ALJDEC

01-12268-CPP · Department of Administration - Capitol Police Parking · 2001-04-26

IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

HEARING: April 13, 2001 APPEARANCES: Capitol Police Aide Mario Trevizo appeared on behalf of the Capitol Police, Department of Administration; James Hillyard appeared on his own behalf. ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: Sondra J. Vanella _____________________________________________________________________ FINDINGS OF FACT Capitol Police Aide Trevizo (“Mr. Trevizo”) testified that on February 13, 2001, a citation was issued to the owner of a vehicle with license plate number 499CEY, for unauthorized parking in a reserved parking space at 1624 West Adams. Appellant testified that he is contesting the citation because he is the holder of a valid X-permit, entitling him to park in a space reserved for such. However, on the day the citation was issued, Appellant allowed his secretary to borrow his permit in order to entitle her to park in Appellant’s reserved parking space for the day, to accommodate a temporary medical condition from which she was suffering. Appellant did not want her to have to walk the distance from her usual parking location to the building, and Appellant’s parking permit would enable her to park closer to the building than her usual parking location. Appellant’s secretary is the holder of an R-permit, and those reserved spaces are farther away from the building than X-permit reserved spaces. On February 13, 2001, Appellant exchanged parking spaces with his secretary and parked in an R- permit space, but inadvertently forgot to obtain his secretary’s R-permit. Therefore, he did not display any permit when he parked his vehicle in an R- permit space on February 13, 2001. CONCLUSIONS OF LAW 1. A.R.S. §41-796 (E) provides Police personnel with the authority to: “issue a notice to appear for an alleged violation in the form adopted by the department [of administration] directing a person accused of violating a rule for control of vehicles on state property adopted pursuant to this section to appear at a designated place to contest the allegation of violation or to admit the violation and pay a penalty…” . 2. A.R.S. §41-796 (A) authorizes the Arizona Department of Administration (the “Department”) to “adopt and administratively enforce rules for the control of vehicles on state property” regarding, among other things, the “place, method and time of parking” and the “designation of special parking areas for state employees and the general public.” 3. The Department has promulgated rules governing traffic and parking (See Arizona Administrative Code R2-6-201 et seq.). 4. Pursuant to A.R.S. §41-796 and the rules promulgated thereunder (A.A.C. R2-6-201 et seq.), a citation contains an alleged violation of the State’s Parking and Traffic Rules and is not determinative as to whether such a violation occurred. A.A.C. R2-6-203(A)(5) provides that a person shall not park in a “reserved parking space without authorization.” A.A.C. R2-6-205(B) provides, in pertinent part, that “a person…parking a vehicle on state property shall obey posted traffic and parking signs.” A.A.C. R2-6-206(B)(6) provides for a $16.00 fine for unauthorized parking in a reserved parking space, other than a space reserved for the physically disabled. A.A.C. R2-6-207 provides for a hearing process available to individuals who wish to contest alleged parking violations contained in a citation issued by the Capitol Police. A.A.C. R2-6-204(A) requires that a “person shall properly display a reserved parking space decal . . . to be authorized to park in a reserved parking space.” The above-mentioned statutory and regulatory scheme provides the Administrative Law Judge with the authority to determine whether the Appellant has violated the State’s Parking and Traffic Rules. Impliedly, the Administrative Law Judge has discretionary authority to determine the amount of penalty to assess in the event that a violation of those rules has occurred as alleged in the Citation. Capitol Police, Department of Administration, has the burden of proving that on February 13, 2001, Appellant violated the State’s Parking and Traffic Rules as alleged in the Citation. The Department has met its burden of proving by the weight of credible evidence that on February 13, 2001, Appellant violated the State’s Parking and Traffic Rules as alleged in the Citation. Due to Appellant having failed to display the required permit, Appellant was not authorized to park in a reserved space on the day the citation was issued. The undersigned Administrative Law Judge concludes that the mitigating circumstances presented by Appellant warrant that no fine be imposed against Appellant. However, Appellant is forewarned not to park in a reserved parking space without proper display of the permit appropriate for the reserved space. ORDER Based on the above, IT IS ORDERED that no penalty be imposed against Appellant. Notwithstanding A.R.S. §41-1092.08, on standing motion of J. Elliott Hibbs, Director of the Department, this decision is the final administrative decision. The Appellant has the right to request a rehearing from the Department

pursuant to A.A.C. R2-6-208 and A.R.S. §41-1092.09(A). The Appellant has the right to appeal the action to the Superior Court, pursuant to A.R.S. §41-1092.08(H).

Done this day, April 26, 2001.

______________________________________ Sondra J. Vanella Administrative Law Judge

Original transmitted by mail this ____ day of April, 2001, to:

J. Elliott Hibbs, Director Department of Administration-Capitol Police Parking Attn.: Wendy Hammon 1700 W. Washington, Room B-15 Phoenix, Arizona 85007

By ___________________________

-----------------------

Office of Administrative Hearings 1400 West Washington, Suite 101 Phoenix, Arizona 85007 (602) 542-9826