Councilor-at-Large Tom Rossignoll spearheaded a series of motions at a recent City Council meeting to ensure the building department will provide an explanation as to why it did not charge late fees to Sir Charles Limousine.
Rossignoll first set the stage for his fellow council members.
“There was a business that did not renew their license, and per the Council’s motion back in ‘25, we made a fee structure that you have to pay a penalty for not doing what you’re supposed to (which is) submitting your renewal,” Rossignoll said, “and a business did not do that, so I wanted to educate the new councilors of the process that we decided to fine businesses for not putting their paperwork in on time for renewal.”
The Council unanimously voted to receive documentation called Late 1, which was the basis for this discussion.
“If you look at Late 1,” Rossignoll said, “we fined Sir Charles Limousine $300 that, for some reason, the building commissioner decided to write off, which I have significant issue with. Our job is to make sure everybody follows the rules, and the fact that a department head decided not to, I want rationale for that.”
Rossignoll’s first motion was to “request the building commissioner to give the Council reason and rationale for dismissal or cancellation of fines set forth by this Council and his own department for non-renewal of license in the amount of close to $900 for Sir Charles Limousine services.”
Councilor-at-Large Anne Manning-Martin commended Rossignoll for bringing attention to this matter.
“I appreciate where you’re going with this,” she said. “I’d like to know why (and) how he would have superseded the Council’s authority and motion.”
That motion passed unanimously.
Rossignoll then issued his second motion, which was “to request the building commissioner to give the Council reasons why said business was allowed to operate the entirety of last year without paying fines and without a license.” It passed unanimously.
His third motion was “to request the city clerk not renew Sir Charles Limousine’s license for 2026 until all back fines are paid and request the building department assure business is not in operation until (a) new license is issued.” It passed unanimously.
Rossignoll’s fourth motion was “to request the building department apprise the Council of any and all other fees that the building department has withdrawn or canceled for the year of 2025.”
Ward 5 Councilor Dave Gamache clarified that this motion would not include any legal exemptions from the courthouse. Rossignoll explained that the motion would strictly regard what the department itself has withdrawn or canceled. The motion passed unanimously.
Rossignoll’s fifth motion was “to request the building commissioner respond to said requests prior to our next meeting on Feb. 12.” This motion passed unanimously as well, and this discussion is set to continue at the next City Council meeting on Feb. 12.
