Arrow-right Camera
Subscribe now

This column reflects the opinion of the writer. Learn about the differences between a news story and an opinion column.

Front Porch: Parking ticket gets her day in court, Stefanie Pettit writes

Last week Spokesman-Review columnist Paul Turner wrote about his parking ticket and cautioned readers that yes, indeed, parking enforcement personnel take it seriously when you continue to plug your parking meter so you can remain parked longer than the maximum time allowed at a particular location.

He paid his ticket.

I didn’t. Different parking offense, but I took another path. Glad I did, and I can’t say what transpired was unjust, but it was one of those things that, while perhaps legally right, just didn’t feel right. Oh, I know, most of us who get a parking ticket feel we have good justifications, and I know, too, how many times I’ve returned to my car after the meter has expired and was not ticketed. I’ve dodged a lot of potential parking ticket bullets.

So here’s my story. I am on the board of a nonprofit organization that puts on an event in the downtown area every December. This year – as in years past – my husband dropped me off. We pulled up to the area in front of the venue, which is a commercial loading zone during certain hours and a passenger pick-up and drop-off area in other hours and is located right in front of the load-in door.

Because there were several boxes and bins to take in, my husband did most of the heavy lifting, as I went inside to start setting up tables. After bringing in the first load, he went back outside for more and encountered a parking enforcement person writing down our license plate number. Bruce, my husband, mentioned that he was unloading for an event and would be gone in a matter of minutes.

He was told, not unpleasantly, that we were parked in a commercial loading zone and were not displaying a commercial loading zone sticker on our car. Not one to argue, Bruce continued unloading the car while the ticket was being processed, and then he took the ticket from under the windshield wiper and drove off. It was before 9 a.m. on a Saturday.

It was a $30 ticket, probably not worth fighting over, but I had issues with it beyond the cost. The options were pay, acknowledge guilt but seek a reduction in the fine, or plead not guilty. I chose door number 3 and received a court date for mid-January.

Parking violations court is interesting. The assistant prosecutor addresses those of us in attendance and lets us know that the burden of proof for parking misdemeanors is lower than in a criminal procedure, so if we are shown to be in violation of the appropriate statute or even if it’s a 50-50 situation, the state prevails and no reduction in fine is then possible. Each of us was called up to see if we wished mitigation or wanted to go to trial. A few people had their tickets pardoned by the prosecutor for just cause – such as the man who had a police report showing he had reported his car stolen prior to the ticket being issued.

Most took mitigation and reduced fine. Only two of us chose trial.

When the judge came in, the prosecutor presented the case against me, citing RCWs or other rules and definitions. Car was parked, no commercial vehicle sticker, done.

I stated, politely I believe, that I was not parked but only actively unloading in front of the access door to the venue we had rented for our daylong event and that it was unreasonable (perhaps not my best choice of words) to expect that a temporary sticker should be required for a few minutes of unloading at a once-a-year event. Plus it was early on a Saturday morning, not a high commercial traffic time, so some slack might be in order.

Slack, as had been explained earlier, isn’t a part of the proceedings. This is a letter-of-the-law thing. It’s not that I actually thought I was going to prevail; it’s just that there was a fairness thing here that I felt compelled to speak to prior to handing over my $30.

I did learn from the judge that a car is considered parked if is not moving and is by the curb or side of the road; hence, I was parked. I was armed with RCW 46.04.381, which speaks to parking as being “… the standing of a vehicle, whether occupied or not, otherwise than temporarily for the purpose of and while actually engaged in loading or unloading property or passengers,” but I decided not to be one of “those” people who argue over things about which I have limited knowledge, so I left it alone.

After the $30 fine was imposed, I did mention to the judge that with parking downtown already an issue for organizations and most everyone else who wishes to hold or attend events or shop there, this particular kind of enforcement has a chilling effect. We want to support downtown. The judge agreed that downtown parking concerns are significant, that he would like to see nonprofits encouraged to continue coming downtown and seemed sympathetic. Still, the law is the law (he didn’t say that last part; I’m adding it now).

I’m glad for four things. I had the opportunity to have my say in court. I can afford to pay the ticket. The parking enforcement officer did not return at 10 p.m. on the evening of the ticket when my husband pulled up in front of the venue to do in reverse what we did early in the morning – or any time in the previous 11 years we’ve sponsored this same even at that location. And, most important of all, I’m grateful I wasn’t the other defendant who argued against the ticket she got.

She had parked in a handicapped zone. Her fine was $450.

Voices correspondent Stefanie Pettit can be reached by e-mail at upwindsailor@comcast.net.

More from this author