A) The coffee can is empty.
B) I'm feeling good today.
Are these sentences statements in the sense that they are true or false and never true and false at the same time?
Does it matter that they are subjective(or in A) situational) and there is no objective answer wether they are true or false?
Both sentences are totally normal propositions in that they can either be true or false.
In natrual language use, propositions always have to be evaluated w.r.t. a current utterance, i.e. including the utterance time, utterance place, speaker, addressee, and so on.
Mathetmatics usually doesn't care about this context dependence and automatically assumes that such statements trivially can only be valid in a certain time and place, but the fact that a sentence might have a different outcome in a different situation doesn't change the proposition's ability to have a truth value in the first place.
In more advanced logics, you could also inroduce symbols and semantic evaluation functions for time (i.e. a sentence like "The coffee can WAS empty" is true at point of time $t$ if and only if there exists a point in time $t'$ such that $t'$ stands in a before-relation to $t$ and the proposition is true at $t'$ and so on), but this only adds another factor to evaluate a statement on, without impacting a proposition's ability to carry a truth value at all.
This means that statement A) obviously can have different truth values in different situations (i.e. different points in states and time), but since they are always evaluated w.r.t. a specific situation, this context dependence (which applies to the vast majority of utterances) is rather a triviality than a serious issue - from a mathematical point of view, it is pretty clear whether it is true or false under the given circumstances.
As for B), although the evaluation whether this is a true matter of fact or not is rather vague, one can certainly make judgements about whether you are convinced that you feel good or not, either you uttered something truthful or you made a false statement if in fact you do not feel good.
That the statement is about a subjective feeling is already included in the sentence, and the sentence's truth value only depends on the question whether the statement about your subjective perception is true or not, and it does not depend on anyone's judgement whether you actually feel good or not, because this is indeed subjective and not really a matter of propositional logic.
Things would look differently if it were about "Coffee tastes good", here the truth value judgement is fully dependent on the evaluater's opinion and yes, here logic can not make objective statements. But it doesn't really want to either; that judgejements about certain states of affairs in our world are oven opinion-based is a trivial truth, and propositional logic is not interested in making any attempt to set an (impossible) objective world view on any proposition once and for all. So yes, subjective statements can not be objectively evaluated in propositonal logic without explicitely encoding in your model what is assumed to be true and what is not.
But this is not the matter here - the sentence B) is only about the truth of the subjective perception (i.e. whether the speaker's subjective feeling actually is good or bad) and not a subjective perception itself, and as long as it is true that the speaker feels good, the proposition is true and oterherwise false, thus, the sentence can very naturally have a truth value, no matter how vague such statements may be.