six months out of the year, and are therefore considered permanent rather than temporary.

However, the cleanliness standards outlined in the ordinance apply to all dumpsters.

If passed, the ordinance, formally titled Article XVI, will be an amendment to the existing license and permit ordinances in the city.

“The new ordinance establishes a system for monitoring and enforcing waste management practices, which have been a contributing factor in the City’s rat problem,” Ward 7 Councilor Paul S. Katz said in an email. “It is another tool to take aim at the problem.” 

Katz was among the majority of city councilors who voted in favor of advancing the ordinance.

Rats use dumpsters not only as a food source but also as a sheltered place to nest.

The ordinance specifies that all dumpsters, whether permanent or temporary, must have a covered top and have no holes or visible wear that might compromise the container by allowing access to rodents. 

It also requires all dumpsters to be cleaned and deodorized regularly and be positioned so that no possible runoff can enter the water system.

The ordinance calls for all fees pertaining to the dumpster license and violations of the ordinance to be paid directly to the city’s Department of Health. Those who fail to obtain a license would incur a fee of $100, with a $250 fee for the second offense and a $300 fee for any further offenses. License holders also would incur fees at the same rate if they fail to maintain the dumpster according to the stipulations of the ordinance.

A first reading and preliminary vote for the ordinance took place on Jan. 27 with only Councilor-at-Large Paul J. Brasco and Ward 5 Councilor Joey LaCava voting against the proposal. Both LaCava and Brasco were contacted for comment; LaCava called to decline comment, and Brasco did not respond.

The ordinance will be revisited at future meetings for a second reading and a vote on whether to make it a law.