Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Local Government Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Homewood waives late-license penalties for two businesses, denies third after repeat delinquencies
Summary
Finance committee forgave penalties and interest for one business owner with documented medical hardship and forgave penalty for a second business that paid, while denying a third repeat applicant's request after the owner failed to appear.
The Homewood Finance Committee on May 19 approved waivers of late-license penalties for two small businesses and denied a third request following repeated late filings and mixed documentation.
The committee said it would consider penalty waivers case by case and noted that interest on delinquent amounts is generally not waivable under state law; the committee used discretionary authority to forgive penalties and, in one case, associated interest.
What the committee decided - For a business owner who said she suffered serious post‑COVID illness and rehabilitation and had multiple years of missed business-license filings, the committee voted 3–1 to forgive the stated penalties and interest on past-due business-license charges, provided the remaining balance (license fees) be paid within 30 days. The committee recorded concern about setting a precedent but cited documented medical hardship when reaching the outcome.
- Constantine International Foods (operating as Najee’s Pita Gourmet) had already paid its current license fee and asked the city to waive a $4,278.89 penalty that resulted from an ownership change and a software-transition issue. The committee unanimously granted that waiver; staff said no interest had accrued because the case was recent.
- A third business (Gripesons) sought waiver of a $2,689.28 penalty for a late 2024 filing and asserted that an office manager’s death and other staffing problems caused the lapse. Committee members said the business had a prior late filing and the owner or representative did not appear for the hearing; members denied the waiver request.
How the city framed its discretion City staff told the committee that municipal code allows waiver of penalties but not interest in many cases, and that the interest collected is paid to the city. Committee members asked whether waivers risk creating a precedent; several members said they would handle future cases on a case-by-case basis and that documented, verifiable hardship would be an important criterion.
At the hearing, one business owner said, “I still have trouble. Somehow that license that was hanging there … got missed,” and asked for compassion because poor health had limited her capacity to manage the business. That owner agreed to pay current licensing fees and to resolve the outstanding balance if the penalties were waived.
The committee formalized the three decisions during its May meeting and directed staff to implement payments or follow-up as described.
